Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
stryker

Where does the IOC go from here?

Recommended Posts

Well now that the 2024 and 2028 saga is settled, the IOC has two solid hosts that buy them some time but still doesn't solve the problems which they've been grappling with ever since the 2022 race and I think the upcoming Olympics in Pyeongchang  and Tokyo are ultimately going to determine whether or not the IOC is really serious about reform.

Pyeongchang - I have no doubt that they will host an outstanding Olympics next year (barring a war on the peninsula). However, it's after the WOGs conclude that I see problems. The Koreans do not have a great track record when it comes to white elephants. Two cases in point, when Korea co-hosted the 2002 World Cup, rather than refurbish the Seoul Olympic Stadium they built an entirely new stadium. Why? Even worse, when Incheon hosted the 2014 Asian Games they built a 60,000 seat stadium for athletics (when they had 50,000 seater built from the World Cup that accommodated an athletics track) with the oft-repeated but failed concept of scaling it down to 30,000 afterwards. The downsizing never happened. Now the Olympics are coming along and the Koreans have built two-full sized ice arenas plus a speed skating arena (that could see demolition after the WOGs). The IOC even encouraged the Koreans to use a sliding track in Japan yet they built one anyways. I don't doubt that some increase in winter sports will occur post-Olympics in Korea, but is it realistic to think that the Koreans will find regular use for all these venues. I doubt it. In fact, it's likely the Pyeongchang Olympics will be overbudget though not to Sochi scale.

Tokyo - Governor Yuriko Koike promised to get costs under control and while she did somewhat, she largely blinked in the face of pressure from the IOC and respective sports federations. In fact I liken it to a poker player with a full house playing someone who has two pair and folds. She folded on the issue of venues for volleyball and rowing. Somehow the story was spun that building the Ariake Arena for volleyball was a more cost-effective option than using the Yokohama Arena? Then were was the whole fiasco with the rowing and canoeing venue when she threatened to move it outside of Tokyo. She could've stood her ground and said you want the sports here this where they will be held. What could the IOC do? Take the Olympics from Tokyo? Not likely. Instead the costs are still continuing the rise and if Tokyo goes over budget as its on course to do, then Governor Koike will have committed political suicide.

The IOC talks reform but they still want their cake and eat it too. Rio was a good case of this with the problematic golf course. Eduardo Paes was on record saying he thought building it was questionable considering Rip had several existing golf courses that could've been used, but the IOC insisted on the new course. Going forward, if the IOC wants to continue to draw western countries into the bidding process then the IOC is going to have to accept the fact that the compact bid won't always be available. We've already seen that in the plans for Innsbruck, the regional bid in Germany, and even Calgary, citing the need for two 10,000 plus seat arenas, partnering with Edmonton if the Flames cannot get a new one built.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Where does the IOC go from here?'

Melbourne. 

As for the winters, well that's a whole different problem. If they can't get anyone for 2026 but Almaty, it's difficult to see how they could retrieve that situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously, next up is finding the best candidate for 2026.  And I'm sure they're hoping to encourage South Africa to get its ducks in a row so they can cross that all-important marker (Afrique) off its list -- whether it be '32 or '36.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, yoshi said:

'Where does the IOC go from here?'

Melbourne. 

As for the winters, well that's a whole different problem. If they can't get anyone for 2026 but Almaty, it's difficult to see how they could retrieve that situation. 

Now that the U.S. is locked down for 2028, I could see Salt Lake jumping in for 2026 or 2030 if it looks like no one else is interested.  If Almaty is the only option, I could even see the IOC approaching the USOC to gauge Salt Lake's interest.  As it stands, I think we'll have back-to-back Games in North America in either 26-28 or 28-30; it's just a matter of whether Canada or the U.S. gets the Winter Games.

I'm going to predict right now that 2032 will end up in Shanghai.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Barcelona_'92 said:

Now that the U.S. is locked down for 2028, I could see Salt Lake jumping in for 2026 or 2030 if it looks like no one else is interested.  If Almaty is the only option, I could even see the IOC approaching the USOC to gauge Salt Lake's interest.  As it stands, I think we'll have back-to-back Games in North America in either 26-28 or 28-30; it's just a matter of whether Canada or the U.S. gets the Winter Games.

I'm going to predict right now that 2032 will end up in Shanghai.

2026 NOT happening in the US because there will be the World Cup.  Earliest for a US winter games, depending on if Calgary gets 2026 or 2030, would be 2038.  Shanghai will be doubtful since 2022 will just have been in China + they may get World Cup 2030 if Argentina-Uruguay don't.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see the IOC wanting to go to China (or anywhere else in East Asia, for that matter) for 2032. I'm sure East Asian fatigue, right after PC2018, Tokyo 2020 & Beijing 2022, will still be high even in 2025 when 2032 would be awarded.

With that said, of course beggars can't be choosers (it's why Beijing got 2022 ITFP). But if any other strong, viable bid is on the 2032 table, that's where the IOC will go. If (western) Germany actually materializes, the IOC will pounce on it. If Melbourne throws it's hat in the ring (which I can see moreso than Germany), the IOC will jump on it. So barring a competition where all we have is Doha-hah, Baku-koo & Shanghai, China ain't gettin' 2032.

As for the whole IOC suggesting to South Korea to use an existing sliding track in Japan, from what it seemed, that by the time they suggested it, South Korea was already well underway with the construction of the new track. And then the ,extra logistics involved to actually FLY the athletes & spectators to the event in Japan, it just wasn't worth it to even consider in the end. So that one is really not on the South Koreans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with these two old whores I can't see Shanghai winning the 2032 games if a strong European bid and/or Australian bid (be it Sydney, Brisbane or even Melbourne) are put forth. Beijing, with a metro population of over 20 million, couldn't repurpose every single venue from the 2008 games, what makes them think that the IOC will believe Shanghai will provide for a better Olympic legacy? I'd sooner believe the US winning the right to host the 2026 winter games than see China host another summer games earlier than 2036.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I don't see what would prevent us from hosting both the WOG and the WC in 2026 other than avoiding American fatigue in international sports events. The US doesn't have to build anything for a WC. We can host a 48-team event without the need for Canada and Mexico if need be. But yea wouldn't happen either way since I don't see the USOC showing any interest in hosting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, LatinXTC said:

I agree with these two old whores I can't see Shanghai winning the 2032 games if..

So says the "old whore" who would do other old whore "daddies" in their 50's & 60's. :P

22 minutes ago, LatinXTC said:

..a strong European bid and/or Australian bid (be it Sydney, Brisbane or even Melbourne) are put forth. 

Sydney so soon again? Nope. And for all the talk about Brisbane by some, it's really just the American equivalent of Charlotte or Kansas City. Nice cities in their own merit, but Olympic caliber they're not. What ever happened to the old "putting your best foot (or in this case, city) forward" by many here when it comes to Olympic bidding.

Plus, Brisbane would need a lot of work, which couldn't be justified for such a relatively smaller metropolitan area. The only thing Brisbane has going for it is the weather in the prefered Games-time window. But that alone isn't enough to get the nod. Melbourne is really the no-brainer here. They have the facilities, the infrastructure & the international recognition to be the next Aussie candidate & Olympic host.

29 minutes ago, LatinXTC said:

Also I don't see what would prevent us from hosting both the WOG and the WC in 2026 other than avoiding American fatigue in international sports events. The US doesn't have to build anything for a WC. We can host a 48-team event without the need for Canada and Mexico if need be. But yea wouldn't happen either way since I don't see the USOC showing any interest in hosting. 

Now that the U.S. has 2028 locked-up, I wouldn't be surprised sometime in the not-too-distant future of the USOC wanting to bid for the 2030 Winter Games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no real need for massive venues for the Olympics when the money comes in from television. Smaller venues that are full look better on television anyway. So I think it should be easy to cut the venue size requirements. IE cities should only need to provide a 2,500 seat velodrome instead of a 5,000 seat velodrome.

