It is currently Sun Nov 24, 2024 2:42 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:43 pm
Posts: 20537
pizza_Place: Joes Pizza
Quote:
"The aggressive nature of (the vision) that Manny, Lou and the board have—they understand they can count on the Sox for complete support," Boyer said. "We're not going to get in the way of any revenue-generating opportunities for ISFA."

The Sox backed up that sentiment by waiving a right in the management agreement that has prevented ISFA from pulling in its own revenue from advertising on the video boards. ISFA will now be able to sell ads for the video boards during non-Sox events, an allowance that "represents a huge revenue-generating opportunity for our future," Bertuca said.

how charitable of Mr. Reinsdorf to allow the IFSA to do that. his generosity knows no bounds.


oh.

Quote:
Those events have not been easy to come by for the Cell, in part because of language in the Sox's deal with the stadium making them difficult to schedule. Among other restrictions, no special events—including preparation and cleanup—can be done within 72 hours of a Sox home game or 48 hours afterward.


brooks boyer my guy!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:10 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79554
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
bigfan wrote:
Not sure how JORR reasons being the guy hating the TIFs and Rahm for fucking up everything and yet OK with everything in the Sox deal? I mean the Sox deal doesnt even pretend to him a real financial impact for anything but the Sox....and in reality, they have been correct.


I'm not okay with it, but I'm also not kidding myself that the Cubs are doing everything at Clark and Addison on their own dime.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 1:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55947
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
Kirkwood wrote:
the funny thing about past 5 years is the difference in approach between the two franchises.

the long running criticism was fans go to USCF to watch baseball and cubs fans to Wrigley to party.

and yet here we are in 2015 where only one franchise is focused on creating an exciting great on-field product while the other thinks bacon-on-a-stick and hand-crafted artisanal churros will pack the park.

It's been like this longer than five years. Sox fans were crowing about how they, unlike us, come to watch the game back when they first built FUNdamentals and we didn't even have a video board.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
bigfan wrote:
Not sure how JORR reasons being the guy hating the TIFs and Rahm for fucking up everything and yet OK with everything in the Sox deal? I mean the Sox deal doesnt even pretend to him a real financial impact for anything but the Sox....and in reality, they have been correct.


I'm not okay with it, but I'm also not kidding myself that the Cubs are doing everything at Clark and Addison on their own dime.


Guessing 95% on their own dime. If the actual model of revenue production was applied to Wrigley, it would probably be one of the few facilities that should get public funds to improve, but like anything else in life, easy to attack the guy at the top of the heap...so they moved on.

But, all public ulilities, streets, lighting and other infrastructure should be paid for by the city, just as in almost every development. Someone is spending to improve the area, the city should also be putting in new sidewalks, new sewers, new water lines, new power, etc. That includes if the Sox were spending any of their own money, the streets should be built to accomodate the traffic, pedestrians, etc. Even the public park near Comiskular should be made to accomodate tailgating, barbqs etc.

Once again, EVERY MORNING 2 old guys walk by my place with brooms and garbage cans sweeping the street, with jackets that say Courtesy of the Chicago Cubs. Well, the cubs havent been home since last weekend, will guess that the mess isnt from the Cubs fans, yet they are charged with that responsibility?

Let me ask this question.

Would the Sox be getting new video screens if they had to pay for the whole thing?

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
bigfan wrote:
Would the Sox be getting new video screens if they had to pay for the whole thing?
Yes.

Assuming they owned the stadium why wouldn't they?

If the Cubs wanted the Sox sweet deal they could have sold Wrigley to them for a $1. The city would have jumped at the chance.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:31 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Kirkwood wrote:
Image

you got to give the Sox a hand for being realistic in their rendering.:

Yep. There were no World Series banners on display in the Wrigley mockups.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
bigfan wrote:
Would the Sox be getting new video screens if they had to pay for the whole thing?
Yes.

Assuming they owned the stadium why wouldn't they?

If the Cubs wanted the Sox sweet deal they could have sold Wrigley to them for a $1. The city would have jumped at the chance.


So, you think the city would have jumped at the chance to allow the Cubs to pay them $1.50 for every fan, then do $500 mill in improvements and every year dump in another $5 mill?

Who is your great source on this one?

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
bigfan wrote:
So, you think the city would have jumped at the chance to allow the Cubs to pay them $1.50 for every fan, then do $500 mill in improvements and every year dump in another $5 mill?
Yes.

It happens pretty much everywhere else, including in Chicago.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 4:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
The discussed rent for Wrigley was $20 mill a year, if the ISFA acquired the property via a sale from Sam Zell to the ISFA, brokered by Uncle Jerry, even though he didnt have really any input in Sam's talks, even though he put Sam in touch with those at the ISFA and he talked with Sam about owning shares of 2 baseball teams, he really had nothing to do with any of it...oh yeah, he was overseeing the offers made to buy the Cubs....but had very little to do with the whole process as he told Cuban to stop bidding on something he would never get.

