| 0 |
Subject: BH: Announcing Final 2001 Hoops Prices
Posted by: Bernie H.
- [19852422] Mon, Oct 01, 14:46
Hi, gang at Cheers!
We're making available for you guys an advance preview of the final player prices for our upcoming Ultimate Fantasy Hoops game. We're not launching the game until later this week, but we wanted to let you loose at the prices right now so you guys can 1) get first crack at them, 2) make sure we didn't screw anything up, and 3) get some spirited discussions going on so we can get some more juicy tidbits for our fan's voice section.
Dave has graciously put the file in two formats up on his server.
uncompressed:
http://rotoguru1.com/hoop/ulthoops.xls (650K)
and zipped:
http://rotoguru1.com/hoop/ulthoops.zip (200K)
This is the spreadsheet we eventually plan to make available to the public, even before they buy a team. Check it out, and let's hear your thoughts!
Thanks,
Bernie, TSN |
| 1 | DR Stars
ID: 162592010
Mon, Oct 01, 15:34
|
VC as a Guard? there are a ton of Guards to choose from once we have lots of $$$.
|
| 2 | The Bandwagon
ID: 148381715
Mon, Oct 01, 16:05
|
Where are all the rookies? I saw Shane Battier priced at $5,280,000 and a few lower top 10 picks, but not the top picks. I'm kind of afraid to ask after seeing Battier priced at 5.2 mill! Looks like no one will have any rookies on there teams. Also, what did you base your prices on? Last season you could get 23 TSN/SW points per game for 2.5 mill to 3.00 mill, this year you get 11 to 15 TSN/SW points for 2.5 - 3.0 mill with a few 17-18 TSN/SW point players mixed in. Looks like you guys upped the price for lower end players, while keeping the studs the same.
My opinion on this is, when you do find a cheap producer, everyone will have to own him to keep up. I think this will hurt differation severely.
|
| 3 | Bernie H.
ID: 19852422
Mon, Oct 01, 16:25
|
By the way,
Yes we are offering a free fantasy hoops game.
However, it will be a much easier game geared towards the more casual fan. It'll be only 5 players (2G, 2F, 1C) under a $25,000,000 cap, 2 trades per week, and weekly price changes. It's become pretty clear to us that our standard salary cap game is too demanding for a lot of people, and we hope this game will keep their attention more effectively.
|
| 4 | E'ville
Leader
ID: 29017810
Mon, Oct 01, 16:37
|
Is it my imagination or did prices go up a lot this year.
I counted 109 players @ 5 mil and above this year. Last year ended with 47 above 5 mil.
Should pose a challenge for sure.
|
| 5 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Oct 01, 16:38
|
The only 1st round draft pick that seems to be missing is DeSagana Diop. (Oversight?)
The highest priced of the rookies is Battier, at $5.28m. Doesn't seem out of line. Last year, Kenyon Martin was initially priced at $4.75m.
Other players in the $5m price vicinity: Horace Grant, Kurt Thomas, Patrick Ewing, Ron Artest, Rodney Rogers, Lorenzen Wright....
I'm sure by the end of preseason, there will be a number of interesting opportunities at the cheaper end.
|
| 6 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Oct 01, 16:42
|
E'ville - I'll bet that gravity had a lot to do with last year's lower number of higher priced players. In fact, I just went back and counted last year's draft prices. There were 70 players with draft prices at $5m or higher in last year's SW draft.
|
| 7 | culdeus
Donor
ID: 21839313
Mon, Oct 01, 16:44
|
So what's the old game cost? And will the prices be the same from pay to no pay. Why all the changes?
|
| 8 | The Bandwagon
ID: 148381715
Mon, Oct 01, 16:55
|
Bernie H. in previous years, TSN/SW usually based the mid range players (4-6 million) at or around 5.5-7 TSN/SW points per million dollars, and the lower end players (2-4 million) at or around 7-11 TSN/SW points per million. With this years prices, we are getting 4.5 TSN/SW points per million or lower for a mid range player, and around 5.5 TSN/SW points per million for the lower end players.
