Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
The Ratcheting Safe Withdrawal Rate – A More Dominant Version Of The 4% Rule?
Old 01-16-2022, 02:53 PM   #1
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 21,150
The Ratcheting Safe Withdrawal Rate – A More Dominant Version Of The 4% Rule?

I couldn't find a newer one, but this chart starts in 1985 - which covers 30 years to 2015. These have been posted here before, but it's been a while since I've seen one. Another way to see how safe 4% has been over past history, back to 1871 which includes World Wars, the Great Depression and numerous other wars, recessions and other market corrections. You could have withdrawn more, a lot more in some cases, than 4% for many 30 year periods. Just FWIW.

https://www.kitces.com/blog/the-ratc...of-the-4-rule/

__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 50% equity funds / 45% bonds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 1.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 01-16-2022, 03:45 PM   #2
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 2,690
Historically the broad market, e.g. S&P 500, has done much better than 4% over the long term, 10 to 30 years. It seems a case of 4%>5%, and then 3%>4%. From source listed below:

Quote:
During the best 30-year period (1932-1961), the S&P 500 delivered*10.1%*annual returns.

During the worst 30-year period (1965-1994), the S&P 500 delivered*4.3%*annual returns.

The median annual returns for 30-year periods since 1928 has been*7.1%.
So 4% feels about right and is probably set based that the worst period was 4.3%.

Source: https://fourpillarfreedom.com/heres-...med-since-1928
bobandsherry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 05:05 PM   #3
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Tampa
Posts: 11,198
IIRC, the mean WR% one could take out is 6.5%, but the worst 5 years or so to retire bring the WR% down to a more conservative 4%.
__________________
TGIM
Dtail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 09:32 PM   #4
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 973
If you think you can withdraw more than 4% each year, do you have some easy ways to spend the extra money?
The 4% calculation is based on your spending amount. Another way to get around is to adjust your spending amount, i.e., the numerator used to calculate to percentage.
flyingaway is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 09:39 PM   #5
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Posts: 926
In Kitces article, the point was that a 50% increase in assets would allow you a permanent 10% increase in withdrawals. Since that "ratchet" up to higher spending would never need to be reduced, he called it dominant vs the traditional 4% rule. In contrast, traditional variable withdrawal methods could leave you withdrawing less, sometimes a lot less, if markets go down.

I took it as a "think piece" to make people consider their withdrawal strategy and why they shouldn't greatly increase spending if markets go up without understanding that unless they are careful, they are putting themselves in front of the SORR bus again.
Exchme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:10 PM   #6
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Posts: 468
The 4% rule confuses me somewhat…. I have $1.8 million in a taxable brokerage account, $200k in savings, $600k in IRA’s, home worth $500k, cabin worth $500k, and investment rental properties worth $1.5 million (which we plan to liquidate over the next few years).

Thus, is the 4% guidance based on just my taxable brokerage account? Everything combined, other?

If my brokerage account is sitting at $2 million next year do I pull 4% of $2 million or $1.8 million next year?

BTW - I’m 49 so can’t touch IRA’s for awhile.
RetiredAt49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2022, 10:43 PM   #7
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Sunset's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Spending the Kids Inheritance and living in Chicago
Posts: 16,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbabubba View Post
The 4% rule confuses me somewhat…. I have $1.8 million in a taxable brokerage account, $200k in savings, $600k in IRA’s, home worth $500k, cabin worth $500k, and investment rental properties worth $1.5 million (which we plan to liquidate over the next few years).

Thus, is the 4% guidance based on just my taxable brokerage account? Everything combined, other?

If my brokerage account is sitting at $2 million next year do I pull 4% of $2 million or $1.8 million next year?

BTW - I’m 49 so can’t touch IRA’s for awhile.
The 4% "rule" was based on folks retired at 65 and living for up to 30 years.

Being retired at 49, I think you would want a lower number to ensure it lasts the extra 16 yrs.

Maybe 3% or 3.3% (all done without using actual math )

I'd calculated 3% of: $1.8 million in a taxable brokerage account, $200k in savings, $600k in IRA’s, and investment rental properties worth $1.5 million
Which is 3% of $4.1 Million ($123K) , I never count the house and did leave out the cabin as maybe you have a house and cabin rather than a bigger house.

But of course how does this $123K compare to your spending ?

At 3.3% it would be $135K
__________________
Fortune favors the prepared mind. ... Louis Pasteur
Sunset is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 02:36 AM   #8
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
teejayevans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,691
Don’t count anything you don’t plan on selling.
I would sell the real estate now given how hot the market is.
teejayevans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 05:42 AM   #9
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Tampa
Posts: 11,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exchme View Post
In Kitces article, the point was that a 50% increase in assets would allow you a permanent 10% increase in withdrawals. Since that "ratchet" up to higher spending would never need to be reduced, he called it dominant vs the traditional 4% rule. In contrast, traditional variable withdrawal methods could leave you withdrawing less, sometimes a lot less, if markets go down.

I took it as a "think piece" to make people consider their withdrawal strategy and why they shouldn't greatly increase spending if markets go up without understanding that unless they are careful, they are putting themselves in front of the SORR bus again.
If one uses a variable withdrawal rate, the percentage of discretionary spending comes into play more highly, so some necessary potential cuts can be wants instead of needs.
__________________
TGIM
Dtail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 07:07 AM   #10
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
donheff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 11,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbabubba View Post
The 4% rule confuses me somewhat…. I have $1.8 million in a taxable brokerage account, $200k in savings, $600k in IRA’s, home worth $500k, cabin worth $500k, and investment rental properties worth $1.5 million (which we plan to liquidate over the next few years).

Thus, is the 4% guidance based on just my taxable brokerage account? Everything combined, other?

If my brokerage account is sitting at $2 million next year do I pull 4% of $2 million or $1.8 million next year?

BTW - I’m 49 so can’t touch IRA’s for awhile.
Bubba, you probably want to read up on this to get a fuller understanding. But the simple answer is that you start retirement by setting an initial SWR fixed dollar amount based on all of your liquid assets (IRAs, taxable accounts, not house and cabin). You would probably want to toss in the rental property values for estimates since you plan to liquidate them. So, if everything adds up to $4M your initial dollar amount if you go with 4% would be $160K. In the following year you would adjust that $160K upward by the social security COLA, and so on in the following years.

Now, having done this myself for more that 15 years I have come to realize that it is (for me) a theoretical exercise. I am spending way below that theoretical initial SWR amount based on 4% or even 3%. But starting out it is a useful tool. And, if your actual spending rate is at or near the initial pull, setting a tight SWR limit could be important to protect yourself from a bad sequence of returns. As you get further down the road you can evaluate how best to adjust.
__________________
Idleness is fatal only to the mediocre -- Albert Camus
donheff is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 07:34 AM   #11
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Dash man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Limerick
Posts: 5,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbabubba
The 4% rule confuses me somewhat…. I have $1.8 million in a taxable brokerage account, $200k in savings, $600k in IRA’s, home worth $500k, cabin worth $500k, and investment rental properties worth $1.5 million (which we plan to liquidate over the next few years).

Thus, is the 4% guidance based on just my taxable brokerage account? Everything combined, other?

If my brokerage account is sitting at $2 million next year do I pull 4% of $2 million or $1.8 million next year?

BTW - I’m 49 so can’t touch IRA’s for awhile.

I would only include your investment properties after tax/sales costs value. You’re likely to have a significant capital gains and depreciation recapture tax.
Dash man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 09:04 AM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
SecondCor521's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boise
Posts: 7,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbabubba View Post
BTW - I’m 49 so can’t touch IRA’s for awhile.
This is a common misconception.

There are at least three or four different ways to access IRAs earlier than 59.5:

1. SEPP / 72(t)
2. Roth conversion ladder
3. Rule of 55 (for IRAs would require rolling into one's 401(k) I guess)
4. Just pay the 10% penalty

As for the original topic on this thread, I generally like Kitces' stuff but I like the Payout Period Reset model here better:

https://retireearlyhomepage.com/popr.html

It ratchets up sooner and is easier to keep track of.

That being said, I'm 52 and at a 1% WR so it's really just theoretical for me also.
__________________
"At times the world can seem an unfriendly and sinister place, but believe us when we say there is much more good in it than bad. All you have to do is look hard enough, and what might seem to be a series of unfortunate events, may in fact be the first steps of a journey." Violet Baudelaire.
SecondCor521 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 01:03 PM   #13
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Koolau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Leeward Oahu
Posts: 17,715
For the newer folks, let me be the first to remind that most retirees never actually "execute" the 4% rule (or the SWR calculated by FIRECalc.) We don't "slavishly" calculate 4% (plus appropriate inflation) to withdraw from our nest egg. Rather, we keep our early spending to around 4% or less (in the yearly rear view mirror.)

So IOW most of us plan our FIRE by asking the question "How much income do I need to generate to meet my proposed FIRE spending?" Then, using the 4% rule or the results of FIRECalc or similar tools, we work toward a nest egg that will supply our needs within the bounds set around 4% WDR or whatever.

But once we achieve the required nest egg, we FIRE, then relax a bit and take what we need, keeping in mind the general limits of the 4% rule. I've gone over 4% a few times - especially when doing rehabs on my property. I've viewed these as a partial investment, so the 4% can be stretched a bit. Time has confirmed the investment aspect as I've sold 2 properties which I rehabbed and recouped most of the rehab costs.

My point is to use the 4% rule (or whatever) to prepare for FIRE. Once FIRE is achieved, use 4% (plus inflation, etc.) as a guideline not a "bright" line. And always be ready to cut back if your gut tells you to. Most of us did cut back a bit during the unpleasantness of 2008, etc. Your gut will probably guide you well in uncharted waters.

Or, more succinctly, measure with a micrometer and cut with an ax though YMMV.
__________________
Ko'olau's Law -

Anything which can be used can be misused. Anything which can be misused will be.
Koolau is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 01:13 PM   #14
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 37,931
I expect that we are under withdrawing. Don’t know what to do about it yet, but there is something to be said for building a later nest egg for funding long term care and/or family medical emergencies/care needs.
__________________
Retired since summer 1999.
audreyh1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 01:14 PM   #15
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koolau View Post
For the newer folks, let me be the first to remind that most retirees never actually "execute" the 4% rule (or the SWR calculated by FIRECalc.) We don't "slavishly" calculate 4% (plus appropriate inflation) to withdraw from our nest egg. Rather, we keep our early spending to around 4% or less (in the yearly rear view mirror.)

So IOW most of us plan our FIRE by asking the question "How much income do I need to generate to meet my proposed FIRE spending?" Then, using the 4% rule or the results of FIRECalc or similar tools, we work toward a nest egg that will supply our needs within the bounds set around 4% WDR or whatever.

But once we achieve the required nest egg, we FIRE, then relax a bit and take what we need, keeping in mind the general limits of the 4% rule. I've gone over 4% a few times - especially when doing rehabs on my property. I've viewed these as a partial investment, so the 4% can be stretched a bit. Time has confirmed the investment aspect as I've sold 2 properties which I rehabbed and recouped most of the rehab costs.

My point is to use the 4% rule (or whatever) to prepare for FIRE. Once FIRE is achieved, use 4% (plus inflation, etc.) as a guideline not a "bright" line. And always be ready to cut back if your gut tells you to. Most of us did cut back a bit during the unpleasantness of 2008, etc. Your gut will probably guide you well in uncharted waters.

Or, more succinctly, measure with a micrometer and cut with an ax though YMMV.
Exactly. In ten years of retirement we have never even bothered to calculate our withdrawal rate. Never even thought about it. There are other deciding factors for us on how much we withdraw.

I have never paid any attention to the supposed 4 percent rule. I just determined out spend and compared same to our income and to our resources. Prior to, and on an after tax total annual annual spend. That is as far as our budgeting goes. Whether it be on a trip to SE Asia, a can of peas, or a new roof.
brett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 01:24 PM   #16
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sarasota, FL & Vermont
Posts: 36,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbabubba View Post
The 4% rule confuses me somewhat…. I have $1.8 million in a taxable brokerage account, $200k in savings, $600k in IRA’s, home worth $500k, cabin worth $500k, and investment rental properties worth $1.5 million (which we plan to liquidate over the next few years).

