GDT down 1.6%

The GlobalDairyTrade price index dropped 1.6% in the first auction of the year.

gdt6.1.16

Whole milk powder which has the most influence on the farrmgate price dropped 4.4%.

globaldt6116

 

gdt 6116

42 Responses to GDT down 1.6%

  1. Dave Kennedy says:

    We will just have to ramp up the efforts to add value…here is an area of potential success: http://www.nzsca.org.nz/dutch-dominate-at-nz-cheese-awards/

  2. Mr E says:

    “We will just have to ramp up the efforts to add value.”

    “We”? I guess from that you are in the dairy industry? Or is that the ‘Royal We’?

    You appear to think that cheese is the way to go. The following cheese companies have gone into liquidation over the last few years:
    Miranda Valley Cheese Co
    TE MATA CHEESE HOLDINGS
    City Winery and Cheese Factory
    Kaimai Cheese Company

    Perhaps you should contact the company owners and tell them to start up business again?

  3. Dave Kennedy says:

    Mr E, you do need to check your facts. Te Mata had award winning cheeses but folded when the milk prices were high, the same reason why most of the others struggled. The cost milk put up the price of the cheese, which made them uncompetitive.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10720825

    “Since the 2010 review, we have seen Fonterra continue to set market prices and hold substantially the same level of market power and influence that led to DIRA being extended in 2010,”

    It has been too difficult for smaller dairy operations to operate when Fonterra was dictating prices and bullying competitors:
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11480653

    I think you will find that Kaimai’s new owners are already taking advantage of lower milk prices. 😉

  4. Mr E says:

    Dave,
    “Mr E, you do need to check your facts”
    Which of my facts are you unhappy with? It seems you have corroborated my facts rather than question them.

    Several cheese conpanies have closed over recent years because they were not profitable. Value add is not always profit add. There are many risks involved which you seem oblivious to.

    Then again I’m not sure you have any involvement in the dairy industry, so I’m not sure the value of your opinions on the matter.

  5. Dave Kennedy says:

    Mr E, Happy New Year to you too 😉

    I can see that you are still determined to ignore sound arguments and have a blinkered approach. The enterprises you listed failed because of the Fonterra monopoly and control of local milk prices. This forced what should have been successful companies to the wall and when world prices dropped there was nothing to fill the Fonterra vacuum. Also be aware that this isn’t just my view but that of many within the industry.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/dairy/68672971/fonterras-impact-on-dairy-competition-to-be-investigated

  6. Mr E says:

    Dave,
    “I can see that you are still determined to ignore sound arguments and have a blinkered approach. ”

    Sound arguement? Don’t you think that sounds a little arrogant? Your self endorsement?

    And I don’t have a blinkered approach. Anyone with half a business brain would know any value add has risks. I point that out and you consider me “blinkered”. I think that says a lot about your business brain.

    Happy new year to you too… Hope the break was kind to you. The weather seemed good for holidaying.

  7. Dave Kennedy says:

    But Mr E, it isn’t just my argument, there is no self endorsement in my comments just paraphrasing what many others are saying.

    As we have established before, it is yourself who often appears to believe that your life experience alone is enough to draw on for your arguments. How many times have you told me that my opinions have no value because of my background and “having no skin in the game”?

    All business has an element of risk, but the best businesses do their homework, know their markets, have a good product and a sound business plan. Why do you want New Zealand to remain committed to commodities markets that are so fluctuating and unstable and not work at developing some strong brand identity in value added products?

    Here is an example of a local business that have succeeded in doing this that I have used before: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/67641903/retro-organics-experiencing-growing-pains-as-business-expands

  8. Mr E says:

    Dave,
    “How many times have you told me that my opinions have no value because of my background and “having no skin in the game”?”

    Never….

    “All business has an element of risk, but the best businesses do their homework, know their markets, have a good product and a sound business plan.”

    Whilst this is a simplistic view I agree with your sentiment that thorough processes are required before investment is considered.

    Your value add cheese idea fails your own arguement. I’m willing to bet, you don’t know the markets, know the product or have done a business plan on such a proposition. Based on your own commentary we can surmise that you have know idea of the risk of the proposition you are promoting. Therefore, your ideas just look…. Well… Cheesy.

