CC says Telecom should un-bundle the local loop

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Chris MAyhew, Sep 18, 2003.

  1. Chris MAyhew

    Chris MAyhew Guest

    Chris MAyhew, Sep 18, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Chris MAyhew

    Gordon Guest

    On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 03:47:59 +0000, Chris MAyhew wrote:

    > The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop network
    > to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    >
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186


    Pity that the people of this country could not own it. Oh, that is right
    they once did.

    Some things, such as health, are common to all people, and thus the people
    should own them. Roads is another example.

    --
    Gordon

    Google knows where to find things, ask at http://www.google.com
    Works for me, will work for you, so be it.
     
    Gordon, Sep 18, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Chris MAyhew

    Mainlander Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 03:47:59 +0000, Chris MAyhew wrote:
    >
    > > The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop network
    > > to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    > >
    > > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186

    >
    > Pity that the people of this country could not own it. Oh, that is right
    > they once did.
    >
    > Some things, such as health, are common to all people, and thus the people
    > should own them. Roads is another example.


    When is the state seting up its own supermarket, oh that's right they
    never did.
     
    Mainlander, Sep 18, 2003
    #3
  4. Chris MAyhew wrote:

    > The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop network
    > to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    >
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186


    Surely you would like something better then what can be delivered over old
    copper? I know that the prospect of 1.2 megabit doesnt really excite me too much
    over the 128k that I get out of it at the moment.

    I dont really want to see telecoms loop unbundled myself, I would prefer
    something better.

    Perhaps those lucky enough to live close to the exchange are going to be
    satisfied with adsl speeds tho.
     
    Richard Malcolm-Smith, Sep 18, 2003
    #4
  5. Chris MAyhew

    PJ Guest

    "Chris MAyhew" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns93FAA0BE18664noemale@202.20.93.13...
    > The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop

    network
    > to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    >
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186


    yeah, with any luck, we should have LLU in around a year or so. :)
    The final recommendation will be completed in December, add another 6 - 9
    months for the goverment to vote on, and add another 6 - 9 months for
    Telecom to take the goverment to court as an attempt to slow down the
    process.
    If all go as planned, cheap broadband (ADSL) should start to roll by
    Christmas '04

    Pete.
     
    PJ, Sep 18, 2003
    #5
  6. On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:29:14 +1200, Gordon wrote:

    > Pity that the people of this country could not own it. Oh, that is right
    > they once did.


    When it was sold, the govt never envisaged a monopolistic gorilla, nor did
    it envisage the possibilty of local loop competition.

    Very little of the local loop has been upgraded since 1988, basically only
    stuff which has rotted out or required new lines.
     
    Uncle StoatWarbler, Sep 18, 2003
    #6
  7. Chris MAyhew

    steve Guest

    Gordon wrote:
    > On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 03:47:59 +0000, Chris MAyhew wrote:
    >
    >
    >>The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop network
    >>to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    >>
    >>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186

    >
    > Pity that the people of this country could not own it. Oh, that is right
    > they once did.
    >
    > Some things, such as health, are common to all people, and thus the people
    > should own them. Roads is another example.


    I don't have any problem with Telecom being privately owned, provided
    they (and others) are actively regulated.

    Their desire for profit very often conflicts with what is in the public
    interest. An active regulatory regime can arrive at a compromise.

    It works better when you don't have other countries trying to impose
    their values and ideas on you, but that is what governments are there
    for: to administer the country the way its citizens want it to be
    administered, according to their values.
     
    steve, Sep 18, 2003
    #7
  8. Chris MAyhew

    Gavin Tunney Guest

    On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 03:47:59 GMT, Chris MAyhew <> wrote:

    >The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop network
    >to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    >
    >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186


    I really can't see it making any difference. It's a nice thought that
    we'd have unbridled competition & cheaper prices etc if the copper &
    exchanges were open slather, but history doesn't support it.

    Only have to look at mobile phones to see that hobbling Telecom will
    only result in more of our dosh heading overseas to the likes of
    Telstra. We've got supposed competition there & look how much mobile
    calls cost compared to landline calls....if prevailing theory about
    competition was correct then mobiles would be cheaper.

    Unless they can come up with a way for small players to enter the
    market, like what happened with the ISP market, then unbundling the
    loop will just let Telstra get bigger at the expense of Telecom IMO.
    The big guys are interested only in a bigger slice of the pie, they
    don't really want to compete on price.

    I don't like the existing situation, but if it came down to a choice
    between being stitched up by multinational telcos or stitched up by
    our own monopoly.... I'd take the latter. Telecom may be a burglar,
    but at least they're our burglar... well partly anyway ;-)

    Gavin
     
    Gavin Tunney, Sep 19, 2003
    #8
  9. "Richard Malcolm-Smith" <> wrote in message
    news:bkbl20$f7p$...
    > Chris MAyhew wrote:
    >
    > > The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop

    network
    > > to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    > >
    > > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186

    >
    > Surely you would like something better then what can be delivered over old
    > copper? I know that the prospect of 1.2 megabit doesnt really excite me

    too much
    > over the 128k that I get out of it at the moment.
    >
    > I dont really want to see telecoms loop unbundled myself, I would prefer
    > something better.
    >
    > Perhaps those lucky enough to live close to the exchange are going to be
    > satisfied with adsl speeds tho.
    >

    Richard what we have today is the result of Telecom owning the 'local loop'.
    Apart from Saturn (now part of TelstraClear) there has been no attempt by
    anyone to produce an alternative service to residential customers (the mass
    market within the 'local loop') and many businesses are also similarly
    affected. The clear message is that duplicating the Telecom 'local loop' to
    deliver a competitively priced (or even premium) service is not viable.
    Telecom bought the entire network as a going concern rather than paying for
    its construction at today's prices.

    Therefore if you want a phone service nearly all of us need to contact
    Telecom. Once connected we have some non-Telecom options.

    My understanding of 'unbundling the local loop' is that this allows other
    Telco's to offer a full service. For example, TelstraClear or Ihug or
    whomever could offer a service direct to every consumer provided they can do
    a deal with Telecom over the 'last mile' of cable to a consumer. The
    consumer never deals with Telecom but they still own the cable into the
    house/business.

    Is this correct?
     
    Bryan Souster, Sep 19, 2003
    #9
  10. Chris MAyhew

    Wyn Guest

    pete wrote:
    > "Bryan Souster" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> "Richard Malcolm-Smith" <> wrote in message
    >> news:bkbl20$f7p$...
    >>> Chris MAyhew wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local
    >>>> loop network to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186
    >>>
    >>> Surely you would like something better then what can be delivered
    >>> over old copper? I know that the prospect of 1.2 megabit doesnt
    >>> really excite me too much over the 128k that I get out of it at the
    >>> moment.
    >>>
    >>> I dont really want to see telecoms loop unbundled myself, I would
    >>> prefer something better.
    >>>
    >>> Perhaps those lucky enough to live close to the exchange are going
    >>> to be satisfied with adsl speeds tho.
    >>>

    >> Richard what we have today is the result of Telecom owning the
    >> 'local loop'. Apart from Saturn (now part of TelstraClear) there has
    >> been no attempt by anyone to produce an alternative service to
    >> residential customers (the mass market within the 'local loop') and
    >> many businesses are also similarly affected. The clear message is
    >> that duplicating the Telecom 'local loop' to deliver a competitively
    >> priced (or even premium) service is not viable. Telecom bought the
    >> entire network as a going concern rather than paying for its
    >> construction at today's prices.
    >>
    >> Therefore if you want a phone service nearly all of us need to
    >> contact Telecom. Once connected we have some non-Telecom options.
    >>
    >> My understanding of 'unbundling the local loop' is that this allows
    >> other Telco's to offer a full service. For example, TelstraClear or
    >> Ihug or whomever could offer a service direct to every consumer
    >> provided they can do a deal with Telecom over the 'last mile' of
    >> cable to a consumer. The consumer never deals with Telecom but they
    >> still own the cable into the house/business.
    >>
    >> Is this correct?

    >
    > Sounds just like the electricity "reforms". Remember how that was
    > supposed to enable customers to switch suppliers at will and shop
    > around for the best deal.
    > I have switched once in that time - and have been sold (as a
    > customer) at least three times.


    Yup, and just think of this: You (and the rest of us) are now paying for
    the privilege of having been bought - after all, how else would they pay
    back all the money that they had to borrow in order to buy you? :-(

    Wyn
     
    Wyn, Sep 19, 2003
    #10
  11. On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:37:27 +1200, Richard Malcolm-Smith
    <> wrote:

    >DSL is a stopgap technology designed to give telcos another revinue stream
    >without laying more cable.


    All comms technology is stop-gap. 300bps acoustically coupled modems
    were just a stopgap before 2400 baud direct-connect modems, which were
    just a stopgap before 9600 modems, before 14.4K modems, before 28.8K
    before 33.6K, before 56K, before DSL, before fibre, before whatever...

    The pace at which the technology changes means that nothing will last
    forever.

    >Its a pretty mediocre product, severe lack of upstream speed, and not going to
    >go past 8 megabit in its current form. It will not scale to future bandwidth
    >demands that are likly to arise.


    ADSL usually has medocre upstream speeds but DSL sould be symetrical
    (because the A for assymetric is missing :)

    I'd also say that 512Kbps is more than fast enough for 99% of online
    content and applications right now -- certainly from a home-user
    perspective.

    Given the limitations of the backbones on which the Net is currently
    based, giving everyone 8Mbps would *not* improve things much at all --
    you'd just move the bottlenecks from the copper to the next link in
    the chain.

    >A lot of people cannot get that because they
    >are too far from the exchange or there are no free pairs etc. Unbundling the
    >loop will not solve that without considerable investment by the new owner of it.


    Hey, a fairly significant percentage of the NZ population is in a
    position to get DSL service right now -- but they choose not to
    because of cost/risk. Unbundling the loop should reduce the cost and
    raising the caps will reduce the risk.

    >Whoever owns it will be interested in getting the maximal return for minimal
    >outlay, just like the current owner is. We will still have to nag and nag and
    >nag to get faults fixed, and there will be 2 partys passing the buck to each
    >other about whose fault it is, 3 partys if you get phone and adsl from different
    >companies.


    That's life -- it's still got to be better than paying around $800 for
    10GB of traffic at a sloth-like 256Kbps as is currently the case.

    >Do you really think there is much life left in the conventional analog phone
    >product that is what telecom sell to home customers? A phone tied to a location
    >is pretty hopeless compared with a mobile phone.


    Maybe so -- but I see no reason why copper won't remain one of the
    mainstays of broadband for the next few years. The problem with
    wireless is that it doesn't always scale very well. As you start
    muxing up the traffic, the slices of the pie get smaller and smaller.

    --
    you can contact me via http://aardvark.co.nz/contact/
     
    Bruce Simpson, Sep 19, 2003
    #11
  12. Chris MAyhew

    Jay Guest

    Chris MAyhew wrote:

    > The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop
    > network to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    >
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186


    And why is the government so slow to act?
    I mean they should have done something 15 years ago - about the time
    they flogged off Telecom to the highest bidder.

    Why are they so slow? To scared to make a wrong move?
    Waiting until things are so bad that they have no choice?

    Look at the sad way they have planned the electricity supply in NZ.
    Maybe they should ask everyone to save using the internet so it
    can ve spread around a bit more. If everyone cut back on their
    internet usage by 5% then everything would be ok.

    I would like to like a Labour government but really they have to
    show some competence in addition to their political colours.
     
    Jay, Sep 19, 2003
    #12
  13. Chris MAyhew

    Jay Guest

    Richard Malcolm-Smith wrote:

    > Bryan Souster wrote:
    >
    >> Richard what we have today is the result of Telecom owning the 'local
    >> loop'. Apart from Saturn (now part of TelstraClear) there has been no
    >> attempt by anyone to produce an alternative service to residential
    >> customers (the mass market within the 'local loop') and many businesses
    >> are also similarly
    >> affected. The clear message is that duplicating the Telecom 'local loop'
    >> to deliver a competitively priced (or even premium) service is not
    >> viable. Telecom bought the entire network as a going concern rather than
    >> paying for its construction at today's prices.

    >
    > DSL is a stopgap technology designed to give telcos another revinue stream
    > without laying more cable.


    No, it was not designed for that reason.
    It was designed because it was possible.
    There has been no great global conspiracy amonggst telcos to diddle
    the public. If that was the case they would not have developed DSL..

    >
    > Its a pretty mediocre product,


    No it isn't.

    > severe lack of upstream speed,


    Not really. Is 512k slow?

    > and not
    > going to go past 8 megabit in its current form.


    Given that all of NZ is stuck with 128k I cannot understand why
    you grizzle about 8Mbps.

    > It will not scale to
    > future bandwidth demands that are likly to arise.


    Even you expensive Mercedes doesn't "scale".
    Every telephone doesn't "scale".
    Your latest video camera doesn't "scale".
    What planet do you normally live on?

    > A lot of people cannot
    > get that because they are too far from the exchange or there are no free
    > pairs etc.


    Or because the telco hasn't upgraded the exchange.

    > Unbundling the loop will not solve that without considerable
    > investment by the new owner of it.


    Oh yes it will!

    >
    > Whoever owns it will be interested in getting the maximal return for
    > minimal outlay,


    .... because of a lack of incentive tbhrough a lack of competition.

    > just like the current owner is. We will still have to nag
    > and nag and nag to get faults fixed, and there will be 2 partys passing
    > the buck to each other about whose fault it is, 3 partys if you get phone
    > and adsl from different companies.


    Competition.

    >
    > Do you really think there is much life left in the conventional analog
    > phone product that is what telecom sell to home customers? A phone tied to
    > a location is pretty hopeless compared with a mobile phone.


    No it isn't.

    >
    >> Therefore if you want a phone service nearly all of us need to contact
    >> Telecom. Once connected we have some non-Telecom options.

    >
    > That is phone service. I and most people I know are quite happy with the
    > phone service we get from telecoms competition. I want a choice for
    > internet.


    But it doesn't "scale"!

    >
    >> My understanding of 'unbundling the local loop' is that this allows other
    >> Telco's to offer a full service. For example, TelstraClear or Ihug or
    >> whomever could offer a service direct to every consumer provided they can
    >> do
    >> a deal with Telecom over the 'last mile' of cable to a consumer. The
    >> consumer never deals with Telecom but they still own the cable into the
    >> house/business.

    >
    > Over the existing last 3 miles of crap. I doubt whatever offspring of
    > telecom crops up when the loop is unbundled will be running to provide
    > fibre etc to such low return places as residential customers.


    Ok, let's all give up. Just stick with 128k and a non-competitive monopoly.
    You really should be running Telecom because it seems like you have
    exactly the correct attitude the job requires.
     
    Jay, Sep 19, 2003
    #13
  14. Chris MAyhew

    Enkidu Guest

    On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:59:04 +1200, Bruce Simpson
    <> wrote:
    >
    >>A lot of people cannot get that because they
    >>are too far from the exchange or there are no free pairs etc. Unbundling the
    >>loop will not solve that without considerable investment by the new owner of it.

    >
    >Hey, a fairly significant percentage of the NZ population is in a
    >position to get DSL service right now -- but they choose not to
    >because of cost/risk. Unbundling the loop should reduce the cost and
    >raising the caps will reduce the risk.
    >

    No, the local loop is just the first step. All lines would currently
    have to go to the exchange and be carried by Telecom. Telecom could
    decide to charge *nothing* for the local loop and load all the charges
    onto exchange connections. With prefernetial treatment for *their*
    customers.

    I don't see unbundling the local loop doing anything but increase
    prices overall.

    Cheers,

    Cliff
    --

    The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
    that the conspiracy is working.
     
    Enkidu, Sep 19, 2003
    #14
  15. Chris MAyhew

    colinco Guest

    In article <bkept8$uo86$-berlin.de>,
    says...
    > Given that all of NZ is stuck with 128k I cannot understand why
    > you grizzle about 8Mbps.
    >

    Where do you get that idea from?
     
    colinco, Sep 19, 2003
    #15
  16. Chris MAyhew

    Mainlander Guest

    In article <>, lid says...
    > "Richard Malcolm-Smith" <> wrote in message
    > news:bkbl20$f7p$...
    > > Chris MAyhew wrote:
    > >
    > > > The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop

    > network
    > > > to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    > > >
    > > > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186

    > >
    > > Surely you would like something better then what can be delivered over old
    > > copper? I know that the prospect of 1.2 megabit doesnt really excite me

    > too much
    > > over the 128k that I get out of it at the moment.
    > >
    > > I dont really want to see telecoms loop unbundled myself, I would prefer
    > > something better.
    > >
    > > Perhaps those lucky enough to live close to the exchange are going to be
    > > satisfied with adsl speeds tho.
    > >

    > Richard what we have today is the result of Telecom owning the 'local loop'.
    > Apart from Saturn (now part of TelstraClear) there has been no attempt by
    > anyone to produce an alternative service to residential customers (the mass
    > market within the 'local loop') and many businesses are also similarly
    > affected. The clear message is that duplicating the Telecom 'local loop' to
    > deliver a competitively priced (or even premium) service is not viable.
    > Telecom bought the entire network as a going concern rather than paying for
    > its construction at today's prices.
    >
    > Therefore if you want a phone service nearly all of us need to contact
    > Telecom. Once connected we have some non-Telecom options.
    >
    > My understanding of 'unbundling the local loop' is that this allows other
    > Telco's to offer a full service. For example, TelstraClear or Ihug or
    > whomever could offer a service direct to every consumer provided they can do
    > a deal with Telecom over the 'last mile' of cable to a consumer. The
    > consumer never deals with Telecom but they still own the cable into the
    > house/business.
    >
    > Is this correct?


    The other telcos will only offer a full service to selected customers.
    What is quite likely to happen is that Telecom will be relieved of its
    kiwishare obligations and therefore have no obligation whatsoever to
    offer services in remote rural areas. As such customers in those areas
    will be worse off.
     
    Mainlander, Sep 19, 2003
    #16
  17. Chris MAyhew

    Mainlander Guest

    In article <bkephj$qti6$-berlin.de>,
    says...
    > Chris MAyhew wrote:
    >
    > > The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop
    > > network to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    > >
    > > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186

    >
    > And why is the government so slow to act?
    > I mean they should have done something 15 years ago - about the time
    > they flogged off Telecom to the highest bidder.
    >
    > Why are they so slow? To scared to make a wrong move?
    > Waiting until things are so bad that they have no choice?
    >
    > Look at the sad way they have planned the electricity supply in NZ.
    > Maybe they should ask everyone to save using the internet so it
    > can ve spread around a bit more. If everyone cut back on their
    > internet usage by 5% then everything would be ok.


    The so called benefits of electricity reforms are a perfect example of
    what you can expect to see when the local loop is unbundled. Telecom will
    no longer have an obligation to provide services cheaply to all and
    sundry and so rural users will pay more for their services.
     
    Mainlander, Sep 19, 2003
    #17
  18. Chris MAyhew

    Chris Mayhew Guest

    (Gavin Tunney) wrote in
    news::

    > On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 03:47:59 GMT, Chris MAyhew <> wrote:
    >
    >>The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop
    >>network to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    >>
    >>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186

    >
    > I really can't see it making any difference. It's a nice thought that
    > we'd have unbridled competition & cheaper prices etc if the copper &
    > exchanges were open slather, but history doesn't support it.
    >
    > Only have to look at mobile phones to see that hobbling Telecom will
    > only result in more of our dosh heading overseas to the likes of
    > Telstra. We've got supposed competition there & look how much mobile
    > calls cost compared to landline calls....if prevailing theory about
    > competition was correct then mobiles would be cheaper.
    >


    I know of people in the USA that have to pay to RECEIVE calls on their cell
    phone and TXT doesn't work to well over there either unless both TXT ing
    people are on the same network - so maybe we arn't that *over priced* after
    all.

    > Unless they can come up with a way for small players to enter the
    > market, like what happened with the ISP market, then unbundling the
    > loop will just let Telstra get bigger at the expense of Telecom IMO.
    > The big guys are interested only in a bigger slice of the pie, they
    > don't really want to compete on price.
    >
    > I don't like the existing situation, but if it came down to a choice
    > between being stitched up by multinational telcos or stitched up by
    > our own monopoly.... I'd take the latter. Telecom may be a burglar,
    > but at least they're our burglar... well partly anyway ;-)


    Yes they are only partly *our burglar* but they are still a multinational
    telco

    >
    > Gavin
    >
     
    Chris Mayhew, Sep 19, 2003
    #18
  19. Chris MAyhew

    Chris Mayhew Guest

    Jay <> wrote in news:bkephj$qti6$-
    berlin.de:

    > Chris MAyhew wrote:
    >
    >> The Commerce Commission has recommended Telecom open its local loop
    >> network to competitors, in a draft decision released today.
    >>
    >> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3524186

    >
    > And why is the government so slow to act?
    > I mean they should have done something 15 years ago - about the time
    > they flogged off Telecom to the highest bidder.
    >
    > Why are they so slow? To scared to make a wrong move?
    > Waiting until things are so bad that they have no choice?
    >
    > Look at the sad way they have planned the electricity supply in NZ.
    > Maybe they should ask everyone to save using the internet so it
    > can ve spread around a bit more. If everyone cut back on their
    > internet usage by 5% then everything would be ok.
    >
    > I would like to like a Labour government but really they have to
    > show some competence in addition to their political colours.
    >
    >


    Every political party (that has been in power) has shown competence along
    side incompetence - just in differing areas.
     
    Chris Mayhew, Sep 19, 2003
    #19
  20. "colinco" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <bkept8$uo86$-berlin.de>,
    > says...
    > > Given that all of NZ is stuck with 128k I cannot understand why
    > > you grizzle about 8Mbps.
    > >

    > Where do you get that idea from?


    Jay makes things up.
     
    Olson Johnson, Sep 19, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Chris Mayhew
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    792
    Bruce Sinclair
    May 23, 2004
  2. news.xtra.co.nz
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    775
    Gavin & Sandy
    May 5, 2006
  3. Buffalo
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    554
    Buffalo
    May 5, 2009
  4. VanguardLH
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    614
    VanguardLH
    May 5, 2009
  5. Centre Parting
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    622
    Centre Parting
    May 5, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page