High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

High Definition Media A place to discuss BD and UHD Content from physical and digital media

Like Tree260Likes

Optical (Blu-ray/DVD) and Digital (EST/UV) Sales Thread

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-29-2012, 06:40 PM   #2176  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
Malanthius's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruceames View Post
Well at least on this site it has been exposed as grossly wrong. If Kosty wants to post it anyway, then all one can do is continue to point out that it's bad data. It only takes looking at the above table to see how ridiculously high and wildly inconsistent (with HMM) it is.
That's true. To be honest he can post it wherever he wants as much as he wants. I don't really care. But it's interesting to debate why someone does things like that. Even when proven that the data is horribly wrong as you and mike have done. I just don't get it.
Malanthius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 06:54 PM   #2177  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
bruceames's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Novato, CA
Posts: 17,128
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malanthius View Post
That's true. To be honest he can post it wherever he wants as much as he wants. I don't really care. But it's interesting to debate why someone does things like that. Even when proven that the data is horribly wrong as you and mike have done. I just don't get it.
That makes two of us.
bruceames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 06:58 PM   #2178  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 106
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kosty View Post
Its their data, I did not create it.

I only use it as its the only and best data we have for individual title sales on a weekly or longer term basis.

The best use of it is for internal comparisons between titles and for trending over time.

Even if the magnitudes of the estimates are problematic or have more issues in the short term use of the data in relative terms still has validity and in any case is the best data available and better than not using any data at all to support an argument or discussion.

Stating arguments based on your opinion only without any evidence to support your conclusions or assumptions seems to have an agenda as well.
Just wait a few weeks and they'll be nipping at your heels with the same tired baseless attacks. It happens without fail.
cakefoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 07:02 PM   #2179  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
bruceames's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Novato, CA
Posts: 17,128
Default

It's true though that HMM is tracking about 8% lower than DEG, but 8% isn't that bad, and at least the weekly revenue data makes sense given the releases that occured.

The-Numbers on the other hand shows extremely exaggerated data on weeks where releases are strong. During the weaker weeks the data seems reasonable for the most part, but it's the bias toward being very high plus the inconsistency which makes it almost useless.

As a whole, I would guess it's tracking at least 50% high. Blu-ray top 20 revenue should be no more than 70% of all Blu-ray revenue. On top of that, the top 11-20 titles on average account for 15% of top 20 revenue. That would put the average top 10 revenue at around 60% of the total.

In the second half of 2011, the DEG had Blu-ray at $1.346 billion. The-Numbers 2nd half data adds up to $1.210 billion. 60% of $1.346 billion is only $808 million, so the reported $1.210 billion is 50% higher than that.

Again, the premise of that 70% top 20 estimate is that it's reasonable to expect the other 6000 titles to account for the other 30% of the revenue. During weeks where Blu-ray has crap releases or no releases at all worth mentioning, HMM still reports $20-25 million. Those 6000 non-top 20 titles do constitute a revenue base, and it's probably between $10-15 million.
bruceames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 07:28 PM   #2180  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 106
Default

Just checked the past two weeks of data and TN's rankings are identical to HMM's titles. The % indexes are also identical, save for a couple titles with 1% difference at the most. Also, IIRC, someone checked The Numbers BD-DVD unit marketshares recently and they too were consistent with HMM's.

Now, you'd think, "The Numbers publishes their data after HMM so obviously they can just copy that." But if that's the case wouldn't have half a brain to make sure their units/revenues jive with HMM's overall revenues? It would appear to me they are not paying any attention to HMM afterall, and are arriving at the same indexes and rankings on the merits of their own tracking methods. Or one would hope, because then that would mean useful data.

One could argue, "But what use is TN if the only two things they're reliable for are already accounted for by HMM?" Well, assuming they are legitimately arriving at the exact same indexes and shares as HMM using their own tracking methods, then they have probably been consistent within their own database over time. That is, unit sales of Hugo one week could be compared to unit sales of Transformers in another week, at least relatively.

Last edited by cakefoo; 03-29-2012 at 07:35 PM..
cakefoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 08:05 PM   #2181  
Home Theater Enthusiast
 
Kosty's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,063
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malanthius View Post
Nobody questioned how long it took you to post on all those sites. They questioned "why" you would do it knowing how inaccurate the data was.

