Join 3,438 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Flickr founders leaving Yahoo
June 18, 2008 9:23 AM   Subscribe

Please turn off the lights. The founders of flickr are joining the executives leaving Yahoo. Caterine Fake left Friday; Stewart Butterfield will leave July 12th.
posted by timeistight (61 comments total) 5 users marked this as a favorite

 
That first article's headline is kind of misleading. It talks not at all about the "mass exodus". Are we supposed to?

If so: Duh. Yahoo was the hotness back in 1327 IY (Internet Years) but now? They have a couple services (News and, apparently, Flickr) but nobody thinks of it as part of any kind of branded, cohesive whole the way the Google Empire is. Nobody wants to run Nameless Internet Commodities R Us.
posted by DU at 9:32 AM on June 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


I like Google, I think they make a great product, and their placement in the search hierarchy is well earned. But could someone not suck long enough to provide them with an inkling of competition? How bad must it get when everyone's best hope was for them to be bought out by Microsoft?

Yahoo has some really good disparate parts, they just don't add up to a whole profitable company. It doesn't help that they haven't been able to monetize some of the really good parts (del.icio.us, yahoo pipes).

On preview: exactly DU. Their needs to be a reason for Yahoo, besides increase shareholder value. I'm not found of vision statements, but that doesn't mean you don't need vision.
posted by zabuni at 9:35 AM on June 18, 2008 [3 favorites]


that reminds me, I should probably bring my resume up-to-date.
posted by davejay at 9:36 AM on June 18, 2008


Valleywag claims to have Stewart's resignation letter:

As you know, tin is in my blood. For generations my family has worked with this most useful of metals.
posted by ahughey at 9:46 AM on June 18, 2008 [5 favorites]


Yahoo has some really good disparate parts, they just don't add up to a whole profitable company.

If you are trying to support your later point that Yahoo! doesn't have good vision, that's fine. But if you're trying to say that Yahoo! is not profitable, that's just wrong. See, for example, here. They might not be profitable enough for your liking or their shareholders' liking, but they're certainly not loosing money.
posted by iknowizbirfmark at 9:52 AM on June 18, 2008


So did their sale to Yahoo! three years ago stipulate that they had to remain on staff for three years in order to be vested in the stock they received as part of the sale price? How fast can they unload that stock?
posted by mattbucher at 9:53 AM on June 18, 2008


...and Carl Schmidt will be leaving his job at Home Depot to become a cashier at Lowes...
posted by Postroad at 10:02 AM on June 18, 2008


The Valleywags and TechCrunches of the world are really making ventures out there on the good old web a little more depressing, day by day. I know that it's been a business by and for the cash for well over a decade, but the reactions to Stewart Butterfield's resignation letter are aggravating. It boils down to "Where's the money? Who is this flake? Good riddance!" in most cases, with others telling others not to read his letter too deeply, since it's just whimsical.

While whimsical, there's some melancholy in there and quite a bit of truth. I'm not sure how much tinsmithing is really done at Yahoo! these days, and I (naively) would like to think that the craftsmen working with the raw materials are still responsible for a lot of what makes new ventures good. Tin or code, I wish them all the best in any future pursuits.
posted by mikeh at 10:09 AM on June 18, 2008 [3 favorites]


mattbucher -- "So did their sale to Yahoo! three years ago stipulate that they had to remain on staff for three years in order to be vested in the stock they received as part of the sale price? How fast can they unload that stock?"

Any stock they received at that time may already be gone. SEC Rule 144 covers when they may sell certain securities received, but as usual, the banks are one (maybe more?) steps ahead of the regulators.

Many investment banks will cut a deal as follows. Assume that at the time the sale to Yahoo! was brokered each received a allotment of shares that would fully vest in three years.

Naturally, each would be concerned about concentration risk in general, and the possibility that Yahoo! might tank over that three year period thus eroding - perhaps totally erasing - their wealth.

A bank might offer to purchase the shares at, for example, 25% discount to current value but pay immediately.

The shareholders benefit as they've realised cash now, and have offloaded their market risk.

The bank benefits as they have a 25% buffer against future declines in price, and can fully participate in any upside over and past the three year term.

