iSixSigma

Why is Six Sigma Training so Expensive???

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General Why is Six Sigma Training so Expensive???

This topic contains 43 replies, has 36 voices, and was last updated by  Cone head 17 years, 11 months ago.

Viewing 44 posts - 1 through 44 (of 44 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #28158

    Question the Status Quo
    Participant

    I’m a big proponent of the Six Sigma Approach to doing business.  However, I think that the rates that consultants are charging these days is ludicrous.  For Green Belts, the statistics are basic, and the concepts are not that difficult to understand.  I can’t justify spending anywhere from $3000 – $6000 per Greenbelt candidate to learn basic statistics and measurement systems evaluation for a week.  Shouldn’t a select number of MBBs attend the training (or maybe they have from a different company), and train the BB and GB candidates internally?  It just seems to make so much more sense.
     
    Also, what does everyone think of the whole belt ranking system being deployed in most Six Sigma organizations?  Tom Pyzdek recently commented on a prominent Six Sigma consultant who denounced the whole concept of MBBs, BBs, and GBs as sort of a  caste system.  I would tend to agree – I mean this whole BOK stuff seems so esoteric and unnecessary.
    Your thoughts?

    0
    #69768

    Ken K.
    Participant

    I myself don’t see those costs as too outrageous, depending on what exactly the consultant does. The GB should easily recoup those costs fairly rapidly.
    I don’t see the GB, BB, & MBB as a “caste” system. In my business these labels are used to provide and easy/quick identification of person’s level of skill and experience. BB’s are expected to develop GB’s & new BB’s. MBB’s have a leadership, training, mentoring, and consulting role.
    In other businesses (GE) the titles also distinguish the person’s job. What I mean is that GB’s stay in their current job (the inside man that provides local expertise), BB’s take on a new leadership job (the outside man brought in to lead), and MBB’s take on the training, mentoring, and consulting role.

    0
    #69769

    Frustrated TOO!
    Participant

    Sounds like an entrepreneurial opportunity.
    Let the free market prevail.

    0
    #69775

    Tinoco
    Participant

     
    As a manager who has run different businesses for my company and now as a black belt I have see an important role for the belt hierarchy within the Six Sigma organizations.  You should be very skeptical of any ” consultants ” viewpoint including one that is denouncing the belt system.  As with any organization(i.e., six sigma) that is creating so much change in a company, a clear, concise and straightforward structure must be maintained and must be simple enough for people to remember.  The origin of the belt system goes back to the origin of six sigma and if you research from that angle you may have a better appreciation for the belt system….in other words look at the facts not the opinion of others. 

    0
    #69776

    EPS
    Participant

    I agree with you, let the market decide.
    Companies should be careful; there’s all kinds of consultants.., some are good, some are not good at all; some are interested only in their profit, others also care about a win-win relationship with their clients.
    Ciao!
     

    0
    #69780

    yadagri
    Member

    I do agree that the rates are very much exorbitant. I am from Chennai-India.
    I would be interested if the course fee for certification is less than rupees ten thousand

    0
    #69781

    Todd D.
    Member

    Venkat,
    Your request for training for 10,000 rupees will probably go unanswered because it only equates to about $208US. There are currently no training organizations that will perform full training for this amount. Maybe in the future the training will become more commercialized to allow this type of pricing.
    Todd

    0
    #69784

    Ken K.
    Participant

    Oh no! Now ASQ is going to try to start certifying Six Sigma consulting companies!!!

    0
    #69792

    T N
    Member

    SIX SIGMA WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE!  YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR BELTS!!

    0
    #69797

    Kim Niles
    Participant

    Two quick comments to add.
    1- There are cheaper ways to go.  One company is selling a web based training package for exec training.  Also, once MBB’s are on board and trained, they can start training others.  BB’s can train GB’s etc.
    2- Six Sigma is the way it is because it’s evolved from TQM based and other less optimum quality improvement systems.  That doesn’t mean it’s as good as it will get nor that something else wont come along that is even better in the future.
    KN

    0
    #69800

    nsilva
    Participant

    Learn from other organizations’ mistake – train your MBBs first then have them to train BBs and GBs in the organization. Hiring outside consultants can cost you a fortune and make six sigma implementation expensive.
    I am speaking from experience as an MBB of Ford Motor Company Philippines.
    As far as naming is concerned, I do not like being called an MBB or BB or GB, I hope one day, another Ph.D. student can come up with a better name for a similar program.
     
     

    0
    #69805

    1000GG
    Participant

    On the traing front be very careful!  Just because  you have received a quick (4-6 weeks) Six Sigma training plus 2 or 3 projects, and labelled a BB or GB does not make you a trainer in Six Sigma or anything else.
    Training provision is a skill.  Not everyone can do it no matter what technical qualifications they have.

    0
    #69809

    R Jennings
    Participant

    I agree that there are other ways to save on the training of green belts.  In our company, we are now using our own MBB and BB to teach the classes with materials designed by our MBB. 

    0
    #69811

    Rj
    Member

     
    I agree the cost is high, although when I did research I found a great non-profit company in Mass. that was the teaching to the ASQ body of knowledge. The co is Quality & Productivity Solutions in Oxford Mass. (508) 987-3800. The person’s name is Jay Patel
    I have been using consultants to implement the 6-sigma program. I have been trained as a GB & BB. My plan was to attain the MBB certification to officially teach it at my company. I have an extensive training, Organizational development, and quality background.  Unfortunately after 9/11 all use of consultants was cancelled.  I now will be creating my own program to fill the needs of my company.
    The benefits of the 6 Sigma program was a foundation to help change the culture and move into a better business philosophy. This can be risky for anyone implementing as this process impacts so many different variables of the business and you are a change catalyst. The consultants helped me set the foundation. Now I am able to move forward and build the structrue. I have my second set of teams starting, I have tools on the intranet, all the appropriate processes set up to support the business process.
    RJ
     

    0
    #69813

    MP
    Participant

    Training is so expensive because it is the new buzz word and relatively new to the general business world.  Our approach is to get a few trained the expensive way, and let them  train our interanal force. 
    As for the Belt system, I’m sure you all have org. charts in your companies, that’s all the belts are. 

    0
    #69817

    Frank Hanna
    Participant

    I agree with you 110%.  I’ve held CQE status since the early eighties, have used all of the statistical tools successfully in the workplace, have done extensive work in stastistics and engineering mangement at the graduate level, but yet I’m excluded from many position which I’m actually over qualified for because I am not a “Master Black Belt” and neither I or my company has the wherewithal to burn 25 grand on the training presently offered.

    0
    #69824

    Sinnicks
    Participant

    As a certified BB, I am expected to save $1,000,000/year annually – hard savings. If my expenses and salary make up $100,000, it is still a 10:1 return on investment. Show me a stock with a 1000% return on investment and I’ll empty my bank account into it. If anything, there is a lack of compensation and recognition for what we do as change agents.
    If GB training is $3,000-$6,000, and they are expected to save $10,000-$50,000 per year, it’s still a 3:1 to 8:1 return on investment and this does not take into account future savings – 2002, 2003 etc.
    As for the “caste” system, I can understand that people may think it’s
    “esoteric” as you put it, but one thing to remember: All of the tools we use as Black Belts existed long before 6 Sigma. 6 sigma put structure around the tools and without the belt ranking system, you lose some of the structure. MSEs, DOE’s, control charting, they’ve been around for years. The key to 6 Sigma is how you apply them to solve a problem. As a culture and a way of doing business, I think the ranking system is necessary for the success of 6 sigma. Otherwise, we’ll go back to some people knowing about control charting, some knowing about a Components of Variation study, some knowing about FMEAs etc…6Sigma is the whole package (DMAIC).

    0
    #69830

    PW
    Participant

    Is anyone using or has anyone considered implementing web based Six Sigma training to reduce the costs of training Green Belts? I have been involved in a project that is testing the idea, and so far it has been well received by Green Belt teams. The web training teaches basic concepts and frees up more time for the BB and MBB to work on project results rather than teaching basic concepts. So far, GBs like the flexibility and minimal classroom time. Classroom time is easily cut in half and has a fraction of the price tag of $3000 – $6000. Although, BB I have worked with seem threatened by the use of web training. Has anyone consided this approach or have any related thoughts?