And yes, you have made yourself very clear. You will disregard those inaccuracies. As long as they make Bluray look better. That's very clear. Here's a novel idea. How about not using data you know is grossly wrong? And how about not plastering it on multiple sites? I can see bringing it up in a discussion. But you plaster those numbers like they are fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruceames View Post
Well at least on this site it has been exposed as grossly wrong. If Kosty wants to post it anyway, then all one can do is continue to point out that it's bad data. It only takes looking at the above table to see how ridiculously high and wildly inconsistent (with HMM) it is.
Its just that your expectations on how closely any two sets of databases should match that is unrealistic.

We all know that the HMM data has trended lower than the DEG data as well. Its pretty much expected that any other source should have a higher estimate than the weekly HMM vendor estimate if it again is supposed to be closer to the accepted DEG numbers.

A 10% or more longer term variation is not that bad for magnitudes for any estimates of revenues on a weekly basis. If HMM is low (it was 8% low to DEG in 4Q 2111) and TN is high in the other direction that accounts for much of the difference. You also have the weekly offset.

In any event, The-Numbers having a systemic house bias that's consistently high for revenues is not going to change any estimate by an order of magnitude, only by degrees. A title doing $1 of volume is not going to be mis-estimated to do $10 in revenues and in general terms the relationship between titles is still going to be approximately correct.

On any short term basis the variations are going to be more extreme as well but its just plain unrealistic to expect that the variations would be much closer than they are now.

You just have to understand that magnitudes are the toughest to estimate and that's where any two sources are more likely to vary as well.
Kosty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 08:26 PM   #2182  
Home Theater Enthusiast
 
Kosty's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,063
Default

I think that your assumption of what the non new release revenues are for Blu-ray at this moment is still quite high than what it is at the moment.

I just assume at the moment that HMM is tracking low to DEG and that The-Numbers is tracking high for revenues and accept it at that.

On some weeks The-Numbers does miss by a larger margin and they have announced that in their narratives (Thor and other weeks) and they are forced to adjust subsequent weeks to make their cumulative totals jive as their intent is to have the cumulative totals to be most accurate over time as that't their database design strategy to go along with their other data points they use for consulting services.

They also seem to have more issues in estimating the Blu-ray revenues of DVD leading genres that have higher volumes at Walmart. Things like Twilght Saga come to mind as problematic for them for initial estimates and other Friday releases that have large weekend volumes.

You are probably grossly overestimating the amount of revenues that the non leading titles are doing for Blu-ray at this time. Pulling 60% out of the air without any validation that its reasonable and using that as a basis to criticize the magnitude of The-Numbers is basically nothing more than pure speculation.

Quote:
In the second half of 2011, the DEG had Blu-ray at $1.346 billion. The-Numbers 2nd half data adds up to $1.210 billion.

You can also do the calculation in this manner.

The DEG data had Blu-ray at $1.346 B so the TN estimate of $1.210 B gives $1.346 B - $1.210 B leaves $0.136 B or $136 M for the non Top 10 titles.

Assuming for a moment that TN is tracking 10% high that would also give an additional $120 M for older releases as well for a total of $136+$120 M = $256 M for that 26 week period.

That's a flat average of around $10 M a week for non Top 10 Blu-ray title revenues which seems more order of magnitude correct.



Quote:
Originally Posted by bruceames View Post
It's true though that HMM is tracking about 8% lower than DEG, but 8% isn't that bad, and at least the weekly revenue data makes sense given the releases that occurred.

The-Numbers on the other hand shows extremely exaggerated data on weeks where releases are strong. During the weaker weeks the data seems reasonable for the most part, but it's the bias toward being very high plus the inconsistency which makes it almost useless.

As a whole, I would guess it's tracking at least 50% high. Blu-ray top 20 revenue should be no more than 70% of all Blu-ray revenue. On top of that, the top 11-20 titles on average account for 15% of top 20 revenue. That would put the average top 10 revenue at around 60% of the total.

In the second half of 2011, the DEG had Blu-ray at $1.346 billion. The-Numbers 2nd half data adds up to $1.210 billion. 60% of $1.346 billion is only $808 million, so the reported $1.210 billion is 50% higher than that.

Again, the premise of that 70% top 20 estimate is that it's reasonable to expect the other 6000 titles to account for the other 30% of the revenue. During weeks where Blu-ray has crap releases or no releases at all worth mentioning, HMM still reports $20-25 million. Those 6000 non-top 20 titles do constitute a revenue base, and it's probably between $10-15 million.
Kosty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 08:37 PM   #2183  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
bruceames's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Novato, CA
Posts: 17,128
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cakefoo View Post
Just checked the past two weeks of data and TN's rankings are identical to HMM's titles. The % indexes are also identical, save for a couple titles with 1% difference at the most. Also, IIRC, someone checked The Numbers BD-DVD unit marketshares recently and they too were consistent with HMM's.

Now, you'd think, "The Numbers publishes their data after HMM so obviously they can just copy that." But if that's the case wouldn't have half a brain to make sure their units/revenues jive with HMM's overall revenues? It would appear to me they are not paying any attention to HMM afterall, and are arriving at the same indexes and rankings on the merits of their own tracking methods. Or one would hope, because then that would mean useful data.

One could argue, "But what use is TN if the only two things they're reliable for are already accounted for by HMM?" Well, assuming they are legitimately arriving at the exact same indexes and shares as HMM using their own tracking methods, then they have probably been consistent within their own database over time. That is, unit sales of Hugo one week could be compared to unit sales of Transformers in another week, at least relatively.
Basically The-Numbers is just the Nielsen ratios with a unit number guess for the top title. Since the ratios mirror each other, once you know one figure then you know them all. Funny though because Nielsen doesn't include Walmart and TN does, and they still are carbon copies of each other.

I'll concede that TN may be of some use comparing titles to each other, although it even that is probably off by quite a bit. Better than nothing I guess.
bruceames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 08:38 PM   #2184  
Home Theater Enthusiast
 
Kosty's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,063
Default

Quote:
Again, the premise of that 70% top 20 estimate is that it's reasonable to expect the other 6000 titles to account for the other 30% of the revenue. During weeks where Blu-ray has crap releases or no releases at all worth mentioning, HMM still reports $20-25 million. Those 6000 non-top 20 titles do constitute a revenue base, and it's probably between $10-15 million.
The above calculation gives about a $10 M revenue base for Blu-ray so that's in line with your expectations.

I think that $10 to $15 right now is order of mafnitude correct for the base rate of non new release Blu-ray sales but it was probably closer to $10 for most of the 3Q and early 4Q of last year.

I think your out of the air assumption that the new or recent release revenue share for Blu-ray is 70% or 60% is just too low as every indication and every source I have is still telling me that the new release revenues for Blu-ray is still around 80% for revenues and somewhat less than that for overall units sold. New releases generate a higher percentage of revenues than older or non day and date titles compared to revenues as the unit skus are at higher retail price points.

Making an assumption of only 60% or 70% of revenues going to new releases would mean that 10-20% less percentages would go to the units split and that is just not true at the moment. Its probably more along the lines of 60% to 75% of Blu-ray units sold are non new or recent release titles and along the lines of 70% to 85% of all revenues on any given week are from new releases.

The base rate of non new releases is still probably around $10-$15 M or about a million units a week with a lot more variation coming from new releases.
Kosty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 08:52 PM   #2185  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
bruceames's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Novato, CA
Posts: 17,128
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kosty View Post
I think that your assumption of what the non new release revenues are for Blu-ray at this moment is still quite high than what it is at the moment.

I just assume at the moment that HMM is tracking low to DEG and that The-Numbers is tracking high for revenues and accept it at that.

On some weeks The-Numbers does miss by a larger margin and they have announced that in their narratives (Thor and other weeks) and they are forced to adjust subsequent weeks to make their cumulative totals jive as their intent is to have the cumulative totals to be most accurate over time as that't their database design strategy to go along with their other data points they use for consulting services.

They also seem to have more issues in estimating the Blu-ray revenues of DVD leading genres that have higher volumes at Walmart. Things like Twilght Saga come to mind as problematic for them for initial estimates and other Friday releases that have large weekend volumes.

You are probably grossly overestimating the amount of revenues that the non leading titles are doing for Blu-ray at this time. Pulling 60% out of the air without any validation that its reasonable and using that as a basis to criticize the magnitude of The-Numbers is basically nothing more than pure speculation.




You can also do the calculation in this manner.

The DEG data had Blu-ray at $1.346 B so the TN estimate of $1.210 B gives $1.346 B - $1.210 B leaves $0.136 B or $136 M for the non Top 10 titles.

Assuming for a moment that TN is tracking 10% high that would also give an additional $120 M for older releases as well for a total of $136+$120 M = $256 M for that 26 week period.

That's a flat average of around $10 M a week for non Top 10 Blu-ray title revenues which seems more order of magnitude correct.
The 60% was not pulled out of thin air. It was based on one assumption only: That T20 BD revenue is no more than 70% of the total. The 60% is calculated from 11-20 titles being 15% of T20 unit sales. So 70%*85% = 59.5%.

At least my assumption is reasonable. Your assumption that the Blu-ray top 10 data alone accounts for over 80% revenue is not only ridiculous, but impossible. The bottom 10 titles alone account for around 15%. That makes the top 20 at 95% of all BD revenue.

