GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-18-2012, 15:11   #126
Z71bill
Senior Member
 
Z71bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 10,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
What would really be great would be for employers in localities to band together and fix wages and employment terms for various employee classes.

Like a union for businesses.
That would be illegal - because it would be anti competitive.

The Justice Department has been fighting with Ebay and Intuit for years because they had an informal agreement to not hire each other's employees.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...6e2_story.html

Last edited by Z71bill; 11-18-2012 at 15:11..
Z71bill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:16   #127
SevenSixtyTwo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tampa Bay Area Fl
Posts: 2,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by devildog2067 View Post
It is a great example.

But the most important takeaway from that example is this:



At the time that Henry Ford made that decision, it made business sense.

He didn't do it out of kindness. He did it because it would make him more money. Ultimately, he did it out of the very greed that you villify.

Today, things are both the same and different. There are lots and lots of companies out there who offer top pay and top benefits in order to reduce turnover and replacement costs (I know, I work for one, and I'm hugely loyal to my organization because I know that a) I'd have a hard time replacing my wages if I left and b) they treat me very, very well). The reason they do so is because top talent is hard to find.

However, factory work doesn't require top talent. A factory worker is far cheaper to replace than the ones of Henry Ford's day, because the general level of education today has made skills that were scarce in Henry Ford's day far cheaper.

The Henry Ford example is a great example of corporate greed being allowed to guide corporate decisions, improve the competitiveness of a company, which allowed the company to continue providing wages and benefits to its labor force, to the ultimate benefit of the owners, the workforce, and the nation.
Greed that I vilify? We're all greedy and we're all in it for the money. We all want the most we can get for our efforts. Greedy union members and greedy suits are all in it for the money. I'm not the one having a hard time understanding this. Henry Ford's greed was a great example of how to effectively apply it. He and his employees all benefitted from it. Something today's corporate heads can't seem to grasp.
SevenSixtyTwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:21   #128
9jeeps
Fogey
 
9jeeps's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: at the end of the road
Posts: 4,125
Hostess turns up this way.... You had a job. Now you don't!

Pretty simple from this angle.
__________________
FOGEY
Trying to make
sense of it all.
9jeeps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:26   #129
SkyyUniverse
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 122
Hey Devildog...best croissant in the country; Pearl Bakery in Portland.
SkyyUniverse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:29   #130
PBR Sailor
Senior Member
 
PBR Sailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: CONUS
Posts: 725
The strikers in my area thought that Hostess was bluffing. They also told the newspapers that in the event Hostess was not bluffing they thought another company was waiting for the opportunity to purchase the company and they felt they would keep their jobs.

I guess they guessed wrong.
__________________
Guerre 'A Mort
PBR Sailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:34   #131
devildog2067
Senior Member
 
devildog2067's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Near Chicago, IL
Posts: 15,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenSixtyTwo View Post
Greed that I vilify?
Well, yeah. I was responding to your words. Here they are:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenSixtyTwo View Post
Maybe for the betterment of the state of our economy instead of simply satisfying the insatiable greed of the few.
You make greed sound pretty villainous, wouldn't you say?

But ok, maybe I took your words out of context. Given what you say next, maybe I misunderstood.
Quote:
We're all greedy and we're all in it for the money. We all want the most we can get for our efforts. Greedy union members and greedy suits are all in it for the money.
Yep. That's what I've been saying all along.

Quote:
Henry Ford's greed was a great example of how to effectively apply it. He and his employees all benefitted from it. Something today's corporate heads can't seem to grasp.
Today's employees are benefiting from it just the same as they were a hundred years ago.

Like I said, there are lots and lots of companies out there actively recruiting for top talent and locking that talent up as soon as possible, and offering great wages and benefits. As a college professor, I just watched my undergrads go through the hiring cycle for full-time jobs next year. IBM, Accenture, Boeing--these companies are snapping up talented engineers by the truckload. As a consultant I'm helping my firm with the recruiting cycle as well; we just handed out the first round of signing bonuses. People are getting 5-figure checks just to commit to working for us. We're literally throwing money at potential recruits just to get a lock on the top talent early.

But the key word is "talent." People who have valuable skills are getting recruited every day and being treated well by companies, because those talents make them valuable to those companies. They help create value, they improve the bottom line, and therefore companies need to treat them well. They're vital to the success of that business.

"Bakers" who work in an industrial snack cake factory, quite frankly, do not need to be all that talented. Their skills are not unique, and (most critically) they can be replaced relatively easily. That means it's most valuable to the company to pay them as little as possible. Those folks simply are not as "valuable" in the economic sense. They don't have the power to force wage concessions from their organization.

Last edited by devildog2067; 11-18-2012 at 15:35..
devildog2067 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:36   #132
SevenSixtyTwo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tampa Bay Area Fl
Posts: 2,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBR Sailor View Post
The strikers in my area thought that Hostess was bluffing. They also told the newspapers that in the event Hostess was not bluffing they thought another company was waiting for the opportunity to purchase the company and they felt they would keep their jobs.

I guess they guessed wrong.
The market has a way of correcting itself. Twinkies will continue to line the shelves at the local Quickie Mart. Only a fool would pay $300 for a friggin' Twinkie on eBay.

http://www.examiner.com/article/twin...-hostess-brand
SevenSixtyTwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:37   #133
JW1178
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,985
I can promise you Hostess would have gone under anyways unless someone can show me where the workers were overpaid for their skill level and that brought down the company.
Oh I see, the company was doing fine and the evil Union asked for such high wages they had to shut down... what the hell ever...

They paid those wages for a long time and were doing okay, seems that what really changed was management. The rude fact is that they would have gone under anyways.

Perhaps some here should get their heads out from under the right wing and see what really happened. I wonder how much the CEO and to executives were paid? I bet they get paid much better than any union employee... but I gues they are worth the pay... apperantly not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RonS View Post
Not a union defender by any means, but suppose the company told you, dudes, we're on the ropes, we make crap nobody wants anymore. Our two main products have become the generic names for bad junk food and cheap, mass produced mediocre white bread. So, why don't you all take a xx% pay cut, pay more for your health insurance, lose some other stuff and then in a few months or a year maybe we'll bow to the inevitable and go bankrupt and lay you off anyway.

I have no idea what the union was offered, but sometimes your choice is a crap sadwich or a crap sandwich with cheese.

Another possibility is that unions and management develop a real hate relationship over the years of constant bargining, grievences, arbitrations etc. Unions and management routinely lie to each other and the press to gain an advantage in bargining so how do we know the union members both knew and believed the financial state of the company.

Agreed. The employees did their jobs, it's not their fault that management can't get the product sold and run the finances, why should the workers take a cut?

So what, they took a gamble, and well, they "lost". Then again, how much were they getting paid? SOME union workers really are overpaid and underworked, but not all of them are.

Perhaps all in all, why did Hostess open their plant and keep thier plant in a Union friendly state if it was so horrid?

I think the company is trying to make an excuse for their failures.
JW1178 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:47   #134
devildog2067
Senior Member
 
devildog2067's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Near Chicago, IL
Posts: 15,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by JW1178 View Post
I can promise you Hostess would have gone under anyways unless someone can show me where the workers were overpaid for their skill level and that brought down the company.
Hostess Brands is a private company now, so I haven't had a chance to look at their financials.

Having said that, some experience and simple logic tells me that the bulk of their costs were (in order) 1) labor 2) distribution 3) ingredients.

They're not General Electric. They weren't building locomotives or gas turbines. The actual cost of ingredients for a Twinkie is quite small. The machinery they're using was probably paid for ages ago; I doubt that there have been huge advances in commercial baking technology recently (although I could be wrong, I've never tried to find out).

Labor is their biggest cost driver.

Quote:
Oh I see, the company was doing fine and the evil Union asked for such high wages they had to shut down... what the hell ever...
The company WASN'T doing fine. That was the point. The union went on strike at a time when the company was already on its knees.

Quote:
They paid those wages for a long time and were doing okay
Two bankruptcies in 10 years is "doing ok"? Damn, you set a pretty low bar.

Quote:
Perhaps some here should get their heads out from under the right wing and see what really happened. I wonder how much the CEO and to executives were paid?
Since last March, $1/year. They gave up paychecks this year to help the company out.

Quote:
I bet they get paid much better than any union employee... but I gues they are worth the pay...
Do you honestly dispute the fact that someone with management training and 30 years of experience as a C-level executive at a number of different companies with an established history of working with turnarounds is probably worth more money that someone who dumps flour and sugar in a machine and watches it make Ding Dongs?


Quote:
The employees did their jobs, it's not their fault that management can't get the product sold and run the finances, why should the workers take a cut?
So they could continue to have jobs...?

Quote:
So what, they took a gamble, and well, they "lost".
It wasn't a "gamble." The company opened its books. The Teamsters took one look and decided to go back to work. Some idiot in the Baker's union decided that the company management must be lying for absolutely no reason at all.

It was a "gamble" like playing Russian roulette with a semi-auto is a "gamble."

Quote:
Then again, how much were they getting paid?
More than zero, I'm betting.
devildog2067 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:52   #135
SevenSixtyTwo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tampa Bay Area Fl
Posts: 2,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by devildog2067 View Post
Well, yeah. I was responding to your words. Here they are:


You make greed sound pretty villainous, wouldn't you say?

But ok, maybe I took your words out of context. Given what you say next, maybe I misunderstood.


Yep. That's what I've been saying all along.



Today's employees are benefiting from it just the same as they were a hundred years ago.

Like I said, there are lots and lots of companies out there actively recruiting for top talent and locking that talent up as soon as possible, and offering great wages and benefits. As a college professor, I just watched my undergrads go through the hiring cycle for full-time jobs next year. IBM, Accenture, Boeing--these companies are snapping up talented engineers by the truckload. As a consultant I'm helping my firm with the recruiting cycle as well; we just handed out the first round of signing bonuses. People are getting 5-figure checks just to commit to working for us. We're literally throwing money at potential recruits just to get a lock on the top talent early.

But the key word is "talent." People who have valuable skills are getting recruited every day and being treated well by companies, because those talents make them valuable to those companies. They help create value, they improve the bottom line, and therefore companies need to treat them well. They're vital to the success of that business.

"Bakers" who work in an industrial snack cake factory, quite frankly, do not need to be all that talented. Their skills are not unique, and (most critically) they can be replaced relatively easily. That means it's most valuable to the company to pay them as little as possible. Those folks simply are not as "valuable" in the economic sense. They don't have the power to force wage concessions from their organization.
Comment was made tongue in cheek. Aimed at those who cry greedy union members as if we're not all greedy. The bakers pushed too far and by the sounds of the article I linked above, will be replaced by employees who can easily do the job for a pittance of what they were making. Sad but reality.
With Florida being a right to work state, we can be fired for little more than bruised feelings. Saw it happen earlier this year. Many times over the past 32. I've been with them a long time and they compensate me above scale in several ways. They've told me straight up they want to keep me from going to a competing company. I have no desire to flee. Like shopping for insurance. If you get a better offer, tell your agent and if you're profitable to them, there's a good chance he'll match that offer. If you're not, he'll kiss you goodbye. People jump ship too soon and then realized they've phqt up a good thing. When I've had better offers, I talk with the boss and life is good.
SevenSixtyTwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:53   #136
devildog2067
Senior Member
 
devildog2067's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Near Chicago, IL
Posts: 15,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenSixtyTwo View Post
Comment was made tongue in cheek.
In that case, I apologize for taking you seriously. I promise never to make that mistake again.

devildog2067 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:54   #137
devildog2067
Senior Member
 
devildog2067's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Near Chicago, IL
Posts: 15,762
(also tongue in cheek, in case that wasn't clear)
devildog2067 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:58   #138
SevenSixtyTwo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tampa Bay Area Fl
Posts: 2,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by JW1178 View Post
So what, they took a gamble, and well, they "lost". Then again, how much were they getting paid? SOME union workers really are overpaid and underworked, but not all of them are.

Perhaps all in all, why did Hostess open their plant and keep thier plant in a Union friendly state if it was so horrid?

I think the company is trying to make an excuse for their failures.
Very true and unfortunate for thousands.

Very good question. Management fail.

Which goes back to the question I've asked twice with no answer. Who do the union haters blame for the thousands of non union companies that have gone out of business?
SevenSixtyTwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 15:59   #139
SevenSixtyTwo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tampa Bay Area Fl
Posts: 2,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by devildog2067 View Post
(also tongue in cheek, in case that wasn't clear)
I recognize the beer mugs!
SevenSixtyTwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 16:13   #140
Haldor
Retired EE
 
Haldor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Central Arizona
Posts: 5,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenSixtyTwo View Post
Never happened. Pure fabrication. If it did, link to any union contract that states an office geek can't move a lamp.
My company (the American half before we merged with a Swiss company), had a union plant in Toledo Ohio. UAW to be precise (no we had nothing to do with making cars).

An engineer I worked with once hand carried a small box containing a PCB to the shipping department. He was supposed to have a union laborer carry the box to the shipping department, but it was after their normal cutoff deadline and we had a customer with production shut down until they could get the part.

For this he got a written reprimand and was threatened with termination if he ever did it again.

UAW came very close to putting us out of business with a 9 month strike at our only manufacturing facility. We had been in Toledo for over 75 years, but within 3 years of the strike we started moving manufacturing to South Carolina, in part for labor cost, but equally to get away from the UAW. We closed the Toledo facility within 10 years of the strike.

The lead union negotiator that was instrumental in the strike happening ended up working at Champion Spark Plug's Toledo plant. I recall seeing an interview with him when Champion closed that plant and moved production elsewhere. Once again he was astounded that the company would move. You would think he would have figured it out the second time a company fled his union where the problem might lie.
__________________
Quote:
Guys! Guys! He's down! Stop kicking him! If he shows up on another thread, Tasers are indicated, but for now, let him slink off into the shadows to lick his wounds and ponder how deeply cool and misunderstood he is!
Hoot nred Mrs. Vr.
Haldor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 16:29   #141
CaptCave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NC
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
Who do the union haters blame for the thousands of non union companies that have gone out of business?


Hostess told the union, if you did not go back to work, we will have to liquidate. You cannot operate if you do not have a cash flow. Not making and delivering ding dongs probably puts a hurt on cash flow.

In this case, Hostess went out of business because of unions, pain and simple
CaptCave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 16:35   #142
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,703


Quote:
Originally Posted by Z71bill View Post
That would be illegal - because it would be anti competitive.

The Justice Department has been fighting with Ebay and Intuit for years because they had an informal agreement to not hire each other's employees.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...6e2_story.html
I'm aware of that. Unions are fundamentally the same thing but the communists managed to get it legalized.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 16:36   #143
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,703


Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptCave View Post
Hostess told the union, if you did not go back to work, we will have to liquidate. You cannot operate if you do not have a cash flow. Not making and delivering ding dongs probably puts a hurt on cash flow.

In this case, Hostess went out of business because of unions, pain and simple
I can't imagine how stupid those union thugs must feel having fired themselves the week before Thanksgiving.
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 17:11   #144
nikerret
Mr. Awesome
 
nikerret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 6,924
From the article:

"Our members were aware that while the company was descending into bankruptcy and demanding deep concessions, the top ten executives of the company were rewarding themselves with lavish compensation increases, with the then CEO receiving a 300 percent increase..."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrikkoolaid View Post
While demanding an 8% pay cut and an eventual 30% give-back on benefits, the CEO pay went from $750k to $2.5 million. Hardly the kind of thing to inspire solidarity in "shared sacrifice" with your workforce.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by devildog2067 View Post
Since last March, $1/year. They gave up paychecks this year to help the company out.

Well, whcih one was it? Did they take the increase to $2.5M, get it, then take a dollar, afterward? Wow, yeah, thanks for your sacrifices

The top ten executives shouldn't get paid anything more than what they give their lowest paid worker, comapny-wide. Especially, since they failed and sunk the whole company. Unions may have been the iceburg, but the Captain was drunk while playing strip poker in steerage.
__________________
-Ambition is only appreciated after success.
-3/325:Now, where's my dedicated bodyguard? Oh, yeah, he's staring back at me in the mirror.
-"Every fear hides a wish"
nikerret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 17:19   #145
devildog2067
Senior Member
 
devildog2067's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Near Chicago, IL
Posts: 15,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikerret View Post
Well, whcih one was it? Did they take the increase to $2.5M, get it, then take a dollar, afterward?
Nope.

The incoming CEO, who got bumped up from CRO in March, cut the executive team salary to $1. He never got millions.

The outgoing CEO had a $1.5M total comp package. The details haven't been published, but I'm guessing most of it was stock options, and since they're liquidating the company most of it is worthless.

Quote:
The top ten executives shouldn't get paid anything more than what they give their lowest paid worker, comapny-wide.
That's utterly retarded. This kind of classist crap is why people laugh at unions.

People who operate Twinkie making machines simply aren't as valuable as management talent. They're not as valuable as accountants, or engineers, or any of the hundreds of other people in the company who make more money than the "lowest paid worker."

No one's salary should be tied to anyone else's. Salary is tied to the value that a person creates, and nothing more.

Quote:
Especially, since they failed and sunk the whole company.
The CEO has been with the company less than a year. How is any of this his fault?

When you have a company that's got almost 3 billion in sales yet can't turn a profit, do you go out and look for a CEO who's willing to work for $12/hr, or do you find an expensive guy with talent?
devildog2067 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 17:25   #146
AWoods
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by srhoades View Post
Apparently the situation is a bit more complex. I heard a radio report that about 10 years ago the company was taken over by hedge fund managers and bean counters and ever since then they have been slowly screwing the workers year after year in order to maximize the bottom line. Do companies have a right to make a profit? Of course. But when it comes to the point that you are dehumanizing your workers and treating them like factory equipment, the potential evils of capitalism pokes up its ugly head.

Do unions likewise have potential evils? Absolutely. Once they start getting in bed with politics and ignoring their responsibility to negotiate a fair wage they have overstepped their bounds.

I think both sides have a share in the blame.
You hear wrong. The company is facing it's 2nd bankruptcy.

The blame only goes one way -> unions.
AWoods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 17:28   #147
AWoods
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 72
I've personally seen people who bring more value to companies than 10M/year. Why shouldn't they be compensated with a fraction of the value that they bring? Sure, it may be 50x more than the lowest paid worker, but if you don't pay them a fair price, they will go elsewhere, and a bunch of those low paid workers will be out of a job.
AWoods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 17:33   #148
SevenSixtyTwo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tampa Bay Area Fl
Posts: 2,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haldor View Post
My company (the American half before we merged with a Swiss company), had a union plant in Toledo Ohio. UAW to be precise (no we had nothing to do with making cars).

An engineer I worked with once hand carried a small box containing a PCB to the shipping department. He was supposed to have a union laborer carry the box to the shipping department, but it was after their normal cutoff deadline and we had a customer with production shut down until they could get the part.

For this he got a written reprimand and was threatened with termination if he ever did it again.

UAW came very close to putting us out of business with a 9 month strike at our only manufacturing facility. We had been in Toledo for over 75 years, but within 3 years of the strike we started moving manufacturing to South Carolina, in part for labor cost, but equally to get away from the UAW. We closed the Toledo facility within 10 years of the strike.

The lead union negotiator that was instrumental in the strike happening ended up working at Champion Spark Plug's Toledo plant. I recall seeing an interview with him when Champion closed that plant and moved production elsewhere. Once again he was astounded that the company would move. You would think he would have figured it out the second time a company fled his union where the problem might lie.
I don't doubt the incident as I've heard stories of such instances up north. They give free ammo to the union haters and plenty of it. But a "lead negotiator" for the UAW wound up working at the spark plug plant? Negotiators for the union and management both are far from line assembly workers.

http://www.negotiations.com/articles...ve-bargaining/
SevenSixtyTwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 17:34   #149
AWoods
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrenrj1 View Post
The company chose to go bankrupt instead. Guess bank of Obama was ok with that.
It's the evil overlord's prerogative when picking winners and losers. The bakers union were losers. The auto union were winners. Every American taxpayer is a loser.
AWoods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 17:39   #150
SevenSixtyTwo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tampa Bay Area Fl
Posts: 2,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptCave View Post
Hostess told the union, if you did not go back to work, we will have to liquidate. You cannot operate if you do not have a cash flow. Not making and delivering ding dongs probably puts a hurt on cash flow.

In this case, Hostess went out of business because of unions, pain and simple
JC Penny located it's headquarters in Plano Texas where labor is cheap and some of them even speak English. Who put the blinders on Hostess management? If you're dumb enough to build a house in a flood zone, don't blame the water.
SevenSixtyTwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:39.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 931
247 Members
684 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42