    0
    #69832

    Patrick Waddick
    Participant

    We live in a free market economy and there are many consultants out there trying to capitalize on Six Sigma. They deserve every penny they get, BUT we as consumers have a few caveat emptors. Not all consultants have proven track records, some of the rekowned training providers have had some poor deployments, and a lot of them insist that you buy their software as well – which typically has high startup costs and may have additional annual maintenance costs to boot. Six Sigma is truly an investment – in education and in your people. Any company that wishes to pursue Six Sigma has got to answer a few questions before they hire a consultant: How many employees do I want to be trained on Six Sigma? All of them, 10%, only a select few? Ideally you should have the Champions, Execs, BBs and MBBs get trained from QUALIFIED providers, obtain ownership of the material and tailor it to your business, then follow up with in-house GB training – conducted by QUALIFIED BBs and MBBs – for all employees who touch important processes. There is a cost attached to that, but if you want the best bang for the buck, then you select the consultants who offer training not only on Six Sigma, but Change Management (GE calls it the Change Acceleration Process) as well OR provide that type of training in-house by QUALIFIED people. A BB has to learn how to sell ideas to management, lead and energize an improvement team, handle conflicts, etc. Most of the consultants out there do not supply this kind of training on Change Management. So what you are left with is knowledge of the theories and applications of Six Sigma, but very little in the way of infrastructure that will help support and sustain the initiative.

    0
    #69834

    Tierradentro
    Participant

    You get what you pay for.  There are even some universities that you can get an MBA over the web.  However, would you rather get an MBA over the web, or go to class and get one?

    0
    #69835

    john beaudoin
    Participant

    Look at the costs involved for the trainer.  In my case, I was trained by the Air Academey.  They had to fly a trainer from Denver to San Diego.  Round Trip Airfare would have been about $300.  Since the training was for 2 weeks (1 week, go back to work for 4 weeks to start projects, then 1 week to follow up with additional training and to insure projects are on target).  This means Round Trip Airfare twice = $600.  A training room needs to be used.  If done at a Hotel, $500/day for 10 days. ($5,000)  2 weeks of rental car for the trainer is $300.  The trainer would get meal reimbursement for the 2 weeks at $60/day – another $600.  Every student was provided with SPC Kiss and DOE Kiss software $200/student., a Basic Statistics Hard Cover book $80, and a large 3 Ring Binder with 500 pages of training material $50.  The trainer has the overhead of an office – phone, voicemail, cell-phone, e-mail, web site, sales and marketing, a laptop computer ($2000), and maybe even a projector ($2,500).  Has Airport parking and milage to and from the airport to worry about ($150), and should make a couple of hundred dollars a day ($2000 for 2 weeks) based on their experience, level of education, and knowledge.  The company also needs to make a little profit.  Once they have finished training, the new students 1st projects should also save the company at least $25,000/year.  Based on this, I think the rates are more than fare.

    0
    #69836

    Vilma L. Maldonado
    Member

    Yesterday I attended my first introductory seminar on what Six Sigma is about and I realized that the whole concept is the  integration of knowledge that has been developed through the past 25-45 or maybe many more years.  This integration is very useful for the improvement of processes, quality, etc. in organizations but does not provide magical results.  It is hard work (interesting, however) and requires upper management support, which is essential in order to see the results.  The structure does work and you will see the benefits, but only eventually!  It is professional work!  Vilma L. Maldonado, Right Hand – HRServices, San Juan, Puerto Rico

    0
    #69838

    Bob H
    Participant

    Like any new/emerging “technology”, training is expensive because there isn’t  a plethora of trainers.  The day will probably come when Leaning Tree type organizations will teach courses on Six Sigma at $800 (or less) a pop.  As more trainers get in the business of teaching Six Sigma, the price will come down.  However, the cost is cheap at twice the price.  As long as the training is associated with a project, the ROI justifies “any cost” of training.  The costs up front are sunk costs and paying these costs up front is offset when first projects complete.  When a critical mass of people in the organization are trained and the 2nd and 3rd projects come to fruition, the ROI/gains can be staggering so why worry about training costs.  You’re either in it for the long-haul or you’re not.
    As for BOK and “levels”.  Until the BOK is fully understood/evolved, it doesn’t make sense to have definitive “levels”.  Maybe something along the lines of “apprentice”, “journeyman”, and “master” are the only “levels” we need, with the specific activities accomplished by personnel at these “levels” being set forth.  Then the BOK components can be aligned to both the levels and the activities.
    Roles such as Sponsor, Champion, Mentor, Coach, MBB, BB, GB, Brown Belt, White Belt etc could then be explored. 
    The idea of a Green Belt being a “mentor” to another person in Green Belt training would help the Six Sigma movement in a company as it is hard for BBs and MBB to effectively get to all employees involved in Six Sigma.
     Then I think a “career ladder” with “certification rungs” could/should be established and “standard” certification exams should be developed and used.
    Just my 2 cents.
    Bob H.

    0
    #69854

    Stephen Curtis
    Member

    To see greenbelt training as purely a cost is shortsighted.  It’s an investment which must be weighed up against the returns. 
    Importantly though, you should be asking why you are paying external consultants for greenbelt training.  This should be part of the MBB and BB roles. 

    0
    #69855

    Joe Perito
    Participant

    Personally, I feel the rates being charged are a black mark on the character and integrity of the people and organizations doing so. Obviously, the time, materials, and investment in the presentations do not merit the ROI. The realism is that you could make a lot of money if you dedicate the time and effort to addressing the dollar problems in your companies. Management seldom supports any more people on the payroll other than what the P&L statement will allow. On the other hand, once the almighty doller is sniffed out and a taste of it is realized, GE and Motorola made these programs “mandatory”… that’s were the support and success of these programs come from. Now, the vultures smell the benefits. (Vultures do little work for a living and grab all they can when it is available). That’s where we are now. The “Black Belt” titles should attach a high level of suspicion to anyone sporting the title. The title could mean professional Quality Assurance Engineers with a high level of engineering training, experience, and collegiate level training in statistics. In most cases,though, it means people not working in the Quality profession, with no statistical training, perhaps no college… or even a High school drop out, get pulled off their job for four weeks of crash training. We all know how much we learn in a crash training course. These people may work on a few projects and then return to their non teccnical jobs… perhaps dock workers, perhaps machine operators, supervisors, MIS people, Managers, or many other well trained respectable professions. This does not merit the superfluous title of a “Black Belt”. If these are Black Belts, where does that put the Master Degrees and CQE’s in the QA Profession then? By definition, these people have a far superior level of experience and training. By scale, the Black Belt has completed a “seminar” whereas the latter group has “years” of pactice and training and education. Mind you, “Six Sigma” does not provide you experience or lots of new tools, (hopefully) it provides you management support and a (good) formatted guideline to execute a project. Final answer to the initial question about cost? “Parisitic” (giving little or nothing in return) feeding frenzy… like parana fish.

    0
    #69869

    muhannad al nabulsi
    Participant

    I agree fully with your opinion,I think the whole “belt ranking  system”is built on “business” approach similar to the “ISO”BUSINESS,it is all in all  (as you said)unnecessary,but this how cosulting companies are making profits,I believe “SIX-SIGMA_is (integrated ) part of the quality concept (based strongly on SPC) AND IT CAN’T  be seperated from the whole TQM CONCEPT.but no body would hear you or me .                             REGARDS           MN 

    0
    #69871

    C Cox
    Participant

    The key word is “eventually”  If your company does not see a pretty good pay back on the projects which are selected for training projects (very often enough to pay for the training expenses) then there is a problem on how the projects were selected (not an uncommon problem by the way).  So, “eventually” should be 4 – 5 months.

    0
    #69889

    Andy Brody
    Participant

    BRAVO! This is something that has been sticking in my craw (whatever that is). If my company wanted to implement six sigma, the cost would be prohibitive versus our revenues, and the payback would be minimal. However, a continuous improvement team may uncover an opportunity perfect for six sigma. We would have to use traditional methods, but whats so bad about that? It would be interesting to take a problem and independently submit it to a six sigma team and a team of certified quality professionals and Qualtiy Engineers each team acting without the knowledge of the other’s existence.-

    0
    #69894

    MM
    Participant

    I too, think the costs are outrageous and do not reflect anything more than the greed of the companies that have copied and recopied the program.  I saw similar problems when ISO 9000 came out and with the computer certification programs being offered at present. 
    Many of these companies expect the person’s company to pay these prices, but in fact, it is usually the individual who is forced to take out the loan and pay for years, just to maintain their place in the workforce.
    My suggestion to those who cannot afford these prices, wait a year and buy the book!  You can always be certification ready, if your company is insistent on the title, then when they pay for it, take the exam! This works with ISO 9000-2000 and MCSE programs. The companies will pay for the exams gladly, even when they refrain from paying for the courses!
     
     
     

    0
    #69895

    Ron Jarrett
    Member

    I agree that the costs are too high. I’m the Quality Director for an $18 million company & we spend several $1,000s each year on training. We are willing to spend $ when we can see the payback. However, there’s no way we can justify the costs of getting an employee certified as a black belt. The other current parallel issue today is “Lean Manufacturing” & I think the two go hand-in-hand. However, we have been able to get very reasonably priced training for Lean Mfg. and it’s paying off. The huge paybacks touted for 6 sigma are doable for the GE’s & Motorola’s of the world but unrealistic for us small guys. Let’s get real, and that includes ASQ.

    0
    #69898

    Anonymous “Black Mark”
    Participant

    Joe,I am sorry but this is not a socialist country. You can buy a Cadillac or you can buy a Chevrolet – it’s your choice.As with most products/services you can do Six Sigma on a shoestring budget or you can spend millions.

    Do you really think companies would keep using me as an expensive consultant if they did not get the verifed ROI? I am not Mikel Harry but he was right when he said you quality guys just dont get it!

    0
    #69899

    Tierradentro
    Participant

    If you can’t afford to train someone, you could always try to hire someone already certified.  If you can’t afford that either, you can buy a book and read.  On a more serious note, if your revenues have not reached a point where a project can save you $10,000 or more a year, then your business may be fine without 6-Sigma and just some common sense best business practices.  Using only these tools, you may already be at a 3-4 Sigma level.  Remember, these are in the thousands of errors per million opportunities, if you only have 10,000 opportunities/year, you probably have errors less than 100/year.  Handling 100 errors/year may not be much more costly than handling 20-50 errors/year as the same processes would need to be in place to handle both.  6-sigma is good for everyone, but it really gets the payback when a company can reduce 10,000 errors to 2,000 vs. 500 to 100.

    0
    #69901

    john beaudoin
    Participant

    Your lucky to get one credit hour at a State University for $208!  Most classes are 3 credit hours or more.

    0
    #69902

    Tierradentro
    Participant

    I can’t believe I’m wasting time replying to a message like that.

    0
    #69903

    john beaudoin
    Participant

    I like your points.  The problem is that the companies complaining most about the training prices are small enough that if they did pay to train and develop a Master Black Belt, they could not afford the $80,000/year they would need to pay them to keep them.  Yes, larger companies would like the costs to be cheaper too, but in the long run, trained individuals are worth money in the marketplace, and it is the smaller companies that are the least likely to implement 6-Sigma.

    0
    #69904

    Andy Brody
    Participant

    Thanks, that was helpful and put some things into perspective. We do indeed have fewer than 100 defects/year – actually close to 10-20. This is due basically to our being a mature industry (coatings) there isn’t alot of new technology that would offer cost effective improvements based on the way operate. We’ve been in business for 149 years and most of the major kinks have been worked out. Most of the problems we have are special cause vs. common cause and therefore difficult to anticipate. What you say is true, and our problems are best addressed with traditional quality tools. Thanks for your time to respond.

    0
    #69905

    JS
    Participant

    I know some pretty sharp managers that have gotten their MBA using the web!!! Everyone’s learning style is different and some people would MUCH rather work at their own pace and on their own time and not be forced to listen to someone present material they could get on their own
    Both alternatives would be beneficial!!

    0
    #69906

    john beaudoin
    Participant

    Frank,
    What is to stop you from calling yourself a Master Black Belt?  If you use the Six Sigma tools, as you say you do, and you do projects, which I think you do, and you help others in the use of the tools (I assume you do this as well), then you could call yourself a Master Black Belt.  If it looks like a Duck, Quacks like a Duck, and Walks like a Duck; It is probably a Duck.
    At my company, to get “certified” as a Black Belt, you get trained in the tools from either a MBB or consultant, you perform a project that uses a DOE, and your project savings are verified.  Then you get your certification, which comes from your own company and not an official 6-Sigma body.  I believe all you require is for your company to have people familiar with the tools, management willing to support you in the tools, and management that call you 6-Sigma.
    I believe the only reasons other companies go the expensive training route is that most people do not have a clue about statistical tools and need to be brought up to speed.  Also, there is a solid structure in going through the training and initial rollout to a company.  In large companies, deployment is very complex and has a high risk of failure.  In a small company, deployement should be very easy because convincing a small amount of people to embrace 6-Sigma should be easier.

