Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by VedantaTrader

  1. What is your thinking here? I mean what makes you believe the US will withdraw the stimulus too soon? Can you show me any evidence of a time when this FED withdrew expansionary monetary policy too soon? 2001-2004, they kept interest rates at 1% before raising them in 0.25% increments. They never raised them high enough in the cycle to curb credit growth...I m not saying your wrong, just would like to know why you think Bernanke will take away the stimulus anytime soon? I m actually a USD bull in the shortterm, longterm I m not. The Japanese example also shows that zero interest rates did actually cause inflation, just not within Japan. One must also look at the relationship 2002-2007 of a weakening Yen and rising asset prices, and the strong correlation when assets went down the Yen went up. The Yen was debased and did cause inflation in the global economy. With projected deficits in the US for the next 3 years at 2 trillion USD a year, and it will probably will be more, how is this withdrawing monetary and fiscal stimulus too soon?
  2. The only useless thing I see here is this post. To take this slant on it is to misuderstand Jim Rogers as an investor. He is one of the longterm variety. In this back in November 2007, he said he wouldnt buy oil at that time as he is not a trader...however why would you when you bought it at 10 USD in 1998?Also why would he buy gold today when he bought it 1998? If you actually knew Rogers you would know he never buys things when they make new highs? Also, I guess you think shorting all the investment banks back in 2007, icluding CITI and Fannie Mae was a bad choice as he didnt give a timetable when they would collapse? He covered in November in 2008 by the way... As for the persons comment about sterling, go back and watch it on youtube, what he did say was his prediction was not for this quarter or this year...If you are deflationist then how do you link your thread of thought with the other deflationists like Mish, Bob Hoye etc etc who say gold will increase in real terms?
  3. Ah yeah, Urban Dictionary: "A Spanish W*ank£r" Probably too busy looking for any negative property sentiment comments, that one could post profuse pornograhic smut and it would get through> Perhaps they have filter that censors comments with the words "overvalued", Bubble, 50% falls, spring bounce etc etc
  4. haha, yeah I wonder if that person is taking the piss. Reminds me of a scence from Phoenix Nights.
  5. Well, it depends on what data feeds you use and how much real time intraday markets you want or need. SierraChart in and of itself is the best one I have used for what it gives you and value for money. I have used pretty much all the others, including esignal pro-realtime, tradestation and I really prefer this one. They provide the software, however, they have data services from many sources which you need to get the data. I think I use service level 3 with seperate subscriptions to CBOT Mini, CBOT gold, silver, wheat, corn, soybeans and also I use Mytrack for London Stock Exc data for all stocks...and also Barchart for foreign exchange data. Plus historical end of day data for 1000's of other markets, including all the future exchanges, indexes, LSE, T-bonds, all commodities, very usefull all in all. These are all the realtime services I use...I reckon I m over £50 a month...The program is based on C++, and you can do just about everything with it, from testing and wrting simple indicators to building and backtesting fully automated trading systems. I reckon you if you wanted just historical data which is updated at the end of everyday you could get it for about £14 a month, which is great value for money. Or if you want forex also, around £15-20 per month. You can get a free trial by the way, so you should try it. The website is no bells and whistles, but don't let that put you off. Check this page out[/url.
  6. EDIT to ADD, not quite used to the new board yet. It does actually seem alot better function wise. If you right click the charts and hit view image then you ll see the full chart on a separate tab. Hi PP, yeah I have been keeping an eye on all the metals, and the gold/silver ratio also. So gold makes new highs. I wonder if this is or could be the bellwether for future problems in the economy or credit markets. With US T-bonds rising in price, the flattening yield curve and the gold price soaring it may be a signal. Remember back arounf the time Bear Stearns failed gold soared in a similar fashion as today, March 2008. It seems that gold is anticipates future economic problems with these abrupt moves up. The arrow shows the rise in gold before the train wreck of the summer and autumn of 2008. It might be something to keep an eye on. Here are two palladium charts. I don't trade the metal but I like to keep an eye on it. This is the weekly chart, where I like to define the trend, primary trend at least. The system signal is automated with the software placing the blue arrows to trade on the long side and the orange ones to trade on the downside. There are quite a few parameters however the indicators are not visible on the chart as the arrows keep the chart "clean" The system gave the long signal in mid february for Pa and the trend has remained intact. Next move to the daily chart. As the primary trend is up on the weekly, we only want to be taking longs on a shorter timeframe. This chart is quite messy, but hopefully it will make sense. On this chart we have volume, some resistance lines in red, and a keltner standard deviation bar overlayed on the volume. The very bottom indicator is a derivative from the volume and kelter overlay. This is really to smooth out the volume trend and remove the spikey noise, to see easily see where the volume reaches peaks and troughs and divergences between volume and price occur. Basically when the orange crosses over the blue line to the upside we have slow rising volume, and vice versa when the orange crosses the blue to to the downside. It all gives a clue to the future direction of volume. When it flatlines around the bottom at historically low volume levels, then we know volume is likely to rise again, and when it peaks we know volume is likely to fall. All in all, I think it does a good job of smoothing th volume trend with very few whipsaws and takes out the noise. Some points to note: Now since we have established the uptrend on the weekly, a useful strategy is to trade long in the direction of the price, when the volume indicator bottoms, or starts to move up. If you look at every touch of the bottom channel, volume was flat, but then started to rise as the orange average crossed the blue. A useful way is to trade in the direction of the price and volume. This strategy works nicely. Now if you look at the peaks between Feb until today the volume spikes have been decreasing in size. The spikes in volume have declined 12% between Feb and August. At the resistance at circa 300, there was heavy sell volume, and now we are moving up on low volumes...volume has fall 74% since the last peak. So perhaps we will reach the 330 mark before a sell off, and failing that next target will be 372...Volume is historically low. It will be interesting to see if volume starts to rise with price. Or will volume start to rise with a decling price. As the trend is up on the weekly chart, then for now we have to go with the trend. Of course we have to go with what is happening and react. I m not going to make a solid prediction on what might happen as it is easy to become dogmatic that way. It is ok for fundamentals, but with actual trading i think it is better to use price as the ultimate guide. However, if forced to take a bias, with a more than 50/50 either way, I think a strong move up is possible to 372, before a sharp move down. However, if volume contines to weaken and gets stronger on the downside and any indicators give sells the we ll go with that. Finally here is a clean daily chart with no channels and the system applying the buy signals with green arrows.. It uses slightly different rules for alerts than the weekly one and is more reactive. Even with the aid of the channel it has given some very nice buys...Remember the red arrows do not denote sells, as the prmary trend is up, so we will only trade in the long direction until that weekly trend changes, unless we get extremely overbought and go parabolic. I have hidden the actual indicators as I don't really want to post them on a public forum, however, if anyone os genunely interested discussing some methods then PM me... By the way I have been traded just applying part of the system I would use over palladium.
  7. Alright Weebobby, happy days,I sat with my mate on Sunday as he tried again and again to get on the site...I would actually love to go back to Glastonbury...I have nt got a ticket as yet. My bro works in the music industry so I ll wait and see as usually he can get us tickets in or on guest lists...but yeah should be a good one. No line up of course yet, but don't think that really matters with Glastonbury.
  8. I do get the feeling many people are setting themselves up for a fall. I have been saying all year that we will get single digit falls for a couple of years with a nominal bottom in 2011/12 sometime, and I will stick by that. The stockmarket it seems is a leading indicator for further house price falls and the FTSE is hanging up there although in the recent sell off was accompanied with very high volume. Once the markets roll over, then expect house prices to fall again. I have also been keeping track of the Uk economic indicators and some are turning negative again... These are the latest figures we have available month on month, consumer credit down £200 million, net lending on dwellings down £400million, public sector net borrowing came in at an awful £16billion for the month of August. In contrast the producer price index is up and the Core CPI is up also...and my bellweather is the GBP/JPY as a leading indicator is down heavily which is a sign of risk aversion... and today.... SHOCK FALL in Industrial Output UK industrial output fell unexpectedly in August, confounding analysts' expectations of an increase and casting doubt on the strength of the economy. It fell 2.5% from July, the biggest such fall since January, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said. The same measure of output was down 11.2% year-on-year, dashing hopes of a speedy economic recovery. Manufacturing output, which excludes energy production, fell 1.9% from July and 11.3% year-on-year. The ONS said there was evidence that factories had been ramping up production in July and then shutting down for holidays in August. Output was also hit by factories closing for maintenance. "August's dismal industrial production figures will dampen some of the recent optimism about the economy's apparent bounce-back," said Vicky Redwood, UK economist at Capital Economics. "A return to positive overall GDP growth in the third quarter [from July to September] now looks less certain." Call for stimulus There was a decrease in oil and gas production of 7.7% due to planned maintenance. But there were big rises in production of wood and wood products and transport equipment. Industrial production in the three months from June to August fell 0.2% compared with the previous three months and 10.4% compared with the same period last year. Motor vehicle production, which had given a boost to manufacturing figures in July, fell 2.6% in August. Earlier, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) announced that sales of new cars rose 11.4% in September compared with the same month last year, helped by the government's scrappage scheme. Also, the Halifax said that UK house prices rose for the third consecutive month in September and showed the first quarterly increase for two years. The Bank of England's policymakers begin their latest two-day rate-setting meeting on Wednesday, but are not expected to either change interest rates or their policy of quantitative easing. The British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) said the manufacturing figures showed that more money needed to be allocated to the quantitative easing programme. "The weakness in bank lending poses serious obstacles to a sustainable recovery," said David Kern, chief economist at the BCC. "We urge the MPC to increase the quantitative easing stimulus to £200bn and to take other measures aimed at increasing bank lending."
  9. Haha, for sure Nemesis... Like this for example...
  10. Well, I think I have settled this debate...I have a 2 year old nephew comes around to my house. So there always lots of toy balls around the house...I just lifted one of his little toy golf balls, plastic. I have an oak wooden staircase in the house, not carpet, so the ball has a good surface to bounce on...So I did a real life simulation of Belfast Boys analogy, just so we could put your tedious argument to bed,as you don't seem to realise it is an analogy...I dropped the ball on the first step, it went down the stairs bouncing down each step, and each bounce up never made it past the previous high...In conclusion, Belfast Boys analogy stands firm and stands up to scientific scrutiny...Your theory Spader has been proven wrong no less by a 2 year old and his ball...
  11. Exactly, the reason being that falling prices is an all together positive for society, however, deflation is a disaster when high levels of debt exist and when basically the whole economy depends on ever increasing debt levels to support the continuation of the boom. This is why it is seen as "bad" as it will expose the lie that it was built on, a severe period of adjustment characterised by unemployment, reduced business activity, failure of the malinvestments, bankruptcys increasing etc etc, this is what is seen to be bad, yet it is the necessary adjustment which is needed. However the media will link cause and effect in an erroneous way by asserting that unemployment and economic problems are the effect of falling house prices so it must be resisted to get the economy "back on track." However, hardly ever do they look or talk about the credit growth that caused the artificial boom in the first place. I reckon this is why it is seen as bad. Misguided yes, but it just shows how big the problem is when the basic fundamentals become ever more diffused and difficult to understand, even though they shouldnt be that difficult to understand.
  12. One only has to drive into Belfast along the M2 or M3 between 7-9am and see how heavy the traffic is to see that certainly there have been great changes in the demographics as you mention SP. Perhaps this heavy traffic is a symptom of this.
  13. For sure, you have a good point. However within a secular up swing or within a particular cycle that could last 2-3 decades it will have in my opinion an influence on the price of gold, if the demand for gold continues to grow. Your right it will not have a longer term impact on gold cyclicals like it would have on oil as there will be times when demand for gold falls...this is the nature of any money, and it is this characteristic that shows gold acts as money. In a period when the demand for gold drops, supply will not matter so much, but over the next number of years if demand surges then this will force prices up. If you look within past secular up swings in gold, there has been an inverse relationship between production and price. As price increases, production has been falling, and vice versa. Of course it is very hard to make projections, about gold demand and supply in the future. YOU mention real price should be down as supply has been ever increasing. However, population has also been increasing...The long term average of ounces of gold per capita seems to be around 3/4 of an ounce per person. So even though we have ever increasing supply, we also have more people. If within a secular up swing for gold lasting a decade or two the percentage of the population who own gold moves from 2% to 6%, then of course this large increase in demand will have an impact on the price, given that the quantity of gold available per capita has not changed greatly over the last 200 years, so a change in demand from 2% to 6% of the population in relation to ounces percapita say 100 years ago would have a similar influence on demand and real value of gold as today.
  14. Yet the largest falls in property prices came ain the period when bond yields were getting lower? I would rather say that low bond yields will be a symptom (not the cause) of falling house prices not rising house prices. If bond prices are rising and yields are going down this will be symptomatic of a very weak economy and in response to falling asset prices. We have had bond yields rising heavily since March yet in this period house prices have been rising...
  15. Quite Doccyboy, I remember you posted this a couple of weeks ago...TQ nightmare It seems very strange that this guy is having sleepless nights when all he has to do his contact the the developer and he will get the response the original poster has received. Somehow I think the poster is a property ramper, or he is not telling the whole truth... Another buyers experience...Nationwide don't seem to be part of the group of valuers the topic starter used. Ben’s apartment at the Titanic Quarter was worth £200,000 when he put pen to paper with Harcourt Developments when property prices were at their peak. “I paid a deposit of £20,000 to secure the apartment which is due for completion in November/December,†he said yesterday. “But now the apartment has been valued at around £135,000 and that’s the limit which the Nationwide are prepared to grant me for a mortgage. It leaves a black hole of more than £60,000. Other purchasers are worse affected than I am, with prices as high as £600,000 for penthouses. “The 100 purchasers in the group are being represented by Brian Speers of GMC Solicitors and we want a meeting with Harcourt Developments, without preconditions, to try and reach a compromise. We fear that they may hold us to the original prices and lead to some of us being declared bankrupt. Frankly, it’s impossible for me to garner the extra money and I don’t know what I’m going to do.†I m sure the solicitor would have advised them to contact Harcourt as first point of call also? The end of the article ends with The BT contacted Harcourts dev but did not receive a response. If things were as Steve66 said surely then Harcourts developers would be happy to tout this in the media. I smell a very large rat in the forum room.
  16. So yeah, taxpayers then have to pay these companies also.
  17. This is such as stupid debate. The writer of that quote needs an education in cyclical analysis. Also, the best know deflationsists such as Bob Hoye have been saying to own gold...you are one of the few deflationists that seem to be saying don't own any gold. Bob Hoyes point is that gold might not move much above $1000 USD, but it will increase in real value. If you take today the price of gold, and you take the start of the crisis back in 2007, what will buy you more of every asset? Gold, including USD, all other currencies, bonds, real estate, Sterling, Gilts, stocks, Commodities, oil, wheat, corn, insurance policys. Show me the maths that this is not true? If you are expecting deflation without credit stress then fine don't buy gold, so I assume you are expecting a nice unwind. Also no one is saying gold will not go down to 600-700 USD, but in the next 10-15 years you will be better off owning gold. Perhaps the USD will have a 2-3 year bullmarket during this deflation, but after that what? As an insurance hedge within this cycle in history gold is a sensible metal to own.
  18. 1 ina 4? Is this including all the people that work in the banking system?
  19. This is true, but things have not speedened up due to the digital world which was my original point...Gold I don't feel is a trade, and buying banks was a very good trade. I feel comparing the two though from my view point is not helpful. If people have just bought gold in the same day you bought banks shares yes you have a point. However, if you owned gold coming into this crisis, you can now buy 20/30* times as many bank shares with the same amount of gold as 18 months ago. Gold has increased in real terms greatly without actually moving up nominally. I would say if you can buy something 90% cheaper than 18 months ago that is not something to worry about...unless you are trading gold against bank stocks in the shortterm. Edit to add, well done for having the b*lls to buy them, I didnt at the time or now actually,not the major UK ones at least. Have owned Arbuthnott banking in the FTSE 350, and like the Asian banks such as Bangkok Bank, UOB and Standard Chartered.
