Video ID:
10542
Player:
Default
Job Number:
7629
Akademia
Coming Soon:
0
Meta
Description:
GLG Fixed Interest Market strategies Q3 2013 update with Jon Mawby, Co-Portfolio Manager, and Warren Shiels, Director, UK Retail.
Bookmarks:
0|GLG Fixed Interest Market Strategies
100|Bond funds overview
271|Global credit team
300|Sector and macro expertise
543|Complacency in the market
613|Best place to invest
738|Active asset allocation
822|Duration
991|US investment grade duration exposure
1089|Risk management
1232|Strategy return
1282|Returns
1311|Volatility
1335|Questions
Duration:
00:26:08
Recorded Date:
10 October 2013
Video Image: 
Transcript:
WARREN SHIELS: Good morning and welcome to the GLG Fixed Income web conference. My name’s Warren Shiels. I’m a director within UK Retail at Man GLG. I’m joined this morning by Portfolio Manager Jon Mawby. This morning we’ll be talking about fixed interest and the many challenges that this asset class is facing, whether it’s been the Eurozone, tapering or debt selling challenges to name a few. The purpose of the update is to provide some insight into these headwinds and also discuss some of the opportunities within these asset classes, and talk about how we’re using these within the funds. We have a facility online, which hopefully you’re following, where we can take questions and I’ll ask Jon to answer those at the conclusion of his update. So without further ado I’ll hand over to Jon.
JON MAWBY: Thanks Warren, good morning everyone and welcome to the GLG Fixed Interest web conference call. I’d like to cover a few topics today, and then as Warren said at the end we’ll be open for Q&A. So firstly for those of you not familiar with the strategies and the team I’d like to outline the funds and the differences, and then briefly cover the teams that support them. Secondly, I’ll go through an overview of the current market and particular some of the prevalent tail risks that we’re facing as investors at the moment. Thirdly, I’ll cover what we’ve been doing on the funds this year, in light of the market backdrop. And finally I’ll cover performance and how this has been impacted by some of the investment themes we’ve been implementing.
So if we just start with an overview of the funds. I’m responsible for four funds across two broad strategies. These can be broadly labelled as alpha-based and beta-based strategies. So the alpha-based strategies consist of the GLG Strategic Bond Fund and the Flexible Bond Fund. This is managed with an absolute return mindset and aims to deliver a positive return over a fixed income and credit cycle. Duration in the fund can be minus three to plus eight years. Volatility currently is round about 4% with a yield of 6.4%. Geographically the fund is unconstrained as is the sector profile of the fund. Really the aim of this fund is to be a fixed income asset allocation tool to choose the sweet spot within fixed income markets across the cycle, moving from a more broadly default sensitive structure, as is the case at the moment, it’s structured as short duration credit fund, to a more duration sensitive structure dependent on the point in a cycle.
The second part of the broad strategy that I manage is the beta-based strategies. This consists of the GLG Corporate Bond Fund and the Global Investment Grade Bond Fund. The return objective on this fund is to deliver a return in the region of benchmark plus 100 to 150 basis points. The funds are both benchmarked to the Merrill Lynch Large Cap Corporate Index. Duration on these funds will be approximately plus or minus two years either side of the benchmark. Currently the benchmark is around about six years with the fund around about lower fives. Volatility on this fund is obviously higher as you can see than the alpha-based strategy. The alpha-based strategies are designed to be lower volatility in profile, given their ability to invest across fixed income asset classes and not be constrained by a benchmark.
Geographically the beta-based strategies will be benchmark plus or mine 10% with a sector profile ranging plus or minus 5% around the benchmark. In essence we aim to deliver core fixed income and credit market beta with these funds, with an alpha overlay which corresponds to the benchmark plus or minus 150 basis points per annum. To deliver this alpha we have three levers. One is stock selection; two is sector rotation, making sure that we’re positioned in the appropriate sectors for the particular point in the credit cycle; and third is avoiding any domestic bias and making sure the fund sources its investment opportunities from around the global and hence it is a truly global fund.
In terms of the teams that support the fund, you can see on the screen at the moment that the fund is supported closely by the credit and convertibles team, headed by Steve Roth. This is composed of 28 asset managers and analysts across a variety of sectors, and distributed geographically around the globe in terms of expertise. In a broader sense the fund is supported by the wider GLG platform. This is comprised around 120 investment professionals in a multidisciplinary format, which includes a very strong macro team, equity sector specialists, regional expertise as well as emerging markets, rates and currency teams.
So that’s the funds and the team outlined. What I would like to now cover is the market backdrop, just a little bit of an update of what we’re facing at the moment. So you can see on the screen at the moment the investment backdrop faces a variety of tail risks across the globe. In the US, we have questions over Fed exit from QE. You know, kind of taper talk that we’ve experienced through the majority of this year from the end of the first quarter, now combined with debt ceiling of fiscal funding worries, the new Fed Chairman who I think in recent days is now more or less likely expected to Janet Yellen, kind of the policies that they will pursue. So, in the US, which has obviously been the backdrop of basically flight to quality over the last three years, you have building tail risks in terms of political structure and also central bank intervention.
I think in Europe it’s pertinent to say that we believe that the sovereign debt crisis is not over. We still have significant stress across economies within peripheral Europe, be that Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece, which undoubtedly will need another bailout shortly, youth unemployment is running a record levels. The sovereign debt crisis in Europe has gone from being front page news 12 months ago to being off the charts and basically not in the newspapers really in the run up to the German election of last month. And all of this kind of means that investors have become very sanguine over the risks in Europe, peripheral spreads have normalised dramatically over the last 12 months, and many of the tail risks that are still prevalent within Europe are not priced in.
Japan, I think many of you will have probably read the article by Stephen Harker by colleague recently. Dependent on your perspective, Japan are at the beginning or towards the end of a great financial experiment. Their three arrows policy is I think questionable in terms of its effectiveness. One thing to say is that the central bank and the government basically have held their hands up and at least are now saying that their policies are not independent, that they’re very much dependent on each other. How this plays out for Japan, who knows. I think we will get further clarity over the coming years. But certainly there are tail risks building in terms of their all in reflationary bias and as I say we’ll see in the next few years as to how this plays out.
Then you have the Middle East. Again the potential for an exogenous inflationary shock I think is very pertinent for Western economies. Increasing tension in the Middle East, increasing oil prices, given the backdrop of the amount of QE and the amount of money printing we’ve had across Western economies over the last few years, increases the risk of potential inflationary shock in one or more of those economies. Underlying inflation, ignoring the government numbers, is running at much higher levels than I think the government are willing to admit, particularly in the UK, and an exogenous inflationary shock could have a dramatic impact on not only people’s real incomes but also the bond markets in those countries.
So where does this all leave us in terms of markets and what they’re pricing in? Obviously I've just run through four or five potential tail risks, be they inflationary, be they geopolitical, be they to do with central bank intervention. As you can see on the next slide, which shows you the fixed index, investor complacency, if we take VIX as a barometer of both fear and greed, investor complacency is running at all-time highs relative to the tail risks prevalent in the market. As an investor this worries me. This makes me want to be more tactical on portfolios. We’ve seen a spike in recent days I think in terms of VIX, although a moderate one given the historical backdrop for the last five years, given the debt ceiling and the fiscal worries in the US, and I would expect the VIX at some point to trade substantially higher on one of those tail risks coming to the fore.
Also worth noting is liquidity in markets at the moment. You can see on slide 7, which shows you the market dynamics of buy side versus sell side in the US, you can see the total size of the credit markets there, which is the red line, continues to increase as corporate issuance continues to increase. A few weeks ago we had a record $49bn issuance out of Horizon. That dynamic is not surprising from corporates, given the record historical low yields that they can issue at. It’s a great short for a corporate treasurer or a CEO to finance at these levels. If we just look at the Apple bond that came six months ago, that’s currently trading at 89 cents on the dollar. It makes incredible sense for corporates to issue here.
So you’ve had a continuing increase in the size of the corporate bond market, you’ve had record inflows into the fixed income asset class over the last three years, so you’ve had a supply side and demand side both meeting. That has given the impression that liquidity is fine, people have been able to buy the assets they wanted to buy, not to mention on the back of this you’ve had an unprecedented financial deleveraging. And so all the assets that people have wanted to sell there’s been demand technical there to buy them.
I think the blue line is slightly worrying, especially if we see those flows in risk asset markets generically, and I think you can use this chart generically for risk assets, not just credit markets. I think the blue line shows a worrying technical that basically primary dealer positioning through regulation is now at all-time lows post-2008. It makes you wonder who will be there to buy the assets should we see a turnaround in those flows into risk and also fixed income asset classes. Will it be the Federal Reserve, who knows?
So if we just move on to some of the things we’ve been doing on the fund over the course of the last 12 months. As I mentioned earlier one of the tail risks we perceive is that to peripheral Europe we have been reducing peripheral European risk generically across the fund, especially into the first quarter, at the end of the first quarter of this year. Currently it sits below 10%. I would say the core position on the fund would be around about 4 to 5%. The excess that you see on the chart there is purely tactical positioning in terms of participating in new issues, very very short-term positioning in the region of one day to a couple of weeks.
We want to remain very tactical in terms of peripheral European exposure. It has been, as you can see from the chart, as high as nearly 18% this year. We want to be in a position to be able to invest in peripheral Europe in the credits, the companies that we like and that we see as good underlying credit risks, but we want to do that at much more favourable yields and find a much more favourable entry point. At the moment the risk reward in peripheral Europe is incredibly skewed against the fund, and so our exposure will remain very very tactical for the foreseeable future.
In terms of duration, on the next slide you can see duration over the previous 12 months and indeed since inception. Again, we’ve been reducing durations, particularly into the end of the first quarter this year, and that was prior to Ben Bernanke’s taper talk. We did this because breakeven durations, particularly in investment grade, were getting incredibly skewed against the fund. We couldn’t really find any attractive entry points into investment grade. You’ll see in a second how we’ve traded US investment grade exposure, and given the breakeven profile we thought it pertinent to take duration down in light of the negatively asymmetric return profile that we were seeing within credit markets.
Prior to the FOMC meeting in September, we thought that fixed income markets generically and particularly treasury markets were pricing in too much taper. We weren’t smart enough to anticipate no taper, I think very few people were, but we did anticipate a much lower amount of taper given the actual underlying data, not the headline date but the numbers that underlie the headline data, particularly unemployment, the quality and quantity of jobs are just not there. And we thought markets were starting to price in a much higher degree of tapering than was justified. So we allowed duration to trade up on the fund, and indeed consciously took duration up on the fund through purchasing US 10-year treasuries prior to the FOMC meeting.
On a reduced taper, we kind of expected a rebound in 10-year treasuries down to around the 2½% level. On no taper I would have expected the 10-year treasury to trade pretty much immediately below 2½%, at least within the week after. We didn’t see that. The market reaction was much more muted than that. Treasuries rallied to around about 2.7% and then down to 2.6%, and are currently back up at 2.7%. Given this muted reaction we’ve taken duration back down. There’s a very kind of, there’s a feeling of indecision I think in the markets at the moment. Both on strategic bond fund, we’ve taken that duration back down, and again on global corporate, we’ve reduced the duration profile slightly. We’ve been underweight on global corporate all year, sitting around about the 4.2 years. That’s obviously helped the fund in terms of the interest rate volatility. We took it back up to benchmark weight and we’ve currently reduced it a little in light of the uncertainty.
So if we just move on to the next slide, which I've just touched on, and that’s the US investment grade exposure. Again we’ve been reducing this pretty much all year in light of the breakeven duration profile in US investment grade and also the liquidity position that I discussed earlier. If you look at something like the Apple deal that came in the second quarter of this year, that was issued at a treasury level of around about 1.6%, and was an investor friendly transaction designed to obviously return cash to shareholders, and Apple came to the bond markets and expected credit investors to pay a premium for that issue because they basically hadn’t issued for 20 years.
We saw this as ludicrous, we didn’t get involved, and actually that was one of the key catalysts for continuing to keep and indeed making sure that US investment grade duration exposure was kept at low levels. This is reflected both in the strategic bond fund and in global corporate fund where it’s one of our key underweights, and it will continue to be until we see the risk reward profile change. I don’t expect this for the foreseeable future, and I think that probably our participation ratio in new issues in the US is a very good indication of our thoughts. It’s probably gone from seven out of ten new issues into the end of 2012, to currently around about one in ten at the moment.
So, in terms of the funds’ risk profile, it’s worth touching on the risk management process here at GLG. We have a dual level of risk management, but David Charles, who’s the Market Risk Manager who directly supports the funds on a day-to-day basis, he’s looking at correlation versus the underlying markets. So for instance just to touch on a little bit of a difference between global corporate and strategic bond fund. Strategic bond fund is really positioned to have a negative correlation or be uncorrelated to a traditional fixed income product.
So one of the correlations we look at is both to iTraxx crossover and to the broader index. We want this fund to be basically uncorrelated, so a traditional fixed income product, which will give it the scope and the ability to be able to deliver a positive return across a fixed income and credit cycle. Conversely, global corporate, we want to be highly correlated to the Merrill Lynch large cap corporate, to the extent that it can still deliver its alpha but also deliver the core credit market beta and fixed income market beta.
On top of this we also produce a number of stress tests looking at disaggregating things such as CSO1, so the credit spread from the actual interest rate risk. The duration number you saw at the start of the presentation is actually an overall duration number. The actual interest rate sensitivity is significantly lower. And looking at scenario analysis across a variety of instances, so looking at shocks to the interest rate scenarios, shocks to the equity scenario, looking at 1987, looking at the correlation crisis, looking at Asia, looking at things such as the Lehman default, and using various correlation assumptions to work out how the portfolios would react in terms of each of those instances.
So together these two things really give you a good handle on the exact risks that the funds are running. It makes sure that all the risks in the fund are conscious risks and are risks that you want to be there. So hopefully we’ll have no surprises in terms of the return profiles of the fund across a variety of market scenarios.
Finally I just want to touch on the return of the two funds. As you can see the moves we’ve made this year have had a significantly positive impact on the strategic bond fund, particularly in light of the interest rate volatility we’ve had this year. I think we’ve been fairly pleased with our positioning. One of the overall investment styles of the fund is to use rallies to basically reduce risk, whether that’s duration or credit, and that gives the fund the flexibility to be able to add risk in terms of, in the face of increased volatility. So you saw earlier the peripheral risk profile. That is consciously designed at the moment to give us the ability to buy into volatility and not be afraid to do so.
In terms of the global corporate fund, you can see there that we’re still ahead of index on the year. Obviously we’ve been affected by the interest rate volatility on this fund. That feeds directly into the overall volatility figure. We’re still ahead of index, and again the sector positioning and the duration positioning of the fund this year has helped the fund produce a reasonably good performance. So as you can see from the final slide here, the volatility on strategic bond fund has been kept fairly contained since inception. This is obviously one of the, within the aims of the strategy to produce a lower volatility than a traditional bond fund, and use the levels that we have on strategic bond fund to make sure this is the case.
WARREN SHIELS: Jon, the first question we’ve had through is do you see the yield on the alpha strategies falling if we see more opportunities at the capital level arise?
JON MAWBY: I think that one of the things that the strategic bond fund or an alpha-based strategy is a fixed income asset allocation tool. So we want to be ahead of the curve rather than behind it. I think two of the key decisions on a strategic bond fund is how much default sensitivity versus interest rate sensitivity that you have. At the moment strategic bond fund is set up as a short duration credit fund, as I've mentioned previously. At some point if we see stickier higher underlying yields I’m going to start getting worried about the default cycle and a spike in global default rates.
This will naturally mean that I’m going to want to shift the portfolio away from a default sensitive structure, so a short duration credit fund, as is in the case at the moment, to a less default more interest rate sensitive structure where you’re less exposed to a spike in global default rates. This will naturally mean that at some point the yield will fall as we seek to move the asset allocation away from the short duration credit structure, so there may be a period of time when you’re moving that asset allocation where yields naturally do fall. But that obviously is done in the framework of a better, a much better risk adjustment return profile for the strategy as a whole.
WARREN SHIELS: Got another question here, in what scenario would you go negative duration on the strategic and flexible bond funds?
JON MAWBY: I think one of the central investment themes and one of the central investment styles of strategic and flexible bond fund is very much to use rallies to reduce risk, and use volatility to add to risk. I think the beginning of this year, the first quarter is a perfect example, we were reducing duration all the way through the treasury rally, right into the taper talks where we had our lowest level of duration year-to-date. If we’d have got to 1% in terms of 10-year treasuries, we would have been pretty much flat duration at that point.
I think if we move into a situation that we saw Japan in earlier in the year, where 10-year yields were significantly sub 1%, and the rest of the yield curve was following suit, the risk return profile, so the asymmetry of risk for a bond fund to go negative duration moves significantly positive at that point. So if we saw, and just using 10-year yields as a proxy, if we saw 10-year yields go significantly sub 1% I think at that point it would make sense to have the conversation about going slightly negative duration on those types of strategies.
WARREN SHIELS: Thanks Jon, and then a final question: what would make you change the fund from being a short duration credit as it’s currently positioned?
JON MAWBY: Yeah, I think as I said earlier, if we saw stickier 10-year yields or stickier yields generically in terms of governments, at higher levels for longer, then I would start worrying about a spike in the default rate globally, and that would make me start to worry about the complacency in terms of that, and we would start to unwind that credit trade and move to a less default sensitive structure.
WARREN SHIELS: Thanks Jon, and thank you very much for the questions that you’ve emailed through to us this morning. So finally thank you very much for your support and listening to the conference call this morning, thank you.
Important Information
This document has been prepared by GLG. References to ‘GLG’, ‘we’ or ‘us’ relate to GLG Partners LP or GLG Partners UK Ltd, whichever is the legal entity managing/advising the fund or investment instrument. Both are authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.
Investment into the GLG Strategic Bond Fund and GLG Global Corporate Bond Fund is provided by GLG Partners Investment Funds Limited which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.
With regards the GLG Flexible Bond Fund this document has been prepared and is communicated by Man Umbrella SICAV, 19, rue de Bitbourg L-1273 Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg which is regulated by the Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier and registered under the number R.C.S. Luxembourg B-53150.
This document is provided to you for information purposes only and should not be used or considered as an offer or a solicitation to sell or buy the securities mentioned in it. Any decision by an investor to buy shares in the Fund must be made solely on the basis of the information and terms contained in the Fund’s Prospectus. Nothing in this document should be construed as investment advice, or as an opinion regarding the appropriateness or suitability of any investment. This document does not take into account the particular investment objectives, restrictions, financial or tax situation or needs of any specific client. No representation is made that the objectives or goals of any investment fund will be met or that an investment will be profitable or will not incur losses.
Performance data of the Fund is not based on audited financial data. Past performance is not a guide to future performance and the value of investments and the income derived from those investments can go down as well as up. Future returns are not guaranteed and a loss of principal may occur. Performance may be affected by economic and market conditions. Opinions expressed herein may not necessarily be shared by all personnel of GLG Partners UK Ltd and its affiliates and are subject to change without notice. There can be no guarantee that the events or circumstances envisaged in any forward looking statement will occur.
GLG Flexible Bond Fund
The fund currently has or intends to have more than 35% of its total holdings in Governments of the following States: United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Norway, Japan, Australia, Spain, Finland, Germany, Holland, France, Belgium, Ireland, Sweden, Austria, Italy, Denmark, New Zealand, Switzerland, Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Hong Kong, Singapore and also in World Bank, European Investment Bank, International Financing Corp, KFW, Eurofima, Inter-American Development Bank.
GLG Strategic Bond Fund
The fund currently has or intends to have more than 35% of its total holdings in Governments of the following States: United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Norway, Japan, Australia, Spain, Finland, Germany, Holland, France, Belgium, Ireland, Sweden, Austria, Italy, Denmark, New Zealand, Switzerland, Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Hong Kong, Singapore and also in World Bank, European Investment Bank, International Financing Corp, KFW, Eurofima, Inter-American Development Bank.
GLG Global Corporate Bond Fund
The fund currently has or intends to have more than 35% of its total holdings in Governments of the following States: United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Norway, Greece, Japan, Australia, Spain, Finland, Germany, Holland, Portugal, France, Belgium, Ireland, Sweden, Austria, Italy, Denmark, New Zealand, Switzerland, Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic and also in World Bank, European Investment Bank, International Financing Corp, KFW, Eurofima, Inter-American Development Bank.
In order to fulfil the fund’s objectives the Prospectus allows the manager the ability to invest principally in units of other collective investment schemes, bank deposits, derivatives contracts designed with the aim of gaining short term exposure to an underlying stock or index at a lower cost than owning the asset, or assets aiming to replicate a stock or debt securities index.
Full details of the fund objectives, investment policy and risks are located in the Prospectus which is available with the Key Investor Information Document in English and an official language of the jurisdictions in which the fund is registered for public sale, together with the Report and Accounts of the UCITS all of which are available free of charge from www.man.com
The information is furnished as of the date shown or cited; no representation is made with respect to its accuracy, completeness or timeliness. All information is based on GLG Partners UK Ltd calculations unless otherwise stated. No part of this material may be (i) copied, photocopied or duplicated in any form, by any means, or (ii) redistributed to any person without GLG’s prior written consent, except to those of your agents and employees responsible for its evaluation. All rights reserved, GLG Partners UK Ltd (2013).
UK/13/0831-P
Slides:
0|_BLANK_
9|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/55f7427c1c7bce8655b6889a06ef3d75_Slide 01.jpg
100|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/ca4990542e725017c0c8c874ae59f1ad_Slide 02.jpg
271|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/d701705d0a51199c81e199e033db5320_Slide 03.jpg
300|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/858f351c31409533ec7e693ca760fab0_Slide 04.jpg
315|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/a1c041b14da2cf9138d256a19695f43a_Slide 05.jpg
543|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/e8b126f7d12b670ddccb9f22c86a65c8_Slide 06.jpg
613|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/f7c0285fbd1358f9fea73d7e07686051_Slide 07.jpg
739|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/ffb9db75cebd0a98a3d4fb93c6f6e28e_Slide 08.jpg
822|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/9c9cfc01711d96c100940741d6b125cd_Slide 09.jpg
991|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/527b6591618172ab8adbea6a517fa71a_Slide 10.jpg
1089|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/05916947abb6c0923d69d04eac951e74_Slide 11.jpg
1232|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/13dd56e191e842e809507e71ced03243_Slide 12.jpg
1282|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/5025a3f662ad224403a18cbdd792aaff_Slide 13.jpg
1311|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/e09081e6add2e397f74c92a788e58de6_Slide 14.jpg
1336|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/55f7427c1c7bce8655b6889a06ef3d75_Slide 01.jpg
1558|https://daf4376a8a4e6d503c36-c52f3d86aa92eb8736915f89bc358a94.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/d6ad607e5abace863e4ff1ca8a22bec2_Slide 20.jpg
Advanced
Disable Comments:
Allow Comments
Slide Mode:
On
Structured:
Nonstructured
Company info:
Contact: Man GLG