Pick the company properly, and a bank can make several hundred percent returns. Not a bad business to be in at all, especially so as this is done via most Private Banking divisions, and its expected that this trade will in turn generate large commissions for unrelated activities.

These arrangements have come under IRS scrutiny recently as many are structured so no taxes are due until the three year period (in this example) has elapsed. One can do a lot with money over such a horizon, enough to render the original sale effectively tax free (i.e. generate enough money to pay the taxes originally incurred).
posted by Mutant at 10:13 AM on June 18, 2008 [2 favorites]


So is this all fallout from the failed microsoft offer?
posted by Dave Faris at 10:19 AM on June 18, 2008


They have a couple services (News and, apparently, Flickr)

They also have YUI, which is great little UX library and also has a grid-based layout system embedded in it.

Honestly, much of what they've done the last three years -- acquire talent by merger, build out APIs and libraries for developers to hook into, and let the developers develop and the merged companies (mostly) do their own thing -- has been brilliant. But in the end, Google has far more cash and the same desire to do what Yahoo has done in the innovation department.

Microsoft has doomed Yahoo. Their two most viable options were to accept the merger or grab a white knight like News Corp. Now, $10 under Microsoft's original offer, they're either going to go in a fire sale to Baidu or Google, or they're going to have to accept that they're going to be a distant #2 behind the new monopoly that is Google -- or worse, #3 behind Microsoft if they ever get their Live.com act together.

Yahoo is done. We're probably looking at a long, slow, AltaVista type collapse for them. They'll still be profitable, but they're already heading off on a siding.
posted by dw at 10:20 AM on June 18, 2008


they're certainly not loosing money.

That's too bad. I like loose money.
posted by timeistight at 10:21 AM on June 18, 2008 [3 favorites]


...but maybe the loose money has all been tied up.
posted by timeistight at 10:22 AM on June 18, 2008


I think one of the most important parts of a successful online business--or a computer business of any type for that matter--is agility. The best companies can move quickly to fit niches as they appear; they are pro- rather than reactive. There are exceptions, of course, like Microsoft, but these are rare. Even IBM (the 800-pound gorilla of IT) has shown a great deal of adaptability.

The problem is, the stockholders and "outside" executives don't understand this fact, and it's easy to fall victim to an entrenchment mentality. Yahoo! was organized to be the best "web portal" of the 1990s, and it was. Unfortunately, that was a decade ago, and Google has outstripped them in every way.

Hell, they still own (and run!) Geocities. Has there ever been a better example of an obsolete boondoggle?
posted by sonic meat machine at 10:25 AM on June 18, 2008


It figures everyone's leaving right before I get to the party...

(I start at Yahoo! July 7th)
posted by potch at 10:27 AM on June 18, 2008


I hope that awesome resignation letter is real!

I also hope that the flickr founders start a new photo sharing site, so I can abandon my yahoo account. Until they sold out I'd never used yahoo for anything, neither had any friends my age (early 20s), but we all had flickr accounts so we were forced to, which kinda pissed us off. Now none of us use flickr, for a variety of reasons.

the reactions to Stewart Butterfield's resignation letter are aggravating

Are they ever! I was kind of shocked that it seemed to fly over most of their heads. If something doesn't fly over my head, it's pretty much like a 2x4 to the skull, so what's up with those folks? And so crotchety, like old men sending back their soup.
posted by zarah at 10:27 AM on June 18, 2008


Google has outstripped them in every way.

I'm assuming Google will get there too, inevitably. They are a heavily valued public company and eventually their agility will atrophy as the risk tolerance of their investors declines, which I assume will happen as more people get shares and want to hold on to being in the black.
posted by spicynuts at 10:30 AM on June 18, 2008


In all seriousness, Michael Arrington is pursuing and attacking Yahoo and Yang specifically with a bloodlust that's actually kind of pathetic. Is there some long-standing vendetta there, or is Yahoo just not in his portfolio?
posted by potch at 10:34 AM on June 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


they're going to have to accept that they're going to be a distant #2 behind the new monopoly that is Google

Second place isn't a bad place to be for a while. This started working for Apple, after Microsoft got soft in the late 90s. I imagine Google can't keep buying other properties unless they have a larger vision, which they have yet to share with the public, and they will start to rot from their own weight, just like Microsoft. That's an opportunity, if Yahoo is lean and hungry.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:35 AM on June 18, 2008


