Under Armour - Hunting

[pluto]

Sickening vile stuff

 

 

https://twitter.com/UAHUNT

[pluto]

https://twitter.com/UAHUNT/status/738422438971740165

[Suhari]

Yeah. I'm really not comfortable with this. It's not nice.

 

Is there really a need for bow and arrow hunting of large animals nowadays?

 

Don't like that it's branded...... with the same logo as our kit.

[Suhari]

Anyone tweeting this to the club?

[sfc4prem]

Looks to be mostly stag in terms of "large animals", from what I can see. In which case, it's not that alarming.

 

If it were elephants, lions etc; endangered animals, then I agree with your views.

[Jonnyboy]

Looks to be mostly stag in terms of "large animals", from what I can see. In which case, it's not that alarming.

 

If it were elephants, lions etc; endangered animals, then I agree with your views.

 

I've been meaning to post a thread like this. A picture I saw on Facebook the other day was some stupid celebrity Hunter with a big mountain cougar of some sort. Disgusting.

[Jonnyboy]

Here it is:

https://www.change.org/p/please-take-the-pledge-not-to-purchase-under-armour-products-until-they-stop-endorsing-trophy-killers-and-profiting-off-the-blood-of-the-innocent

[petts]

I don't have a problem with people hunting thing that can be eaten and not endangered. Not to sure if the bear would fall into that category though?

 

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk

[Pamplemousse]

I don't agree with trophy hunting at all. However, there is a big hunting tradition in North America.

[Goatboy]

I would love to go hunting. A great bow or a gun. It would make me feel really manly. And if I actually killed something? Wow. That would make me so hard. I would just have to stroke myself until I exploded into a massive creamy fountain of manliness.

[BlakeySFC]

I don't like hunting full stop, but if it's Deer/Stag only then it's not a huge deal to me.

[Hatch]

Go get your fathers gun.

[Gunnery]

Big deal, hunting is vital for nature, those who slate it should do some research. ,#SFC #WeShootStuff

[Maggie May]

Awful, but what can we do? I'm not happy with it, but not happy with loads about this planet.

[brmbrm]

Here in NZ some animals (deer, pigs, ducks, possums) are pests and need to be controlled: have no problem hunting them.

 

Bears? Cougars? Elephants/rhinos/lions etc? Disgusting

[southamptonfc]

You can not buy Under Armour products

[Shance]

Hunting pest animals to control their numbers is vital BUT trophy hunting big animals and endangered ones at that is not cool at all with me.

[revolution saint]

Only problem I have with hunting is that it's not really a fair fight, is it? I mean, the game's rigged. Now if these hunters were to hunt each other then that would be fair and they could rightly take some pride in having taken down their opponent. I'd respect that and it would also cut down on some of the pests that seem to be particularly prevalent these days.

[Convict Colony]

No problem with it as long as they eat it

[Lastman73]

Devils advocate here but..... does anybody here go fishing??

It's hunting, all the same as every form!!

That's acceptable isn't it ? What's the difference ?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sammysaint]

To be fair they did drop a few hunters in the summer for killing a bear while wearing sponsored UA gear, so they are only sponsoring athletes if you can call them that who follow hunting rules in the US and Canada.

 

http://fortune.com/2016/08/22/under-armour-sponsorship-bowmar/

[angelman]

I am against trophy hunting but sometimes a bit of pragmatism is needed. Apex hunters have often been killed off so numbers of those lower down the chain need to be controlled. Also as there is much more food, numbers have blossomed. So if you can get money for it, that can then be used beneficially elsewhere, isn't that a price worth paying? This of course doesn't apply to all animals that have been mentioned here, all which I would personally like to shoot with my camera.

 

The bow and arrow is wholly unacceptable though. No defence of that is possible.

[Shance]

Devils advocate here but..... does anybody here go fishing??

It's hunting, all the same as every form!!

That's acceptable isn't it ? What's the difference ?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The difference is the fish are put back in the water. I agree it's not a very pleasant experience for the fish but unless something goes unfortunately wrong then the fish live. There's a stark contrast to putting an arrow through the side of a big cat that is cowering up a tree or putting an arrow through a bear etc.

