Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Super League as an Anglo-French competition is the best way forward


  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

#81 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,725 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 01:29 PM

So creating awareness in areas where there is already awareness will lead to commercial development?

How aware do you think everyone in Toulouse is of RL? And how many of them are attracted to the game at the current low level it's being played at in Toulouse? I'm not sure if you're being disingenuous or just don't understand what awareness truly means?

The more that are aware (which will increase as there'll be a fully pro club in the area with a marketing team and increased media coverage), the more that will be attracted/attached to the club and the more revenue streams that will be opened.

I don't see how feeder teams creates barriers to participation. It creates opportunities. Just ones that you think not all people would take.

French players having to go to England to play professionally is a huge barrier to participation. And completely avoidable if you create a club in their area.
Posted Image

#82 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,399 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 02:13 PM

No idea. I can't imagine much as the Championship isn't exactly a high profile competition in France that will see sponsors come on board. Sponsorship will increase as TV coverage does. Carlos has spoken a lot in the past about his commercial links in the city, which will be key in discussions between them and the RFL.


I was talking about the local marie thing, not sponsorship

If the clubs aren't up to it, they will go. That's sport. That's how it works. You can't keep the failing in just to save people's jobs. New jobs will be created.

But this is talking about dumping a bunch of clubs to be replaced by others with absolutely no indication that they will succeed. I don't know which other sports do this.

Why would we lose Sky money? The figures are still large. A European competition seems to be hit property in union and football.

In both of these, there are lots of well matched teams. Sky have no idea if this will be the case for new SL. And if I was sky, I would be making these arguments. Why pay high prices for a unproven product? Unless there is a bidding war...

The NFL have added/relocated loads of teams over the last two decades. And they're talking of adding even more.

I don't think anyone is expecting more than one French club to join the league initially.


I can think of Houston, Jacksonville, Carolina, and Baltimore in the last 20 years. Maybe you'd include the Browns. Otherwise, there have been lots of moves, but only comparable to 'London Bronco-esque' moves. And that is in a league of 32 teams (currently). From what I see, no teams have been lost from the NFL. Is our expansion to retain all the current teams?

One other thing - do the teams themselves (or the cities they are in) not have to pony up to the league in order to have the franchise in that palce? That could be completely wrong, but I seem to remember talk of LA trying to outbid St Louis for the Rams recenty...

And I have been seeing 3-4 clubs being mooted as the watershed for funding...

Edited by zorquif, 01 April 2013 - 02:22 PM.


#83 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,975 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 02:14 PM

Many on this forum have to understand how sport works in France its normal for the maire and region to put monies into local clubs,in the UK the taxpayers would be up in arms.

Clubs like PIA receive 90% of their funding from the maire which would equate to around Euros 800000.00 a season for a small village this is a massive amount of funds.

Gentlemen we are now moving to critical and someone out there needs to get a grip on things as i have stated on here many times SL clubs in the UK have to bite the bullet and except that French TV will NOT put up any cash until they see 3/4 french clubs in the league with a thriving comp.

What is the alternative? I will tell you what it is :( a comp that will slowly die a death over the next few years one only has to look at the fact that sky are now moving matches away from SKY SPORTS 1 onto 2 and 3 and putting them up against Union and Football matches at the same time (This was NOT happening a few years back) it is basically saying you know what we think SL in its current form has reached its max potential:(((( and this will be reflected in future by the amount of money they offer for a new contract.

CM


Fair enough viewpoint but you don't answer the question of the mechanics of doing this.

It's my guess Superleague needs to stay at 14 to avoid the repetitive fixtures, and it'd be good in theory to have three French clubs to sustain this but how do they avoid becoming 12th. 13th. & 14th. and suffer all the problems of getting hammered week in and out.

I'd cringe if three new French clubs came into SL 2015 at short notice to face 10 strong M62 clubs.

#84 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,399 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 02:18 PM

How aware do you think everyone in Toulouse is of RL? And how many of them are attracted to the game at the current low level it's being played at in Toulouse? I'm not sure if you're being disingenuous or just don't understand what awareness truly means?

The more that are aware (which will increase as there'll be a fully pro club in the area with a marketing team and increased media coverage), the more that will be attracted/attached to the club and the more revenue streams that will be opened.


I think that most people in RL are aware of RL. How many are attracted to go and spectate is a different thing. Actually, in a town where RU is (apparently) loved, would having a pro team there drag that many more people down? Without some serious (and transparent) market research about that, I can't see the justification for replacing a current SL team with Toulouse.

French players having to go to England to play professionally is a huge barrier to participation. And completely avoidable if you create a club in their area.


But having feeder clubs and motivation for the clubs to sign lads from these clubs would still create more opportunities. It might not break down the barriers as much as having pro-clubs in the south of France, but it would certainly remove barriers as compared to the status quo.

#85 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,725 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 07:38 PM

I was talking about the local marie thing, not sponsorship

Fair dos. I couldn't tell you.

But this is talking about dumping a bunch of clubs to be replaced by others with absolutely no indication that they will succeed. I don't know which other sports do this.

That is how the licensing/franchise system works, regardless of whether they're French or British.

NFL teams move their franchises to different cities. They dump their original city. The two LA clubs got dumped for St Louis and Oakland. Houston got dumped for Nashville.

In both of these, there are lots of well matched teams. Sky have no idea if this will be the case for new SL. And if I was sky, I would be making these arguments. Why pay high prices for a unproven product? Unless there is a bidding war...

You could say that about ANY sport that has promotion and relegation. There are new, unproven teams entered EVERY YEAR. It's a poor argument.

I can think of Houston, Jacksonville, Carolina, and Baltimore in the last 20 years. Maybe you'd include the Browns. Otherwise, there have been lots of moves, but only comparable to 'London Bronco-esque' moves. And that is in a league of 32 teams (currently). From what I see, no teams have been lost from the NFL. Is our expansion to retain all the current teams?

'London Bronco-esque'?!
LA to St Louis - 1,826 miles
LA to Oakland - 370 miles
Cleveland to Baltimore - 375 miles
Houston to Nashville - 855 miles

They ARE NOT London Bronco-esque!

One other thing - do the teams themselves (or the cities they are in) not have to pony up to the league in order to have the franchise in that palce? That could be completely wrong, but I seem to remember talk of LA trying to outbid St Louis for the Rams recenty...

The NFL being able to command hundreds if thousands of fans every week means they'd be hot property for any location, so not hard to believe.

And I have been seeing 3-4 clubs being mooted as the watershed for funding...

3-4 wouldn't happen all at once. It wouldn't be viable at all.
Posted Image

#86 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,725 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 08:16 PM

I think that most people in RL are aware of RL. How many are attracted to go and spectate is a different thing. Actually, in a town where RU is (apparently) loved, would having a pro team there drag that many more people down? Without some serious (and transparent) market research about that, I can't see the justification for replacing a current SL team with Toulouse.

I'd say all people in RL are aware of RL ;)
I'm guessing you meant most people in Toulouse are aware of RL. Are they though? Are they aware of TO13? Do they know when and where they play? Do they know what it's all about? I doubt the vast vast majority do.
Perpignan has an RU team. Toulouse is a huge place. There's room for a fair few sports there.

But having feeder clubs and motivation for the clubs to sign lads from these clubs would still create more opportunities. It might not break down the barriers as much as having pro-clubs in the south of France, but it would certainly remove barriers as compared to the status quo.

But why should English clubs have motivation to sign French players? Don't we want them to stock with English players? And why do France get special treatment? Why not Wales?
Posted Image

#87 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,399 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 08:18 PM

NFL teams move their franchises to different cities. They dump their original city. The two LA clubs got dumped for St Louis and Oakland. Houston got dumped for Nashville.


You could say that about ANY sport that has promotion and relegation. There are new, unproven teams entered EVERY YEAR. It's a poor argument.

I thought the idea with P and R is that the teams coming up have shown that they are the best in the division below. And so deserve to take the place of the worst teams in the division above. Not exactly unproven. In theory...

'London Bronco-esque'?!
LA to St Louis - 1,826 miles
LA to Oakland - 370 miles
Cleveland to Baltimore - 375 miles
Houston to Nashville - 855 miles

They ARE NOT London Bronco-esque!

You said in the last two decades...
St Louis to LA - 1980
LA to Oakland was 1997 so fair enough. You got me on the oilers one as well, damn you!
I classed the Ravens as a new team in 96, as they seem to. I actually mentioned the Browns just after that, who officially became inactive and then restarted.

When I said Broncosesque, I was meaning teams like the redskins, Panthers. Further than the Broncos really, but on the grand scheme not that big (lets not start that again!)

So in 20 years, the NFL have had four new teams and two moves. One of the new teams was generated to presumably fill the market gap left by one of the moves. In a 32 team league, of which none of the areas which had teams in '93 are without a team now.

3-4 wouldn't happen all at once. It wouldn't be viable at all.


But apparently this would be required for the TV deal. If it can't go ahead without the TV deal and it isn't viable to introduce this many teams at once, then what's happening?

#88 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,399 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 08:23 PM

I'd say all people in RL are aware of RL ;)
I'm guessing you meant most people in Toulouse are aware of RL. Are they though? Are they aware of TO13? Do they know when and where they play? Do they know what it's all about? I doubt the vast vast majority do.
Perpignan has an RU team. Toulouse is a huge place. There's room for a fair few sports there.


But why should English clubs have motivation to sign French players? Don't we want them to stock with English players? And why do France get special treatment? Why not Wales?


Got me again! Maybe you are right about Toulouse. But I thought that was the point of the NL1 campaign... But given the big RU following, how many of the newly educated masses would decide they want to watch RL?

If we had 3 or 4 French teams in a 10 team SL, I reckon there'd be fewer English lads in SL than if we had 9 English teams, all of whom have special arrangements (maybe a one way DR thing) and salary cap incentives to sign French players. As for Wales, we aren't talking about having three welsh teams in SL. We can cross that bridge when we come to it!

#89 MustardBoy

MustardBoy
  • Players
  • 28 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:21 PM

RE: As for Wales, we aren't talking about having three welsh teams in SL. We can cross that bridge when we come to it...
You're absolutely dreaming if you think Wales could ever sustain even one Super League side. South Wales isn't interested, North Wales has been deemed too small and sprawling for even a Union side.
I can see where all this expansion is going, you'll end up shutting down several English clubs, for a handful of French clubs of the same size (or smaller) to pop up in their place.
There may be more cash floating around, and a few more players available, but none will benefit your clubs or England, you'll just have aided the growth of French RL at your own expense.
Expansion should come as an addition, not as a replacement. France should be encouraged to form their own league, not just take a slice of Super League which would indeed become bottlenecked.

#90 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,975 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:42 PM

Expansion should come as an addition, not as a replacement. France should be encouraged to form their own league.

I can see where all this expansion is going, you'll end up shutting down several English clubs, for a handful of French clubs of the same size (or smaller) to pop up in their place. There may be more cash floating around, and a few more players available, but none will benefit your clubs or England, you'll just have aided the growth of French RL at your own expense.


France has it's own league it just doesn't have a £90,000,000 TV contract.??

I'm not sure Les Catalans are a small club, 4th. in the league last years and seventh best supported.

Maybe the English game should kick Les Catalans out as they are there "at our expense"?

The league is open to European clubs and currently they pick the biggest 14.

If Toulouse are a better bet than and English club in they go.

The time when French clubs will be coming in "at our expense" is when they are brought in offering less than any English club displaced.

You also forget that if French RL does grow, so does meaningful International RL which comes above clubs.

#91 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,725 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 11:13 PM

I thought the idea with P and R is that the teams coming up have shown that they are the best in the division below. And so deserve to take the place of the worst teams in the division above. Not exactly unproven. In theory...

No, the team promoted have proven they can compete in a lower league, not that they can compete in a higher league. They then change the vast majority of their squad for the new league.
Any new team is unproven.

You said in the last two decades...
St Louis to LA - 1980
LA to Oakland was 1997 so fair enough.
You got me on the oilers one as well, damn you!
I classed the Ravens as a new team in 96, as they seem to. I actually mentioned the Browns just after that, who officially became inactive and then restarted.
So in 20 years, the NFL have had four new teams and two moves. One of the new teams was generated to presumably fill the market gap left by one of the moves. In a 32 team league, of which none of the areas which had teams in '93 are without a team now.

No, the two LA franchises left in 1995. I'm not sure where you've got your dates from but they're wrong.

1995
Jacksonville Jaguars join AFC
Carolina Panthers join NFC
Los Angeles Rams move to St. Louis
Los Angeles Raiders move to Oakland
1996
Cleveland Browns move to Baltimore
1997
Houston Oilers move to Nashville
1999
Cleveland Browns join the AFC
2002
Houston Texans join the AFC

LA had two teams in 1993. 20 years on it still has none.

But apparently this would be required for the TV deal. If it can't go ahead without the TV deal and it isn't viable to introduce this many teams at once, then what's happening?

That was one person's opinion, not a stated fact.
If it were a fact, you'd guess they'd look to add one at a time and go from there to get the revenue. Short term pain, long term gain. It's strategy.
Posted Image

#92 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,725 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 11:23 PM

Got me again! Maybe you are right about Toulouse. But I thought that was the point of the NL1 campaign... But given the big RU following, how many of the newly educated masses would decide they want to watch RL?

The Championship campaign was a nightmare. A poor idea in the end. The salary cap was actually smaller than the local French league, so they couldn't sign up the best players. They were actually weaker. Awareness would not have been spread very much, and not many will have wanted to follow them as a result of that campaign (playing with a weak squad in an English second tier getting smashed every week).

If we had 3 or 4 French teams in a 10 team SL, I reckon there'd be fewer English lads in SL than if we had 9 English teams, all of whom have special arrangements (maybe a one way DR thing) and salary cap incentives to sign French players.

Not one person has suggested a 10 team SL with 3-4 French clubs in. It's an argument of extremes.

As for Wales, we aren't talking about having three welsh teams in SL. We can cross that bridge when we come to it!

Why? Why can't we cross that bridge now? Why do we need to wait until Wales RL is in a position to have three clubs strong enough to apply for SL before putting up a wall and saying "you can't come in, we'll develop players via our English clubs"? If it's a good idea, we should be proactive, not reactive, surely?
Posted Image

#93 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,725 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 11:39 PM

RE: As for Wales, we aren't talking about having three welsh teams in SL. We can cross that bridge when we come to it...
You're absolutely dreaming if you think Wales could ever sustain even one Super League side. South Wales isn't interested, North Wales has been deemed too small and sprawling for even a Union side.

So they will never be interested? Ever? I'm pretty sure Crusaders managed a few 6-10k crowds in Wrexham with some good marketing. Had they had the right backing, this could have continued. There's huge potential there to build, and I'm glad things are going well for them in their rebuilding phase.

I can see where all this expansion is going, you'll end up shutting down several English clubs, for a handful of French clubs of the same size (or smaller) to pop up in their place.
There may be more cash floating around, and a few more players available, but none will benefit your clubs or England, you'll just have aided the growth of French RL at your own expense.

How many English clubs were "shut down" because of Catalans?
Same size? Catalans are probably about the 7th largest club in the northern hemisphere. What English club that isn't getting a chance is bigger or even close to as big as them?

Surely increasing cash and the number of players in the pool is good for the intensity of the competition? Surely having better international competition will help England's preparation?

Expansion should come as an addition, not as a replacement. France should be encouraged to form their own league, not just take a slice of Super League which would indeed become bottlenecked.

The SL has too many clubs as it currently stands. There's talk of retracting anyway. There are only so many clubs the league can hold presently. In an ideal world we'd just keep adding to the league, but it's not an ideal world. We aren't the NRL.

France do have their own league. They just don't have millions of pounds in the form of a TV deal to make it all professional. Maybe one day, if we grow them one in at a time. Should Wales form their own professional league as well?
Posted Image

#94 ParraEelsNRL

ParraEelsNRL
  • Coach
  • 1,245 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:21 AM

Go to the toulouse website toxiii.com click on the TOXIII TV banner on the right just above the LER competition table and you can either watch all of toulouse's games, or just read the match report that has all their home crowds.

I'm sure with a full time squad, their current crowds of anywhere between 1,000 up to 3,500 watching more or less third tier RL will more than double and probably triple over night.

For example of a crowd they got not a few rounds ago.

TO vs. Lézignan - The Toulouse feast their public
Saturday night (17/11) Minimal stage in front of a good crowd, Toulouse Olympique wins against FC Lézignan score of 32-18.

Technical: TO XIII 32 - 18 Lézignan
MT: 8-6; Referee: M. Molinier (Midi-Pyrénées League) 2142 spectators.



#95 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,399 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 06:58 AM

No, the team promoted have proven they can compete in a lower league, not that they can compete in a higher league. They then change the vast majority of their squad for the new league.
Any new team is unproven.


No, the two LA franchises left in 1995. I'm not sure where you've got your dates from but they're wrong.

1995
Jacksonville Jaguars join AFC
Carolina Panthers join NFC
Los Angeles Rams move to St. Louis
Los Angeles Raiders move to Oakland
1996
Cleveland Browns move to Baltimore
1997
Houston Oilers move to Nashville
1999
Cleveland Browns join the AFC
2002
Houston Texans join the AFC

LA had two teams in 1993. 20 years on it still has none.


That was one person's opinion, not a stated fact.
If it were a fact, you'd guess they'd look to add one at a time and go from there to get the revenue. Short term pain, long term gain. It's strategy.


Ah, I was looking at St Louis to La, not the return trip!
Baltimore was definitely considered as a new team - Cleveland Browns were just inactive for a couple of years.

In any case even with your numbers, that is eight changes in 20 years. In a (currently) 32 team competition. Seeing as we are not looking at expanding the league, that is like us adding/moving 4 teams in 20 years.

Lets think about what RL has done in that time. We added PSG, Catalans, Gateshead, Celtic Crusaders and their subsequent move to just being the Crusaders. So we are actually expanding as aggressively as the NFL. Even if you count the Browns as a move then new team. We just aren't as good at keeping the new teams alive!

So the suggestion of adding 3 or 4 clubs was in addition to the current 14 teams, or adding 3 or 4 clubs? If we do add one team at a time, where does the money to fund these clubs come from?

As for Wales, is there any potential single club there? And if so, do we add or replace?

#96 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,725 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 11:06 AM

Ah, I was looking at St Louis to La, not the return trip!
Baltimore was definitely considered as a new team - Cleveland Browns were just inactive for a couple of years.

In any case even with your numbers, that is eight changes in 20 years. In a (currently) 32 team competition. Seeing as we are not looking at expanding the league, that is like us adding/moving 4 teams in 20 years.

Lets think about what RL has done in that time. We added PSG, Catalans, Gateshead, Celtic Crusaders and their subsequent move to just being the Crusaders. So we are actually expanding as aggressively as the NFL. Even if you count the Browns as a move then new team. We just aren't as good at keeping the new teams alive!

You're comparing apples and oranges though. NFL is huge. RL is not. Expansion of the NFL is far easier to achieve.
Out of all those expansions, only one has worked. And out of all those expansions, only one was based in an area with a history of RL. What does this tell you? It tells you that unless you've got a butt-load of money (like at London), top-down expansion won't work.

So in 18 years of SL, we've got two expansion sides, and only one success.

So the suggestion of adding 3 or 4 clubs was in addition to the current 14 teams, or adding 3 or 4 clubs? If we do add one team at a time, where does the money to fund these clubs come from?

