Jump to content
Create New...
  • Cmicasa the Great
    Cmicasa the Great

    Cadillac Sees Global Sales Up 24.5 Percent In Dec. 2015, and 7.5% For the Year

      Cadillac's ATS, SRX and Escalade lead the charge to Global Sales being up for 2015.

    Cadillac finishes 2015 with a year over year increase of 7.5 % globally finishing the year 277,868, or 19,000 more than 2014. Cadillac’s ATS, along with the SRX set annual sales records. The ATS moved 63,049 units in 2015, an increase 35%while the SRX totaled 99,397, an increase of 13.3%.
    For December 2015, Cadillac saw a 24.5% jump in sales overall, and 28.7% in the U.S., its home market. In China, Cadillac’s second largest market, sales increased 17%. Canadian Cadillac dealers saw and increase of 16.2% , while sales were boosted 19.6% in the Middle East, 27.7% in Mexico and 75.8% in South Korea.

     

    It should also be noted that These come on the heal of a healthy $51,000 average transaction price for 2015 in the U.S., second only to Mercedes Benz. Inventory levels have been pushed below the 50-day mark as Cadillac plans to expand its line-up soon with the launch of the range topping CT6 large executive sedan in March, followed by the XT5 crossover as a replacement for the very successful SRX. The vehicles will be built in Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly Plant and Spring Hill, Tenn. respectively.

     

    “Cadillac’s global expansion is building momentum, driven by increasing product substance and disciplined growth strategies,” said Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen. “Not only did volume grow, but Cadillac’s transformed products earned higher transaction prices from customers, driving lower inventory levels. This creates a strong foundation for our two all-new products launching in the first half of 2016 – the CT6 prestige sedan and the XT5 luxury crossover.”

     

     

    Cadillac ATS sales grew 51% to 7,825 units
    Cadillac CTS sales grew 1% to 3,043 units
    Cadillac ELR sales grew 12% to 135 units
    Cadillac Escalade sales grew 30% to 5,306 units
    Cadillac SRX sales grew 22% to 10,001 units
    Cadillac XTS sales grew 12% to 5,982 units

     

    23tqufl.jpg

     

    vrrqjl.jpg

     

    Source: Cadillac

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Well VW will pay for it dearly now.  But you could pick a number of brands that turn a better profit than GM.  You need profit from the luxury brand, there needs to be greater focus on more Cadillac product and more Cadillac advertising.

    Since you wanted to bring up profits, I though I would share this article with you which explains in very good detail why GM's profits are behind companies like Toyota. Inform yourself.

    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/05/09/why-cant-general-motors-earn-profits-like-toyotas.aspx

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Toyota still out-earned GM several years ago when the Dollar to yen ratio was not as strong.  The Germans are more profitable than GM too, they aren't benefiting from the Yen.  My main point is GM could be a more profitable company if it had more Cadillac sales.  A profitable Cadillac division could carry the whole company, and offset the money losing European operation.

     

    Which as a side bar, they should either sell the European operation totally, or go the One Ford route, and rename Opel and Vauxhall to Chevrolet, and make a global Spark, Sonic, Cruze, Malibu/Insignia, Camaro, Trax, Equinox line up that is the same in Europe, as it is in Asia, as it is in the USA.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Toyota still out-earned GM several years ago when the Dollar to yen ratio was not as strong.  The Germans are more profitable than GM too, they aren't benefiting from the Yen.  My main point is GM could be a more profitable company if it had more Cadillac sales.  A profitable Cadillac division could carry the whole company, and offset the money losing European operation.

     

    Which as a side bar, they should either sell the European operation totally, or go the One Ford route, and rename Opel and Vauxhall to Chevrolet, and make a global Spark, Sonic, Cruze, Malibu/Insignia, Camaro, Trax, Equinox line up that is the same in Europe, as it is in Asia, as it is in the USA.  

