Storm Financial Group

Solly · 15 October 2009

Solly said:
gg, I don't mind the Stamford but the lure of the Port Office across the road may be a bit too much of a temptation and cause a distraction, wouldn't want to miss any of the proceedings.

I hear the Sofitel is also pretty swish since the refurb, it's just a short stroll down Turbot to Harry's place.

I'm still open to suggestions.

gg, the Trollydollies were around BNE yesterday and after getting a bit bored with the examination, they went for a recce and sent me these pics.

The Sofitel does look good, I really don't mind the view over ANZAC Square, it's a potent reminder of the sacrifices that have been made by the brave of the past.

If budget is problem for some, the Palace Backpackers is a fine choice, I hear the Downunder Bar gets a bit wild and you may need a basic understanding of Swedish.

But then again The Y is very handy, The Hotel George Williams is a solid 3.5 star and just around the corner from Harry's. I believe you may even get a couple of cocktails there now.

Just throwing up a few suggestions

TOBAB · 15 October 2009

specialed said:
Garpel you previously stated...

Don't wait however for the Cassimatises to get their "just deserts" as described above.

Through a number of factors, mostly lack of street smarts and blind allegiance to a failed model, SICAG have set a scenario for them to get off with very little penalty, possibly a suspended sentence or a few months in a low security facility.

Exactly how is SICAG setting up a scenario for "them" to get off lightly ? I understand your problem with SICAG as you have articulated this well and consistently. But please explain how SICAG is going to influence the findings of a Senate inquiry, an ASIC inquiry and the Worrells Inquiry in such way that any penalties against the Cassimatises are minimised. I fail to see how the four points you listed after the above quote can have any influence on penalties when they are handed out. It is absurd to suggest that this group is attempting to reduce any penalty against the Cassimatises. How and Why exactly would they do this ?

SICAG is "based in Redcliffe or the Sunshine Coast" because this is where the founders live. Whether you live in Redcliffe, Townsville , Sydney or wherever you are still able to participate with the Group. Hence their visits to Rocky, Cairns, Townsville, Mackay etc.

It is a shame that in your contributions to this forum Garpel, which are often very insightful and provide interesting analysis usually also contain a "shot" at SICAG which appears to be included for no other reason than to be a malicious attempt to discredit what they are attempting to do to support those who have chosen to join the group.

My understanding is that SICAG answers to its members, many of whom are in daily, if not weekly contact with the committee members. NOT to you or to ASF. I have yet to see you make any such ridiculous "explanation" demands of the banks, or for that matter Manny. Why dont you also demand that Ralph Norris logs on and answers your questions...Please....

As for this being the place where most storm victims get their independent advice, I suspect, but do stand to be corrected, that the number of SICAG members far outways the contibutors to this forum. Maybe its time you identified exactly why you continue to attack this group, for which no one has made you join nor has anyone else been forced to join. If you dont believe in what SICAG is doing, it simple you dont become a member. If your friends or relatives dont believe in what its doing, simple they dont become members. Unfortunately your continued attacks on SICAG are beginning to appear as nothing more than vindictive. If your not happy with what SICAG are doing, then just dont join them. Its a pity you could not put this much energy into investigating the legalities of the banks and storm rather than chasing a volunteer group, serving to support it members of which I assume you are not one. Man get over it...

Please advise where you state on your website the awful advice and the laughable responses from the Cassimatises?

Garpal Gumnut · 15 October 2009

Solly said:
gg, the Trollydollies were around BNE yesterday and after getting a bit bored with the examination, they went for a recce and sent me these pics.

The Sofitel does look good, I really don't mind the view over ANZAC Square, it's a potent reminder of the sacrifices that have been made by the brave of the past.

If budget is problem for some, the Palace Backpackers is a fine choice, I hear the Downunder Bar gets a bit wild and you may need a basic understanding of Swedish.

But then again The Y is very handy, The Hotel George Williams is a solid 3.5 star and just around the corner from Harry's. I believe you may even get a couple of cocktails there now.

Just throwing up a few suggestions

Mate I've stayed in the Palace, when it was known as the "People Palace" and I'd stay there again if they didn't speak Swedish and banned the mad, the bad and the sad. I do find Swedish girls a bit broad about the ......

It was a great place to stay.

