Garbad

The Official Garbad Fan Club Thread

Which moderator's cunt smells the worst?   440 members have voted

  1. 1. Which moderator's cunt smells the worst?


Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

4,789 posts in this topic

I'm a really good drummer - I really want to do something with it but god fucking knows what that is. I'm easily enough to be TayTay's live drummer, Kolni give me a job pls.

Yeah, so I feel like I'm at that point right before I start that social life thing for myself. It's just... Where2find these people to connect to?? Also, how did you start from the bottom in music? Like what was the process from day 1 of "I like this shit" to "pls sign here for mad bux"?

Can relate to that attention and owning your own life. Woke up to that a while back lol. Well we all have different shit to deal with but the way of the unicum is dealing with the shit and finding a way to win under any and all circumstances.

On a scale from Lars Ulrich (yes, hands down the worst pro drummer alive) to Steve Gadd/Chad Smith/Buddy Rich (depending on what kind of music you play), how good are you?

Also, what music do you play? I really prefer to play drums with cool beats, like this:

 

But also stuff that's chopsy (Red Hot Chili Peppers and stuff) like this:

Wierdly I couldn't find a single live/studio version on Youtube, yet it's on Spotify

Or something jazzier like

 

Or something else? Or in between? I play almost exclusively Count Basie Orchestra ftm because it offers so much of everything, Jo Jones was amazing as a drummer

My dad and all my three uncles are in the music business, one of them which's played sax for Steely Dan on occasion, and my last name is well known so, I kinda had it easy for me regarding networking. Took three days after the first EP until someone approached me with some low-ball offer. I started writing, started producing, and then I just.. kept on doing that. It was easy really if you're good enough, original enough, and hardworking enough. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, pubberinos, time for a thought exercise.

You are a wealthy investor.  You are considering buying a factory that makes T-54s.  This factory generates exactly $100,000 in sales a year, has exactly $90,000 in costs per year, and thus generates $10,000 profit per year.  This will never change.  For all time, no matter what, this factory will produce this same amount.  It will never go out of business.  It cannot be sued.  Nothing will never change this.  You will never have to pay taxes on this business.  And for simplicity, let's assume there is no inflation, ever, but otherwise the financial world works as it does now.  Its just a straightforward $10k a year, no catch.  It is a perfect, risk free investment.

Being a dank super investor, you have a shitton of cash.  But you are bidding against a few other investors, as well.  They want to get the best deal they can as well, so they will try to bid up the factory to a point also.  Here's your question -- what is the most money you will pay to own that factory and why?  IE, I'll bid $10,000, because I'll get that $10k back in a year and I'm potato enough not to care about the future income, because stats aren't real.

This is not a trick question; there is no "right" answer.  After a few of you answer, I'll tell you how I would answer, and why it matters.

Easy. I'd at max spend a 100k, but why do that when I can go dig up dirt on the other investors/hire someone to shut them up for barely any money and lowball offer as the only investor for the factory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are a wealthy investor.  You are considering buying a factory that makes T-54s.  This factory generates exactly $100,000 in sales a year, has exactly $90,000 in costs per year, and thus generates $10,000 profit per year.  This will never change.  For all time, no matter what, this factory will produce this same amount.  It will never go out of business.  It cannot be sued.  Nothing will never change this.  You will never have to pay taxes on this business.  And for simplicity, let's assume there is no inflation, ever, but otherwise the financial world works as it does now.  Its just a straightforward $10k a year, no catch.  It is a perfect, risk free investment.

Being a dank super investor, you have a shitton of cash.  But you are bidding against a few other investors, as well.  They want to get the best deal they can as well, so they will try to bid up the factory to a point also.  Here's your question -- what is the most money you will pay to own that factory and why?  IE, I'll bid $10,000, because I'll get that $10k back in a year and I'm potato enough not to care about the future income, because stats aren't real.

This is not a trick question; there is no "right" answer.  After a few of you answer, I'll tell you how I would answer, and why it matters.

You're a wealthy investor, so times are good for you, no pressure, but potential in the future for tough times... So how much of your fortune do you want to put down/how long do you want to wait for a return? The sensible thing I'd do is this: it's is a comfort thing. I'd weigh it against a forecast for my future and figure out the optimum for opportunity cost. What my gut would tell me to do is limit it to five years as a max bid. I've a wealthy investor, I didn't become that way for no reason and I'll sure as hell find a way to make up for it if I get out bid. Yes, I'd stake the rest of my life on waiting 5 years for a return - I'm that motherfucker who will always make something work.

edit: assuming sneaky business tricks are off the table?

On a scale from Lars Ulrich (yes, hands down the worst pro drummer alive) to Steve Gadd/Chad Smith/Buddy Rich (depending on what kind of music you play), how good are you?

Also, what music do you play? I really prefer to play drums with cool beats, like this:

But also stuff that's chopsy (Red Hot Chili Peppers and stuff) like this:

Wierdly I couldn't find a single live/studio version on Youtube, yet it's on Spotify

Or something jazzier like

Or something else? Or in between? I play almost exclusively Count Basie Orchestra ftm because it offers so much of everything, Jo Jones was amazing as a drummer

My dad and all my three uncles are in the music business, one of them which's played sax for Steely Dan on occasion, and my last name is well known so, I kinda had it easy for me regarding networking. Took three days after the first EP until someone approached me with some low-ball offer. I started writing, started producing, and then I just.. kept on doing that. It was easy really if you're good enough, original enough, and hardworking enough. 

Steve Gadd and Buddy Rich are the very top of the shelf imo. I'm not at their level yet. As far as relation goes, I'm similar to Chad Smith, I probably have a broader toolbox than him even though he might play more solidly than me - but that's live experience vs the practice pad and sheet music. There's not too much "better than", more "oh he's cool at XYZ, I could learn from that". Give me a week and I can play any of that music at the respective drummer's level.

Jo Jones was top shelf indeed... There are so many on that top shelf, god damn, it's a blessing and a curse. 

Well congratz on your success man, long may it continue.

P.S. I never said thank you to both you guys. So, cheers. 

Edited by Gashtag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're a wealthy investor, so times are good for you, no pressure, but potential in the future for tough times... So how much of your fortune do you want to put down/how long do you want to wait for a return? The sensible thing I'd do is this: it's is a comfort thing. I'd weigh it against a forecast for my future and figure out the optimum for opportunity cost. What my gut would tell me to do is limit it to five years as a max bid. I've a wealthy investor, I didn't become that way for no reason and I'll sure as hell find a way to make up for it if I get out bid. Yes, I'd stake the rest of my life on waiting 5 years for a return - I'm that motherfucker who will always make something work.

edit: assuming sneaky business tricks are off the table?

Its a math question, not a values/trick question.  The question is mathematically, what do you think a $10k guaranteed income stream is worth as a lump sum up front?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be investing it as a "safe place" to store some extra cash, so would expect the yearly return to be 5-10% of my investment otherwise I could just go elsewhere. Max 200k?

Edited by Terekhov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to a homeless person, his life.

to a sheikh in the middle east rich with oil money, literally nothing.

 

to me... well I don't have that mad cash but somewhere around 1M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At my age, and as a hedge against future downturns in other markets, I'd bid up to 300k on such a factory. That's a break even point in 30 years, and guaranteed food on the table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, let's think of it like this.

A)  Which do you prefer?  A gift of $11k or the $10k stream.  Literally everyone would rather get $10k a year than $11k now.  So clearly, an income stream of $10k is worth at least $11k.

B)  Which do you prefer?  A gift of $100,000,000,000 or the $10k stream?  Obv you take the 100 trillion, because who the fuck cares about 10k when you have 100 trillion?  You can easily invest it in something else and get 10k+.  So clearly, its worth less than 100 trillion.

Now narrow it down.  At what point do you think the $10k is basically equal to X amount?  Why?

 

P.S.  At least theoretically, this answer is completely mathematical, and independent of your age, risk tolerance, circumstances, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a trick question; there is no "right" answer.  After a few of you answer, I'll tell you how I would answer, and why it matters.

Actually, there is right answer. Find what is the risk-adjusted return for an alternative investments and you've got your answer. If the best possible alternative gives you 5% return after adjusting for risk, then you should buy the factory as long as the price is below 200,000 (which would result in the yearly return of 5% or higher). If the price is higher than that, you should choose an alternative investment instead.

Of course, in the real world it is very difficult to evaluate the risk with high precision. Also most people are risk-averse, so they prefer smaller (risk-adjusted) return with a lower risk, so they would choose 5% return with zero risk over 10% return with 10% risk of losing their investment (which is still 9% return after adjusting for risk), even if this is not rational.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 It's not independent of circumstances (rather, entirely dependent upon them - if you're being rational) because of exactly what isterija just posted (too fast and said it better than I would have^^)

Edited by Terekhov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S.  At least theoretically, this answer is completely mathematical, and independent of your age, risk tolerance, circumstances, etc.

Unless we assume you are immortal, the answer might depend on your age. Let us assume that any alternative investments are so much inferior that we aren't even discussing them. Let us assume that you do not have any children or simply do not care about them. So, if you are 20 and expect to live another 60 years, you can expect 600,000 of total income from your investment. But if you are 80 years old, it is very likely that you will die within next 10 years, so if you have 200,000 USD spare, you will probably achieve a higher standard of living by simply spending these money instead of investing them and spending only the returns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, there is right answer. Find what is the risk-adjusted return for an alternative investments and you've got your answer. If the best possible alternative gives you 5% return after adjusting for risk, then you should buy the factory as long as the price is below 200,000 (which would result in the yearly return of 5% or higher). If the price is higher than that, you should choose an alternative investment instead.

Of course, in the real world it is very difficult to evaluate the risk with high precision. Also most people are risk-averse, so they prefer smaller (risk-adjusted) return with a lower risk, so they would choose 5% return with zero risk over 10% return with 10% risk of losing their investment (which is still 9% return after adjusting for risk), even if this is not rational.

You're right, I lied.  There is a right answer.  But if I don't stick in that lie no one will answer.

What we are talking about is the risk free rate of return -- IE, what an investment should pay without any risk at all. In reality, there is no such thing as no risk, but 30 day US t bills held to maturity are often considered a proxy for risk free investment, because the US will never default and its very short term, so little market speculation.  The current tbill yield is about 0.3%.

This means the business is worth $3,333,333.33 in today's world.

Does that blow your pubbie minds?  It should.  That is an insane amount of money for a tiny return.  Why so much?  Because its risk free, by definition.  In reality, all investments have risk, and thus, command higher return.  Relatively safe investments like bonds might yield a pathetic 2-3%, the 30 year average of the stock market is about 8%, and small, risky businesses like a T-54 are likely much higher than that.  Risk vs reward.

The point of this is twofold.  First, note how many of you seemed to think you deserved 5-10%+ interest rates for no risk.  That ain't reality, son.  No risk, little to no reward.  Second, this demonstrates to some degree the value of capital.  In today's market, capital is plentiful, and profitable investment opportunity is rare.  Too many investment dollars chasing too few profitable businesses -- and its been bad for years.  So we have tons of people sitting on huge piles of capital earning next to nothing with it.  IE, capital isn't all that valuable atm.

___________________________________________

So why does this matter to poor gash's social life?

1.  Investing in the stock market and hoping to make large returns will mean monstrous risk.  I'll talk about efficient market theory and no load index funds later, but for now let's just think principles.  Gash can slap his 100k savings into the market at zero risk, and earn $300 profit a year.  That isn't shit.  Or he can invest it in more risky things, such as the stock market, and take his ~8% ($8k a year, still not shit)....if he's lucky.  Or he might just lose it all.  Understand what you are seeing here -- if you think you can grow that 100k into 1 mil in 5 years, be prepared for an extremely high chance of losing it all.

2.  So we now know the value of investing gash's 100k into the market is relatively low over the short term.  Still, that 100k is a hell of a nest egg/emergency fund.  If only there was some alternative investment to stocks/bonds/etc.

OH WAIT, THERE IS!

Gash can invest in his education.  $20k in schooling might result in a 90% chance of earning an additional $10k in salary per year.  That beats the fuck out of the market, and its not even that risky (relatively).  Its a hell of a lot more return per dollar risked than investing in commodity flipping or something.

And that's not all -- gashy could invest $20k into his consulting business -- actually advertise, actually hire staff, but a little office, try and grow his business.  Now let's face it, that $20k is risky.  80% of businesses fail in 2 years.  But spending $20k for a 20% chance of increasing his earning power by 20k a year is still a hell of a lot better than the market.

Am I making sense here gashy?

 

 

> so they would choose 5% return with zero risk over 10% return with 10% risk of losing their investment (which is still 9% return after adjusting for risk), even if this is not rational.

You did the math wrong here.  imagine 10 runs:

110+110+110+110+110+110+110+110+110+0 (remember, you lose not just profit but investment).  This is a -1% interest rate on average, so the 5% no risk is clearly superior.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we can take me for an example

I stand to make well over 2 million dollars this year (thank you Frankie), but after that I've got nothing planned

I could gamble my life away with continuing my music career (probably a steady decline in revenue, and almost none in 3-4 years) as Yung Lean

or invest money in education, to let the money work for me (Uni in Sweden is completely free, but less prestigious and I'm going abroad if I'm going to study law or whatever, pretty sure I can pass the bar)

or invest in something else

 

the latter two are obviously better choices, but actually doing stuff is boring and obligations (ie work) is definitely not for me

and then there is retiring vs investing

but i can live my life at the fullest with a budget of what i have right now and stand to make this year? (will be around 4-5 mil)

probably not

investing it is

how much money would i put up

realising i don't want to lose money

buying cocaine fields in colombia to ensure better profit vs risk odds

I am a druglord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we can take me for an example

I stand to make well over 2 million dollars this year (thank you Frankie), but after that I've got nothing planned

I could gamble my life away with continuing my music career (probably a steady decline in revenue, and almost none in 3-4 years) as Yung Lean

or invest money in education, to let the money work for me (Uni in Sweden is completely free, but less prestigious and I'm going abroad if I'm going to study law or whatever, pretty sure I can pass the bar)

or invest in something else

 

the latter two are obviously better choices, but actually doing stuff is boring and obligations (ie work) is definitely not for me

and then there is retiring vs investing

but i can live my life at the fullest with a budget of what i have right now and stand to make this year? (will be around 4-5 mil)

probably not

investing it is

how much money would i put up

realising i don't want to lose money

buying cocaine fields in colombia to ensure better profit vs risk odds

I am a druglord

why not just license out your dick to some dildo manufacturer?  you are sure to be their best seller.  making $5 per dildo you would be a rich man instantly

win

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why not just license out your dick to some dildo manufacturer?  you are sure to be their best seller.  making $5 per dildo you would be a rich man instantly

win

i sincerely doubt i have the sex appeal to make the dildo sales go up at all 

but a girl ain't worth shit until she had some lean in her :doge: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought that the answer to "how much will I bid ?" is dependant on first knowing what is the opportunity cost of investing in this imaginary factory.  That is, what else could I be investing in? Are the alternatives only to be found in the real world?

 

A guaranteed fixed ten thousand dollars is pretty impressive in a world dominated by low interest rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Garbad also P/E ratio is important in the T54 factory example.

Because if the T54 factory is churning out 10,000 pa, but down the road there is a T62a factory that churns out a profit of 15,000 pa but is for sale at only 10% more upfront cash, clearly the one with the higher earnings ratio is worth more.

Before investing in proposition A, always check the market in case proposition B affords a better return on your capital. Look before you leap. Research and preparation can be useful tools.

 

Also Gash lives in the UK. The London property market over the last 30 years has been a better capital investment than stocks or shares, the return on bricks and mortar over that period has been running at near enough 15% pa (a few years better and some worse, and some areas even more). Because there is so much virtue in the market, foreign investors have begun to pile in (even the chinese middle classes are buying up 650k flats in London with cash, and not even bothering to try and rent them out). How long can this market run? When will there be a down turn or correction? There were two corrections in the last 30 years 1992 and 2007 (which would have been excellent years to buy, but not to sell). Even so a property purchased in 1985 for say 150k would likely now be worth 675-700k thiry years later. House my brother purchased to make some quick money on in 1990 for 60k, did up and sold 18mths later for 175k,  the house next door to it sold on 10th April 2015 for 900k- I checked because I thought it would have been about 700k, bloody market is crazier than I thought. On the same street the public records show number 37 (which is smaller) sold ;

18 Oct 2012
Terraced, Freehold
£647,270Land Registry
03 Dec 2007
Terraced, Freehold
£428,000Land Registry
23 Mar 2005
Terraced, Freehold
£233,000Land Registry

 

@ Kolni - to get into a top law school nowadays requires not only cash but extraordinarily high grades. If you are looking at Oxford, Harvard, Cambridge, Yale, or LSE as examples. In addition hard work is required not only to secure a good degree, but then to get established. A top London lawyer can earn over 1 mil per year, but thats not likely until late thirtys early forties, so it's a bit of a slog. Generally New York is higher than London, but the cost of living is also more, and flights to Sveden are easier from London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rate this. Im not exactly law school or finance material. So im 19 atm going into the navy next year. I've had a college internship at a comtracting company for about 6 months now. I do everything from pre-construction accounting, designing, and junior level project management. I get full 40 hours, college credit, and health care benefits, as well as FREE housing (thx canadian govt) rhat said im making alot of disposable income. what im planning on doing in my time in the navy is cyber warfare. When i come back i can do 4 years of project management and have the back up job at a cyber security firm since it will probably be huge in a few years. a good idea y/n?

Edited by _Revenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Garbad also P/E ratio is important in the T54 factory example.

Because if the T54 factory is churning out 10,000 pa, but down the road there is a T62a factory that churns out a profit of 15,000 pa but is for sale at only 10% more upfront cash, clearly the one with the higher earnings ratio is worth more.

Eh, not exactly.  If the T-54 factory is producing 10k risk free for 3.3mil, and the T-62a is producing 15k for 3.6....that means, by definition, its not risk free, and the risk of failure is structured into the price.  The same applies to the real estate examples you gave.

I get that most, maybe all, of you don't have a background in finance so I won't try to explain theory.  I was going for a general point -- that reward is always commensurate with risk.  There are no T-62a factories out there that are simply better buys than the t-54 factory -- if there were, someone would have already snapped it up.  In gash's example, I say this because he seems to be thinking that he should take his windfall $100k, invest it in the stock market, day trade, "master the system," and in a few years he will be rich.  If he thinks that, he is in for a rude awakening, and is extremely likely to lose all his money.  That was my goal to demonstrate (which obviously failed).

Rate this. Im not exactly law school or finance material. So im 19 atm going into the navy next year. I've had a college internship at a comtracting company for about 6 months now. I do everything from pre-construction accounting, designing, and junior level project management. I get full 40 hours, college credit, and health care benefits, as well as FREE housing (thx canadian govt) rhat said im making alot of disposable income. what im planning on doing in my time in the navy is cyber warfare. When i come back i can do 4 years of project management and have the job security of working at a security company for the internet since it would be lucrative. Should project management go badly. Is this a good idea y/n?

Project management varies wildly in pay scale and responsibility.  However, the military is a good way to get education, security clearance, and experience especially in certain fields.  OFC, its military, with all its shitiness.  But its a choice that can pay the bills and set you up decently.  Beats the hell out of a lot of paths, although you might have a better option as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also Gash lives in the UK. The London property market over the last 30 years has been a better capital investment than stocks or shares, the return on bricks and mortar over that period has been running at near enough 15% pa (a few years better and some worse, and some areas even more). Because there is so much virtue in the market, foreign investors have begun to pile in (even the chinese middle classes are buying up 650k flats in London with cash, and not even bothering to try and rent them out). How long can this market run? When will there be a down turn or correction? There were two corrections in the last 30 years 1992 and 2007 (which would have been excellent years to buy, but not to sell). Even so a property purchased in 1985 for say 150k would likely now be worth 675-700k thiry years later. House my brother purchased to make some quick money on in 1990 for 60k, did up and sold 18mths later for 175k,  the house next door to it sold on 10th April 2015 for 900k- I checked because I thought it would have been about 700k, bloody market is crazier than I thought. On the same street the public records show number 37 (which is smaller) sold ;

BTW, you significantly overestimate the ROI on housing.  Using your own examples, the return is 6-7%.  That's lower than the stock market (which, again, suggests not that its a worse investment, but that its considered to be a safer investment, and thus, commands less return than stocks).  Real life numbers in my very brief search as slightly lower than what you remembered.

25CC560400000578-0-image-a-16_1424276406

This is in line with conventional investment wisdom.  Real Estate is typically more risky than bonds, but less risky than stocks.  This is ofc looking at things in the broad sense over the long term -- individual properties, markets, and so on can vary wildly.  Some will win, some will lose.

P.S.  Most investors predict a crash in UK housing prices very soon.  Its true that it did well the last two years, but either that means we are due for a correction down or you got a good windfall, but don't expect it to continue -- expect it to revert to historical norms.  In any event, risk vs reward, diversification of assets, etc.  All standard theory, and not really my point here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, not exactly.  If the T-54 factory is producing 10k risk free for 3.3mil, and the T-62a is producing 15k for 3.6....that means, by definition, its not risk free, and the risk of failure is structured into the price.  The same applies to the real estate examples you gave.

I get that most, maybe all, of you don't have a background in finance so I won't try to explain theory.  I was going for a general point -- that reward is always commensurate with risk. 

I would have pegged it at 10% rather then the 0.3% because of my risk tolerance and financial timelines.  I have no interest in making 0.3% on an investment.  I won't live long enough for that investment to matter so investing in it is like playing for a draw in WoT.  The % return for an investor is also not necessarily the market average if you believe that you can beat the average.  I know that markets are inefficient to varying degrees, I damn well know that insider trading is very lucractive and real, and I think that savvy investors can beat averages consistently.  I mostly invest in low-cost ETFs that track long-term trends that I think are quite reliable based on concrete demographic data.  As with a WoT example you gave me regarding WR, it's less about avoiding losses that boosts your numbers, it's swinging for those big home-run games/investments that boosts Wn8/return.  Of course, the trick is being able to do that without yoloing, but it is possible in both fields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Project management for me atm applies to the the brand new solar facilities across the entire southern united states. The pay grade for it tends to be very high with government and private utility contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have pegged it at 10% rather then the 0.3% because of my risk tolerance and financial timelines.  I have no interest in making 0.3% on an investment.  I won't live long enough for that investment to matter so investing in it is like playing for a draw in WoT.  The % return for an investor is also not necessarily the market average if you believe that you can beat the average.  I know that markets are inefficient to varying degrees, I damn well know that insider trading is very lucractive and real, and I think that savvy investors can beat averages consistently.

In a technical sense, yes.  The market is only semi efficient.  But the real question is if YOU have legal insider information or expertise to beat the average.  Based on the math, the odds are extremely low.  Next, the question is if you can hire fund manager X who can do it for you and consistently win.  Again, the answer is not likely, especially considering fees.  So unless you happen to be Warren Buffett, aka, the man who makes econ professors scream in rage, stick to no load index funds (ETFs).  <-- Believe me on this, I've heard a lot of professionals and professors debate this to death, but the bottom line is efts are your best bet, statistically.

0.3% is also uncommonly low, due to the economic circumstances of our day.  We are stuck in the odd situation of having good profits, low growth, and far more capital looking for investment opportunities than there are good investments.  This has driven rates of return down extremely low, forcing investors into increasingly more risky investments.  The historical norm for a risk free investment is more like 1-3%, depending on how you figure it.

P.S.  My bank offered me an unsecured personal loan of $100k with a 3% interest rate the other day.  I though, damn, is this what we have come to?  Banks are so desperate to get even a pitiful 3% return that they will gamble on trying to loan some dumb pubbie 100k with no security or business plan or anything?  Just a general solicitation.  The financial world is out of whack, yo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.