That would not only make it cheaper for host cities that need to build new venues. More important than new construction costs is enabling smaller existing venues to be used. And that would make it possible for cities like Vienna or Stockholm to host the Olympics once again. For example Vienna could use Ernst-Happel Stadion (50,000 seats) instead of needing to build a new Olympic stadium, and Stockholm could use its existing tennis stadium with only 5,000 seats. Or Toronto could use many of its venues from the Pan-American Games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LatinXTC said:

Also I don't see what would prevent us from hosting both the WOG and the WC in 2026 other than avoiding American fatigue in international sports events. The US doesn't have to build anything for a WC. We can host a 48-team event without the need for Canada and Mexico if need be. But yea wouldn't happen either way since I don't see the USOC showing any interest in hosting. 

Hey, young dumb b*tch, it's NOT the US capabilities.  It's the int'l organizations parceling out their favors.   Why should they give everything to the US in a span of 2 years?  DUH!!

Your arrogance rules you.  You still have a lot to learn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Calgary and the potential European bidders drop out, which is entirely possible, the IOC isn't going to have many options for 2026 and/or 2030.  The U.S. could end up getting one of those Games by default, even if they're not expressing interest now.  Salt Lake would have to build almost nothing to host, and the Olympics would be a good excuse to build a new arena for the Jazz or the University of Utah to replace arenas that will be 35-50 years old by 2026.

I'm pessimistic that any European bidders will make it to the finish line for 2026 or 2030.  I think Calgary-LA-Salt Lake is even a possibility for 26-28-30.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Barcelona_'92 said:

If Calgary and the potential European bidders drop out, which is entirely possible, the IOC isn't going to have many options for 2026 and/or 2030.  The U.S. could end up getting one of those Games by default, even if they're not expressing interest now.  Salt Lake would have to build almost nothing to host, and the Olympics would be a good excuse to build a new arena for the Jazz or the University of Utah to replace arenas that will be 35-50 years old by 2026.

I'm pessimistic that any European bidders will make it to the finish line for 2026 or 2030.  I think Calgary-LA-Salt Lake is even a possibility for 26-28-30.  

Even before talking Salt Lake, Denver is gearing up to be a WG contender.  They sent a team of 80 people to Vancouver to check out the event.  Yeah, yeah, I know . . .  And Denver has a bigger population than Salt Lake.  But nah, you're being too optimistic about No. American chances for 2026-30.  The Euros want one back there against after TWO Asian WOGs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think South Africa is an option till the 2040s at the earliest. If they cannot scrape together the cash for the Commonwealth Games then forget an Olympics. Even then, I think given the costs involved, South Africa would have to use more than one city, maybe even a country-wide bid. There'd simply be too many white elephants if South Africa went to bid with, say, Durban.

I don't think Shanghai is as far-fetched in 2032 as one might think. Sure it might not be desirable, but unless there are major concessions by the IOC, it's going to be harder to attract bidders from democratic countries. The likes of Shanghai, Moscow, Baku, Doha will gladly pay for sparkling new venues regardless of cost and regardless of whether or not they will be white elephants. Even Brisbane likely would have to go regional probably with Gold Coast for it to be affordable and what would Brisbane's option be for an athletics stadium?

Regarding 2026, if Calgary, Innsbruck, and Sion all drop out which I think is entirely likely and the IOC was left with Almaty I think they'd move to try to convince Salt Lake City to jump in. Salt Lake City is already considering 2030 but if the IOC is desperate I could see them begging Salt Lake City to give it a go. The Utah Jazz won't be getting a new arena anytime soon. The Jazz just announced a major renovation for their arena (Vivint Smart Home Arena) last September. However, Salt Lake City did just open a new 10,000 seat arena on the state fairgounds  which would almost certainly feature in a bid. Denver would likely have to use the ski jump and sliding track in Salt Lake City plus they only have one 10,000 seat plus arena in the Pepsi Center and Denver has no need for a second arena of that size.

I also agree with the earlier post about smaller venue capacity which would make the Olympics much more affordable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, sure. Shanghai, Moscow, Baku-koo & Doha-hah (which the latter two the IOC isn't going to touch with a ten-foot pole anyway) can "gladly" give the IOC all the glitz & glamor they want, where money is no object. But is that the impression that the IOC still wants to generate. Do they still want all that bad PR of white elephants & cost-overruns (which that pretty much just deflates the earlier post about why the Winter Olympics are in so much trouble TBW). That would mean they are not realizing the predicament that they're in now, & what prompted them to make the unprecedented move (well, in 100 years anyway), that they were desperate to award both the 2024 & 2028 Olympics to western, democratic countries with two rock-solid bids. In a hypothecial despot line-up like that, Shanghai wins it hands-down anyway. But all the IOC needs is just ONE, good, viable & democratic bid, which in this case, I could easily see it be Melbourne 2032, & it's the 2000 vote all over again, where the Aussies overtake the Chinese. 

As for 2026 (& the winter Olympics in general), I can only imagine that later this year (once the dust starts to settle with all the 2024 & 2028 red-tape), the IOC will begin feverishly working to try & get a traditional host to the 2026 table. I doubt that the IOC will simply just let Sion & Innsbruck go without a fight. The IOC is desperate for a Western European Winter Olympics like never before, & they'll be stupid if they wouldn't try to entice those two Alpine bids with somekind of incentives, like they threw L.A.'s way just to convince them to simply take 2028. Personally, I see the Austrians being more receptive to some kind of deal VS the Swiss. So I'd say that 2024, 2026 & 2028 are all going to be three-peat Olympic hosts. As for Calgary, they seem to be the back-up plan (in the IOC's view) if Europe again falters for 2026. Whether or not Calgary actually bids is another story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barcelona '92 and Stryker, re your thoughts on the upcoming WOGs bids, you're forgetting that if the IOC is throwing some $2 billion LA's way, what's $1 billion for Innsbruck or Sion or Calgary?  Think about that.  If anything, that'll probably cover the cost of new Athletes' and Medis WOG Villages at least. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding 2026, with Pyeongchang likely set to be overbudget and saddled with white elephants after the 2014 Sochi fiasco, the IOC is going to have to throw a lot more than $1 billion to convince the citizens of Calgary, Innsbruck, and Sion to vote yes in a potential referendum. The IOC says they want change, but it seems to be on their terms. The pushback when Tokyo tried to change the volleyball and rowing venues is a perfect example. I do think the reason the IOC extended the invitation phase is to try for a PR offensive in those cities in advance of a referendum. I can't see referendums passing in either Innsbruck or Sion. If memory serves me correctly, Innsbruck has a referendum this October. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Denver seems incredibly unlikely to me.

  1. It is not in the mountains: it is nearly a two hour drive to Vail (without ice and snow) and a three to four hour drive to Aspen.
  2. Denver would have to build everything other than the ski areas from scratch.
  3. People in Colorado do not want the Olympics.
  4. The city does not exactly have warm relations with the IOC after what happened with 1976.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UHmm...didn't I say a few weeks ago (I can't be jazzed to find it ...but I know I posted it) that if the IOC threw something like $1.8 billion LA's way, that would make it very attractive for them to accept 2028.  Well, I was only some $200 million off.  I sort of know how these things will play out.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nacre said:

Denver seems incredibly unlikely to me.

  1. It is not in the mountains: it is nearly a two hour drive to Vail (without ice and snow) and a three to four hour drive to Aspen.
  2. Denver would have to build everything other than the ski areas from scratch.
  3. People in Colorado do not want the Olympics.
  4. The city does not exactly have warm relations with the IOC after what happened with 1976.

1. Closeness to mountains, while preferred, is not always the winning factor for winter games, as proven for the 2022 games. They chose Beijing, which is at least 2hrs away from their mountain cluster, over Almaty, where you can see the mountain cluster right outside your hotel window. If Denver were to put in a strong bid they have a chance.

2.

what-the-fuck-are-you-talking-about-gif.

Do you think Denver is a shanty little town with nothing there? They have a baseball, college football and NFL stadium each with over 50k capacity to choose from to host the opening/closing ceremonies. They have a basketball stadium with 18k capacity that can host hockey, figure skating, and/or short track speed skating. They have college facilities and convention centers that can take care of other ice events as well. The only thing they need to build for sure is a long track speed skating venue.

3. Do you have any evidence such as polling to prove that statement???

giphy.gif

4. That was over 40 years ago. I'm sure there are hardly any IOC members who were even around that time to have lived through that. A lot has changed in that time. Besides, the IOC wouldn't hold a grudge that long towards Denver over giving back the right to host the games. As you can see, any games in the US has made a profit since at least the 1984 LA SOG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, FYI said:

So says the "old whore" who would do other old whore "daddies" in their 50's & 60's. :P

I'm not an ageist! As long as they're in great shape and hot I'll gladly sleep with them. But for relationships? Nah. I do prefer someone older than me for that, but not by more than 8 years.

8 hours ago, FYI said:

Sydney so soon again? Nope. And for all the talk about Brisbane by some, it's really just the American equivalent of Charlotte or Kansas City. Nice cities in their own merit, but Olympic caliber they're not. What ever happened to the old "putting your best foot (or in this case, city) forward" by many here when it comes to Olympic bidding.

Plus, Brisbane would need a lot of work, which couldn't be justified for such a relatively smaller metropolitan area. The only thing Brisbane has going for it is the weather in the prefered Games-time window. But that alone isn't enough to get the nod. Melbourne is really the no-brainer here. They have the facilities, the infrastructure & the international recognition to be the next Aussie candidate & Olympic host.

 

Sydney so soon? It would only be a 32 year difference. It will hardly be that memorable to folks. And no, Brisbane is more comparable to Atlanta, which they themselves won against far more world-recognized cities. They may not be as large and not have as many of the facilities as Australia's 2 largest cities, but they have at least some venues in place. They won't have to start completely from scratch like Rio had to do.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LatinXTC said:

1. Closeness to mountains, while preferred, is not always the winning factor for winter games, as proven for the 2022 games. They chose Beijing, which is at least 2hrs away from their mountain cluster, over Almaty, where you can see the mountain cluster right outside your hotel window. If Denver was to put in a strong bid they have a chance.

Every bid has "a chance". That doesn't mean it would be a strong one, though. Using the 2022 race as a point of reference for your argument doesn't really mean anything here, bcuz by the time that vote came around, & all the IOC was left with were two despots, the IOC members were really voting on many other factors, least of which was the distance to the mountain cluster.

If that was the main & only criteria (which it never really is), then Beijing would've not won. But as usual, it's about who has the best tallied report card in the end, & all-importantly, to the IOC. 

You put Denver in the 2022 vote, they win hands down. If you were to put them in a hypothetical 2026 race, against a solid,  less spread-out Western European bid or two, Denver's "chance" then pretty much goes out the window.

4 hours ago, LatinXTC said:

Sydney so soon? It would only be a 32 year difference. It will hardly be that memorable to folks.  

 Yeah, so soon. Many people think that L.A. hosting yet again after only 44 years is too soon. Yeah, 32 years will hardly be that memorable to people, but to the "old whores" (as you so eloquently put it) in the IOC who are the ones who actually vote on these things, Sydney will seem like just yesterday in *Olympic* years to them. Heck, some people still gripe on Paris hosting 2024 as a "repeater", where I'm sure none of their a$ses were even around back in 1924. :rolleyes:

5 hours ago, LatinXTC said:

And no, Brisbane is more comparable to Atlanta, which they themselves won against far more world-recognized cities. 

OH YAWN, here we go again with "Atlanta". Why do some people continue to think that's actually some sort of acceptable gauge to go by. Who were the last three cities that the USOC used for their last three Summer Olympic bids? They sure weren't anything like Atlanta.

And no, Brisbane is NOT anywhere near like Atlanta anyway. Atlanta was even more back in 1990 than what Brisbane is today. Even John Coates (an Autralian IOC VP himself) cited Brisbane as "inferior" to the likes of Paris & L.A. So even he can see that against big guns like those two Brisbane would have a very difficult time. Even some of our Aussie members here have described Brisbane as a "big town backwater".

And what "far more world-recognized cities" did Atlanta won against? Belgrade & Manchester? Lmfao! :lol: And while Toronto is more world-recognized, "far more" is a big stretch, especially back in 1990, where even Canadians here have said Toronto was really just starting to develop back then. Not to mention that Montreal 1976 was also Toronto's achelles heel. Same with Melbourne & their previous hosting in 1956. And Athens just wasn't ready for 1996. They were barely ready for 2004 as it was! Maybe Brisbane could've done better in the '96 scenario instead of the '92 one. :P

5 hours ago, LatinXTC said:

They may not be as large and not have as many of the facilities as Australia's 2 largest cities, but they have at least some venues in place. They won't have to start completely from scratch like Rio had to do.

There's no "may not" about it. Brisbane IS not as large as Australia's two largest cities, nor do they have as many of the facilities. Brisbane's metropolitan population is equivalent to Charlotte & Kansas City (like I noted earlier), & not Atlanta's, even back in 1990. 

And Rio did NOT have to start from "scratch". They already had two of the big ticket items already in place; the Olympic stadium (the Maracana) & athletcs stadium (Joao Havelange), plus other facilities. And whatever they did build was justifiable in a metro area four-times the size that of Brisbane.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does the IOC go?  They do everything they can to ensure bidders stay in the 2026 so they're not left with a giant douche and a turd sandwich.  After that, they can reevaluate themselves since it'll be a couple of years before the next Olympics in 2030 is up for bids.

What of the next Summer Olympics?  Who knows.  There's a lot of "well, this city would be strong, but only if they bid, and not if this other city bids as well" logic here.  So it's anyone's best guess.  But we're now several years away from potential Summer hosts even having to think about whether or not they want to bid.  Not that I trust the IOC to realize the situation they're in and adjust accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Barcelona_'92 said:

If Calgary and the potential European bidders drop out, which is entirely possible, the IOC isn't going to have many options for 2026 and/or 2030.  The U.S. could end up getting one of those Games by default, even if they're not expressing interest now.  Salt Lake would have to build almost nothing to host, and the Olympics would be a good excuse to build a new arena for the Jazz or the University of Utah to replace arenas that will be 35-50 years old by 2026.

I'm pessimistic that any European bidders will make it to the finish line for 2026 or 2030.  I think Calgary-LA-Salt Lake is even a possibility for 26-28-30.  

Gotta be in it to win it.  The U.S. can't get an Olympics unless they express interest and I don't see them diving in to try and save the IOC's bacon by offering a 2026 bid when they already have 2028 locked in.  I'd sooner see Calgary grab that one before Salt Lake jumps into the fray.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Nacre said:

Denver seems incredibly unlikely to me.

  1. It is not in the mountains: it is nearly a two hour drive to Vail (without ice and snow) and a three to four hour drive to Aspen.
  2. Denver would have to build everything other than the ski areas from scratch.
  3. People in Colorado do not want the Olympics.
  4. The city does not exactly have warm relations with the IOC after what happened with 1976.

What Latin said.  This is nonsense, especially number 2.  I know it's a popular narrative around here to talk about a bad relationship between Denver and the IOC.  All these years later, does anyone on either side give a crap?  I understand there may be some hesitancy from NIMBY types in Colorado that they might resist or reject an Olympic bid, but don't base that on old history.  Denver and Colorado are different places than they were 40-45 years ago, which is precisely why they didn't want the Olympics then.  But the argument can be made that the growth and development that inevitably happened in Colorado which they were resisting against back then might have gotten a boost from being spurred by the Olympics.  But that's neither here nor there.

Desperate times call for desperate measures.  We saw what the IOC was willing to settle for with 2022, not that they had a choice.  If the USOC has to choose between Denver and Salt Lake, they could go either way on that one.  And it would be likely that Denver would use at least a couple of Salt Lake's facilities.  But they had the big city and downtown core that many current bid cities are able to put into a bid.  That's the least of their concerns.  So long as they can link the city and the mountain clusters (easier said than done, as has been the story over the years there), that puts them in halfway decent shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...