    0
    #69907

    Tierradentro
    Participant

    The chances are that if you can learn from the Web, there are already books out there you can learn from on your own.  Since there is no official certification program that I know of (What I mean by this is that if you are a company of 3 people, and the owner reads a book, he can call himself a Champion.  If the second individual has a degree with a great statistical background and uses items such as DOE’s on projects and teaches others, he could call himself a MBB.  If the 3rd know how to complete projects and uses IPO’s, CNX’s,  can calculate a sigma level, and create a run chart, he can call himself a Greenbelt.  The company can certify itself as 6 sigma.  Not all companies have the talent to do this on their own.  Also, larger companies have more trouble getting buy-in from all of their employees, but I do not think there is anything stopping a smaller company from self implementation.
    Web based training would work on an individual as you have said (I am getting my PMI over the web), but for most larger companies, a successful rollout and change of mindset for an organization will not come from the Web.  Key leaders need to be involved in seminars, with each other to get buy-in to 6-Sigma and coordinate the mindset that everyone in the organization needs to be 6-Sigma.
    Another requirement for success is that the individuals sent to training must be somewhat good with numbers, math, and charting.  They must also have enough time to do their regular job and spend 1-2 hours a day on projects.
    Once these have been established, and you have had the consultants in converting upper management, you probably would train a few at your company that could propagate the learning from within.  This would be more effective than the web based learning anyway.
    Last, if your company is small, doesn’t need management buy-in, etc. and you already have individuals to step to the plate, they would do just fine from the books out there.  If you don’t have the internal talent, you could hire someone that has already been through the training, and if you can’t pay the $80,000/year salary of an MBB, then your organization is small enough to where you do not need 6-Sigma.  If you do not have millions of opportunities for errors, then you probably only have a few hundred error/year now.  This is probably not enough money to warrant paying the salary of MBB’s and GB’s or training someone.

    0
    #69922

    TN
    Member

    Thanks John.  I can’t believe people could be so obsessed with the means rather than the end, the form rather than the substance.  If someone is really interested in Six Sigma-induced quality, why would or should he be so worried about the BELTS?   The focus and the priorities are all wrong.   Pay all you can or are willing (or save your money for retirement); in the end you’ll be recognized for what you can do for quality, not the color of your BELT.
     

    0
    #69940

    “Ken”
    Participant

    All of you who want to have MBBs or BBs train others on Six Sigma might want to keep in mind that there are five areas of expertise needed: Subject expertise on Six Sigma
    Subject expertise on statistics
    Presentation skills
    Training skills (telling isn’t training)
    Facilitation skills It is not always easy to get this particular skill mix in the same individual, which is clearly one factor in why consultants charge the rates they do.By the way, within my company, the cost per student per day to be trained on Six Sigma using contractors is in alignment with the cost per student day of the other courses offered.

    0
    #69976

    Johnny
    Participant

    The key people in any business should distribute their KPI’s and the projects to pursue will come from these..  If pay back is 5000 grand then why spend 6000 grand on training?     Significant payback should allow for significant payout on training.
    THE problem is though?    The KPI’s are hidden deep and projects are selected for their easiness to achieve results.  ( Not necessarily the big returns…….)  ” Those green belts dont give us any return! ”  Is there any reason why?

    0
    #69985

    Paul S. Gill
    Participant

    The titles (MBB, BB, GB, etc) all do sound hierarchical, but in an organization where Six Sigma is being implemented, particularly on a large, company-wide scale, these titles help in the following ways:
    1.  They help in defining day-to-day job duties
    2.  Help to make channels of communication during projects clear
    3.  Help to make the division of project duties clear
    4.  Allow, in some cases, BBs with demonstrated abilities to move up the ladder and become MBBs.  The same applies to good Gbs being selected to become full time BBs.
     
     

    0
    #70056

    Cone head
    Participant

    I have 1 thing to say to u Mr Cox.   ” There is no such thing as Can’t.”

    0
Viewing 44 posts - 1 through 44 (of 44 total)

The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.