    Speaking of cheesy jokes;
    What did the cheese say when it looked in the mirror?
    Halloumi!

  9. TraceyS says:

    Dave, you’re saying that these cheese businesses struggled because they were completely dependent on the price of a commodity input remaining low. This means that the so-called value-added product is really a commodity product. Sadly, it cannot logically be seen any other way.

    Real value-add puts space between a product’s success/failure and dependence on commodity market fluctuations. The greater the space the greater the value which has been added. If they are tightly bound then the “value-add” is actually nil because the product will fluctuate in concert with the performance of the commodity.

    A few years ago when fuel prices rose quickly we were able to increase prices without losing business. Partly that was because our clients were doing well in their markets but it’s more complex than that. Our services could help them do even better. So that’s where the value-add comes in. It’s adding value to the customer or their business, not your own (necessarily), but in an ideal world it is both.

    What you are naming as value-add is actually just further processing of a raw product. In terms of cheese, the consumer would have to realise a direct added value to themselves, eg. health benefits. When such value is realised then the product’s success will not be so susceptible to commodity input fluctuations because the customer will not lightly forgo the value it adds for them or their business.

    I think this is entirely possible and so I support adding value. I’d cheer anyone along who has a good strategy for making it work (even you). But this cannot be dictated. Creativity is required and creativity is a commodity that control cannot manufacture.

  10. farmerbraun says:

    Tracey has this right. These cheese minnows did not have sustainable business models/ competitive advantage/point of difference.
    In the case of Kaimai there was some argy-bargy going on as well.
    Te Mata was never a sound business : Miranda had no competitive advantage .

    Other boutique cheese producers are still in the game , but fancy cheeses (camembert, brie etc) are oversupplied, and the main market is for “soap-style” colby , cheddar , gouda and edam, all of which are commodities.
    Lovers of blue cheeses are spoilt for choice in the way of accompaniments for their single malts (a match made in heaven).

  11. farmerbraun says:

    Anyone who thinks that there will be significant recovery in commodity dairy prices anytime soon is , in my view, just dreaming.
    I doubt that we have seen the worst yet.

    Give it five years to shake out.
    In that time a lot of conversions on marginal dairy land will quietly go under.

    There are sound geographical reasons why Canterbury was never a traditional dairying area.
    The same applies on parts of the Central Plateau and , to a lesser extent , Southland.

    However , specialist town-supply dairy operations were present in most geographic areas of NZ . . . . until the “rationalisation” that gave us Fonterra.
    I say “rationalisation” , but there was nothing rational about it.

  12. farmerbraun says:

    And so much for the “spectre of drought” that was haunting the dairying areas . It continues to be an excellent season, and production will not be significantly down for reasons associated with the weather.

    Every farmers knows that el Nino is not a predictor of weather, just as a climate model does not predict global average temperature.

    The only detectable trend this season has been cooler conditions.

    http://www.metservice.com/rural/monthly-outlook

  13. Paranormal says:

    Further to TraceyS excellent summary, the thing cheese manufacturers need is significant capital behind their operation.

    DK what you fail to understand is that boutique cheese takes years before it can be sold. Not only do manufacturers have to pay for the raw materials, production costs etc, they also have to pay for storage at the correct temperature then cover the interest costs on all of that for some years before they have a product to sell. As we have seen markets can change in that mean your product that has been in storage for some time may no longer be in demand.

  14. Dave Kennedy says:

    There is always a market for quality products, including cheese. New Zealand developed a reputation for excellent wine and we have a growing reputation for great craft beers. It takes good research and market knowledge and we currently spend less than most in the OECD for R&D. According to Mai Chen we do not properly utilise the cultural diversity we already have in NZ to understand different markets and cultural perspectives.

    You can nit pick my argument as much as you like but what I am saying is just repeating the likes of Campbell Naish who is an respected advisor for exporters:

    A am also just repeating what the Herald’s markets reporter has said (based on interviews with business leaders):
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11156459

    Mr E and Tracey appear to just disagree with anything I say on principle:
    “What you are naming as value-add is actually just further processing of a raw product.”…yes Tracey, that is how you add value 😉

    When I was asked to contribute to the AUT Briefing Papers the article I wrote just summed up a range of ideas and views that I had absorbed from a range of sources. Of course cheese is just one area that has more potential, there are lots of possibilities where we can establish ourselves as high quality food producers. The New Zealand brand should be synonymous with quality (value added) products, not just a mass producer of milk powder that others process and add their brand to.

    “We may be great at producing commodity quantity but we have limited brand presence in the countries we export to and we are operating at the bottom of the value chain.”

    http://briefingpapers.co.nz/2015/11/encouraging-regional-diversity-in-food-production/

    Stubbornly defending the status quo is not the best approach to establish a resilient agricultural sector.

  15. Dave Kennedy says:

    How funny, the link to Campbell Nash ended up as a video of the recently passed Lemmy from Hawkwind and Motorhead, not sure how that happened :-P…here is the one I intended:
    http://katabolt.com/2015/08/why-cant-new-zealand-create-another-nestle/

  16. TraceyS says:

    “What you are naming as value-add is actually just further processing of a raw product.”…yes Tracey, that is how you add value.”

    You are talking about value-added in the (decidedly unexciting) accounting/economic sense. Of course this is the basis for a form of taxation so that is not a surprising angle for you to take. You are so transparent. Any time you talk pro-business, Dave, there is a hidden barb buried somewhere in there.

    I am talking about value-added in the market(ing) sense. This is about adding value, through product and service lines, to investor’s capital; which is essential to attracting necessary capital as Paranormal points out above.

    Two very different things even if the distinction eludes you a little!

    But let yourself envisage this scenario for a moment. You have capital of $500,000 to invest. Will you invest it in a company that highly processes raw inputs without a solid strategy to turn that extra ‘work’ into a return? Or would you invest in the company whose strategy is to do less work but produce a greater return?

    Essentially this choice is why many businesses decide to stay small. We could multiple our business many times but when I look at larger versions of us they often perform worse on their bottom lines and their return on capital can be orders of magnitude less. Why choose to work more for the same or even less? That’s not value-add. It’s nuts! Better to stay small and seek to add value to your customer’s life/business rather than attempt to gain strength though size alone. But if you can grow and add value simultaneously then you’ve got it made (unfortunately it’s not that easy to achieve). And it’s certainly not something that can be dictated by politicians.

    As I’ve already pointed out regulating to add value, in the market(ing) sense, is much to blunt a tool to succeed. But then you have basically confirmed my suspicion that you want to pump cost value-add rather than the much more important capital value-add.

    Apologies for not being prepared to follow your lead on this one 🙂

  17. Dave Kennedy says:

    For goodness sake just read my links and my whole argument. What we need is a wider strategy of ensuring that SMEs that are innovative and not squashed by monopolies unfairly (as has happened) that has stifled boutique businesses with potential. We have heaps of talented business people in NZ but support for SMEs could be far better.

    The Government has a role in ensuring that local markets are operating fairly as the domination of the Supermarket duopoloy and Fonterra has been problematic. Government investment in R&D is also a crucial element in future success. The Green Party’s policy of amping up investment in R&D and providing tax credits to businesses to encourage them to do more research is crucial.

    There is nothing wrong with businesses remaining small when we have a collective reputation for quality. This will boost our reputation amongst tourists and support our infiltration of overseas niche markets. I only used cheese as one example but there is huge potential in our craft beers, processed fruit products (the Barker family have been innovative leaders here for years) and diversifying into oat products, as being explored currently.

    http://idealog.co.nz/venture/2015/06/skulling-success-craft-beer-breweries
    http://www.barkers.co.nz/our-story/#cottage-industry

    I have not advocated for just pursuing ‘value add’ for its own sake as a sort of Government led decree, as suggested, but removing the barriers that have hindered innovation and support collective marketing of those who have already proven themselves.

    Where we have gone wrong is supporting a boom and bust culture, rather than growing carefully and sustainably (as Tracey actually suggests). It was just dumb to throw billions into the milk gold rush and invest in massive coal powered driers. It just threw all our eggs into one volatile commodity market and the inevitable happened (as predicted by many commentators that I have linked to).

    We have so much unrealised potential in this country and we need to allow it to blossom and grow in a sustainable and strategic way.

  18. Dave Kennedy says:

    More support for a review on how we farm to better recognise diverse markets and operate more sustainably:
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2016/jan/07/organic-small-scale-alternative-vision-for-future-farming

  19. farmerbraun says:

    “The Green Party’s policy of amping up investment in R&D and providing tax credits to businesses to encourage them to do more research is crucial.”

    None of that is required if the direction that is envisaged in your Guardian link were to be the way of the future. I don’t say that this direction is wrong ; it might be inevitable in the long run.
    But it would be all about the transition. We don’t need another violent upheaval.
    Perhaps some politicians could stop thinking for a while , and start listening.
    I’m not holding my breath.

  20. Mr E says:

    “Perhaps some politicians could stop thinking for a while , and start listening.
    I’m not holding my breath.”

    Please please don’t hold your breath FB, because the result of doing so would be forlorn.

    Dave puts up links that have nothing to do with cheese, and nothing to do with NZ agriculture and nothing to do with value add. I think that shows an arguement that fails the credibility test.

  21. Dave Kennedy says:

    FB and Mr E, when you are referring to politicians it must be those in this current Government, who clearly don’t get their advice from the most useful sources. The direction we are heading in currently is clearly focussed on the big players and corporate interests rather than looking at what will really be the most sustainable approach that benefits all levels of the agriculture sector.

    The current approach is listening to the advice of overpaid managers who are more interested in feathering their own nests.
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/278949/fonterra-defends-top-salaries-after-cuts

    Mr E, you clearly didn’t read the links.

  22. Mr E says:

    Dave,
    Clearly I did read the links. I do doubt you comprehended them though. You seem to imagine meanings from them that are not there.

    I’ve voted for multiple parties, left and right. I am currently more satisfied with this government than any previous government during my entire lifetime. Their responses to challenges are largely logical and well thought out. I think they have generally done a great job of supporting the economy, human welfare and environment.

    If I imagined the country being run by the greens, I can only imagine wreck and ruins. Largely I have built that view from your dialogue here. I guess I should thank you for that, but I find it disappointing to think of the capability of the opposition. I guess the polls support my view.

  23. farmerbraun says:

    ” referring to politicians it must be those in this current Government,”

    My wish was for politicians in general to stop, look and listen.
    We, the people , are not so stupid that politicians would gain nothing by listening for a while.

  24. Dave Kennedy says:

    Mr E if you like increasing public debt ($60 billion), increased homelessness and the selling off of state assets to foreign interests then National is probably the party for you. If you see a future in exporting milk powder and the discovery of oil and gas in our territorial waters that others will profit from other than us, then so be it. The main claim to fame for this Government is that our situation isn’t as bad as some other countries and yet given our population and resources, and the fact we weren’t hit as badly by the GFC, we should be one of the strongest economies in the world. Lots of missed opportunities.

    Interestingly FB, you have strongly advocated for the resilience of organic farming here and the yet the Green Party is the only party that recognises the advantages that you have espoused. The view that we would be a dictatorial party is plain nonsense and as you know we recognise that rather than an autocratic approach we need the stories and experience from farmers themselves to find solutions to everyday issues. Since the last election all our MPs have been traveling around the country listening to people from all industries and all walks of life. I am keen for us to add to our ‘Good Farm Stories’ that document what ordinary farmers have done to resolve common problems and build resilience.

    Also i note that when i have described conversations I have had with those in the industry and repeated them hereI am told that drain layers don’t understand drainage on farms and I talk to the wrong farmers… it appears if I do listen to others it has be be only those with similar thinking to yourselves.

    What I find difficult is the reluctance here to view different ideas with an open mind and there appears to be a belief that if something comes from a Green it immediately must be wrong. Sad.

  25. Will Dwan says:

    Try reading publications like ‘Rural News,’ ‘Straight Furrow,’ ‘Farmers Weekly,’ etc Dave. They always carry “good farm stories.” Examples of farmers solving problems, developing new techniques and sharing ideas. But you won’t, they would not interest you, you only care about those with similar thinking to yourself. If it isn’t ‘green’ it must immediately be wrong. Pathetic.