In previous years, a player could buy a low end player for a low price (7-11 TSN/SW Points per game),and we could deal with the ups and downs, 25 TSN points one night, 10 the next. This year it will not be worth it to hold a low end player due to the inconsistenty they provide. This will discourage people from buying low end players, and force people to buy the mid-range consistent players, which leads to the problem of people having the same players. The new price system almost makes the low end players obsolete.
|
| 9 | culdeus
Donor
ID: 21839313
Mon, Oct 01, 16:56
|
Oh, and on the off topic side, since SW people seem to be reading this. Please beat severely the person who changed cash left to "Credit on GM Card (r)". I don't think this needs a long explanation.
|
| 10 | The Bandwagon
ID: 148381715
Mon, Oct 01, 17:00
|
It was an oversight on the rookies, my bad. I expected the top picks to be higher than Battier like in previous seasons. Prices are not bad at all on the rookies. I appologize Bernie :)
|
| 11 | curly
ID: 347231613
Mon, Oct 01, 17:08
|
dang,my webtv won't load these links. no preveiw for me?
|
| 12 | Erik B.
ID: 48830517
Mon, Oct 01, 17:11
|
Culdeus:
Beating has commenced.
-ESB
|
| 13 | Fatal Image
ID: 35601219
Mon, Oct 01, 17:52
|
no, you won't be able to view a Excel spreadsheet file on WebTV
|
| 14 | patjams
ID: 41957117
Mon, Oct 01, 17:57
|
Is it just irony, or did you guys intend for row #23 to be MJ? ;o)
|
| 15 | Dave R
Leader
ID: 147341310
Mon, Oct 01, 18:01
|
Hey Bernie, I'll comment on hoops later, but how bout getting SW baseball up and running. Trying to log in has been sporadic at best abd I notice one of the top ten players is invalid for today, thats not right.
|
| 17 | The Dienasty
ID: 2783842
Mon, Oct 01, 19:30
|
WHAT? So the free game will only be with 5 players?... Dang it :(
|
| 18 | The Dienasty
ID: 2783842
Mon, Oct 01, 19:41
|
@ BH or EB,
I hope it's not too late to change anything but I really hope that the roster size for the free game can be expanded to 10 much like the pay game. I don't have a credit card and unfortunately my parents are extremely weary about spending online, credit card #'s, etc...
So it does not look like i can join you guys on the pay side. I just hope that the free game can be spruced up a little because right now it looks a bit plain and almost too simple, my ideal free game setup would be 10 players, 2-4 trades, weekly price updates. But again, i just hope it's not too late to make any changes. I hope the other folks in the same situation as me appreciate my suggestion.
Looking forward to the season.
-TDN
|
| 19 | Special K
ID: 2091119
Mon, Oct 01, 22:36
|
Yeah Dienasty, i'm kind of in your situation. Only difference is my dad is on disability (open heart surgery) and we are experiencing financial problems at home. I would pay if I could, but I doubt I can. :|
It almost brings a bit of sadness to me when I read that it wouldn't be the same as last year.
:sigh;
My $.02
-Kurupt
|
| 20 | rockafellerskank
Donor
ID: 4911539
Mon, Oct 01, 22:44
|
Erik or Bernie:
Does TSN accept paymnets thru Paypal
rfs
|
| 21 | The Dienasty
ID: 2783842
Tue, Oct 02, 01:47
|
Special K,
That sadness is felt on this side as well. In a year were i felt i finally had the time to really put some serious time and effort into Hoops (this is my first year in University, and i have a light schedule) it hurts to know that the game I've come to love won't be the same... :(
|
| 22 | dusty bottoms
ID: 18442117
Tue, Oct 02, 06:54
|
I would really like to have 10 in the free game, A lot of people I know like it and probably won't play anymore, it takes away all the fun, everyone is used to playing with 10 players and 50 million. Every other sport stayed the same player wise from year to year why not basketball. The sport change was football with no KR, but everyone agreed with that, no one will agree with this.
|
| 23 | Prettyfly
ID: 17431315
Tue, Oct 02, 07:33
|
5 players and 2 trades? Boooooooring...
I will not play pay-game before SW can smoothly run at least one game through ALL SEASON without any "server down before trading deadline", "messed up repricings" or "no repricings" problems. I can hardly forgive those errors in free game but that's it. Oh well, likely I will skip hoops this year.
|
| 24 | DR Stars
ID: 162592010
Tue, Oct 02, 08:16
|
To me it looks like the prices have really shot up this year, I guess I'm looking at last year's good players, and trying to set up a team.
Also it looks like the barbelling (sp?) approach is going to be hard to take this year, even with Shaq out of the mix, and more people will opt for the balanced roster approach.
|
| 25 | rfs @ work
ID: 5092128
Tue, Oct 02, 11:12
|
Erik or Bernie:
has there been a final determination as to price for ultimate hoops?
rfs
|
| 26 | Knightmare
ID: 74342318
Tue, Oct 02, 11:27
|
Don't you think Danny Fortson is a little overpriced? I mean he did great when he played, but he only played 6 games and then was injured the rest of the season. Does that really warrant him at 7+ million. I thought he would be a good sleeper pick this year. I can understand the prices on A. Mourning and G. Hill, because they are both proven All - Stars and will probably be again. On the other hand, I don't think anyone would pay 7 million for a relatively unproven player such as Fortson especially coming off such a serious injury.
|
| 27 | Erik B.
ID: 48830517
Tue, Oct 02, 12:13
|
RFS:
There HAS been a final decision, but we're going to hold off posting it until actual game launch. We think that you'll think it's FAIR.
-E
|
| 28 | Tree
ID: 7919212
Tue, Oct 02, 12:19
|
i too am disappointed with the dramatic changes in the free game. 5 players and 2 trades and 25 million?
i dont normally post here, but i am a long time player that does relatively well (usually finish in the top 5,000 in baseball, football, and hoops), and i find these changes to be overly drastic and unnecessary.
it seems that ever since TSN got involved, there's been a lot of things going haywire with the SmallWorld games.
there have been more crashes, more downtimes, more slow updates, this season than every before.
and now the free game looks to be beyond lame.
sorry about the whining, but that's how i feel..
Tree
|
| 29 | Janitor
ID: 8939211
Tue, Oct 02, 13:03
|
Thanks for posting the prices.
They seem overpriced in general, but I think I say that every year. It's going to be hard to fill the center spot this year. Any center that is decent is at least 7 mil or more.
|
| 30 | biliruben
Sustainer
ID: 3502218
Tue, Oct 02, 13:29
|
I have to disagree with you, Tree.
I think the games have been run with fewer glitches and with a staff that is vastly more responsive.
I think that TSN is trying to figure out a way to actually profit from providing these games for us, and the new reality of the internet is that they will ask us to pay. They are trying to make that transition not to painful, so as to not lose too many folks, but at the same time differentiate and offer a superior product if you are willing to pay for it. Sounds pretty smart to me. I think those truly competitive managers out there can dig up 5 or 10 bucks for A WHOLE SEASON! Come on - close to a nickle a day! If you aren't dedicated and just want to half-heartedly compete with some buds, play the scaled-down free game.
Get with the reality that nothing is free. We got spoiled with companies offering us free stuff, but that is in the past.
Speaking of that, you might want to consider donating to rotowire, or else they are gonna start charging too. They may anyway.
|
| 31 | Janitor
ID: 8939211
Tue, Oct 02, 13:39
|
Erik B.
One player I couldn't find on your list is Zeljko Rebraca for Detroit. The Sporting News NBA Preview Magazine that I am reading lists him as the Pistons starting center. With the lack of quality centers at a low price Rebraca should be added.
I hadn't heard of the guy, but this is what the mag says about him: "they aquired the rights to European legend Zeljko Rebraca, a 7-0, 257-pound center. Rebraca, 29, a national hero in Yugoslavia, is considered similar to a young Vlade Divac."
"the Pistons will try to get by with Yugoslavians Rebraca...Rebraca will be given every opportunity to start. Rebraca, who has nice range on his jumper, can score off the dribble and in the post. He also is supposed to be a good shot blocker."
"Sonics' 1994 first-round pick has ben top player in Europe for seven seasons. A perimeter-oriented big man."
|
| 32 | Erik B.
ID: 48830517
Tue, Oct 02, 13:50
|
Gang:
I see both sides of this. I know that we're better on the C. Service side than we've been in a while, that we still have a lot of glitches that are annoying (to say the least), and that we care (a great deal -- as is evidenced by Bernie's interaction with y'all on this board).
We're not trying to fleece our loyal users. We're trying to devise an economic model that is at the midpoint between keeping a free user base and building a premium audience. We want both groups to be happy, and ultimately we want to stay in business too. I think we've been fairly upfront about all these things.
I can promise you this -- that those who pay for our premium product will have fun, will participate in our Fan's Voice community, and won't be paying more than $.07 per day...
-ESB
|
| 33 | Bernie H.
ID: 19852422
Tue, Oct 02, 13:50
|
Janitor:
He's not in the game because he was giving Microsoft Excel's spell checker some major problems. I imagine that he'll be IPO'd into the game once we get closer to opening day and we get a clearer idea of his status on the Pistons.
Thanks,
Bernie, TSN
|
| 34 | Erik B.
ID: 48830517
Tue, Oct 02, 13:55
|
Regarding pricing:
We'll look for the Pistons Center (thanks).
I went online (using Bernie's nifty spreadsheet) and drafted the following team:
G Kidd
G J Williams
G B Jackson
G J Tinsley
F Gugliotta
F Sprewell
F T. Chandler
F Madsen
C Shaq
C Todd MacCulloch
Now let me ask you this: With the possible exception of the Lakers, what team wouldn't be happy with a starting line-up of Kidd, Williams, Sprewell, Gugs/Chandler and O'Neal? This team would be a DOMINATING team in the real NBA, and we didn't want to let managers pick all all-stars or starters to begin with.
C'mon, guys. Accept the challenge. We're not pricing too high. We're pricing so that you need to assemble a team that resembles a real NBA team.
Without a struggle, there can be no glory ...
-ESB
|
| 35 | rockafellerskank
Donor
ID: 4911539
Tue, Oct 02, 14:00
|
Erik B and all:
I'm saving comments for later. There are some very nice bargains IF people will take the time to:
1. Look past the $9M and up guys
2. Read up on off season moves
3. Research some trends
4. watch the pre-season
5. Take some risks on players returning from injury (retirement? ;)
6. Realize thatw e are all int he same boat. Just becuase a player (marion, for example) was a bargain last year, it doesn't mean that he has to be a bargain this year. People will have to decide whether Marion is wort it rather than makinghim a unanamous no-brainer.
7. Do you want a bunch of no-brainer picks. I don't
rfs
|
| 36 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Oct 02, 14:18
|
Thanks Erik. I was getting rather tired of all the whining over high prices, but your post suggests that maybe they could even be a little higher.
Last year, I was disappointed that it was possible to draft an opening roster with several studs. As it turned out, a lot of the cheapies that made that possible - Desmond Mason, Ed Najera, Hanno Mottola, etc. - turned out to be disappointing, especially in the early weeks. A better approach would have been to go with more mid-priced guys, like Fortson, Camby, Grant, Marion... all who were priced in the $3-6m range. Some of them turned out to be real steals at those prices.
Of course, we got used to being able to own some of those guys at bargain prices, so now when we look at their new prices, we get sticker shock. What we don't know yet, though, is who the new bargains will be this year. Some will emerge in the preseason. Some won't break out until November. But I have no doubt that they are in there. The best managers will find them early.
I've always favored high prices at the outset. Most of us are so good at making $ that we are able to afford All-Star rosters before the All Star break. I'd hate to have that eventuality moved up even earlier.
Of course, we could all quibble with the price of this player or that player. If you think someone is overpriced, then don't draft him. Maybe gravity will bring the price into line someday. Maybe not. There are plenty of fish in the pond.
And to those of you who are belly-aching about paying - deal with it. You will find this happening with many other gaming sites as well. Producing these games costs real money, and advertisers aren't paying big bucks for you to ignore their ads anymore. If you really want to play, I'm sure you can find a way.
If you want better technology, more server capacity, & more responsive customer service, who do you think is going to pay for it?
Erik and Bernie, from what I've seen so far, the prices look fine.
|
| 37 | Erik B.
ID: 48830517
Tue, Oct 02, 14:21
|
Thanks, Guru. Also, one other point -- for all those who hate ads, our pay game will have none of them...
|
| 38 | DR Stars
ID: 162592010
Tue, Oct 02, 14:57
|
Erik, I don't know if this is the thread to post this, but since it's the one getting more attention now, I'll ask:
What's going to be done with us international managers?
|
| 40 | JCS
ID: 136251215
Tue, Oct 02, 15:34
|
I agree with Guru's comments concerning the high prices, the game will be more interesting if you can't have a star-studded team right from the all-star break.....
But....I think the big-time studs are priced TOO LOW....In my opinion, the price difference between, say a T-Mac, and someone in the 8.5M$ is too little for the difference of production you will get....People will rather spend one million more to have the real studs, so I think a lot of the players in the 7.5M$-9M$ range will see a continual decrease in their price in the first months of the season.....
|
| 41 | blue hen, almighty
Leader
ID: 34937217
Tue, Oct 02, 15:41
|
I agreed with Guru. The low prices in baseball this year contributed to my disinterest.
I also think a lot of you need to leave Erik and the other guy alone about the free game being crappy. Maybe it is crappy, but that's why it's free. If you want something that's not crappy, then fork over the dough. I mean, you can't get a Jaguar for the price of a Civic. That's why people drive Civics...
|
| 42 | Bernie H.
ID: 19852422
Tue, Oct 02, 16:00
|
"Erik and the other guy"? I'm "the other guy" now? Yeesh, last time I was "the other guy" was 7 years ago when I stole my wife away from her ex-boyfriend.
Bernie, TSN
|
| 43 | The Bandwagon
ID: 148381715
Tue, Oct 02, 16:19
|
Whining? Bernie H asked for our thoughts? When you ask for our thoughts, you usually get good and bad feedback. Some may seem to be "whining", others may seem like suck-ups. If we all thought alike, their would be no need for this message forum.
Anyway, I'm up for any hoops challenge that TSN offers.(Pay game only)
|
| 44 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Oct 02, 16:29
|
BW: are you now whining about my comment?
;-}
|
| 45 | The Bandwagon
ID: 13955216
Tue, Oct 02, 17:20
|
Finally! I got a response from someone, thanks Guru :)
I thought I had a decent point in my 2nd post, with no response from TSN. It doesn't bother me at all if they raise prices,(Not "Whining") BUTT, they should raise the prices of the top tier players instead, and not the bottom/middle tier players. Raising the prices of bottom tier players leads to more people avoiding those players (because most of them suck), which leads to less differation in rosters. Raising the prices for top tier players makes more sense, because people will pay a higher premium for a quality/consistent player rather than paying a premium for a mid/low tier player. Does this make sense to anyone but me? This solves the problem of managers loading up with top tier players at the beginning of the season (because of the higher price), and would create more opportunities to differ there rosters. Why?(Their are more middle/lower tier players in the game than their are top tier players)
I am just afraid this season will resemble the season of 98 when SW had 80% of the players over priced, and most managers were swapping the same 20 guys. Like I said, I'm not agaist raising prices, but my point would lead to more differation IMO.
PS. I am on a different computer, so my IP address may be different. I can assure you that this is the same "blunt" Bandwagon :)
|
| 46 | Tree
ID: 2385279
Tue, Oct 02, 22:39
|
as for the prices...at first i was pretty stunned..but then when i spent a few minutes on it, i realized it was pretty easy to draft a fairly good team with 50 million..
no complaints on that,
Tree
|
| 47 | DR Stars
ID: 162592010
Wed, Oct 03, 07:52
|
Give an example Tree, I've spent a couple of hours, and I'm not close to happy with the team I can draft...
|
| 48 | Tree
ID: 7919212
Thu, Oct 04, 12:44
|
without giving too much away...
when i draft a team, whether it be hoops, baseball, or football, there are usually two kinds of guys i pick.
1. guys that are legit point scorers (for me, it's 25 ppg), and will probably go up in value for 3 reasons...
A. i think they're undervalued.
B. i think they had a breakout season last year, and my gut tells me it was no fluke.
C. other people think like me on points A and B, so the value will go up for that reason...
2. guys that are cheap, that score ok, and that my gut tells me will score some decent points, and increase in value because:
A. Everybody needs cheapies to fill in the holes, and everybody who does even a tiny bit of research will find these guys.
B. They're gonna score more ppg then last year...
3. i also think an underrated stat in games like smallworld/tsn is ppg/$m. that's key to me. if a guy is not even 4.0, he gets NO consideration from me. i have one guy at less that 4.5 and six guys over 5.0.
i don't read fantasy mags. i do go to rotoguru, and rotowire a couple times a week. but i dont put a ton of time into it. i enjoy playing, i know i'll never win the dang thing, but if i finish in the top 10,000 i'm happy with a job well done, the top 5,000 i'm ecstatic, and the top 1,000, i'm thrilled to death.
fantasy is fun. always has been. i played roto baseball WAY back in the day in high school when i discovered the book by..steve wulf? in college, i used some baseball game on my old Tandy 1000 to get my buddies in a league where we drafted our teams. in the mid 90s, i played USA Today's game, before the internet took off...
and for the last 5 years or so, i've done fantasy baseball, hoops, and football, always finished first or second in my division (first in all sports the last 3 years running, and always in the top 10,000 - usually 5,000, but i'm struggling in baseball this year)
so there. why did i type all that? who knows? who cares? it's fun..
that being said, some of the guys on my rough draft team are:
Hardaway (ok, he is since looking injured again - may have to change that)
McGrady
Hughes
Nash
Mills
Fortson
maybe my biggest sleeper is evan eschmeyer. i'm a little biased by being a mavs fan, but it's a big dude in the middle, and i think he's gonna see some good playing time, taking the spot when bradley is hurt or in foul trouble, or the mavs need a big man in there.
ok, i ramble on. time to get back to my job.
Tree
|
| 49 | DR Stars
ID: 162592010
Thu, Oct 04, 13:49
|
Tree that's all good, but don't overlook the schedule, it happenned to me the first year and endep up around 10,000, last year I looked more into it and ended up with two teams in the top 400.
Good luck to all.
|
| 50 | Knightmare
ID: 74342318
Thu, Oct 04, 13:56
|
Do any of you think having 3 or 4 players from the same team, that has a great schedule, would be too many? For example I am thinking of either having 3-4 Indiana, or 2-3 Seattle, and depending on the progress of Shawn Kemp and Zach Randolph, 1-2 Portland Players.
|
| 51 | Tree
ID: 7919212
Thu, Oct 04, 15:25
|
schedule. haven't even thought of it yet..i've still got a few days of baseball left, and sunday football to prepare for...
i'm not sure if you're talking about "strength of schedule" over the entire season, or games played each week...
if you're talking about weekly games played, i definitely do pay attention to that, and you're right. it's crucial, to both increases in points and played value..
if you're talking about strength of schedule, that falls into the whole category of reading fantasy mags - no time to think that hard on the subject! LOL
Tree
|
| 52 | DR Stars
ID: 162592010
Thu, Oct 04, 15:32
|
Weekly games is what I meant, and Indiana, Seattle and Portland have the best start, I guess I'll have 5-6 players from those 3 teams to start the season. If they work out, they should see a lot of buying and allow me to keep trades for a while.
|
| 53 | Knightmare
ID: 74342318
Thu, Oct 04, 21:27
|
yeah I was thinking the same thing too DR STARS, Golden State has a good schedule as well, maybe Jason Richardson or Larry Hughes would be worth a buy.
|
| 54 | kan d
ID: 4936421
Thu, Oct 04, 21:38
|
Can someone tell me when the site will be up? What address?
|
| 55 | DR Stars
ID: 162592010
Fri, Oct 05, 08:19
|
Here's a question, what's better of this two options:
A) Draft a GSW player from day one, knowing they don't play the first day, but keeping a trade in hand.
B) Drafting someone else, and waiting for a GSW player to have a good showing and jumping on that player then.
|
| 56 | Knightmare
ID: 74342318
Fri, Oct 05, 08:30
|
Well,I would think one trade would be worth more than one game, but I don't really know.
|
| 57 | The Bandwagon
ID: 5911271316
Sun, Dec 23, 2001, 14:34
|
Just bringing this to the top. Comments have been made today in "Todays Price Changes 12/23" thread about this subject. Post 45 in this thread explains my theory I'm talking about in the price change thread.
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|