...but other than that.....he had really no input in the process.....basically a bystander.

Must be hard to live out of town.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 5:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
bigfan wrote:
The discussed rent for Wrigley was $20 mill a year, if the ISFA acquired the property via a sale from Sam Zell to the ISFA, brokered by Uncle Jerry, even though he didnt have really any input in Sam's talks, even though he put Sam in touch with those at the ISFA and he talked with Sam about owning shares of 2 baseball teams, he really had nothing to do with any of it...oh yeah, he was overseeing the offers made to buy the Cubs....but had very little to do with the whole process as he told Cuban to stop bidding on something he would never get.

...but other than that.....he had really no input in the process.....basically a bystander.

Must be hard to live out of town.
Yeah, but in reality, it would end up the same way as most other stadiums.

However, there is an advantage to owning your own stadium, as the Cubs are learning with all the other events and other things they can do with it.

The bottom line is that if having the city of Chicago own your stadium is such a major benefit the Cubs could have sold it to them for $1. There is a reason they didn't.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
Yes, the Cubs didnt sell because they can make money, but the SWEET DEAL acquired by the Sox would NEVER have been offered to the Cubs is the point, yet you claim it would have been...why, I am not sure.

Nor should it have been. The City or State should NOT be in sports or entertainment business, this includes the new DePaul facility. The government owned facilities never seem to make a profit, even though some of them could.

Welcome to 2015, here is your crowd, like it or not, what are you going to do for them.

https://sports.vice.com/en_us/highlight/sorority-girls-welcome-the-dystopic-technological-overlords-while-old-baseball-announcers-balk-in-fear

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55947
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
Haha, I was just going to post that video. It made me miss Bob Brenly.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
Curious Hair wrote:
Haha, I was just going to post that video. It made me miss Bob Brenly.

Now you are 2-0 as I even said they shouldnt be involved in the DePaul arena. Maybe I am wrong in the end and they hire some management/booking company that only makes money based on the $$ from the concerts, but in my vast experience, management contracts for buildings are a fabulous method of kickbacks....Jerry knows what I mean :wink: .Harold Washington Center, State of Illinois Building, DuPage airport. hey, someone has to manage them..... :D

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
bigfan wrote:
Yes, the Cubs didnt sell because they can make money, but the SWEET DEAL acquired by the Sox would NEVER have been offered to the Cubs is the point, yet you claim it would have been...why, I am not sure.
Because it would have, because that is what happens to all teams now. I have a hard time coming up with any team in pro sports, besides maybe southern hockey teams, that didn't get a sweet deal from the city to stay.

Let me put it another way, if they offered Tom Ricketts $1 to sell Wrigley Field to them, and then they offered him the exact same deal that Jerry has do you think there is any chance in hell that Ricketts takes it? In fact, if Wrigley Field is such a burden then I formally offer Tom Ricketts $1 for Wrigley Field, and I will give him the same deal as Jerry has with the White Sox. You have connections. Can you get me a meeting?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:24 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79554
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
bigfan wrote:
Once again, EVERY MORNING 2 old guys walk by my place with brooms and garbage cans sweeping the street, with jackets that say Courtesy of the Chicago Cubs.


Nice! If the City allows me to glom half of a couple streets plus a raliroad right-of-way, I'll send a couple crackheads out to sweep too.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
bigfan wrote:
Once again, EVERY MORNING 2 old guys walk by my place with brooms and garbage cans sweeping the street, with jackets that say Courtesy of the Chicago Cubs.


Nice! If the City allows me to glom half of a couple streets plus a raliroad right-of-way, I'll send a couple crackheads out to sweep too.
Not to pile on, but isn't it pretty common for businesses to clean the area directly in front of their establishment?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
bigfan wrote:
Once again, EVERY MORNING 2 old guys walk by my place with brooms and garbage cans sweeping the street, with jackets that say Courtesy of the Chicago Cubs.


Nice! If the City allows me to glom half of a couple streets plus a raliroad right-of-way, I'll send a couple crackheads out to sweep too.
Not to pile on, but isn't it pretty common for businesses to clean the area directly in front of their establishment?


1. The streets around the neighbors are not right in front and when the business isnt operating, no its not common. Oh, and lets not forget the fact that the Bars are ones on the streets,

2. Ricketts would take the same deal jerry got in a second. You think because they get to have 4 concerts a year they wouldnt take the deal? $4.5M a year would be the estimated rent cost, you get $ 5M a year to build whatever you want (like a bar and grill and keep the money from that), you can sell the naming rights and keep the money, you didnt have to put in $500 mill...and the kicker, ALL expenses are on the States bill. The deal would never be offered and Ricketts would take it in a second. Oh and they PAY you for Wrigley on top of all it. Its an amazing deal that would never be offered unless you "OWN" the voting rights of those involved.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
bigfan wrote:
2. Ricketts would take the same deal jerry got in a second. You think because they get to have 4 concerts a year they wouldnt take the deal? $4.5M a year would be the estimated rent cost, you get $ 5M a year to build whatever you want (like a bar and grill and keep the money from that), you can sell the naming rights and keep the money, you didnt have to put in $500 mill...and the kicker, ALL expenses are on the States bill. The deal would never be offered and Ricketts would take it in a second. Oh and they PAY you for Wrigley on top of all it. Its an amazing deal that would never be offered unless you "OWN" the voting rights of those involved.
So why does he even own the stadium at all?

