Jump to content

John Mackey's "Conscious Capitalism"


darkstar965

Recommended Posts

As for Costco, meh, the fact that its cash or AMEX is enough to make your head spin. Really AMEX?

As with everything else Costco, by focusing on a single supplier rather than providing competition, they keep their costs down. They struck a deal with AmEx for a much-lower-than-usual cut, in exchange for not accepting Visa/MC/other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point. I still loathe AmEx, not so much Costco. Decent wine program.

You can also use your Costco card as a Costco credit card. We started doing that a long time ago, and I actually forget what the application process involves now. The only problem with it is that the processing company they use seems to give a pretty small turn-around time for payment and you can't pay online, only by check via return mail.

ETA: I wasn't clear above. You can't pay them directly online. We switched to doing it by online banking through our bank. For a while, though, it was pretty much the only regular check we were writing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As with everything else Costco, by focusing on a single supplier rather than providing competition, they keep their costs down. They struck a deal with AmEx for a much-lower-than-usual cut, in exchange for not accepting Visa/MC/other.

Not sure what you mean by "as with everything else Costco?" Encouraging competition is what keeps costs down. Sure they got a good deal from AMEX but in virtually all other areas, they offer different options (providers) within categories who compete with each other whether televisions, apparel or wine. The AMEX deal was as much about targeting more affluent customers that overlap with AMEX's cardholder base (and data sharing) as it was about a sweetheart deal. There's also the scale issue. As in, any gargantuan buyer of anything is able to wrestle its suppliers into submission to bring costs down. Problem is, those low costs can have big impact on the suppliers, whose people and practices aren't as wholesome as what Costco is able to do.

I like Costco quite a bit also though we don't go as much as we might because it's tough to buy small amounts of many things and it's not as conveniently located as other places. Jim Sinegal, IMHO, was a good and honest person with values he tried hard to instil in his business. Worth noting however, that Sinegal's nearly $2.5 million compensation in 2011 was way, way more than Mackey's has been for the past 7 years.

Also, while I agree that Costco is generally more progressive and humane than most other mass merchandisers, they're far from perfect. As one example, they currently have a certified gender discrimination class action lawsuit pending against them.

Costco did improve its seafood sustainability practices a couple of years ago but only after tremendous pressure from customers and activists. They also partner substantially with the MSC that Dean feels has lost credibility. (second paragraph at that link).

My sense (not 100% sure), is that Whole Foods is more progressive than Costco (though not perfect) on sustainability given its labeling program and work with Monterey Bay and Blue Ocean Institute. If interested to learn more about MSC, Monterey Bay, Blue Ocean and other organizations that certify and rate seafood, click here. As with anything and everything else, some of these orgs do a better job than others.

Dean's of course right (when he was discussing labor practices upthread) that these are all large corporations. None of them are all metaphorical milk and honey though some will be generally better than others from individual informed perspectives.

I'll say what I wrote upthread once more. I think it may be better for some of us to prioritize our own "right answers" (such as farmer's markets and small local providers) rather than feeling too concerned about absolute wrong answers since, while true some big chains are better than others, all have major issues and concerns. The reality is that local providers like Tom the egg seller at Dupont, other vendors at the area's farmers' markets, Jason Andelman, the Rappahonnock oyster guys, Jaime Stachowski, Righteous Cheese, Leonora Bakery, Toigo Farms, and even Dean/Dino could not operate the way they do currently if they were multi-billion dollar operations. At that scale, very difficult tradeoffs have to be made due to a host of complex and competing factors beyond an individual CEO's control. Still, some push the limits and operate unethically or illegally more than others so being informed is key.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll say what I wrote upthread once more. I think it may be better for some of us to prioritize our own "right answers" (such as farmer's markets and small local providers) rather than feeling too concerned about absolute wrong answers since, while true some big chains are better than others, all have major issues and concerns. The reality is that local providers like ... could not operate the way they do currently if they were multi-billion dollar operations. At that scale, very difficult tradeoffs have to be made due to a host of complex and competing factors beyond an individual CEO's control. Still, some push the limits and operate unethically or illegally more than others so being informed is key.

Names removed as my comment has nothing to do with folks you mentioned, but just because they are small and local does not mean that they are incapable of acting unethically or illegally versus a large company. I wonder how many businesses, large and small, that we all patronize have practices that we don't agree with that we will never know about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darkstar, what I mean, is that you don't see eighteen different brands of soap on the shelves at Costco like you do at the local grocery store. You see two. They negotiate with the manufacturer a much lower price, because they're providing less competition on the shelf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Names removed as my comment has nothing to do with folks you mentioned, but just because they are small and local does not mean that they are incapable of acting unethically or illegally versus a large company. I wonder how many businesses, large and small, that we all patronize have practices that we don't agree with that we will never know about.

Great point and absolutely true. While the nature of challenges and pressures varies by business size, whether a business is small or large has no bearing on its likelihood to be honest, ethical or compassionate.

Darkstar, what I mean, is that you don't see eighteen different brands of soap on the shelves at Costco like you do at the local grocery store. You see two. They negotiate with the manufacturer a much lower price, because they're providing less competition on the shelf.

I understand but would still make the same point. In many Costco categories, the number of supplier options is well more than 1 or 2 though not as high as 18. The bigger point though is that they're not offering lower prices so much because their suppliers experience 'less competition' in the stores. Costco can offer lower prices for the same reason Wal-Mart does: they're huge and have more leverage with suppliers. Someone more jaded than I am would term it as they being big enough to put the squeeze on suppliers. Another way this is done in the industry is through private label programs. Costco has a huge private label program with its Kirkland brand. This is generally deal-with-the-devil stuff for the branded companies that decide it's better than nothing to subjugate their brands to the retailer. This is important because it should figure into anyone's accounting of how values-driven or ethical a business is. If the business you buy from is wonderful but has put such intense pressure on its suppliers that those companies don't pay a living wage, don't provide benefits or cut corners on safety, sustainability or whatever, that deserves consideration as well.

When thinking about buyer/supplier relationships, scale and volume are usually much bigger drivers of price than exclusivity. That's definitely true with the largest retailers like Costco, a company that booked nearly $100 billion in sales in 2012.

Again, I personally like Costco and shop there occasionally. I do think they are more progressive on the labor front..with their own people (more than 80,000 of them). And, I admire that they've built a hugely successful business since that's not easy to do. But whether Whole Foods, Costco, Wal-Mart, Trader Joes or whomever, the full story is usually more complex than first appears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of "conscious capitalism": Why is it that the Georgetown Safeway has "Wild Caught" US Shrimp, frozen with no preservatives at all, for under $10/lb, but my local Safeway has only the farmed crap from Thailand for more $$$? Is it that the poor denizens of G'town are in need of the better, less expensive goods? I discovered this yesterday, when I rented a Zipcar and went to G'Town to take advantage of their wine sale and also pick up stuff for a Mardi Gras meal. Their wine selections are far more extensive, not to mention more interesting, than what is on offer at the Columbia Road store. But, the shrimp really got my hackles up. What's up with that?

OK, I'm gonna have to apologize to Mr. Safeway. I went to the Columbia Rd. store this afternoon and found the "Open Nature" brand of wild-caught US shrimp on sale in a couple of different sizes (of shrimp). An employee was busily stocking the seafood freezer, so I was able to suss out what's happening. It seems they have been carrying this stuff for about a month. It's been awhile since I have bothered looking at the stuff in that freezer, since there wasn't anything in there that I wanted to buy. I just hope they keep this up. It'll save me a trip to WF to find the good stuff. The wine selection there still sucks ventworm nuts, however.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Mackey on unions: "The union is like having herpes. It doesn't kill you, but it's unpleasant and inconvenient, and it stops a lot of people from becoming your lover."

I think that supporting workers in their right to group together and ameliorate the power imbalance between the company who has all the money and all the power and the single individual worker who has none is absolutely a key civil rights issue. It is as important to me as not discriminating against people because of their sex, race, or sexual orientation. It's the only way to break the back of generational poverty and to keep the middle class. We all owe so much to the trade union movement--the 40 week, the end to child labor, a whole slew of health and safety and anti-discrimination practices in the workplace. If my choice is between a UFCW organized shop like Safeway or Giant or a union-buster like WF then I won't shop at Whole Foods--and I haven't since the early 00s.

And for city-dwellers without a car, I do recommend Peapod, where groceries are brought to your house by Teamsters.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Mackey on unions: "The union is like having herpes. It doesn't kill you, but it's unpleasant and inconvenient, and it stops a lot of people from becoming your lover."

I think that supporting workers in their right to group together and ameliorate the power imbalance between the company who has all the money and all the power and the single individual worker who has none is absolutely a key civil rights issue...

Absolutely agree with you on that bolded part, Anna. And related to that point but connecting back to previous posts by others, I'll reiterate that Costco is, IMHO, better and more humane in how it treats its people than is WF. That said, take a look at what happened in Seattle here and, still ongoing in Milwaukee, here and here. Again (and as of now; 2012/2013), Costco does pay and treat its employees better than their peer big-box merchants and that's a very good thing. But, nothing is simple or absolute. Facts at odds with general impressions like those with Costco is why prioritizing whatever best options is sometimes better and more realistic than trying to figure out lesser (of multiple) evils.

Separately, some truly thorough and great stuff here, from NPR and summarized by HuffPo on WF's efforts around seafood sustainability. This highlights more recent and detailed research supportive of Dean's views on MSC, but also gives credit for the relationships WF has with Blue Ocean and Monterey, two other third-party rating organizations with reputations different from MSC. As I wrote in the first post of this thread, MSC isn't the whole story for WF but, as came out later in the thread, MSC is a very important (and concerning) story. And, that said, I was in at WF Glover tonight. Looking very closely at the seafood case (but not buying anything), I saw the labels for both MSC and Blue Ocean. Oddly though, no sign whatsoever of Monterey. I asked the worker behind the counter about it. He had no idea what I was talking about (not surprising and very probably not his fault). That made me wonder if the WF/Monterey relationship is i) on the skids or ii) if the specific store isn't signing and labeling as they should or iii) if it's a more innocuous explanation.

I personally find the reading and listening at all the above links pretty elucidating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully this doesn't cross any lines. Zora--I know you'll let me know if it does :D And that'd be totally fine; really appreciated even. :D :D

Take One

I've been railing a bit on this thread about focusing on right answers (local, farmers markets, small producers) more than trying to justify, debate, defend or investigate the wrong answers. It's fine (interesting even) to discuss that stuff here to be sure. But too much navel gazing and hand wringing at an individual level isn't good for one's stress level or health. Sometimes the wrong answers are right for some people at certain times for different reasons and, of course, that's for each person to decide individually.

Take Two

donrockwell.com is many things but, sometimes, it reminds me of the attic of an old house. Stay with me here. This is on point. An old attic is usually unruly. Things aren't always perfectly boxed, stacked or organized. If you're looking for something specific using a logical approach, you may well be thwarted. The attic is imperfect and musty. But the attic I have in mind is also exciting. It's a place for discovery. It's where you might find the long lost baseball card collection, the photos of a great grandfather from the first world war, your own 1st grade report card, and the like. In some ways, this website is kind of like that.

The Point

I was poking around some of the darker corners of the site--it's not so important where so no link or time and date stamp needed--a day or two ago. I was looking for something I couldn't find. But I found something Zora wrote. She wrote it nearly 7 years ago.

It's short. It's to the point. And I though it totally relevant, on this thread, to drag into the sun. The entire quote. This isn't an excerpt or something that I've edited or changed in any way.

This message is for people who buy all of their food in supermarkets: Get your lazy butt out of bed on Saturday morning and go to the
Arlington Market, or Sunday morning go to Dupont or Takoma Park markets. Support local farmers!!!
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW Article by John Fund on this on today's National Review website:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/340971/mackey-maverick-john-fund .

My criteria on where I will be shopping in priority order:

selection/quality of product

access -- i.e. how easy is it get there and park when you do

comparable price point

customer service

Practically, this translates into an early Saturday morning shopping run to Falls Church Farmers market, TJs and then Whole Foods across rt 7 from TJs. Safeway, for common household products not available at locations above. [since the Farmers Market doesn't open til 9 am during the winter, infrequent stops there.] I agree with Don, that unless there is firm evidence of abuse of children, employees or animals, I will leave political considerations out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Please, everyone, no arguments about religion or politics - they're only guaranteed to alienate a large minority of the members here. It's okay to voice an opinion about the gentleman's actions, but not to voice it in general terms or to make extrapolations. We're all friends here, and I want to keep it that way. Thank you! :)]

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Separately, some truly thorough and great stuff here, from NPR and summarized by HuffPo on WF's efforts around seafood sustainability. This highlights more recent and detailed research supportive of Dean's views on MSC, but also gives credit for the relationships WF has with Blue Ocean and Monterey, two other third-party rating organizations with reputations different from MSC. As I wrote in the first post of this thread, MSC isn't the whole story for WF but, as came out later in the thread, MSC is a very important (and concerning) story. And, that said, I was in at WF Glover tonight. Looking very closely at the seafood case (but not buying anything), I saw the labels for both MSC and Blue Ocean. Oddly though, no sign whatsoever of Monterey. I asked the worker behind the counter about it. He had no idea what I was talking about (not surprising and very probably not his fault). That made me wonder if the WF/Monterey relationship is i) on the skids or ii) if the specific store isn't signing and labeling as they should or iii) if it's a more innocuous explanation.

I continue to be puzzled by why WFM's policy concerning seafood and sustainability seems exemplary. It's probably the most blatant case of hypocrisy in the company. If there is a general agreement that Species X is over-fished and your buyer knows this, why is she ordering it by the boatload and distributing it to regional stores? Why are members of the seafood team not passionate about issues related to the commodities they are selling? Why are they under-educated about seafood, farm-fishing and endangered species and what many view as an important food source that is dwindling?

Those yellow seals displayed in seafood cases kind of remind me of "SMOKING CAN BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH" on the side of cigarette packs in terms of the efficacy of labels and corporate sincerity.

I can't blame WFM alone. I also blame Dr. Oz and other professionals in nutrition and health care who continue to promote salmon as a source for reversing signs of aging and fish as something everyone should eat several times a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A yellow rating from Blue Ocean or Monterey is in no way like the smoking may be hazardous to your health. There are a lot of factors in determining the health of a fishery. There are natural life cycle factors of a fish's rating.

If the fish is slow growing or if it is low fecundity, then these natural factors tend towards unsustainability. But if the fishery is in fact no over fished, and no over fishing is going on, and the fish is at mean sustainable biomass, then with a good management plan in place, it is possible to have a healthy fishery with a relatively small catch to stock ratio and careful monitoring. Bu the fish may be yellow or even red flagged.

On the other hand, look at a fishery where over fishing has occurred over time. Suppose this fishery is now managed well and the stock is growing on a healthy path to mean sustainable biomass targets. In otherwords, the fishers are playing the game the way it should be. The fish may be yellow or red flagged, but if we don't reward the responsible behavior now in place, how do we expect other fisheries to become enlightened. Mexican grouper is an example here. I think that Mexican Grouper is on the way to sustainability and is well managed according to the reports I have read from NOAA and Blue Ocean. Atlantic Grouper stocks are not.

Having said this, the important point here is not that the stock is not being over fished, but htat the stock is on a healthy path to sustainability. Cod from the North Atlantic is by current data, currently not being overfished {new data coming may change this view} but the destruction of the stock has been so great that it is way to early to allow the amount of fishing that is currently allowed. Plus the management plan on cod is one of a type that allows for factory trawlers which make keeping a healthy biodiversity even harder. So one should not eat Western North Atlantic cod whatsoever despite is ranking in Monterey Bay.

Last, using MSC certification is simply wrong. It is worthless and is a corrupt system. WFM is a major supporter. Fisheries that are not currently sustainable but have promised to become sustainable at some distant date in the future are certified. It is the "worse then Whimpy" seal of approval: Give me all the hamburgers today and I will gladly pay you back Tuesday. 2025. If you can find me. If I am still in business. Fuck it, WFM can sell Chilean Sea Bass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW .... I will leave political considerations out.

John, this is simply impossible. When you spend your dollars, you are supporting the system that produces the product you are paying for.

Just because you choose to ignore the results of your actions does not free you from the outcomes your actions contribute to. Until we understand this, big business will win because of the uneveness of the playing field. Some call that economies of scale, but as a non practicing economist, I think the empirical evidence that political outcomes with real economic results can be bought surprisingly cheap.

I am not a purist by any means. For example, I use lemons year round. But I struggle with the compromises and really try to think them out. For some dishes I use a much more expensive local product {gold potatoes} and for others I use a commercial product {russets}. The russets just don't work right if they are local and I am not willing to compormise my dish. Same with onions, for most soffrito, I use commercial and fo some dishes I use local organic. And, sometimes the local product has more inputs used, may contribute more to global warming etc, but may also be less harmful to the health of the bay, of the ground water and to the folk that grow it. These are difficult trade offs that we make weather we think about them or not.

At U of C Department of Economics, my alma matter, there was a saying: "It's not surprising that every man has his price, its just surprising how low that price may be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing I'm like most here in that I learn from most every post Dean has made. I agree with nearly all of it.

Whether to keep 'politics' in or out of one's buying decisions is, of course, a personal call. I like to keep them in. To be informed. And to have what I learn influence whatever decisions so I can meet personal, family and national/global needs. I think that's what most people do when they decide to shop certain places, avoid others, etc.

Aside from the necessary platitude that all this stuff (i.e., sustainability and how it's measured, tracked and ensured) is more complicated than meets the eye, is another truism that deserves a role in this conversation and that's the role of "Big Corporations" (BC) in food and our society more generally.

It's easy to use BC as the punching bag. They make billions. They answer first to investors and maybe never to environmental or personal concerns. They don't do things the way we, as concerned individuals might. All said, sustaining a BC is incredibly difficult and complicated. It requires more tradeoffs and compromises than 99% of Americans could ever fully understand. Like most people, BCs do bad and good things at different times for reasons sometimes obvious and, at other times, a total mystery. And, some BCs deserve more condemnation that others to be sure.

But here's the thing. Our society and lives and all that is good about them would be much, much worse without Big Corporations. Small, local, values-driven businesses cannot and do not meet all essential human needs. Cars, places to invest retirement funds, planes on which to visit family or take vacations. clothing, medical services, devices and pharmaceuticals, roads on which to drive, the movies, music and books we love, cell phones, computers, and, yes, many things we consume as parts of our diets. All of our diets, whether or not we avoid WFM, all big grocers or whichever we don't like, rely in some part on BCs.

Not directing this at any individuals on this thread or elsewhere but it's too easy to simply condemn all BCs or, for that matter, all _____ (fill in the blank with most anything).

One specific example using Anna's post above and WFM. I personally agree with almost her entire post but want to address these questions she rightly poses:

I continue to be puzzled by why WFM's policy concerning seafood and sustainability seems exemplary. It's probably the most blatant case of
hypocrisy in the company. If there is a general agreement that Species X is over-fished and your buyer knows this, why is she ordering it by the
boatload and distributing it to regional stores? Why are members of the seafood team not passionate about issues related to the commodities they are selling? Why are they under-educated about seafood, farm-fishing and endangered species and what many view as an important
food source that is dwindling?

WFM is a multi-billion dollar company. So, definitely a "BC." I wouldn't label them "exemplary" because many things about them deserve criticism or even condemnation as several here have written. But I would argue that their seafood sustainability program, while very far from what it should be, could be and, imho, inevitably will be, is better than any other very large grocer in the US. Fair and right to have huge concerns about MSC. Fair and right to be totally befuddled about why they'd label something endangered yet still sell it. At the same time, go into a Giant, Stop & Shop, Kroger, Costco, TJs, Safeway, Wal-Mart, or, for that matter, most restaurants not named "Dino" and try to figure out the real origins of seafood on offer. Watch and listen as staff struggle to answer basic questions or, worse, when providers get defensive when you start asking about the provenance of a given product. I ask often. And I get those reactions All The Time whether in restaurants or grocery stores.

Positive change and a better world starts with transparency, however imperfect and however much driven by consumers, providers or the constitutionally-protected and generally free media that we enjoy in this country. That, combined with informed consumers, can drive change when people avoid certain products and behaviors. As much as Dean is teaching us about fish stocks and sustainability, there is much more to know about large global companies and how they operate--good and bad. At minimum, if you do shop WFM, maybe don't buy those red-labeled items or others that you know should be avoided. There are many fine alternatives if we know to prioritize them. We all can at least do that. And, if we did, I can assure you one of Anna's questions would be answered to all our satisfaction: they won't any longer be ordering or selling endangered species. That's happened before. And it'll happen more. With our awareness and our decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, this is simply impossible. When you spend your dollars, you are supporting the system that produces the product you are paying for.

Just because you choose to ignore the results of your actions does not free you from the outcomes your actions contribute to. Until we understand this, big business will win because of the uneveness of the playing field. Some call that economies of scale, but as a non practicing economist, I think the empirical evidence that political outcomes with real economic results can be bought surprisingly cheap.

I am not a purist by any means. For example, I use lemons year round. But I struggle with the compromises and really try to think them out. For some dishes I use a much more expensive local product {gold potatoes} and for others I use a commercial product {russets}. The russets just don't work right if they are local and I am not willing to compormise my dish. Same with onions, for most soffrito, I use commercial and fo some dishes I use local organic. And, sometimes the local product has more inputs used, may contribute more to global warming etc, but may also be less harmful to the health of the bay, of the ground water and to the folk that grow it. These are difficult trade offs that we make weather we think about them or not.

At U of C Department of Economics, my alma matter, there was a saying: "It's not surprising that every man has his price, its just surprising how low that price may be."

Dean: I choose to conduct my political activities through other channels than the way I participate in the marketplace. While I take your point in general I could say that the potential and probably unknown consequences of virtually every purchasing choice I may make, if I were to follow your methodology, would lead me to don a loincloth, get a bow and arrow, and cook whatever I could kill or obtain through forage on a fire in front of my cave. There are pros and cons to virtually every product we purchase. While you may have personal knowledge that WFM is truly run wickedly, I have heard plenty of stories from persons that I consider equally reputable that it's marketing practices are no more predatory than other large food suppliers. You have given me a good reason to drop in to Dino soon to discuss this further. BTW I did stop in around Christmas time, but you were off that evening. Hope to see you soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh. Two very different moves in the transparency wars in the past week.

First, I'm sure many saw the Whole Foods, front-page NY Times announcement that they'll be moving to label all GMO food in all stores by 2018. It comes on the heels of last year's narrow defeat of California's GMO-labeling initiative, Proposition 37 and was covered by all media outlets. The move is already being criticized by industry. And no doubt it'll also catch some criticism from consumers who'll question why they're taking five years to implement it or that it isn't a sincere move. As always, the devil will be in the details as this rolls out. Whatever one's view, WF becomes the first major food retailer in the United States to do this with this announcement.

Second, a shorter piece about some legislative efforts currently underway to make media investigations of food producer facilities and tactics much more difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Old dress code at Dino:

Anything that won't get you arrested walking from your mode of transportation/home to Dino

New Dress Code at Dino

Old Dress Code plus no loincloths with or without bows and arrows!

So that's why you never have Ted Nugent as a guest!

"I'm sorry sir, but the whole wango-tango thing just doesn't go down well with the other guests."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Costco, meh, the fact that its cash or AMEX is enough to make your head spin. Really AMEX?

If you have a Costco Amex card (available to Costco members for no annual fee), you get a year-end rebate of 1% on all purchases, 2% on Costco purchases and gasoline, and 3% on travel. If you buy a lot of stuff at Costco, you can get a fairly hefty rebate at the end of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have a Costco Amex card (available to Costco members for no annual fee), you get a year-end rebate of 1% on all purchases, 2% on Costco purchases and gasoline, and 3% on travel. If you buy a lot of stuff at Costco, you can get a fairly hefty rebate at the end of the year.

What Zora said. Our Costco AMEX pays for our membership and more each year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...