Peppy Ads – “Buying a Home Is Like A Sport. Meet Your Coach. Win The Real Estate Game.”




Screen captures of banner web-ads displayed at The Vancouver Courier website, 14 Apr 2012

Reminiscent of:
“Real estate is like a sport here.”
– Tracie McTavish, president of Rennie Marketing Systems, quoted in Businessweek, 24 Jun 2010
“At a certain level, in Vancouver, real estate is a sport.”
– Bob Rennie, CKNW 980AM, Vancouver Radio, 9am Friday 16 Mar 2012

Yeah, ‘Coach’, RE is a ‘sport’, and when the ‘game’ gets ugly, we’ll stop using these playful metaphors for what is a very serious business.
Try selling RE, or RE related services, using these slogans in Ireland or Spain.
– vreaa

52 responses to “Peppy Ads – “Buying a Home Is Like A Sport. Meet Your Coach. Win The Real Estate Game.”

  1. It’s your life and your future. It’s a game.

    • Okay, sure, point taken. You can argue philosophically that ‘it’ (life; everything) is all a ‘game’ when it comes down to it, agreed.
      However, I’m sure you’ll at the same time agree that rew does not intend to evoke that gravity when they use the metaphor.

      • Paul Streppel

        A person with dominant planetary energy along the north-south axis; the Medium Coeli (north) and the Imum Coeli (south), is said to have ‘gravity’. If that energy is along the horizontal axis, east-west (AC-DC), the person is ‘magnetic’. Find your vertex-antivertex and if you have planets their, you’re said to conduct ‘electricity’. Metaphors are what they are. The Sedin twins are electric, yours truly is magnetic.

      • I should have closed with a /snark tag, maybe? 😉

      • “planetary energy”

        Whether this is satire or not, a wonderful addition to the blog.

      • I’m rather enjoying the astrological analysis. Honestly, as good a predictive method as any other.

    • Point still valid, though.

    • 20-somethings are used to games with 1-ups. In RE, the only 1-up is bankruptcy.

    • spreadthenews

      “It’s a murky Monopoly game. Thanks to strict regulation in China, Chinese real estate investors look off-shore for capital gains. Our wild open market attracts investors from everywhere, warping the local supply and demand equation, helping push middle class residents out to the suburbs or into crushing debt.”
      Would be great to see this story go national:
      http://www.vancourier.com/opinion/Chinese+investors+shutter+Vancouver+neighbourhood+while+apologists+racism/6468126/story.html

      • It is already National. I am reading it. That is proof and I LOVED the article today. I would say more but this system keeps putting my comments in moderation. Too long maybe. If I keep em short and Tweety they almost always go through…..like this one 🙂

      • Happy face aside (how the hell did that thing appear in my comment?) I am so damn mad about what is happening in Vancouver I could spit. Really pissed off. Lets all hope sane heads take a hard look soon.

      • It is not just Vancouver anymore. Our regulators need to look seriously at acting now as both Toronto and Montreal go to the ledge. Last year it was all just a “haha” big joke as Vancouver went parabolic (hey, maybe this bubble theory will damage the economy….maybe not…..who knows, eh?) but now it is the real McCoy and we have to stop screwing around and get serious before we end up like Spain. This is NOT funny anymore. We are in deep trouble in this country and that is widely recognized by the IMF, World Bank, our domestic think tanks, the media and a growing awareness amongst the general public. All we need to stop the nonsense is a clear signal from above. I most strongly encourage the Bank of Canada to lay down the law here and raise rates 25 basis points and to suggest a repeat of that medicine again in three months. Talk is not working anymore. Only money matters. That is what the public responds too.

  2. Shelter – the number one human necessity according to my survival training courses – should never be “a game”.

    • I think Maslow had a few things to say on the topic. Food, shelter and water were all on the bottom of his pyramid of needs. They are the most basic requirements of survival and so it is fair to think we respond to those from our primitive minds. It hardly matters that there are so many alternatives. I am thinking it is hardwired into us already to operate with a jungle mentality even when the topic is highly complex. They say real estate is the most emotional of subjects. I wonder if it is because our rational thinking turns off as instincts turn on and our survival genes turn the need for security into a blood sport.

      • Farmer,

        Allow me to indulge you in a quote from the wisest man (a bartender) I once knew:

        “Humans are plenty of fun to be around when they have food in their bellies, a nice warm house to stay, and plenty of drinks. However, take away any of these things, and they become the most vile of creatures.”

        We’re seeing that already, where do you think the hockey riots (originating mostly from the young) come from? Say what you want, but the baby boomers for the most part have denied my generation reasonable/stable housing for family formation. I’m sorry, but renting a 500 sq. ft. box that takes up half my income isn’t a viable alternative.

        Of course, leave it to the hypocritical elders to tell me I should be grateful for what I have in my 500 sq. ft. box because I could me living in a 3rd world country. What’s funny about this condescending argument, besides the fact it comes from a generation living in 3000 sq. ft. McMansions, is that I’ve actually been/lived in what many would consider 3rd world countries. While the families I visited may not have televisions, I-Pods, Internet, etc, they seem to have a lot more living space than me; along with a small plot of land to grow their own food and maybe even raise a few chickens. And this isn’t strictly in the country side – often these are what I would consider urbanized areas.

        Of course the boomers will then ignorantly argue if I give up the the Internet, I-Pod, televsion, etc. I should then be able to afford a modest Canadian house. We’ve all done the math on that – and to be quite frank it doesn’t add up. I haven’t had a television in 5 years. I recently switched to an “emergency line” telephone service that was a part of an I-Phone package deal (much cheaper than $40 a month landline). As for the Internet? Tried the “no Internet” experiment for a year and discovered my income started to suffer due to all the lost opportunities.

      • I hear you Don. I can well imagine you feel as though you were born at the wrong time too because what should be normal for people in your age group, having families, nesting etcetera, seems like someones elses reality.

        You might even wonder how can you live in one of the wealthiest cities/communities in the world and still find that the normal expectations of life are unattainable while those in abject poverty seem to carry on with a usual life cycle, get married, have kids and buy a home.

        Those who bought in years ago are no help either. My best suggestion is to ignore them because they are all operating on bad information that does not apply anymore. Their excuses, intonations of why you should participate or perish, blaming the kids who are getting punished the most as if all this is their fault….are just a waste of breathe. Not worth hearing either.

        Fact is, you are getting cheated out of the best years of your life if you try to live in compete in this real estate shark-pool we call Vancouver. To try to fight this is an utter waste of time. The enemy (debt and leverage) is overwhelmingly powerful. You must retreat and take cover until a better opportunity presents itself.

        Sometimes the best thing to do is just pack up and refuse to participate in the insanity. It will end in good time, don’t worry about that. One thing on your side is that you will be here to buy back in when the market bottoms.

        All is not lost. If you missed the run-up to todays madhat top then aim to be amongst those who will participate on the next long cycle by getting in when fear of housing hits its peak in the next few years.

      • Farmer, I find your comments to be very wise.

        Are you able to share some information about your background? I’m curious what sort of educational / professional experiences underlie your wisdom.

        Thanks for any information you’re willing to reveal.

      • Joe_Blown_Away_By_High_Housing_Costs

        I agree with Jeff Murdock that Farmer’s comments are generally very wise. In fact, I enjoy Farmer’s comments more than any others on this blog.

        That said, I actually disagree with part of Farmer’s advice to Don. Farmer said: “One thing on your side is that you will be here to buy back in when the market bottoms. All is not lost. If you missed the run-up to todays madhat top then aim to be amongst those who will participate on the next long cycle by getting in when fear of housing hits its peak in the next few years.”

        Really? Is this all young people today have to hope for??? Are we doomed to repeat RE bubble/bust cycles over and over again. You mean, after the RE crash we” be right back to 2001 pre-bubble territory, with RE prices set to take off once again to the stratosphere? That is a very depressing thought. It just confirms my belief that it is wrong to treat housing as a commodity to be bought and sold, to be valued for exchange values as opposed to use value. Even after the RE correction, there will be no relief because at the end of the day our homes will still be commodities valued more for their profit potential than for what they mean to our families and communities. So after the RE crash you all are predicting, it will be a “great time to buy” because prices can only go up. I can’t take anymore of this.

        I actually think it is unethical to profit from housing. As someone pointed out, housing is one of Maslow’s essential human needs. We all need homes in order to raise families and function in society. Any time someone profits from housing, that profit comes about because someone has been excluded from the housing market due to high prices. I have personally experienced the deleterious effects of high housing prices. I have witnessed other people be displaced and torn apart from friends and family because they can no longer afford to live in their neighbourhoods. These stories of displacement are the flip side of the coin of all the RE profiteers. So I hope you can sleep well at night when you sell your homes and cash in on the millions. It’s ill-gotten gain and it’s immoral in my books. RE profits should be donated to charity because you didn’t actually work for it and it came at others’ expense and suffering.

        So I think it is bad advice to tell someone to wait out the RE market, wait for the prices to crash so you can then buy in when prices are low and ride out the next bubble so you can cash in at the next peak. Advising people to participate in a repeat of the insanity we have witnessed in Vancouver over the last decade and a half is bad advice, IMHO. It’s only good advice if the only thing that matters is self profit maximization and to hell with morals and ethics.

      • Joe -> Excellent post, good points; very foresightful.
        You’re implying that all participants, bull and bear alike, should examine their involvement in the entire ‘dance’ that is causing the problem; wise thoughts.
        We agree with you regarding the seeming futility of the mindless cycles. Whatever ‘system’ exists, it has to be able to deal with the percentage of the population that will demonstrate and act on their greed. The biggest problem causing the global and local asset bubbles over the last 10-20 years appears to have been governments mispricing risk. Perhaps all that is necessary is that the ‘system’ should ensure that those who demonstrate greedy behaviour must bear the full risk of that behaviour.

      • Joe_Blown_Away_By_High_Housing_Costs

        vreaa: Thank you. I want to respond to your proposed solution: “The biggest problem causing the global and local asset bubbles over the last 10-20 years appears to have been governments mispricing risk. Perhaps all that is necessary is that the ‘system’ should ensure that those who demonstrate greedy behaviour must bear the full risk of that behaviour.”

        I have to admit, it is hard for me to understand exactly what this means. My sense is that vreaa and others on this blog are economists– ‘mispricing risk” sounds like economist speak to me and my eyes start to glaze over (I mean that respectfully). I am more of a sociologist. The problem of high housing prices in Vancouver is something I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about — from a sociological perspective. One of the things I appreciate most about this blog is that I learn a lot from hearing how economists think about the same problem.

        I assume what you mean VREAA is abolishing CMHC mortgage insurance. The truly free market solution would be to get the government out of the business of insuring mortgages. Under these conditions, the RE bubble likely never would have formed because banks would not be lending money to marginal borrowers knowing that eventually housing prices have to come down. But if we think back to the 1940s and earlier –before we had CMHC mortgage insurance– there were a lot of problems with housing back then. It was hard to qualify for a mortgage, interest rates were high, amortization periods were very short (I believe 5-10 years, if I’m not mistaken). Canada was a country of renters because working class people couldn’t get mortgages from banks in an environment without CMHC insurance. But we had very poor quality rental housing. People lived in overcrowded slum housing. We don’t want to go back to this.

        That is not the solution that I favour (although it probably would be better than what we have now). As I have admited before, I am a socialist. I see the problem as treating housing as a commodity and privileging exchange values over use values (marxist concepts right there). So the solution would be to de-commodify housing, at least to some extent. I am not a full blown solialist, I believe in some role for the free market. So my solution would be to set up a socialized housing system, much like our socialized health care system. I am talking about public housing. Let’s have big supplies of public rental housing for families and low income individuals. Let’s make public housing that is attractive and desirable to live in. Let’s make public housing that is open to the middle class (as opposed to restricting it to the very poor–or restricting it to drug addicts as in Vancouver’s recent supportive housing approach). Let’s make housing that is on the free market have to compete with public housing. I am a middle class average income earner looking for a home to raise my family–let’s make renting public housing a meaningful option for this demographic. In this environment, we can have a parallel system of speculative free market housing without the deleterious social effects this blog has detailed. This is what they do in Hong Kong where 50% of housing is public housing and the other 50% is speculative free market housing. Those displaced by the free market have priority for public housing. To me, that is the best solution. Then the real estate schmucks can play their specker game to their hearts content and it won’t really affect people like me because we would have public housing to turn to.

        I recommend reading John C Bacher’s book Keeping to the Marketplace: THe Evolution of Canadian Housing Policy. It explains the formation of CMHC and mortgage insurance and the choices that policymakers made in Canada in the 1940s.They went with CMHC mortgage insurance because they wanted to create a country of homeowners because this is better for capitalism. Renters are harder for capitalists to control. But policymakers didn’t have to go this route. They could have gone with a system much more like I just described. Sometimes people think the alternative to what we have now is soviet-style block buildings for public housing. It doesn’t have to look like that. There is something in between the extreme perverted ‘free’ market we have now and outright socialism. We need a mix of quality, desirable public rental housing and market ownership housing.

      • Good points, Joe. I too believe in social equity however I am not socialist by a long mile so I won’t be able to go along with you on that train of thought.

        My comments only acknowledge that booms and busts are an inevitable part of life. I can only suggest ways to negotiate around them when they appear as they inevitably do.

        That’s life. It is not fair to everyone. That is why two billion people on planet earth live on less than two bucks a day while other people come here and cry they can’t have a million dollar crack-shack on the West Side.

        Some of them have such a screwed up perspective. It is really beyond belief to me some days. I bite my tongue and read but don’t answer. We have terribly high expectations in this country of ours. We have a sense of entitlement that would disgust people in the Third World. Go there and tell them about your life. They smile and go along with you and then out of the damn blue just burst into tears. I have seen it.

        You want life to be fair? Then give away your money. Take up a cross.

        You can probably appreciate I am not all that sympathetic. In any case, I don’t think it matters what political environment these kinds of boom/bust cycles occur under as we can easily see they just keep occurring.

        I won’t even pretend to understand why Capitalism, Socialism, Fascism, Communism (or even the modern command-driven politics in China that attempt to bridge all of these philosophies) continue to create almost identical boom/bust cycles.

        Same outcomes, different political crib notes. Can you tell me why?

        So I won’t apologize if you think my advice is not good. Like you, I cannot fix the world. I do not entertain any ideals of doing so. There is no treatise sitting on my kitchen bureau filled with utopian idealism. We will just do our best to get through what the world throws our way.

        It is in your best interests to make an effort and profit along that path if you can. You are born into a part of the normal business cycle that will work for you or it will work against you. You can change the world or you can deal with what is sent your way.

        Why would you do otherwise? Just don’t complain about it. Most people have it worse…..a lot worse. You just can’t see it from a basement window in Vancouver.

  3. entry fee for the “game” is impossible for many
    never was very good at sports
    maybe should have played more Monopoly as a kid

  4. A dichotomy of planetary energy, signs and circumstances. That ad may appeal to some and not to others. In Western astrology the Moon rules Cancer: the home and family. The Sun rules Leo: the speculator. Pity the ape or lift the veil? House 2 rules money, values and possessions, and the opposite, House 8, rules other people’s money, sex and death. When a person has lots of energy in Sign or House, (represented by planets in that area), ‘relief’ is by going to the opposite side of the zodiac. Take note, bubblemen and women. Was there not 7 visible planets in Aquarius January/February 1962, at the peak of the baby boom? Do you find ‘relief’ reading and responding to this ad? The astrology marketers are counting on you.

    • I don’t understand astrology at all. Not that long ago everyone was talking about an asteroid that was sure to destroy earth in 2012. Did it miss and just keep going? Have not heard much about it lately.

      • Paul Streppel

        @farmer
        The best I can come up with. Utilizing a chart formation:
        Much to the glee of the uninitiated the hyperbolic comet Elenin appears to have put Astrology/Astronomy in a Bear Trap.

      • Ok. That’s pretty funny. But is it the end of the world as we know it? You were also mentioning an alignment of stars/planets shaping up soon that was significant in many ways. I was curious about the date of the alignments.

      • Paul Streppel

        @ cattle
        you can lead them to water, but can’t make them drink

        @ farmer
        I’m looking mostly at the month of June for alignments that portend a whole rash of emotions, and hard actions. I’ve mentioned the position of Uranus, at 8°Aries16′ on about June 18 (6th month,18th day), the anniversary of the 1929 crash, the planet that rules sudden changes, revolution, rebellion…
        This same planet is exact square to Pluto a week previous, and a week previous to that Venus occults the Sun. Also during June, Jupiter exits Taurus, and enters its detriment, Gemini. Taurus is the money sign, and Jupiter is the money planet. Is it any wonder we will have completed the 5th wave (elliot) blow off top in our favorite topic here?

        Flaherty and Carey and other financial crack dealers can say what they want, it’s the Sherpa’s and the knowledge of the stars that will guide us.

      • So June 18th thereabouts? Glad you mentioned Elliot Waves. OK, so you are thinking along the same lines as me now. I know way too many guys who invest by planets. I have ignored it all my llife but oddly enough, bad things happen on some key dates. Perhaps it is because so many believe in them. I don’t even pretend to know how or why and it is a big mystery to me. Now I pay more attention though.

      • Paul Streppel

        @ Farmer,
        Monday, June 18, 2012
        12:01 am, Hong Kong time
        Uranus, 8°Aries16’31”

        12:01 am, London (UTC)
        Uranus, 8°Aries16’52”

        12:01 am, Vancouver
        Uranus, 8°Aries17’16”

        careful about calling me out on sloppy posts

      • Hunh? I never called you out on any post. I never said you were sloppy either. Are you getting me mixed up with someone else because that last comment makes no sense to me.

      • No matter what predictive data series you are using, VIX, entrails, whathaveyou, it’s critical to be on guard for confirmation bias.

  5. “Buying a Home Is Like A Sport”
    “Slot Machine Is Like A Sport”
    “649 Is Like A Sport”

  6. I think the problem with calling real estate a sport, at least in the Lower Mainland, is that many participants don’t honestly believe anyone can lose. At least in the traditional sense, a sports game involves a winner and a loser (often many losers and only one victor). Who loses in real estate in Vancouver? Only the people that sit on the sidelines, if you believe the pumpers.

    • Agree with that Rolo. Everyone loses in this game. That is why it is so damn crazy. Down in the States there have been hundreds of bank failures. People like to pin blame on banks but when they are victims too it is not so easy anymore. In the very long run, the only people who seem to have come out on top were those same old boring bunch of savers who are suffering to this day with negative real rates. Everyone else is going bust but those guys are getting their reward by having the pick of the litter for a small fraction of the bubble highs.

      And who can hate a really good sale when you have wads of cash on hand?

    • Rololo -> Very good point.

  7. Buying a home is like a sport, eh? You know, that advertising line is just an attempt to make this lunatic market seem like a big game. The ad minimizes the seriousness of what is actually taking place. You could almost be lulled into a sense of complacency reading it. Yeah, it’s just a sport. No worries, man. Just relax and play. It will all be OK in the end.

  8. Renters Revenge

    “The Roman arena was technically a level playing field. But on one side were the lions with all the weapons, and on the other the Christians with all the blood. That’s not a level playing field. That’s a slaughter. And so is putting people into the economy without equipping them with capital, while equipping a tiny handful of people with hundreds and thousands of times more than they can use.”
    (Louis O. Kelso, Bill Moyers: A World of Ideas, 1990)

  9. Speaking of people playing games with RE:

    Three new builds one block away from each of me in 3 directions. Plenty of other new builds too, but these have several things in common. I KNOW these facts from talking to the listing realtors for these houses (they were recently/are on the market now).

    1). Two were built by local developers and lived in for a year or two. One of the developers, that listing realtor told me, plans to keep doing the same thing — buy a property, tear down the house on it, build a new one, live in it for a year, and move on. Both of these builds are in the trendy new style — gray with black trim — both big, pretentious, plasticky inside.

    2). The third was built also by a local family 2 years ago. Now they are selling. Why? The realtor said “Because their children are growing.” Hmm, guess that was news to the parents. I’m afraid what we have here are more speckers.

    3). All three owners/builders? Local and Caucasian.

    • Live in for a year because of HST or something? Oh my that’s less certainly less demand, should “certainty” of higher land prices become a bit less “certain”!

      • Ralph Cramdown

        Principal residence = tax free capital gains, if the CRA doesn’t look too closely. If they decided you did in the nature of an adventure (i.e. to make money), it’s taxable. The guy’s essentially paying no income tax.

    • Are you sure?

  10. Some of you might remember my photo essay from a few weeks ago, re: the non-stop construction insanity in my South Surrey neighbourhood. Well, one of those 200-plus new homes just came on the market. 3000 sq ft and a decent sized yard (one of the few new homes around here that does). But I tells ya, it sure *seemed* like it was slapped together in a month. If it’s like everything else they’re puking up down here, it’ll be looking pretty rough within a year. And don’t get me started on the landscaping. Does “dirt” count as landscaping?

    Anywho, the place is just seven or eight doors down from our $1600 rental on Zero Ave. In other words, we both face the US. Thing is, we face a forest. They face low-rent apartments (including the obligatory crappy looking exteriors, broken cars, etc, etc) in a lousy neighbourhood of Blaine. A neighbourhood that won’t be upgraded in any of our lifetimes. They’re also close enough to the Pacific Highway border crossing that they’ll awake to the sound of long-haul semis shuffling around night after night after night.

    I figured they’d be asking maybe $800,000 for what’ll likely be a $500,000 house in a post-bubble world. Turns out I was $300,000 under. That’s right: $1.1 million. Mind-blowing. Just mind-blowing.

  11. Home Price Index for Greater Vancouver (Heatmapped M/M %)

    It always helps to look at the market from a different prospective.

    • Interesting perspective, it shows the seasonality in prices; March rarely has price drops. This year was no different but, at least based on current sales volumes, prices are going to have a tough time measurably moving up from here.

      • Well, let’s remember these are the new HPI stats that are quality adjusted to smooth out volatility. I just started analyzing Van stats and can already say REBGV’s prices are sustaining because sales are low. When sales are low, the sample size is smaller. Average prices are only as strong as the sales volume to back them up, or in other words, the market has not been tested to handle higher sales volume yet. If/when the trend reverses, it is likely that sales will increase and prices will fall due to slashed prices.

        As for that heatmap, what amazes me is how square the 2008 crises sell-off was. It goes to show how sensitive RE is to stocks. I just charted the Greater Vancouver Detached Price with a 12 month rolling standard deviation (spread price between 12 months), and sure enough, it shows a wide spread (bidding) right when QE2 was announced, only now it’s falling back, and this is with 2.99% mortgages and a cornucopia of tax credits. http://i44.tinypic.com/2n8d6vm.png

        It should get interesting after May.

      • CanWatchdog ->
        Remarkable ‘chart’, thanks.
        Yes, the uniformity (‘across the board’) nature of the 2008 sell off is remarkable.
        Also, it’s subtle but it does appear to show how, thus far in 2010 and 2011, detached homes have showed less price weakness than townhomes, which in turn have shown less weakness than apartments.
        We’d expect to see homogenous chunks of decline a la 2008 once the topping is complete.
        Will headline your ‘graphic’, thanks.

  12. Pingback: ‘Heat-Map’ of Home Price Index, Greater Vancouver, Month Over Month Change, 2007-Present | Vancouver Real Estate Anecdote Archive

  13. Pingback: “I figured they’d be asking maybe $800,000 for what’ll likely be a $500,000 house in a post-bubble world. Turns out I was $300,000 under. That’s right: $1.1 million. Mind-blowing. Just mind-blowing.” | Vancouver Real Estate Anecdote Arch

  14. I have been thinking about this “sport” metaphor for the past few days. Here is my conclusion:

    In Vancouver, Real Estate is primarily a “game” in the sense of “zero-sum game”: the profits of those selling at bubble prices are the losses of those buying at those prices. There is little economic productivity and genuine wealth creation.

    • Yeah, it’s interesting to think about the process.
      One party goes to a lender and takes on a commitment to pay back a very large amount of money (say $200K downpayment from their condo sale; $1M mortgage) over the next 25 years.
      That borrowed $1M then magically materializes and is given to the seller (along with the downpayment).
      The second party’s good fortune is on the back of the first party’s future commitment.
      Of course, the first party is only buying at those levels because they are 98% positive that the $1.2M property will be worth $2M within a few years, in which case their $200K downpayment will end up being the best gamble (“investment”) they’ve ever made in their life (400% gain in a few years).
      When the crash comes and the $1.2M property turns (back) into a $600K property, the $200K will evaporate, and the first party will have roughly a $950K mortgage on a property with a market value of $600K.
      The last level of future-committers are the big losers. They end up paying for all the prior ‘gains’.
      (Thus all the very appropriate ‘greater-fool’, ‘musical-chairs’, ‘hot-potato’, ‘pyramid scheme’ metaphors/labels.)

      And the size of the numbers really do make it all a “game”. It’s played in a space completely removed from actual earnings, and with no consideration as to how long it’d take a family to accumulate this kind of money by work and savings.

  15. onzvvvxzm tyilcswxk gicwvfru

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s