I'd still go for the Marriott, they have a fine "posh area" where you get free breakfast, grog at night and respect", just like the old Peoples Palace but costs a bit more. But scccchhhheeezzze, whats money for but spending.

gg

specialed · 15 October 2009

TOBAB said:
Please advise where you state on your website the awful advice and the laughable responses from the Cassimatises?

Not my website mate...am not a SICAG member...or a storm investor...as I have stated previously...Keep up.......

Garpal Gumnut · 15 October 2009

specialed said:
Garpel you previously stated...

Don't wait however for the Cassimatises to get their "just deserts" as described above.

Through a number of factors, mostly lack of street smarts and blind allegiance to a failed model, SICAG have set a scenario for them to get off with very little penalty, possibly a suspended sentence or a few months in a low security facility.

Exactly how is SICAG setting up a scenario for "them" to get off lightly ? I understand your problem with SICAG as you have articulated this well and consistently. But please explain how SICAG is going to influence the findings of a Senate inquiry, an ASIC inquiry and the Worrells Inquiry in such way that any penalties against the Cassimatises are minimised. I fail to see how the four points you listed after the above quote can have any influence on penalties when they are handed out. It is absurd to suggest that this group is attempting to reduce any penalty against the Cassimatises. How and Why exactly would they do this ?

SICAG is "based in Redcliffe or the Sunshine Coast" because this is where the founders live. Whether you live in Redcliffe, Townsville , Sydney or wherever you are still able to participate with the Group. Hence their visits to Rocky, Cairns, Townsville, Mackay etc.

It is a shame that in your contributions to this forum Garpel, which are often very insightful and provide interesting analysis usually also contain a "shot" at SICAG which appears to be included for no other reason than to be a malicious attempt to discredit what they are attempting to do to support those who have chosen to join the group.

My understanding is that SICAG answers to its members, many of whom are in daily, if not weekly contact with the committee members. NOT to you or to ASF. I have yet to see you make any such ridiculous "explanation" demands of the banks, or for that matter Manny. Why dont you also demand that Ralph Norris logs on and answers your questions...Please....

As for this being the place where most storm victims get their independent advice, I suspect, but do stand to be corrected, that the number of SICAG members far outways the contibutors to this forum. Maybe its time you identified exactly why you continue to attack this group, for which no one has made you join nor has anyone else been forced to join. If you dont believe in what SICAG is doing, it simple you dont become a member. If your friends or relatives dont believe in what its doing, simple they dont become members. Unfortunately your continued attacks on SICAG are beginning to appear as nothing more than vindictive. If your not happy with what SICAG are doing, then just dont join them. Its a pity you could not put this much energy into investigating the legalities of the banks and storm rather than chasing a volunteer group, serving to support it members of which I assume you are not one. Man get over it...

Mate you have been "specialed" to confound Storm victims on ASF.

Much of your individual statements make sense, but you are not an asf person.

Read through the posts and you will find that I and many others have posted adverse comments on the Banks.

Your site does little to advance the cause of Storm victims.

And this is because you are focussed on this particular scam that has destroyed the lives of thousands of people.

On ASF we take a broader view.

The past, the present, the future.

The reason we are so hard on your organisation mate, is that you have lost the plot, you may get something from the banks, but by refusing to even mention the dereliction of governance by Storm and the Cassimatises, you are condemning future investors to the same fate.

And that is not fair dinkum.

gg

darkside · 15 October 2009

specialed said:
Garpel you previously stated...

Don't wait however for the Cassimatises to get their "just deserts" as described above.

Through a number of factors, mostly lack of street smarts and blind allegiance to a failed model, SICAG have set a scenario for them to get off with very little penalty, possibly a suspended sentence or a few months in a low security facility.

Exactly how is SICAG setting up a scenario for "them" to get off lightly ? I understand your problem with SICAG as you have articulated this well and consistently. But please explain how SICAG is going to influence the findings of a Senate inquiry, an ASIC inquiry and the Worrells Inquiry in such way that any penalties against the Cassimatises are minimised. I fail to see how the four points you listed after the above quote can have any influence on penalties when they are handed out. It is absurd to suggest that this group is attempting to reduce any penalty against the Cassimatises. How and Why exactly would they do this ?

SICAG is "based in Redcliffe or the Sunshine Coast" because this is where the founders live. Whether you live in Redcliffe, Townsville , Sydney or wherever you are still able to participate with the Group. Hence their visits to Rocky, Cairns, Townsville, Mackay etc.