[Pancake]

The difference is the fish are put back in the water. I agree it's not a very pleasant experience for the fish but unless something goes unfortunately wrong then the fish live. There's a stark contrast to putting an arrow through the side of a big cat that is cowering up a tree or putting an arrow through a bear etc.

 

Never been fly fishing then?

[bpsaint]

Anyone tweeting this to the club?

 

Don't know what that will achieve, UA is an American company and you know how much those stupid yanks like to shoot stuff. I'm sure UA isn't the only major brand that advocate hunting.

[Lastman73]

The difference is the fish are put back in the water. I agree it's not a very pleasant experience for the fish but unless something goes unfortunately wrong then the fish live. There's a stark contrast to putting an arrow through the side of a big cat that is cowering up a tree or putting an arrow through a bear etc.

 

You have obviously never fished seriously then, try putting back a fish that has greedily swallowed a large 6/0 hook! To take the hook out, is to pull his guts out as well. Or, cut the line and throw it back with the hook still attached to the inside of its throat!!

Not all fish are returned alive , don't be silly.

I'm part of that and love fishing, but sometimes it can be a bit barbaric !

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AdrianC]

There is an awful lot of misinformation about hunting.

I have read the comments here and it is plain that no-one recognises or understands the concept of sustainable conservation. It's knee jerk reactions based upon social and mainstream media propaganda.

I hunt in the New Forest and also in Africa and am being judged by people who don't know me or understand principles behind hunting it and the benefits that result from it.

I am not going to engage in a hunting debate on the forum as it's the wrong place but I can assure you that Under Armour were making clothes for hunters a long long time before they ventured over here to provide sports equipment so it's a little ironic now that after securing the decent kit sponsorship everyone wanted, it's now something to complain about.

[Secret Site Agent]

Yeh, i'm not a big fan of this.

 

But there are those that do, America has a huge gun culture and hunting backs this up. Russia, Sweden, Finland, all have a hunting tradition.

 

We, in this country had Fox hunting by the hooray henries that got banned because of Townies and class war and a humane agenda. What the hunters did was abhorrent and it was banned.Good. Foxes have now become a pest,killing small live stock,not just for food, carrying desease, etc.

Badgers were protected under law, now they have spread Bovine TB, we need to now employ people to cull.

And the poor, poor, mink in the new forest, kept in captivity, bred for their coats. Congratualtions to the animal right activists that realeased them into the wild, onto to realise that they enjoy killing for fun and will attack the New Forest Pony, (protected),the deer, (protected) and what have the Red Squirrel done to be put in danger of extincsion from American gray squirrels than for Animal Rights Activists to impose the Mink on them.

 

So, instaed of hunting these animals, we now employ experts to trap,shoot, gas and cull these cuddly little animals,beacuse they aren't as cubbly as we thought.

 

Oh, and on a side note, as most people know it is an offence to injure or kill a Great Crested Newt, with unlimited fines and upto 6 months in Prison, which is just so because they are endangered right? No, not in this country they are not endangered, it is a European law, as they are endangered on the continent, not here.

 

Not condoning, defending, or even anti-hunt, I am neutral on the subject, and as the advert is aimed at those in other countries with Cultures different to us, who am I to criticize. After all I, like a lot of you posting, have a smartphone with a Hon Hai Precision Industry Co manufactured chip in it, made in a sweatshop in Taiwan by a 14 year old.

 

You would be surprised what the rest of the world think about what we do. Shouldn't be so quick to judge.

[Goalie66]

There is an awful lot of misinformation about hunting.

I have read the comments here and it is plain that no-one recognises or understands the concept of sustainable conservation. It's knee jerk reactions based upon social and mainstream media propaganda.

I hunt in the New Forest and also in Africa and am being judged by people who don't know me or understand principles behind hunting it and the benefits that result from it.

I am not going to engage in a hunting debate on the forum as it's the wrong place but I can assure you that Under Armour were making clothes for hunters a long long time before they ventured over here to provide sports equipment so it's a little ironic now that after securing the decent kit sponsorship everyone wanted, it's now something to complain about.

 

I thought hunting was shooting an animal for pleasure. Conservation is about preservation. Are you telling me that you are a licenced conservationist?

[Secret Site Agent]

There is an awful lot of misinformation about hunting.

