This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: China Home Sales Down 50% In A Month
China Home Sales Down 50% In A Month, Submitted by Mac Slavo of www.shtfplan.com
China has been the investment darling for the last couple of years.
As US economic woes continued to mount and the EU ran into debt
problems, many an analyst continued to talk about China as if it had
decoupled from the rest of the world.
The Chinese government, much like the rest of the world’s
industrialized nations, injected billions upon billions of stimulus
into their economy, sending auto sales, home sales and stock prices
soaring.
Chinese citizens, with an average income of roughly $4,000 a year,
piled into the aforementioned assets in droves, looking to flip
property and paper in the spirit of capitalist speculators here in the
US.
But, like the US, the dream of profits for the citizen proles will soon come to an end:
Authorities have tightened restrictions nationwide on
advance sales of new property developments, introduced new curbs on
loans for third home purchases and raised minimum down payments for
second homes.The Beijing city government has gone even further, limiting families
to one new apartment purchase and barring people who have not paid
taxes or made social security contributions in the city for one year
from getting home loans.“Sellers have started to lower the prices,” said Hu Jinghui, vice
general manager of 5i5j, a real estate agency chain that has around 600
outlets in eight cities across China.“But the buyers are still waiting.”
…
Since the capital put in place the austerity measures on April 30,
prices have dropped an average 10-15 percent, with the number of home
purchases slumping by 50 percent, according to Hu.Jack Guan, a securities firm executive from the coastal city of
Qingdao, searched last year on the outskirts of Beijing for his first
home, but said he could not make a deal as prices “went insane”.[source: Breitbart]
China’s asset appreciation was due not to any sort of real,
sustained growth from increased consumption of Chinese goods abroad,
but government stimulus. Sound familiar?
If global stock markets, bond markets and economies tank in the
latter part of 2010, we suspect China will also feel the pain of their
government’s tightening of lending policies and capital flight from
risky Chinese assets.
China’s recent rise in real estate prices is akin to what we saw in
the US in the mid-2000’s and is nothing more than an illusion.
We would expect Chinese asset prices to take a hit in the near-term. As trend forecaster Gerald Celente pointed out recently, it’s no time to gamble now.
Speculating in stocks or real estate in the US or abroad is a dangerous
game, and one’s focus should remain on preservation, rather than
growth, especially if we’re talking about retirement accounts.
However, we’ll note that because of China’s large population and
internal consumption, as well as export expansion into new markets,
they will decouple at some point in the future. While the rest of the
world crumbles around them, the Chinese, with massive reserve of not
just US dollars, but manufacturing capacity and an as of yet unknown
store of precious metals, may be able to better weather the storm than
western nations.
Thus, in an effort to diversify wealth, considering well run Chinese
companies that cater to internal Chinese interests, such as wireless
carriers, agricultural farms, industrial construction companies and
energy firms, may be good investments after the next round of crashes.
We will, however, warn would-be investors that you are investing in a
country with a communist political government, so there is always the
risk of manufactured corporate earnings, government intervention into
personal assets, and changes in the law without consideration of how
those laws may affect your wealth. Oh wait, we’ve got pretty much the
same thing here in the US - so have at it.
China will grow, and likely overtake the US as the largest economy
in the world within the next decade or two. As an American, it’s
difficult to make this suggestion, but the numbers don’t lie, and
unless some massive global war were to take place, the trends for the
next few decades will see China grow exponentially.
But in the short-term, we wouldn’t be too excited about China.
They’ve created a bubble over there and it is going to deflate somewhat
while the rest of the developed nations see their bubbles popping.
»
- 13268 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
steps against speculation decreased turnover? dont you say so! it is home sales, not new home sales, the flippers are gone and that is a good thing. their shit is planned, the corrections are much more panic resistant than the speculative US madness.
ROFL. I guess you are unaware of all the emerging market funds and ETFs. Tick..Tick..Tick....BOOM!
you don't know many Chinese do you.
Bazooka Economics 101.
And some yahoo strategist from US Trust (BofA) said this morning to buy the dips with large caps because there are great opportunities out there. (first thing that came to my mind...is that Harry W. on tv?!?!)
This prognosticator also said that Chanos "doesn't understand" China and that it may not grow at 9% anymore, but it will grow at 6%, and China's economic growth will be stronger than all of Greece's output.
we may be surprised in 20 years when china has outgrown us and we have to switch to their system just to keep up.
There isn't the oil supply to permit that to happen
You are, without a shred of doubt, one of the handful of people who look at the whole growth paradigm taking into account all variables of the equation. If China were to surpass USA it would basically need a new, untapped KSA. Not gonna happen. Money [or better said] mechanism can support the thesis of perpetual growth but there simply isnt enough shit which can be bought and utilized. Peak everything.
*disclosure; reading Kudryavtsev and the rest of the gang I still have doubts about the origin of oil; since the method [as rigorous as is it] of identifying the origin of oil; is still a method only used on known variables of a known system; basically it references itself since there is not data available for other systems [think if serious geological test is performed on, say, Mars and oil is found, standard theory implodes].
Thanks for noticing.
For China and India to reach the US's per capita consumption would require something like 20 Ghawars. It's just not possible, not even remotely close to possible.
I look down the list at the peaks of gold, helium, oil...helium is utterly critical for superconducting, imaging, semiconductors, a whole host of bleeding edge scientific stuff, nevermind would be the best coolant for PBMR applications. Yet here you can still get it in fking kids' balloons...<boggle>. We're wasting the hell out of critical resources and nobody says anything. Nobody knows helium peaked except deepwater divers. It just came and went.
There's no replacement for it either...the stuff comes from U238 alpha decay. We can't "substitute" for it either like we could with oil for some other energy. Yet we squander it...sad.
If there's oil on Mars it will necessarily be of lower EROI than oil on earth. In fact, it will likely be highly EROI negative.
I subscribe to the abiotic theory but it doesn't matter. Where oil comes from is irrelevant to the maximum supply rate we can pump it out of the ground.
Given that growth has peaked, credit has peaked and this means that our entire worldwide monetary system is presently in effective default. There isn't the credit growth to pay even simple interest on the existing base. Time for a significant epoch, methinks...
Although China has a lot going for it, it has a lot of negatives too. The China hype of the past few years reminds me of the: "Japanese management practices will take over the world" nonsense at the end of the 1980's. Energy is a clearly limiting factor, don't over look water as a major limiting factor too
Thanks for the info about helium. I hadnt a clue. The bull-run to peak-profanity is just getting started.
War over oil then is inevitable.
Cheeky,
Even taking what you said into account and Trav's big picture view, the real point is that it does not even matter if Oil is adiabatically produced or is munched up dino's or whatever.
The bigger point is that Oil as primary source of fuel driving the current industrial trend (especially from early 20th century) is what is unsustainable.
Burning oil as we do (and primarily, I believe the figure is close to 50 %) as motor fuel is just plain nuts because the efficiency to the ground of moving 200-400 pounds of flesh in a 3,000 lb machine, or flying them in multi-ton aircraft......that is what makes oil dependence unsustainable.
The dominant paradigm of oil usage is what is meeting it's end, even if not the oil itself.
Hope that made sense.
Seen another way, we are coming to the natural limit of a supply-side driven (largely oil as grease driven) industrial system, which has maxed out it's demand side of the equation.
And so by extension, in a fractal world, we are at the limit of most of what makes our current world experiment go round (food, money, shelter, transport.....).
China may outgrow us in 20 years, but the next 5 - 10 yrs could be a real b*tch for China and EM investors (OECD equities for that matter as well).
Chanos has probably already made a fortune. I know nothing, just speculating here, but if he nibbled at the commodities complex he has already recorded a nifty paper gain.
And, best of all, he was right.
Tech downgrades across the board this morning. Downstream ramifications abound.
Who was that turd who publicly challenged Chanos' short of China, saying 'You don't short a country with $1 trillion in foreign reserves," "I've never seen one of those empty cities," etc. ?
Since there will be no accountability for an incorrect call, one can only hope he was levered balls-max and lost his ass in this last 25% downturn.
I believe your thinking of Thomas Friedman.
Good memory:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/opinion/13friedman.html
Look at that for damn-near perfect timing.
January 13th: Shanghai closes at 3273.99
May 17th: Shanghai closes at 2559.93.
I think I'll write him and taunt him a bit.
"And that’s the point. I am reluctant to sell China short, not because I think it has no problems or corruption or bubbles, but because I think it has all those problems in spades — and some will blow up along the way (the most dangerous being pollution). But it also has a political class focused on addressing its real problems, as well as a mountain of savings with which to do so (unlike us)."- Friedman NY Times article
So the politicians, which he admits are corrupt, will save them? That's reassuring. It takes some balls for him to call out Chanos like that in his article. It seems like he's probably out of his comfort zone on that call.
http://mpettis.com/2010/02/never-short-a-country-with-2-trillion-in-reserves/
Mike Pettis on Friedman.
China is likely to be fine, outside of the RE market. Remember, they have real income, which was only misallocated towards RE speculation due to a government policy of importing US inflation. Once that is over, there will be a short adjustment period followed by a long period of real growth. This is assuming they continue down the path of increasing market freedoms (this particular measure was a step in the wrong direction). If they should deviate, then it could indeed all come crashing down as so many on these forums have said.
Income? From where... The imploding US and/or the imploding EU? "Fine" might not be the best word for what's coming.
Define income. You might define it as little peices of paper that are claims on labor that doesn't exist, but I would define it as the goods that one can gain in exchange for labor. China has plenty of goods, and the ability to make a nearly unlimited amount more.
No, they don't.
They have very marginally economical activity in a global capacity glut. Their factories compete against their own factories, tons of which are idle.
There isn't DEMAND for all the bullshit they could produce. Much of their later-stage activity was only synthetically economical as a matter of gov't subsidy. It cannot stand on its own two feet.
Yup, and don't forget that their trade surplus vanished this past year, their currency is overheating and their population may have a high savings rate, but who cares? 100% savings on 4k isn't worth a bag of squirrel farts.
+1000 - hits that cover off that one!
So, you're saying that their prices are going to fall domestically? This makes them richer, not poorer.
There is no such thing as overcapacity. There is such a thing as non-economical activity, but that only comes from misallocation of capital. Once the capital is in place, it just drives down the prices of goods.
All they have to do is cut their tie to the dollar, and China will take off like a beachball held underwater. They will retool for domestic consumption, and those idle factories will come back online. This is how markets work when you don't drive all your capital out of the country, as we have done.
Nice theory but when you're predominantly capitalized by bank debt, you've got to earn a return above your cost of capital, otherwise, your banks have to write down their loans. And since China doesn't have an FDIC to back up banks, deposits are destroyed.
You also forget that China has comparatively few raw materials, so they'd have to buy all the commodities to run through their factories in world markets. Unless they can pay world market prices in China, which they can't, there is no way the higher marginal cost of imports can be justified at lower than global market prices.
If your theory really held, then places like Cleveland and Buffalo would be viable still.
You're entitled to your opinion irrespective of how absurd it is.
Overcapacity means that there is more supply than there is demand.
Drives down the price of goods?? You mean operates at a LOSS????
You're out of your mind with respect to their currency peg, totally so. The deflation would crush their levered economy.
AND China's agriculture is highly unproductive even as arable land is diminishing fairly rapidly. In other words, Food could be a major problem at some point, and certainly contribute to inflation.
25% of the world's population and 6% of the world's arable land with a nasty, nasty water table in the North where they grow most of their wheat.
They have, however, been investing heavily in farmlands abroad over the past few years for this very purpose; Africa been one such destination.
That said, food and water are really at the crux of keeping the country stable - any country stable for that matter - so it has a massive challenge over the next decade with regards to sourcing clean water + decent food, which could bite severely into potential economic growth.
Schiff and Jim Rogers will likely ultimately be right on China given the demographics, but it could be an ugly 10-20 years before that happens. It's funny that free market guys like Schiff and Rogers can recognize and diagnose the problems of government intervention in the economy in the western world, but for some reason they think the ultimate command and control economy (China) is flawless.
For the life of me I don't know how people here can still fail to GET peak oil...I just don't.
It's really this simple. China is not going to be fine, they're a bubble and a classic case of malinvestment and even if they WEREN'T there CAN NOT EXIST the oil supply sufficient to support their rise to per capita consumption equal to that in the West.
You seem confused. If China is a "bubble" then peak oil won't be a problem, because Chinese consumption will not scale at geometric/exponential levels. If China is *not* a bubble, then peak oil might be a realistic problem.
You gotta pick one or the other.
"If China is a "bubble" then peak oil won't be a problem.."
?? Peak oil is such a sticky problem, it does not need a bubble nor an offshore oil disaster to "blow up" our economies
no, I most certainly do the fuck not seem confused.
I very clearly said EVEN IF. That suggests I intended to place a conditional presumption in my statement.
Ah, you assume a) the consumption per capita in the west is a constant, Kw, and the consumption in China is a variable, vc, and you assume b) the sum of Kw + vc can never be larger than the constant Opeak, and then you assume c) because of a and b, China is a malinvestment. I suggest you go through your assumptions.
There's a shitload more people in China than in the US, we're already at peak oil and the Chinese aren't anywhere near American consumption levels yet.
China has zero headroom. Even if all the consumers in the US vanished and the Chinese were the only ones picking up the slack the per-capita increase in consumption still would not bring Chinese consumers anywhere near their American counterparts. That obviously isn't going to happen though US consumption has to shrink it's a moot point really. China may yet grow, but until we figure out an economical way to implement fusion or something China's growth will be capped by a limit the Planet has already hit.
Consumption growth per capita is the DEFINITION of "getting wealthier"
The west could vanish off the face of the earth and there still ain't enough oil supply for Chindia.
If consumption per capita in the west declines, purchases of Chinese shit declines. Do you get that?
And yes, Kw+vc can never be higher than the oil peak insofar as oil is the energy exeter foundation. I also assume you should STFU.
I don't get peak oil, certainly not in the apocalyptic way you mean it. You guys have a chicken-and-egg problem you'll never admit. Sometimes I wonder if peak oil theorists are really working for the oil companies, because the case you make is designed to scare people about oil shortages.
The rapidly growing demand for and consumption of oil was itself fueled by unsustainable fiat / credit growth, wasn't it? (uh oh) And that unsustainable fiat credit growth actually began at least in 1971 when we abandoned gold and started blowing money out of our asses, and certainly in 1980 when the interest rate reductions began.
http://energy.senate.gov/legislation/energybill/charts/chart8.pdf
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/DGS10
See anything similar in those two charts? The almost constantly-accomodative monetary policy caused a wave of demand for everything, not just oil, that was neither real nor sustainable.
Is our energy policy stupid and self-destructive? Absolutely. Are the oil companies in charge of it? Absolutely. Do we still have time to get off of the oil nipple? Hell yes. When the credit bubble pops, the oil demand bubble pops right along aith it.
China has a rapidly aging population with no social safety net - Schiff and Rogers will get this wrong.
Ah, yes, China
Currency and North Korean Puppet manipulator. Prolific crappy product manufacturer. And of course, American politician owner (a close second to the W.S. casino operators)
China's beggar-thy-neighbor policy will come down on top of them in spades. Hope they enjoyed the American subsidized growth party.
Hubris is not an economic base.
"..barring people who have not paid taxes or made social security contributions in the city for one year from getting home loans"
..but how can people be expected to pay taxes if they aren't allowed to take loans to invest in property so that they can make money out of nothing in the first place?
Besides I thought China didn't have social security, which was why people saved so much for their old age. Or is this a local community thing?
China has a scatter-shot of pension programs. Just about any city-dweller is covered by pensions partly funded by work, partly funded by personal contribution, and partly funded by government.
"Saving for old age" isn't a common complaint. The usual complaint is: saving for potential medical care (health insurance is still broken), and saving for home purchases (because real estate is broken).
Vast, vast majority of Chinese are hoping for a gradual, ordered deflation of the bubble. Prices have moved out of the reach of most, and it's time to end the speculation. It's still an open question whether the developers will be forced to fold... this is going to be a battle of political will, since just as in the United States, the "moneyed" class have a great deal of access to and influence over the politicians.
Anyone been following the Canadian housing market? I'm hearing anecdotes out of Vancouver that sound very much like the US housing market circa 2006. Any of you Canadians have thoughts on it?
http://www.crackshackormansion.com/
vancouver
Yeah, I saw that. Hilarious. I can't believe they're walking down the same road just a few years after we did.
Peep this place: americacanada.blogspot.com
As a young adult in University, I'm glad I don't own a house.
It's really interesting, when you think of it, the fact that we're following the US' playbook word for word. The political class, as long as they have plausible deniability couched in spurious economic theories, is utterly unwilling to take the necessary steps to curb bubbles like this. There is just too much money to be made by the well-situated members of the economy and too many people who's quality of life depends on the denial of thermodynamic laws for any sort of positive action to be taken by the politicos. And the Canadian taxpayer, through the CMHC, is guaranteeing all of it.
Leo said he and so many Canadians saved so much energy from his solar panels, they were thinking about collectively buying Detroit: price 1 million doelarrs.
Homebuilding Confidence is up so that means that it would be a good buy for Canada because it appears housing has bottomed in the US.
<Sarcasm off>The ratings on these indexes are so flawed.....
The governor of our central bank spent 13 years at GS. I fully expect we will go down a similar road as the US. People here think we are just fine, "what's a bubble?", 20 year old kids with decent jobs in the oil industry near where I live think nothing of taking a mortgage for 500k.
It’s official, China is doing poorly. High inflation, low indexes; guess it is time for them to raise the Yuan.
It has been my contention for years now that China will find a way to screw up. Historically they always have, just when they become a superpower, the decadence of whatever dynasty running the show brings China down.
China is the place that came up with Yin and Yang.
With their demographics, corruption and Communist government, I will not put money there.
Peak oil / peak resources indeed will not allow them to become the Hyperpower.
As long as our leadership here in the USA just stays cool with China, we do not have to worry about conflict with them. Diplomacy.
Stay cool with China....
DCRB for El Presidente.
I've read more inspired analysis in a 5th grade history textbook. "Just when they become a superpower", the dynasty brings it down? China's been a super-power for about 1000 out of the last 2000 years.
But there are certainly cycles in society just as there are cycles in business. The Chinese say: "that which is long united will shatter, and that which is long shattered will unite", and also "ten years the river flows east, and then ten years the river flows west". No one stays on top forever.
For now though, China is absolutely on the upswing of this current cycle.
China had some shots to become THE superpower. When they outlawed large sale vessles from sailing around the globe, this right before Europeans did it, cost them a legacy. The have been at the top of chart always sure, but they have never claimed the top spot alone. The only countries to do that was the British and only briefly and the US but also briefly (WWII on). Sometimes, there has been no global superpower. I think we are headed back there shortly.
Surely. They sailed to Africa, came back home and scuttled the fleet lol.
Europe was for the taking at that time. Trade would have been huge for them. Only once the British, Portuguese, and Dutch really went over THERE did trade begin.
The Chinese were more interested in their obsolete 2nd generation alphabet and building gigantic walls than anything else. Even today, superstition and mystical crap abounds
WTF crack are you smoking, the same kind the british shoved up their ass?
They haven't been a superpower basically EVER. They were a major nation, sure, but a superpower?
Their navy did what?
Let's see here, we use the Roman alphabet and arabic numbers. Chinaman uses QWERTY
China has more copper in stores than the London Metals Exchange. China is constructing more steel capacity---on top of what they already have---than the entire steel production capacity in all the countries on the planet. China warehouses electronics production, since they produce far more than they can sell (and the way China calculates GDP is on factory shipments, not end user sales). So what is 9% vs. 6% when the 9% is bogus?
So unless China intends to knock down the Great Wall, and build it again from scratch with steel and with a TV every fifty feet, they are going to have trouble finding sufficient consumption to absorb their output.
Chanos is already up 25% on his trade, so he was right.
When the new depression starts in earnest, I'd rather have a surplus of copper, steel and productive factories, than a surplus of consultants and "financial services" professionals.
+1000. We will definitely need them and their stuff to help us rebuild post peak transportation.
And just exactly how the fuck are we going to get it here?!?!
+1
Reading the top part of your post and harking back to the 30's tells me one simple thing.
The gamechanger.
China is preparing for war.
In this day and age, to have mfg. capacity like china's along with all those copper/steel/rare earths/gold mines..............
War is what I see, clear and almost present.
well you all should check out copper today -6.4% for the session so far... Thats China for you HG1 Comdty <go> for Bloomberg fans. Its also a leading indicator for you in terms picking market turning points.
Yeah, where did those people go who were telling us to buy (industrial) PGMs as an alternative to the monetary metals?
Euro positive for the day bitches!
short contracts higher by app. 400% comparing to historical average. Simply put; an oversold market.
China has accepted all the world's operating leverage in return for low margins. The author gets a ton right but he's wrong in believing China will weather this better than most. Ask the folks in our Midwest what happens when demand for your products declines. Ask the Japanese what happens when you can find a cheaper producer somewhere else.
Ask your grandparents what happens when you supply the world with everything it uses.
You get rich. Whether the rest of the world is in a depression or bombed out doesn't really matter that much in the long run. Its the industrial capacity that matters.
Wrong - industrial capacity is only profitable when you get paid for your output. Leading up to the Great Depression, we exported to Europe, who ultimately reneged on their obligations. After WWII, we were the only game in town, which allowed us to earn rent because the world needed to rebuild.
You have to think of marginal ROIC, which is a function of input costs, volume, and marginal pricing. Again, there is a reason why the cities of Cleveland and Buffalo are shells of their former selves. Drive down Delaware Ave in Buffalo sometime and see how those mansions paid for by industry are now low-rent apartment buildings.
That said, I believe we'll re-industrialize within the next ten years.
I am not so sure about how the real estate market in China works, but if I draw an analogy with what happens in India then a bubble will not burst as easily as it did in the US. In India, a lot of the properties are bought in cash and not by leverage. It's a country with a per capita income of slightly more than $1000 but with rates in certain areas comparable or higher than those fo developed countries. Even though the income is lower, it is concentrated in a limited section of the population and it is this population which look at real estate as an investment. Since, it is bought using cash, there are no problems of needing to unwind your deals. Also, even when the prices rise or fall, people don't feel compelled to sell (or in many cases cannot do it easily) as a lot of the ownership is through murky deals. If the bubble is because of such a nature, it can last for a long long time.
I think we should not be worry much about Chinese speculators.
China leader panicked with their stimulus package to soften a blow from the present worldwide economic crisis and its influence on China economy. But, apparently, they learned a lesson.
Finally, I see no reason for China to support either the US economy or US$ by buying US Treasury obligations. Presently, China started to look at the USA more as an adversary rather than a partner. The same is true for the USA mid- and long-term national interests.
Show me a Chinese that can innovate/create not just copy and I will believe it
They can be the largest market / exporter BUT not the leading economy
Chances for a massive global war are 50-50
Quote Du Jour
"Rabid believers in the China growth story may need to reconsider."
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/05/china-equities-sink-5...
yesterday I saw an web ad for a mexican brazillian hooker with big hooters with rates.
$500 1 hour
$750 2 hours
$1000 4 hours
all prices are double if you're CHINESE
I think it's complicated.
The numbers aren't going to tell you the whole story. They also have some major social issues to work through - but oddly enough, those issues are probably easier to overcome than in the US.
Male/female population imbalance? Can ship mail order brides to them from the Eastern Bloc, South America, and the United States.
Oppressive government? Probably less authoritarian than the US in certain respects. The US looks horrifying to an outsider... Chinese understand how their system works.
On a fundamental basis, much of China is less bound to ideology than the US.
As soon as companies find a cheaper place to manufacture other than China they will leave in a NY minute. Just look at Mexico.
China has the quantity and price that will turn the lights out on the exporting
of any other nation. Unless some spaceship flies out here with eager to work
cheap labor (ala District 9 style) China is going to destroy us all.
Same was said about Japan, Mexico and Germany (reason for WW1 since it's rapid industrial rise was threatening the Imperial Empire). China is no longer regarded a low cost country. If you want to know who is, look at your underwear (the label, not what's inside)
I think it's more like, unless history repeats itself, as it's done so many times before, then the China threat of world domination will be nothing more than a miscalculation.
EURUSD / EURJPY continues to show buying support on intra day chart.
EURGBP daily chart gives mild bullish warnings.
http://stockmarket618.wordpress.com
http://www.zerohedge.com/forum/latest-market-outlook-1
http://www.thecheapbags.com
http://www.thecheapbags.com/miu-miu-handbags-c-16.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/chanel-handbags-c-537.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/louis-vuitton-handbags-c-513.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/hermehttp://www.thecheapbags.com
http://www.thecheapbags.com/miu-miu-handbags-c-16.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/chanel-handbags-c-537.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/louis-vuitton-handbags-c-513.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/hermes-handbags-c-536.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/balenciaga-handbags-c-534.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/marc-jacobs-handbags-c-15.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/dior-handbags-c-530.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/jimmy-choo-handbags-c-532.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/dg-handbags-c-7.html
s-handbags-c-536.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/balenciaga-handbags-c-534.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/marc-jacobs-handbags-c-15.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/dior-handbags-c-530.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/jimmy-choo-handbags-c-532.html
http://www.thecheapbags.com/dg-handbags-c-7.html