After looking back, the suggestion by the OP had 4 French teams and 6 UK teams so apologies there, although he has also suggested a SL2.
Either way, it's not something I agree with. The balance wouldn't be right. You can't have 33% of a league as new clubs. It's too dangerous.

Like I've said, one at a time would be better. Whether we replace teams or add to them would be dependent on the relative strengths of the clubs left. There are numerous C-License clubs at the moment that aren't pulling weight, so I wouldn't expand.

As for Wales, is there any potential single club there? And if so, do we add or replace?

As above, depends who are left. If you had 14 A-license clubs, you wouldn't replace them. Even 14 A/B-License clubs. But we've got 4-5 clubs on C-License (I'd say Cas, Salford, London, Wakefield and Widnes) so unless they improve, we should look to replace the worst ones.

Potential clubs are in Championship 1. They are just nowhere near ready. We don't need to rush this again.
Posted Image

#97 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,399 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 01:19 PM

By Jove Wellsy, I think we've come to an agreement of sorts! The thing I couldn't get my swede around was banging 4 clubs in at a go. One at a time might work. But I sort of think addition is the way forward there. Maybe a retraction to 10 teams, as has been much mooted, and then addition of clubs - either championship teams that have reaaly got themselves together or a french/welsh team that looks ready to make the jump (maybe with slightly lower - but transparently so - requirements). I do think that reducing to ten clubs and then replacing 4 of those with French clubs is taking too much away from the 'heartlands' though.

#98 joe elliot

joe elliot
  • Coach
  • 485 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:52 PM

I might of missed it if somebody has already mentioned it, today's league express on page 2 says that Catalans are commercially a bigger club than Leeds.
So why wouldn't Toulouse be in for 2015
waddell

#99 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,399 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 06:28 PM

I don't understand the logic there. Please go on...

#100 MustardBoy

MustardBoy
  • Players
  • 28 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 07:57 PM

I'm pretty sure Crusaders managed a few 6-10k crowds in Wrexham with some good marketing. Had they had the right backing, this could have continued.

Well you're pretty wrong if you think anywhere near 10k fans turned up at Wrexham. Huge potential, how, in what respect? Have you ever been to Wrexham/North West Wales, what are you basing this on? I live not too far from the border and there's no interest in RL or money in the area. It's Union or Premiership football.

How many English clubs were "shut down" because of Catalans? Catalans are probably about the 7th largest club in the northern hemisphere. What English club that isn't getting a chance is bigger or even close to as big as them?

But you're not talking about one club are you, you're talking about several. What if we end up having a SL of 5 English, 5 French and 2 Welsh clubs? Some teams will have made way for them. If Barrow or Halifax were French or Welsh, many people would be pushing for them to join SL, infact they'd probably already be there.

Surely increasing cash and the number of players in the pool is good for the intensity of the competition? Surely having better international competition will help England's preparation?

Why will there be more cash if there are a few Welsh and French teams? Won't this all aid Wales & France in getting a few more players, but come at the cost of the English, where teams have downsized and no longer have top training facilities? Shouldn't there be more of a push to promote the game in the North East, Cumbria, South Yorkshire & the Midlands?

The SL has too many clubs as it currently stands. There's talk of retracting anyway. There are only so many clubs the league can hold presently. In an ideal world we'd just keep adding to the league, but it's not an ideal world. We aren't the NRL.

So you're saying SL may downsize, then why not just have promotion & relegation, and allow these French teams to join that? Why must they join the top flight? You say downsize, in the case the league is already full of top sides. Or if the league downsized, surely there'd then be no room for more French teams.

France do have their own league. They just don't have millions of pounds in the form of a TV deal to make it all professional... Should Wales form their own professional league as well?

No, of course not... But should we just let Crusaders join SL and kick out maybe Hull KR? Allow 3 engineered expansion clubs from France to join and remove Castleford, Wakefield & Huddersfield. I'd have said Broncos, but using the Welsh logic, rugby Union is big down there, I think they had an attendance near 15k once, and additionally, it's the capital city.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users