    I suppose the reverse must happen. There must be blogs for primary school teachers where some farmer comes along and lectures those ignorant educators on how to do their jobs. I’m sure it must.

  26. farmerbraun says:

    Dave what I had in mind was a conversation about the future of NZ, in which the people were asked what they would like that future to be.
    I don’t see any political party advocating for such a dialogue.

    In respect of sustainable agriculture, I accept that the Green Party may be less dismissive of my views than is Jong Ki, but the difference is slight, and essentially makes no difference.

    As an example , I oppose immigration until such time as all NZers have been assisted to reach their potentials. At that point we could have a conversation about population and landscape .
    But it will never happen ; no politician would ever have the guts to touch that.

  27. farmerbraun says:

    Just for reference Dave , I am not a National Party voter/member, but although I am clearly an “environmentalist” , I have never voted Greens , and the possibility of doing so seems remote with the present suite of policies that the Greens hold dear.

  28. Dave Kennedy says:

    “Try reading publications like ‘Rural News,’ ‘Straight Furrow,’ ‘Farmers Weekly,’ etc Dave. They always carry “good farm stories.”’

    I am sure you’re right Will Dwan, and I do read them when I have the opportunity. I often link to NZ.Farmer.co.nz as you would know. I wonder why you haven’t used these publications yourself to support your arguments?

    “Dave what I had in mind was a conversation about the future of NZ, in which the people were asked what they would like that future to be. I don’t see any political party advocating for such a dialogue.”

    Interestingly that is a conversation that we Greens have with others all the time. We are probably the most future focused party. Given our democratic processes embedded in our rules, the constant links to Stalin and North Korea are just nonsense.

    Your comment about immigration is sadly ignorant. We have an aging population and a diminishing workforce. http://briefingpapers.co.nz/2015/12/ageing-populations-and-regional-decline/
    if we relied on our own current resident population alone many of our industries would fail through a lack of available labour. Due to the reduction of apprenticeships we lack tradesmen and our own plumbers, electricians and carpenters are an aging group. If we didn’t import labour the Christchurch rebuild would have ground to a halt. Overseas investment is also useful and those investors are more likely to be committed if they become residents. We also have have a moral obligation to support refugees and those escaping from intolerable circumstances, we should take our role as global citizens seriously.

    I agree with you that all New Zealanders should be supported to reach their full potential (strengthen our human capital and creating a more caring society) but this should happen regardless. Sadly we have a low wage economy and many of our brightest young people shift overseas for work (like my son) and we are left with a large proportion of young people damaged by poverty, domestic abuse and the failings of CYFs. We also have an education system that does not support science and technology as it should and boys are often being failed by a system that does not recognise hands on skills. There is a lot to sort out.

  29. farmerbraun says:

    “sadly ignorant. ”

    Thanks. Dialogue is concluded.

  30. farmerbraun says:

    So let the monologue commence :-

    Dave says :-“if we relied on our own current resident population alone many of our industries would fail through a lack of available labour.”

    Absolutely right! There is no chance that “sadly ignorant” unemployed NZers could ever learn to milk a cow , to care for animals. We need to import Filipinos to do that.

    What is wrong with these “sadly ignorant ” NZers? There is absolutely zero chance that NZ could ever produce an Ernest Rutherford , or a Karl Popper!
    And look at the indigenous population . . . . engaging the might of the British Empire in guerrilla warfare.
    What were those “sadly ignorant” Maori thinking?
    That they were the equal of any man in spite of having none of the latest weapons that technological advantage could produce?
    Ridiculous!

    Dave says :- ” If we didn’t import labour the Christchurch rebuild would have ground to a halt. ”

    Oh granted ! There is no chance that a NZer could ever master the exquisite skills involved in wielding a pick ; swinging a hammer ; driving a nail. These things are beyond us . . . we must have immigrant labour.
    And the rebuild has been such an unqualified success as a result of these imported skills.
    “Sadly ignorant ” NZers simply would never cut it.

    Dave says:- ” Due to the reduction of apprenticeships we lack tradesmen and our own plumbers, electricians and carpenters are an aging group.”

    Never a truer word was spoken.
    “Sadly ignorant ” NZers are quite incapable of passing on their skills and experience to their sons and daughters.
    So why would we waste hard-earned taxpayer money in apprenticeships for their ineducable offspring? Apprenticeships? Pearls before swine . . . obviously!

    Thank Dog for the Green Party. They know what is best for all us “sadly ignorant” no-hopers.
    Nothing like a safe pair of hands in Government , I always say.

    Oh . . . wait!
    🙂

    (I can’t be bothered with the red herrings of overseas investment and refugees . . . we were talking about voluntary immigration – I thought.)

  31. Mr E says:

    I lost interest in this thread because it has gone of topic (again), and now sounds like a Green Party media release.

  32. farmerbraun says:

    “like a Green Party media release.”. You might be right there Mr E.
    My bull releases similar material, although his material is slightly more useful, and generally less offensive.

  33. Dave Kennedy says:

    Oh dear, FB, perhaps you can explain how we can get all New Zealanders to reach their potential and quickly fill the employment gaps currently held by migrant labour. I hope you also realise that not all the unemployed are able to take on the physical work and retrain as you describe (the unemployed are a diverse group).

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8959919/Grandparent-carers-forced-back-to-work

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/75413488/woman-recovering-from-back-surgery-told-to-find-a-job-by-work-and-income

    Thousands of migrant workers are exploited across the country are being paid below the minimum wage, few New Zealanders can be exploited the same way, so perhaps stopping immigration and migrant labour we may see an improvement in wages 😉

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11393144

  34. Mr E says:

    Dave,
    “Thousands of migrant workers are exploited across the country are being paid below the minimum wage, few New Zealanders can be exploited the same way”

    Skiting about how you paid Wwoofers no money and kept them in a caravan, is way off topic. How about you go back to the topic…

  35. Dave Kennedy says:

    Old tired argument, Mr E, and easily rebutted before. I can always tell when my arguments have merit, the personal attacks come thick and fast 😉

  36. TraceyS says:

    I’m not certain about this but my guess would be that Wwoofers are generally advantaged people and therefore fair game for exploitation; fair because they can knowingly and freely choose whether to enter the arrangement or not. They don’t have to, but they want to. Whereas some immigrants are disadvantaged people and maybe have little choice. They don’t want to, but they have to.

    Should the same principles apply (eg. a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work), regardless of an individual’s economic status, or not?

    I’d be keen to hear the opinions of all.

  37. Will Dwan says:

    If someone works for you, you should pay them properly. No exceptions.

  38. farmerbraun says:

    “If someone works for you, you should pay them properly. No exceptions.”

    Agree. We have never accepted wwoofers because they are not committed to working ; they are mostly tourists with no understanding of agriculture. That sort of person is a liability on a farm as well as being an OSH hazard.

    As Tracey said , they are generally rich kids with no idea ; they think farming is cute.

  39. Mr E says:

    Tracey,
    My comments are in the Sunday soapbox. To avoid a continuation of off topic commenting.

  40. Name Withheld says:

    Skiting about how you paid Wwoofers no money and kept them in a caravan, is way off topic. How about you go back to the topic…

    Ouch… That hit the mark beautifully . Evidenced by …..

    I can always tell when my arguments have merit, the personal attacks come thick and fast

    Field guide to narcissism..
    3 (a).
    The narcissist requires constant reminders of his brilliance to feed his ego.
    If these are not forthcoming from others he will provide his own.

  41. Mr E says:

    Name Withheld,

    I pointed out some facts. You say “Ouch” and Dave considers it an “attack”. What does that say about those facts? Sounds like they could be problematic doesn’t it?

  42. Name Withheld says:

    Yes indeed.
    The sjw, or social justice warrior whinger, tries various strategies when cornered and the argument is lost.
    The most pathetically obvious one is the “personal attack”, a tactic exposed for what is is in a thread long ago, by JC, discussing the rules of engagement on newsgroups.
    Expect more damp-eyed, quivery lower lip accusations like this as his narrative continues to become threatened by facts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: