SQLServerCentral / Editorials / SQLServerCentral.com / The DBA Tax / Latest Posts

RE: The DBA Tax

Miles Neale — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:01:11 GMT

Loved the article! Over the years I have found that the more we expose data, and the better understood the data is the more data is required and the higher the quality the better. As long as there is a need to make information out of the data artifacts we collect there will be an increasing need for professionals who can clean, prep, and show that data. We are not a tax, nor a luxury but a business necessity.M.

RE: The DBA Tax

Revenant — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:16:21 GMT

[quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]Eric M Russell (7/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]. . .I am positive you were making a point that does not deserve the rant above, so I put it in rant tags in the hopes you would understand I am attacking the situation, not the person.What is the issue here? Management. They are too willing to simply cut expenses without looking at why they spend money on something. They need to understand that you have to employ a lot of people in cost centers to run the company, so those people in revenue generating areas have the support they need to actually obtain any revenue.[/quote]True, my main point was that executive management is often clueless about how vital a DBA is to keeping the IT department running. However, I also believe that many DBA positions actually could be outsouced. Notice I said "outsourced" not "offshored". Outsourcing could simply be a local independent contractor or 24x7 DBA support company (based in the US) who monitors the organization's databases remotely. Many organizations simply don't need a full-time DBA to keep a seat warm in their server room. Many organization don't even need a server room or even an onsite server for that matter.I also beleive that a SQL Server DBA has to also know SQL and the Microsoft BI stack to remain employable.[/quote]There are companies that are small enough that they [i]might [/i]benefit from this. What is bothersome is the larger companies that think they can save money.Simple logic will show that if both the company doing the outsourcing and the provider employ comparable quality people doing the same job, the cost of the employee should be the same. We will ignore minor differences. Then you must add in the profit motive. Nobody does anything for free. Granted I am ignoring economies of scale at the provider, but I don't believe they exist nearly to the degree they are sold at. We have looked at outsourcing a large number of systems, and in every case it was far more expensive.If I have one database, and it takes me 5% of my day to manage it, outsourcing may be a good idea. If I have 100 databases...I appreciate you reading my rant in the manner in which it was offered, and I am happy I did not annoy you or cause you any angst!Dave[/quote]Well, there is one more dimension to this problem.What if you outsource and build a facility in a place where labor is cheap, but lots of other companies do the same and the local price of qualified labor goes up and up? And you are locked in a 20 year agreement?This is not a speculation, this has been happening and that is one of the reasons why the enthusiasm for outsourcing is ebbing off.

RE: The DBA Tax

djackson 22568 — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 08:46:34 GMT

[quote][b]Eric M Russell (7/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]. . .I am positive you were making a point that does not deserve the rant above, so I put it in rant tags in the hopes you would understand I am attacking the situation, not the person.What is the issue here? Management. They are too willing to simply cut expenses without looking at why they spend money on something. They need to understand that you have to employ a lot of people in cost centers to run the company, so those people in revenue generating areas have the support they need to actually obtain any revenue.[/quote]True, my main point was that executive management is often clueless about how vital a DBA is to keeping the IT department running. However, I also believe that many DBA positions actually could be outsouced. Notice I said "outsourced" not "offshored". Outsourcing could simply be a local independent contractor or 24x7 DBA support company (based in the US) who monitors the organization's databases remotely. Many organizations simply don't need a full-time DBA to keep a seat warm in their server room. Many organization don't even need a server room or even an onsite server for that matter.I also beleive that a SQL Server DBA has to also know SQL and the Microsoft BI stack to remain employable.[/quote]There are companies that are small enough that they [i]might [/i]benefit from this. What is bothersome is the larger companies that think they can save money.Simple logic will show that if both the company doing the outsourcing and the provider employ comparable quality people doing the same job, the cost of the employee should be the same. We will ignore minor differences. Then you must add in the profit motive. Nobody does anything for free. Granted I am ignoring economies of scale at the provider, but I don't believe they exist nearly to the degree they are sold at. We have looked at outsourcing a large number of systems, and in every case it was far more expensive.If I have one database, and it takes me 5% of my day to manage it, outsourcing may be a good idea. If I have 100 databases...I appreciate you reading my rant in the manner in which it was offered, and I am happy I did not annoy you or cause you any angst!Dave

RE: The DBA Tax

Eric M Russell — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 08:10:40 GMT

[quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]. . .I am positive you were making a point that does not deserve the rant above, so I put it in rant tags in the hopes you would understand I am attacking the situation, not the person.What is the issue here? Management. They are too willing to simply cut expenses without looking at why they spend money on something. They need to understand that you have to employ a lot of people in cost centers to run the company, so those people in revenue generating areas have the support they need to actually obtain any revenue.[/quote]True, my main point was that executive management is often clueless about how vital a DBA is to keeping the IT department running. However, I also believe that many DBA positions actually could be outsouced. Notice I said "outsourced" not "offshored". Outsourcing could simply be a local independent contractor or 24x7 DBA support company (based in the US) who monitors the organization's databases remotely. Many organizations simply don't need a full-time DBA to keep a seat warm in their server room. Many organization don't even need a server room or even an onsite server for that matter.I also beleive that a SQL Server DBA has to also know SQL and the Microsoft BI stack to remain employable.

RE: The DBA Tax

djackson 22568 — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 07:49:17 GMT

[quote][b]Eric M Russell (7/16/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]Doctor Who 2 (7/14/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/9/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/9/2012)[/b][hr]I agree with the point that I believe you were intending to make. No arguments whatsoever....[/quote]Good points, and I won't argue with you on this. There are any number of managers who do think the DBA is a tax and shouldn't be paid. They are happy to get by with less. Nothing to be done there, except to prove you're an asset, not an expense.[/quote]Yes, I think that happens. Unless the DBA (or anyone else for that matter) directly produce whatever it is that company/organization sells or produces, then that person is seen as a liability rather than an asset.[/quote]If the DBA's daily routine consist almost entirely with monitoring jobs, troubleshooting, and performing manual tasks that could be automated, then I can see why the executive management would (perhaps mistakingly) believe that the DBA is an unnecessary expense, especially if the DBA is locked away in the server room and not visible at meetings that include management. In all honesty, those type of tasks could be automated or outsourced to a 3rd party.[/quote]<rant on>Holy crap Batman! This is the main reason our country is so screwed right now. "Just out source it, nobody does anything important!" We have outsourced our own missile programming to our enemies! When will it end! Just because something can be done does not mean it should be done.As to automation - I do the same job that is done at similar companies where those companies the same size have anywhere between 5-10 people doing the same job. I used to do purchasing, and similarly sized competitors had 4 times OR MORE as many people doing the same job. Automation I get. I automate things in my sleep! A coworker used to spend 8 hours a week doing a task that I wrote a script to handle - it takes 5 minutes a week now. They didn't have time to write it. (Huh? We will ignore their obvious ignorance.)As to outsourcing - What happens when something goes wrong, when automation sends you an alert that something failed? Good luck getting that guy in India or China to fix it! They are sleeping right now. Good luck getting them to understand the issue, most of their companies don't train any better than any other company. There are very good technical people all over the world, they just don't tend to work for the kind of companies that focus on taking away "simpler jobs". Why would they. I am NOT disparaging people from other countries. I have worked with a large number of foreign workers. Probably 80% or so were absolutely outstanding workers, very intelligent, able to communicate. Some of those were among the most brilliant people I have ever met! The other 20% were just like the 20% of poor workers we have here. Summary - foreign workers are no different than domestic workers except you pay them less, they have no committment to our country or organization, and in fact are frequently working against us to help their country. Studies have shown that outsourcing costs companies more money than it saves, sometimes even when the outsourcing is done to other domestic companies.<rant off>I am positive you were making a point that does not deserve the rant above, so I put it in rant tags in the hopes you would understand I am attacking the situation, not the person.What is the issue here? Management. They are too willing to simply cut expenses without looking at why they spend money on something. They need to understand that you have to employ a lot of people in cost centers to run the company, so those people in revenue generating areas have the support they need to actually obtain any revenue.

RE: The DBA Tax

Eric M Russell — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 07:27:27 GMT

[quote][b]Doctor Who 2 (7/14/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/9/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/9/2012)[/b][hr]I agree with the point that I believe you were intending to make. No arguments whatsoever....[/quote]Good points, and I won't argue with you on this. There are any number of managers who do think the DBA is a tax and shouldn't be paid. They are happy to get by with less. Nothing to be done there, except to prove you're an asset, not an expense.[/quote]Yes, I think that happens. Unless the DBA (or anyone else for that matter) directly produce whatever it is that company/organization sells or produces, then that person is seen as a liability rather than an asset.[/quote]If the DBA's daily routine consist almost entirely with monitoring jobs, troubleshooting, and performing manual tasks that could be automated, then I can see why the executive management would (perhaps mistakingly) believe that the DBA is an unnecessary expense, especially if the DBA is locked away in the server room and not visible at meetings that include management. In all honesty, those type of tasks could be automated or outsourced to a 3rd party.

RE: The DBA Tax

Doctor Who 2 — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 15:04:56 GMT

RE: The DBA Tax

Eric M Russell — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:12:16 GMT

[quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/10/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]Eric M Russell (7/10/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]TravisDBA (7/9/2012)[/b][hr][quote]The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on. [/quote]I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D[/quote]You need to take two or three weeks off from work, and then your IT Director will know exactly what it is you do.[/quote]I don't understand. What does it mean when you say "take time off from work"?Let's see, over the past two years I have had to exit waiting lines at Disney so I could handle issues, I have had to pull my kids out of a play area at another vacation spot to handle an issue, I have been on field trips taking calls on a bus filled with kids yelling and screaming, and being told I need to find a quieter place to call from.Seriously, especially in today's economic mess created by our so called governmental leaders, employers seem even less interested in whether your vacation is actually a vacation or not. I know I am not unique in my experience.Dave[/quote]Right, and when you reply to all those emergency requests, I hope you remember to copy your boss, so he knows that issues get resolved during your vacation... only because your vacation gets intrerrupted. If you were to really drop off the map while on vacation, maybe spend a couple of weeks on the Appalachian Trail or in a Buddhist temple, then your boss would truely appreciate what it is you do. He'd be a fool to hold it against you.

RE: The DBA Tax

djackson 22568 — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 14:51:36 GMT

[quote][b]Eric M Russell (7/10/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]TravisDBA (7/9/2012)[/b][hr][quote]The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on. [/quote]I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D[/quote]You need to take two or three weeks off from work, and then your IT Director will know exactly what it is you do.[/quote]I don't understand. What does it mean when you say "take time off from work"?Let's see, over the past two years I have had to exit waiting lines at Disney so I could handle issues, I have had to pull my kids out of a play area at another vacation spot to handle an issue, I have been on field trips taking calls on a bus filled with kids yelling and screaming, and being told I need to find a quieter place to call from.Seriously, especially in today's economic mess created by our so called governmental leaders, employers seem even less interested in whether your vacation is actually a vacation or not. I know I am not unique in my experience.Dave

RE: The DBA Tax

TravisDBA — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 07:51:22 GMT

That's correct. They never appreciate a DBA until disaster strikes. Also, on the topic of telling them what I do, that's not my job to tell the Director what I do. It's his job as Director of Operations to KNOW what I do and the protection I provide to his multi-million dollar business daily. If they don't have their data they don't have doodly squat. Like jfogel said, basically, if they are too lazy to find that out for themselves what you do and provide then you are better off leaving in the long run. :-D

RE: The DBA Tax

Eric M Russell — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 06:41:35 GMT

[quote][b]TravisDBA (7/9/2012)[/b][hr][quote]The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on. [/quote]I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D[/quote]You need to take two or three weeks off from work, and then your IT Director will know exactly what it is you do.

RE: The DBA Tax

Jeff Moden — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 17:11:51 GMT

[quote][b]TravisDBA (7/9/2012)[/b][hr][quote]The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on. [/quote]I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D[/quote]Be careful what you ask for. You could end up writing a weekly report, instead.

RE: The DBA Tax

SQLRNNR — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 14:54:16 GMT

[quote][b]jfogel (7/9/2012)[/b][hr]If your employer doesn't know what you do and why they pay you then you have already lost the battle. Get out while the getting is good.[/quote]It's also time to educate that employer on what you do.

RE: The DBA Tax

jfogel — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:38:02 GMT

If your employer doesn't know what you do and why they pay you then you have already lost the battle. Get out while the getting is good.

RE: The DBA Tax

TravisDBA — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:13:49 GMT

[quote]The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on. [/quote]I totally agree. I once had a IT Director say in a very large meeting "I'm not sure what our DBA's do here." I could not let that go, and I immediately replied, but respectively. "Well sir, if you attended our Change Control meetings every week you would definitely find out. You get the invitation in Outlook every week.." The moral of the story is don't say things about the DBA's if you don't know or care what they do for you.:-D

RE: The DBA Tax

djackson 22568 — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 10:27:39 GMT

[quote][b]Steve Jones - SSC Editor (7/9/2012)[/b][hr][quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/9/2012)[/b][hr]I agree with the point that I believe you were intending to make. No arguments whatsoever....[/quote]Good points, and I won't argue with you on this. There are any number of managers who do think the DBA is a tax and shouldn't be paid. They are happy to get by with less. Nothing to be done there, except to prove you're an asset, not an expense.[/quote]Agreed. The goal is to show you save more then you cost. Not always easy to do, but each year I seem to stumble across some way to save actual expenses that exceed what I get paid, not including what I actually "produce" each year as an Analyst and DBA.One of my favorite examples is when we had to replace all of our time clocks, and I negotiated a price that saved us about 80% of my salary. Pretty easy to show your value that way!Showing your value as a programmer, a DBA or other technical roles isn't as easy, because we don't normally have those kinds of opportunities for clear savings. How does one assign a value to backups, integrity checks, reindexing - unless something goes wrong first!Dave

RE: The DBA Tax

Steve Jones - SSC Editor — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 09:45:19 GMT

[quote][b]Doctor Who 2 (7/9/2012)[/b][hr]Bottom line: if the agency is small enough, they don't want a DBA. They're not willing to pay that "DBA tax". They'll make anyone who has any IT experience be the developer, administrator, PC tech, help desk, network engineer and of course DBA.[/quote]I'm not sure you're getting the same point I wanted to make. It isn't that you need a DBA, or that a DBA is a tax. It's that the DBA is often seen as a tax for a system, not providing value, but just cost. That could apply to any position.The idea is that you want to prove you have value to the company, whatever your position. Make sure they see you as valuable, or I would advise you move on. Side note: I wouldn't make my life/career decisions based on the impact to other employees. You can talk with them, but if you don't like the work, move on. Life is short, way too short to stick around if you don't have to in a position that doesn't work for you.

RE: The DBA Tax

Steve Jones - SSC Editor — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 09:42:53 GMT

[quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/9/2012)[/b][hr]I agree with the point that I believe you were intending to make. No arguments whatsoever....[/quote]Good points, and I won't argue with you on this. There are any number of managers who do think the DBA is a tax and shouldn't be paid. They are happy to get by with less. Nothing to be done there, except to prove you're an asset, not an expense.

RE: The DBA Tax

Steve Jones - SSC Editor — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 09:40:12 GMT

[quote][b]Jeff Moden (7/8/2012)[/b][hr]Excellent editorial, Steve! I wish I could give it a hundred stars because it really hits the nail on the head. There're too many people that spend way too much time doing the "Chicken Little" thing.[/quote]Thanks and glad you like it.

RE: The DBA Tax

Doctor Who 2 — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 08:15:39 GMT

[quote][b]djackson 22568 (7/9/2012)[/b][hr]Steve,I agree with the point that I believe you were intending to make. No arguments whatsoever.However, a lot of people are worried about losing their jobs, and the reasons are similar enough that I expect to see some contrarian positions here. For example, a lot of highly educated people end up losing their jobs as part of cost cutting measures, only to be replaced by less costly, younger workers. The H1B visa is an atrocious attack on American high tech workers, sold to the public as a way to fill jobs "nobody wants" and "nobody is qualified for", and has been shown to be causing a decline in college students pursuing tech.Am I afraid of technology replacing me? Not at all.Do I understand why a lot of people are worried about thier jobs, oh yeah. Those who do may or may not benefit from improving themselves. It is possible to improve oneself out of a job as the cost to employ is raised.Dave[/quote]WOW, very good points, Dave.

RE: The DBA Tax

TravisDBA — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 08:04:53 GMT

Great article about addressing fear. To conquer fear is the beginning of wisdom.:-D

RE: The DBA Tax

Doctor Who 2 — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 08:01:11 GMT

In this case, I don't entirely agree with you, Steve. In my work situation things go from hard to harder. 3 years ago we had 5 people in our IT department: 1 manager who occasionally programmed, and was excellent at hardware issues; 1 part time student who did our DBA work; and 3 developers (I was one of the 3). However, before that year was out we lost the student and he was never replaced. I became the accidental DBA, because I happen to know more about SQL Server than anyone else. Last year one of the 3 developers died, and has never been replaced. In March the IT manager quit and will not be replaced. That leaves just 2 of us, who are, remember, first developers. Neither of us have hardware experience. Neither of us are network administrators. Between the 2 of us, I did take 1 SQL Server administration course (for SQL 2005), so that also contributes to my being placed in the role. But using the terminology you introduced in your article, I guess my management thinks that a DBA is a tax, because believe me, they have no intention of replacing that student we lost 3 years ago. Now, perhaps in our situation that's not such a bad thing, because we only have 1 production SQL Server server, and 1 test SQL Server server. We have 5 servers in all, however most of those servers are old and have gone off of warranty, and my management isn't willing to pay the money to either replace the servers or renew the warranties. I live in fear that one of those old servers will die. If either the other developer or I were to leave, then it would really hurt the agency badly, and it certainly would put the person staying behind in a horrible situation (no more vacation, no sick leave allowed, etc).Bottom line: if the agency is small enough, they don't want a DBA. They're not willing to pay that "DBA tax". They'll make anyone who has any IT experience be the developer, administrator, PC tech, help desk, network engineer and of course DBA.

RE: The DBA Tax

Eric M Russell — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 07:54:00 GMT

Self-serve online trading has been around for a couple of decades, but that hasn't reduced the demand for stock brokers and financial planners.

RE: The DBA Tax

djackson 22568 — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 07:25:34 GMT

Steve,I agree with the point that I believe you were intending to make. No arguments whatsoever.However, a lot of people are worried about losing their jobs, and the reasons are similar enough that I expect to see some contrarian positions here. For example, a lot of highly educated people end up losing their jobs as part of cost cutting measures, only to be replaced by less costly, younger workers. The H1B visa is an atrocious attack on American high tech workers, sold to the public as a way to fill jobs "nobody wants" and "nobody is qualified for", and has been shown to be causing a decline in college students pursuing tech.Am I afraid of technology replacing me? Not at all.Do I understand why a lot of people are worried about thier jobs, oh yeah. Those who do may or may not benefit from improving themselves. It is possible to improve oneself out of a job as the cost to employ is raised.Dave

RE: The DBA Tax

jfogel — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 07:11:13 GMT

For years I've seen companies that produce BI products make the claim that users will be able to create complex reporting such as "as of", drill thru graphs, etc right out of the box. A constant I always see is that this is never the case. Report writing is a profession itself and it is something that requires experience to be good at. We have been a re-seller for several reporting tools that we package with our app and I've never once been worried about job security due to any reporting tool.

RE: The DBA Tax

P Jones — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 01:32:10 GMT

The only ones who see us as a "tax" on company computer systems are the technical/network managers who can't understand why we do so many backups and need so much storage and tell us that their once a day tape backup is enough for our databases (assuming that particular production server is even on their list of backups :-D)

RE: The DBA Tax

geoffrey.sturdy — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 01:02:04 GMT

..And it was ever thusI remeber being on a training course back in 1984 learning COBOL being told (by the trainer !) that we were the last generation of programmers and that after a couple of years our Role would be to assist end-users in building their own systems .... however the 4GL has come and gone , programmers still program DBAs and sysadmins still administer ...That is not to say that technology has not eliminated some roles - I don't think there are many (if any ) punch operators or Tape librarians out there and the computer operator has evolved away from being just a "tape monkey" into more of an ops support role but as the French say -- Plus ca change

RE: The DBA Tax

Revenant — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 22:48:02 GMT

I have to strongly agree against Jeff. ;-)"When PowerPivot was released a few years ago, I heard no shortage of fears from data professionals that this tool would eliminate much of their work. Since then I've heard no shortage of consultants and BI developers say that this tool has spurred even more work for them. It simplifies prototyping, and allows for a better front end experience, but it also requires [b]better data, cleaner data, and better models of data for users to work with.[/b] They are drowning in work."Steve, I think you forgot the word "performance." PowerPivot gave an entirely new meaning to it.And yes, to state the obvious, "drowning in work" does not even begin to make any justice to the description. (I worked honest 6 hours this sunny July Sunday...)

RE: The DBA Tax

Jeff Moden — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 12:39:19 GMT

Excellent editorial, Steve! I wish I could give it a hundred stars because it really hits the nail on the head. There're too many people that spend way too much time doing the "Chicken Little" thing.I'll also point out that there are also too many people that invest way too much time in following the lastest and greatest shiney object. Yes, things like Power Pivot are absolutely the bee knees but, if you don't know how to do a simple CROSS TAB with some pretty good performance behind it, then you're really not doing anyone a favor. You've got to know the basics first.As I ask a lot of people who skip the basics... "Do you want to be a DBA... or just a user?"

The DBA Tax

Steve Jones - SSC Editor — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 04:48:16 GMT

Comments posted to this topic are about the item [B]The DBA Tax[/B]