Yahoo! does seem to have some direction. Acquisitions like eGroups, GeoCities, del.icio.us, and Flickr are all generally about sharing information between individuals within their chosen communities. They could have been the biggest community nexus of the Internet. Unfortunately, Yahoo! feels more like a toll booth than like my local community centre.
posted by zennie at 10:39 AM on June 18, 2008


I'm secretly hoping Yahoo merges with Google as Yahoo's fantasy sports games could only get more awesome with Google involved.
posted by drezdn at 10:40 AM on June 18, 2008


The founders of flickr are joining the executives leaving Yahoo have been gone since long before MS's offer, and the formal announcement of their departure was made yesterday.

FTFY.
posted by genghis at 10:41 AM on June 18, 2008


MetaFilter: like old men sending back their soup. Sorry, couldn't resist.
posted by Cranberry at 10:43 AM on June 18, 2008


As soon as I typed that I new someone would tag it, lol.
posted by zarah at 10:47 AM on June 18, 2008


What is bad about about Flickr now that it's Yahoo. Sorry, I really don't see a difference.
posted by Zambrano at 10:48 AM on June 18, 2008


I like Flickr, but it won't take much for me to abandon it. There's always something new/better/different.
posted by tommasz at 11:15 AM on June 18, 2008


I think it's be great if Stewart and Caterina started a GNE that in the end didn't turn out to be vaporware, because that 'alpha' was fun as hell.
posted by cellphone at 11:23 AM on June 18, 2008


What is bad about about Flickr now that it's Yahoo. Sorry, I really don't see a difference.

Then you're probably not Chinese or German, or from the UAE. Lots of censorship issues for a lot of flickr users since it was yahooed. Also a lot of people didn't like being literally forced to open an yahoo account in order to access their long standing flickr accounts. Plus, if you're a real internet old timer you might have old yahoo scars that didn't totally heal from the takeovers of Geocities & Webring. A lot of those people have been understandably nervous that this well liked service would end up in ruins too. None of these things may bother you personally but they have been legitimate concerns. For some people it's better to avoid a company like Yahoo.
posted by zarah at 11:24 AM on June 18, 2008 [2 favorites]


Zambrano, what's bad about Flickr, del.icio.us, and a million other sites that fall under Yahoo!'s umbrella are the fact that they're practically mothballed. del.icio.us 2.0 should have been out by now but they're supposedly having scaling issues in testing. Flickr has rolled out a handful of features and kept up fairly well on maintenance, but they should have either had video sharing eons ago or more agressively pushed their way into other frontiers. Pipes are pretty great, but I haven't done much with them recently since a few features I'd like aren't there and don't seem to be on the way.

The point is that there aren't differences to be seen. These, among other things, were either rolled out as individual companies or introduced by Yahoo! only to sit around without the push they deserve. There are things Yahoo! is doing well, like the aforementioned YUI, their design templates for Visio/OmniGraffle/etc. and a lot of cool developer support, but the number of other things they've stumbled on -- only some of which I've seen, since I'm not really on their site that much -- are distressing.
posted by mikeh at 11:24 AM on June 18, 2008


they're supposedly having scaling issues in testing

Supposedly? Do you think they're making them up?

I work in scalability (not for anyone related to yahoo). Most people are terrible at it. Even the people that are good at it have lots of issues. It's not easy at the scale of Yahoo's properties.
posted by flaterik at 11:40 AM on June 18, 2008


I use flickr and del.icio.us heavily, and I was sad to see them get picked up by yahoo for this very reason. I don't think they've done badly under yahoo (I doubt it's yahoo's fault that flickr totally blew it with video, and del.icio.us hasn't changed much at all, but that's neither a problem nor yahoo's fault), but I sure wish that google had picked them up instead. Flickr has nearly 6,000 of my pictures so switching is going to be a pain if it comes to that. Google's answer to flickr, picasa, charges by storage amount rather than by amount uploaded. It's not a serious competitor.

As for Caterina and Stewart leaving, wevs. I doubt they've personally done anything significant at flickr in years anyway. When you're that high up the food chain, most of your day involves boring meetings and sucking up to people even higher up the food chain. It's much more significant when an underpaid mid-level engineer, who makes everything happen, gets burned out and leaves than when a couple suits do.
posted by mullingitover at 11:54 AM on June 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Sorry, I didn't know it was censored. The other stuff is greek to me.