It is a shame that in your contributions to this forum Garpel, which are often very insightful and provide interesting analysis usually also contain a "shot" at SICAG which appears to be included for no other reason than to be a malicious attempt to discredit what they are attempting to do to support those who have chosen to join the group.

My understanding is that SICAG answers to its members, many of whom are in daily, if not weekly contact with the committee members. NOT to you or to ASF. I have yet to see you make any such ridiculous "explanation" demands of the banks, or for that matter Manny. Why dont you also demand that Ralph Norris logs on and answers your questions...Please....

As for this being the place where most storm victims get their independent advice, I suspect, but do stand to be corrected, that the number of SICAG members far outways the contibutors to this forum. Maybe its time you identified exactly why you continue to attack this group, for which no one has made you join nor has anyone else been forced to join. If you dont believe in what SICAG is doing, it simple you dont become a member. If your friends or relatives dont believe in what its doing, simple they dont become members. Unfortunately your continued attacks on SICAG are beginning to appear as nothing more than vindictive. If your not happy with what SICAG are doing, then just dont join them. Its a pity you could not put this much energy into investigating the legalities of the banks and storm rather than chasing a volunteer group, serving to support it members of which I assume you are not one. Man get over it...

Specialed,

not standing up for GG, because i am more than sure he can do it on his own,
but i don't believe he attacks SICAG , but more to the point identifies the problems as well as conflict of interest that they have with their higherarcy running the show. You call it vindictive, other more open minded may call it informative.

It may be a volunteer organisation , yet they employ (yes PAY) a media adviser to come to internet forums and berate and abuse the posters, what sort of organisation would employ that tactic, and what does it achieve.

As far as the banks or Storm for that matter go, i dont think GG, or anyone here has had anything really positive to say about them either. If you still feel it's ok to endorse the Storm Model and advertise it on a support website,(SICAG) well thats just like Macdonalds , having their ads placed at the "Fat Farm", Very poor taste and no one is convinced.

Solly · 15 October 2009

ahonner said:
can anyone actually tell me what the Storm Missions Staement is?

ahonner , I don't know what the Company's mission statement was but this link to an archive of the old website states to "expect the unexpected"....

http://web.archive.org/web/20080720070059/www.stormfinancial.com.au/ins_abo.php

If you are wondering what EC's personal publicly stated mission statement is, please refer to this post.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=493197&postcount=3667

I do not recall any public retraction or variation to this mission statement.

I believe that EC is a man of honour and is tirelessly burning the midnight oil seeking a positive resolution for all those negatively affected.

I believe that he would expect nothing less of himself.

specialed · 15 October 2009

Garpal Gumnut said:
Mate you have been "specialed" to confound Storm victims on ASF.

Much of your individual statements make sense, but you are not an asf person.

Read through the posts and you will find that I and many others have posted adverse comments on the Banks.

Your site does little to advance the cause of Storm victims.

And this is because you are focussed on this particular scam that has destroyed the lives of thousands of people.

On ASF we take a broader view.

The past, the present, the future.

The reason we are so hard on your organisation mate, is that you have lost the plot, you may get something from the banks, but by refusing to even mention the dereliction of governance by Storm and the Cassimatises, you are condemning future investors to the same fate.

And that is not fair dinkum.

gg

Am happy to say again its not my organisation, nor my website, am not a SICAG member or Storm Victim as mentioned a long time ago when I answered your questions of me. To suggest that your attacks on SICAG are based solely on your desire to prevent "condemning future investors to the same fate" is ridiculous. You have regularly called the storm investors muppets with little financial knowledge. You have stated that this is the place where most storm investors come for advice, in which case I am sure they will not go through the same fate again. I have read your posts regarding the banks and as stated have found them insightful and knowledgeable, but I have yet to see you demand what the CBA put on their website, or that they appear here to answer your questions.

Darkside, to suggest that SICAG is paying someone to attack posters on this or other forums is ridiculous and reeks of conspiracy theory. If you believe that then obviously this forum must also be littered with CBA employees doing the same… I would assume that CBA employee just a couple more media advisors than SICAG, and its not SICAG who have a clause regarding public perception built into their bonus scheme. This type of statement is indicative of much, not all, but much of the information that has been posted by Garpel and others r.e SICAG, based more on rumour, misquotes and hearsay than fact. You say it is not vindictive but informative, but my concern is that some of the information is far from factual and not designed to inform at all.

