ERICOPOLY Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Things are very odd at the zero bound, so who knows what it all means, but I can see deleveraging pressures continuing awhile yet. Yes, the zero bound is a very different picture. Today's 30 yr amortization schedule mortgages on the books will run-off at an accelerated rate due to the fact that a low-interest loan has a very high principle component. Take a loan at 4% with a 100,000 initial balance. It's first monthly payment has a $144 principle component and a $333 interest payment. Compared to a loan at 8% with a 100,000 initial balance. It's first monthly payment has a principle component of only $67 and an interest component of $666. So the debt runs off at twice the pace in the beginning days of a mortgage. So the household expenditures to service the debt today are night and day apart compared to those historical periods when the household debt to GDP was lower. Most of the household debt out there is mortgage debt. Not only are the household debt service ratios are historically healthy/normal levels today, but the absolute amount of the debt (which is historically high) is running off at a historically high rate. It's not anywhere near as simple as looking at a chart. The charts don't tell us how fast the debt is running off vs other periods in history. I'm in the industry and know that our group has seen a higher percentage of new originations being 15 or 20 year compared to the more traditional 30 year. Again, the 30 year amortization schedule is still the norm, but 15's are gaining popularity in our shop. Project that over the industry and the run-off rate to which Eric refers is amplified. -Crip P. S. Seeking to see what I can get for a more holistic view of this. I find the 15 to 20 yr mortgages to be risky for the borrower and for the economy. Just a like a business, cash flow is very important for a household. Suppose you lose your job -- at that very time you don't want a high monthly payment. It's like analyzing a business -- you want more positive cash flow. Paying a bit more interest to get a lower payment is sort of like buying yourself insurance against the "what if I lose my job" scenario. It also takes away their spending power and puts their savings into a low-return instrument (investing in their own low-interest mortgage). I just think a risk-averse household should go interest-only if possible rather than commit to such a high payment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Japan doesn't have a fixed currency either and they've suffered from deflation for the last two decades. Secondly, QE isn't inflationary for anything but risk assets which has the potential to transcend to the greater economy - but generally doesn't since most of the risk assets are owned by a handful of the wealthy that don't typically spend the money unless if they just bought a Picasso. Japan has not really printed that much money until the start of Abenomics? There could be a real argument made that QE has been absolutely pointless except in potentially driving asset bubbles and monetizing the government debt. When too much debt is the problem, QE is the only workable solution isn`t it? They have to print enough money to offset the negative money velocity. And ideally the government spends more money financed by the FED. That way you simply can`t have deflation. At the moment the FED is not printing money and the government is spending less, the outcome of that is what we see at the moment. I would disagree. Japan originally embarked on QE in 2001 - over the course of 4 years it purchased over $30 trillion yen worth of bonds. That was equivalent to about 2-3% of GDP per year being infused into the financial system where it sat as excess reserves. Before the U.S., and other countries, started regularly running deficits of 7-8% GDP after 2008, a consistent 2-3% was considered large. Sure, Abenomics was much larger, but policy makers are already beginning to doubt its efficacy and many have deemed it a failure. In the meantime, the Japanese currency has lost half of it's purchasing power and what do the Japanese have to show for it? A GDP level that has yet to exceed the high set in Q1 2014? The Japanese have basically had an implicit default - if you pay back all of your debt in a currency that is worth 1/2 as much, it's no different than paying only 1/2 your debt and writing off the other half. One of these is immediate - the other is drawn out. Both are defaults. So, if anything saves Japan in the future, it will be the default via a destruction of their currency and not the effects of 15 years of QE that has left them with a significantly higher debt burden. You say that QE is the only solution. That assumes it's a solution at all - I wait for you to provide evidence of it's efficacy. Secondly, assuming supporting data exists, let's compare two scenarios: 1) Managed delevering/default cycle where debts are slowly paid off or written off over the course of a decade or more. Growth is constrained, but the balance sheet of the American consumer and government is repaired and more responsible attitudes towards debt and personal finance likely emerge from the financial strains. Also, on the moral side, the highest costs are generally borne by those most responsible OR 2) Print $4 trillion dollars to buy government debt to monetize a deficit to help facilitate a transfer of debt from consumers to the government. Consumer balance sheets are moderately repaired ONLY if you assume they never have to pay the money back via higher taxes. Best case scenario, very little headway is made in balance sheet reparation and general attitudes are little changed. Also, on the moral side, almost the entire cost is borne by a later generation that had no vote in the matter nor did they contribute to the problem that their money is required to solve. Yea, #2 seems like the only workable solution... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frommi Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Yea, #2 seems like the only workable solution... I can`t really see how the US is able to default without creating a huge problem for retirees at the same time. And since this is a growing and voting cohort, its nearly impossible for the US to go that way. Of course printing money is a slow and long process, but its the one that can work without a revolution. Assuming we get a long period of deflation has the implicit assumption that the FED has no power/control anymore (at least over the currency). I simply don`t believe this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Yea, #2 seems like the only workable solution... I can`t really see how the US is able to default without creating a huge problem for retirees at the same time. And since this is a growing and voting cohort, its nearly impossible for the US to go that way. Of course printing money is a slow and long process, but its the one that can work without a revolution. Assuming we get a long period of deflation has the implicit assumption that the FED has no power/control anymore (at least over the currency). I simply don`t believe this. I don't think any defaults because "they can." They default because they have to. An explicit default and an implicit default are the same thing. All that changes is who pays for it and when. Also, I'm having a hard time understanding how printing $4 trillion to buy bonds in a bid to force interest rates to 0 so would-be retirees have to save 2-3x the amount of money they needed for retirement just 8 years before so that we can stoke inflation to destroy the value of those very savings doesn't seem like a real winning strategy with retirees either....but maybe that's just me. Also, if QE was really intended to print money and induce inflation, it's probably about the poorest mechanism one could come up with to do it. The Treasury could quite literally print $4 trillion dollars and pass it out at random and likely produce better inflation results than we've seen. Better yet, you could target it and only pay out to the bottom half of society - it's still $22,000 per individual on average. Somehow $4 trillion sitting on reserves of banks is better at inducing inflation/economic activity/dollar velocity/etc. than $4 trillion injected into the real economy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Things are very odd at the zero bound, so who knows what it all means, but I can see deleveraging pressures continuing awhile yet. Yes, the zero bound is a very different picture. Today's 30 yr amortization schedule mortgages on the books will run-off at an accelerated rate due to the fact that a low-interest loan has a very high principle component. Take a loan at 4% with a 100,000 initial balance. It's first monthly payment has a $144 principle component and a $333 interest payment. Compared to a loan at 8% with a 100,000 initial balance. It's first monthly payment has a principle component of only $67 and an interest component of $666. So the debt runs off at twice the pace in the beginning days of a mortgage. So the household expenditures to service the debt today are night and day apart compared to those historical periods when the household debt to GDP was lower. Most of the household debt out there is mortgage debt. Not only are the household debt service ratios at historically healthy/normal levels today, but the absolute amount of the debt (which is historically high) is running off at a historically high rate. It's not anywhere near as simple as looking at a chart. The charts don't tell us how fast the debt is running off vs other periods in history. A good set of points which I hadn't thought of, partly because I live in London where house prices have just kept going up so monthly payments (for a new buyer anyway) have not fallen with interest rates, and although the interest/principal ratio may have changed, the principal has risen so fast you don't pay off any quicker. And it's all floating rate debt...scary. But my point about the zero bound was more that I think it makes things very unpredictable. We've never been here before so we don't have any historical guide to how things play out. My *guess* is that the US continues on its current path until consumer BS's are fully repaired and wages are rising, which with fixed rate mortgages sets you up for a period of great growth after which government debt/gdp will look fine. But I can see deflation or inflation too. My base case is it's pretty stupid to try to predict, but there's no harm in protecting yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Also, if QE was really intended to print money and induce inflation, it's probably about the poorest mechanism one could come up with to do it. The Treasury could quite literally print $4 trillion dollars and pass it out at random and likely produce better inflation results than we've seen. Better yet, you could target it and only pay out to the bottom half of society - it's still $22,000 per individual on average. Somehow $4 trillion sitting on reserves of banks is better at inducing inflation/economic activity/dollar velocity/etc. than $4 trillion injected into the real economy? I'm instinctively anti-QE. I think it's better than a depression, but I'm not sure it stopped one, and if there wasn't going to be a depression then all the moral hazard and inequality it created was for nothing. The one thing I am fairly sure of is that it could have been done better. Instead of buying financial assets, I think the printed money should have been spent on infrastructure. That employs the poor and has a productivity benefit, rather than enriching the rich and blowing asset bubbles. The only downside I can think of is that, having bought bonds, the FED can contain inflation by selling them again (even if at a loss). They couldn't take the money out of the system so easily if they'd built infrastructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adesigar Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Gross Sees Global Economy Dangerously Close to Deflation http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-gross-says-global-economy-133347460.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james22 Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 David Stockman CNBC Interview: Tops In—–Next Comes An Epochal Deflation http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/david-stockman-cnbc-interview-tops-in-next-comes-an-epochal-deflation/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cageyone Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 Pretty convincing support for Prem's thesis from David Stockman! So are the key questions "when?", "how bad?" and "is FFH the best place to be?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dazel Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 ww.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-09/pricier-pork-pushes-up-china-s-cpi-as-deflation-threat-abates This another misleading headline...under it is "China's cpi lowest in 6 years!" 2009 that is...even with pork prices being up 16%! This is Fairfax thesis and the events are going unnoticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 China devalues by 1.9% - not huge, but significant in context of prior moves and change of mindset. What fascinates me about this is that I've read a number of forecasts of Chinese/Japanese competitive devaluations driving deflation in the West. I feel like certain elements of the deflation thesis are playing out as expected (currencies, commodities) but that it's not being reflected in the CPI numbers because heavy weights for things like rents. Although, owner-imputed rent is inflating a lot less than real rents from what I have read, and healthcare (inflating fast) is underweighted in the index, both of which are good for the deflation hedges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dazel Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 The china devaluation is the first in 20 years. Not unlike the Canary in the coal mine story everyone now knows that there is big trouble and they run for the exits. China has already had $800b in outflows this year. As Prem Watsa alluded to the cds' s experience when New Century went down in 2007...the domino's fell on sub prime and the Cds' portfolio at Fairfax began to sky rocket. The US and Europe both had deflation in the last quarter of 2014....the world still believed at that point that China would ride out their problems as did I. to some extent they still will but the surprise devaluation today shows us just how desperate things really are there at the moment. Businesses will not make the investments they were going to...projects will get cancelled as the $5 trillion in commodity wealth disappeared so will the projects that were to accompany that wealth and the growth in corporate earnings from China will get discounted.... Deflation comes from businesses and consumers doing nothing....they will wait for a better time to expand, buy that new car etc or go on that vacation...until prices come down. its like online travel....everyone knows that during certain times you can wait until the last minute to get 50% off on the trip (deflation). Other times you are competing to get there first to get the best price because demand is high and the trip will get more expensive as the rooms fill up (inflation). As you can see it is the anticipation of deflation (falling price) or inflation (rising prices).... The USD $ rise is relatively new and consumers businesses are now adapting...with China now proving that their GDP numbers are a off and they will no longer be driving up prices they will actually be bringing down prices globally it will change the masses buying habits...consumers will win in some cases but their employers may win or lose depending on what their business is. either way deflation looks very likely...it will last for awhile and then the world will print enough money to get out of it. right now the FED is stuck a they can't ease...so deflation looks unavoidable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 China devalues by 1.9% - not huge, but significant in context of prior moves and change of mindset. What fascinates me about this is that I've read a number of forecasts of Chinese/Japanese competitive devaluations driving deflation in the West. I feel like certain elements of the deflation thesis are playing out as expected (currencies, commodities) but that it's not being reflected in the CPI numbers because heavy weights for things like rents. Although, owner-imputed rent is inflating a lot less than real rents from what I have read, and healthcare (inflating fast) is underweighted in the index, both of which are good for the deflation hedges. I think the dollar strength is a more important going forward than is commodity weakness. Commodities are such a small part of the index - even oil falling by 50% didn't take us much lower in CPI regards despite the fact that it's literally used in just about everything. A strong dollar will affect the purchase of American made goods at home and abroad. It will also naturally lower the amount of international profits that a U.S. company makes. Lower profits + lower domestic economic activity + strengthening currency = deflationary environment...especially with debt loads like we have. The real key for a sustained deflationary trend in the U.S. again is another sustained hit to housing. Housing is nearly half of the CPI index. It would be hard to see any significant, sustainable deflationary trend if half the index isn't moving downward at least somewhat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 The real key for a sustained deflationary trend in the U.S. again is another sustained hit to housing. Housing is nearly half of the CPI index. It would be hard to see any significant, sustainable deflationary trend if half the index isn't moving downward at least somewhat. Yes - housing and assets in general. I find it hard to see a housing hit given that consumer/bank balance sheets are in much better shape. EDIT: unless rates rise. That's the most deflationary thing of all. Which is why I think we might get a deflation: if things go ok, rates rise, and I don't think things stay ok for long; but if they don't (which they never do, for too many years in a row), rates can't fall. Deflation both ways? But then I've been thinking this (and wrong) for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 China devalued by 1.9% and the Aussie is down 1.6%. Pretty close. Wow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 The real key for a sustained deflationary trend in the U.S. again is another sustained hit to housing. Housing is nearly half of the CPI index. It would be hard to see any significant, sustainable deflationary trend if half the index isn't moving downward at least somewhat. Yes - housing and assets in general. I find it hard to see a housing hit given that consumer/bank balance sheets are in much better shape. EDIT: unless rates rise. That's the most deflationary thing of all. Which is why I think we might get a deflation: if things go ok, rates rise, and I don't think things stay ok for long; but if they don't (which they never do, for too many years in a row), rates can't fall. Deflation both ways? But then I've been thinking this (and wrong) for years. It's not just about consumer balance sheets - it's about incomes too. Housing prices and rents can't continue to rise without an enduring rise in wages. We're not seeing that yet which will hold housing. If a slowing economic environment causes negative wage gains, even by a small amount, I think you'll see that creep into housing. Also, I'm not talking about a 10-20% decline in housing prices/rents. Even if it simply falls 1% a year for the next 5 years, you're going to get a pretty good deflationary print in the CPI with the falling prices of commodities, energy, and all imported goods. But if housing stays stable, or rises by 1% a year for the next 5 years, that's a pretty hard hurdle to overcome for the remainder of the index to pull down. We get close to $600 million for every 1% of deflation below the strike price in the U.S. We don't need the CPI to collapse by 10% for these to be wonderful investments. If we get just 2% below the strikes, we'll have more than made a great return on these swaps. I can understand everyone's frustration with the equity hedges - I certainly don't understand anyone's frustration with these swaps. It's such a low bar for success with the potential for an extremely high payout simply because everyone has faith that a room full of a dozen people can control the global economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 It's not just about consumer balance sheets - it's about incomes too. Housing prices and rents can't continue to rise without an enduring rise in wages. No, but we might be seeing the start of that with big corporations lifting bottom-end wages and minimum wages rising. If this feeds into other wage levels then we will see how QE+policy=reinflation. Other than that, +1! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 It's not just about consumer balance sheets - it's about incomes too. Housing prices and rents can't continue to rise without an enduring rise in wages. No, but we might be seeing the start of that with big corporations lifting bottom-end wages and minimum wages rising. If this feeds into other wage levels then we will see how QE+policy=reinflation. Other than that, +1! I'll believe it when the numbers show it. Real median wages haven't sustained upward momentum over the last 15 years despite periods of economic growth and minimum wage hikes. Obviously, nominal wages are the only thing that matters for CPI, but inflation has been tremendously hard to find even before the strong dollar so where is it going to come from after the strong dollar? I think real wages will be a relatively good proxy for nominal wages going in the near-mid term. I don't expect wages to be stagnant forever. I just don't expect the problem to magically fix itself anytime soon due to minimum wage hikes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary17 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 It's not just about consumer balance sheets - it's about incomes too. Housing prices and rents can't continue to rise without an enduring rise in wages. No, but we might be seeing the start of that with big corporations lifting bottom-end wages and minimum wages rising. If this feeds into other wage levels then we will see how QE+policy=reinflation. Other than that, +1! I'll believe it when the numbers show it. Real median wages haven't sustained upward momentum over the last 15 years despite periods of economic growth and minimum wage hikes. Obviously, nominal wages are the only thing that matters for CPI, but inflation has been tremendously hard to find even before the strong dollar so where is it going to come from after the strong dollar? I think real wages will be a relatively good proxy for nominal wages going in the near-mid term. I don't expect wages to be stagnant forever. I just don't expect the problem to magically fix itself anytime soon due to minimum wage hikes... I have my own theory.. and no real data to back it up , that we need to account for the fact that technology is replacing human labour... and this could affect wages, employment, etc. movement of stuff to the Cloud probably meant less manufacturing of paper- and general office stationary music / movies are now cloud based... we have self-checkout counters.... even for fighting a war we now send drones... Self-driving vehicles probably next - could have a very huge impact ! i know mining companies will be the first to do this in their own operation where insurance is not an issue. Interesting world to see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dazel Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Gary 17, excellent thinking... -i have seen the studies on this and you are dead on (comparable to the 20's innovation)...we are not going to see real wage growth in the U.S...Walmart yes..manufacturing No...oil production in the US was huge for employment as the Shale revolution were high paying jobs as were the water companies, steel pipe, trucking, housing and services etc that serviced the oil...to the trains that shipped it...these are huge losses that have not flowed through yet as everyone expected a rebound in oil...and US production was not cut it was expanded in anticipation of higher oil prices. Now the debt remains. -add to that low oil evens the playing field on global production of everything being shipped.... $100 oil for example was about 12% tariff on goods