  20. It is an interesting idea, but as you say it is just a theory, and one that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. You are laying the accent on efficient market theory which seems to be a theory for academics who write about it and teach it in universities, whereas successful traders constantly prove efficient market theory as false, which is probably why they are not sitting in a university lecture hall, and thats not denigrating any lecturer as of course the world is a better place with academia. Just an observation. Markets have been proven not to be efficient. However this graph of debt/GDP ratio tells a story...Debt/GDP ratio In the 1920's it took just 5 years between 1924-1929 for debt/GDP to go from 150% to 260%, and for the same credit growth to take place between as between 1924-1929 it covered a period of 1980 to 1995, another such period was 1995 to 2007, a mere 13 years to achieve the same credit growth that occurred in the 5 years between 1924-1929. Yet we have a world of digital communication. If anything this has been a much slower growth in credit that the 1920 period. IS this trend important you might ask? Well, if you look at the correlation between asset prices and credit growth the link between the two is very high. Right now we are actually increasing this ratio and not allowing the bad debts to liquidate, however it will unwind, and it could take a very longtime. The correlation between asset prices and this unwind is also very high, at least in real terms, assets lose value usually over a 10-25 year period. A Pricewater house Cooper accountant in charge of the Lehmans unwinding was on today saying it will take baout 10 years to unwind the Lehmans trades and assets. A friend who works as a lawyer to a financial firm in London told me this at Christmas also. Remember, they have not actually solved any of the problems that existed before the boom. If anything they have actually made them worse in the medium and longterm at the benefit of the short term. This is the man who has not got anything right, this is the man who has been one of the major architects in the boom and the cause of these problems... An Austrian view of the Great D was that it was the result of the credit growth that occurred between 1924-1929, not what happened between 1929 there after...The Keynesians on the other hand, and their text books focus on what happened after 1929. Yet it was the interventions which prolonged the crisis and made it worse. People were going hungry and the government were ploughing up crops to try to keep prices of agriculture up to prop up business. What sort of insanity was this? Cash for clunkers anyone? Destorying good cars to shift demand forward? Sound familar. People cannot afford houses, yet we are trying to prop them up by taking money from the productive areas of the economy? Also protectionism of the 1930's? Just google trade wars on google news any day to see the protectionsim surfacing now between China and the west...Smoot-Hawley anyone? Freedie and Fannie Mae had their genesis in the 1930's also. These are dangerous people to believe in, and history and the last few years have indicated this clearly, yet the media have trust in these people. And where are these billions coming from? What is backing it? Is it coming from real production? What blackholes are we pumping billions into? Why are we doing this? To offset prices of assets which will fall, and need to fall? This debt bubble will unwind, and has started, it took longer this time to build the same amount of debt than in the 1920's with electronics and house price crash.co.uk, it is very likely it will take longer to unwind, 24 months is not going to unwind what took 4 decades to build up, and it history has shown that it never take just 24 months to unwind. I just don't undwerstand how we are so complacent and in denial about this. edit to add, newspaper clipping from this day 1930... “While the recovery in business will undoubtedly be gradual, and characterized by confusing uncertainties, the fact remains that all indices that have pointed to revival in the past are now existent. As the stock market is usually some months ahead of trade, observers ... think there is a good chance that Wall Street will be the outstanding bright spot of the country during the winter months.” Today, Bernanke Bloomberg article...Bernanke Says U.S. Recession ‘Very Likely’ Has Ended
  21. Haha, now thats a question. Well, I have a theory that Keynesian policies are much easier to implement politically. These types of policies are great vote winners. If you think about it, and this is being said in broad brush strokes not exact figures, there is Paretos law or the 80/20 rule. If we take it that 80% of the money is owned by 20% of the rich, but conversely that 20% of the rich, the entrepreneurs the ones who create employment create 80% of the tax income also. From this loose theory we can assume that the majority of the electorate will be the 80% who don't have the money, these will be the people that will vote based on the popularist schemes that the government love to market in order to preserve their status quo. From this I can observe that our keynesian leaders will find it easier to implement vote winning strategies from these type of economic program.
  22. I agree, I think someone should send Mr TUC or any union or government official a copy of BAstiats, "That which is Seen and that which is not Seen"...This part is particularly apt I thought...The mistake the Keynesian always makes is to focus on that which is only seen. II. THE DISBANDING OF TROOPS It is the same with a people as it is with a man. If it wishes to give itself some gratification, it naturally considers whether it is worth what it costs. To a nation, security is the greatest of advantages. If, in order to obtain it, it is necessary to have an army of a hundred thousand men, I have nothing to say against it. It is an enjoyment bought by a sacrifice. Let me not be misunderstood upon the extent of my position. A member of the assembly proposes to disband a hundred thousand men, for the sake of relieving the tax-payers of a hundred millions. If we confine ourselves to this answer - "The hundred millions of men, and these hundred millions of money, are indispensable to the national security: it is a sacrifice; but without this sacrifice, France would be torn by factions, or invaded by some foreign power," - I have nothing to object to this argument, which may be true or false in fact, but which theoretically contains nothing which militates against economy. The error begins when the sacrifice itself is said to be an advantage because it profits somebody. Now I am very much mistaken if, the moment the author of the proposal has taken his seat, some orator will not rise and say - "Disband a hundred thousand men! do you know what you are saying? What will become of them? Where will they get a living? Don't you know that work is scarce everywhere? That every field is overstocked? Would you turn them out of doors to increase competition, and weigh upon the rate of wages? Just now, when it is a hard matter to live at all, it would be a pretty thing if the State must find bread for a hundred thousand individuals? Consider, besides, that the army consumes wine, clothing, arms - that it promotes the activity of manufactures in garrison towns - that it is, in short, the god-send of innumerable purveyors. Why, any one must tremble at the bare idea of doing away with this immense industrial movement." This discourse, it is evident, concludes by voting the maintenance of a hundred thousand soldiers, for reasons drawn from the necessity of the service, and from economical considerations. It is these considerations only that I have to refute. A hundred thousand men, costing the tax-payers a hundred millions of money, live and bring to the purveyors as much as a hundred millions can supply. This is that which is seen. But, a hundred millions taken from the pockets of the tax-payers, cease to maintain these taxpayers and the purveyors, as far as a hundred minions reach. This is that which is not seen. Now make your calculations. Cast up, and tell me what profit there is for the masses? I will tell you where the loss lies; and to simplify it, instead of speaking of a hundred thousand men and a million of money, it shall be of one man, and a thousand francs. We will suppose that we are in the village of A. The recruiting sergeants go their round, and take off a man. The tax-gatherers go their round, and take off a thousand francs. The man and the sum of money are taken to Metz, and the latter is destined to support the former for a year without doing anything. If you consider Metz only, you are quite right; the measure is a very advantageous one: but if you look towards the village of A., you will judge very differently; for, unless you are very blind indeed, you will see that that village has lost a worker, and the thousand francs which would remunerate his labour, as well as the activity which, by the expenditure of those thousand francs, it would spread around it. At first sight, there would seem to be some compensation. What took place at the village, now takes place at Metz, that is all. But the loss is to be estimated in this way: - At the village, a man dug and worked; he was a worker. At Metz, he turns to the right about, and to the left about; he is a soldier. The money and the circulation are the same in both cases; but in the one there were three hundred days of productive labour; in the other, there are three hundred days of unproductive labour, supposing, of course, that a part of the army is not indispensable to the public safety. Now, suppose the disbanding to take place. You tell me there will be a surplus of a hundred thousand workers, that competition will be stimulated, and it will reduce the rate of wages. This is what you see. But what you do not see is this. You do not see that to dismiss a hundred thousand soldiers is not to do away with a million of money, but to return it to the tax-payers. You do not see that to throw a hundred thousand workers on the market, is to throw into it, at the same moment, the hundred millions of money needed to pay for their labour; that, consequently, the same act which increases the supply of hands, increases also the demand; from which it follows, that your fear of a reduction of wages is unfounded. You do not see that, before the disbanding as well as after it, there are in the country a hundred millions of money corresponding with the hundred thousand men. That the whole difference consists in this: before the disbanding, the country gave the hundred millions to the hundred thousand men for doing nothing; and that after it, it pays them the same sum for working. You do not see, in short, that when a tax-payer gives his money either to a soldier in exchange for nothing, or to a worker in exchange for something, all the ultimate consequences of the circulation of this money are the same in the two cases; only, in the second case, the tax-payer receives something, in the former he receives nothing. The result is - a dead loss to the nation. The sophism which I am here combating will not stand the test of progression, which is the touchstone of principles. If, when every compensation is made, and all interests are satisfied, there is a national profit in increasing the army, why not enroll under its banners the entire male population of the country?
  23. All in all I think both sides have lost the art of a proper protest. I m not saying one is better than the other, just that we are as indolent. However, it may come back again in the next decade, everyone has a breaking point and if things get bad then we could reach that point where people say enough is enough. I do see signs of it, in how people are on the Radio in these phone ins. Bank lead, well I would include all that in the market.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.