     

    Cadillac actually makes huge profits per unit. It's when you throw in the less profitable lower end models from other brand where average per car drops.   The reason the Germans make so much money is because they have managed to convince n00bs like you that their taxi cabs are premium.  It would be like if Ford shipped the Panther cars to Germany, only sold the top end packages with big motors and marked the price up $15k per unit... but the only way the Benz keeps the lights on is by fleeting the hell out of their bread-and-butter cars in Europe while inflating the prices here. 

     

    Where GM loses money per unit is on cars like the Volt which is an experiment technologically, but also helps their CAFE, and on the small cars like Adam, Cruze, Sonic, Spark, which are necessary for doing business but have razer thin and sometimes negative margins. I wouldn't be surprised if GM also only made money on the mid-price and higher Malibu.  The Regal probably loses them money because of the limited sales in the US while being produced in the US, moving the Regal production back to Europe or over to China would be a smart business move there.

     

    Opel/Buick/Holden is the "One GM" plan.  They've already found out that the Europeans won't buy Chevys. Euros also demand more premium feels in even their family cars, so it fits in well that Opel and Buick are paired. With nearly 1 million Buick sales in China last year, that gives Opel and Holden a whole bunch of breathing room on design costs.  Designers can switch out a badge and grille, and head to the bar for the rest of the afternoon.  Don't expect Opel to be losing money much longer, another year or two depending on the Russian economy and no other changes. 

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Toyota still out-earned GM several years ago when the Dollar to yen ratio was not as strong.  The Germans are more profitable than GM too, they aren't benefiting from the Yen.  My main point is GM could be a more profitable company if it had more Cadillac sales.  A profitable Cadillac division could carry the whole company, and offset the money losing European operation.

     

    Which as a side bar, they should either sell the European operation totally, or go the One Ford route, and rename Opel and Vauxhall to Chevrolet, and make a global Spark, Sonic, Cruze, Malibu/Insignia, Camaro, Trax, Equinox line up that is the same in Europe, as it is in Asia, as it is in the USA.  

    You literally ignored EVERY OTHER FACTOR (like the bankruptcy, how Toyota exports, and to how their numbers are reported in the first place) in the article to focus only on the dollar. Oh and Germans are benefitting from the Euro so of course the Yen does not factor. DUH! 

    Edited by surreal1272
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I know Cadillac makes profit and Opel does not.  This is why I would sell Opel, even if you sell it to FCA or Ford or VW for $1 be rid of it.  Holden/Opel/Buick isn't like the One Ford plan, it is still 4 brands if you count Vauxhall and they don't have the same product line up.

     

    Also we know Cadillac makes a profit, why even make a Regal in the first place?  Why redo the Malibu ever 4 years when it won't sell anyway?  Pump money into Cadillac.  If GM made hybrid SUVs and pickups to boost their CAFE numbers they wouldn't need to sell Sparks and Sonics at a loss to offset the Silverado's gas mileage.

     

    Cadillac should have 4 sedans (compact, small, medium, large), 3 coupes (small, medium, large) , 2 convertibles (small, medium), 1 sports car above Corvette, 4 crossovers (compact, small, medium, large), plus the Escalade, and everyone of those products should have a V-series, and everyone of those products should offer a plug-in or diesel engine option.  That should all be in show rooms by 2020.  Currently only the CT6 and XT5 fit that line up, and the Escalade could soldier on until 2020, and they can re-do it in 2021.   So they need 12 more models in 4 years, they need 3 brand new products per year.

     

    They need a lot of product, that is where GM needs to put focus.  Why would you not put the most models in your most profitable brand?

    Edited by smk4565
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I know Cadillac makes profit and Opel does not.  This is why I would sell Opel, even if you sell it to FCA or Ford or VW for $1 be rid of it.  Holden/Opel/Buick isn't like the One Ford plan, it is still 4 brands if you count Vauxhall and they don't have the same product line up.

     

    Also we know Cadillac makes a profit, why even make a Regal in the first place?  Why redo the Malibu ever 4 years when it won't sell anyway?  Pump money into Cadillac.  If GM made hybrid SUVs and pickups to boost their CAFE numbers they wouldn't need to sell Sparks and Sonics at a loss to offset the Silverado's gas mileage.

     

    Cadillac should have 4 sedans (compact, small, medium, large), 3 coupes (small, medium, large) , 2 convertibles (small, medium), 1 sports car above Corvette, 4 crossovers (compact, small, medium, large), plus the Escalade, and everyone of those products should have a V-series, and everyone of those products should offer a plug-in or diesel engine option.  That should all be in show rooms by 2020.  Currently only the CT6 and XT5 fit that line up, and the Escalade could soldier on until 2020, and they can re-do it in 2021.   So they need 12 more models in 4 years, they need 3 brand new products per year.

     

    They need a lot of product, that is where GM needs to put focus.  Why would you not put the most models in your most profitable brand?

    Again, you have ignored every other factor that came into play here. Simply amazing. I've never seen goalposts with wheels built in to them. Must be why it's so easy for you to move them.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    What other factors?  GM needs profit, bankruptcy 7 years ago is not an excuse to not be profitable, especially when they argued that if the government bailed them out they would become a profitable company.

     

    Regardless of what Toyota or Honda do, GM is not as profitable as they should be.  Ford is a more profitable automaker than GM as far as total dollars of income, and Ford has less revenue.  The easiest and best way for GM to improve profit margin is more Cadillacs.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I agree, Cadillac does need more models and they will have them soon. I realize not soon enough for you SMK. I also will have to disagree with you over FORD. With Fords DEBT load, if they really paid down what they borrowed they would not have a single profit. FORD has been lucky but could be even better if they went the bankruptcy route and dumped all the crazy obligations to unions and other crap to over paid executives and cleaned house. I truly think it would have been better to actually use the courts to right side and then prove that you did not need 7 years to get profitable.

     

    GM is doing well, we all want more and expect more and I think they have the right CEO now to make it happen. I still question if Johan was the right person to lead Cadillac. I personally do not think so.

     

    FCA is a mess we all know and agree on that. Sergio is an idiot and killing off the better brands all for trying to hold onto his stupid Italian ones.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    What other factors?  GM needs profit, bankruptcy 7 years ago is not an excuse to not be profitable, especially when they argued that if the government bailed them out they would become a profitable company.

     

    Regardless of what Toyota or Honda do, GM is not as profitable as they should be.  Ford is a more profitable automaker than GM as far as total dollars of income, and Ford has less revenue.  The easiest and best way for GM to improve profit margin is more Cadillacs.  

    They are profitable and those margins have gone up every year since bankruptcy. Again, pay attention to the actual facts. That is also not the ONLY way for them to make more profit. Their trucks are proof of that alone.

     

    And don't sit there and now try to dismiss Toyotas numbers. You brought it up and were corrected as to why those numbers are misleading. Admit you just pulled that out of your rear and own up to your error for once.

    Edited by surreal1272
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)

    Posted

    I agree, Cadillac does need more models and they will have them soon. I realize not soon enough for you SMK. I also will have to disagree with you over FORD. With Fords DEBT load, if they really paid down what they borrowed they would not have a single profit. FORD has been lucky but could be even better if they went the bankruptcy route and dumped all the crazy obligations to unions and other crap to over paid executives and cleaned house. I truly think it would have been better to actually use the courts to right side and then prove that you did not need 7 years to get profitable.

     

    GM is doing well, we all want more and expect more and I think they have the right CEO now to make it happen. I still question if Johan was the right person to lead Cadillac. I personally do not think so.

     

    FCA is a mess we all know and agree on that. Sergio is an idiot and killing off the better brands all for trying to hold onto his stupid Italian ones.

     

     

    So you are more proud of GM for sticking it to the US taxpayer while also crushing the life savings of so many families......yet you frown on Ford for borrowing the old fashion way and paying it back huh?

     

    Interesting.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am not a Johan fan either, I'd rather see Cadillac embrace their history rather than run from it.  I think Johan wants to make Cadillac like Audi, bring on the CT1 sedan, the XT1 and XT3 crossovers and go after urban buyers currently buying A3s and Q3s.  And yes you need small cars and crossovers, but Cadillac should be Cadillac, the company that made the first mass produced V8 engine, the company that made extravagant Eldorado convertibles, etc.  

     

    Where GM has the big advantage over Ford is Cadillac.  Ford doesn't have a luxury brand that could be global (and by that I mean more than USA and China) and post strong volume.   Cadillac could mop the floor with Lincoln if GM would get Cadillac the product they need.  Imagine an Alpha crossover lined up against the MKC, and an Omega platform 3-row crossover in the $60,000 range, with the XT5 in the middle and Escalade at the top.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    What other factors?  GM needs profit, bankruptcy 7 years ago is not an excuse to not be profitable, especially when they argued that if the government bailed them out they would become a profitable company.

     

    Regardless of what Toyota or Honda do, GM is not as profitable as they should be.  Ford is a more profitable automaker than GM as far as total dollars of income, and Ford has less revenue.  The easiest and best way for GM to improve profit margin is more Cadillacs.  

    They are profitable and those margins have gone up every year since bankruptcy. Again, pay attention to the actual facts. That is also not the ONLY way for them to make more profit. Their trucks are proof of that alone.

     

    And don't sit there and now try to dismiss Toyotas numbers. You brought it up and were corrected as to why those numbers are misleading. Admit you just pulled that out of your rear and own up to your error for once.

     

    Even if you take away the currency manipulation and  yen exchange rates, Toyota is still kicking butt.  That article mentioned they get like 500 million from the yen exchange, even if it was $1 billion, they still made an $18 billion profit.  I don't like Toyota nor their products, but that company bankrolls cash.

     

    I know GM makes their money on trucks, that is how the company has been since the 90s, all the profits came from trucks with Hummer, Escalade, the GMT360s, Silverado/Sierra, Aztek/Rendezvous, Colorado/Canyon, etc.  They had all those trucks in the early-mid 2000s and still went bankrupt.  Their trucks didn't save them then.  

     

    If you look at the current GM lineup and current auto sales over all.  Crossovers, particularly small crossovers are growing, luxury segment is growing.  Pick-up trucks and full size SUV is sort of a flat market, plus you have new Tundra, Tacoma, Titan, Ridgeline hitting the pick up segments.  I don't think GM can hope to grow global Silverado sales 20%, but I do think they could grow global Cadillac sales by 50%.  And Cadillacs should have high profit margins.   If GM could sell 500,000 Cadillacs a year at $4,000 profit per vehicle that is $2 Billion in total profit.   If they sold 1 million Cadillacs that is $4 billion in profit, that is more than all of GM makes now.  That is why Cadillac is the most important brand GM has.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    What other factors?  GM needs profit, bankruptcy 7 years ago is not an excuse to not be profitable, especially when they argued that if the government bailed them out they would become a profitable company.

     

    Regardless of what Toyota or Honda do, GM is not as profitable as they should be.  Ford is a more profitable automaker than GM as far as total dollars of income, and Ford has less revenue.  The easiest and best way for GM to improve profit margin is more Cadillacs.  

    They are profitable and those margins have gone up every year since bankruptcy. Again, pay attention to the actual facts. That is also not the ONLY way for them to make more profit. Their trucks are proof of that alone.

     

    And don't sit there and now try to dismiss Toyotas numbers. You brought it up and were corrected as to why those numbers are misleading. Admit you just pulled that out of your rear and own up to your error for once.

     

    Even if you take away the currency manipulation and  yen exchange rates, Toyota is still kicking butt.  That article mentioned they get like 500 million from the yen exchange, even if it was $1 billion, they still made an $18 billion profit.  I don't like Toyota nor their products, but that company bankrolls cash.

     

    I know GM makes their money on trucks, that is how the company has been since the 90s, all the profits came from trucks with Hummer, Escalade, the GMT360s, Silverado/Sierra, Aztek/Rendezvous, Colorado/Canyon, etc.  They had all those trucks in the early-mid 2000s and still went bankrupt.  Their trucks didn't save them then.  

     

    If you look at the current GM lineup and current auto sales over all.  Crossovers, particularly small crossovers are growing, luxury segment is growing.  Pick-up trucks and full size SUV is sort of a flat market, plus you have new Tundra, Tacoma, Titan, Ridgeline hitting the pick up segments.  I don't think GM can hope to grow global Silverado sales 20%, but I do think they could grow global Cadillac sales by 50%.  And Cadillacs should have high profit margins.   If GM could sell 500,000 Cadillacs a year at $4,000 profit per vehicle that is $2 Billion in total profit.   If they sold 1 million Cadillacs that is $4 billion in profit, that is more than all of GM makes now.  That is why Cadillac is the most important brand GM has.

     

    Stop, stop, just stop. Until you see the folly of this, just stop. Don't forget to grease those goalpost wheels though. Makes them easier to move.

     

    BTW, GM has been in the middle of a $12 billion investment in 8 new Cadillac models for the rest of this decade so you have been misinforming yourself if you think GM hasn't been taking a more aggressive, i.e. more money making, approach to Cadillac's future. 

    smk- are you an accountant by trade?

    Sure doesn't seem like it but stranger things have happened. :breakdance:

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well the term he's trying to get at is contribution margin. I would like to see Cadillac sell Escalades in Gulf regions way more than they do now. That would kill it.

     

    Ford had the unfortunate position of being in dire straits in 2006. Credit was still accessible for capital intensive firms like automakers, before there was a liquidity crisis, which led to the financial crisis and then companies had a very difficult time getting anything on commercial paper. 

     

    Cadillac does have immense profit potential. I would also like to see the General weigh its priorities. If a customer that is into Buicks can be guided into a more expensive Cadillac - then I would be all for it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I agree, Cadillac does need more models and they will have them soon. I realize not soon enough for you SMK. I also will have to disagree with you over FORD. With Fords DEBT load, if they really paid down what they borrowed they would not have a single profit. FORD has been lucky but could be even better if they went the bankruptcy route and dumped all the crazy obligations to unions and other crap to over paid executives and cleaned house. I truly think it would have been better to actually use the courts to right side and then prove that you did not need 7 years to get profitable.

     

    GM is doing well, we all want more and expect more and I think they have the right CEO now to make it happen. I still question if Johan was the right person to lead Cadillac. I personally do not think so.

     

    FCA is a mess we all know and agree on that. Sergio is an idiot and killing off the better brands all for trying to hold onto his stupid Italian ones.

     

     

    So you are more proud of GM for sticking it to the US taxpayer while also crushing the life savings of so many families......yet you frown on Ford for borrowing the old fashion way and paying it back huh?

     

    Interesting.

     

     

    Nope, I am not proud of sticking it to the tax payer, but at the same time, during a terrible time over all for the country, why not use the laws to clean up the books and turn the ship hard rather than slow.

     

    The airplane industry has already abused the tax payer for the over paid pension funds that were dumped on us to allow United, AA and many others to still survive and have the tax payers cover the over kill on pension funds.

     

    I just feel Ford should have used the same route to clean up and unload the pensions and move forward as all companies need to just endorce the 401K, dump pensions and move forward. Companies should have never offered the pensions to begin with.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)

    Posted

     

     

    I agree, Cadillac does need more models and they will have them soon. I realize not soon enough for you SMK. I also will have to disagree with you over FORD. With Fords DEBT load, if they really paid down what they borrowed they would not have a single profit. FORD has been lucky but could be even better if they went the bankruptcy route and dumped all the crazy obligations to unions and other crap to over paid executives and cleaned house. I truly think it would have been better to actually use the courts to right side and then prove that you did not need 7 years to get profitable.

     

    GM is doing well, we all want more and expect more and I think they have the right CEO now to make it happen. I still question if Johan was the right person to lead Cadillac. I personally do not think so.

     

    FCA is a mess we all know and agree on that. Sergio is an idiot and killing off the better brands all for trying to hold onto his stupid Italian ones.

     

     

    So you are more proud of GM for sticking it to the US taxpayer while also crushing the life savings of so many families......yet you frown on Ford for borrowing the old fashion way and paying it back huh?

     

    Interesting.

     

     

    Nope, I am not proud of sticking it to the tax payer, but at the same time, during a terrible time over all for the country, why not use the laws to clean up the books and turn the ship hard rather than slow.

     

    The airplane industry has already abused the tax payer for the over paid pension funds that were dumped on us to allow United, AA and many others to still survive and have the tax payers cover the over kill on pension funds.

     

    I just feel Ford should have used the same route to clean up and unload the pensions and move forward as all companies need to just endorce the 401K, dump pensions and move forward. Companies should have never offered the pensions to begin with.

     

     

    As someone who personally knows several families who lost a lot of money from GM taking advantage, 

    I completely, 100% disagree.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Posts

    • Argh.  This is a question I almost want to avoid. The A380 is incredible.  Yes, I had a roundtrip through AA on British.  They have a small economy section at the back, upstairs.  Then I flew a one way from Italy to New York-JFK on an Emirates "fifth freedom" flight segment.  They have economy taking the entire main level, with none upstairs. Economy seats are a little wider on the A380 ... definitely on Emirates, at least.  It was an outstanding flight because of that.  On British, I paid for an economy seat upstairs and the curvature of the exterior translates into windows that are too sloped and with an odd and bigger void in between the cabin and the exterior.  I will be sitting downstairs if there is a future flight on one. The 747-8 isn't as comfortable in economy because the seats are traditional economy width.  I feel more comfortable in one because I know it.  It's also much more photogenic all the way around.  You feel good when it pulls up to the gate and you see that beautiful and proportioned machine through the big glass windows. The humidification is good on both planes. It's really sad that no more passenger quadjets are being produced.  It's easier to get onto an A380 if Europe bound (British, Lufthansa, Emirates, and others via connections, with Air France holding back).  For a 747-8, Lufthansa is the only choice and I am grateful to them for that.
    • My car has a supposed 525 mile highway crusing range on a full tank (19.5 gallons).   I haven't fully tested that since I tend to fill up at 1/2 tank when on road trips..but I have recorded averages of 29.5 and 30 mpg on road trips, which is pretty good for a comfortable 4200lb AWD sedan..
    • @trinacriabob in your flying in recent years, have you had a trip on an A380?    If so, how does it compare to the larger Boeings? 
    • Right.  It's not the aircraft themselves, but the haste and sloppiness.  ("Haste makes waste.")  This 777 X is ambitious and the folding wingtips are novel.  They will be very late with delivering this plane.  I now like some Boeing and some Airbus.  It's a mix.  In the recent past, I took a ride on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner and I definitely like it more than the Airbus 350 (even though the Airbus 350 has that photogenic curved winglets).  The cabin fatigue from flying is much reduced on the Dreamliner. Yesterday, I was on two domestic Boeing 737 Max 8 segments back to back on Southwest.  I like its newer features - ambient lighting, larger bins, a little quieter.  So, if it's working, it's a very nice rendition of the 737.  It's too bad that their newest version of this storied workhorse had to be tainted.  I get on and sigh.  If it keeps a clean track record going forward, people may be less weirded out as the statistics may become better. It is.  However, I'm not a fan of the leg design, which is also now popular on sofas.  The biggest turnoff for me in sofas - when I bought a sleeper for another room with the last stimulus money - was the amount of product that had nailheads all over the place.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search