being shipped from China in 2008...this helped the U.S steel's of the world who were doing well in 2008 with high oil prices. -this will help lower end jobs greatly though as they need small deflation to survive in a low wage environment...and low interest rates are essential for everyones debt load... -Deflation not a terrible thing if you can control it...and keep it mild and this is what the world leaders have compromised on. This will create winners and losers. -cost of production of imports to the US will be in free fall... if oil stays here USD hold The winners US treasury and muni bond holders at the long end US dollar companies that can hold their price-Hershey was a huge winner in the 30's deflation Gold eventually any others? (I don't know if any other company besides Fairfax with deflation hedges) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary17 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 LOL, thanks ! i have no finance or economic background; just an observation as an engineer. US treasury and muni bond holders at the long end US dollar So if I am a Canadian holding a major US Bank should I do well ????? fingers crossed.... Gary 17, excellent thinking... -i have seen the studies on this and you are dead on (comparable to the 20's innovation)...we are not going to see real wage growth in the U.S...Walmart yes..manufacturing No...oil production in the US was huge for employment as the Shale revolution were high paying jobs as were the water companies, steel pipe, trucking, housing and services etc that serviced the oil...to the trains that shipped it...these are huge losses that have not flowed through yet as everyone expected a rebound in oil...and US production was not cut it was expanded in anticipation of higher oil prices. Now the debt remains. -add to that low oil evens the playing field on global production of everything being shipped.... $100 oil for example was about 12% tariff on goods being shipped from China in 2008...this helped the U.S steel's of the world who were doing well in 2008 with high oil prices. -this will help lower end jobs greatly though as they need small deflation to survive in a low wage environment...and low interest rates are essential for everyones debt load... -Deflation not a terrible thing if you can control it...and keep it mild and this is what the world leaders have compromised on. This will create winners and losers. -cost of production of imports to the US will be in free fall... if oil stays here USD hold The winners US treasury and muni bond holders at the long end US dollar companies that can hold their price-Hershey was a huge winner in the 30's deflation Gold eventually any others? (I don't know if any other company besides Fairfax with deflation hedges) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dazel Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-11/gross-says-treasuries-are-a-winner-as-china-exports-deflation i guess Bill Gross is reading our posts! maybe my interest is so high because my Pats have a lot at stake with Deflate-Gate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 It's not just about consumer balance sheets - it's about incomes too. Housing prices and rents can't continue to rise without an enduring rise in wages. No, but we might be seeing the start of that with big corporations lifting bottom-end wages and minimum wages rising. If this feeds into other wage levels then we will see how QE+policy=reinflation. Other than that, +1! I'll believe it when the numbers show it. Real median wages haven't sustained upward momentum over the last 15 years despite periods of economic growth and minimum wage hikes. Obviously, nominal wages are the only thing that matters for CPI, but inflation has been tremendously hard to find even before the strong dollar so where is it going to come from after the strong dollar? I think real wages will be a relatively good proxy for nominal wages going in the near-mid term. I don't expect wages to be stagnant forever. I just don't expect the problem to magically fix itself anytime soon due to minimum wage hikes... I have my own theory.. and no real data to back it up , that we need to account for the fact that technology is replacing human labour... and this could affect wages, employment, etc. movement of stuff to the Cloud probably meant less manufacturing of paper- and general office stationary music / movies are now cloud based... we have self-checkout counters.... even for fighting a war we now send drones... Self-driving vehicles probably next - could have a very huge impact ! i know mining companies will be the first to do this in their own operation where insurance is not an issue. Interesting world to see Broadly speaking I agree - there'll be a continued skilled/non-skilled wage divergence anyway. I am no Luddite, but I do wonder when we get to the point where machines can do most things (bar maybe the arts) better than humans...and what happens then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurgis Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Broadly speaking I agree - there'll be a continued skilled/non-skilled wage divergence anyway. I am no Luddite, but I do wonder when we get to the point where machines can do most things (bar maybe the arts) better than humans...and what happens then? We will need to provide means of living for 80%+ non working population. I don't think we are prepared for that at all (intelectually, spiritually, morally, economically, politically). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Broadly speaking I agree - there'll be a continued skilled/non-skilled wage divergence anyway. I am no Luddite, but I do wonder when we get to the point where machines can do most things (bar maybe the arts) better than humans...and what happens then? We will need to provide means of living for 80%+ non working population. I don't think we are prepared for that at all (intelectually, spiritually, morally, economically, politically). Quite. Unless we all just retire to the beach while the machines do everything. I'm surprisingly intellectually and spiritually prepared for that ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now