What will be "ruined"? Should I cancel it?
posted by Zambrano at 11:54 AM on June 18, 2008


what's bad about Flickr, del.icio.us, and a million other sites that fall under Yahoo!'s umbrella are the fact that they're practically mothballed. del.icio.us 2.0 should have been out by now but they're supposedly having scaling issues in testing. Flickr has rolled out a handful of features and kept up fairly well on maintenance, but they should have either had video sharing eons ago or more agressively pushed their way into other frontiers. Pipes are pretty great, but I haven't done much with them recently since a few features I'd like aren't there and don't seem to be on the way.

I'd see this as legit criticism if it weren't for the company that is kicking their ass being even worse. Integration across Google appears to take forever. Blogspot, Adsense, Feedburner and Analytics all require separate logins despite being clearly related offerings from the same company. The integration that does exist is awkward crap.

Yahoo isn't losing because of the lack of integration or new features. They are losing because the only thing Yahoo is doing well is buying web2.0 companies and they took way too long to roll out their advertising system.
posted by srboisvert at 11:59 AM on June 18, 2008


srboisvert writes "Integration across Google appears to take forever. Blogspot, Adsense, Feedburner and Analytics all require separate logins despite being clearly related offerings from the same company. "

Integration can be a headache, and it takes time that could instead be spent developing things that the users care about. Most users don't sit around thinking, 'gosh, I wish a bigger company could buy this site I use and forcibly assimilate me into their userbase.' So I forgive them for dragging their feet on this 'feature.'
posted by mullingitover at 12:10 PM on June 18, 2008


Yeah, thanks genghkis. I enjoyed this whole crunchbase-gossipy-Ooh Web 3.0 you whacky California .Com Startup IPO Guys- linkage, but it was the Valleywag link that made any of it made sense.

It's not the MS crap, it's that they had to wait 3 years to get their money. Good for them, and vaya con dios.

And if they did have any stock, I'm guessing Mr. Ichahn would love to take it.
posted by cavalier at 12:25 PM on June 18, 2008


made any of it make. Harumph.
posted by cavalier at 12:25 PM on June 18, 2008


This started working for Apple, after Microsoft got soft in the late 90s.

No, it started working for Apple when they got the iPod. Before then, what sustained them was their immense and intense cult, giving them 3-4% of the market. Then came the iPod, and it was the gateway drug to bring people into the Mac world. Market share for them is now at what, 8%?

Yahoo, OTOH, just doesn't have the same cult following. To lurk in the shadows like some shrew waiting for the asteroid to take out the Google-saur just isn't going to work for them.
posted by dw at 12:32 PM on June 18, 2008


Oh, and Yahoo isn't the only one to have bought some of these products and abandoned them. Anyone remember Dodgeball?
posted by dw at 12:35 PM on June 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Fair enough, srboisvert. I think judging a company by comparing it to it's presumptive competition isn't necessarily the best way to set goals, but it's true that Yahoo's doing a reasonable job. "They're doing a worse job than us" isn't really a refutation.

As for scaling, I definitely believe that scaling is likely a difficulty if they've added any more complexity to del.icio.us or have the expectation that the user load is going to be heavier than the current (sparse) version. Still, it's been cooking for a long time now since it was publicly announced as a limited beta last September. Minor bitching on an unrelated subject here, though.

I'm just an end user and developer. I know Yahoo makes money from advertising and positioning, but those are just necessities of the game to me. I care more about the fact that my toys are being used but aren't as shiny and some of them are gathering dust on the shelf. That and the fact that they turned my favorite TV Listings page into some Flash monstrosity for a while a few months ago.
posted by mikeh at 12:49 PM on June 18, 2008


Hell, they still own (and run!) Geocities. Has there ever been a better example of an obsolete boondoggle?

Musn't forget Yahoo's 1999 acquisition of Mark Cuban's Broadcast.com for $5.7 billion.
posted by ericb at 12:50 PM on June 18, 2008


Yes yes but how will this affect development on Game Neverending???!
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 1:19 PM on June 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


I know that it's been a business by and for the cash for well over a decade, but the reactions to Stewart Butterfield's resignation letter are aggravating. It boils down to "Where's the money? Who is this flake? Good riddance!" in most cases, with others telling others not to read his letter too deeply, since it's just whimsical.

Money turns everything to shit. I'm really glad to see that Stewart has kept his sense of humour -- it's something that infused GNE back in the day, and Flickr too. You don't have to be a suit to wear a suit, Valleywag, you douchebags.

I'll keep using delicious no matter what, probably, but my first thought on reading this news yesterday, that Stuart and Caterina were leaving, was: well, shit, guess I better finally cancel my Flickr account.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:45 PM on June 18, 2008


My beef with Yahoo comes primarily from their shady advertising practices. When I worked in digital media, their typical standard operating procedure would be to charge us an inflated CPM based on ridiculous overpromises, then underdeliver and screw up our ad serving or targeting (which was based on bogus data anyway). Furthermore, they typically had no way to demonstrate any benefit from what they were selling us in the first place. When we called them on it, their usual response was essentially to shrug and point to their comScore results, as if to say "we're the most popular enormous portal, you have to buy us." Their idea of innovation was "look, we have a new page layout with a more noticeable L rec."

As I understand it, one of the things making their shareholders nervous was that ad revenue has been practically running in the other direction from Yahoo for the past two years. Now the ad networks and social networks are eating their lunch when it comes to display advertising (let's not even mention paid search).

Good. Fuck 'em.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 1:47 PM on June 18, 2008


Also: Yahoo, Google, Microsoft and Apple are all equally fucking pernicious. And hilarious, in their own ways. Dinosaurs die, though. That's what dinosaurs do.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:48 PM on June 18, 2008


I think it's be great if Stewart and Caterina started a GNE that in the end didn't turn out to be vaporware, because that 'alpha' was fun as hell.

No shit. Maybe one day....
posted by jokeefe at 3:01 PM on June 18, 2008


Hey Dodgeball still works... i still get texts about what people I don't really care about are doing from time to time!

It was terribly useful for a big loosely coordinated trip to vegas (something like 30 people); back home it seems mostly a novelty.
posted by flaterik at 3:12 PM on June 18, 2008


If Yahoo keeps losing good people, nobody will want to buy them for more than a fire sale. They don't really have any great technology that an acquiring company doesn't already have or want, and if Yahoo dies, competition will pick up the customers anyway. Look at Netscape.

Instead an acquiring company would be buying a package including the good people. The more that leave (or the more that threaten to leave if any given company buys them out) the less likely any deal will happen - at least for any good price.

Anyway, I disagree with some comments people have made about old, lumbering companies. Sure, adapt or die, but you can't call Microsoft or IBM old and lumbering. They are still out there on the edge innovating. Anyone that thinks differently should go talk to IT and see what companies are always mentioned for enterprise level hardware (IBM) or any gamer who wants a new box (MS and XBOX360). On top of that, companies like MS are gobbling up innovation (see Sea Dragon, now Photosynth). Contrary to how people are painting Yahoo's best hope being purchased by MS as sad, it is actually the dream of most small and mid-sized companies. Yahoo just has a corporate culture that says they must be out there on their own or die. Well, looks like die.

p.s. - this will get me shot by zealots, but Sun is in the same boat. Their stock has been in freefall since October where it has slid from $24 to $12.
posted by Muddler at 3:43 PM on June 18, 2008


Michael Arrington is pursuing and attacking Yahoo and Yang specifically with a bloodlust that's actually kind of pathetic. Is there some long-standing vendetta there, or is Yahoo just not in his portfolio?

No, he's just a jerk.
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 3:56 PM on June 18, 2008


I hope Flickr survives. I haven't found any other photo site (including Picassa & Zooomr) with the same mix of features. I'd also miss del.icio.us, which I use instead of my browser's bookmarks.
posted by mike3k at 4:43 PM on June 18, 2008


That first article's headline is kind of misleading. It talks not at all about the "mass exodus".

Well, duh. It's TechCrunch.

Yahoo! was organized to be the best "web portal" of the 1990s, and it was. Unfortunately, that was a decade ago, and Google has outstripped them in every way.

Ridiculous: Flickr (vs. Picasa), del.icio.us (vs. ..), Yahoo News, Yahoo Sports, fantasy sports, instant messaging, casual community games...