Amongst many others I am still yet to hear how SICAG is going to impact on possible committal hearing or sentences as suggest earlier in this forum.

Of course I am focused on this scam, this is the Storm Financial Group thread isn’t it ?

Garpal Gumnut · 15 October 2009

Solly said:
ahonner , I don't know what the Company's mission statement was but this link to an archive of the old website states to "expect the unexpected"....

http://web.archive.org/web/20080720070059/www.stormfinancial.com.au/ins_abo.php

If you are wondering what EC's personal publicly stated mission statement is, please refer to this post.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=493197&postcount=3667

I do not recall any public retraction or variation to this mission statement.

I believe that EC is a man of honour and is tirelessly burning the midnight oil seeking a positive resolution for all those negatively affected.

I believe that he would expect nothing less of himself.

Thanks Solly.

As usual you hit the button.

Shame on the sicag.info site.

Storm victims, google " Storm Solly asf" and you'll get the truth about whats happening.

Let us hope that none of the sicag people resurrect themselves as financial advisers, although I hear some may plan to have already.

the sicag model

the storm model

gg

darkside · 15 October 2009

Solly said:
ahonner , I don't know what the Company's mission statement was but this link to an archive of the old website states to "expect the unexpected"....

http://web.archive.org/web/20080720070059/www.stormfinancial.com.au/ins_abo.php

If you are wondering what EC's personal publicly stated mission statement is, please refer to this post.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=493197&postcount=3667

I do not recall any public retraction or variation to this mission statement.

I believe that EC is a man of honour and is tirelessly burning the midnight oil seeking a positive resolution for all those negatively affected.

I believe that he would expect nothing less of himself.

Solly , nice find , and after reading the Storm blurb, i don't know why people are complaining, your right it specifically tells them to expect the unexpected.

I bet no one expected to be in debt upto their eyeballs, and lose their house, lifestyle and most of their hope. So really , Storm did deliver what they promised.

specialed · 15 October 2009

Garpal Gumnut said:
Mate you have been "specialed" to confound Storm victims on ASF.

Much of your individual statements make sense, but you are not an asf person.

Read through the posts and you will find that I and many others have posted adverse comments on the Banks.

Your site does little to advance the cause of Storm victims.

And this is because you are focussed on this particular scam that has destroyed the lives of thousands of people.

On ASF we take a broader view.

The past, the present, the future.

The reason we are so hard on your organisation mate, is that you have lost the plot, you may get something from the banks, but by refusing to even mention the dereliction of governance by Storm and the Cassimatises, you are condemning future investors to the same fate.

And that is not fair dinkum.

gg

Am happy to say again its not my organisation, nor my website, am not a SICAG member or Storm Victim as mentioned a long time ago when I answered your questions of me. To suggest that your attacks on SICAG are based solely on your desire to prevent "condemning future investors to the same fate" is ridiculous. You have regularly called the storm investors muppets with little financial knowledge. You have stated that this is the place where most storm investors come for advice, in which case I am sure they will not go through the same fate again. I have read your posts regarding the banks and as stated have found them insightful and knowledgeable, but I have yet to see you demand what the CBA put on their website, or that they appear here to answer your questions.

Darkside, to suggest that SICAG is paying someone to attack posters on this or other forums is ridiculous and reeks of conspiracy theory. If you believe that then obviously this forum must also be littered with CBA employees doing the same… I would assume that CBA employee just a couple more media advisors than SICAG, and its not SICAG who have a clause regarding public perception built into their bonus scheme. This type of statement is indicative of much, not all, but much of the information that has been posted by Garpel and others r.e SICAG, based more on rumour, misquotes and hearsay than fact. You say it is not vindictive but informative, but my concern is that some of the information is far from factual and not designed to inform at all.

Amongst many others I am still yet to hear how SICAG is going to impact on possible committal hearing or sentences of Manny as suggest earlier in this forum.

Of course I am focused on this scam, this is the Storm Financial Group thread isn’t it ?

Solly · 15 October 2009

Garpal Gumnut said:
Mate I've stayed in the Palace, when it was known as the "People Palace" and I'd stay there again if they didn't speak Swedish and banned the mad, the bad and the sad. I do find Swedish girls a bit broad about the ......

