Jump to content

Saints Trust


StuRomseySaint
 Share

Recommended Posts

What is happening with the Saints Trust then?

 

I see Nick Illingsworth is still giving interviews to the Echo as the 'chairman of the Saints Trust' So does this mean the Trust are still going?

 

Have the Trust informed all their 'members' what has happened with their shares? Or has everyone been ignored?

 

Give it up people, the Saints Trust is dead. Stop using the name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is happening with the Saints Trust then?

 

I see Nick Illingsworth is still giving interviews to the Echo as the 'chairman of the Saints Trust' So does this mean the Trust are still going?

 

Have the Trust informed all their 'members' what has happened with their shares? Or has everyone been ignored?

 

Give it up people, the Saints Trust is dead. Stop using the name.

 

Given the premise under which they were formed you would have to say that the Saints Trust is dead unless they have contacted all those who joined and agreed with them to continue under the same name but with a different agenda. Presumably they still won't be pushiing for a fan on the board?

 

Still they have a dawn site more creedance than SISA who appear to me to be cobbled together by some local mouth pieces who have the vocal gymnastics of an avid reader of the Sun's letter page. They represent no one other than themselves which as far as I can tell is a number yet to require two taps of a keyboard.

 

Nick Illingsworth may have his detractors but given the like's of Callaghan (O'Callaghan?) and Foley as an alternative and to back them over Nick would be a bit like selecting Crouch and Le Tissier over Liebherr and Coretes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which he is not. I remember him trying to preach about how bad things would be if we tried to get rid of Lowe, remember that article he did about Lowe and Wilde returning would save the club?

The only person he speaks for is himself. And i think it is time he like all those connected to the old regime fade away. A clean sweep was needed and that includes Nick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really annoys me when Illingsworth calls himself the "voice of the fans".

 

It annoys me how the Echo and Sky describe him as the voice of the fans, but to be fair to Nick on a personal level I don't think he's ever described himself that.

 

But I could be wrong.

 

As for the Trust, I thought the same thing when I read the Echo today. I didn't really understand the point in it before ML and NC but I'm even more confused about it's existence now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick has never claimed to be the voice of the fans. In fact, from reading his posts on the Ugly forum, he is quite happy to take the p*** out of himself for constantly being labelled this by the media. As far as I can tell, he neither believes it himself nor takes it seriously. Nick is merely someone who is passionate about Saints, has opinions, and is happy to express those opinions when asked by the media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really annoys me when Illingsworth calls himself the "voice of the fans".

 

Which he is not. I remember him trying to preach about how bad things would be if we tried to get rid of Lowe, remember that article he did about Lowe and Wilde returning would save the club?

The only person he speaks for is himself. And i think it is time he like all those connected to the old regime fade away. A clean sweep was needed and that includes Nick.

 

We are all on the same side now though surly, I aways liked Illingsworth as I do feel he is at least pretty positive in his comments. No need for in-fighting come on were better than that now.

COYR

 

I agree with Joe and I have always felt that Nick has tried to talk on behalf of all Saints fans and given the line of divide at times that has been no mean feat.

 

If messers Clark and Marco want a clean sweep then perhaps that should nominate themselves for election as fans spokesperson who simply get out there and make themselves know as a fan worthy of comment in the media. From what I have read Nick Illingsworth is by far the best suited and positioned to speak on behalf of us fans and I have no issue with him carrying on in that vain by the the whole Saints Trust thing must be sorted out as otherwise it's simply a stick to beat all those involved with it.

 

For those who say we don't need a fan representation is a bit like saying consumers don't need action groups like Which?. There may come a time when the club take an action of which the majority strongly disagree and it will be then that the likes of Nick will come into their own. So I for one would like to see a 'Saints Supporters Association' from the ashes of the Saints Trust and bury with it all the other versions of fans association which anyone can call themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It annoys me how the Echo and Sky describe him as the voice of the fans, but to be fair to Nick on a personal level I don't think he's ever described himself that.

 

But I could be wrong.

 

 

I consider that distinction to be sophistry.

 

Illingsworth could always correct the Echo and Sky, and if they persist in referring to him as the "voice of the fans", he could refuse to speak to them.

 

But no, he secretly likes it because he loves the attention and fawning, and whenever his comments cause uproar by being wide of the mark of the fan base, he holds his hands up and comes out with the line about his personal viewpoint and never claiming to speak for us.

 

As St Marco wrote, he was willing to do some serious a*se-kissing to Lowe last time round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I consider that distinction to be sophistry.

 

Illingsworth could always correct the Echo and Sky, and if they persist in referring to him as the "voice of the fans", he could refuse to speak to them.

 

But no, he secretly likes it because he loves the attention and fawning, and whenever his comments cause uproar by being wide of the mark of the fan base, he holds his hands up and comes out with the line about his personal viewpoint and never claiming to speak for us.

 

As St Marco wrote, he was willing to do some serious a*se-kissing to Lowe last time round.

 

How do you know all of this? do you know him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And his persistent and tiresome sermonising about attendance ? You call that positive ?

 

Exactly this. All this bloke has to offer is constant sermonising about what a super duper fan he is. The latest article is no different. And he doesn't half come out with some absolute nonsense.

 

If we are serious about wanting to get into the playoffs then we need to average 26,000 or 27,000 for the rest of the season.

 

I'm not entirely sure how attendances are related to our ability to make the playoffs, but there we go. He just needs to stop spouting off about being such an uber-fan and get on with just supporting the club without criticising others who do it in their own way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know all of this? do you know him?

 

Would it be reasonable to expect him to correct The Echo and politely ask them to stop reffering to him as the chairman of an organisation which doesn't exist?

 

Not only does it not exist but none of their board have even bothered to let their shareholders know what has happened to their shares and membership as a result of the takeover... Which I think is fuxking disgusting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Still they have a dawn site more creedance than SISA who appear to me to be cobbled together by some local mouth pieces who have the vocal gymnastics of an avid reader of the Sun's letter page. .

 

Nick Illingsworth may have his detractors but given the like's of Callaghan (O'Callaghan?) and Foley as an alternative and to back them over Nick would be a bit like selecting Crouch and Le Tissier over Liebherr and Coretes.

 

What does dawn site mean?? I think you mean darned sight don't you? HTH

I noticed another dig at Le Tissier, you can't help yourself can you?

PS: Its Cortese not Coretes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be reasonable to expect him to correct The Echo and politely ask them to stop reffering to him as the chairman of an organisation which doesn't exist?

 

Not only does it not exist but none of their board have even bothered to let their shareholders know what has happened to their shares and membership as a result of the takeover... Which I think is fuxking disgusting.

 

Why are you so bothered? are you a member/shareholder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Joe and I have always felt that Nick has tried to talk on behalf of all Saints fans and given the line of divide at times that has been no mean feat.

 

If messers Clark and Marco want a clean sweep then perhaps that should nominate themselves for election as fans spokesperson who simply get out there and make themselves know as a fan worthy of comment in the media. From what I have read Nick Illingsworth is by far the best suited and positioned to speak on behalf of us fans and I have no issue with him carrying on in that vain by the the whole Saints Trust thing must be sorted out as otherwise it's simply a stick to beat all those involved with it.

 

For those who say we don't need a fan representation is a bit like saying consumers don't need action groups like Which?. There may come a time when the club take an action of which the majority strongly disagree and it will be then that the likes of Nick will come into their own. So I for one would like to see a 'Saints Supporters Association' from the ashes of the Saints Trust and bury with it all the other versions of fans association which anyone can call themselves.

 

I don't think we need one, it is that simple. I appreciate the efforts of those who try and do what is best for the club but in my opinion i don't think he always did that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Saints Trust was a decent idea at the time of the former regime when the shareholding factions were split between two or three factions and there was a possibility that if enough fans bought shares, the Trust might just garner enough support to make a difference to the balance of power. But it was a good idea that withered and died on the vine of apathy, because although there was ultimately enough support amongst the ordinary fans to dislodge the Lowe regime, there was little interest in enough people joining the Trust as the way to achieve that end and in any event, as has been mentioned above, there was not the resolve from the leadership of the Trust to get shot of Lowe once he returned with the Quisling lap dog.

 

Now that all of the shares are held by Markus Liebherr, the Trust is a total irrelevance, as are the members of its committee. It is about time that the Echo recognised that their usual mouthpieces have no authority to speak on behalf of the fans any more.

 

Nineteen Canteen:

For those who say we don't need a fan representation is a bit like saying consumers don't need action groups like Which?. There may come a time when the club take an action of which the majority strongly disagree and it will be then that the likes of Nick will come into their own. So I for one would like to see a 'Saints Supporters Association' from the ashes of the Saints Trust and bury with it all the other versions of fans association which anyone can call themselves.

 

Consumers groups like Which have been superceded by internet sites like Money Saving Expert and in any event any disgruntled consumer has access to the local Trading Standards office or some Ombudsman or other. At the moment, there is no requirement for any fans' group, but accepting that there remains the future possibility of a need for one, then there will be the impetus towards one being formed, much as SISA rose to prominence during the Branfoot era.

 

In the meantime, it is up to those who feel that Nick Illingworth does not reflect their views to tell the Echo. Regarding the relationship between the club and the board, it appears to be the case, unless somebody can tell me otherwise, that if anybody contacts them with some grievance, it will be looked into and responded to. It might be that at some stage the new people will consider it beneficial to themselves to have a continuous dialogue with the fans, but I'd personally much prefer an open meeting that anybody could attend rather than the farcical arrangements from during the Lowe era when there were the regional groups and SISA meeting him a few times a season and then he totally ignored their grievances. And what a farce that Tell Rupert email facility was. Thank God there isn't a tell Nicola email.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Echo are in a position now to be able to glean supporters opinions through their website, either through the responses to their articles as at present, or, if they so wish, by posting polls on various issues.

 

IMO the need for a single spokesman is no longer required, technology has removed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think it is Nick Illingsworth that should be criticised when he is quoted, afterall, I assume, it is the media that contacts him, I agree with what RonManager posted but that would mean those outlets needing to do a little work which doesn't seem to be within their remits of late the way some 'stories' have been reported.

 

Perhaps the Trust could find a new purpose, one that will assist fans...I'm sure someone could come up with a few ideas for them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Saints Trust was a decent idea at the time of the former regime when the shareholding factions were split between two or three factions and there was a possibility that if enough fans bought shares, the Trust might just garner enough support to make a difference to the balance of power. But it was a good idea that withered and died on the vine of apathy, because although there was ultimately enough support amongst the ordinary fans to dislodge the Lowe regime, there was little interest in enough people joining the Trust as the way to achieve that end and in any event, as has been mentioned above, there was not the resolve from the leadership of the Trust to get shot of Lowe once he returned with the Quisling lap dog.

 

Now that all of the shares are held by Markus Liebherr, the Trust is a total irrelevance, as are the members of its committee. It is about time that the Echo recognised that their usual mouthpieces have no authority to speak on behalf of the fans any more.

 

Nineteen Canteen:

 

 

Consumers groups like Which have been superceded by internet sites like Money Saving Expert and in any event any disgruntled consumer has access to the local Trading Standards office or some Ombudsman or other. At the moment, there is no requirement for any fans' group, but accepting that there remains the future possibility of a need for one, then there will be the impetus towards one being formed, much as SISA rose to prominence during the Branfoot era.

 

In the meantime, it is up to those who feel that Nick Illingworth does not reflect their views to tell the Echo. Regarding the relationship between the club and the board, it appears to be the case, unless somebody can tell me otherwise, that if anybody contacts them with some grievance, it will be looked into and responded to. It might be that at some stage the new people will consider it beneficial to themselves to have a continuous dialogue with the fans, but I'd personally much prefer an open meeting that anybody could attend rather than the farcical arrangements from during the Lowe era when there were the regional groups and SISA meeting him a few times a season and then he totally ignored their grievances. And what a farce that Tell Rupert email facility was. Thank God there isn't a tell Nicola email.

 

A good read Wes even though I don't agree that a fans association is not required especailly now the fans have potentially less of a 'voice' than simply voting with their feet which I have always been against as it's so self defeatist. That siad you make some pertinent points and that history shows something is required if not the blueprint of the past and on that we do agree.