Tell the city that you are moving to Rosement unless they buy it for $1 and give him the EXACT same deal as Jerry gets. Done deal.

My offer still stands. I will buy Wrigley Field for $1 and give Tom Ricketts the same deal that Jerry gets. Get him on the line!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
So, you pay nothing for Land.....you then get $4.5 mill a year in rent....and you give back $5 Mill a year for annual iprovements. So now, you are down $500K a year.

On top of it, you need to pay all the utiliy bills and expenses of running Wrigley....Another $10 mill a year.

The cubs have the right to deny you use of the park for any reason, as they can claim it effects baseball operations.

They start with a 20 year lease and then can have a series of 10 year options.

The Cubs can sell the naming rights and keep that money.

Addtionally, you need to buy them every available parking lot in the area and they keep that money. You also need to pave them.

Oh, you also need to invest $500 mill to build the new park, clubhouse , building, hotel, etc.

So I estimate you spend about $1 +BILL and then over 50 years and get back $125 mill in rent....

Explain again where this is a GREAT DEAL for you? because you now own the land that is Wrigley Field?

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
bigfan wrote:
So, you pay nothing for Land.....you then get $4.5 mill a year in rent....and you give back $5 Mill a year for annual iprovements. So now, you are down $500K a year.

On top of it, you need to pay all the utiliy bills and expenses of running Wrigley....Another $10 mill a year.

The cubs have the right to deny you use of the park for any reason, as they can claim it effects baseball operations.

They start with a 20 year lease and then can have a series of 10 year options.

The Cubs can sell the naming rights and keep that money.

Addtionally, you need to buy them every available parking lot in the area and they keep that money. You also need to pave them.

Oh, you also need to invest $500 mill to build the new park, clubhouse , building, hotel, etc.

So I estimate you spend about $1 +BILL and then over 50 years and get back $125 mill in rent....

Explain again where this is a GREAT DEAL for you? because you now own the land that is Wrigley Field?
Your numbers seem off. I should be getting about $5-10 million alone every year in ticket sales over 1.9 million.

The lease also indicates that "special events" can be held when they are out of town so I'd do pretty good there also.

I think I could make it work.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
Good luck...I will take the under...and buy the place back when you go bust.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
bigfan wrote:
Good luck...I will take the under...and buy the place back when you go bust.
I'd turn it into condos before I went bust.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:43 pm
Posts: 20537
pizza_Place: Joes Pizza
Earlier it was stated from Crain's how few events have been held at USCF due to White Sox objections.

Ricketts would never receive the White Sox deal as the state is broke and I'm 100% sure two of these deals can't be financially supported.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
Kirkwood wrote:
Earlier it was stated from Crain's how few events have been held at USCF due to White Sox objections.
Yeah, but they could be told to go screw themselves too.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:43 pm
Posts: 20537
pizza_Place: Joes Pizza
The White Sox have contractual rights.

Quote:
Among other restrictions, no special events—including preparation and cleanup—can be done within 72 hours of a Sox home game or 48 hours afterward


That's a ridiculously tight window to fit an event.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
Kirkwood wrote:
The White Sox have contractual rights.

Quote:
Among other restrictions, no special events—including preparation and cleanup—can be done within 72 hours of a Sox home game or 48 hours afterward


That's a ridiculously tight window to fit an event.
Tom and me may need to lower that a little for me to buy Wrigley Field.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
I have been told that no promoter will have anything to do with the Cell due to the Sox interactions in the events.

On paper the place was designed to be a facility for the use of the State of Illinois...and they had all these money making events that would go down....but in reality, its Jerrys park and he doesn what he wants. I would guess they have to authorize anything that happens there under some crazy clause of "field impact".

It was scam of a deal, some of the people in the scam are now in jail for similar issues.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40649
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
bigfan wrote:
I have been told that no promoter will have anything to do with the Cell due to the Sox interactions in the events.

On paper the place was designed to be a facility for the use of the State of Illinois...and they had all these money making events that would go down....but in reality, its Jerrys park and he doesn what he wants. I would guess they have to authorize anything that happens there under some crazy clause of "field impact".

It was scam of a deal, some of the people in the scam are now in jail for similar issues.



I get you but after so many years and no ability to do anything about it what is the point?

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group