It was a great place to stay.

I'd still go for the Marriott, they have a fine "posh area" where you get free breakfast, grog at night and respect", just like the old Peoples Palace but costs a bit more. But scccchhhheeezzze, whats money for but spending.

gg

Yep I'll probably check out the Marriott tomorrow or Sat , I haven't been there since I saw a presentation by one of Jon Giaanopoulos's mates on options trading a few years back. Yeah you are right, it's better to pay a little more and spread the wealth around, after all you can't take it with you. And my Swedish is very limited and it wouldn't be a very professional look stumbling over backpackers at the Palace.

darkside · 15 October 2009

specialed said:
Am happy to say again its not my organisation, nor my website, am not a SICAG member or Storm Victim as mentioned a long time ago when I answered your questions of me. To suggest that your attacks on SICAG are based solely on your desire to prevent "condemning future investors to the same fate" is ridiculous. You have regularly called the storm investors muppets with little financial knowledge. You have stated that this is the place where most storm investors come for advice, in which case I am sure they will not go through the same fate again. I have read your posts regarding the banks and as stated have found them insightful and knowledgeable, but I have yet to see you demand what the CBA put on their website, or that they appear here to answer your questions.

Darkside, to suggest that SICAG is paying someone to attack posters on this or other forums is ridiculous and reeks of conspiracy theory. If you believe that then obviously this forum must also be littered with CBA employees doing the same… I would assume that CBA employee just a couple more media advisors than SICAG, and its not SICAG who have a clause regarding public perception built into their bonus scheme. This type of statement is indicative of much, not all, but much of the information that has been posted by Garpel and others r.e SICAG, based more on rumour, misquotes and hearsay than fact. You say it is not vindictive but informative, but my concern is that some of the information is far from factual and not designed to inform at all.

Amongst many others I am still yet to hear how SICAG is going to impact on possible committal hearing or sentences of Manny as suggest earlier in this forum.

Of course I am focused on this scam, this is the Storm Financial Group thread isn’t it ?

Specialed , once again it's great to see you have put in no research to your post , a bit like no one seeing the GFC coming even though it was on TV every night for months leading up to it.

Now i will write this very slowly for you, You claim SICAG are a volunteer organisation yet someone who used to come here often and abuse us,claims he was a paid consultant, ,(So whos Lying) I hope all the SICAG members know where their hard earned is going and to what !!!!!

Big Max said:
Hey Darkside, when you're proven to be wrong, it's polite to apologise and important that you correct the record. I'll say it again . . . not only am I not a former Storm employee, I am not a former Storm client! I am a paid consultant to SICAG. Do the right thing.:nono::nono::nono:

He actually took up nearly a whole page abusing all and sundry, i think it was drug induced but cant say for sure, although we havent heard from him for a while, so maybe he isn't allowed internet privileges yet ???

So no , i am not into conspiricy theorys, although i did hear a whisper there maybe a melt down in the world economies coming but keep it to yourself, i don't want the media getting hold of it again then no one will know !!!!

darkside · 15 October 2009

Sorry Specialed.

I just re read my post and realised that was un called for , you did explain to me a few pages back why you just make up things as you go , as opposed to researching them or even checking some facts and i do apologise for not taking that into consideration in my last post.

specialed said:
As for checking my facts, I am merely continuing the tradition of this great forum. As I have pointed out on numerous occasions this forum is littered with comments that are based little on fact, but instead on rumour, hearsay or innuendo. In particular the attempts to “badmouth” and discredit the work or motives of SICAG.

Hope all is forgiven .

Darkside. !!

Solly · 15 October 2009

"Battered Storm investors torn"

"The Commonwealth Bank won praise from investors when it announced a compensation scheme for clients of the collapsed firm Storm Financial.

But the process has barely begun and already it's drawing criticism from those it's meant to be helping.

Storm clients say that rather than compensation the bank is offering merely petty cash and sympathy.

Annie Guest reports."....

Listen to the World Today on the ABC

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2009/s2715008.htm

Harleyquin · 15 October 2009

Just paid a visit to the old storm website that you put up Solly. It says to 'expect the unexpected' why the hell didn't we all read this first before going to storm ... we expected a bit more than the unexpected.

As for a 'storm' meaning 'a new beginning to a parched land', sounds more like it might be 'something that comes along with a lot of wind and hot air and blows us all away.'

Solly · 16 October 2009

"Bank of Queensland banking on becoming one of big boys"

"BoQ is facing legal actions over its role in the collapse of Storm Financial. Its Townsville branch was a major lender to Storm clients.

Mr Liddy said he did not think the furore had damaged the reputation of the bank, pointing to its recent capital raising, which he said was five times oversubscribed. But he expressed concern for those customers caught up in the fiasco."

As reported by James McCullough in The Courier Mail here;

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26215478-3122,00.html

specialed · 16 October 2009

I am familiar with the ramblings of Big Max, and no where did I see him state that his postings to this forum were as part of his paid duties to SICAG as has been suggested.I will of course re-read every post of his to check my facts

I note with interest that there have been postings by Financial advisors to this forum. Am I to assume that their postings are also part of their paid employment. Would someone like to tell me any of the legal implications this. Actually I'll just refer you to the ASIC Notice below, point 4. To suggest that someone who is employed by an agent is not able to participate in this forum is a little rich.Or to say that when they are contributing to this forum, they are doing it as part of their day job is also a stretch. .....And as for abusing all and sundry, he is certainly not the only participant here abusing people or attempting to defend others. All us "muppets" are guilty of that.....

And yes, any SICAG members who are concerned about the money, Im sure will or have sought clarrification. I suppose thats the point of many of my posts. If your a member of SICAG and have concerns that surely you would raise them. It is clear that much of the misinformation stated hear regarding SICAG is stated for no other purpose then malicious intent, rather then any attempt to enhance debate around the STORM issue, or as stated, to prevent this happening to others again.....

maccka · 16 October 2009

todarellor said:
Colonial (CBA) should have raised the alarm bells with so much leverage being allocated but then again greed is above all a dominant human trait. Its a pity that the poor investor continues to be duped by high commission salesman!

Going back through past threads it is interesting to see this quote from 18 Dec...

This goes back pre-SICAG and right at almost the "BIG BANG" day when it really exploded into the consciousness of people who weren't caught up in it.

cheers
Maccka

Big Max · 16 October 2009

specialed said:
I am familiar with the ramblings of Big Max, and no where did I see him state that his postings to this forum were as part of his paid duties to SICAG as has been suggested.I will of course re-read every post of his to check my facts

I note with interest that there have been postings by Financial advisors to this forum. Am I to assume that their postings are also part of their paid employment. Would someone like to tell me any of the legal implications this. Actually I'll just refer you to the ASIC Notice below, point 4. To suggest that someone who is employed by an agent is not able to participate in this forum is a little rich.Or to say that when they are contributing to this forum, they are doing it as part of their day job is also a stretch. .....And as for abusing all and sundry, he is certainly not the only participant here abusing people or attempting to defend others. All us "muppets" are guilty of that.....

And yes, any SICAG members who are concerned about the money, Im sure will or have sought clarrification. I suppose thats the point of many of my posts. If your a member of SICAG and have concerns that surely you would raise them. It is clear that much of the misinformation stated hear regarding SICAG is stated for no other purpose then malicious intent, rather then any attempt to enhance debate around the STORM issue, or as stated, to prevent this happening to others again.....

Thanks for the support Specialed. I note you got an apology from Darkside - I'm still waiting for mine! You're right, the constant berating of SICAG by GG et al is bemusing and not a little concerning. Methinks they doth protest too much (apols go Shakespeare). Be warned, Specialed, it can be quite tiring visiting ASF and reading the same old chestnuts recycled over and over again. One can understand the frustration of those who have lost everything thanks to the Greeks bearing gifts but some posters are very creative with their version of the facts. It's worth a visit though to read GG's colourful posts - love the one about his second ma-in-law getting zapped by customs!

Storm Financial Group

Solly

Attachments

TOBAB

Garpal Gumnut

Ross Island Hotel

specialed

Garpal Gumnut

Ross Island Hotel

darkside

Solly

specialed

Garpal Gumnut

Ross Island Hotel

darkside

specialed

Solly

darkside

darkside

Solly

Harleyquin

Solly

specialed

maccka

Big Max

Similar threads

Storm Financial Group

Attachments

Ross Island Hotel

Ross Island Hotel

Ross Island Hotel

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency