Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Imposes Big Tariffs On Korean Chipmakers

dipfan writes "This is serious - the U.S. government has decided to levy steep import tariffs on South Korean computer chips (and Vietnamese catfish). The result is a 44 percent tariff on DRAM semiconductors made by Hynix. The case was brought by Micron Technology on the grounds that the South Koreans were receiving unfair subsidies. Hynix says the tariff is 'outrageous', and the South Koreans plan to appeal to the World Trade Organisation."

38 of 827 comments (clear)

  1. Coincidence? by dolphin-brother · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Micron's lobbying wouldn't have anything to do with Micron posting a loss last quarter, would it? Nah. Of course not.

    1. Re:Coincidence? by HornyBastard77 · · Score: 5, Informative
      No I think it has more to do with Hynix making posting a loss (of about $800 mil, and its operating loss). If they were able to recoup their costs then Micron's claims of them artificially deflating their prices would not hold much water. As it stands, this does appear to be a case of government aided dumping.

  2. Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I hope you remember to giggle next time when you hear people from this administration talk about "market economics." This is not an isolated case. Take a look a steel tarifs, orange juice, and many other goods whose domestic producers have been loyal Bush lobbyists.

    Bush should be trying to stimulate the tech economy. Instead, he's killing the US$ to historic lows, and now this? Pretty weak!

    1. Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" by jimmy_dean · · Score: 5, Funny

      Good one, isolated cases without proof. Not mentioning the number of fantastic things that Bush has done. It's always about "what do I get from the current president?" The man brought much needed integrity back to the presidential position. He is a strong leader in the time of terrorism, war and uncertain economies brought about by Bill Clinton. What more do you want? Nobody's perfect nor sees things your way all of the time. Give the guy a break.

      --
      -> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
    2. Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not quite sure you can claim Bush brought "integrity" to the office, he did afterall win with a margin of victory so slim it could have been overturned had disputed results in a territory run by his brother gone the other way... there's never going to be a scandal-free president ever again, especially when there's always more than half the nation looking for something to attack.

      You can't blame the residents of the White House for everything that goes wrong or assign them credit for everything that goes right. The real world is just a whole lot more complex than that.

    3. Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" by dpete4552 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Let's see, thanks to Bush I've been able to witness a war over weapons of mass destruction (Iraq has WoMD you just can't see them fool), I've been given the honor to go through a POS economy (and don't give me this Clinton set it up crap, the GOP was in office for 6 years before Clinton, and for 6 years the economy crap), the Bush appointed Ashcroft cut the DOJ's budget for the Microsoft case & changed course from justice to slap on the wrist (if you can even call it that), the Bush appointed Ashcroft -- gaining control via the homeland security bill -- put an end to the inconvenient reports filed by the ATF each year that showed the stats of gun dealers in regards to them being caught selling illegally, my state -- along with the vast majority of the states -- are poor as hell now due to tax cuts that lead to a drastic cut in federal funding...

      Oh, but this president doesn't get laid, so I guess that should make me proud. Because getting laid is much more shameful than inciting a war that lead to the death of thousands of innocent people (Oh, I think I figured it out, Saddam is using ultra-high tech /invisable/ WoMD!).

      --
      http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
    4. Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" by pi_rules · · Score: 5, Interesting
      This is not an isolated case. Take a look a steel tarifs, orange juice, and many other goods whose domestic producers have been loyal Bush lobbyists.


      I'll bite.

      Steel tarrifs are there for a reason. I don't know the current situation in detail, but when NAFTA hit Canada started sucking up the steel business. They were much cheaper than US counterparts. I know this because my own father (we're from Michigan) started buying Canadian steel products because of this. As far as I know the Canadian steel is so much cheaper because the production is subsidized by the government. Canada is a bit more socialist than the US so the taxpayers foot the bill in getting industries the help they need. Result is that it's cheaper for us than US products.

      Things like NAFTA are fair only when employers are playing on the same ground across countries and that just doesn't happen in this economy. US employers are -strapped- with taxes that other countries just don't see and sure as hell aren't helped out by the government. Save the "what about Enron" combacks too -- I'm talking about good honest businesses. We're fucked in a global economy.
    5. Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" by Fishead · · Score: 5, Funny

      In Canada we have these things called "Large Forests". In these "Forests" we have large amounts of "Trees". Because we have so many of these "Trees", it is cheaper for lumber companies to harvest, and make "Lumber". This "Lumber" can be sold cheaply to countries where the lumber companies must pay high prices in order to harvest their small number of "Trees". Apparently this is unfair to the Bush administration. Hence we have ~30% tariffs on our lumber. But hey, our dollar is going up and theirs isn't so PBTBTBTBTBT :-Ãz

    6. Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" by dvdeug · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The man brought much needed integrity back to the presidential position.

      Instead of getting blowjobs from the interns, he's putting felons, convicted for wrongful acts in high office (Poindexter), in high office again. I'd rather have integrity as president then integrity as a person, if I'm forced to choose.

    7. Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" by WatertonMan · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I may well be incorrect, but I seem to recall that the problem was that many of the American steel mills were simply not well designed. The ones using newer designs *can* compete. The problem is that those which can't get no aid.

      The complaints against Canada are typically that socialized medicine and so forth lower costs. I suppose that is true to an extent. But, as someone else mentioned, the large number of easily accessable trees also does.

      There never is a truly level playing field. Complaining about that and then asking for tarriffs is akin to asking that the kid in class who gets all the A's ought to be penalized a few points because the rest aren't as smart.

      Don't get me wrong. There are times when tarrifs are appropriate. But thus far the US isn't doing too well with the WTO.

    8. Re:Yeah, this is Bush's version of "free trade" by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 5, Insightful

      chemical weapons are pretty hard to destroy and require very large incinerators that would easily be spotted by satelliete.

      So where are they?

      Nobody, not the French or Hans Blix or anyone else has any kind of coherent evidence that indicates that these weapons were destroyed.

      So where are they?

      18 chemical-factory trucks.
      Where?

      1550 R-400 bombs.
      Where?

      7,000 gallons of anthrax.
      Where?

      572 gallons of concentrated aflatoxin.
      Where?

      15,000 gallons of botulinum.
      Where?

      500 tons of mustard gas, sarin gas and VX nerve gas.
      Where?

      If you are so retarded as to think that it is impossible to hide a bomb in a country the size of Iraq... you have other issues.

      If it was a bomb, I could buy it. But we've been told there are many more weapons. That they were a threat to America, and the world. You'd think we'd have found something by now. We knew what they had, right? How come we can't find a single thing? Not one goddamn thing. And don't waste my time with the fucking 'chemical trailers.' I want to see barrels of anthrax. I want to see warheads with mustard gas, on missiles that can reach Washington. Show me. Just one. I'll believe you then. Just one.

      And if you tell me they're in Iran, I weep for the world.

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
  3. Business as usual by SAN1701 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Demand free trade to 3rd world countries, close the internal market. Nothing to see here.

  4. Well by 7x7 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the U.S. is going to get itself involved in the WTO, it should learn to play by it's own rules. Free trade? Or free trade only when it's good for us?

    1. Re:Well by afidel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because the South Korean government has repeatadly propped up a dying company that dumps product onto the market below cost? This is generally considered a bad thing and if we can get rid of the last vestiges of this type of protectionism (all countries are guilty of it to some degree, the Americans subsidize their farmers as do the French, etc) then maybe free trade might eventually become a reality, but as long as one country is proping up some sectors and allowing them to undercut the rest of the market free trade without sanctions is kind of a pipe dream.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:Well by 73939133 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Because the South Korean government has repeatadly propped up a dying company that dumps product onto the market below cost?

      You mean, like the US is doing with steel, agriculture, airlines, and defense contractors?

      we can get rid of the last vestiges of this type of protectionism

      "Vestige"? This isn't a "vestige", it's worse than it has ever been.

      I think all nations should just drop the pretenses of "fairness" and "openness" and just assume that protectionism is a fact of life. Then, democratically elected governments can negotiate about it rationally and without all the bluster and lies, and without having the WTO interfere.

    3. Re:Well by Alsee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think all nations should just drop the pretenses of "fairness" and "openness" and just assume that protectionism is a fact of life.

      Protectionism is a harmful and ultimately self destructive practice. Unfortunately there are always self serving groups pushing for these sorts of measures. Protectionism should not be accepted as a "fact of life".

      Protectionist policies were one of the reasons the great depression was so deep and long. When things started to go sour countries all over the world starting implementing these kinds of policies to "protect themselves" and international trade came to a grinding halt.

      On the other hand world trade treaties do recognize a right to retaliate to unfair trade practices. I don't know much about what's going on with the South Korean chips, but if they are in fact dumping them below cost then tariffs are permitted.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    4. Re:Well by Teancom · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As an employee of Micron, I do.

      As a stockholder of Micron, when a vested interest in seeing Micron able* to make a profit, I do.

      As a resident and homeowner in the Treasure Valley (Boise and surrounding area for non-Idahoans) where 12,000 people are employed by Micron, I do.

      As a resident of Idaho, where (supposedly) one out of every twenty people is employed by Micron, I do.

      As a resident of the US, where Micron is the *only* remaining US company producing dram, I do.

      As a guy who's done his econ. homework and realizes that there are two outcomes from the current situation: eventual failure of all but a couple dram companies and resultant (bi|mo)nopoly pricing *or* return to free competition and fair pricing, I do.

      But go ahead and demand 512Mb sticks of PC2700 for $30. I mean, after all, why should *you* care?

      *not gaurunteed, just able. As Appleton is fond of saying, we'll compete with any company out there, but we can't compete against governments.

    5. Re:Well by altstadt · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hmmm. You weren't around the last time this happened were you?

      The main result of the last RAM tarrif was to throw all of North America into a deeper recession than it already was, and the economy at that time was in much better shape then than it is currently. Everybody else in the world got cheap RAM except the US and Canada. We got all that nice expensive RAM that was produced by the one company in the US that still manufactured it. As I recall, the one protected company still went tits up.

      I guess it will all work out better this time around. Computers and embedded systems are too cheap right now, we really should double the prices so that we can keep electronics out of the hands of consumers. Y'all might want to ask your parents about how the computer industry <sarcasm>surged</sarcasm> during the Regan years.

      If a foreign country wants use their citizen's tax dollars to support our computer consuming habits, let 'em I say.

  5. Worst part is tariff goes directly to Micron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    as per US tariff trade law. Just the same way that US steel and lumber tariffs to US steel companies and US lumber companies respectively. Basically this means that the comsumer pays for the inefficiency of these firms, and those same inefficient firms get rewarded for their lack of productivity. Wacky system. Let he with the most lobbying money win.

  6. Tariffs are wrong... by Sri+Ramkrishna · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I see that the U.S. government is continuing it's slide into the corporate welfare government. Corporations don't need welfare and protection. If they can't compete, get the fuck out or find a new business plan.

    Maybe that means that Micron needs put a plant in Korea or something. I don't know. But as a consumer I want the lower prices, it makes me want to go and buy more memory. I don't see my government acting in my favor here.

    sri

    1. Re:Tariffs are wrong... by Dr.+Bent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, Corporate Welfare is wrong. And that's exactly what the South Korean government is doing. If you had bothered to read the first paragraph of the article you would know that the reason the Commerce Department is levying this tariff because it believes the Korean government is illegally subsidizing chip exports.

      This tariff is just leveling the playing field, but "U.S. imposes chip tariff in response to Korean subsidy" doesn't draw nearly as many eyeballs to the advertisements below the article.

    2. Re:Tariffs are wrong... by Tsian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So why, exactly, does the US like to beat the free trade drum?

      Because it's no tariffs on the products they export, but they can put tariffs on anything they decide deserves it.

      That isn't free trade.

      Personally, I don't want free trade. Most people don't want free trade. But if you are going to ram it down our throats you may as well actually let the populace see the full effect of it.

    3. Re:Tariffs are wrong... by 1010011010 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How is a company supposed to "compete" with South Korean government subsidies? The Korean taxpayers are subsidizing the low cost of Hynix products. Why *shouldn't* the U.S., and E.U., apply a tarriff to Hynix products? Should the U.S. and the E.U. allow countries like S.K. and companies like Hynix destroy their native industries? No. Should they subsidize their native industries in return? No. Should they apply a tarriff that negates the effects of the South Korean subsidies? Yes!

      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
  7. This is bad... by leviramsey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This gives Micron carte blanche to raise their prices by 44%, which while it may save a few jobs in Idaho, will ultimately cost even more jobs at US companies that buy memory (think the likes of Dell and so forth).

    Tariffs BAD! Free trade GOOD!

  8. The *US* complains of Foreign Subsidies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    US government imposes tariffs due to foreign subsidised business selling into the US market.

    Pot calls kettle black.

    The US government is the worst offender on Earth with subsidising industries to kill foreign competition.

    Is the free market being peddled by the US so hard to implement on their own shores? Do they hate others using their own tactics against them?

  9. Took a while to arrive by red_dragon · · Score: 5, Informative

    This tariff has been in the air for Hynix for a few months now. They're getting it easier than originally proposed: the tariff was originally 57%. Also, the US is not the only one sticking it to the Koreans: the European Commission smacked them with a 37% duty too.

    --
    In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
  10. Re:Extreme by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 5, Interesting
    You know, this got me thinking: Linux evangelists should not be lobbying non-US governments to adopt Linux. There is much more evidence of Microsoft impropriety than there is in the case of Korean SDRAM. So if Bush can levy a 44% tariff, all the governments in the world should impose a 50% tariff on Microsoft products. They could do useful things with that money.

    Just like we tax polluting fuels to encourage alternatives, this would have a very positive effect on "alternative" operating systems.

  11. Just like Canadian Softwood. by Red+Meanie · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The US is doing exactly the same thing to BC. If a non-US market is more competitive than an American producer, the American government slaps a huge tariff.

    Exactly the same thing happened with Canadian softwood lumber even though we have a supposed free trade agreement. It'll go to the WTO, the S. Koreans will win but that'll take years. In that time, their industry is crippled.

  12. Re:North Korea? by Bonker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Korea makes a huge amount of different kind of embedded electronics. For example, they export a huge number of the ATMs in use in the United States. If I remember correctly (and I may not) Chung Ho electronics makes a big perecentage of them. Glory brand ATMs are also manufactured in Korea, IIRC.

    You *will* be screwed by this ruling, regardless of where you live. Prices for various electronics will be going up.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
  13. Re:Worst part is tariff goes directly to Micron by afidel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Micron is NOT inefficient, in fact they are one of the more healthy memory makers, it's just that they can't compete with a government propped business that dumps chips below production costs. The EU is not very happy about Hynix either so it's not just the American's protecting a weak company.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  14. Hey, great... this worked so well the last time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From Cringely's "Accidental Empires":

    In 1975, Japan's Ministry for International Trade and Industry had organized JApan's leading chip makers into two groups-- NEC-Toshiba and Fujitsu-Hitachi-Mitsubishi-- to challenge the United States for the 64K DRAM business. They won. By 1985, these two groups has 90 percent of the U.S. market for DRAMs. American companies like Intel, which had started out in the DRAM business, quit making the chips because they weren't profitable, cutting world DRAM production capacity as they retired. To make matters worse, the United States Department of Commerce accused the Asian DRAM makers of dumping-- selling their memory chips in America at less than it cost to produce them. The Japanese companies cut a deal with the United States government that restricted their DRAM distribution in America-- at a time when we had no other reliable DRAM sources. Big mistake. Memory supplies dropped just as memory demand rose [OS/2 had created a need for RAM] , and the classic supply-demand effect was an increase in DRAM prices, which more than doubled in a few months. Toshiba, which was nearly the only company making 1 megabit DRAM chips for a while, earned more than $1 billion in profits on its DRAM business in 1989, in large part because of the United States government.

  15. This is another example of freedom and democracy by confused+philosopher · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually it is an example of pig headedness. If the US market breeds unfair competition, then it should rethink its business model instead of imposing large and/or illegal tarrifs.

    Did you know that the US thinks the Canadian Wheat Board subsidized farmers off the books, to sink American farmers, and so Canadian farmers are being unfairly abused by the American market.

    Or how about the illegal [as the WTO ruled] tarrif on Softwood lumber?

    Or how about the Mad Cow related Canadian beef ban, when the cow has ties to Montana, USA?

    Double standard? You bet.

    --
    Why slashdot? Why not?
  16. Gee where have I heard this before by whitecanuck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a Candaian living by our forest industry region this sounds exactly like the crap the americans gave us on our softwood.

    --
    I never realized how bad net porn was till I broke my arm
  17. Re:How about charge extra for labor? by SAN1701 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But, as I've said, it's no news. Recently, U.S. Gov. has put huge barriers against steel from others, more competitive countries (Brazil, E.U., etc.).

    U.S. preaches capitalism to the world, and, by the way, I have nothing against that. But, when others show themselves better than U.S. in some tiny economic niche, all the courageous, competitive dogma goes away and "protective tarrifs" come in place.

    Wasn't big american companies also subsidized? Airlines, Aerospace companies, etc...? What is so different with South Koreans?

  18. The Simpsons, from whom all wisdom flows... by runlvl0 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Why would a money-losing company cheat any more than a money-making company? Afterall, the money-making company is more likely to have succeded at cheating...
    Lisa: Dad, I think he's an ivory dealer! His boots are ivory, his hat is ivory, and I'm pretty sure that check is ivory.
    Homer: Lisa, a guy who's got lots of ivory is less likely to hurt Stampy than a guy whose ivory supplies are low.

    -- Simpsons [1F15] "Bart Gets an Elephant"
    --

    Carthago delenda est!
  19. background to the dispute by odin53 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not that I support the tariff, but it seems like slashdotters don't know the whole story, so let me explain.

    Hynix, for the last few years, has been losing a LOT of money, mostly due to the commoditization of DRAM and general Asian economic malaise. A couple years ago, Micron offered to buy Hynix. Hynix refused and instead kept taking out loans and otherwise attempted to stay afloat. (Hynix was bailed out a couple times after the first proposal. Some of these loans were from government owned banks; also, apparently, Hynix received some direct subsidies from the Korean government.)

    Last year, though, Hynix's bad fortune came to a head, and the company was on the verge of collapse. Micron again offered to buy Hynix, and after extensive negotiations, it seemed like the merger would go through. But for some inexplicable reason, at the last minute Hynix refused the offer, claiming it wasn't high enough. (I say inexplicable because there were no other buyers or potential buyers and Hynix was ridiculously deeply indebted -- in this situation (i.e., close to bankruptcy with a viable way out), refusing to merge was almost probably (at least in America) not in the best interests of its shareholders.) Some creditors tried to band together and force Hynix to sell itself (after the two bailouts, creditors were the biggest shareholders) but that didn't pan out.

    As Hynix's debt grew and grew and its financial state deteriorated (even after two huge bailouts) everyone knew that Hynix needed to get acquired -- even the government encouraged it. However, Korean politicians, civic groups and industry leaders outwardly opposed Hynix's acquisition by a foreign company; they wanted to figure out a way to keep Hynix Korean. From what I remember, a few months ago Hynix went through a restructuring/recapitalization and got some debt relief, but its financial prospects haven't improved.

    Hynix's survival is very, very strange given its circumstances, except when you realize that its survival is only due to tremendous political pressure to keep the company alive for a Korean acquirer. Otherwise, I think that financial analysts have uniformly agreed that Hynix needs to get acquired by somebody.

    For better or for worse, Micron had a strong argument. Hynix should probably not be independent right now, and is only so because of the direct (and indirect) help of the Korean government. Also, the overall effect has been really bad: Hynix's non-creditor shareholders have been screwed repeatedly in the bailouts (convertible debt is great for creditors, horrible for current shareholders); Korean government-owned banks have arguably wasted insane amounts of money by riskily throwing it Hynix; and now, prices for DRAM will artificially go up because of the tariffs.

  20. I'm not a potato farmer by tuxathon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I live in Boise, ID, headquarters of Micron Technology. Micron is the the largest private employer in Boise (and Idaho, for that matter), so criticizing the company is often risky business considering all the company loyals in town, as well as the clout they hold on local leaders. There has been almost no direct negative press about MU in the local newpapers or media.

    In January, Micron CEO Steve Appleton held a press conference and announced a "product misstep" was to blame for several quarters of steep losses. This "misstep" is Micron's leapfrog to DDR400, which essentially left them out of the hot market for all of 2002. This press conference was covered lightly, and the media certainly didn't dwell on it this revelation.

    By March, nearly everybody had forgotten about Appleton's admission of "misstep"ing the company into perpetual quarterly losses, and decided to go on the spin campaign. Another press conference was called to announce the company's losses were the fault of subsidized Korean chip maker Hynix. This time, every media outlet in driving distance was notified. U.S. Senator Mike Crapo was on hand to lend his support for the home-town corporation and blast the Korean government for propping up Hynix and running Micron into the ground. This story ran for several days in the local media.

    Appleton masterfully deflected earnings shortcomings from himself to the Koreans, and at the same time positioned Micron to be the beneficiary of "emergency" protection from the the US International Trade Commision, the body who deals with trade complaints from US companies. Interestingly, according to US trade law, it is not necessary for the ITC to have conclusive evidence of dumping/subsidies/etc to grant short-term protective tariffs. They need only have proof that there may be "unfair" trade practices taking place. In addition, the ITC may levy countervailing duties against foreign offenders if a company is harned, or may be harmed, by fair and legal trade .

    As with most protection, the consumer ends up footing the bill. The greatly inceased duty on Korean chips will drive up the price in the DRAM market and force US consumers to pay artifically high prices. Meanwhile, Micron recovers and Appleton saves face. These duties are NOT about Korean subsidies, they are about Micron trade protection wrapped in an All-American, patriotic, apple-pie-loving shell.

    Just remember who's paying for the "product misstep": YOU!!!

  21. Good article - "Enslaved by free trade" by Craggles · · Score: 5, Interesting
    If you are a subscriber to the excellent magazine "New Scientist", they have a great opinion article about this.

    The US is certainly very good at hypocrisy, I suppose that comes with diversity and arrogance ;)

    Here is an excerpt :-
    THE founding myth of the dominant nations is that they achieved their industrial and technological superiority through free trade. Nations that are poor today are told that if they want to follow our path to riches they must open their economies to foreign competition. They are being conned. Almost every rich nation has industrialised with the help of one of two mechanisms now prohibited by the rules of global trade. The first is "infant industry protection": defending new industries from foreign competition until they are big enough to compete on equal terms. The second is the theft of intellectual property. History suggests that technological development may be impossible without one or both.

    It seems the US and Britain were quite ruthless in their "infant industry protection".

    Shame the article is locked up in the closed New Scientist archive. Great resource, well worth the subscription cost.