 

Lets hope (and on current evidence) a supports association/action group is never needed but I think it is always important for us to have one elected spokesperson to have a dialogue with the club and be a point of reference with the media. In the meantime I am more than happy to continue with Nick as I think he speaks honestly and at least tries to balance his views to encompass the myriad of views of all the fans.

 

With regards to Consumer action groups I think you took a well intended analogy on my part based on the fact that sometimes you need others to help to fight or champion the cause of many. Which, MSE has done and failed along with the OFT on Bank Charges but at least they have intiated some food for for thought in the retail banking sector and I fail to see a well run Supporters Association couldn't achieve the same for us if necessary and provide comments to the media in good and bad times.

 

I am loving what Mr Liebherr is doing woth the club at the moment but that is not to say that will always be the case and if that day comes we may be grateful of an association we can get behind as the Sainst Trust tried to do and failed during the Lowe era but died on the 'vine of apathy'. ( a nice touch of pathos most worthy of a quote IMO)

 

Are you going to volunteer to stand? No doubt the infamous gang of 6 or whatever it was will be in line to usurp Nick but open meetings won't work when the media obviously want a quote from supporters spokesperson so who should that be and who could rally the troops and talk on our behalf in the hopefully unlikely event it became necessary? Nick seems to be in that position already and worthy holder IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly this. All this bloke has to offer is constant sermonising about what a super duper fan he is. The latest article is no different. And he doesn't half come out with some absolute nonsense.

 

 

 

I'm not entirely sure how attendances are related to our ability to make the playoffs, but there we go. He just needs to stop spouting off about being such an uber-fan and get on with just supporting the club without criticising others who do it in their own way.

 

Mr Liebherr has given every indictation that the club should be self-funded and live within it's means and certainly that was the widely acknowledged doctorine of his father. Spend only what you earn and borrowing is a gamble.

 

I don't know about the numbers but guess Nick is alluding to the fact that the higher the attendances the greater the revenue and the better the players we will be able to attract assuming money is a motivator in the world of football.

 

Mr Liebherr has shown investment in the club with the initial purchase price and proposed development of Staplewood but it's less clear to me how the team has been funded and we cannot discount the skill of our manager . If we cannot add to the squad without offloading a dozen players to start with next month can we position ourselves for a push for the play offs this season without increased revenues or a loan or handout from our owner?

 

I think Nick is just trying to manage expectations on the balance of his observations IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good read Wes even though I don't agree that a fans association is not required especailly now the fans have potentially less of a 'voice' than simply voting with their feet which I have always been against as it's so self defeatist. That siad you make some pertinent points and that history shows something is required if not the blueprint of the past and on that we do agree.

 

Lets hope (and on current evidence) a supports association/action group is never needed but I think it is always important for us to have one elected spokesperson to have a dialogue with the club and be a point of reference with the media. In the meantime I am more than happy to continue with Nick as I think he speaks honestly and at least tries to balance his views to encompass the myriad of views of all the fans.

 

With regards to Consumer action groups I think you took a well intended analogy on my part based on the fact that sometimes you need others to help to fight or champion the cause of many. Which, MSE has done and failed along with the OFT on Bank Charges but at least they have intiated some food for for thought in the retail banking sector and I fail to see a well run Supporters Association couldn't achieve the same for us if necessary and provide comments to the media in good and bad times.

 

I am loving what Mr Liebherr is doing woth the club at the moment but that is not to say that will always be the case and if that day comes we may be grateful of an association we can get behind as the Sainst Trust tried to do and failed during the Lowe era but died on the 'vine of apathy'. ( a nice touch of pathos most worthy of a quote IMO)

 

Are you going to volunteer to stand? No doubt the infamous gang of 6 or whatever it was will be in line to usurp Nick but open meetings won't work when the media obviously want a quote from supporters spokesperson so who should that be and who could rally the troops and talk on our behalf in the hopefully unlikely event it became necessary? Nick seems to be in that position already and worthy holder IMO.

 

It is an interesting subject for a debate.

 

Whereas ML and NC could ride roughshod over our wishes as their ownership of the club is total, I honestly believe that they are people who have realised long ago the simple axiom that a business thrives if its customers are content. Provided that the team is successful and the price for watching them is reasonable, there is little else that concerns most of us beyond being treated with respect and consideration. I agree that voting with one's feet is a last resort for when talking has failed, but I can't foresee that situation arising with the new people. I'm sure that they would welcome dialogue and feedback regarding customer satisfaction as any good business would.

 

Under the new regime, I feel that the open meetings, say a couple of times a year including the Radio Solent evening would suffice, unless there was some pressing matter that arose that needed more urgent discussion. But even then, I think an open meeting would be better.

 

If the media wanted to have an opinion supposedly representing the fans, I personally am not happy that there be one or two of the usual suspects as a spokesman. I often find that they don't reflect my own views and as the current bunch have no real basis as elected representatives they really ought to preface their remarks with "in my opinion". There is a fairly simple solution for the media to resolve the situation of not having a broader view from the fan base; all they have to do is publish or broadcast a request for some to volunteer their services to be contacted at short notice to express a view on any current situation. They could then make a dozen or so phone calls and get at least some sort of consensus rather than having Nick tell us what we are thinking. They would soon recognise those who are able to speak cogently and sensibly on most matters and the views expressed would be seen to be those of the ordinary punter rather than from some group tarnished by past agendas. Also much better to have quotes from two or three fans simultaneously rather than having one individual in front of the camera. Another possibility if the media can be bothered, is to go to the stadium, where more often than not there are some fans buying tickets, in the shop, etc. Ask them for a reaction or opinion and you truly have the vox populi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be reasonable to expect him to correct The Echo and politely ask them to stop reffering to him as the chairman of an organisation which doesn't exist?

 

 

Whenever they drag out Richard 'Here's my mobile phone number' Chorley he is referred to as the Chairman of SISA. I never even knew it was possible to be Chairman of oneself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is an interesting subject for a debate.

 

Whereas ML and NC could ride roughshod over our wishes as their ownership of the club is total, I honestly believe that they are people who have realised long ago the simple axiom that a business thrives if its customers are content. Provided that the team is successful and the price for watching them is reasonable, there is little else that concerns most of us beyond being treated with respect and consideration. I agree that voting with one's feet is a last resort for when talking has failed, but I can't foresee that situation arising with the new people. I'm sure that they would welcome dialogue and feedback regarding customer satisfaction as any good business would.

 

Under the new regime, I feel that the open meetings, say a couple of times a year including the Radio Solent evening would suffice, unless there was some pressing matter that arose that needed more urgent discussion. But even then, I think an open meeting would be better.

 

If the media wanted to have an opinion supposedly representing the fans, I personally am not happy that there be one or two of the usual suspects as a spokesman. I often find that they don't reflect my own views and as the current bunch have no real basis as elected representatives they really ought to preface their remarks with "in my opinion". There is a fairly simple solution for the media to resolve the situation of not having a broader view from the fan base; all they have to do is publish or broadcast a request for some to volunteer their services to be contacted at short notice to express a view on any current situation. They could then make a dozen or so phone calls and get at least some sort of consensus rather than having Nick tell us what we are thinking. They would soon recognise those who are able to speak cogently and sensibly on most matters and the views expressed would be seen to be those of the ordinary punter rather than from some group tarnished by past agendas. Also much better to have quotes from two or three fans simultaneously rather than having one individual in front of the camera. Another possibility if the media can be bothered, is to go to the stadium, where more often than not there are some fans buying tickets, in the shop, etc. Ask them for a reaction or opinion and you truly have the vox populi.

 

Wes, while I do agree with you, there's just no way it will happen. The problem lies at the heart of having supporters trusts/associations in the first place. Just relying on quotes from Joe Bloggs, Saints fan isn't enough for the print media; personalities are given credence by having a title. In the case of NI its chairman of the Saints Trust. In the same article, Mick O'Callaghan as a representative of SISA. Now I wouldn't have a clue how to "join" SISA, from what I hear it would be near impossible, yet the Echo still routinely use these mouthpieces due to the title they ascribe themselves, and I guess its a very quick and easy way to get a quote that sounds like the reporter has actually done some research.

