Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If you look at the Philadelphia Facebook page all activity went dead

Sometimes those Facebook pages can be fakes, just people who see that city as a good candidate and want to make a page to promote it. That's at least what I saw from the New York one for 2024, I haven't really seen Phillys
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 5.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

if everyone in this thread just agrees to agree with you will you please stop? i'm not sure how many more pages of you posting the exact same post on the damn bus drivers getting lost we can take. i

Why do you like to repeat yourself multiple times? Its very annoying.

In sum....

Here's a recent article on Dallas. Interesting that Woods won't comment on where the Opening & Closing ceremonies would take place. Guess it's just assumed that it would be in a renovated Cotton Bowl.

Another interesting note is that a 2024 Games would cost around $17 Billion. "A fair comparison" to what London spent on the 2012 Summer Games. So San Diego is completely fooling themselves if they can get away with it with only "$10 Billion". Especially when they would require much more work than Dallas.

"Dallas' bid for 2024 Summer Olympics faces June hurdle":

By JEFF MOSIER

Staff Writer

Published: 03 May 2014 10:37 PM

Updated: 03 May 2014 11:56 PM

The U.S. Olympic Committee is expected to decide by next month whether Dallas is still a contender for the 2024 Summer Games or whether its grand ambitions are shelved again.

Dallas is one of an estimated seven cities angling to be the U.S. bid city for 2024. USOC officials plan to reduce that group to two or three by the end of June. Those finalists would receive closer scrutiny for the remainder of 2014 before any decision about whether to pursue the next available Summer Olympics.

Matt Wood, who is leading the local effort and worked on Dallas 2012 bid, said a steady stream of major events, including the Super Bowl, the Final Four and a possible 2016 GOP convention, has strengthened the regions reputation.

Those successes make us an attractive option, he said. I feel good about being in the conversation.

USOC executive director Scott Blackmun said last month that the organization plans to decide later this year or early next year whether to bid for the 2024 Games. The U.S. did not bid for the 2020 Games because it was in a dispute with the International Olympic Committee over finances. That issue has been settled, making a 2024 bid more likely. We do think its time for the Games to come back to the United States, Blackmun said in a media conference call. Larry Probst, USOC board chairman, said he had received encouragement from multiple members of the IOC.

The other cities believed to still be in contention are Boston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Diego, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. The USOC hasnt confirmed which cities are still hopefuls and isnt planning to publicize which ones make the June cut.

Greg Staley, a spokesman for the U.S. Travel Association, said he couldnt think of anything else comparable to the Olympics or what it can do for a citys reputation. Its a very significant moment for Dallas and for all the other cities that are shortlisted to advance, he said. It sends a very clear signal that its a destination thats capable of and prepared to welcome the world. The Olympics would create a lasting impression for generations.

The full bid has not been released to the public, but Wood has provided some details about what the Olympic Games would look like in the Dallas area. In the proposal, an Olympic Village would be created near Fair Park and house about 15,000. Those units would be sold to the public afterward. A renovated Cotton Bowl would probably host track and field events. Sports that require less seating such as pingpong and badminton could be played at some existing Fair Park buildings, given renovations.

American Airlines Center, Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center, the Trinity River corridor, Toyota Stadium in Frisco and existing and proposed facilities at Southern Methodist University would all be major event sites.

Wood said he would expect AT&T Stadium to be used for some of the largest-attended events. That would include gymnastics and the medal rounds of high-profile sports, such as basketball and boxing.

The USOC would ultimately analyze all facilities and decide how they would be used.

Wood declined to talk about possibilities for the opening or closing ceremonies. The local effort has operated mostly out of the spotlight, with about 50 active volunteers helping with planning.

Wood said the committee is taking the USOCs lead in its low-key approach. Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings, who has periodically been briefed by Wood on the effort, took the same approach.

It is premature to discuss the potential role of Dallas in hosting the 2024 Summer Olympics until the USOC makes a final decision about submitting a bid, Rawlings said in a written statement.

Wood estimates that if the city is chosen as a finalist, the Dallas 2024 Committee would need to raise a couple of million dollars through private donations. Well have a conversation with them [uSOC] about how much information theyll need, he said. The money would probably go toward an economic study and further work on determining the cost of turning some venues such as the Cotton Bowl into Olympic facilities.

Dallas-based HKS Architects has already volunteered its service to help create the committees preliminary plans.

The cost would escalate to between $50 million and $75 million if Dallas were submitted as the U.S. bid city. The expenses for staging and operating the Summer Olympics would be more than 200 times larger. Wood said the $17 billion cost of the 2012 London Summer Games would be a fair comparison.The local bid committee wouldnt start trying to generate broad public support or launch major fundraising unless it was chosen as the USOCs bid city. We dont want to get the publics hopes up when its still just a possibility, Wood said.

TIMELINE: Olympic bid process

June 2014 The U.S. Olympic Committee is expected to decide on two or three finalist cities.

Late 2014 or early 2015 The USOC is expected to decide whether to bid on the 2024 Summer Games, and if so, decide on a city.

Summer or fall 2015 Bids are due to the International Olympic Committee.

2017 The IOC decides on the 2024 Summer Games host city.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/metro/20140503-dallas-bid-for-2024-olympic-summer-games-faces-june-hurdle.ece

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a recent article on Dallas. Interesting that Woods won't comment on where the Opening & Closing ceremonies would take place. Guess it's just assumed that it would be in a renovated Cotton Bowl.

Another interesting note is that a 2024 Games would cost around $17 Billion. "A fair comparison" to what London spent on the 2012 Summer Games. So San Diego is completely fooling themselves if they can get away with it with only "$10 Billion". Especially when they would require much more work than Dallas.

With the renovated Cotton Bowl and Cowboys Stadium both as options, probably not an overly important detail at this point. It does seem like they have their ducks in a row though.

If you look at the Philadelphia Facebook page all activity went dead after February 4th, and while Social Media is not always the best indicator it is the only direct source from the bid. Most of the other bids have had increased activity and I'm suspecting it's because they are still trying to interest people, Philly on the other hand looks like it has closed shop.

This is not surprising, especially when you consider their early drop during the 2016 race.

You can't go by what's on social media and these websites, some of which aren't even officially created by the groups charged with organizing Olympic bid efforts for their city. This all is not a process that plays out in public. A website or a Facebook page is window dressing. What goes on there doesn't mean all that much. It's the cities' interactions with the USOC that matter. Case in point this Dallas article.. so what if they have nothing to offer the public compared to what we saw from LA (and again, that probably wasn't for public consumption either). Seems like they know what's going on.

You may be right that a city like Philadelphia took a look at what an Olympics entails are realizes it's not in the cards for them. But that Facebook page looks a lot more like a fan site than something the city or any sports commissions are offering. So if you're basing your opinion on Philadelphia from that, I think you're off base.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dallas - another waste of time and effort. The USOC will NOT put Dallas forth; if they do, they are complete fools.

Between Dallas, Durban and Paris -- who would you vote for? I would go Paris #1, Durban #2...and a very unenthusiastic #3 for Dallas.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

With the renovated Cotton Bowl and Cowboys Stadium both as options, probably not an overly important detail at this point. It does seem like they have their ducks in a row though.

The Cowboys stadium is not an option for the ceremonies. It's too far away from downtown & the proposed main Olympic complex at Fair Park with the OV. Plus the transit network around Cowboys isn't that great.

It's like Los Angeles proposing ceremonies somewhere in Orange County instead of the Coliseum. Or San Francisco proposing it with far-flung Levi stadium inside of something much closer to the city. The only thing cowboys could be good for is some soccer mathes. But you can't offering it up as the main stadium when you're proposed main cluster is some 25 miles away.

*instead, not inside.

**offer, not offering.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cowboys stadium is not an option for the ceremonies. It's too far away from downtown & the proposed main Olympic complex at Fair Park with the OV. Plus the transit network around Cowboys isn't that great.

It's like Los Angeles proposing ceremonies somewhere in Orange County instead of the Coliseum. Or San Francisco proposing it with far-flung Levi stadium inside of something much closer to the city. The only thing cowboys could be good for is some soccer mathes. But you can't offering it up as the main stadium when you're proposed main cluster is some 25 miles away.

I had a conversation on something like this issue about Major League Soccer stadiums. When MLS first started, it used NFL stadiums and it was a disaster. Attendance was miserably low. So teams have switched to soccer specific stadiums and had better results.

However the best supported MLS team BY FAR plays in an NFL stadium . . . in Seattle. Their attendance is essentially twice that of any other club. (44,000 vs 22,000 for the LA Galaxy with the next highest attendance.) So why has a mid market city been able to be successful with an NFL stadium when other teams struggle?

The stadium is located downtown near touristy areas with lots of bars and stuff to do nearby. Meanwhile most NFL stadiums are in the middle of nowhere. This is the same reason the Super Bowl in Indianapolis was one of the best ever: they have a downtown stadium with lots of stuff to do nearby in a walkable area. It's also why the Super Bowl in New York wasn't that great: because the stadium is way over in East Rutherford, New Jersey with relatively little to do within walking distance and few hotels nearby.

That's why I think it would be such a challenge for San Francisco or Boston to host. You're never going to see an Olympic stadium near downtown in one of those cities. The only reasonable way for San Francisco to host is with the main stadium in Oakland.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dallas - another waste of time and effort. The USOC will NOT put Dallas forth; if they do, they are complete fools.

Between Dallas, Durban and Paris -- who would you vote for? I would go Paris #1, Durban #2...and a very unenthusiastic #3 for Dallas.

I would tend to agree. While technically speaking, Dallas could pull it off, the perception (especially by international standards), is that it'd be too similar to the host city of the '96 Games.

Surely a comeback to the U.S. the IOC would at least want something of big contrast to that. Even if that means a three-peat with L.A.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reasonable way for San Francisco to host is with the main stadium in Oakland.

This would create other logistical challenges though. Especially if you're still going to propose the main cluster with the OV on the SF side. Unless of course, you propose everything in Oakland. But then it becomes an "Oakland" Olympics instead. And raises the root of your post, that lots of people when want to cross the Bay anyway cuz there'll be much more to do on the other side in Cisco.

*Will want to cross.. Not when.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This would create other logistical challenges though. Especially if you're still going to propose the main cluster with the OV on the SF side. Unless of course, you propose everything in Oakland. But then it becomes an "Oakland" Olympics instead. And raises the root of your post, that lots of people when want to cross the Bay anyway cuz there'll be much more to do on the other side in Cisco.

*Will want to cross.. Not when.

That's my point. The only obvious solution to a main stadium for San Francisco is a new stadium for the Raiders. But that would put the main stadium too far from the affluent population of the bay area and that area in Oakland isn't going to be super attractive for foot traffic. So that really hurts SF's chances of hosting and leaving a strong legacy afterwards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I've stated before, I believe Los Angeles is America's best bet, seeing as though New York City and Chicago have ruled themselves out. Los Angeles has many Venues in place from the 1984 Summer Olympics, which can be Re-Built or Renovated. Either way, I don't believe America will Win 2024. It's between Rome, Berlin and Paris IMO and I believe Rome will Win. I can see 2028 going to Durban, 2032 going to Berlin and 2036 Hosting Rights being a Toronto VS Los Angeles race.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I've stated before, I believe Los Angeles is America's best bet, seeing as though New York City and Chicago have ruled themselves out. Los Angeles has many Venues in place from the 1984 Summer Olympics, which can be Re-Built or Renovated. Either way, I don't believe America will Win 2024. It's between Rome, Berlin and Paris IMO and I believe Rome will Win. I can see 2028 going to Durban, 2032 going to Berlin and 2036 Hosting Rights being a Toronto VS Los Angeles race.

In the case that both Rome and Paris bid they would win 2024 and US would be a shoo in for 2028 or 2032, Durban still has to prove itself. And you have been saying the same thing for the past five months, we know where you stand on this issue.

You can't go by what's on social media and these websites, some of which aren't even officially created by the groups charged with organizing Olympic bid efforts for their city. This all is not a process that plays out in public. A website or a Facebook page is window dressing. What goes on there doesn't mean all that much. It's the cities' interactions with the USOC that matter. Case in point this Dallas article.. so what if they have nothing to offer the public compared to what we saw from LA (and again, that probably wasn't for public consumption either). Seems like they know what's going on.

You may be right that a city like Philadelphia took a look at what an Olympics entails are realizes it's not in the cards for them. But that Facebook page looks a lot more like a fan site than something the city or any sports commissions are offering. So if you're basing your opinion on Philadelphia from that, I think you're off base.

Actually all the websites are owned and operated by the exploratory committees or organizing group, secondly while social media is not the best source it's a good indicator of a bids progress. We see the other bids talking about 'the June hurdle', not Philly. The most information we have is that they expressed interest, were visited by the USOC in November and were probably eliminated. At this point all of the bids would have a site or official social media page because it spreads the bid and gains support, based on what we know, right now is when these bids need high support.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I've stated before, I believe Los Angeles is America's best bet, seeing as though New York City and Chicago have ruled themselves out. Los Angeles has many Venues in place from the 1984 Summer Olympics, which can be Re-Built or Renovated. Either way, I don't believe America will Win 2024. It's between Rome, Berlin and Paris IMO and I believe Rome will Win. I can see 2028 going to Durban, 2032 going to Berlin and 2036 Hosting Rights being a Toronto VS Los Angeles race.

So what you're saying is...

2024: Europe

2028: Africa

2032: Europe

2036: North America

That's quite the exclusion of North America (25+ years since Vancouver 2010 and 40 years since Atlanta 1996). Europe, on the other hand, would only have a 12 year gap (since London 2012) AND a sandwich with Africa 2028 in the middle. Yup, totally realistic :rolleyes:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I've stated before, I believe Los Angeles is America's best bet, seeing as though New York City and Chicago have ruled themselves out. Los Angeles has many Venues in place from the 1984 Summer Olympics, which can be Re-Built or Renovated. Either way, I don't believe America will Win 2024. It's between Rome, Berlin and Paris IMO and I believe Rome will Win. I can see 2028 going to Durban, 2032 going to Berlin and 2036 Hosting Rights being a Toronto VS Los Angeles race.

I see problems

2024- Rome is lacking government support again

2028- after this rio mess, you think they will go to a unreliable country (or could be unreliable)

2032- ioc won't go back to Europe after a non North American summer games hasn't been held. for 40

40 years* by bad

Link to post
Share on other sites

This "Rio mess" will be over by Sept 2016. A whole year before the 2024 vote. So we'll see then what a mess (or not) it was, & how it could effect the 2024 vote if Durban is involved.

However, South Africa has already proven itself by successfully hosting a mega sporting spectacle, the FIFA 2010 World Cup. So to suggest that they're an "unreliable country" is being completely ignorant of that fact. Not to mention, that Brazil bit off more than it could chew. And that was seen even before they were awarded the Olympics. Hosting the World Cup & the Summer Olympics would be a lot for any country to tackle, let alone a developing one. But the IOC went with it anyway.

Brazil probably shoulda waited to bid for at least the 2020 Games, as to spread out the resources much more efficiently, instead of just trying to cram everything at once. That's not South Africa's fault & should not be used against them as a result, since they're taking the more pragmatic approach, & an approach that Brazil shoulda followed as well. But back to USA 2024.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the case that both Rome and Paris bid they would win 2024 and US would be a shoo in for 2028 or 2032.

First, there's no guarantee that LA or even the USOC will bid again if they lose 2024. If LA is the 2024 candidate and loses, the IOC will have rejected the top three cities in the country within a 12 year span. I can imagine all parties being fed up and saying enough is enough.

Second, while I very much see the arguments in favor of Europe hosting 2024, I think LA would be formidable competition regardless and could win. It really depends on how the race takes shape. There are economic and political variables (not to mention the bid plans themselves) that could have a significant impact on the outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First, there's no guarantee that LA or even the USOC will bid again if they lose 2024. If LA is the 2024 candidate and loses, the IOC will have rejected the top three cities in the country within a 12 year span. I can imagine all parties being fed up and saying enough is enough.

If LA, Paris & Durban were to all bid for 2024, all things being equal (politically, economically, venue wise, etc) two of those are gonna feel just as spurned. The glamor French Capital would be rejected for yet a fourth time in 30 years. Surely that wouldn't go over well in France, especially losing to the Americans. They might stomach it better from the South Africans, though. And/or the South Africans felling dissed that the IOC "doesn't want Africa". I think the IOC would be in a damn if you do, or damn if you don't scenario with that one. In such a race, I think the USOC should still be realistic that there's also a chance of losing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If LA, Paris & Durban were to all bid for 2024, all things being equal (politically, economically, venue wise, etc) two of those are gonna feel just as spurned. The glamor French Capital would be rejected for yet a fourth time in 30 years. Surely that wouldn't go over well in France, especially losing to the Americans. They might stomach it better from the South Africans, though. And/or the South Africans felling dissed that the IOC "doesn't want Africa". I think the IOC would be in a damn if you do, or damn if you don't scenario with that one. In such a race, I think the USOC should still be realistic that there's also a chance of losing.

True. In that scenario, it's unavoidable that someone will be really upset. However the losers are not compelled to demonstrate good sportsmanship by bidding again. I think it would be totally understandable and above reproach if the US or Paris gave up for a while.

I don't see Rome having a super strong case thanks to Torino and the economy. I also think Durban's stock is dropping with all Rio's problems. Durban has never hosted an international multi-sport event and that is a real problem. They need to prove themselves first and I suspect the majority of IOC members will agree with this.

As I see it, the big battle would be between Paris and the US, both of which have compelling arguments. Either one of those two is likely to feel decimated by yet another loss, whereas I think the others would bounce back better.

As of now, it is not certain that either the US or France will even bid, but at this stage the US is looking a little bit more likely than France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not worried about Durban feeling unloved. The IOC has made it so clear that they want to go to Africa, but in the wake if Rio, I think the desire for a proven host makes sense. Plus, to date, SA hasn't experienced anywhere near the rejection that others have. They had one failed bid for 2004. It's not like they've suffered a string of consecutive losses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

True. In that scenario, it's unavoidable that someone will be really upset. However the losers are not compelled to demonstrate good sportsmanship by bidding again. I think it would be totally understandable and above reproach if the US or Paris gave up for a while.

I don't see Rome having a super strong case thanks to Torino and the economy. I also think Durban's stock is dropping with all Rio's problems. Durban has never hosted an international multi-sport event and that is a real problem. They need to prove themselves first and I suspect the majority of IOC members will agree with this.

As I see it, the big battle would be between Paris and the US, both of which have compelling arguments. Either one of those two is likely to feel decimated by yet another loss, whereas I think the others would bounce back better.

As of now, it is not certain that either the US or France will even bid, but at this stage the US is looking a little bit more likely than France.

I think America would be more positive than the French. TBH I want Paris to beat the US, because I think France would officially pack their bags if they lost again. America could stomach another loss, especially if it was a close one against Paris.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think America would be more positive than the French. TBH I want Paris to beat the US, because I think France would officially pack their bags if they lost again. America could stomach another loss, especially if it was a close one against Paris.

Well, if the LA gets a devastating loss, like Chicago, there could also be a chance that LA may also kiss goodbye to their Olympic spirit. NYC and Chicago have already done that, so what makes you LA or any other city will keep trying? LA's glamorous plan leaks could be a hint that this may be their last try by attempting to finish strong. Like Athensfan said, If the IOC rejects our top three, who knows what will happen to the olympic-bidding spirit in the US.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not worried about Durban feeling unloved. The IOC has made it so clear that they want to go to Africa, but in the wake if Rio, I think the desire for a proven host makes sense. Plus, to date, SA hasn't experienced anywhere near the rejection that others have. They had one failed bid for 2004. It's not like they've suffered a string of consecutive losses.

But they have that "proven host" for 2020, with Tokyo, though. Plus, like I said earlier in the thread, by the time the 2024 vote comes around, Rio 2016 would be in the history books. Rio would have to be a total disaster (which I don't think it will be) for the IOC to be put off by going to last continent that they've yet to visit. And even then, is it really South Africa's fault that Brazil bit off more than they can chew by hosting the two biggest sporting spectacles on the planet back-to-back. That's like holding you personally responsible for the bad decisions made by someone else.

I personally don't believe the South African's would bid for 2024 anyway, if they feel they're not totally ready. It's most likely why they refrained from 2020. And yeah, they may not have a string of losses, but there could be a certain kind of stigma related to a loss, especially if the bid was up to par, to begin with & especially like you said, the IOC's been harping that they would like to finally get there sooner rather than later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But they have that "proven host" for 2020, with Tokyo, though. Plus, like I said earlier in the thread, by the time the 2024 vote comes around, Rio 2016 would be in the history books. Rio would have to be a total disaster (which I don't think it will be) for the IOC to be put off by going to last continent that they've yet to visit. And even then, is it really South Africa's fault that Brazil bit off more than they can chew by hosting the two biggest sporting spectacles on the planet back-to-back. That's like holding you personally responsible for the bad decisions made by someone else.

I personally don't believe the South African's would bid for 2024 anyway, if they feel they're not totally ready. It's most likely why they refrained from 2020. And yeah, they may not have a string of losses, but there could be a certain kind of stigma related to a loss, especially if the bid was up to par, to begin with & especially like you said, the IOC's been harping that they would like to finally get there sooner rather than later.

What you are describing is an optimistic, best-case-scenario.

Of course SA is not to blame for Rio's problems. But Rio staged successful PanAms that offered no hint of the Olympic dilemmas to come. SA has never staged CWG's. Brazil's economy is far larger than SA's and yet they are having financial issues with their preparations. Why should the IOC assume that SA would be smooth sailing?

I think it would be a huge mistake to believe that SA is the best judge of their own preparedness. They may think they are ready, but they have never hosted an international multi-sport competition of any kind, much less Olympics. No matter how intelligent and well-researched they are, they can't possibly really understand the task ahead of them. That's why it's essential that the IOC examine them very closely.

Rio will be fresh in the IOC's minds when they vote for 2024. Tokyo will not have happened yet. I think the big question is how much work the IOC will have had to do to bail Rio out. If they are all exhausted from helping Rio pull off the Games by the skin of their teeth (no matter how exceptional the Games turn out to be), it's hard for me to imagine them signing up for the same process with SA. The ends do not justify the means. Even if the final product in Rio is successful, if the IOC has to go through hell to pull it off, they'll be wary of repeating that process anytime soon. Personally, I think the IOC should EXPECT an unprecedented level of involvement in the delivery of the first African Olympics. That isn't wrong, it's just practical.

I can imagine the members saying, "Yes, we're dying to go to Africa, but we need a bit of a breather. Tokyo is great, but the 2024 planning will begin before Tokyo happens. We're having issues with Winter Games too. Our image is in the toilet because we look like a bunch of out of touch big spenders. Africa would not only be exhausting, it could be tricky from a PR point of view. We need something safe that will give us a chance to catch our breath and help create a paradigm for lower cost, more sustainable Olympics."

Link to post
Share on other sites

But they have that "proven host" for 2020, with Tokyo, though. Plus, like I said earlier in the thread, by the time the 2024 vote comes around, Rio 2016 would be in the history books. Rio would have to be a total disaster (which I don't think it will be) for the IOC to be put off by going to last continent that they've yet to visit. And even then, is it really South Africa's fault that Brazil bit off more than they can chew by hosting the two biggest sporting spectacles on the planet back-to-back. That's like holding you personally responsible for the bad decisions made by someone else.

I personally don't believe the South African's would bid for 2024 anyway, if they feel they're not totally ready. It's most likely why they refrained from 2020. And yeah, they may not have a string of losses, but there could be a certain kind of stigma related to a loss, especially if the bid was up to par, to begin with & especially like you said, the IOC's been harping that they would like to finally get there sooner rather than later.

But still, the IOC will be hesitant. Though, South Africans are smart, if they feel they are not ready they are not going to push it. Unlike our Brazilian friends...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...