Which Manufacturer should enter TT:120?

[John Isherwood]

20 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Revolutions N gauge EMUs are quite frankly stunning.

 

Way better than any TT120 tooling ive seen.

 

Now here's a theory - which may or may not have already been expounded.

 

Could Hornby, as an antidote to the the exponential chase for 'gimmicks' / higher prices in 4mm. scale, actually wish to temper expectations of detail in TT120?

 

If you are a 'newbie' to railway modelling, launching into TT120, you will probably be quite content with Hornby's modest provision of detail.

 

Less detail equals lower production costs / higher profit margin and, without competition in that scale, no need to be constantly chasing the latest 'gimmick' introduced by a competitor.

 

Just my two-penn'orth!

 

CJI.

[adb968008]

2 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Now here's a theory - which may or may not have already been expounded.

 

Could Hornby, as an antidote to the the exponential chase for 'gimmicks' / higher prices in 4mm. scale, actually wish to temper expectations of detail in TT120?

 

If you are a 'newbie' to railway modelling, launching into TT120, you will probably be quite content with Hornby's modest provision of detail.

 

Less detail equals lower production costs / higher profit margin and, without competition in that scale, no need to be constantly chasing the latest 'gimmick' introduced by a competitor.

 

Just my two-penn'orth!

 

CJI.

But that exists in OO.

 

For less than £50 you can go on ebay, buy something from the 1980’s-2000’s and be up and running in an afternoon and have TT levels of detail and accuracy.

Theres nothing wrong in opening a new TT market imo, but believing it will create a whole new market of hithero unknown modellers is a bit naive.. it’ll be curates, inquisitives and other scale converts rather than purely new market entrants who have never modelled before.

 

To build a market in TT will imo take a generation, cannibalising the OO children's market and growing with it, the current offering of hotchpotch range and minimum viable product seems to reflect that.

 

Edited June 29 by adb968008

[spamcan61]

1 minute ago, cctransuk said:

 

Could Hornby, as an antidote to the the exponential chase for 'gimmicks' / higher prices in 4mm. scale, actually wish to temper expectations of detail in TT120?

 

If you are a 'newbie' to railway modelling, launching into TT120, you will probably be quite content with Hornby's modest provision of detail.

 

Less detail equals lower production costs / higher profit margin and, without competition in that scale, no need to be constantly chasing the latest 'gimmick' introduced by a competitor.

 

Just my two-penn'orth!

 

CJI.

Yes, SK pretty much says this in the interview with Howard on World of Railways at launch. Quote was something like "aimed at people who won't pay 200 quid for a loco"

[John Isherwood]

Just now, adb968008 said:

But that exists in OO.

 

For less than £50 you can go on ebay, buy something from the 1980’s-2000’s and be up and running in an afternoon and have TT levels of detail and accuracy.

 

Quite so - but I fail to see how that relates to a notional new entrant to a new scale, who would like to buy new models at affordable prices.

 

Remember, the notional new entrant has no preconceptions about the relative merits of 4mm. versus TT120, particularly as to the level of detail; but he may well not wish to risk the hazards of the secondhand market.

 

CJI.

[adb968008]

2 minutes ago, spamcan61 said:

Yes, SK pretty much says this in the interview with Howard on World of Railways at launch. Quote was something like "aimed at people who won't pay 200 quid for a loco"

And for everything else, there is railroad, with a huge supporting range of wider market products supported by a 50 year second hand market.

 

 

[adb968008]

5 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

Remember, the notional new entrant has no preconceptions about the relative merits of 4mm. versus TT120, particularly as to the level of detail; but he may well not wish to risk the hazards of the secondhand market.

 

Trainsetters who may grow out of it, or those who become more informed and realise they made an error.

 

Without competition it may take a generation to be established imo.

If they want to speed it up they need to turn heads… but imo the current range, approach and target profile (if there is one)  isnt doing that.

However bigger thinkng part of me wonders if TT is an exercise in creating brand value.. if they show investors there is IP with a value and a growing market segment that becomes ripe for investment or divestment… that to me justifies an MVP adhoc plan that I see.

Edited June 29 by adb968008

[John Isherwood]

2 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Trainsetters who may grow out of it, or those who become more informed and realise they made an error.

 

........ or, just maybe, a new generation of price-conscious modellers who can see through the current 'Emperor's new clothes' marketing frenzy of 'got-to-have-it' electronic tom-foolery!

 

Then, we might actually be able to get back to railway MODELLING.

 

CJI.

[Ravenser]

2 hours ago, Dungrange said:

 

However, I'd suggest that 5% of the 00 market is a significantly greater number of models than 50% of the TT:120 market.  I'd suggest that the relative market sizes at present are that the 00 market is of the order of 100 times greater than the TT:120 market.  That therefore means that a prototype in which only 1% of 00 modellers would buy would need 100% of TT:120 modellers to buy it for the manufacturer to get the same profit.

 

Hornby have chosen to take a gamble on this scale in the hope that the market increases over time and they will sell more models in the long term.

 

 

 

The OO market is only a portion of the total model railway market, albeit a large one. If you were correct about the TT:120 market being approximately 1/100th the size of that for OO , we'd be talking about TT:120 amounting to decimal points of a single percent of the total market. That seems implausibly low, especially as some retailers report there being a noticeable interest in the stuff. Sub 1% of the hobby is about the market share for 3mm scale. This is visibly a lot bigger in terms of numbers

 

More seriously, your argument would equally suggest that N gauge and O gauge RTR shouldn't be viable either. Very pertinently, exactly the same logic would apply to Bachmann's OO9 and 7mm NG ventures. It's not obvious that OO9 RTR has sold more units than TT:120 - arguments could be constructed that 1/120 has had the bigger impact in the market. (Although nobody actually kinows, since neither Hornby nor Bachmann know what  the other's relevant sales figures are, so no comparision can be made). But if Bachmann's OO9 range is a viable initiative - and plainly it is - it's not clear at all that TT:120 is a much more marginal/less profitable venture. TT:120 is certainly a bigger play, but so far it's made a rather bigger splash, and has a stronger marketing push behind it. It also seems to have been driven by new entrants to the market rather more than OO9 has 

 

The fact that Bachmann have attacted some criticism from N gauge modellers for sitting on their tooling and not keeping trhe market supplied with bread and butter items might point to N gauge being less profitable for them. But since we are talking about using existing tooling in N the economics involved are somewhat different.  Nevertheless nobody is talking about  N or O RTR as a marginal activity in scales the stronger players don't need to touch.

 

The idea that TT:120 models are established as being less profitable than OO and therefore something you would only touch because you couldn't sell OO models successfully it something I've seen casually assumed by by several people. But nobody knows Hornby's sales volumes or margins on this product, or how they compare with OO, N or O  sales by anyone. I believe that when people gave up estimating TT:120 set sales from carton markings the estimated total was nearing 10,000 sets. And that was about a year ago. It implies that total sales of Gresley Pacifics were around 10,000 units even then , and sales of coaches were around 30,000 . Those seem decent volumes, and of course the figures will have risen , perhaps significantly , since. Those items may go on selling for some years to come

 

Are you going to sell 5000 units of the Lickey Banker or the Worsborough Garrett in OO? Or the Bulleid 4DD? Are three rival models of the Class 25 in 4mm all going to hit 5000 units in short order?

 

And then there's the question of saturation. There's 75 years mass production of OO RTR out there , and probably 35 years worth is usable at some level. Every new RTR thread in 4mm seems to have its fair share of people posting that they already have a perfectly acceptable XYZ-class or three, and while they might perhaps have an extra one they don't see enough of an upgrade here to replace their existing models .This issue does not exist in TT:120 . You could sell people 4 or 5 or 6 models of a Class 37 or a Class 08 or a Class 66 ; and probably 3 or 4 A3s, Castle Class locos or HSTs . Everyone is starting with a clean slate. This is one of the classic benefits of format change . Everyone buys their music afresh

 

What is certainly true though is that no-one really knows what the sales figures and margins are, except Hornby. Because this was launched as web-only and is still web-driven, not even the retail trade have a good handle on how it is doing. Anyone launching a rival product is therefore doing it with a very high degree of uncertainty about the potential market , and that means a high risk. Easier and safer to do nothing, until you are certain that a significant market is definitely there, and more critically, will remain there in 4-6 years time when you are trying to sell the product you might develop. There are considerable advantages  in moving first - others may take a long time to catch up    

 

But I'm not convinced that TT:120 somehow needs someone other than Hornby "to lend it credibility" or save the project. The stuff has apparently been selling as fast as Hornby make it for 18 months now. There is no sign that's about to change. It seems to be attracting appreciable numbers of people new to the hobby. N gauge ran with just one producer of British outline - Farish - for two decades. It might have been better if Farish were challenged, but the existence of British N was never in any question .  Similarly OO had basically one producer from 1964-1977. Not ideal, but no threat to the viability of the scale. It's entirely possible British 1/120 modelling could continue for up to a decade with just Hornby RTR . How the hobby would respond to that situation is an interesting question. But it wouldn't mean that the product wasn't particularly profitable, or that the scale's long term future was in doubt. "Hornby's Z gauge" is currently looking a rather plausible scenario 

 

Quote

As far as making comparisons of detail across scales, it would be much better to compare Hornby's TT:120 offerings with N gauge as these two scales are much closer than TT:120 and 00.  If anyone is looking for the ultimate in fidelity, then they will choose one of the bigger rather than one of the smaller scales.

 

Quote

 

The reality is that N and TT:120 are competing small-scale options. 4mm is obviously the favoured scale - but what if you like the fidelity of the larger scale , but don't actually have the room to build a layout in it? If the question is "what is the largest scale I can fit in the space I've got?" rather than "what is the smallest most compact scale out there?" , 1/120 scale may show an advantage. There are certainly plenty of people "in 4mm" who plainly do not have the space to do anything meaningful in 4mm . If N were the answer they'd already be in N - but they are not. TT:120 might shake some of these people free

 

In some respects the way everyone seems to treat TT:120 as "small 4mm" rather than  comparing it with N is one of the most positive signals for the scale's long term future

[Ravenser]

2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

But that exists in OO.

 

For less than £50 you can go on ebay, buy something from the 1980’s-2000’s and be up and running in an afternoon and have TT levels of detail and accuracy.

Theres nothing wrong in opening a new TT market imo, but believing it will create a whole new market of hithero unknown modellers is a bit naive.. it’ll be curates, inquisitives and other scale converts rather than purely new market entrants who have never modelled before.

 

 

 

This is a misconception of the levels of accuracy and detail on TT:120 models.

 

Coaches are flushglazed. No RTR coaches in 4mm were before about 2000. Consensus seems to be that the TT:120 Mk1s are about on a par with Hornby's current Railroad Mk1s - recognised as rather better than any attempt at a Mk1 other than the Bachmann models. The 08 is accurate in a way that the Lima model was not. The HST /Mk3 coaches are close to the current Hornby full fat model, and well ahead of the ex Lima Railroad version. Standards of finish are far higher thanh Lima and Hornby achieved in the 1980s and 1990s.

 

More pertinently TT:120 stuff blows the socks off Poole-era Farish on a second-hand table. If you are looking to the smaller scales for space reasons , that's what buying second hand from the 1980s-2000 gets you. It's not that cheap , and it was mechanically quite suspect   

[Dunsignalling]

3 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Now here's a theory - which may or may not have already been expounded.

 

Could Hornby, as an antidote to the the exponential chase for 'gimmicks' / higher prices in 4mm. scale, actually wish to temper expectations of detail in TT120?

 

If you are a 'newbie' to railway modelling, launching into TT120, you will probably be quite content with Hornby's modest provision of detail.

 

Less detail equals lower production costs / higher profit margin and, without competition in that scale, no need to be constantly chasing the latest 'gimmick' introduced by a competitor.

 

Just my two-penn'orth!

 

CJI.

Though it seems to be Hornby themselves  who are perpetrating most of the gimmickry in OO.

 

The competition seems to be sticking with good, old-fashioned quality and value-for-money to grow their market share.

 

Who would have thought, even five years ago, that I'd hardly be batting an eyelid at the idea of shelling out thirty quid plus for wagons?

 

John

 

[Jeff Smith]

Just skimmed through this thread and an element that has not been touched on is that Hornby came to the TT120 market with a basically 'complete' system.  Track, buildings, rolling stock, with track-packs to expand the train sets.  A significant achievement to tempt new entrants into model trains.  Only the major players in OO and N do this to a greater or lesser extent.  All a new TT120 manufacturer needs to do is pick a loco which is missing from Hornby's projected line up and would fill a hole.  Surely this is the same philosophy as the smaller players do in OO and N, riding on the back(s) of the major investors!  However, I would still give it several years before any emerge!

[Dunsignalling]

22 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said:

Just skimmed through this thread and an element that has not been touched on is that Hornby came to the TT120 market with a basically 'complete' system.  Track, buildings, rolling stock, with track-packs to expand the train sets.  A significant achievement to tempt new entrants into model trains.  Only the major players in OO and N do this to a greater or lesser extent.  All a new TT120 manufacturer needs to do is pick a loco which is missing from Hornby's projected line up and would fill a hole.  Surely this is the same philosophy as the smaller players do in OO and N, riding on the back(s) of the major investors!  However, I would still give it several years before any emerge!

 

You are confusing what might boost the credibility of TT:120 with what might be commercially beneficial for any or all of Hornby's OO competitors. Two entirely different things.

 

The simple explanation is that the "smaller" players aren't after the beginner market because, as the old proverb goes, beginners have never heard of anything but Hornby. 

 

There's no incentive for them to move into TT:120 unless and until doing so offers them a better return than what they are doing in OO, and I doubt anybody over 40 today will live long enough to see that happen.

 

Hornby TT:120 is poorly aimed, in one breath they say it's for beginners, but few of those who have adopted it on here are, and Hornby compete with themselves by continuing to produce more suitable "beginner" sets in OO.

 

This lack of focus is leaving OO wide open for the competition, old and new, to carve up Hornby's market share in that scale, while they are probably being forced to grow TT:120 faster than is comfortable in order to keep the enthusiast market interested. That in turn, diverts some of their development resources, further weakening their competitiveness in OO.

    

[teletougos]

On 29/06/2024 at 17:30, Ravenser said:

.This issue does not exist in TT:120 . You could sell people 4 or 5 or 6 models of a Class 37 or a Class 08 or a Class 66 ; and probably 3 or 4 A3s, Castle Class locos or HSTs . Everyone is starting with a clean slate. This is one of the classic benefits of format change . Everyone buys their music afresh

 

Think there's a strong element of this in TT, with a cadre of participants being able to re-experience emotions they felt when things were first released in OO ?? 

 

The discussion about new releases bears it out.  Are some TTers former OOers who'd lost interest in model railways?

 

The participation of total newbies in a scale that's cheaper to enter, may make things more exciting for them too. Also enables them to share expertise etc.

Edited June 30 by teletougos

[teletougos]

39 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Hornby TT:120 is poorly aimed, in one breath they say it's for beginners, but few of those who have adopted it on here are

 

On Facebook TT groups there are certainly many beginners. 

[teletougos]

3 hours ago, Ravenser said:

More pertinently TT:120 stuff blows the socks off Poole-era Farish on a second-hand table. If you are looking to the smaller scales for space reasons , that's what buying second hand from the 1980s-2000 gets you. It's not that cheap , and it was mechanically quite suspect   

 

But who does that ?  Wouldn't you just buy current era N ? 

[teletougos]

4 hours ago, Ravenser said:

In some respects the way everyone seems to treat TT:120 as "small 4mm" rather than  comparing it with N is one of the most positive signals for the scale's long term future

 

Agreed. I noticed this and it's very much where Hornby wants to be in terms of perception. 

[teletougos]

9 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

The only reason for a competitor to enter TT is to compete, not just to give the scale credibility, by playing a bit-part support role to Hornby's lead. 

 

Or to find a niche, as PECO appear to have, with track and wagons, a bit like they did in N. 

 

At the same time, given who PECO are, their presence does help with credibility. 

[Peachy]

I like O gauge

But I cant afford it.

I like HO 

But there’s not enough British Outline (rtr with todays tech)

I like TT120

I can afford it.

I’ve bought/ordered at least one and in some cases (rolling stock) multiple of everything in Hornby’s range. 
I’d do the same if any of the above manufacturers “joined in” 

 

I don’t like any of the mismatched scale/gauges. I’ve never quite understood how anyone can make a fanfare out of how fantastically super detailed a 00 loco is, when the moment it leaves the station it looks like a fat lass in ballet shoes….. 

Edited June 29 by Peachy

[jjb1970]

Like most things in life, people can discuss what TT120 is or what they think it should be. 

 

Peachy makes one of the significant points in its favour for many enthusiasts, it's an RTR system offering a reasonable, growing range at affordable prices which has correct  scale/gauge. That's never really bothered me (I like Japanese outline where if anything it is worse than OO) but I  get why it is a big deal for others. Add in the possibility to add a wide international range of models at the same scale and TT120 offers something that OO doesn't and probably never will regardless of other merits.

 

Whether those things matter to you is an individual decision.  Enthusiasts can lose sight of the fact that our preferences and opinions are just that, ours. Others can and do have completely different preferences and opinions. However,  they matter to some.

 

My small scale is N, and will remain so as that is the dominant scale for Japanese outline and with a growing Chinese range. Nowadays my British OO is boxed up and only a few locomotives are displayed. However if I was starting again with British outline I would probably go with TT120. It's a great scale, small enough to offer opportunities to run long trains on a home layout but with a bit more presence than N.

 

None of which addresses other manufacturers. Whether another British RTR producer enters TT120 or a European producer offers UK prototypes will be a business decision. I think the other British producers of rolling stock are most likely still waiting to see how well it can establish a position in the hobby. For European producers they may see potential for one off models for overseas enthusiasts wanting something different or British items which operate(d) in other countries. Either way I suspect it is 'when' rather than 'if'.

Edited June 30 by jjb1970

[spamcan61]

8 hours ago, Peachy said:

 

 

I don’t like any of the mismatched scale/gauges. I’ve never quite understood how anyone can make a fanfare out of how fantastically super detailed a 00 loco is, when the moment it leaves the station it looks like a fat lass in ballet shoes….. 

I take your point, but it's not like UK outline TT:120 isn't compromised, my Hornby A4  is around a scale foot to wide over cylinders, hence the head on "tip toe" look isn't much different to OO in my opinion. 

 

I'm buying in to TT:120 to a degree, but the track gauge/scale relationship isn't a significant plus point to me, as the compromise is just moved elsewhere.

Edited June 30 by spamcan61

[jjb1970]

33 minutes ago, spamcan61 said:

I take your point, but it's not like UK outline TT:120 isn't compromised, my Hornby A4  is around a scale foot to wide over cylinders, hence the head on "tip toe" look isn't much different to OO in my opinion. 

 

I'm buying in to TT:120 to a degree, but the track gauge/scale relationship isn't a significant plus point to me, as the compromise is just moved elsewhere.

 

I agree, the question is not whether or not a model manufacturer makes compromises but rather which compromises are made and the degree of dimensional compromise. HO obviously scores ahead of OO in terms of gauge being correct for the scale but is associated with all sorts of dimensional compromises of its own. The high end brass manufacturers reduce these but at a cost of needing very careful handling and deep pockets.

[Dunsignalling]

The fundamental truth is that, whatever one's preferred scale, unless you have the space for curves of generous radius, some aspect of the appearance of your model will have to be compromised in order for it to function.

 

In HO, and apparently TT:120 (see earlier post) , it means keeping the upper works (splashers excepted) in scale with the gauge, but kicking the cylinders outward to create space for valve gear mounted on wheels of overscale thickness. Having cylinders poking out beyond the running plate really draws attention to the subterfuge.

 

Claims of correct scale/gauge proportions are therefore disingenuous.

 

I still consider OO to be visually the least worst of the compromised scales. Quite simply, almost all the discrepancies are contained within the mechanism without stretching the external "envelope". In very few cases is there a need for "adustment" to anything but splashers on the superstructure, and cylinders relate correctly to the running plate.

Edited June 30 by Dunsignalling

[franciswilliamwebb]

21 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Claims of correct scale/gauge proportions are therefore disingenuous.

Absolutely. I’ve taken the TT120 plunge, got two baseboards up and running so far and spent more on the scale this year than any other. But the salesman’s snake oil is just plain embarrassing 😳

Edited June 30 by franciswilliamwebb

[adb968008]

16 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

This is a misconception of the levels of accuracy and detail on TT:120 models.

 

Coaches are flushglazed. No RTR coaches in 4mm were before about 2000. Consensus seems to be that the TT:120 Mk1s are about on a par with Hornby's current Railroad Mk1s - recognised as rather better than any attempt at a Mk1 other than the Bachmann models. The 08 is accurate in a way that the Lima model was not. The HST /Mk3 coaches are close to the current Hornby full fat model, and well ahead of the ex Lima Railroad version. Standards of finish are far higher thanh Lima and Hornby achieved in the 1980s and 1990s.

 

More pertinently TT:120 stuff blows the socks off Poole-era Farish on a second-hand table. If you are looking to the smaller scales for space reasons , that's what buying second hand from the 1980s-2000 gets you. It's not that cheap , and it was mechanically quite suspect   

You just compared TT to the 1980’s releases..

 

What you didnt do is compare TT to 2020’s OO releases.

Why did you not compare a TT 66 to a OO 66

or a TT08 to a Bachmann 08 ?

 

or a TT25 to a 00 25.. (oh sorry you cant do that).

 

Your comparing CDs to VHS but not comparing CDs to Blue-rays.

 

Edited June 30 by adb968008

[adb968008]

19 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

........ or, just maybe, a new generation of price-conscious modellers who can see through the current 'Emperor's new clothes' marketing frenzy of 'got-to-have-it' electronic tom-foolery!

 

Then, we might actually be able to get back to railway MODELLING.

 

CJI.

what saving ?

 

TT class 66 £129.99

https://uk.Hornby.com/products/colas-rail-class-66-co-co-66847-era-10-tt3016m

Railroad class 66.. £99.99

https://uk.Hornby.com/products/gbrf-class-66-co-co-66705-golden-jubilee-era-11-r30334

TT mk3 £37.99

https://uk.Hornby.com/products/br-intercity-mk3-restaurantbuffet-e40728-era-7-tt4026

 

new railroad mk3 £34.99

https://uk.Hornby.com/products/railroad-grand-central-rail-mk3-buffet-coach-40424-era-10-r40444

 

TT stanier £37.99

https://uk.Hornby.com/products/lms-57-corridor-first-1062-era-3-tt4007

 

Railroad Stanier £29.49

https://uk.Hornby.com/products/lms-brake-third-coach-era-3-r4389
 

 

And of course

 

 

TT Scotsman  £176.99

https://uk.Hornby.com/products/lner-class-a1-4-6-2-4472-flying-scotsman-era-3-tt3004m

 

Railroad Scotsman £134.99

https://uk.Hornby.com/products/lner-a1-class-4-6-2-4472-flying-scotsman-era-3-r308

 

 

you cannot have the argument all ways up…

if TT is about being must be new, must be cheaper.. OO still wins

 

Railroad is cheaper

OO is wider variety 

N gauge is smaller

N gauge is more detailed

 

TT is a nice niche, and a good inbetween… but a second coming it is not..  to me TT quality is railroad+ it is not Accurascale or others. It is not the same as some of the really nice things coming out in N gauge, and those who want HO mixed with 00 are very very limited.

 

it feels like TT is a nice cozy cave for Hornby to curl up and feel good inside because theyve no threat, but cannabalising the newcomer trainset business and dragging some converts does not equal expanding the market and bringing a whole set of new entrants…its just slicing up the existing pie… case in point being the considerable slow down in their 00 focus…

 

more importantly the bottom line of the company.. revenue has not grown inline with inflation, despite adding a new product line..if TT is as big as being claimed, revenue jumps should be apparent.. 2022 £53mn, 2023 £55mn (2.5% increase) across the entire company and business lines in a year seeing over 10% inflation. The next annual report is due anytime, and the first one with a full year of TT sales…if its done its job, we should be looking at a huge revenue jump, maybe £65-70mn with all that pent up demand being released, or instead if it was warehoused prior, a moderate £60mn and nice change in cash position… 

 

if this is the next big thing there should be flashing lights all over it saying TT… dont have long to hold our breath and step back in amazement now..

 

if TT is doing its thing, thats when more detail orientated companies may decide to join Hornby in the TT cave and squeeze space on those comfy cushions stuffed with big fat folded pink ones. Imo I’m still feeling more BHS and less M&S about this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 30 by adb968008