 

There will never be any individual who can accurately report the views of all Saints fans into one sentiment. The Echo often prints selected views from individual fans, particularly after games. However, they will always revert to the same old faces for a quick quote, just because they have a formal title. That the title itself is redundant doesn't seem to matter...

Edited by The Kraken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever they drag out Richard 'Here's my mobile phone number' Chorley he is referred to as the Chairman of SISA. I never even knew it was possible to be Chairman of oneself.

 

I think there are 3 others who periodically appear on TV.

 

Maybe because of this, the poor media saps think they are communicating to an organisation with a membership greater than the old politburo ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wes, while I do agree with you, there's just no way it will happen. The problem lies at the heart of having supporters trusts/associations in the first place. Just relying on quotes from Joe Bloggs, Saints fan isn't enough for the print media; personalities are given credence by having a title. In the case of NI its chairman of the Saints Trust. In the same article, Mick O'Callaghan as a representative of SISA. Now I wouldn't have a clue how to "join" SISA, from what I hear it would be near impossible, yet the Echo still routinely use these mouthpieces due to the title they ascribe themselves, and I guess its a very quick and easy way to get a quote that sounds like the reporter has actually done some research.

 

There will never be any individual who can accurately report the views of all Saints fans into one sentiment. The Echo often prints selected views from individual fans, particularly after games. However, they will always revert to the same old faces for a quick quote, just because they have a formal title. That the title itself is redundant doesn't seem to matter...

 

Yes, I think that you are right in what you say, even though as you correctly point out, the Saints Trust and SISA have both become anachronisms. Whenever those indiduals spout forth their opinions on what they believe we think and they are mistaken, then it is up to us to put matters right with the media. We can do this in two ways; firstly we can contact the Editors of the Echo and Radio Solent, pointing out that the views expressed by that individual do not necessarily represent the views of the majority of fans and that those organisations that they purport to speak on behalf of are an unelected sham. Secondly, feedback in the form of letters on their websites could point out the same thing, accusing the Journalist of sloppy and lazy reporting when they quote these individuals instead of taking the trouble to seek out other opinions.

 

As I say, it would be an easy matter to dispatch a reporter to the stadium where there are nearly always ordinary fans about and personally when I listen to a report on anything that involves a membership, I nearly always place more weight on the opinions of the individuals coming out of a meeting rather than those of some spokesman with an agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever they drag out Richard 'Here's my mobile phone number' Chorley he is referred to as the Chairman of SISA. I never even knew it was possible to be Chairman of oneself.

 

The Saints Trust have 838 members according to their website.

 

:---)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by StuRomseySaint viewpost.gif

Would it be reasonable to expect him to correct The Echo and politely ask them to stop reffering to him as the chairman of an organisation which doesn't exist?

 

Not only does it not exist but none of their board have even bothered to let their shareholders know what has happened to their shares and membership as a result of the takeover... Which I think is fuxking disgusting.

Why are you so bothered? are you a member/shareholder?

 

SISA have ****ed this dog to death over the years, it's surprising they get bypassed completely on this topic, maybe not!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr Liebherr has given every indictation that the club should be self-funded and live within it's means and certainly that was the widely acknowledged doctorine of his father. Spend only what you earn and borrowing is a gamble.

 

I don't know about the numbers but guess Nick is alluding to the fact that the higher the attendances the greater the revenue and the better the players we will be able to attract assuming money is a motivator in the world of football.

 

Mr Liebherr has shown investment in the club with the initial purchase price and proposed development of Staplewood but it's less clear to me how the team has been funded and we cannot discount the skill of our manager . If we cannot add to the squad without offloading a dozen players to start with next month can we position ourselves for a push for the play offs this season without increased revenues or a loan or handout from our owner?

 

I think Nick is just trying to manage expectations on the balance of his observations IMO.

 

By Liebherr.

 

Temas averaging circa 20k in League One can't afford to pay £1m for a player, pay the wages of Jaidi, Connoly and Davis and rebuild their training ground to a standard professed to be comparable with the highest in football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...