Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    The Growing Trend Of Longer New Car Loans

      Long-term loans for new and used cars are increasing

    While car sales are down, the number of people opting for loan lengths from 73 to 84 months is going up.

     Karl Kruppa, senior automotive solutions consultant for Experian said at a conference last week that the share of 73 to 84 months car loans has been rising over the past eight years. Through February of this year, 33.8 percent of loans were for terms longer than 73 months.

    Other numbers to take into consideration,

    • In the fourth quarter of 2010, three-fourths of new-car loans were between 73 to 75 months. Only 17.1 percent of loans were 84 months.
    • Fast forward to the fourth quarter of 2016 and 28.7 percent of new car loans reached 84 months.

    Why the sudden increase? It might be due to buyers seeing the small payments on an expensive vehicle, without taking into consideration fully about the length of the loan.

    More worrying however is the growing popularity of long-term loans on used vehicles. Most of these loans are being used on late-model vehicles - about 30 percent of 2016 model year vehicles are being financed with 73 to 84-month terms. But long-term loans are being used on vehicles that are five years or older.

    "You know what's kind of startling? There's actually 10 percent of [2010 model-year] used vehicles being financed at a term between 73 and 84 months. Longer terms are here, and more and more lenders are willing to do that," said Kruppa.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    I have to say with the cost of Auto's, buying a new one is understandable if like me you hold onto them for 10 years or longers. Offering them on used auto's older than 3yrs old is indentured servitude. 

    I can see future generations working to pay off their parents bills still. So Sad, So Stupid.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 minute ago, dfelt said:

    I have to say with the cost of Auto's, buying a new one is understandable if like me you hold onto them for 10 years or longers. Offering them on used auto's older than 3yrs old is indentured servitude. 

    I can see future generations working to pay off their parents bills still. So Sad, So Stupid.

    I think sometimes it makes more financial sense to buy used or CPO after lease vehicle and keep it for 6-7 years or longer instead of buying new and keeping it for 10.  The loans are slightly cheaper on the new vehicles but the amount of value some vehicles loose in 2-3 years is pretty significant.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    6 minutes ago, ykX said:

    I think sometimes it makes more financial sense to buy used or CPO after lease vehicle and keep it for 6-7 years or longer instead of buying new and keeping it for 10.  The loans are slightly cheaper on the new vehicles but the amount of value some vehicles loose in 2-3 years is pretty significant.

    I can totally agree with you in regards to most auto's. Come to full size truck or SUV, I want it new no other drivers with minimal mileage just like how my son bought it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As for that tidbit about 10% of 2010 MY cars being financed longer than 72 months-

    I think this skewed a fair amount by people with excellent credit and large income buying expensive items such as high-end sports/super/luxury cars. I also wonder if possibly vehicles such as RV’s/etc are figured into this.

    These vehicles are driven very few miles a year, and in some cases, may be appreciating assets, and as such, shouldn’t be indicative of a default bad statistic.

    I can tell you, people with low credit scores and buying cars with bad LTV’s are not getting 72 months on a 2010 year vehicle, let alone 84.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    43 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    I can totally agree with you in regards to most auto's. Come to full size truck or SUV, I want it new no other drivers with minimal mileage just like how my son bought it.

    You are right, I just compared used CTS which is loosing about half of its value in 2-3 years to an Escalade, Escalade is loosing maybe 15-20 percent.

    • Upvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    2010 MY vehicles being financed for 84 months?  That's gotta be social climbers chasing used money pits Benz S-classes just to have the badge. 

     

    It's not. Read my earlier post.

    It takes bullets credit to finance most 2010 cars for 84 months. We're not talking your run of the mill cars here. We're talking high-end stuff.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Just now, Frisky Dingo said:

     

    It's not. Read my earlier post.

    It takes bullets credit to finance most 2010 cars for 84 months. We're not talking your run of the mill cars here. We're talking high-end stuff.  

    I was mostly being snarky.  I didn't finance for 84 months, but my credit union didn't even ask the year of the car when I bought out the lease.  They do 84 month "second chance" financing as well, so that's not for people with good credit. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Just now, Drew Dowdell said:

    I was mostly being snarky.  I didn't finance for 84 months, but my credit union didn't even ask the year of the car when I bought out the lease.  They do 84 month "second chance" financing as well, so that's not for people with good credit. 

     

    But that's a credit union. Some credit unions will do crazy stuff that isn't a good measure of what your typical lenders- Wells Fargo, Chase, Cap One, US Bank, Harris, etc, etc will do.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My wife was talked into a 72-month car loan even though it was unnecessary. I objected outright, but their financial guy assured us that it was the same interest rate and gave us a 60 month figure if we wanted to pay it off sooner at no loss.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I find this whole 72-84 month car financing thing positively bizarre.  Not that many people keep brand new cars six to seven years.  I know the average transaction prices have gone through the roof in the last several years, but 72-84 months makes me want to ask people: ever consider a lease?  A 36 month lease can be good, and if you wish to buy you certainly can.  I know that leasing requires great credit, but cars depreciate over time.  They always have.  I forget where I read this but you should finance normally appreciating assets (such as a house, excluding 2003-08) and lease depreciating assets (such as cars, clothes and other more perishable items).  It's one thing if you buy a used car (especially a CPO off-lease model); it is quite another to finance a car (new or used) for seven years.  Of course, that leads me to the following question: how soon will your car be no longer underwater if the terms are for six or seven years?

    • Upvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I get that cars cost more and incomes aren't going up for a lot of people, and that people can keep a car for 10 years or more.  But if you have to go out to 75 or 84 months to get the payment where you want it, you are buying too much car.  Especially when a lot of people buy the car and finance in the sales tax and dealer fees.  Then they are underwater most of the loan.

    Interest rates are still low, so it isn't so much that some one is paying loads of interest on a 7 year loan (obviously its more than a 5 year) but someone would be much more financially healthy if they financed a car for 5 years and kept it for 10, rather than financing for 7 and keeping it for 10.  Having those extra years of no payment frees up a lot of income to pay down other debt or save for retirement.

     

    • Upvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There are so many good used cars out there that I really can't see going over sixty months on anything.

    9 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    2010 MY vehicles being financed for 84 months?  That's gotta be social climbers chasing used money pits Benz S-classes just to have the badge. 

    I think they were talking about 2010 model year cars financed in 2010.

    50 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    I get that cars cost more and incomes aren't going up for a lot of people, and that people can keep a car for 10 years or more.  But if you have to go out to 75 or 84 months to get the payment where you want it, you are buying too much car.  Especially when a lot of people buy the car and finance in the sales tax and dealer fees.  Then they are underwater most of the loan.

    Interest rates are still low, so it isn't so much that some one is paying loads of interest on a 7 year loan (obviously its more than a 5 year) but someone would be much more financially healthy if they financed a car for 5 years and kept it for 10, rather than financing for 7 and keeping it for 10.  Having those extra years of no payment frees up a lot of income to pay down other debt or save for retirement.

     

    Exactly, which is why I drive my cars until they are ready for scrap.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    we bought our taurus x (one year old used) in late 08 right at the time of the banking crash so we were forced into (kind of) a 6 year loan just to get a better payment.  We actually did pay off the vehicle and own it a little longer but then it started to nickel and dime us.  So being familiar with the six year loan I think that's about as far as i would go on a new vehicle.

    I do think too for some people it can be justified on say a 3 year old lease return CPO.  Under the premise that you truly believe you would keep the 3 year old car 6 years or more.  And some do.  It's just that you'll always be fully underwater on that.

    We're leasing currently, primarily because i didn't want to finance so much interest and tax.  I figured i would get the buy down lower than my loan balance after three years, and i would have the option to see if the lease end value is less than the buyout.  The bad part of leasing is you have a deadline, and you can risk getting caught in a situation where your credit tanks or something right when you turn the car in.  Or the interest rates go up.  Or you are forced to another vehicle you didn't really want.  And there is the miles thing.  The Malibu lease is a pittance so i don't feel like we are losing much on that.  The van lease feels a little like throwing money out the window but its much less than the idea of owning something with a Chrysler tag on it and losing that much more.

    I don't have anything ill to say towards people who lease to manage their depreciation losses better.  But i sort of think there can sometimes be instances where status seekers lease and i guess then it depends on how good a deal they get on the lease.  And there are other examples, like people who have leased Volts with great deals and then have tuned them in and GM takes the hit for 10 grand or more.

    Our Chrysler van lease is due in 6 months or so and I've actually been shopping prices on new vehicles.  I don't think I'll have the ability to buy anything new except for a Grand Caravan which is heavily discounted or maybe Pacficas as they sit on lots and weather the market of first year teething pains.  I think leasing or buying will be out of reach for say a new Traverse...the thing is vehicle prices being what they are even a 5 year old Traverse or Explorer with say 80,000 miles will still be like 25 grand.  And to finance that for 6-7 years is crazy i think.  To pay cash up front for one like that is fine i think, if you have that cash for that example.

    I've thought a lot about just scouring the nationwide car sites and finding the diamonds in the rough....the 8-10 year old Taurus X or Flex that some old geezers had and maybe has like 60,000 miles on it and its still only like 14 grand.  And save up more dough.  And maybe try for a warranty.  To avoid the servitude.

    When i sold cars it broke my heart that we would finance 9 and 10 year old cars for like 5 year terms.  Crazy.  Upside down forever.

    One of my biggest regrets when selling was we had a used Tahoe on our lot that was like 8 years old and high miles but was clearly well taken care of and spotless.  It was 8 grand.  Should have bought it.  Neighbor actually bought a used Suburban similarly in the same timeframe and every time i see him pull in and out of the garage i know he made a great find because his ride looks new and its probably a 2004 or something, and he could probably list it on Craigslist some weekend and sell it immediately and make most back of what he paid.

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Crazy prices are one of the reasons I've rethought the whole buying thing...

    I think at this point I am going to continue to run an older fleet of compact cars (best time might be now as no one wants small cars), then throw a compact SUV/CUV later..

    After being laid off, thinking adding a used GM car this year, then maybe an SUV next year if the economy doesn't tank bad....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm all over the map on what I want to do. Part of me wants to go with a new Tahoe lease, another part of me doesn't want that kind of payment since I'm having some misgivings about the economy in the next few years.

     I know I can find Rainiers, Bravadas, 9-7xs, and Envoys with <50k miles on them for $10k. I could theoretically pay cash for that and not have this 125k mile CR-V costing me $500 every other month. Put a new Android Auto head unit in and I'm set. I no longer put lots of miles on my cars, so I wouldn't see 100k in something like that for 5 to 6 years. Even if I did want to finance part of it, my credit union only charges 3% interest on used cars and doesn't ask questions about the year of the car.

    • Upvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't know how many of you guys have kids, but one of the main reason to get a newer car is safety.  It is been proven many times that cars older then 10 year old are not even close to the safety level of the more modern cars.  And I am not even talking about electronics, structural strength is on a complete different level.

    My wife drives our family car and to me personally it is important that she would have car no older then 10 years, preferably newer.

    • Upvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    I'm all over the map on what I want to do. Part of me wants to go with a new Tahoe lease, another part of me doesn't want that kind of payment since I'm having some misgivings about the economy in the next few years.

     I know I can find Rainiers, Bravadas, 9-7xs, and Envoys with <50k miles on them for $10k. I could theoretically pay cash for that and not have this 125k mile CR-V costing me $500 every other month. Put a new Android Auto head unit in and I'm set. I no longer put lots of miles on my cars, so I wouldn't see 100k in something like that for 5 to 6 years. Even if I did want to finance part of it, my credit union only charges 3% interest on used cars and doesn't ask questions about the year of the car.

    I have real misgivings about the economy also. Going through the same thought process myself.

    38 minutes ago, ykX said:

    I don't know how many of you guys have kids, but one of the main reason to get a newer car is safety.  It is been proven many times that cars older then 10 year old are not even close to the safety level of the more modern cars.  And I am not even talking about electronics, structural strength is on a complete different level.

    My wife drives our family car and to me personally it is important that she would have car no older then 10 years, preferably newer.

    There are a lot of advantages to a newer car for sure. Safety is a big concern-My 21 year old daughter drives a 2005 Mazda 3, I cannot wait for her to get something newer and safer.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    just personal experience..

    got a 5Y loan on my mazda when i bought it...

    I refi'd almost a year later to 66m and 1.76% Less.  Over the past 2 years I had made 5 months ahead payments (was on track to pay it of in the original loan time)... this was good cause of my job loss, but planning to start one next week at more than 2x the pay i had been making. 

    • Upvote 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 minute ago, loki said:

    just personal experience..

    got a 5Y loan on my mazda when i bought it...

    I refi'd almost a year later to 66m and 1.76% Less.  Over the past 2 years I had made 5 months ahead payments (was on track to pay it of in the original loan time)... this was good cause of my job loss, but planning to start one next week at more than 2x the pay i had been making. 

    Congrats on the new Job!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    21 minutes ago, loki said:

    just personal experience..

    got a 5Y loan on my mazda when i bought it...

    I refi'd almost a year later to 66m and 1.76% Less.  Over the past 2 years I had made 5 months ahead payments (was on track to pay it of in the original loan time)... this was good cause of my job loss, but planning to start one next week at more than 2x the pay i had been making. 

    Awesome, congratulations on your new and better paying job! Always good to make more money.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 hours ago, loki said:

    just personal experience..

    got a 5Y loan on my mazda when i bought it...

    I refi'd almost a year later to 66m and 1.76% Less.  Over the past 2 years I had made 5 months ahead payments (was on track to pay it of in the original loan time)... this was good cause of my job loss, but planning to start one next week at more than 2x the pay i had been making. 

    Congrats on the better paying job! Send some of that over here!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    8 hours ago, ykX said:

    I don't know how many of you guys have kids, but one of the main reason to get a newer car is safety.  It is been proven many times that cars older then 10 year old are not even close to the safety level of the more modern cars.  And I am not even talking about electronics, structural strength is on a complete different level.

    My wife drives our family car and to me personally it is important that she would have car no older then 10 years, preferably newer.

    i witnessed the end of an extremely brutal accident the other day.  the victim was in a late 90's corolla.  I think he would have fared much better in a newer rig.  To be honest, apart from seeing blood streams run down his face, I am not sure if he was conscious and going to make it.

    With kids, yes, the safety factor increases.

    11 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    I'm all over the map on what I want to do. Part of me wants to go with a new Tahoe lease, another part of me doesn't want that kind of payment since I'm having some misgivings about the economy in the next few years.

     I know I can find Rainiers, Bravadas, 9-7xs, and Envoys with <50k miles on them for $10k. I could theoretically pay cash for that and not have this 125k mile CR-V costing me $500 every other month. Put a new Android Auto head unit in and I'm set. I no longer put lots of miles on my cars, so I wouldn't see 100k in something like that for 5 to 6 years. Even if I did want to finance part of it, my credit union only charges 3% interest on used cars and doesn't ask questions about the year of the car.

    i like that with these national used car search engines, it means you can more easily find gems like those.  And with reliability history and internet forums, you can know more about what you are getting into with older vehicles.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Every week or so, Autotrader emails me when one of the 4 I listed above comes on the market with the specs I want.  There are plenty of deals out there, so I'm not in a rush to pull the trigger just yet. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      The State Fair of Texas began last week and truck manufacturers were out in force with new models to tempt consumers in the largest truck market in the U.S. Both Ford and Ram Trucks rolled out new luxury trims of their pickups - Ford with the Limited and Ram with the Longhorn Southfork. Both trims can easily reach $100,000 which to some is pushing it. But marketers at the truck manufacturers tell Automotive News they don't know where the ceiling is on how much consumers are willing to spend.
      "It's hard to guess how big the market is. I don't think trucks have found a ceiling yet. You get customers who want every bell and whistle," said Todd Eckert, Ford's truck group marketing manager.
      "For us, it is not about the dollar amount. It's about meeting the needs of the customers. We see an opportunity in the marketplace to bring the Limited trim to Super Duty. We know customers will demand it."
      Luxury models are in demand and truck manufacturers are having a difficult time keeping them in stock. For example, more than half of Ford's F-Series Super Duty trucks sold are the high-end models - Lariat, King Ranch, and Limited.
      As there is no ceiling yet, manufacturers are considering going even further. Sandor Piszar, Chevrolet truck marketing director said they have found a group of customers that are willing to pay "for a bigger, more luxurious and more capable truck."
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Automakers have been downsizing their engines and adding turbochargers to improve fuel economy while retaining power from larger displacement engines. But is there a point where this trend doesn't make sense anymore? Volkswagen believes that time is coming very soon.
      "The trend of downsizing is over," said Herbert Diess, Volkswagen's chairman.
      "Emissions tend to go up as engines get smaller."
      This is due to smaller engines needing to work much harder to produce the power figures of higher displacement engines, which in turns causes more fuel to be used. Currently, small displacement engines do very well in the European fuel economy and emission tests. But the test results have come under intense scrutiny as they don't match up to real-world tests. In a few years, the European Union will introduce new procedures that include tests in the lab and real-world. The new tests could put this trend at a standstill.
      Diess said they would continue to offer the turbocharged 1.0L three-cylinder and 1.6L turbodiesel, but wouldn't go any smaller in the future.
      Source: The Telegraph

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      We're getting close to entering the seventh month of not having a fix for Volkswagen's cheating TDI engines in the U.S. A couple weeks back, a Federal judge in California gave Volkswagen a deadline of March 24th to provide a definitive status of a fix. But Volkswagen might not have the answer the judge or affected owners want.
       
      In an interview with German newspaper Wolfsburger Allgemeine Zeitung, Volkswagen brand boss Herbert Deiss said it could take months before Volkswagen and U.S. authorities come to an agreement.
       
      "I think that we have a good chance to reach an agreement with the authorities in the US in the coming months," said Deiss.
       
      There are a couple possible reasons for Deiss' response. First is that Volkswagen still doesn't have another solution ready. As we reported back in January, Volkswagen's first proposal was rejected by CARB due to it being "incomplete, substantially deficient and fall far short of meeting the legal requirements to return these vehicles” to compliance. Volkswagen has been hard at work on a new proposal since then. There has been talk this new proposal will include a buyback program.
       
      The second reason comes down to money. Volkswagen knows that it will be facing large fines from various regulators, along with the massive costs in terms of fixing vehicles and dealing with lawsuits.
       
      Source: Wolfsburger Allgemeine Zeitung, Reuters

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      The State Fair of Texas began last week and truck manufacturers were out in force with new models to tempt consumers in the largest truck market in the U.S. Both Ford and Ram Trucks rolled out new luxury trims of their pickups - Ford with the Limited and Ram with the Longhorn Southfork. Both trims can easily reach $100,000 which to some is pushing it. But marketers at the truck manufacturers tell Automotive News they don't know where the ceiling is on how much consumers are willing to spend.
      "It's hard to guess how big the market is. I don't think trucks have found a ceiling yet. You get customers who want every bell and whistle," said Todd Eckert, Ford's truck group marketing manager.
      "For us, it is not about the dollar amount. It's about meeting the needs of the customers. We see an opportunity in the marketplace to bring the Limited trim to Super Duty. We know customers will demand it."
      Luxury models are in demand and truck manufacturers are having a difficult time keeping them in stock. For example, more than half of Ford's F-Series Super Duty trucks sold are the high-end models - Lariat, King Ranch, and Limited.
      As there is no ceiling yet, manufacturers are considering going even further. Sandor Piszar, Chevrolet truck marketing director said they have found a group of customers that are willing to pay "for a bigger, more luxurious and more capable truck."
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
    • By William Maley
      Automakers have been downsizing their engines and adding turbochargers to improve fuel economy while retaining power from larger displacement engines. But is there a point where this trend doesn't make sense anymore? Volkswagen believes that time is coming very soon.
      "The trend of downsizing is over," said Herbert Diess, Volkswagen's chairman.
      "Emissions tend to go up as engines get smaller."
      This is due to smaller engines needing to work much harder to produce the power figures of higher displacement engines, which in turns causes more fuel to be used. Currently, small displacement engines do very well in the European fuel economy and emission tests. But the test results have come under intense scrutiny as they don't match up to real-world tests. In a few years, the European Union will introduce new procedures that include tests in the lab and real-world. The new tests could put this trend at a standstill.
      Diess said they would continue to offer the turbocharged 1.0L three-cylinder and 1.6L turbodiesel, but wouldn't go any smaller in the future.
      Source: The Telegraph
  • Posts

    • And READ my post.   *On one hand you say and SUV like your friends Infiniti is perfectly fine for hauling stuff because all you need is a tarp and a vacuum.   *On the other hand you say that this cannot be done with a Suburban for a different set of reasons.   If you don't the issue I have here, then perhaps we need to move on from this because we are not going to see eye to eye here if you don't that issue.   Again, vehicles like the Hyundai Santa Cruz do have multiple uses for multiple types of people. You just happen to not be one of them but you were never interested to begin with. I, on the other hand, am very interested in it and that bed length is the LEAST of my worries.
    • For shit like that I'd hire a landscaper, who would haul such content in a dump truck or trailer. 
    • You going to hand-shovel a ton & a half of wet stone into the back of a Suburban, trying to tarp the carpeted bottom & plastic sides of the interior to keep it from getting torn apart? Really? Re-read my post- people don't put LOOSE material of any considerable volume in a vehicle like a Suburban. Is it physically possible? Sure - but does it happen? But a lawn mower or a potted shrub or a few bags of mulch- a roofed SUV could handle as well as a 4-ft bed trucklette. The overlap in cargo capability of a 4-ft bed and a mid-size SUV is a LOT more than between a Suburban and a full-size pickup.  
    • So while a tarp for your friends Infinite was okay, is not okay for a Suburban? That makes zero sense and that is the double talk I was talking about here. What you just said about the Suburban can be applied to the Infiniti and it actually makes a case for the Hyundai in the process. Again, being hung up on the bed size caused this. 
    • Everything else (and a buttload of excuses by you) aside, I do find it amusing how you think bags of mulch don’t gets holes in them and leak everywhere like they tend to do. Quite frankly you have tried to play it both ways by touting Full size trucks on one hand while trying to say that SUVs are better suited for light work (they are not in this case) than the Santa Cruz while ignoring the fact that the SUV argument applies to full size trucks. This all started because of your “problem” with bed size which, quite honestly, seems to be your problem and your problem alone here but not everyone sees it as a problem and the positives have been pointed out in spades.     And I live in NC and have ZERO use for a snow blower. Thanks for playing though Balth but please don’t try and act like gas spillage inside a vehicle isn’t a issue (it is). Whether someone goes electric or not is 100% irrelevant and you are deflecting with that statement. And again, all of those efforts your Infiniti boy makes to accommodate loads in his SUV could by 99.9% mitigated and simplified by just having a small bed with which to carry those things without the follow up cleaning and tarp shaking lol. Seriously, stop trying to equate your needs with others here (or dropping your “friend” as an example that actually supported the need for something like the Hyundai).
  • Social Stream

  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...