It sounds like your implying that TN is only about 10% high, and is off by about the same as HMM, but that is absurd.

You can continue to defend TN at all costs, but the numbers speak for themselves. Just the amount of energy you expend defending faulty data makes me wonder what's really going on here. I do have a day job and it's not worth it to me. Apparently it is to you, but not to me. But that said, their inconsistencies will continue to be exposed as bad data is one of my pet peeves.
bruceames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 08:52 PM   #2186  
Home Theater Enthusiast
 
Kosty's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,063
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruceames View Post
Basically The-Numbers is just the Nielsen ratios with a unit number guess for the top title. Since the ratios mirror each other, once you know one figure then you know them all. Funny though because Nielsen doesn't include Walmart and TN does, and they still are carbon copies of each other.

I'll concede that TN may be of some use comparing titles to each other, although it even that is probably off by quite a bit. Better than nothing I guess.
The variation is more random than that as usually its plus and minus a little bit for all the matching titles. But it should be much closer this year for the unit sale percentages as by all accounts the Walmart share of Blu-ray overall sales is much closer to their traditional 40% DVD share ever since the start of 4Q 2011.

Its not quite carbon copies either and the variation between titles seems more random than you seem to observe.

Quote:
I'll concede that TN may be of some use comparing titles to each other, although it even that is probably off by quite a bit. Better than nothing I guess.
I'll concede as well that on some weeks the data comparisons seem suspiciously close and as a minimum they have to be comparing their data to NV as a sanity check. But that's perfectly reasonable of them to do as well.

Comparing titles is the best use of their data and that's exactly how I used it to trigger this current discussion. Their trends as well parallel other data sources as well over time and that's another valid use.

Its only when you start get into the weeds and start comparing magnitudes that things start getting problematic but that's just how it is with any broad market comparisons from different data aggregators and estimations from different sources. Its just that magnitudes are always an issue no matter what. Just the way it is.

Quote:
I'll concede that TN may be of some use comparing titles to each other, although it even that is probably off by quite a bit. Better than nothing I guess.
Even if the magnitudes are off or systemically high the relationships for all the data points in the set are still the same and order of magnitude correct. The magnitude just scales the data it does not change the internal relationships between titles as much.

There probably is still some flaws in that some DVD friendly titles probably have greater errors in their estimates and would be somewhat exaggerated in revenues compared to more Blu-ray friendly genres but comparing titles closer in genre would probably be more accurate as well as releases that are closer in release date as well.
Kosty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 09:04 PM   #2187  
Home Theater Enthusiast
 
Kosty's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,063
Default

I think its just a question that your expectations on how close the two different data sources should match is unreasonable.

I think that your assumption of 70% of revenues is unreasonably low as well and that's the source of the flaw in your argument here. I can see why you are making that assumption but its just not accurate from my experience and from what I have been told.

That may be closer to being accurate in terms of overall units sold at this place in time this year but whatever the units sold percentage of the T20 titles the revenues sold percentage are even greater as the T20 BD skus tend to be higher MSRP and retail price ASP skus.

We don't have much data on revenues for titles below the Top 10 list in the list but just from the units sold index numbers we can see that they drop off a cliff pretty fast. Just look at this last week. The Top 10 BD titles did about 89% of the units sold of the Top 20 BD releases and even more of the revenues while the 11-20 slots did only 11% or about 1/8th the unit pace of the 1-10 titles. On weeks with a tent pole release its even more extreme.



Quote:
Originally Posted by bruceames View Post
The 60% was not pulled out of thin air. It was based on one assumption only: That T20 BD revenue is no more than 70% of the total. The 60% is calculated from 11-20 titles being 15% of T20 unit sales. So 70%*85% = 59.5%.

At least my assumption is reasonable. Your assumption that the Blu-ray top 10 data alone accounts for over 80% revenue is not only ridiculous, but impossible. The bottom 10 titles alone account for around 15%. That makes the top 20 at 95% of all BD revenue.

It sounds like your implying that TN is only about 10% high, and is off by about the same as HMM, but that is absurd.

You can continue to defend TN at all costs, but the numbers speak for themselves. Just the amount of energy you expend defending faulty data makes me wonder what's really going on here. I do have a day job and it's not worth it to me. It is to you, but not to me. But that said, their faulty data will continue to be exposed as bad data is one of my pet peeves.
Kosty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 09:14 PM   #2188  
Home Theater Enthusiast
 
Kosty's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,063
Default

Quote:
The 60% was not pulled out of thin air. It was based on one assumption only: That T20 BD revenue is no more than 70% of the total. The 60% is calculated from 11-20 titles being 15% of T20 unit sales. So 70%*85% = 59.5%.
I think its more reasonable to use 80% instead of 70% and 10% instead of 15% as the high volume weeks go even more extreme.

That calculates out to 80%*90% or 72% which is a lot higher than 60%.

But those estimates are really still pretty iffy as they are just based on what we might try and identify as reasonable assumptions but we really have no evidence to point to to give those ideas anything to stand on.

As I've said before I personally feel that The-Numbers unit sales estimates is more accurate than their revenue estimates and that over time the The-Numbers revenue estimates for Blu-ray are high but more accurate in the long term than they are in any given week. Both units and revenue estimates are better in their cumulative totals than in their week to week estimates.

Their macro decision not to revise previous estimates once published and to adjust subsequent weeks to best conform the cumulative totals also leads to some peculiar weekly title estimates. But there data is designed to be more accurate for cumulative totals and their weekly published totals are secondary to the use of their data for their clients and consulting purposes.

But I also think that over time the data and methodology is reasonably consistent as well and comparisons within the data or trends over time is the best use of it even if the revenue magnitudes are more suspect.

Last edited by Kosty; 03-29-2012 at 09:46 PM..
Kosty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 10:16 PM   #2189  
Home Theater Enthusiast
 
Kosty's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,063
Default

Not to say that it got ignored or lost in the recent TN discussion kerfluffle but I honestly would not mind any comments on the last Nielsen Videoscan report and why it seemed that The Muppets did quite a bit better than expectations.

All of the new day and date releases for the week seemed to do pretty good Blu-ray unit marketshare despite having varied genres.

Were there any special circumstances for the weeK?


=========================================

Pretty high Blu-ray Unit Marketshare for two radically different genres with both the new suspense thrillers and the new family title The Muppets selling more than half of their units on Blu-ray.

Not bad for the comedy The Sitter or the Friday release of Hop either.



54.57% Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
52.49% The Muppets (Disney)
50.42% Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
38.19% The Sitter
36.41% Hop

42.96% Blu-ray Top 20 Sellers Unit Marketshare





Kosty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 10:18 PM   #2190  
Home Theater Enthusiast
 
Kosty's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,063
Default

Here is the entire data set in two parts.

Part 1

Spoiler:

Week Ending 03/24/12


Blu-ray Unit Marketshares

54.57% Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
52.49% The Muppets (Disney)
50.42% Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
38.19% The Sitter
36.41% Hop

42.96% Blu-ray Top 20 Sellers Unit Marketshare




Quote:
'The Muppets' Scores With Sales; ‘Tattoo’ Tops Rentals

28 Mar, 2012
By: Thomas K. Arnold


The Muppets

Walt Disney Studios topped the national home video sales charts the week ended March 25 with The Muppets, a family film that grossed $88.6 million in theaters and generated a surprising 52% of its first-week sales from Blu-ray Disc.

The Muppets debuted at No. 1 on both the Nielsen VideoScan First Alert sales chart, which tracks overall disc sales, and Nielsen’s dedicated Blu-ray Disc chart. The film also debuted at No. 4 on Home Media Magazine’s weekly video rental chart, behind Sony Pictures’ The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo at No. 1, Universal Studios’ Tower Heist, fresh off its 28-day kiosk moratorium, at No. 2, and the Sony Pictures comedy Jack and Jill at No. 3.

Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, which took in $102.5 million in U.S. theaters, debuted at No. 2 on both sales charts, moving 78% as many units as The Muppets, Nielsen data shows.

Bowing at No. 3, also on both sales charts, was Universal’s Hop, an Easter film that grossed $108.1 million at the box office.

Girl with the Dragon Tattoo generated 55% of its first-week sales from Blu-ray Disc, while for Hop the tally was 36%.

Warner’s Happy Feet Two, the No. 1 seller the previous week, dropped to No. 6 on First Alert, behind Paramount’s The Adventures at Tintin at No. 4 (down from No. 2) and 20th Century Fox’s newly released comedy The Sitter ($30.4 million box office) at No. 5.

Related Links :

Top 20 Sellers for the Week Ended 03/25/12

Top 20 Rentals for the Week Ended 03/25/12

Top 20 Selling Blu-ray Discs for the Week Ended 03/25/12

Top 20 Blu-ray Market Share for the Week Ended 03/25/12


http://www.homemediamagazine.com/res...-rentals-26811










Kosty is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:10 AM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands