Why Small CMHC Changes Will Affect Canada’s Real Estate

 Real Estate  1 Response »
Apr 302012
 

Americans, consider this your warning to look away. This probably won’t interest you, considering it’s about Canadian real estate and all. Hell, this probably won’t even interest most Canadians. Screw it, I’m writing it anyway. It’s my blog, and I’ll cry if I want to. I hear there’s a lot of porn on this here internet, so feel free to open up a new tab and go find some. My, uh, friend likes midget porn. Don’t judge me.

Anyhoo, there’s been a lot of talk about a real estate bubble in Canada, in between bites of poutine, sips of Labatt’s Blue and curling on TSN2. I’ve wrote about it, on at least one occasion. There is little doubt, at least in my mind, that certain markets have valuations that simply cannot be maintained. That’s fancy talk that means, in Toronto and Vancouver at least, houses cost way the hell too much. I blame you people, especially my American readers. For some reason.

The government of Canada does not want our housing bubble to pop anywhere nearly as badly as America’s. Our finance minister, Jim Flaherty, started taking steps to slow the market in 2008, as he ordered CMHC to stop insuring mortgages with 40 year amortizations and mortgages with zero down payments. This, combined with the global economic crisis, started doing what it was supposed to. Prices started declining, with the overheated markets leading the charge. But then, something funny happened. The trend reversed itself. Prices started going back up.

This was not ideal for the government. Soon, other entities started warning about a bubble. Every single Canadian bank of substance has issued a report warning about the impending doom. The only thing that varies is how much they think the damage will be. Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney has started issuing warning statements about the condo markets in “some parts of the country.” Certain bank CEOs have gone on record to request the government do something about housing.

It appears they’re listening.

Last week, finance minister Flaherty made one announcement and hinted at another. On the surface, these look like fairly innocent statements, but they could have far reaching impacts. Firstly, he announced CMHC would now be regulated by OSFI, rather than the minister of human resources. OSFI, for those of you who are unfamiliar with governmental acronyms, is Canada’s bank regulator. It’s the same regulator that, just a couple of months ago, issued a paper with all sorts of changes it wanted made to the mortgage market. Some proposed changes include:

  • Reducing the maximum value of a line of credit from 80% to 65% of a home’s value
  • Taking away interest only payments for said lines of credit
  • Eliminating cash back mortgages (a way for borrowers to get around the minimum 5% down rule)
  • Requiring home appraisals when you renew your mortgage
  • Stricter income qualification standards

Pretty fancy bullet points, huh?

When it comes to pricking the bubble, the OSFI isn’t screwing around. Now, there’s obviously no guarantee that they’re going to implement all their proposed changes to the market, but the timing of all this screams like a warning to the market. OSFI comes out with a report with mortgage suggestions all of a month before they’re put in charge of CMHC?

I guess what I’m saying is, if you’re looking to get a HELOC, (home equity line of credit) you better start with the applyin’.

The second piece of news is something Fleherty hinted at during an interview with the National Post’s review board. Take it away Jimbo:

Over time, I don’t think it’s essential that a government financial institution provide mortgage insurance in Canada. I think what’s key is that mortgage insurance is available at a reasonable cost in Canada. I think there is a role to regulate but whether we, the Canadian people, have to be the owners and shareholders of a financial institution to do this is a question. I don’t think it’s essential in the long run.

Wha? Is he really talking about the government getting out of the mortgage insurance business? Bitches be crazy, yo! Yeah, that’s right. I’m gangsta.

Private mortgage insurance actually exists in Canada, you just never hear about it. Genworth, the insurance arm of GE, holds about a quarter of the market, with a couple smaller players showing up and insuring a mortgage or two. CMHC dominates the mortgage default insurance business though, with their approximately 70% market share.

Can the remaining players pick up the slack if CMHC decides they’re no longer in the business? CMHC is nearing $600 billion in insured loans on their balance sheet. I’m not sure at what point you qualify to be a behemoth, but CMHC is large and in charge.

The fact that the government is going on the record with this idea should make you pause. The government is so concerned with our property market that it wants OUT OF THE BUSINESS OF INSURING IT. CMHC insurance has been around for decades, and it’s pretty much been a guaranteed money maker for the government. As long as there are less than 3% of people defaulting, CMHC makes money.

