[Colin Macqueen]

Gentlemen,

Frank Pont says
"One could also even classify them in a number of general subjects. Would also provide great reading for people new to the field of golf course architecture."

As it happens I have about 500 threads with their GCA title ( roughly grouped ,,,Bunkers, fairways ...etc) set out in a Word document and an HTML that one can then click on individual items and get straight to the chosen thread.  If any one wants a copy I am happy to provide it. However I cannot get a Word or HTML document to appear in the reply box so that the actual URLs are active.  I can however email the documents to individuals who might be interested.

If anyone can tell me how to enter an HTML/Word document in the Reply box and have the lines activated I will give it a go.

Cheers Colin

[Ted Sturges]

This is something I wrote on this site 11 years ago.  Thank you Colin for bringing it to my attention.  I feel the same way today that I did 11 years ago...


"
What this site is....and what this site isn't
« on: October 03, 2002, 08:54:43 AM »


Time never stands still does it?  Ran and John started this site a few years ago, and it grew, and it grew, and it grew.  Then, "Golf's Most Loved Figure" has his mug in Sports Illustrated, and the site grows some more.  The old gang doesn't hang out as much around here as they used to.  Too bad.  I have learned so much from some of you who don't frequent the site as much these days.  I too am guilty of not participating as much as I once did.

What this site is (to me)-

This site is a miracle.  Through this site, I've made some great friends and met some fascinating people.  I've met people like Tom MacWood, Robert Huntley, Steve Smyers, Brad Miller, Khristine Januzik, Richard Mandell, Bob Harrison and of course, Tommy Nacarrato.  I've shared rounds of golf with people on both coasts that I had not met (other than at this site) prior to meeting them at the 1st tee on those special days.  I would NEVER had made many of these acquaintances if it were not for this site.  How cool is that?  This site is a place to LEARN.  My mother told me when I was about 10 years old that I would have a much easier time learning with my ears open and my mouth shut.  (Advice to GCA participants:  There are some really smart people who are willing to help the rest of us learn more about architecture at this site.  If we stop telling everyone else how much we (don't) know, and ask more questions and listen to the answers you get, you just might learn something).  Have fun with it and enjoy the wealth of information this site can offer.

What this site isn't (to me)-

A general site on golf.  (It's about the architecture stupid!)  Please leave the non architecture topics to sites that cater to those topics.  This site also isn't a place for lynchings and mean spirited posting.  I know there are the occasional uninformed posters hanging out here, but who among you knew everything there was to know about architecture the day you were born (OK Ran, don't answer that question).  All these feuds and wars really drag this site down (and is why, I believe, many of my favorite GCA'ers don't participate as much any more).  PLEASE COME BACK!  Anyway, enjoy the site for what it is (a place to make friends and learn about golf architecture) and when posting, apply the rule Ran always uses when he evaluates topics on this site: "What can we learn about architecture within this topic". 

OK, I'll get off of my soap box now.  Thanks for listening.

TS"



I say reinstitute "Ran's rule":    "What can we learn about architecture within this topic".  I think that would go a very long way in restoring/improving this site.  And...JK wouldn't have to rest on the 7th day (he could rest every day).

Cheers,

TS

[Garland Bayley]

If Ran would give me 5 days with the power to delete posters I could get this site back to greatness.

Day one,  Delete the obvious.
Day two.  Outline the criteria for staying.
Day three and four.  Take private appeals both for and against posters.
Day five.  Delete remaining weak links. 

I would be happy to fall on my sword at the end of day five and enjoy reading this great site from the shadows.

Didn't you fall on your sword before, and apparently weren't satisfied with the shadows so you came back?

[John Kavanaugh]

Garland,

Ted identified a problem and I offered a solution. I have never left the site on my own free will before but have respected the privilege once returning each time. A touch of rest/renewal never hurt anyone.

[Bruce Katona]

I do enjoy coming on here; reading what others feel and believe with a passion.  Engaging in intelligent dialog is an art form and here, the art is almost always well refined.

Back when first registering, there were a few posters who would wax a tale poetic, some of those tales, embellished or not, were a welcome part of my day......sadly those folks fdon't come around much any longer.

Caveat emptor.

[Donnie Beck]

I still drop by here on a daily basis but checked out many years ago...  Over the years a have become friends with many wonderful people whom I would have never met if not for this site, but it just isn't the same as in the early years... A simple glance at the number of newer members with thousands of posts will give you a good indication of how the quality of posts has declined.... I will continue to lurk and enjoy the occasional meaningful threads but my days of starting thoughtful posts only to have them bumped to the bottom are over...

[Bill Brightly]

When this site opened for business more than a decade ago, I was something like customer #5.  It was a fresh idea.  It was fun.  Ran had great ideas for how to improve it, and he did.  He added the feature interview section.  He added the "in my opinion" link.  Then he added the architecture timeline (a terrific learning tool).  The site grew.  Ran's immense mug (ever try to buy Ran a hat?) graced the pages of Sports Illustrated. And more people came to play...and more...and more.

Then it got a little nasty.  Green bold type appeared on the scene.  And it got uglier...  Some antagonists were shown the door.  Others should have.

About that time (something like 06 or 07), I just got bored with the site and left.  What had at one time been a great place to discuss architecture, learn, create interesting topics and chime in on topics created by other site visitors, became a place for put downs, superiority, elitism, bad manners, people taking themselves too seriously...and a lot less "learning" (less fun as well).  So, I left.  I didn't leave mad, I just left.  It just got stale and boring to be honest.

About a year and a half ago, I came back.  I have 2 nephews who are relatively new to the game who got hooked on the site and were talking about it, so I came back.  And it was fun...for awhile.

A fine wine gets better with age.  Not so much with golfclubatlas.com.  Why is that?  Too many people?  Too many "mean" people?  Some of the recent rants about girlfriends as caddies, and playing angles to Augusta greens are just downright ridiculous.  

Why does this site not evolve "better"?  Why can't it continue to "improve"?  As a resource for a young person wishing to study golf architecture, this site is an amazing resource.  As a case study in poor manners/saying things in cyberspace that one would never say to another person's face, it is fairly embarrassing.  

TS

PS:  And I too recall Ran telling me that he had banned the anonymous posters a few years back.  In the early days it was fun, but it was the wild west.  People had several different posting names and used those aliases to post things they wouldn't post under their real name.  I would like to see Ran enforce the no alias rule, as he made that change for a reason and I don't think that reason has changed.

Ted and others,

I have been here seven years and sincerely wish I had been here when it started. You had a relatively small group of REALLY knowledgeable posters and played a huge role in developing a fantastic website. But I get a little tired hearing about the old days...I've read the old posts and you certainly had your share of OT threads and dumb posts. It is easy to remember just the highlights of the good old times, when every new thread was by new by definition...Duh, let's talk about the 8th at Pebble Beach, is this a great golf hole or a just another forced layup? If I asked that question now it would be viewed as lame, but in year one...

I think the current site takes unfair criticism for a few inappropriate threads/comments, ignoring the fact there is a ton of great gca discussion. The Old Course renovation discourse was superb, IMO.


But what this site can proudly take credit for is being the point of the sword in a significant change in attitude among the golfing public at large in terms of appreciating good golf course architecture; and a far greater appreciation for the work of the ODGs. I can't prove this statement, I just feel it. I see things like Donald Trump hiring Gil Hanse and C & C, and I sense the influence of GCA.com. I read about Jack Nicklaus learning from Tom Doak at Sebonack and altering some of his courses to be more player friendly, and I sense the influence of GCA.com.

I see restoration work on my home course, and know that as Grounds Chair I stumbled on this site doing research and became hooked. I KNOW the importance of this site because I see it in the ground, and I can explain to fellow club members the history of our architect and his design intent. I can steal pictures of the Road Hole at St. Andrews and explain each bunker to my members in an article and stop a lot of bitching about why a greenside bunker had to be deepened. (It is hard for them to counter: "the hole is modeled after The Old Course"...) I can post a question to the DG about punchbowl greens, and in two days have 15 photos posted by gca.com members and gather valuable information about the hole we are restoring.

So yeah, Ted, GCA.com is a fine wine that has matured quite nicely. There might be a few pieces of cork in the wine because we opened it, but it is still the most valuable wine/golf course architecture site you can find. The cork is but a minor annoyance. And with care and luck, the bottle will keep pouring.

[Mac Plumart]

I played a great golf course the other day.  One I'd played many times over and one that gets better every single time I play it...yet it was stunning the first go 'round.

The other members of my foursome, three older gentlemen I was randomly paired up with...all right around scratch, complained about every thing.  Greens to fast, greens to slow, not enough water hazards, water over-used, too windy, yada, yada, yada.

Oh yeah, it was 75*, sunny, with just the right amount of breeze.

[Mac Plumart]

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KLqIOTv4FRNlYApnX7w8QF;_ylu=X3oDMTBvcTJzcm5xBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQDVjEzMQ--?p=midnight+in+paris&vid=742cf09a081ad1800e9ea0d7b9fdbc16&l=1%3A07&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DV.4606752846250324%26pid%3D15.1&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dr9n5VJdwvvA&tit=Midnight+in+Paris+%235+Movie+CLIP+-+Adriana+%282011%29+HD&c=19&sigr=11ancvahi&age=0&b=61&tt=b

[Jason Walker]

When this site opened for business more than a decade ago, I was something like customer #5.  It was a fresh idea.  It was fun.  Ran had great ideas for how to improve it, and he did.  He added the feature interview section.  He added the "in my opinion" link.  Then he added the architecture timeline (a terrific learning tool).  The site grew.  Ran's immense mug (ever try to buy Ran a hat?) graced the pages of Sports Illustrated. And more people came to play...and more...and more.

Then it got a little nasty.  Green bold type appeared on the scene.  And it got uglier...  Some antagonists were shown the door.  Others should have.

About that time (something like 06 or 07), I just got bored with the site and left.  What had at one time been a great place to discuss architecture, learn, create interesting topics and chime in on topics created by other site visitors, became a place for put downs, superiority, elitism, bad manners, people taking themselves too seriously...and a lot less "learning" (less fun as well).  So, I left.  I didn't leave mad, I just left.  It just got stale and boring to be honest.

About a year and a half ago, I came back.  I have 2 nephews who are relatively new to the game who got hooked on the site and were talking about it, so I came back.  And it was fun...for awhile.

A fine wine gets better with age.  Not so much with golfclubatlas.com.  Why is that?  Too many people?  Too many "mean" people?  Some of the recent rants about girlfriends as caddies, and playing angles to Augusta greens are just downright ridiculous.  

Why does this site not evolve "better"?  Why can't it continue to "improve"?  As a resource for a young person wishing to study golf architecture, this site is an amazing resource.  As a case study in poor manners/saying things in cyberspace that one would never say to another person's face, it is fairly embarrassing.  

TS

PS:  And I too recall Ran telling me that he had banned the anonymous posters a few years back.  In the early days it was fun, but it was the wild west.  People had several different posting names and used those aliases to post things they wouldn't post under their real name.  I would like to see Ran enforce the no alias rule, as he made that change for a reason and I don't think that reason has changed.

Ted and others,

I have been here seven years and really wish I had been here when it started. You had a relatively small group of REALLY knowledgeable posters and played a huge role in developing a fantastic website. But I get a little tired hearing about the old days...I've read the old posts and you certainly had your share of OT threads and dumb posts. It is easy to remember just the highlights of the good old times, when every new thread was by new by definition...(Duh, let's talk about the 8th at Pebble Beach, is this a great golf hole or a just another forced layup? If I asked that question now it would be viewed as lame, but in year one...)

I think the current site takes unfair criticism for a few inappropriate threads/commets, ignoring the fact there is a ton of  great gca discussion. The Old Course renovation discourse was superb, IMO.


But what this site can proudly take credit for is being the point of the sword in a significant change in attitude among the golfing public at large in terms of appreciating good golf course architecture; and a far greater appreciation for the work of the ODGs. I can't prove this statement, I just feel it. I see things like Donald Trump hiring Gil Hanse and C & C, and I sense the influence of GCA.com. I read about Jack Nicklaus learning from Tom Doak at Sebonack and altering some of his courses to be more player friendly, and I sense the influence of GCA.com.

I see restoration work on my home course, and know that as Grounds Chair I stumbled on this site doing research and became hooked. I KNOW the importance of this site because I see it in the ground, and I can explain to fellow club members the history of our architect and his design intent. I can steal pictures of the Road Hole at St. Andrews and explain each bunker to my members in an article (and stop a lot of bitching about why a greenside bunker had to be deepened...) I can post a question to the DG about punchbowl greens, and in two days have 15 photos posted by gca.com members and gather valuable information about the hole we are restoring.

So yeah, Ted, GCA.com is a fine wine that has matured quite nicely. There might be a few pieces of cork in the wine, but it is still the most valuable wine/golf course architecture site you can find. The cork is but a minor annoyance.

Bill-

Perfect.  Thanks.  Can't say it any better.

[Scott Warren]

Agreed, Jason. A great post, Bill - always good to read about the site's real-world successes.

[Sam Morrow]

Well put Bill.

[Lou_Duran]

So yeah, Ted, GCA.com is a fine wine that has matured quite nicely. There might be a few pieces of cork in the wine, but it is still the most valuable wine/golf course architecture site you can find. The cork is but a minor annoyance.

Hear, hear!  If life would only be muddled by such small bits.

BTW, I joined around 2001 and remember many ugly food fights from the beginning, a number of which were instigated by some of the very same people whose absence we now lament.  My only complaint is that being "frank and open" in public can have relatively serious consequences.  But such is life.  Take the good with the bad. 

[Brett_Morrissy]

...perhaps this site is not like a fine wine, but rather a fine winery - some years are good, some years are not as good and some years are affected by circumstances beyond the control of the winery (weather/climate) /GCA (new courses), but I am sure there are plenty of great vintages to come, we may have already been lucky enough to enjoy many of those fine early vintages, and some not so good - but there will always be the chance of another great vintage next season.
I think fine wine is best enjoyed with likeminded friends. Golf Club Atlas seems pretty close to that.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I have always been interested in what personality type (including me!) gets interested enough in internet forums to make 10K posts over a dozen years.  Here are my stats from the profile:

Total Time Spent Online: 54 days, 6 hours and 13 minutes.
Total Posts: 10138 posts (2.432 per day)
Total Topics Started: 226 topics
Number of Polls Created: 0 polls
Number of Votes Cast: 0 votes

Perhaps a little OCD compared to others?  Not sure....not sure I really want to find out either.......

[Ted Sturges]

When this site opened for business more than a decade ago, I was something like customer #5.  It was a fresh idea.  It was fun.  Ran had great ideas for how to improve it, and he did.  He added the feature interview section.  He added the "in my opinion" link.  Then he added the architecture timeline (a terrific learning tool).  The site grew.  Ran's immense mug (ever try to buy Ran a hat?) graced the pages of Sports Illustrated. And more people came to play...and more...and more.

Then it got a little nasty.  Green bold type appeared on the scene.  And it got uglier...  Some antagonists were shown the door.  Others should have.

About that time (something like 06 or 07), I just got bored with the site and left.  What had at one time been a great place to discuss architecture, learn, create interesting topics and chime in on topics created by other site visitors, became a place for put downs, superiority, elitism, bad manners, people taking themselves too seriously...and a lot less "learning" (less fun as well).  So, I left.  I didn't leave mad, I just left.  It just got stale and boring to be honest.

About a year and a half ago, I came back.  I have 2 nephews who are relatively new to the game who got hooked on the site and were talking about it, so I came back.  And it was fun...for awhile.

A fine wine gets better with age.  Not so much with golfclubatlas.com.  Why is that?  Too many people?  Too many "mean" people?  Some of the recent rants about girlfriends as caddies, and playing angles to Augusta greens are just downright ridiculous.  

Why does this site not evolve "better"?  Why can't it continue to "improve"?  As a resource for a young person wishing to study golf architecture, this site is an amazing resource.  As a case study in poor manners/saying things in cyberspace that one would never say to another person's face, it is fairly embarrassing.  

TS

PS:  And I too recall Ran telling me that he had banned the anonymous posters a few years back.  In the early days it was fun, but it was the wild west.  People had several different posting names and used those aliases to post things they wouldn't post under their real name.  I would like to see Ran enforce the no alias rule, as he made that change for a reason and I don't think that reason has changed.

Ted and others,

I have been here seven years and sincerely wish I had been here when it started. You had a relatively small group of REALLY knowledgeable posters and played a huge role in developing a fantastic website. But I get a little tired hearing about the old days...I've read the old posts and you certainly had your share of OT threads and dumb posts. It is easy to remember just the highlights of the good old times, when every new thread was by new by definition...Duh, let's talk about the 8th at Pebble Beach, is this a great golf hole or a just another forced layup? If I asked that question now it would be viewed as lame, but in year one...

I think the current site takes unfair criticism for a few inappropriate threads/comments, ignoring the fact there is a ton of great gca discussion. The Old Course renovation discourse was superb, IMO.


But what this site can proudly take credit for is being the point of the sword in a significant change in attitude among the golfing public at large in terms of appreciating good golf course architecture; and a far greater appreciation for the work of the ODGs. I can't prove this statement, I just feel it. I see things like Donald Trump hiring Gil Hanse and C & C, and I sense the influence of GCA.com. I read about Jack Nicklaus learning from Tom Doak at Sebonack and altering some of his courses to be more player friendly, and I sense the influence of GCA.com.

I see restoration work on my home course, and know that as Grounds Chair I stumbled on this site doing research and became hooked. I KNOW the importance of this site because I see it in the ground, and I can explain to fellow club members the history of our architect and his design intent. I can steal pictures of the Road Hole at St. Andrews and explain each bunker to my members in an article and stop a lot of bitching about why a greenside bunker had to be deepened. (It is hard for them to counter: "the hole is modeled after The Old Course"...) I can post a question to the DG about punchbowl greens, and in two days have 15 photos posted by gca.com members and gather valuable information about the hole we are restoring.

So yeah, Ted, GCA.com is a fine wine that has matured quite nicely. There might be a few pieces of cork in the wine because we opened it, but it is still the most valuable wine/golf course architecture site you can find. The cork is but a minor annoyance. And with care and luck, the bottle will keep pouring.

Bill,

This is extremely well stated.  I needed to see it this way, and I thank you for the view.

I need to work to sift out the bits of cork as you said.

The real world examples of this site's successes you gave are revealing and true.

Cheers,

Ted

[Mike Hendren]

I invite all participants to send me an IM.  Keep it simple - stay or go.  Barney first.
I will report back and honor your wishes.

Bogey

[Wyatt Halliday]

I still drop by here on a daily basis but checked out many years ago...  Over the years a have become friends with many wonderful people whom I would have never met if not for this site, but it just isn't the same as in the early years... A simple glance at the number of newer members with thousands of posts will give you a good indication of how the quality of posts has declined.... I will continue to lurk and enjoy the occasional meaningful threads but my days of starting thoughtful posts only to have them bumped to the bottom are over...

...and THIS is a damn shame. First, nary a response to someone I've learned a ton from on this site. Second, losing consistent contributions from someone with Donnie's knowledge is a crushing blow to this esteemed board.

I'll go back to not contributing now.

[Wyatt Halliday]

I still drop by here on a daily basis but checked out many years ago...  Over the years a have become friends with many wonderful people whom I would have never met if not for this site, but it just isn't the same as in the early years... A simple glance at the number of newer members with thousands of posts will give you a good indication of how the quality of posts has declined.... I will continue to lurk and enjoy the occasional meaningful threads but my days of starting thoughtful posts only to have them bumped to the bottom are over...

...and THIS is a damn shame. First, nary a response to someone I've learned a ton from on this site. Second, losing consistent contributions from someone with Donnie's knowledge is a crushing blow to this esteemed board.

I'll go back to not contributing now.

I think if Donnie ended his thoughtful posts with his job title more of the newbies would respond and keep his posts near the top of the board. People like to rub elbows with other people who are accomplished, recognized and associated with well regarded places or products. These criteria always enhance the appeal of someone's thoughts.

You are correct. Still...sucks a little.

[Joe Andriole]

I'm a little late to this. In regards to Ted's metaphor, not all fine wine improves with age. Many will but usually not in a linear way. A wine often goes through many stages in its evolution and some of them are described by oenophiles as "dumb" or "awkward". Ultimately a wine will mature and"peak" and then begin to decline, a decline which may be slow and graceful or precipitous and disturbing.  As a wine collector I have always felt that the value of buying and storing wine was to appreciate a particular wine through its evolution from a young tannic beast to a mellow (sometimes flabby) elder.

I am not sure that GCA's evolution is exactly analogous but I thin that it's too early to say that we are in any final decline.  I suspect that there have been phases that could be described as awkward and there may not be as much youthful exuberance but there is still much to savor and much to look forward to.

[Lou_Duran]

In regards to Ted's metaphor, not all fine wine improves with age. Many will but usually not in a linear way. A wine often goes through many stages in its evolution and some of them are described by oenophiles as "dumb" or "awkward". Ultimately a wine will mature and"peak" and then begin to decline, a decline which may be slow and graceful or precipitous and disturbing. 

Lesson learned the hard way.  Pete Pittock sold me a couple bottles of an Oregon Pinot Noir left over from the 2005 KP.  It was great wine for the casual drinker, and my wife and I enjoyed the first bottle shortly after the trip.  The second bottle was put away, real good as it turned out, and it was six or seven years before I came across it and served it.  Lousy, sour stuff.  We now try to drink all of our wines shortly after purchase.  Question:  I have an unopened bottle of 12 year-old Chivas Regal that's closer to 50.  What should I expect when I open it?   

[Bart Bradley]

I'm a little late to this. In regards to Ted's metaphor, not all fine wine improves with age. Many will but usually not in a linear way. A wine often goes through many stages in its evolution and some of them are described by oenophiles as "dumb" or "awkward". Ultimately a wine will mature and"peak" and then begin to decline, a decline which may be slow and graceful or precipitous and disturbing.  As a wine collector I have always felt that the value of buying and storing wine was to appreciate a particular wine through its evolution from a young tannic beast to a mellow (sometimes flabby) elder.

I am not sure that GCA's evolution is exactly analogous but I thin that it's too early to say that we are in any final decline.  I suspect that there have been phases that could be described as awkward and there may not be as much youthful exuberance but there is still much to savor and much to look forward to.

The only proper response to this post is:

CHEERS!

Bart

[Sven Nilsen]

In regards to Ted's metaphor, not all fine wine improves with age. Many will but usually not in a linear way. A wine often goes through many stages in its evolution and some of them are described by oenophiles as "dumb" or "awkward". Ultimately a wine will mature and"peak" and then begin to decline, a decline which may be slow and graceful or precipitous and disturbing. 

Lesson learned the hard way.  Pete Pittock sold me a couple bottles of an Oregon Pinot Noir left over from the 2005 KP.  It was great wine for the casual drinker, and my wife and I enjoyed the first bottle shortly after the trip.  The second bottle was put away, real good as it turned out, and it was six or seven years before I came across it and served it.  Lousy, sour stuff.  We now try to drink all of our wines shortly after purchase.  Question:  I have an unopened bottle of 12 year-old Chivas Regal that's closer to 50.  What should I expect when I open it?   

Depending on how the bottle of Chivas Regal was stored, it should be about the same as it was when it was put in the bottle.  Scotch does not "age" once it has been taken out of the cask and put in the bottle.  Unlike wine and beer, distilled products (like scotch) don't have any yeast, and thus won't go through any sort of changes.  But if the bottle has been exposed to light and/or heat or if the seal is no longer airtight (a serious concern for any bottle that has a cork seal), the quality of the liquor may have deteriorated and won't taste as good as it once did.

As for wine, I'd recommend you look into the the optimal drinking dates for that wine you're drinking soon after purchase.  Some wines are made to be readily consumed.  Others won't peak for a number of years.  General rule of thumb is that the more expensive the wine, the longer it will take before you hit its ideal window for consumption.

[Lou_Duran]

Thanks Sven.  Blood sugar and weight control problems have me drinking socially only.  I developed a taste for scotch while a bartender in my college years.  At my station in life at that time, Chivas was considered topshelf.  My recollection  is that the bottle was given to me sometime in the late 1970s, and it now sits fully sealed.  It was not until the initial King Putter, sampling several fine single-malts at Pete Lavallee's table that I learned it (Chivas) was rather common and ordinary.  Thanks also for the tip about when to drink the wine.  I don't remember seeing a recommendation on the shelf at Walmart, so I guess I'll have to look it up on the vintner's website.

[Bruce Katona]

Lou: The recommendation on dates for consumption on the Walmart shelf may specify the proper month or week to consume that fine botle of Chateau Libido - March 2013, not a range of years.

Cheers!

Bruce

PS: Living in the Great Garden State (NJ), we have arcane liquor laws. There are no "beer & wine licenses" in NJ. If you posess a liquor license to sell to the public, you can sell any and all types.  Yo can't by beer or wine at the gas station here either, not can you pumpyour own gas....no Self-Serv.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()