Entrepreneurship

Is American Entrepreneurship Declining or Simply Changing?

A parallel trend to the new-business nosedive is the rise of the freelance economy.

|

It's a counter-intuitive question: Where have all the entrepreneurs gone? We're incessantly hearing about new startups these days—scrappy innovators that harness technology to conquer cultural Goliaths; labors of love launched with seed money from Kickstarter; home cooks turned culinary capitalists. But researchers from The Brookings Institution claim that American entrepreneurship is in decline. 

"Historically one new business is born about every minute, while another one fails every eighty seconds," write Brookings economists Ian Hathaway and Robert Litan in their paper, "Declining Business Dynamism in the United States." All of this "churning" and "creative disruption" is a good thing, they say, because it helps long-run economic growth by spurring new job creation. 

But Hathaway and Litan pinpoint a "precipitous drop" in new startups since 2006, and a slower but steady drop since the late '70s. The result is an economy oversaturated with mature companies, the pair fret in a follow-up paper. In 1992, just 23 percent of U.S. businesses had been around for 16 years or more. By 2011, such companies represented 34 percent of all U.S. businesses. And this "aging" of the U.S. economy "has occurred in every state and metropolitan area, every firm size and category, and in each broad industrial sector," the researchers found.

In relaying these findings in The Washington Post, Robert Samuelson seems to have fully bought-in to this anti-dynamism narrative and then some. Samuelson writes that "the economy's rejuvenation from below is weakening" and "the Internet's influence exaggerated". He concludes that the idea of new, tech-savvy companies replacing older, outdated ones "may be wishful thinking that conceals deeper forces holding the economy back." 

In a second op-ed, Samuelson explores some ideas about why entrepreneurship may be declining, from too much government regulation to too little investment capital. He's skeptical this "laundry list of gripes shared by many businesses, new and old" can fully explain it, however he offers no ulterior explanation save that perhaps we're "a society whose members are getting older…more risk adverse and less adventurous". 

But let's take a closer look at the underlying premise here. Could the economists (and by extension Samuelson) be seeing an abundance of older entrepreneurs and companies because they're looking at entrepreneurship in an old way?

"Holding all factors constant, we'd expect an economy with greater concentration in older firms and less in younger firms to exhibit lower productivity, potentially less innovation, and possibly fewer new jobs created than would otherwise be the case," write Hathaway and Litan. But other factors are far from constant. A parallel trend to this startup nosedive is the rise of the freelance economy.

The New Entrepreneurs

Freelancers Union/Facebook

As of 2005, there were 42.6 million "contingent workers" in the U.S. workforce, according to the first and only report on this population from the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Contingent worker is a broad term which GAO uses to describe independent contractors, temp workers, the self-employed, day laborers, on-call workers (such as substitute teachers), and anyone engaged in part-time work. Excluding the part-time workers—which includes some we might traditionally think of as freelancers and some working part-time at The Gap—we're still left with about 18.3 million in the contingent workforce. 

Unfortunately there's no data on whether the proportion of contingent workers has grown since the recent recession. But I think it's fair to assume it has increased, considering economic realities and all the attention paid to the rise of what's often called the "sharing economy." Sara Horowitz, founder of the 244,000-member Freelancers Union, calls it the "new mutualism." From the organization's website:

We're lawyers and nannies. We're graphic designers and temps. We're the future of the economy. Freelancers Union serves the needs of this growing independent sector. We're bringing freelancers together to build smarter solutions to health care, retirement, wage security, and other broken systems. We call it New Mutualism. You can call it the future.

Whatever you call it, an under-appreciated aspect of this economy is how it puts self-employment, of sorts, in many more people's reach. Sure, companies like Uber, Lyft, and AirBnB (to name just a few prominent examples) are making things easier for consumers. And they often come with neat origin stories, too. But they're also allowing individuals "to bring their marginal capital and/or labor into productive use," as the R Street Institute put it. They're granting more workers more autonomy.

Take Bellhops, a small-scale moving company founded by two recent college graduates in 2011. It may not be providing many of the kinds of jobs official data is measuring. But in a few short years, it's come to employ more than 2,000 students as independent moving contractors. Movers are paid $13-$15 per hour, can choose when they take jobs, and decide whether they want to take a lead or "wingman" roll on each. 

"Being a Bellhop is very much an entrepreneurial position," says COO Matt Patterson. "They're essentially running their own business. If they pick up a moving job at 8 a.m. on Saturday morning, they chose to be there, which has a huge impact on our customer service levels. The Bellhop wasn't forced by upper management to do so."

The model is good for customer service and good for busy student schedules. But it's obviously not just students who take to flexible work. Whether it stems from a lack of alternative employment options or a conscious career choice, workers of all ages are increasingly cobbling together a living from an array of entrepreneurial activities.

An April 2014 poll from Gallup found one third of microbusiness owners—microbusinesses are defined as those with zero to 10 employees—rely on a second job for income. AirBnb found more than 50 percent of its hosts in New York were non-traditional workers (freelancers, students, etc.). "The entire notion of what 'freelancing' entails is changing," says the Freelancers Union.

"Before, it was gig-based and a freelancer's jobs were mainly limited to their professional field. But that's the past. The new "freelancing" is different—more flexible, more diversified, more anchored in the sharing economy. Today, a freelancer could have a couple of graphic design clients, but she also could have a portfolio of other jobs, like renting her spare room on Airbnb and driving a car for Lyft and working in her local food co-op and scoring some singing gigs on the weekends."

Living in Brooklyn, I was surrounded by people who split their time between creative or professional pursuits, part-time service jobs, temp work, and any number of odd money-making endeavors: teaching yoga, busking in the Subway, selling jewelry on Etsy, selling homemade food at local markets, renting rooms on AirBnB, teaching cooking classes, teaching at local co-working spaces, writing for content mills, designing websites, serving as photographers' assistants, working as part-time movers and dominatrixes and beekeepers.

Traditionally, we may have referred to these folks as "self-employed." But many of them would self-identify as "entrepreneurs." In a 2013 survey of freelancers—3,193 respondents, including 1,958 millennials—90 percent said that being an entrepreneur is a "mindset," rather than strictly someone who starts a company. Of the millennial freelancers familiar with the term entrepreneur, 58 percent classified themselves as one. 

Regardless of whether we call Uber drivers and freelance coders and Etsy emporium keepers "entrepreneurs", this rise in freelancing/self-employment/microbusinesses is happening. And it shows no signs of reversing course, which comes with both some good and some bad. Some will undoubtedly lament that outside the full-time employment contract, workers lose out on aspects of the 20th-century safety net. Many will fret that this new model of employment doesn't provide as much security as the old way. The Brookings economists were concerned about a lack of new startups leading to a lack of new jobs.  

But this is what we have. And people are finding ways to make it work. People are creating their own jobs, becoming businesses of one, absorbing the (annoyingly true) post-modern message that you are your own personal brand. Non-employer microbusiness owners now make up 44 percent of all U.S. business owners overall, according to Gallup. It's certainly plausible that these trends may be countering some of the job and innovation deficit created by the lack of traditional startup launches. 

So how can we accommodate this economy? How do we bolster these new entrepreneurs? What kind of healthcare solutions, financial products, and services—co-working spaces, community kitchens, small business incubators—will appeal to and assist this crowd? How can we adjust the tax code to ease the burden on the self-employed? (A middle-class tax cut if there ever was one.) What kind of regulations could be repealed or changed to help them thrive? 

Entrepreneurship isn't declining, it's changing. How can we adjust our policy prescriptions and cultural expectations accordingly?

NEXT: National Guard Doesn't Improve Ferguson Situation, White House Said to Throttle Records Requests, Fighting Worsens Over Ukraine City: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. What does any of this have to do with abortion?

  2. Sara Horowitz, founder of the 244,000-member Freelancers Union, calls it the “new mutualism.” From the organization’s website:

    We’re lawyers and nannies. We’re graphic designers and temps. We’re the future of the economy. Freelancers Union serves the needs of this growing independent sector. We’re bringing freelancers together to build smarter solutions to health care, retirement, wage security, and other broken systems. We call it New Mutualism. You can call it the future.

    Uhh… why the hell would a freelancer want to join a union? Is this not a counter-intuitive concept, in a mode of employment lacking a managerial class? And the “new mutualism” sounds like the Old Mutualism to me, only designed by dipshit yippies who like John Updike rather than by poor people.

    1. Uhh… why the hell would a freelancer want to join a union?

      The Freelancers Union doesn’t engage in collective bargaining. And that pisses off the labor mafia most people think off when they hear the word “union”.

      1. Did you notice the Freelancers Union poster in the photo? “There Is An “I” In Union”

        1. I was just bummed there was “no hugging”.

    2. All over the place we’re seeing this desperate scrambling to find some way to be business-oriented and “capitalistic” without saying so. So you get these ludicrous new monikers and attempts like this, where they try and smush individualist capitalist concepts with collective concepts like unions. “If we form a union for people who have absolutely no need for a union, maybe the thieves and haters will leave us alone!”

      1. There’s that, but something else is going on, too. My wife sees a lot of talk in social media among lefties about becoming “entrepreneurs,” but it’s all about doing stuff that’s politically correct, like importing fair trade products or selling solar panels or something like that.

        The problem with that thinking is that it’s about supplying something people “should want” versus supplying something people actually demand. Not that there’s no market for fair trade, solar energy, whatever, but it’s certainly not anywhere near as significant as other demands.

        1. Well, I think that’s part and parcel of the typical reality denial of a lot of people. They have the drive to try and start a business, but they deceive themselves into thinking everyone wants what they want. That’s not a good way to succeed. Realizing what people actually want is a much better way.

          1. And thus Porn o’ Plenty was born, mixing pizza and live porn. Episiarch and Pro Libertate’s wealth became so great that they divided up the solar system among themselves and bred a race of sentient escargot.

            1. . . .for use on their famous Squid Ink Lobster and Escargot Pizza, with deep-fried polenta crust.

            2. May I be the first to congratulate you both on such heroic and technologically advanced innovations?

              1. You may. We’re going to print your comment and post it on the wall of the RV. Yes, due to oppressive laws and regulations, this business will have to start off with some built-in mobility.

        2. I’m actually OK with that, since it’s a step away from “force to people to have x because the State determined x is good” to “hey, kids, let’s save the world through market forces!”

          The kids will eventually realize that some products and services will take hold, and some won’t. Some will even start to realize why. All the while, they are pointedly *not* relying state power.

          It can manifest in annoying ways, but all told I think it’s good (unless I’m just being naive and by “entrepreneur” millenials mean “people who apply to the government for Green Jobs grants,” which I’ll acknowledge could be the case).

          1. Sadly, I think they’re too immersed in statism to really pursue these entrepreneurial aims. I think you about hit it on the head with the reference to grants.

        3. But I learned in Macroeconomics that supply creates demand. And if people don’t buy it, then the government buys it or forces people to buy it! Keynes was a genius.

    3. Uhh… why the hell would a freelancer want to join a union?

      I’m guessing it is so that they can get group deals on health insurance and retirement savings plans and such. There are some useful things that unions can accomplish.

      1. There are some useful things that unions can accomplish.

        Certainly. For example, if you need to create a convincing set for a post-apocalyptic action movie unions are the way to go.

      2. …didn’t we used to call those mutual aid societies or even companies offering services to their members? I mean, I’m pretty sure AAA works in a similar manner.

        I think Epi nailed it: some people have to convince themselves so hard that what they’re doing isn’t Bad Old Fashioned KKKapitalism, that they’ve reappropriated terms like unionism or mutualism, despite the fact that what they’re doing has little to nothing to do with discredited Proudhonian economics or worker solidarity.

        1. I vaguely recall that the old mutual aid societies had to be grandfathered in to avoid running afoul of various welfare and other regulations. Not sure the world is safe for their return.

      3. That is EXACTLY why the Freelancer’s Union was formed. To get group health insurance for their members.

        Only ObamaCare fucked that, because now they have to accept people with pre-existing conditions, even people who aren’t even freelancers. They can’t “discriminate” in favor of people who are actually freelancers anymore.

      4. I’m guessing it is so that they can get group deals on health insurance and retirement savings plans and such

        Depending, in a state which allows it, there is likely a more broadly based small-business or trade association with group insurance plans. Those have existed for over 50 years; I created one myself.

        NFIB runs what is essentially a national (where legal) multi-plan health insurance “exchange” for business owners.

        Several decades ago, I worked with what might be a freelance “union” today, but a different name. It was like a social network these days, exchanging ideas on seeking clients, billing practices and the like. Many potential freelancers have no idea how to get started, hence the social structure. (I was an Entrepreneur Coach, but quite rarely with freelancers)

        I don’t see much new in Nolan’s fine piece, but its grown a LOT more than I realized.

        In some cities, they are “young professionals” which include social “mixing” events (like dances, poker nights, etc.).

    4. Uhh… why the hell would a freelancer want to join a union?

      Timecops just want to go home to their families at night after protecting the sanctity of the timeline.

  3. Dude has no clue whats going on out there.

    http://www.Anon-Surf.tk

    1. Well, jsut roll with it!

  4. The world is changing, but sometimes it’s not changing so much, you know? People can go into different kinds of business through more diverse channels and suppliers, but it’s still selling goods or services to others. And the big problem–and growing ever bigger–is the interference and barriers to entry posed by government (at all levels), both on its own and in conjunction with established businesses that don’t want to face competition.

    So no, entrepreneurship is not doing as well as it once was. And there’s a reason for that.

    1. “And the big problem–and growing ever bigger–is the interference and barriers to entry posed by government (at all levels)”

      ^This.

      There’s been a positive orgy of regulatory enforcement over the last 10 years (oddly, from roughly when “entrepreneurship” started taking a nose dive).

      I’ve noticed even government agencies looking with fear at other government agencies and paralyzing each other with their competing regulations.

      If we were to suddenly create an environment in which people could freely offer products and services to each other, you would undoubtedly see an immediate spike in entrepreneurship.

      1. Maybe some sort of Free Market Experimental Zone? I suggest Florida.

        1. Maybe Nevada. I’m not sure they even really have laws there.

          1. I was thinking Florida because it’s got a lot of people, nice weather, and a somewhat more friendly environment already for business start-ups. And I live here already.

            1. This is our Achilles heel as a movement. We’ve got about three people in every region.

              I only agree with you on three out of four. I will suffer CA socio-fascism for the rest of my days to avoid the climate of the rest of this God-forsaken continent.

              Nevada is bizarre, but it’s dry.

              1. In Free Florida, we’ll advance so rapidly as to have weather control.

              2. Colorado.

                Everyone says Colorado is turning into a proggie blue state, but, from what I have seen, it is the entrepreneurial millenials that are moving there.

                The tards are still in Portland and Seattle.

                Anyway, who would you rather hang out with, as a libertarian?

                1. Perhaps multiple free zones, centered where each of us lives. After all, diversity is good for experimentation purposes.

                  1. I vote for Montana. Or we can annex Banff.

      2. Yes, independent contracting gets you around the regulations covering formal employment, but it doesn’t get around occupational licensing or USDA regulations.

  5. What’s really going on here is that the regulations on formal employment have become so onerous that the economy is spontaneously reorganizing itself around the independent contractor relationship.

    If you pay someone as an independent contractor, it is the purest form of free exchange possible – there are no benefits, no taxes collected, no retirement account, no obligations beyond today’s work. It is up to the independent contractor to figure out their own taxes and do their own saving for retirement. Often, you can even get around the minimum wage, becuse many jobs are paid a flat fee for a finished product, not by the hour. (i.e. web development, graphic design).

    Now, none of this is of course _planned_ by anyone. It’s just that the costs associated with formal employment tend to favor businesses that are based on independent contracting instead. So of course, you see startups that are organized around this principle, and they are going to do better financially.

    Imagine Bellhops as a place with formal employees. It would NEVER WORK. It would just be way too expensive to deal with all the paperwork to keep that many part-time employees on the payroll if they only work a few hours every couple of weeks.

    But by moving to independent contracting, not only does this make their business model possible, it also creates these opportunities for marginal people to find employment that they would otherwise be shut out of.

    1. “If you pay someone as an independent contractor, it is the purest form of free exchange possible – there are no benefits, no taxes collected, no retirement account, no obligations beyond today’s work.”

      And more and more people are realizing that they have to *pay* their formal employers to handle these things for them, while they *don’t* if they’re independent contractors.

      You do get hosed on insurance, though – which is clearly what this “union” is for.

      1. Actually, if you are relatively young and healthy your employer hoses you on insurance.
        The group plan price still comes out of your salary, even if you are paying 20% of the premium.

        1. That is very true – I remember being quite annoyed when I was in my 20s and my premiums were being determined by a group that included a bunch of geriatric former drug abusers.

          I suppose it’s not so much that ICs get hosed on insurance as that small groups of old people who can get on group plans with a bunch of healthy young subordinates have a pretty sweet deal.

          1. When I divorced at age 62, I got COBRA coverage under my ex-wife’s plan. My premiums were about $350 per month for zero health co-pays and deductibles and a $5 prescription co-pay.

            Some young singles were having a LOT extra taken out of their pay to get up to the same $350

    2. Wonder how long it lasts before socialists start calling independent contracting a “legal loophole” to get around their regulatory wet dream.

      1. This is what I’m afraid of. It’s never actually been illegal to just make a pure exchange of cash for service. But progressives are so convinced that the employer-employee relationship is all about dominance and submission that they’ll want to come up with all sorts of regulations for the “protection” of independent contractors – also known as restrictions on independent contracting.

        And before long it’ll be like, you can’t hire a babysitter or pay someone to mow the law for you. Because (A) babysitters compete with licensed childcare workers, and (B) that lawn mower is making less than minimum wage once you factor in the social security contributions, unemployment insurance, and time spent advertising his service.

        1. “But progressives are so convinced that the employer-employee relationship is all about dominance and submission that they’ll want to come up with all sorts of regulations for the “protection” of independent contractors – also known as restrictions on independent contracting.”

          That is because they are not “progressive” – they are regressive. Please start calling them exactly what they are.

    3. HazelMeade|8.19.14 @ 6:24PM|#
      “What’s really going on here is that the regulations on formal employment have become so onerous that the economy is spontaneously reorganizing itself around the independent contractor relationship.”

      There’s another way to look at it:
      Air BnB, Lyft, etc all serve to navigate the bureaucracy, allowing the service providers to provide the services without the individual frictional losses for each provider.
      It’s a shame it’s required, but they are the private version of the local ward-healer, ‘fixing’ things for those who want to start a business.

      1. I think it’s part of a broad general trend of technology allowing people to find new ways around the bureaucracy. I don’t really think of AirBnb or Uber as “fixers” because even in a pure free market, there would still be a demand for a centralized website that you can go look at offerings via. I think it’s more that the internet allows people to find trading partners for peer-to-peer transactions very rapidly and easily. Whereas before you would have to place an ad in a newspaper and wait for someone to reply, and your audience would be limited to your local area. And there is just so much of this going on that the government hasn’t had time to react to it. But you can bet they will try.

        1. …”there would still be a demand for a centralized website that you can go look at offerings”…

          I’d agree and that suggests they’re reducing friction in two areas.

  6. I live in the People’s Republic of Ashland, Oregon, and we have this interesting paradox where many younger “I don’t quite fit in” people come here to start businesses. Yet, the hassle and cost of doing so is immense. As a result, everything from gasoline to haircuts to hamburgers is more expensive and many market niches go unfilled. Yet our taxes are among the highest in Oregon. It’s far easier for me, a corporate drone who works virtually, to work from home than it would be if I actually decided to be an entrepreneur. You get what you incent and all that.

  7. I wonder about this quite a bit. I think, and everyone has touched on each, it’s a combination of excessive regulations, lack of access to capital, taxes and general anti-business/private (at least in Canada) sentiment all conspire against the entrepreneurial class. My impression is the state eagerly wants to tax (rape) small business people while creating burdensome red tape (gotta control the greed!) including difficult demands such as forced minimum wage and taxes (to pay your fair share of the roads and welfare) that discourages people from entering the self-employed realm.

    I would love to see how many people actually do a calculation and decide it’s just not worth the headache. They figure, not always wrongly I might add, it’s better to make the same kind of money but without the migraines and responsibilities of a business by working for a company and using whatever savings plans/stock options offered to save – or as their ‘reward.’

    The ones who take the plunge are the risk takers many of whom are just like me in that we can’t work in a corporate setting.

    (cont)

  8. Many people are like this and it would behoove us to permit these people to enter the entrepreneurial class (and by entrepreneurs I use the loose term of just starting a business and not necessarily coming up with the next Pet Rock) and earn a living as they see fit.

    Right now, with the permit and licensing racket in place, it’s bureaucrats who control how entrepreneurial we are. This is ludicrous. The last thing bureaucrats should be able to control is BUSINESS.

    However, despite all this, I tempted to say maybe there’s a lull because the next entrepreneurs are looking at the next great frontier the Internet. That is, how to make money off it.

    Amazon and eBay and places like Tire Rack and Next Tag are just tips of the iceberg.

    Last, the question posed here can also extend to the cultural sphere. Why has achievement in the West seemingly (suddenly?) come to a screeching halt?

  9. Self-employment is not entrepreneurship. They are different terms with distinct meanings. Conflating the two is stupid and not helpful. Self-employment is a perfectly good option for a lot of people, and it’s certainly becoming more common, but it’s not the same as entrepreneurship, doesn’t replace entrepreneurship, and shouldn’t assuage the concerns about the relative dearth of new business ventures.

    1. PM|8.19.14 @ 8:28PM|#
      “Self-employment is not entrepreneurship.”

      I started and they said ‘no it isn’t’. How about a summary?

      1. “Self-employment is not entrepreneurship.”

        I started and they said ‘no it isn’t’

        They aren’t mutually exclusive, which causes confusion, and the definitions aren’t all that sharp.

        One can be both self-employed and an entrepreneur based on the work and who it’s done for. One distinction: is it a business?

        A free-lancer is self-employed only. She works for somebody, typically hourly wage. Typically with one or just a handful of “employers” They make no capital investment (perhaps a computer).

        A plumber runs a business, serves an entire market, one job at a time. She’s self-employed, obviously, but he’s also an entrepreneur because it’s a business. She advertises, has capital invested in costly tools and a vehicle.

        A plumber may or may not employ an assistant. Freelancers never do, or they’d be a business.

        An entrepreneur stops being self-employed, to most people, when she hires an employee. Entrepreneurs are business owners OR fonders.

        I worked with hundreds of both, in 35 years as an Entrepreneur Coach/Consultant. What amazed me – I started in the Rust Belt, Cleveland. Auto and steel workers were the world’s highest paid workers, but a local survey found more than half wanted to be self-employed. They stay on the production line because they had no tolerance for risk. I used that to “sell” profit-based pay plans, which workers EXCEL under (incentive, no risk), and how to knock out a union!

  10. I retired after 35 years as an Entrepreneur Coach, having worked with hundreds. . Forget tax breaks. The 1986 tax “reform” saw both parties conspiring to destroy our best paid jobs. Democrats repealed BOTH Kennedy’s and Reagan’s reforms on depreciation write-offs. The best-paid union jobs WERE in manufacturing, until the Dems increased taxes on new investments in factory equipment, AND increased the write-off from 8 years to an 8 years. All our trade competitors have FIVE year write-offs.

    Republicans expanded the definition of Sub S (tax-exempt) corporations from 10 to 100 shareholders. (Guess which corporations were then allowed to donate to Republicans.)

    All together, we now double-tax large corporations who provide the highest wages and benefits, to subsidize small corporations who provide lower wages and benefits. If you punish the best “job creators” what happens to average wages? DUH

    The effect is similar for entrepreneurs. I’ve worked with hundreds of them. To stand alone as an entrepreneur, full-time, requires a LOT of confidence. So score the Obama recovery on this one. Recall the Obama stimulus failed, largely because consumers paid down debt instead of consuming Obama’s windfall. They feared for their jobs. They still do, but there’s no stimulus to track. You can bet the ranch on lack of confidence being the factor for entrepreneurs.

    Copyright 2014 by Michael J Hihn. All Rights Reserved and Defended

  11. Bellhops is nothing new. Starving Students Moving has been around since 1973 and you can find similar companies all over the country. The article mentions “micro businesses” are nothing more than supplemental income from part time work. Just because you rename something with a new buzzword doesn’t make it new or change what it has always been. The US is gong down the tubes because of our government, and people are desperate to try and find ways to keep their incomes up – end of story. Truly the end of the story once known as America. Welcome to Amerika.

  12. scrappy innovators that harness technology to conquer cultural Goliaths; labors of love launched with seed money from Kickstarter; home cooks turned culinary capitalists.

    And in pretty much all those cases comes the govzilla banhammer.

  13. Thanks for giving great kind of information. So useful and practical for me. Thanks for your excellent blog, nice work keep it up, thanks Again for sharing such interesting knowledge.
    website development company in delhi

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.