It’s been a terrific business for the Canadian taxpayer. The only reason Flaherty is hinting about getting out of the business is because the government is concerned about how large CMHC has become. Would you hint about getting out of a business you thought was terrific?

Anyway, if you’ve made it this far, just remember a couple things. Canada’s housing market is too expensive. If you live in Toronto or Vancouver, get out while you still have time. And, the government is clearly attempting to intervene in the mortgage market. Should the government do that, or should they let this play out?

 Posted by Nelson Smith at 4:20 am

Will Demographics Kill Real Estate Prices?

 Real Estate  3 Responses »
Apr 172012
 

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but you’re getting older. Sure, you may look all sexy now, but every single moment is one step closer to your death. Nobody will come to your funeral. Sorry in advance.

Most of the people reading this blog have more years ahead of them instead of behind. Chances are, you’re in your 20s or 30s, since it’s a proven fact anybody over 39 is bad at the internet. Most of us have either only bought a house over the past few years, or haven’t even gotten around to buying a place. Some people, mostly Americans, are choosing to rent for even longer than before, shy to pull the trigger because of the giant real estate meltdown of the past 5 years in most American markets.

And then, we have our parents. They’re old, they’re cranky, and a good half of them need ED pills for sexy time. Some are still in the workforce, others have already retired. Some have ample retirement savings, while most others are going to come up just a little short. It’s a good thing government pension plans exist, or else there’d be a lot of baby boomers getting ready for a retirement filled with macaroni and cheese and cat food. Yeah, I’d be bummed out too.

Because these people decided going on vacation and buying all sorts of stuff was more important than retirement, many of them will face some interesting choices as their meager retirement savings start to run out. How are they going to get the money they need to exist, once they really start feeling the effects of inflation eating away at their savings? For most retirees, there’s one easy answer.

They’re going to sell their house.

My parents live in a 1250 square foot house, with a full basement underneath. There’s 5 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, a pretty big yard, and all sorts of other amenities that people look for in a family home. When you’ve got a whole family living somewhere, having a basement to send the kids is pretty outstanding. So is having a big yard, so they’ve got room to do stuff outside, or so the dog has somewhere to take a dump. Their house served us all well when there was 4 of us living there, but now it’s just too damn big for just my parents and their fat cat.

If my parents’ house was in Toronto, they’d be sitting on at least a half million dollar piece of real estate. If it was in the right part of Vancouver, it’d probably be worth a cool million. If they had little in other savings, they’d almost be forced to sell their house at some point.

Baby boomers all over the place will begin to run out of money at some point. Many of them have done a woeful job of planning for their retirement. Most of their net worth is tied up in one asset, and that asset is really poor at spinning off cash flow. Unless they look at renting out space in it, which I think will become more and more popular as time goes by.

As I wrote about a couple weeks ago, the strategy makes all sorts of sense for retirees. By selling their house and renting, old folks can free up hundreds of thousands of dollars in non-performing capital and put that capital to use generating income. If you add pension income, retirees have a shot at this retirement thing, assuming they don’t live to 120.

Old people have been doing this for decades now. They don’t want a huge house, because a big house becomes a pain in the ass when you get old. Cutting the grass becomes a pain in the ass, and old Mildred doesn’t want to clean rooms that aren’t being used anymore. Because there really aren’t that many seniors, this hasn’t affected real estate prices. Baby boomers were right there to snatch up these awaiting properties. Go ahead and thank your horny parents, boomers.

The problem is, as this cycle starts to repeat itself, is there aren’t nearly enough boomer kids to buy all these places. The condos are there for boomers to move into – after all, we’ve experienced one mother of a condo boom. There are other factors that will restrict my generation from buying these properties – things like debt levels and general real estate affordability. As any economics 101 student can tell you, too much supply coupled with non-existent demand is not a good thing for prices of anything.

Is there a way to profit off this? If you’re a real estate investor looking to speculate a little, buying a condo in an adult only building could be an interesting way to play this theory. You’d have terrific tenants – they’d have cash in the bank, they’d be too old to party or smoke weed, and they’d have very little incentive to move. You’d just have to make sure the place has an elevator, and you could luck out and have tenants who stay for years at a time, until they end up in the nursing home. Slap on a coat of paint, and you’d be ready to start over with the next geezer.