... so crotchety, like old men sending back their soup
posted by mrgrimm at 5:07 PM on June 18, 2008


Doesn't seem surprising. A lot of small-company founders stick around long enough after an acquisition to vest, then go and found new companies. That's what they like to do, and it's completely different than working for a big company.

I used to like the start-up world, but these days I'm happier in a big company. I've worked at 2 big companies now that are serial acquirers, and this seems like a common pattern. After all, if they were in early enough, after a couple years they've vested and now have the money to do whatever they want... the perfect sort of freedom for doing another start-up (if I was independently wealthy, I'd be a lot more interested in the startup world again).
posted by wildcrdj at 7:21 PM on June 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


Michael Arrington takes on everyone from AP to Yahoo! He needs to get a Z in there.

I subscribed to Yahoo!'s DRM'd music download service for a couple of years. It was nice when it worked, but that wasn't often.
posted by lukemeister at 7:21 PM on June 18, 2008


I'm not a techie, so I really have no right to join this conversation, but mikeh's (second) comment kind of bothered me. I've been a del.icio.us user for years, and I don't think that there's much room for improvement. I mean, I think it's pretty much perfect, and any improvements made should be small modifications -- nothing drastic that would change the overall function, appearance, and usability of the site. I prefer simple, usable sites rather than ones that take forever to load in my browser.. or crash my browser.. or are so bloated that they become more trouble than they're worth. I've had to abandon so many promising sites because they've gone this way, and I would be gutted if I had to abandon del.icio.us. I feel the same way about Flickr. It's fine how it is RIGHT NOW. If I wanted to watch videos and share videos, I'd go to YouTube. I still think that the video segment of Flickr was unnecessary. All of these 'improvements' (from instant messengers in Facebook.. onwards) don't always enhance the user's experience on the site. Some do, of course, but there's nothing worse than knowing that the change is coming, and you're going to have to find a suitable replacement.. or that there is no comparable site. (Don't ever change, MetaFilter)

But, once again, I'm just a computer user (and a barely capable one, at that), so my opinion isn't really important.
posted by Mael Oui at 9:02 PM on June 18, 2008


The two recently celebrated, along with Flickr's other original employees, a "Vestfest" for their take from the $35 million sale of Flickr to Yahoo three years ago;
posted by mecran01 at 10:07 PM on June 18, 2008


I think it's be great if Stewart and Caterina started a GNE that in the end didn't turn out to be vaporware, because that 'alpha' was fun as hell.


They turned it on briefly a couple months ago and got everyone excited. That code and IP is, I am sure, owned by Yahoo since they presumably bought Ludicorp not Flickr. I'm not sure what the future is now but I hope Stew and Cat now realize they have the independence and resources to do what they really want to do and that that means they return to what they had originally started...

/capodistria
posted by vacapinta at 3:36 AM on June 19, 2008


Hmm...just for future reference, does anyone know if there's a way to download all of your Flickr photos? Individually saving 3,000 photos isn't exactly feasible.
posted by Locative at 4:50 AM on June 19, 2008


I've seen people recommend this tool for downloading all of your photos. It doesn't look like it's been updated recently, so I'm not sure how it will handle any videos you might have. Also, I think it might just be for Windows. There's also this flickredit.
posted by bluefly at 5:36 AM on June 19, 2008 [2 favorites]


fuck photo sharing. bring back GNE!
I'm just going to go ahead and assume that the resignation letter is one big nod towards a gne-like already in progress, and that we'll all be camping the mines and yoinking tin in an upcoming gne-like game.
posted by yeoz at 9:50 AM on June 19, 2008


yeoz. vacapinta. I love you both, but I really can't see it happening. I hope I'm wrong.
posted by nthdegx at 1:12 PM on June 19, 2008


I also wish for a GNE return.

But I thought it was other folks who brought it back for April Fool's Day.
posted by Riverine at 4:22 PM on June 19, 2008


I think Stewart is over the gne. Long over it, in fact. But I could be wrong. It was others at yahoo/flickr who brought it back, for the love of the game.
posted by routergirl at 4:49 PM on June 19, 2008


« Older Oops! Swiss national broadcaster SRG turned back t...  |  Moodstream... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments