[Dean DiBerardino]

Yes, I'm pissed because they only offer the retirement account bumps to the PGA members.

CMAA and GCSAA members can participate in Golf Retirement Plus as well.

Below is the "Golf Retirement Plus Overview" from the PGALinks website.....

Golf Retirement Plus is a non-qualified supplemental retirement program tailored exclusively for the Professional Golfers' Association of America (PGA), Golf Course Superintendents Association of America (GCSAA) and the Club Managers Association of America (CMAA). Golf Retirement Plus allows these professionals to contribute to their own personal retirement annuity and allows their employer to make contributions to their retirement annuity. PGA members and apprentices can also earn incentives through the Golf Retirement Plus.

Golf Retirement Plus offers two main ways to grow PGA, GCSAA, and CMAA professional's retirement accounts:

•PGA, GCSAA, and CMAA professionals can personally contribute to their own accounts. This is probably the easiest way to grow a retirement savings because the professional controls when and how much he or she wants contributed. They can also contribute a portion of their income each month through the convenient systematic investing strategy available throughGolf Retirement Plus.

•Since many PGA, GCSAA, and CMAA professionals do not have a retirement option available through their facility, Golf Retirement Plus provides a win-win opportunity for both employers and these industry professionals. Employers win because they can contribute any amount to a professional's account as a reward, bonus or portion of salary and not have to deal with the costs and hassles of a traditional retirement plan. The professional wins because his or her account is getting a contribution from the employer, which helps grow the account.

The investment returns and principal value of an investment at any point in time may fluctuate.

With all these ways to contribute to their retirement accounts, PGA, GCSAA and CMAA professionals of all ages can take advantage of Golf Retirement Plus. They can become part of Golf Retirement Plus and build their retirement savings early in their careers.

[Kyle Harris]

When comp rounds and free equipment become taxable income, I believe we will then determine the true "impact" on the business of golf to the game golf.

[Carl Rogers]

The individual golfer in many areas of the USA (that has a reasonable selection of daily fee courses at a reasonable price) doesn't have to buy into this.

Buy clubs from E-Bay, play at twilight rates ... you do not have to play with ProV1's

I am fortunate to live in a part of the country where reasonable golf can be had without joining a club.  Earlier in life, I lived where decent golf was exclusively ultra private, long long waiting list and pricey beyond my means.

[Mike_Young]

Yes, I'm pissed because they only offer the retirement account bumps to the PGA members.

CMAA and GCSAA members can participate in Golf Retirement Plus as well.

Below is the "Golf Retirement Plus Overview" from the PGALinks website.....

Golf Retirement Plus is a non-qualified supplemental retirement program tailored exclusively for the Professional Golfers' Association of America (PGA), Golf Course Superintendents Association of America (GCSAA) and the Club Managers Association of America (CMAA). Golf Retirement Plus allows these professionals to contribute to their own personal retirement annuity and allows their employer to make contributions to their retirement annuity. PGA members and apprentices can also earn incentives through the Golf Retirement Plus.

Golf Retirement Plus offers two main ways to grow PGA, GCSAA, and CMAA professional's retirement accounts:

•PGA, GCSAA, and CMAA professionals can personally contribute to their own accounts. This is probably the easiest way to grow a retirement savings because the professional controls when and how much he or she wants contributed. They can also contribute a portion of their income each month through the convenient systematic investing strategy available throughGolf Retirement Plus.

•Since many PGA, GCSAA, and CMAA professionals do not have a retirement option available through their facility, Golf Retirement Plus provides a win-win opportunity for both employers and these industry professionals. Employers win because they can contribute any amount to a professional's account as a reward, bonus or portion of salary and not have to deal with the costs and hassles of a traditional retirement plan. The professional wins because his or her account is getting a contribution from the employer, which helps grow the account.

The investment returns and principal value of an investment at any point in time may fluctuate.

With all these ways to contribute to their retirement accounts, PGA, GCSAA and CMAA professionals of all ages can take advantage of Golf Retirement Plus. They can become part of Golf Retirement Plus and build their retirement savings early in their careers.

Dean,
I should have said PGA, CMAA and GCSAA.  In most cases all are employees and if they are the owner then no problem.  Also if it is used as a vehicle by the employer to contribute, then ok...but not vendors.  Thx for the info.

[Mike_Young]

When comp rounds and free equipment become taxable income, I believe we will then determine the true "impact" on the business of golf to the game golf.

Kyle,
I guess you read the article huh?  That's old news and the rating groups never consider it do they?
http://jacksonville.com/sports/golf/2012-03-02/story/government-cracks-down-compensating-course-volunteers-free-golf
 That would be an interesting topic.

[Niall C]

Mike

Let me side step the pension issue and address the main question head on. Like Anthony and others I believe the game will survive just fine and if needs be will simply shrug off the golf business if its dragging it down. Of course I'm speaking from the perspective of the UK with its broad base of members clubs run for the benefit of members and without any real eye to making a profit. But commercial operations will survive as well, even if they have to change their business model to do so, IMHO.

Niall

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
The PGA's retirement account is not a conspiracy.
 

Answers about the plan, including eligibility, options, enrollment, customer service and more.
 
How much in contributions can PGA Professionals receive each year?
Golf Retirement Plus program policy precludes releasing specific account information. However, the average account holder earned $3,200 in 2008 through the Sponsor Programs.

 How do the Golf Retirement Plus Sponsor Program incentives work?
Sponsor Program incentives are designed as a royalty paid by the sponsor to PGA Golf Enterprises, Inc. (PGAGE), which administers the program. PGAGE in turn contributes an equal amount to the participating PGA Professional(s) retirement account once they have opened a Golf Retirement Plus account and completed the annual Facilities Authorization Agreement. Contributions are often a percentage of the wholesale amount of each purchase.


What is Golf Retirement Plus?
Golf Retirement Plus was created as a supplemental retirement program for PGA members, GCSAA members and CMAA members. The program was developed at a time when only one in five professionals had employer sponsored retirement programs. There was significant financial cost and staff time associated with the development of Golf Retirement Plus, which is structured as an after-tax retirement program. This cost was borne by The PGA of America, which agreed to share the program with the GCSAA and CMAA, in order to eliminate the cost for similar due diligence and program development for these other associations.

Other than golf merchandise, what other Sponsor Program contributions are available?
Pepsi-Cola Company and OfficeMax are examples of two companies that recognize the value of delivering top brands and national account discount pricing as well as Golf Retirement Plus incentives to facilities which employ PGA Professionals. Pepsi-Cola Company products include Pepsi, Lipton and Gatorade. OfficeMax provides low price guarantee for facilities as well as a Golf Retirement Plus incentive for the PGA Professional(s) at those facilities. Most Sponsor Programs are from golf manufacturers who agree the PGA Professional is making the purchase decision or is significantly influencing the purchase decision.

How can PGA professionals and apprentices, GCSAA superintendents and assistant superintendents, and CMAA managers contribute to their Golf Retirement Plus accounts?
Professionals of all three organizations can add to their Golf Retirement Plus accounts through their own contributions and Golf Retirement Plus Employer Program contributions. PGA Professionals can also contribute to their accounts through participation in the Golf Retirement Plus Sponsor Programs.

What happens when new Sponsor Programs are added to Golf Retirement Plus?
When a new Sponsor Program is added to Golf Retirement Plus, each PGA Professional who wishes to participate in the new program must resubmit a Facilities Authorization Agreement to The PGA indicating their desire to participate.

Can Sponsor Program contributions be shared by PGA Professionals?
PGA Professionals have the option to allocate any portion or all of their Sponsor Program incentives to a fellow PGA Professional(s) of any member classification, employed at the same facility, using The PGA’s Incentive Allocation Agreement. PGA Professionals are encouraged to consider incentive allocation as part of an employee’s overall compensation package. Currently the majority of Sponsor Program incentives accrue to the highest-ranking PGA Professional at each facility.

Why should Employers support Golf Retirement Plus?One way to reduce hiring costs and retain key employees is by investing in them; both now and in their future. Golf Retirement Plus is one way for your employer to demonstrate their interest in the long-term well-being of employees. Contributing to employees’ Golf Retirement Plus accounts is easy and affordable:
 No costly fees. There are no fees associated with contributing to a Golf Retirement Plus account for a PGA Professional, CMAA Manager and GCSAA Superintendents account.
No employer ERISA concerns. Since the program is not a qualified employer-provided plan, your employer won’t be required to comply with the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) requirements. These requirements are often costly and time-consuming.
No investment decisions. The employer won’t have to worry about choosing an investment firm or investment vehicles, and the won’t have to keep track of their professionals’ accounts.
No administrative burdens. The only paperwork the employer has to complete in order to participate is a single form. The only recordkeeping the employer has is documenting the total contribution amount on the professionals’ W-2 forms.
 
How does the program handle employer authorization for PGA Professionals participating in Golf Retirement Plus?
PGA Professionals can receive contributions to their Golf Retirement Plus accounts in three different ways: their own contributions, employer contributions and Sponsor Program contributions. The PGA has a current Facilities Authorization Agreement on file for all PGA Professionals who are receiving Sponsor Program contributions. The agreement requires the PGA Professional to indicate whether or not they own their own golf shop concession. If they do not own it, they are required to have their employers indicate their consent on the agreement, which lists the Sponsor Programs in which the PGA Professional plans to participate. When a PGA Professional changes facilities/employers, they must submit a new Facilities Authorization Agreement to The PGA.

What happens if there is not an employer authorization on the agreement?
If a current authorized agreement is not on file at The PGA, PGAGE retains the royalties until the agreement is filed.
 

[Kyle Harris]

Jim Kennedy:

Has anyone on this thread stated this was a conspiracy?

[Mike_Young]

Jim,
Thanks.
All looks good to me except for :
How does the program handle employer authorization for PGA Professionals participating in Golf Retirement Plus?
PGA Professionals can receive contributions to their Golf Retirement Plus accounts in three different ways: their own contributions, employer contributions and Sponsor Program contributions. The PGA has a current Facilities Authorization Agreement on file for all PGA Professionals who are receiving Sponsor Program contributions. The agreement requires the PGA Professional to indicate whether or not they own their own golf shop concession. If they do not own it, they are required to have their employers indicate their consent on the agreement, which lists the Sponsor Programs in which the PGA Professional plans to participate. When a PGA Professional changes facilities/employers, they must submit a new Facilities Authorization Agreement to The PGA.
IMHO  there should be no vendor participation..that's all I'm saying....

What happens if there is not an employer authorization on the agreement?
If a current authorized agreement is not on file at The PGA, PGAGE retains the royalties until the agreement is filed.
Just shows they know it's a kickback scheme ( that is vendor contribution)  and want to be clear of any legalities with the employer..


 

[Jim_Kennedy]

Kyle,

Yes and no. Earlier, Ken Fry mentioned that Mike's supposition is "reaching into conspiracy territory" and I tend to agree with him. Mike is looking at a simple retirement program that is completely above board and seeing a conspiracy between the PGA, GCSAA, CMAA and its members that he feels is detrimental to their employers and the 'game'. The truth of the matter is, as Ken mentioned earlier, that no member of any one of those organizations can receive any of the 'extras' that the sponsor portion of the program provides unless their facility, i.e., their boss, has approved it.

[Mike_Young]

Kyle,

Yes and no. Earlier, Ken Fry mentioned that Mike's supposition is "reaching into conspiracy territory" and I tend to agree with him. Mike is looking at a simple retirement program that is completely above board and seeing a conspiracy between the PGA, GCSAA, CMAA and its members that he feels is detrimental to their employers and the 'game'. The truth of the matter is, as Ken mentioned earlier, that no member of any one of those organizations can receive any of the 'extras' that the sponsor portion of the program provides unless their facility, i.e., their boss, has approved it.

That's not exactly what I'm saying Jim.  My issue is the vendor participation.  WHY does a vendor do this?  What is his motivation?  I have never held out that there is a conspiracy. 
Meanwhile this was just one example of the "business vs the game"
Another:
Did anyone see a company displaying ground driven reels at the GIS show?  hmmmm...why not?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
Again, it's all aboveboard. The sponsor program from the vendor must be approved by the facility before it can be implemented. That means the owner is cognizant of the fact that the extra percentage is given to one of the participants if that product is chosen for the shop, the course, etc..  If the owner of the facility feels that product A, (one offering the premium), is less viable than product B, (one that doesn't offer it) the owner will most likely make the choice for B.

Vendor contributions are only "kickback" schemes if they aren't known by the owner, retaining the royalty just recognizes that fact.


 

 

[Mike_Young]

Mike,
Again, it's all aboveboard. The sponsor program from the vendor must be approved by the facility before it can be implemented. That means the owner is cognizant of the fact that the extra percentage is given to one of the participants if that product is chosen for the shop, the course, etc..  If the owner of the facility feels that product A, (one offering the premium), is less viable than product B, (one that doesn't offer it) the owner will most likely make the choice for B.

Vendor contributions are only "kickback" schemes if they aren't known by the owner, retaining the royalty just recognizes that fact.




 

 

Jim,
I understand all of the above.
Again: WHY does the vendor participate?  And would it not be a cleaner simpler program if there were no vendors allowed?

[Ken Fry]

Mike,

Raining where you are, snowing where I am.  This stuff is as close to golf as I can get!

You stated why the companies do these programs earlier:  it provides incentive for someone to carry and sell their stuff.  As I stated, the incentives are only as good as the quality of the product.  I sold a lot of Cobra out of my shop for three simple reasons:  the price point at the time for my members was very reasonable, the performance for my members was outstanding and I received incentive from Cobra to carry them.  It was a win-win all around.  I understand you feel there should be no incentives because because they are simple kickbacks.  It's possible to view it that way but again the scale is so small.

What about a scenario where I'm buying for a shop.  I use a credit card to pay off all invoices.  In turn, I accumulate points/miles/credits or whatever the card provides as incentive to use it.  Is this wrong?  If I hide that from you the owner, it would be.  If you as the owner give your blessing, so be it.

As a side note, I believe some of the companies are providing this program because they're tired of PUD abuse.  Too many pros get equipment free or at a huge discount only to turn around and sell it.  You think all companies should do away with all incentive programs directed toward organizational members.  It's not the tail wagging the dog.  It's any large organization creating a discount for their members based on their collective buying power (AAA, AARP, car clubs for different manufacturers, etc.)  They get discounts for a wide range of services non-members aren't eligible for.  How is this different?

Ken

[Mike Hendren]

Only in the golf/country club business do Republicans behave like Democrats.

Bogey

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
We know why vendors participate, they want to sell product. The system is open to more graft, as you described earlier - "you would be amazed at some of the reps that are just open about offering an architect a rebate to specify a particular pump station or sand etc.", in the absence of such programs.


 

[jeffwarne]

Jim,
Heres the fact:  Everyone could save 6% on purchase of Taylormade (and other products) if the pro was not getting a kickback to the retirement account.
 Put the retirement account deals in the club newsletter and let's see how many members have a problem, especially when most of the members probably are not getting retirement accounts anymore.  All of this was created by the PGA organization. 

As Mac said earlier the game will overcome it but when golf comes to the point it is now then entrepreneurship will take over and  all of these little "add-ons" will cease.  It's all a game at the expense of unknowing members and owners. 

Also, I like week-old shrimp....they have a special flavor....

Mike,
I'm with you(sort've_ and I'm a pro.

BUT,I don't know about taylormade but Tileist was an either/or program when last i checked.
I always took the discount for the club, rather than put it in my retirement account.
I figured since i don't own the shop, I wasn't entitled to the money .
If the pro owns the shop, why would you care whether he takes the discount or puts it in his retirement account?
he's compensated by his performance in the shop.
All retirement + perks require a signed permission slip for the OWNER of the facility if the pro doesn't own the shop so wouldn't that slow the corruption?

In my experience it can get sketchy and I know ANGC  carried tons of Slazenger shirts years ago when they were the pioneers in the RET + business.

I definitely need to call Taylormade
You definitely know more about this than I do.

we had a picture rep for Little league doling out perks like they were candy to us (board members) at our last meeeting.
Our treasurer was like what do I do with a gift card?
I guess some people enjoy the perks if they can get them at someone else's expense.

[Mike_Young]

Ken,
Since it's raining, I'm watching Last of the Mohicans and stirring s**t on GCA.
So here's some more:
I am of the opinion that we have reached a point where most trade associations exist mainly for themselves and the executives.  They reach a point where their main purpose is to convince an industry that it cannot exist without them and their support.  They constantly prey on vendors and suppliers to support them.  And they do this by convincing the vendors that they can sway their members to use them.  OK...so what?...The association executives then go on a mission of convincing an industry that it must have them and trying to squeeze every dollar they can from every segment of the industry they can while making it seem it is all for the "cause".   Most members forget that the associatiions are an industry themselves,  http://www.taforum.org/.  But before we know it the organization is bigger than the parts.  The members mean well and had no initial idea that the association would ever become what it becomes.  That's what we have today.  That's why less than half the golf course in places like MB don't have PGA members running the shops. 

You state: What about a scenario where I'm buying for a shop.  I use a credit card to pay off all invoices.  In turn, I accumulate points/miles/credits or whatever the card provides as incentive to use it.  Is this wrong?  If I hide that from you the owner, it would be.  If you as the owner give your blessing, so be it.   Two things here; 1.  Most companies eliminate the discounts if you pay with credit card.  2.  The credit card payment incentive can be used by anyone, owner, golf pro or bookkeeper.  It is not tied into an organization trying to hold owners or clubs hostage to their members etc. 
You also mention the PUD issue:  I agree it can be abused.  But most reps know who is doing so.  Contrary to popular belief here , I think the individual golf professional is above board and ethical but I don't care for how the various vendors try to play games that can "tempt" a golf professional.  For instance, one prominent club company, and a good one, has a promotion a few years ago where you buy four sets of irons and you get two free.  Why would a company do this unless they knew they could possibly benefit the buyer without someone knowing it.   An owner would just divide the cost of the four sets by 6 and put it in the computer but if a club or owner did not know of the program then there are two free sets sitting out there that can be sold by the employee or whatever.    Or what about the local chemical company that takes a gallon of one chemical and dilutes it into a 55 gallon drum and is completely legitimate about the percentage of active ingredients etc.  He sells it at 10 times the rate it would cost undiluted.  99% of clubs would never catch such and some of the guys buying it might not catch it but it exist.  It provides for one hell of a fishing trip each year.  All of this stuff goes on in many businesses but golf is extremely open to such because most clubs are operated by employees working for boards that eat lunch and meet for two hours a month.  And if not working for club boards the owners have been developers who were mainly interested in RE and considered golf a necessary evil.  BUT all of that is coming to an end as things tighten up. 
So don't take any of this as slamming the individual golf pro...I'm just punching at the BS...

[Jim_Kennedy]

For instance, one prominent club company, and a good one, has a promotion a few years ago where you buy four sets of irons and you get two free.  Why would a company do this unless they knew they could possibly benefit the buyer without someone knowing it.   An owner would just divide the cost of the four sets by 6 and put it in the computer but if a club or owner did not know of the program then there are two free sets sitting out there that can be sold by the employee or whatever.  

Mike,
This is the type of remark that puts your ball OOB. What about the bookeeping department? Who do you think is tracking invoices when the employee doesn't own the shop? Even the 'free' stuff comes with invoices (as you well know).
You're basically implying that employees are willing to collude with manufacturers to defraud their employers.  

Last night I was watching Hitchcock's "Rear Window" and a line of dialogue got me chuckling. Jimmy Stewart is laid up w/a broken leg, so he takes to spying on all his neighbors from his window. His visiting nurse voices her opinion about his obsession and delivers the line that got me chuckling, as it reminded me of this thread. She said  "We've become a race of Peeping Toms".  

  

[Kyle Harris]

I don't think that the program being "above board" absolves it from scrutiny.

[Jim_Kennedy]

I don't think that the program being "above board" absolves it from scrutiny.

So I'll rephrase it, the scrutiny given this decades old program has not produced one fact that shows it to be anything other than above board.

[Ken Fry]

So don't take any of this as slamming the individual golf pro...I'm just punching at the BS...

Mike,

I never have taken any of your points as a slam on the individual in question (be it a supt., GM or pro).  I just don't think in the sited cases it's making a big enough impact to create such a problem.

Your example of the chemical and fert. industry would raise much more of an ire because of the large dollar amounts in question.  In theory you buy $40K of equipment from one of the companies for the golf shop, you're generating about $50K in sales.  You're not losing anything theoretically.  Any and all course apps are pure expense.

My brother in law owns a course near me.  He's been forced to get quite creative with every item brought onto the property (whether it's food, drinks, equipment, office supplies or chemicals).  What he can't get around is the fuel and insurance prices (which includes all insurance from heath care to liquor to general liability).  The small Mom and Pop places are being squeezed into oblivion.

Ken

[Mike_Young]

For instance, one prominent club company, and a good one, has a promotion a few years ago where you buy four sets of irons and you get two free.  Why would a company do this unless they knew they could possibly benefit the buyer without someone knowing it.   An owner would just divide the cost of the four sets by 6 and put it in the computer but if a club or owner did not know of the program then there are two free sets sitting out there that can be sold by the employee or whatever.  

You're basically implying that employees are willing to collude with manufacturers to defraud their employers.  
  

Jim,
Yes I am.  I continue to ask the question:   Why are the vendors in the middle of this.  I don't care how insignificant it may be.  Why?  Just tell me.
Ken says it's so small that it doesn't matter.  It's the principle of the thing not the amount.


Ken,
Like your brother-in-law I know what he is going thru with the small operator but I blame as much of the problem on the associations as I do anything.  Why does he support the very associations that do all they can do to make the industry think they are more important than the small owner risking everything while they risk nothing?

Now back to Jim and his "bookkeeper doing the paying of invoices" comment above.  Jim, I know a couple of companies that don't put the free stuff on the same invoice.  But let me tell you how it works with some ( and you probably already know this)  1.  A club rep has a special deal where a pro can buy 4 sets of irons and get 6 sets.  But the rep knows he has a lot of small shops that can't purchase such so he finds one guy that owns his own shop and sells 1 set to 4 other courses while billing the pro/owner shop.  The rep keeps the two free sets. Now you do this with an entire territory and you have a good "garage" full of free merchandise.  Now one of your small courses has a member-guest coming up and you offer him sets of irons at a really good deal.  He makes money, the club gets a deal and the rep made money. 
2.  Do you remember the reps that were fired by one of the LARGE equipment companies a few years ago after the "rental club" fiasco.  Golf pro orders 4 sets of rental clubs.  Reps "accidentally" adds a zero to the order and sends 40 sets.  Now you know that rental sets are sold at 40% off of wholesale.  The unknowing golf pro calls the rep and says I got 40 sets of rental clubs.  The rep says "oops...don't worry I will get rid of them for you and will take care of it.  ( you also probably know they give 6 month terms on rental clubs)  Well all of a sudden there was an abundance of this particular manufacturer's equipment showing up on ebay at really good deals.  New clubs were selling for less than they could be bought.  A few reps were selling the "overbooked rentals" on ebay at less than wholesale and getting them from the pro shop they had "accidentally" billed.  It blew up....
All of this is to say there are good guys and bad guys anywhere and if you are dealing in a cash business then you have an employee stealing from you.  It's not just the golf business.
MY ENTIRE GRIPE IS THAT THE PGA DOES NOT NEED TO HAVE THE VENDORS AFFILIATED WITH ANY RETIREMENT ACCOUNT REBATES...IT WOULD ELIMINATE ANY QUESTIONS.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
Any 'free' stuff is still being invoiced, it doesn't matter if it's on a completely different bill, it still crosses the bookeeper's desk.
The rest of the shenanigans you mention are the province of thieves.

You know why vendors do this, it's to promote their product. The program is as well known to the clubs that must sign off on it as it is to the 'independent' shop owner. How you arrive at your conclusion is beyond me, especially when participation in the program is only allowed if everyone in authority at a club agrees to it.

You think it looks improper, the participants and clubs they work for do not. It boils down to that.

[Mike_Trenham]

As a CFO of a hard goods manufacturer (not golf related) I can tell you why we entertain these programs

1) Everyone is offering something so we need to as well.  Buyers don't like feeling like victims.
2) The distributors tell us they hide this from the non-decision makers so that margins don't deteriorate (yes one man's  affordable pricing is another's margin deterioration) it is good to have a brand like Titelist to protect your margins
3) They result in more sales or we are not confident enough about the alternative without the program
4) We want them to go to the person that makes the buying decisions or gets the customer to buy
5) We are lucky that we only need to award them to our best customers and we have tools to know who supports us and who simply buys because of consumer demand.

As the member of a club I think I would favor something that helps out my golf professional especially if it was straight forward,and I knew the finace chairman could not chisel it out of his backside.  Members at my club buy elsewhere simply because they know the club owns the shop and don't feel the need to support a shop owned by 500 of their peers.

I bet if you see a logo on a glove or ball in a shop it is from a Retirement Plus vendor

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()