Will baby boomers kill the value of my house? Here’s hoping not, but I’m thinking the inevitable real estate slowdown will be long and drawn out. Feel free to argue in the comments.

 

 Posted by Nelson Smith at 4:20 am

Why Don’t More People Get A Metal Roof?

 Real Estate  8 Responses »
Apr 132012
 

Hopefully all my readers are homeowners who have some sort of hard-on for the material their house’s roof is made out of. All my research indicates this is the case, so I think we’re good to go here.

My house is, without a doubt, better than your house. After all, I live in it, which automatically makes it 462% better. It has my aroma everywhere, which doesn’t smell the least bit like ass. My dirty underwear is strewn about, stepping on it is like stepping on treasure. Random boxes of potato chips are tucked away in random corners, snacks for when somebody comes over. It is the perfect house, which means some girl will undoubtedly mess it all up when she moves in. I will complain loudly, but will gladly exchange regular sex for scented candles and end tables.

(Aside: check out my post that gives you a peek inside my house. It has very little to do with finance.)

Back in 2008 when I bought my house, one thing that drew me to the house was the metal roof. Internet genies, can I get some sort of metal roof picture?

The previous owners kept all their paperwork on the metal roof, partially because the company who installed it guaranteed it with a 50(!) year warranty, and partially because they were a little anal and kept every single shred of paper that had anything to do with the house. Including, a handmade map of who lived in each house on the block and the names of their pets. I wish I was kidding about that.

Back to the roof. It was installed in 1996, meaning, if it was a girl, it would be annoying you with its constant texting and dressing like a slut. It still looks as good as the day it was installed. Even though most asphalt singles are supposed to have a 25 year life, most roofs only get about 20 years before they have to be replaced. For the sake of simplicity, let’s assume my metal roof will get 3 times the life of a normal one.

Normal asphalt shingles cost about $1.75 per square foot. Depending on which metal shingles you buy, you’re looking anywhere from $4.00 to $5.00 a square foot. Let’s take the median cost and assume $4.50. Let’s also assume labor costs would be the same for both roofs, since my crack internet searching couldn’t find a difference in labor costs. The cost of the metal roof is 2.57 times the cost of an asphalt one, so it looks like a slight savings to buy one right from the get go.

Thanks to inflation though, the savings add up even more over time. If a metal roof originally sets you back $10,000, that means a similar asphalt one would cost $3891. 20 years later, if inflation averages 2% per year, the next roof will set you back $5781, and in 40 years the third roof will set you back $8590. That means, 3 asphalt roofs will cost you $18,262 over the life of your home, assuming you stick around there for 60 years before you kick the bucket.

Saying that though, in terms of equal purchasing power, the two processes work out the same. If inflation means a $3891 roof turns into a $5781 roof over 20 years, that means the price of everything else should go up as well, including your income. If $3891 is 0.5% of your income now and $5781 is 0.5% of your income 20 years from now, is it really so bad to pay the seemingly inflated price 20 years from now?

Anyway, the cost is only marginally cheaper over the long haul, that’s the point.

A metal roof will be a selling feature if you do sell, but it won’t cause any buyers to mess their shorts or anything. It’ll also save you a little on cooling costs in the summer, since metal shingles do a better job at reflecting sunlight than asphalt ones do. Since metal shingles either interlock or are literally screwed to your house, you don’t have to worry about shingles blowing off during big-ass windstorms. But wait, there’s more!

I feel like the ShamWow guy.

For you eco-hippie type people, you’ll be happy to know that there are all sorts of metal roofing products that are made from recycled materials, meaning somebody’s old Coke can could be keeping your living room dry. They’re also more fire resistant than normal shingles, since asphalt ones are made from oil, which is just a little bit flammable. A metal roof is also lighter than a normal one, which would make your house faster if it raced other houses in the neighborhood.

For me though, the best part about getting a metal roof is only having to screw around with roofers once during your time owning the house. If you’re in the house you know you’re going to stay in, you only have to deal with getting a new roof once. Nobody really knows if their roofer is giving them a good deal or not, they usually have a number in their head and if the roofer’s quote is close to that number, they’ll pull the trigger. We’re bad at dealing with contractors, myself included. Minimizing those headaches, plus the cost advantages, makes getting a metal roof a pretty good idea. Sure, it’ll cost you more day 1, but it’s a good investment.

 Posted by Nelson Smith at 4:20 am

Your Paid Off House Is A Gold Mine

 Real Estate  1 Response »
Mar 292012
 

Real estate week continues here at Financial Uproar, and I can see you’re literally shaking in excitement, since I’m standing right outside your window. Yes, I was there earlier when you did those unspeakable things to yourself. No, I won’t put the video on the internet, providing you read the rest of this post. You’re welcome.

Today’s post is more directed at the older generation, so kids, get your parents right now, which will be easy if you still live in their basement. You might have to show them how to use the mouse, but it’s important they read this, especially if they’re living in a house that’s fully paid for.

Today, unless you’re lucky enough (or unlucky enough, depending on your perspective) to work for the government, your chances of getting one of those defined benefit pension plans are diminishing by the year. Companies just can’t afford to give them out to anybody these days, so I’m not liking your chances to get one in the future.

Retirement saving is hard too. People should be starting when they’re young, but most don’t take the process seriously enough. They go on vacation when they have unused RRSP contribution room. They decide they’ll max out the TFSA next year, since this year they’ll piss away thousands of dollars on clothes, partying, eating crap food and procreating. You can argue all you want about the benefits of having children, but there is no doubt Junior is going to cost you.

After years of this, many people wake up one day, realize they’re 45, and the figurative light bulb goes off. They need to start saving for retirement, or else they’ll be eating cat food and living in their kids’ basement. So they start to save. But since they didn’t start early enough, their efforts will most likely come up short. Even with aggressive saving during your 40s and 50s, accumulating a nest egg big enough for a comfortable retirement is difficult. Government pensions will help, but many baby boomers are looking at a shortfall come retirement time.

Luckily, I’m here with a solution that’s probably been suggested dozens of times before, but WITHOUT ALL CAPS ANGER. Kids, are your parents still around? Or did they fall asleep or maybe went to yell at some teenagers for being on their lawn? Hey, I can understand. I hate teenagers too. But they’re gonna want to listen to this.

Let’s use Calgary prices as an example. If you go back and check out that graph I included in Monday’s post, the average house in Calgary is worth about $400,000. A quick look on Craigslist found all sorts of 2 bedroom condos that rent for $1000 per month in decent parts of the city, so let’s assume that’s what you’d pay if you sold your house in favor of renting.

Any profit from your principle residence is tax free, so you’d get the full $400k from a sale. If you took that full $400k and invested it in a basket of preferred shares/high yielding stocks/bonds that spun off a 7% return each year, you’d make a cool $28,000 per year. You wouldn’t pay much tax on those earnings either, since they’re mostly in the form of dividends.

If you add the approximately $1500 per month you’d max out on for your Canada government pension and old age security payment, you’re looking at making $46,000 per year, which is easily enough to live on, even paying $1000 per month on rent. If you’re married, you can add an additional $18,000 per year when your spouse collects their stipend as well.

Once you factor all that in, a retired couple in Calgary could make $64,000 per year, all without touching their principle, and that’s not factoring in a nickel of cash flow from their retirement savings. Not bad for not planning for retirement. If our imaginary couple lived in Toronto or Vancouver, they could do even better.

If they do stay in their house, their income falls close to 50%, down to $36,000 per year. Renting will cost them $12,000 per year, but they’ll make an additional $28,000 in income. By selling their home, our imaginary retired couple comes out $16,000 ahead each year. Their grandkids are going to CLEAN UP at Christmas.

Naturally, Martin and Hortense aren’t going to want to rent. They’ll be concerned about the hassle of moving (which should only happen once, and they’ll have strapping young grandkids to do the heavy lifting) and the unfounded concern their new landlord will suddenly increase the rent dramatically on them. What landlord wouldn’t want a nice older couple who want to stay for years? Unless rents shoot upwards for some reason, most landlords aren’t going to risk losing good tenants by getting too aggressive increasing their rent.

A word of caution before everybody above 60 reads this post and goes and sells their house. This strategy is particularly enticing in Canada, the land of maple syrup, Alan Thicke and inflated real estate prices. Rents are cheap because home ownership rates have never been higher. A robust real estate market combined with low interest rates has driven our real estate much higher. Many baby boomers are living in a house that’s doubled or tripled in value since they bought it.

Meanwhile, in the United States, we have the exact opposite situation. Many baby boomers have watched in horror as their precious equity went down the toilet. Renting is all the rage too, since most Americans aren’t very good at buying things when they’re low. The exact opposite situation is happening down south, so the plan doesn’t work too well down there.

It’s silly to continue to live in a $400,000 house for free when you don’t have enough money to have the retirement you want. You worked hard to pay off that house, now let it work for you.

 Posted by Nelson Smith at 4:20 am

How To Short The Canadian Real Estate Market

 Real Estate  7 Responses »
Mar 262012
 

It’s real estate week here at Financial Uproar. HEY! I heard all those groans of disappointment. You can just take your bad attitude and go home. What’s that? You’re already at home? Never mind then.

The Canadian real estate market has officially entered crazy territory. Pockets of the market are starting to resemble the hottest parts of American real estate, from circa 2005. Check out this chart of prices in Canada’s largest 8 cities:

Mucho thanks to cphc.biz for this graph

Take a second there and scroll back up to that graph. The average price of a house in Vancouver has gone from $350,000 in 2002 to over $1,000,000 today. To put that into context, a million bucks is almost 15 times Vancouver’s median household income of $67,550. A million bucks is still an important milestone for people who are trying to accumulate wealth. A million bucks is the ransom Dr. Evil was looking to get for the ENTIRE WORLD, albeit in 1969. It is a considerable amount of money. And, even these days, it should buy you more than an average house in Vancouver.

Then, we have Toronto. Admittedly, Toronto isn’t quite as bad as V-city. A median home in the 416 area code will set you back a mere $600,000. That’s only 9 times 2009′s median income. Geez, Toronto is almost affordable in comparison. Just for the heck of it, let’s take a look at the income to home price ratio for other Canadian cities:

Calgary: 5.1
Edmonton: 4.35
Montreal: 3.4
Ottawa: 3.75

(Note: These are somewhat rough estimates using the graph and the info from the previously linked Stats Canada info on family incomes. But they are close enough to get the point across)

There are two areas in the country which are firmly into bubble territory. There are other areas that are also alarmingly high, (Victoria and Kelowna pop into my head) but I have no data to back up my assertions for those cities. So we’re just going to focus on Toronto and Vancouver.

Want more proof of a bubble? With a bubble usually comes all sorts of speculation. In the condo markets of Toronto and Vancouver, speculation is about as rampant as this blog is with unfunny sex jokes. Check out this video of a condo development in Vancouver that sold out in mere hours:

Did you notice the part where only 150 people showed up, yet they bought 450 units? All sorts of investors speculators are showing up at these presales, with no intention of ever setting foot in their unit. They put down their deposit, wait a couple of years until it’s built, and then sell to an awaiting sucker. If you put 20% down for your deposit and the unit goes up 20%, you’ve doubled your money.

If you combine that with record low interest rates, (2.99% mortgages anyone?) loose lending standards, (cash back mortgages, stated income mortgages) upcoming tightening of banking regulations (currently being tossed around by OSFI, Canada’s banking regulator) and further speculation of Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announcing further CMHC mortgage insurance restrictions, and you have one mother of a housing bubble, at least in TO and Vancity.

This is all fine and good, but you want me to get to the good stuff. How do you profit from this gigantic bubble popping? How can the average Joe play this obvious trend? And just how do I get Taylor Swift to unblock me on the Twitter? Sorry, that last one just slipped out.

I have some ideas. Allow me to present them to you in a fairly organized matter, with only a minimum of all angry caps.

The Banks

Canada has a fairly concentrated banking system. The Big 5 banks (CIBC, TD, Bank of Montreal, Royal Bank, Scotiabank) control something like 75% market share. They hold the majority of mortgages in Canada, with 2 out of every 3 mortgages held at one of the big 5. On the surface, this would be a good place to start if you were looking to bet on a collapse.

There’s only one problem. The banks are way ahead of you on this one. They aggressively have been unloading their mortgages in the secondary market, CMHC actually holds $300 billion worth of Canadian mortgage paper, along with insuring an additional $600 billion worth of mortgages. The big 5 banks have very little exposure to the high leverage loans that CMHC insures, and they’ve taken steps to minimize that exposure. They will weather the upcoming storm just fine.

Fringe Lenders

There are two in particular, First National and Home Trust, that are large, publicly traded, and strictly Canadian.

First National is primarily an A lender. (meaning it lends money to people with good credit and has CMHC insure the majority of their loans) It had a subprime division, but closed it down during the crisis of 2008-09, and hasn’t reopened it since. It will probably suffer with a decline in home values, but not substantially.

Home Trust is much more interesting. They specialize in B loans, lending to people with slightly bruised credit, self employed folks, and other unique situations that traditional lenders won’t touch with a 10 foot pole. (But a 9 foot pole? Totally different story) They will lend up to 85% of the value of the house, while CMHC insured loans go all the way up to a 95% loan to value ratio. Home Trust is currently trading near an all-time high, which is probably pretty good for someone looking to short it.

The bad news is, with these two stocks, you’d have to actually short them. Neither of them have call or put options, which can be the easy way to bet on a certain stock going down the crapper. Naked shorting is risky at the best of times, and if you did short these bad boys, you’d be responsible for paying the dividend on the shares you borrowed.

Home Improvement Retailers

One would think, once home prices start to stall in the 2 biggest markets, sales of home improvement retailers would suffer as well. Lots of house flippers, both amateur and professional, would exit the arena, since falling house prices are like Kriptonite to these guys. And where do these guys get their supplies from? NOT THE DUMP YOU MORON.

Both Home Depot and Lowe’s have exposure to Canada, but it’s irrelevant compared to their American business. That leaves Rona, which has already fallen close to 40% over the past year. The stock trades at a significant discount to book value and has been aggressively paying down debt. Sales are already suffering, an affliction they laughingly blamed on the weather.

I wouldn’t short Rona at this point, but it does have equity options listed on the Montreal Exchange, making it pretty easy to bet against the company.

REITs

The easiest way to short the Canadian REIT market is to buy a put option on XRE, the largest REIT ETF in Canada. I won’t get into details on the options market because I don’t understand much more than the basics. Using options to play the REIT market may be easy, I don’t think it would be that effective in shorting the market.

Most REITs have been around for many years. The majority of their property was more than likely acquired years ago, back when prices were much more reasonable. Plus, most REITs are exposed to the commercial real estate market, which is only loosely correlated to its residential cousin.

The biggest two REITs exposed to residential real estate are Boardwalk REIT and Canadian Apartment REIT. Between the two companies, they own 65,000 apartments across Canada. At first glance, they look like interesting shorting possibilities. Experts agree the condo markets of Toronto and Vancouver are especially frothy, and these guys basically own a whole bunch of them.

The problem is, as people lose their homes, they still need places to live. As we’ve witnessed in the U.S., everyone and their dog now recommends renting, ever since their housing collapse. Companies with a whole bunch of apartments acquired before the boom times may actually benefit as demand for rentals goes up.

Developers

Unfortunately, all the big players in the Canadian market are either privately held (Concord Pacific, Tridel Group) or subsidiaries of huge multinationals. (El-Ad Group) It’s a market dominated by privately held companies.

Terra Firma Capital and Tricon Capital both provide financing to condo developers, but they are both small companies that would be difficult to short. Google them if you want more info, you slacker.

If any readers know of any publicly traded developers, let me know in the comments. If there’s one of any substantial size, it may be the best way to play this.

Real Estate Brokerages

If the market slows to a crawl in the two biggest markets, that’s gotta be bad for the companies that sell this real estate, right?

Obviously, Century 21 and Remax are the two big boys, and they’ll be able to weather this storm, because they’re both primarily American companies. Canada’s third largest brokerage, Royal Lepage, is a big part of Brookfield Real Estate Services, a separate company from the monstrous REIT. It’s a relatively small company, with a market cap of around $130 million, and it pays an 8% dividend. However, it would most definitely be adversely affected by a real estate downturn.

Plus, a major downturn in Toronto and Vancouver would probably negatively affect the whole country, at least slowing down their sales. This is bad news for real estate agents everywhere, and bad news for the company dependent on their percentage on every sale.

Sell Your House And Rent

This is, by far, the best option out there, especially if you’re one of those baby boomers that keep asking me to fix their damn computers. (You know who you are) But, this post is already long enough, so you’ll just have to wait until Wednesday to hear more about that.

DUN DUN DUN! CLIFFHANGER ENDING!

 Posted by Nelson Smith at 4:20 am
 Older Entries
© 2012 Financial Uproar Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha

Switch to our mobile site