I have read the comments here and it is plain that no-one recognises or understands the concept of sustainable conservation. It's knee jerk reactions based upon social and mainstream media propaganda.

I hunt in the New Forest and also in Africa and am being judged by people who don't know me or understand principles behind hunting it and the benefits that result from it.

I am not going to engage in a hunting debate on the forum as it's the wrong place but I can assure you that Under Armour were making clothes for hunters a long long time before they ventured over here to provide sports equipment so it's a little ironic now that after securing the decent kit sponsorship everyone wanted, it's now something to complain about.

 

well done Adrian, I don't agree with Hunting, but support your right to do it. I don't agree with culling, but understand the need for it.

After all, The British Army,in my youth, gave me the right to kill and maim human beings in the name of piece. And I am proud of myself and my fellow servicemen and women who did,do,and will do the same, to give those in this country and abroad the right to be able to think,feel and act in whatever way they wish, without fear of reprisal. Unless you have put on a uniform and/or fully understand the complexities of a thing, you can't judge it. The British military have done a lot of good as well, supporting the delivery of humanitarianism aid, building bridges,hospital,waterline etc. An example......Landmines. An horrible construction of human engineering designed to remove limbs,not to kill. As Princess Diana pointed out, 'Is there a place in the world for such an evil instrument?'....And the world cried,in a loud voice, 'NO....They must be removed and destroyed and never used again............EXCEPT, where they are doing good and are needed to protect 50 million democratic people from 5 million man army intent on destroying them and their way of life.' It's all a matter of perspective.

[Secret Site Agent]

I'm off to church after all this.

[AdrianC]

I thought hunting was shooting an animal for pleasure. Conservation is about preservation. Are you telling me that you are a licenced conservationist?

What does being a licenced conservationist have to to with it?

It's the same old story, misunderstanding based upon misinformation and a lack of understanding on the principles of sustainable conservation.

My cash goes straight to the place it is needed, providing wages and money that is used to the greater benefit of the indigenous wildlife.

I had a very interesting conversation with a vet in Namibia this year who was incensed that the Western and European societies are poking their noses into and trying to tell everyone what is best for everyone else in the world, especially all the do gooders who love to get up in arms about things they don't understand and try and change the world according to their own principles.

Do Africans tell us how to manage our wildlife?

No.

So why do we persist in trying to tell Africans what to do with theirs? It is arrogance of the highest order.

Everyone can sit wringing their hands about an animal being culled but I would suggest not one person bothers to find out why.

Anyway, this thread is about Under Armour and the fact they have provided hunting clothes. It's not a secret but apparently it's only just dawned on folk this side of the pond.

Shops in the U.S. are stuffed full of their cammo gear and have been for years. It's not news and I find it a little strange that suddenly it's a big deal for football fans in the U.K. to discover their team's kit is being supplied by a massive company that has made it's name by manufacturing hunting clothes and equipment and somehow everyone is now shocked by it after being so happy when the kit deal was announced.

[revolution saint]

What does being a licenced conservationist have to to with it?

It's the same old story, misunderstanding based upon misinformation and a lack of understanding on the principles of sustainable conservation.

My cash goes straight to the place it is needed, providing wages and money that is used to the greater benefit of the indigenous wildlife.

I had a very interesting conversation with a vet in Namibia this year who was incensed that the Western and European societies are poking their noses into and trying to tell everyone what is best for everyone else in the world, especially all the do gooders who love to get up in arms about things they don't understand and try and change the world according to their own principles.

Do Africans tell us how to manage our wildlife?

No.

So why do we persist in trying to tell Africans what to do with theirs? It is arrogance of the highest order.

Everyone can sit wringing their hands about an animal being culled but I would suggest not one person bothers to find out why.

Anyway, this thread is about Under Armour and the fact they have provided hunting clothes. It's not a secret but apparently it's only just dawned on folk this side of the pond.

Shops in the U.S. are stuffed full of their cammo gear and have been for years. It's not news and I find it a little strange that suddenly it's a big deal for football fans in the U.K. to discover their team's kit is being supplied by a massive company that has made it's name by manufacturing hunting clothes and equipment and somehow everyone is now shocked by it after being so happy when the kit deal was announced.

 

End of the day you kill animals for pleasure - otherwise you wouldn't do it would you? You get your kicks out of killing things that can't fight back in a fair fight. You can call it conservation if it makes you feel better and there probably are some benefits to the culling of certain species - I'd just rather it was done by someone who didn't enjoy it, or pay for that 'privilege'. It makes you weird.

[Secret Site Agent]

End of the day you kill animals for pleasure - otherwise you wouldn't do it would you? You get your kicks out of killing things that can't fight back in a fair fight. You can call it conservation if it makes you feel better and there probably are some benefits to the culling of certain species - I'd just rather it was done by someone who didn't enjoy it, or pay for that 'privilege'. It makes you weird.

 

Hey, i'm Anti this, but I have put up and argument, so has he.

 

And whats yours, short of name calling. WHY Shouldn't he hunt?

[AdrianC]

End of the day you kill animals for pleasure - otherwise you wouldn't do it would you? You get your kicks out of killing things that can't fight back in a fair fight. You can call it conservation if it makes you feel better and there probably are some benefits to the culling of certain species - I'd just rather it was done by someone who didn't enjoy it, or pay for that 'privilege'. It makes you weird.

 

You're entitled to your opinion of course as I am mine but you can make it without the assumption I'm weird or the other insinuations you appear to make about me.

If any person who disagrees with hunting thinks that it is about getting kicks out of killing something you are very sadly mistaken.

It's about the experience. It's about spending hours in the bush on foot alongside the wildlife. Sometimes you get a shot, sometimes you don't but to focus on the end result is missing the whole point. But I guess unless you have walked in my shoes you wouldn't understand it or get it.

Many animals are culled by employed rangers and as a result they are processed and that's the end of it.

Hunters pay for the experience and generate much needed revenue and food in places well away from the tourist areas and we do the same job as those rangers who are paid to to the same thing as I do.

The fair fight argument is ridiculous. The animals don't stand around waiting for you. You have to put in a lot of work to get close to them. Animals whose instincts are ingrained over thousands of years to avoid dangers and be aware of predators, animals that have superior senses and alert to anything out of place.

It's not driving around in the back of a land rover among animals that are accustomed to people and vehicles like in the Kruger or other places that people visit and believe they've had a taste of 'real' Africa.

I will also make the point that when you sit down to your Sunday roast or eat a meat pie at St Marys that I doubt very much you have the faintest idea or really care where your meat comes from. As long as someone else has done the dirty work so you can eat without second thought it's absolutely fine. I expect the leather on your shoes or car interior came from animals that committed suicide?

When I sit down to my evening meal today it will be from meat that I harvested, butchered and cooked myself. Sustainable and organic meat that I know everything about.

Now when you sit down to your meat product of unknown origin, think about it.

[Shance]

You have obviously never fished seriously then, try putting back a fish that has greedily swallowed a large 6/0 hook! To take the hook out, is to pull his guts out as well. Or, cut the line and throw it back with the hook still attached to the inside of its throat!!

Not all fish are returned alive , don't be silly.

I'm part of that and love fishing, but sometimes it can be a bit barbaric !

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I have fished a hell of a lot over the years and like I said unless something goes wrong the majority of fish go back in alive. I've caught hundreds of fish and can only remember a fish getting a hook stuck down deep once or twice. Also, using non barbed hooks helps. Don't think I've ever thrown a fish back with a hook still in it.

 

Anyway, like I said it's different imo. A fisherman doesn't go fishing with the intent of killing the fish unless they are eating them. Hunters with bows are out to kill trophy animals which I can't say I agree with. Just my opinion though.

[Shance]

Never been fly fishing then?

 

I have, in fact a friend of mine fly fishes for the Royal Navy team. What's your point?

[LuckyNumber7]

Who are we as humans to decide what needs culling and what doesn't, when we are the biggest pest of all?

 

Personally I'd like to see all hunters put in an arena with the lions/bears etc they are hunting, without their weapons, and see how much they enjoy it then.

[suewhistle]

Never been fly fishing then?

 

Yep, the last rainbow I caught was catch and release with a barbless hook. The one before that was very nice cooked in butter...

[Fan The Flames]

You're entitled to your opinion of course as I am mine but you can make it without the assumption I'm weird or the other insinuations you appear to make about me.

If any person who disagrees with hunting thinks that it is about getting kicks out of killing something you are very sadly mistaken.

It's about the experience. It's about spending hours in the bush on foot alongside the wildlife. Sometimes you get a shot, sometimes you don't but to focus on the end result is missing the whole point. But I guess unless you have walked in my shoes you wouldn't understand it or get it.

Many animals are culled by employed rangers and as a result they are processed and that's the end of it.

Hunters pay for the experience and generate much needed revenue and food in places well away from the tourist areas and we do the same job as those rangers who are paid to to the same thing as I do.

The fair fight argument is ridiculous. The animals don't stand around waiting for you. You have to put in a lot of work to get close to them. Animals whose instincts are ingrained over thousands of years to avoid dangers and be aware of predators, animals that have superior senses and alert to anything out of place.

It's not driving around in the back of a land rover among animals that are accustomed to people and vehicles like in the Kruger or other places that people visit and believe they've had a taste of 'real' Africa.

I will also make the point that when you sit down to your Sunday roast or eat a meat pie at St Marys that I doubt very much you have the faintest idea or really care where your meat comes from. As long as someone else has done the dirty work so you can eat without second thought it's absolutely fine. I expect the leather on your shoes or car interior came from animals that committed suicide?

When I sit down to my evening meal today it will be from meat that I harvested, butchered and cooked myself. Sustainable and organic meat that I know everything about.

Now when you sit down to your meat product of unknown origin, think about it.

 

As you say you are entitled to your opinion and you are entitled to do what you want, but at the end of the day you enjoy stalking animals and killing them and others don't. I also think you are weird for liking that and that's ok, it's not an insult it's just someone who thinks about this subject a completely different way to you. You can go on about conservation, wages for poor people, African self determination, do gooders, the old euphemistic harvesting meat and the classic leather shoes, but it's all a mask for someone who likes stalking and killing animals.

[Saint-Fred]

You have obviously never fished seriously then, try putting back a fish that has greedily swallowed a large 6/0 hook! To take the hook out, is to pull his guts out as well. Or, cut the line and throw it back with the hook still attached to the inside of its throat!!

Not all fish are returned alive , don't be silly.

I'm part of that and love fishing, but sometimes it can be a bit barbaric !

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Crikey what sort of fishing is that? I assume sea fishing given the size of the hook, and a lot of that isn't catch and release due to the capture methods and that a lot of fish are good eating. No reason for it to be barbaric though..knock the fish on the head rather than tear its guts out!

I have coarse, fly and sea fished and I don't relate my experiences to yours at all!

Catching for the pot is all part of hunting/fishing. coarse fishing is borderline I suppose as its basically for sport but the fish are looked after (as best they can be when caught with a hook etc) they are protected from predators in some cases and some anglers even take medical kits to treat the hook hole and any wounds the caught fish already has. It's quite contradictory when you think about catching a fish and then looking after its welfare though!

 

Back on topic...hunting isn't my thing and if UA have dropped sponsorship for people breaking the ethics of the company (whatever they decide they are) I suppose they are doing what they can..it's a wider piece to change Nprth american attitudes to hunting but people making their views heard either via Twitter etc will mould help those values of the company IMO.

[Disco Stu]

Only problem I have with hunting is that it's not really a fair fight, is it? I mean, the game's rigged. Now if these hunters were to hunt each other then that would be fair and they could rightly take some pride in having taken down their opponent. I'd respect that and it would also cut down on some of the pests that seem to be particularly prevalent these days.

 

Isn't that referred to as war?

[Jonnyboy]

What does being a licenced conservationist have to to with it?

It's the same old story, misunderstanding based upon misinformation and a lack of understanding on the principles of sustainable conservation.

My cash goes straight to the place it is needed, providing wages and money that is used to the greater benefit of the indigenous wildlife.

I had a very interesting conversation with a vet in Namibia this year who was incensed that the Western and European societies are poking their noses into and trying to tell everyone what is best for everyone else in the world, especially all the do gooders who love to get up in arms about things they don't understand and try and change the world according to their own principles.

Do Africans tell us how to manage our wildlife?

No.

So why do we persist in trying to tell Africans what to do with theirs? It is arrogance of the highest order.

Everyone can sit wringing their hands about an animal being culled but I would suggest not one person bothers to find out why.

Anyway, this thread is about Under Armour and the fact they have provided hunting clothes. It's not a secret but apparently it's only just dawned on folk this side of the pond.

Shops in the U.S. are stuffed full of their cammo gear and have been for years. It's not news and I find it a little strange that suddenly it's a big deal for football fans in the U.K. to discover their team's kit is being supplied by a massive company that has made it's name by manufacturing hunting clothes and equipment and somehow everyone is now shocked by it after being so happy when the kit deal was announced.

 

A very tired argument. If you cared that much about conservation you'd happily donate a lot extra for your holiday without having to shoot anything.

[Lastman73]

Crikey what sort of fishing is that? I assume sea fishing given the size of the hook, and a lot of that isn't catch and release due to the capture methods and that a lot of fish are good eating. No reason for it to be barbaric though..knock the fish on the head rather than tear its guts out!

I have coarse, fly and sea fished and I don't relate my experiences to yours at all!

Catching for the pot is all part of hunting/fishing. coarse fishing is borderline I suppose as its basically for sport but the fish are looked after (as best they can be when caught with a hook etc) they are protected from predators in some cases and some anglers even take medical kits to treat the hook hole and any wounds the caught fish already has. It's quite contradictory when you think about catching a fish and then looking after its welfare though!

 

Back on topic...hunting isn't my thing and if UA have dropped sponsorship for people breaking the ethics of the company (whatever they decide they are) I suppose they are doing what they can..it's a wider piece to change Nprth american attitudes to hunting but people making their views heard either via Twitter etc will mould help those values of the company IMO.

 

If I'm fishing for food then yes a priest will be used to dispatch the fish as soon as possible. However the like of dog fish will swallow a bait meant for larger cod etc... this is where it becomes in my opinion a bit barbaric.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lastman73]

Crikey what sort of fishing is that? I assume sea fishing given the size of the hook, and a lot of that isn't catch and release due to the capture methods and that a lot of fish are good eating. No reason for it to be barbaric though..knock the fish on the head rather than tear its guts out!

I have coarse, fly and sea fished and I don't relate my experiences to yours at all!

Catching for the pot is all part of hunting/fishing. coarse fishing is borderline I suppose as its basically for sport but the fish are looked after (as best they can be when caught with a hook etc) they are protected from predators in some cases and some anglers even take medical kits to treat the hook hole and any wounds the caught fish already has. It's quite contradictory when you think about catching a fish and then looking after its welfare though!

 

Back on topic...hunting isn't my thing and if UA have dropped sponsorship for people breaking the ethics of the company (whatever they decide they are) I suppose they are doing what they can..it's a wider piece to change Nprth american attitudes to hunting but people making their views heard either via Twitter etc will mould help those values of the company IMO.

 

If I'm fishing for food then yes a priest will be used to dispatch the fish as soon as possible. However the like of dog fish will swallow a bait meant for larger cod etc... this is where it becomes in my opinion a bit barbaric.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[adrian lord]

What does being a licenced conservationist have to to with it?

It's the same old story, misunderstanding based upon misinformation and a lack of understanding on the principles of sustainable conservation.

My cash goes straight to the place it is needed, providing wages and money that is used to the greater benefit of the indigenous wildlife.

I had a very interesting conversation with a vet in Namibia this year who was incensed that the Western and European societies are poking their noses into and trying to tell everyone what is best for everyone else in the world, especially all the do gooders who love to get up in arms about things they don't understand and try and change the world according to their own principles.

Do Africans tell us how to manage our wildlife?

No.

So why do we persist in trying to tell Africans what to do with theirs? It is arrogance of the highest order.

Everyone can sit wringing their hands about an animal being culled but I would suggest not one person bothers to find out why.

Anyway, this thread is about Under Armour and the fact they have provided hunting clothes. It's not a secret but apparently it's only just dawned on folk this side of the pond.

Shops in the U.S. are stuffed full of their cammo gear and have been for years. It's not news and I find it a little strange that suddenly it's a big deal for football fans in the U.K. to discover their team's kit is being supplied by a massive company that has made it's name by manufacturing hunting clothes and equipment and somehow everyone is now shocked by it after being so happy when the kit deal was announced.

 

Good post.