Thus, is the 4% guidance based on just my taxable brokerage account? Everything combined, other?

If my brokerage account is sitting at $2 million next year do I pull 4% of $2 million or $1.8 million next year?

BTW - I’m 49 so can’t touch IRA’s for awhile.
4% was based on a study that was only financial assets (stocks and bonds). But as a practical matter it can include other assets that are either income producing (like your investment properties) and others that you plan to sell (like cabin?). IOW, any assets that you plan to convert to cash over your retirement. In our case, I exclude our VT home and our FL condo, both of which we have no plans to sell... the benefit to our retirement of those two assets are places to live and only pay property taxes, insurance, HOA fees and utilities rather than pay rent.

So in your case, assuming thaou plan to keep the cabin and the house, your base would be $4.1 million.

However, as others have posted, 4% was based on a 60/40 AA, 30 year time horizon and a 95% level of success. For longer time horizons, the 4% would need to be lower. If you put into FIRECalc $1m portfolio, 30 years, 60% equities and solve for safe spending at 95% success you'll get 4.06%... the 4% rule. But if you change that 30 years to 46 years (65+30-49) then the safe withdrawal rate changes to 3.49%.

So applying the 4% rule to your situation would result in safe withdrawals of ~$143k... and adding in SS would increase it a bit more.

Also, the 4% rule was based on the percentage applied to the retirement date portfolio balance and then subsequently, withdrawals would be increased for inflation... but not x% of the beginning of year portfolio balance each year.

There is a school of thought that one can safely "ratchet" withdrawals... each year use the higher of 4% of the portfolio at the beginning of the year or the previous year's withdrawals adjusted for inflation. For example say in the first year of retirement you withdraw $143k but your portfolio increases over the year to $4.5m. If it is safe for someone retiring with $4.5m to withdraw $157k ($4.5m * 3.49%) then it should be equally safe for you to withdraw $157k that year rather than limit yourself to $143k plus inflation.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56
pb4uski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2022, 01:28 PM   #17
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 37,931
We’ve been running a strict 3% of end of year portfolio value each year. This % remaining portfolio method, as it is named in Firecalc, obviously tracks with portfolio value. We haven’t tried ratcheting up and keeping it there, but due to the long bull market our income has increased substantially.

We are now 62 and 66. We haven’t increased the % because it’s already above what we usually spend. But I also know from my modeling that we certainly could and still be sustainable.
__________________
Retired since summer 1999.
audreyh1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2022, 08:08 AM   #18
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 987
I echo what Koolau says. It’s a great tool for planning, and is more important for those that depend entirely or nearly on it for income. But depending on what percentage of your income comes from the portfolio, people with lots of rental income, pensions, annuities etc, are less likely to “follow the rule” when retired. Many are forced to do so, if it is mostly in pretax IRAs, via RMDs eventually, where as those with 100% Roth and no RMDs calculate it differently. Naturally, income from $120k via 4% from a Roth is not the same as $120k via 4% from a tIRA The rule does not ever claim to be a tool for living income, but merely a historic probability withdrawal vehicle from a sustainable 30year portfolio, to aid income.

Personally, it is net spendable funds that I care about, so tax arbitrage via Roth conversion is my current tact. I haven’t “enabled” the 4% rule yet, between Roth conversions and delayed SS filing.

Since I have the majority of my retirement funds in my Fidelity accounts, it is easy to estimate the percentage based on withdrawals. I simply subtract the amount I expect to withdraw as a SS substitute (approx $150k, taxable at this time ) from the total, and see what percentage above that amount I have drawn. At this time any income needed in addition to pensions and DW SS, that are less than my yet to be filed SS, means I have not touched my “real” savings yet, which, thanks to C19, I haven’t even gotten close to, to date. My conservative portfolio grew 10%, plus the funds amount I have withdrawn, as one would expect with the markets returns these last years.

I read Kitces paper many times before retiring and liked the idea a lot. For my circumstances, I have no desire at all to leave a large inheritance, so increased withdrawal rate based on success & growth appeals to me, though in our circumstances, our natural tendencies curb wanton spending and like many here we are forced to BTD (but not for excessive toys, etc) if we want to use that 4%, and even more so, if we ratchet. IIRC, approx 50% increase in size from the start means to ratchet up, and I will likely be there by the time we can BTD on travel like we planned.

If we assume 2% inflation, then 4% becomes 6% over 20 years. Yet a lot of Firecalc threads still show net growth at a 6% withdrawal. It has been noted that there is irony in that you can really BTD when you are too old to enjoy it.
Perryinva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2022, 08:32 AM   #19
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Markola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Twin Cities
Posts: 3,927
I used to be focused on obtaining enough resources to generate enough income from a 4% Rule to let me retire. However, “life happens”, such as:

- DW ‘s bucket overflowed and she left her career earlier than planned.
- After experimenting with zero paid work for a year, we both decided we like the concept of semi-retirement indefinitely, her through a PT j*b and me through enjoyable consulting gigs.
- Max SS coming online for both at age 70, we think.
- About 9 more years of insurance to be funded before Medicare helps.
- Yada, yada, making the future unpredictable.

Anyway, Vanguard Personal Advisory Services inputs all of the above and more and our best guesses at wants and needs in the future, and taxes, into their Monte Carlo software and gives us spending category numbers that we aim for. Then we discuss and adjust course with our assigned CFP twice per year based on the precise plan meeting reality, some positive, some negative. Another aspect is that, if/when the SHTF in the markets, we will only be asked to cut the daily spending category 2.5% year over year. If the markets boom, we are asked not to increase daily spending more than 5% year over year.

This service allowed us to semi-retire 5 years earlier than my hard-stop-at-59 plan based on the 4% Rule. Our check ins with our assigned CFP keep DW and me harmoniously on the same page, meeting our individual and collective goals, and we think our plan is flexible enough to meet the uncertainties of the future. All for thirty basis points. YMMV but it definitely works for us.
Markola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2022, 09:31 AM   #20
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koolau View Post
For the newer folks, let me be the first to remind that most retirees never actually "execute" the 4% rule (or the SWR calculated by FIRECalc.) We don't "slavishly" calculate 4% (plus appropriate inflation) to withdraw from our nest egg. Rather, we keep our early spending to around 4% or less (in the yearly rear view mirror.)

So IOW most of us plan our FIRE by asking the question "How much income do I need to generate to meet my proposed FIRE spending?" Then, using the 4% rule or the results of FIRECalc or similar tools, we work toward a nest egg that will supply our needs within the bounds set around 4% WDR or whatever.

But once we achieve the required nest egg, we FIRE, then relax a bit and take what we need, keeping in mind the general limits of the 4% rule. I've gone over 4% a few times - especially when doing rehabs on my property. I've viewed these as a partial investment, so the 4% can be stretched a bit. Time has confirmed the investment aspect as I've sold 2 properties which I rehabbed and recouped most of the rehab costs.

My point is to use the 4% rule (or whatever) to prepare for FIRE. Once FIRE is achieved, use 4% (plus inflation, etc.) as a guideline not a "bright" line. And always be ready to cut back if your gut tells you to. Most of us did cut back a bit during the unpleasantness of 2008, etc. Your gut will probably guide you well in uncharted waters.

Or, more succinctly, measure with a micrometer and cut with an ax though YMMV.
+100 One of the more succinct explanations of how to consider the 4% 'rule' for the new comers! Like FireCalc, folks should use these tools as guides and not gospel!
__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
House version or Senate version ripper1 FIRE and Money 33 11-15-2017 08:11 AM
A "Ratcheting" SWR - Kitces walkinwood FIRE and Money 95 06-27-2015 10:51 PM
Ratcheting up the pension buyout offer ziggy29 FIRE and Money 9 10-07-2014 05:04 AM
"Is the Safe Withdrawal Rate TOO Safe?" Nords FIRE and Money 13 10-20-2004 10:36 AM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:45 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.