ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2821|回复: 18

[阅读小分队] 【每日阅读训练第四期——速度越障14系列】【14-02】经管

[复制链接]
发表于 2013-1-31 19:20:28 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
13系列出勤统计出炉啦,特此公布皇榜,金科状元们都是~~ 详见 13系列封神榜 #70

出勤率前五甲!
No.1 xueluanfei --- 19 days
No.2 铁板神猴 --- 18 days
No.2 fifiwong --- 18 days
No.2 kudoucliff --- 18 days
No.5 iamyingjie --- 17 days
No.5 2012Michelle --- 17 days

本期越障达人!
No.01 xueluanfei --- 18 days
No.02 iamyingjie --- 17 days
No.03 fifiwong --- 17 days
No.04 kudoucliff --- 17 days
No.05 attractg --- 11 days
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------我是分割线----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

【速度】


【计时一】

As sequestration looms, contractors don’t fret
By Marjorie Censer and Jim Tankersley

The next few months could look even scarier than the last few for defense contractors already battered by federal budget cuts, thanks to the threat of automatic reductions looming in March. But industry executives had a surprising message for shareholders this week: Don’t worry about it.

In call after call with investors, officials at some of the area’s largest contracting firms refused to guess how much it would cost them if Congress allows the “sequester” to kick in on March 1. Even as their lobbyists keep warning how much the cuts would hurt the industry, the executives are projecting confidence that the sequester will not happen.

Northrop Grumman chief executive Wes Bush said Wednesday that his company’s outlook for the year projects “the sequestration is not triggered” and that Congress barely touches federal contract spending levels for 2013. General Dynamics chief Phebe Novakovic said last week that she had developed a “realistic” risk assessment for the company’s bottom line — and it, too, assumes no sequestration.

Their confidence defies the emerging consensus on Capitol Hill that Congress will not find an agreement in time to cancel or delay the cuts. It also threatens to disappoint investors in the event the sequester goes through, and it leaves thousands of Washington area contracting employees to wonder how safe their jobs are.

If the sequester cuts take effect in full, economists estimate they will destroy about 1 million jobs nationwide, including hundreds of thousands in the Washington area.

【字数256】


【计时二】

The executives do not appear to believe that will come to pass. It may be because Congress keeps averting fiscal crises at the very last minute, and because the Obama administration asked contractors last year not to issue layoff notices in preparation for cuts that were originally scheduled to begin this month.

It may also be because contracting firms appear confident in their ability to lobby for sequester relief.

' Encouraging action’

Lockheed Martin chief executive Marillyn A. Hewson warned analysts last week that the automatic cuts would hurt her company and the country’s defense capabilities. But Lockheed’s projections, like its competitors, excluded the possibility of the sequester going through. In her remarks, Hewson noted “encouraging action” taken by President Obama and Congress to delay the sequester in December, and she promised that “in the weeks ahead, we’ll continue to work with our government leaders to encourage a more effective solution to our nation’s fiscal challenges.”

Contractors say they cannot account for possible sequestration costs, because of huge uncertainty over whether the cuts will happen and how they would be distributed across programs.

"We are just now starting to see conversations around what cost would be reduced if we go into sequestration,” Samuel R. Strickland, the chief financial officer at Booz Allen Hamilton, said Wednesday. “So we still haven’t yet been able to identify how much that would impact us, if at all.”

【字数232】


【剩余部分】

Some industry analysts note that the contracting firms routinely account for various risks and liabilities in their earnings projections. They seem puzzled by the executives’ reluctance to quantify the risks associated with sequestration.

The notion that the cuts will not happen “is what the management teams of these companies think is the most likely case scenario,” said William Loomis, managing director at the financial services firm Stifel Nicolaus. He said analysts do not buy into their optimism. “We don’t have a lot of confidence in the numbers because of it.”

Several analysts caution that large contractors are certainly working on contingency plans behind the scenes in case sequestration goes through.

An earlier round of budget cuts is already hurting the industry, executives acknowledge. Federal spending reductions squeezed profit margins and stunted hiring last year for contractors, a trend driven home by Wednesday’s report from the Commerce Department that defense cuts pushed the economy into contraction in the fourth quarter.

In Virginia

Virginia’s secretary of finance said in a report late last year that jobs in professional and business services, the sector that includes federal contracting, grew only half as quickly as forecasters expected in 2012. That slowdown was a prime reason that the state lagged the national average in job growth last year.

Sequestration brings the threat of much greater pain. An economists’ report prepared last year for the Virginia Economic Development Partnership estimated that the defense and non-defense components of the sequester would push the Virginia economy into recession and eliminate more than 80,000 jobs a year for two years.

The job losses would probably begin immediately, said Ann Battle Macheras, vice president of the regional economics division at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond’s research department.

"I don’t want to sugar-coat it that we wouldn’t feel it,” Macheras said. “There’s some pulling back that would occur right away.”

Contractors were one of the first groups to cry out about those possible economic effects, warning that the cuts would damage not only their bottom lines and their workforces but also the broader defense industry. The companies attended rallies this summer and announced that they were considering issuing layoff notices to all of their employees.

But the Labor Department and the Office of Management and Budget persuaded companies not to issue those notices, a signal that seemed to calm the industry and suggest that sequestration might not happen — a sentiment bolstered by the delay of the January deadline. Macheras said that probably amounted to “mixed signals” from the Obama administration to the industry.

The Aerospace Industries Association, the main defense industry lobbying group, has sent loud and constant signals that sequestration would be devastating, including a news release Wednesday. Meanwhile, small manufacturers who supply the larger contractors are beginning to speak out about how sequester cuts would affect their businesses, said Chad Moutray, the chief economist at the National Association of Manufacturers.

Moutray said he holds out hope that Wednesday’s report on gross domestic product — and the large effects of spending cuts it showed — will push Democrats and Republicans back to the bargaining table to find a sequester alternative.

“Hopefully, this is a little bit of a wake-up call,” he said. “This is real. Government spending contracted 1.2 percent of GDP. That’s a big hit, and it’s just the beginning.”

【字数550】


【计时三】

Should You Eat While You Negotiate?
by Lakshmi Balachandra

Across cultures, dining together is a common part of the process of reaching negotiated agreements. In Russia and Japan, important business dealings are conducted almost exclusively while dining and drinking and in the U.S., many negotiations begin with "Let's do lunch." But are business deals actually improved when people discuss important matters over a meal?

To explore this question, I conducted two experiments. The first compared negotiations that took place over a meal in restaurants to negotiations in conference rooms, without any food to eat. In the second, negotiations were conducted with or without a meal in a business conference room. In the experiments, 132 MBA students negotiated a complex joint venture agreement between two companies. In the simulation, a provisional deal is in place, but a variety of terms must still be considered and agreed upon to maximize profits for their companies. The negotiators must determine how to handle each term of the deal. As is typical in many negotiations, in order to maximize their profits, the negotiators must share information and work together with the other side to learn where the most value can be created.

The greatest possible profits were created by the parties who were able to discern the other side's preferences and then work collectively to discover the profit maximizing outcomes for the joint venture, rather than merely considering their own company's profits. In the simulation, this can only be accomplished when the negotiators make trade-offs and then compensate each other from the net gains to the joint venture. The maximum value that can be created jointly for both companies is $75 million. Deals can be struck at lower combined values, down to as low as $38 million. To explore how eating together affected negotiation outcomes, I considered the total value created by both companies.

【字数309】


【计时四】

The students who ate together while negotiating — either at a restaurant or over food brought into a business conference room — created significantly increased profits compared to those who negotiated without dining. (Individuals who negotiated in restaurants created 12% greater profits and those who negotiated over food in a conference room created 11% greater profits.) This suggests that eating while deciding important matters offers profitable, measurable benefits through mutually productive discussions.

I designed a third experiment to test if it was in fact the act of eating together and not merely sharing a separate task that led to the better negotiated outcomes. I had 45 MBA students negotiate the same simulation, but instead of negotiating while eating, half of the groups negotiated while completing a jigsaw puzzle that had nothing to do with the negotiation. In this experiment, I found that the negotiators who shared a common task did not create better negotiation outcomes than those who only negotiated the deal.

I expected that both sharing a meal and collaborating on an activity would increase trust between the participants — and perhaps that the cultural history attached to eating together would increase trust more than sharing other activities — but when I surveyed participants in both studies, the trust levels they reported did not increase.

Why else might eating together improve the outcome of negotiations? There may be biological factors at work. When the negotiators in my first two studies ate, they immediately increased their glucose levels. Research has shown that the consumption of glucose enhances complex brain activities, bolstering self-control and regulating prejudice and aggressive behaviors. Other research
has shown that unconscious mimicking behaviors of others leads to increased pro-social behaviors; when individuals eat together they enact the same movements. This unconscious mimicking of each other may induce positive feelings towards both the other party and the matter under discussion.

In future experiments, I will continue to explore the reasons why eating while deciding important matters increases the productivity of discussions. In the meantime, you would be wise to suggest "doing lunch" whenever you meet to negotiate.

【字数345】


【计时五】

New wave of compensation claims to hit banks
by Katherine Griffiths

The UK’s four biggest banks must review thousands of past sales of interest rate hedging products to small businesses and pay compensation in a “significant” number of cases.

Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds and Royal Bank of Scotland will carry out the review within a year at the latest, with most cases resolved in six months.

The Financial Services Authority said today banks had signed up to the review and compensation scheme after its initial inquiry found that in more than 90 per cent of cases it had considered customers had been mis-sold products.

The FSA cautioned that the sample of 173 cases were disproportionately complex, so 90 per cent of customers overall are unlikely to receive compensation. But the regulator said a “significant proportion” of cases are likely to result in payments.

The banks must review sales of interest rate swaps to small and medium-sized businesses dating back to December 2001. Since then, about 40,000 of the products have been sold, the FSA has estimated, with the majority of sales made by the big four banks.

The swaps were supposed to help businesses when they took out loans by protecting them against interest rate increases.

In return for a fee banks agreed not to pass on the full cost of rising interest rates to their customers. However if rates fell, customers had to make regular payments to the banks.

The products became controversial as interest rates have remained close to zero in the past few years, resulting in businesses shelling out crippling payments to the banks.

【字数266】


【剩余部分】

Thousands of small businesses argue that the products were too complex and that the banks did not explain the risks involved.

The FSA announced in June last year that it would review a sample of cases and has today confirmed widespread suspicions of mis-selling to customers defined as “non-sophisticated”, or unable to fully understand what they were signing up for, requiring the big four to launch a full-scale review.

Six smaller other banks, including Santander, the Co-operative Bank and Clydesdale and Yorkshire Banks — both owned by National Australia Bank — are set to launch their own reviews by February 14.

Farmers and bed and breakfast owners have now been included in the category of non-sophisticated businesses that can be considered for compensation. They had previously been excluded because their high numbers of seasonal workers meant they technically fell into the definition of sophisticated businesses.

However, the FSA has ruled that subsidiaries of big companies and special purpose vehicles run by large property developers should be excluded from the review as they should have known what they were doing and therefore did not require the protections given to less well-informed investors.

Among the examples of mis-selling were poor disclosure of costs if the customer decided to stop the product, which could be in excess of 40 per cent of the value of the underlying loan, the FSA said. Banks also failed to establish customers’ understanding of risk, inappropriately incentivised staff to sell the products and sold products that provided more hedging than was necessary to the underlying loan.

The swaps debacle is the latest example of wrongdoing by banks, which are struggling with the task of paying billions of pounds of compensation to victims of payment protection insurance mis-selling. Several, including Barclays and RBS are also caught up in the global Libor rigging scandal.

Under the FSA’s scheme, the compensation bill for swaps is unlikely to match that of PPI. The regulator has ordered banks to repay all costs to customers which would not have taken out the product had it been adequately explained, and in some cases compensation for additional losses such as overdraft charges.

But banks will only have to swap customers into better products if they can demonstrate that is what customers would have bought in the first place in a correct sales process. Compensation will not be paid to customers that would have gone ahead anyway with improved disclosure, the FSA said.

However, some believe that civil litigation going through the courts over Libor will have a much more significant impact on the final bill for swaps mis-selling.

The majority of swaps were linked to Libor. Barclays and other banks are having to admit that they attempted to rig that rate in settlements with global settlements with regulators, opening the door for business customers to sue them on grounds of fraud.

A closely watched test case is being brought by Guardian Care Homes against Barclays. The care home operator has been allowed by a High Court judge to allege fraud in its case when it comes to trial in October.

Some analysts, such as Sandy Chen at Cenkos Securities, have argued that this case could open the floodgates to many more businesses, including large companies that fall outside the FSA review.

Responding to the FSA’s statement, Anthony Browne, British Bankers’ Association chief executive, said: “The announcement today will give clarity to businesses and will enable the banks to put in place the steps needed to resolve each case for customers. Where customers have suffered unfairly the banks have all agreed that they will put it right.”

A spokesman for Barclays said: “Where we have not met the expected standards, we will put things right. Barclays has already suspended swap payments for customers in scope of the FSA’s review who are in financial distress.”

Customers will be contacted directly by their banks. The FSA noted that claims management companies may flood into this market, as they have done with payment protection insurance, but added that they may take a “significant fee”.

“Customers do not need to use a claims management company because the process is straightforward,” the FSA said.

【字数690】


【越障】

Optimal Capital Structure
Jules H. Van Binsbergen, John R. Graham& Jie Yang

How much debt should a company use, and how does the use of debt affect firm value? Hundreds of research papers investigate corporate capital structure in an attempt to answer these questions. Theoretical papers agree that there are many benefits to using debt, including the tax benefits of interest deductibility, oversight and monitoring by intermediaries and financial markets, and the reduction in agency costs that might result from too plentiful free cash flows. The costs of debt include financial distress and bankruptcy costs, the possibility that a firm will pass up positive net present value projects if it has too much debt overhang, and the agency costs that can result if debt creates conflicts between managerial objectives versus those of bondholders and stockholders.

Despite all this research, a consensus view on optimal capital structure has yet to emerge. Consequently, in many cases it is difficult to make a specific recommendation about how much debt a given company should use. In this paper, we develop an approach that allows us to make specific recommendations about the optimal amount of debt that any given firm should use. We do this by estimating cost and benefit of debt functions for thousands of companies that appear to make unconstrained, optimal capital structure choices. In essence, we observe the choices made by firms that appear to behave optimally, which we use to statistically deduce optimal capital structure recommendations for firms with similar characteristics (similar profitability, asset size, collateral, etc).

Our approach starts with the estimation of firm-specific debt benefit functions. Because tax benefits are relatively easy to quantify, we focus the debt benefit functions on the present value of expected tax savings associated with interest deductions. Using the tax benefits of debt as a reference point, we can implicitly back out the associated cost of debt and map these costs to observable firm characteristics. Note that although we start by estimating tax benefits, our approach captures any and all benefits and costs of debt that influence debt choices, such as the benefits of committing to pay out free cash flows and the cost of financial distress, among other influences. More specifically, our approach involves estimating cost of debt functions for a subset of firms that appear to make unconstrained, optimal debt choices. These functions capture the cost associated with any given amount of debt and allow debt costs to vary conditional on a given firm’s profitability, collateral, firm size, investment opportunities, asset tangibility, and dividend policy. Based on these functions, we are able to deduce what the cost of debt would be for any firm with a given set of characteristics.

It is worthwhile to emphasize that our cost estimates capture all possible costs associated with using debt (i.e., not just distress costs). Moreover, as explained in more detail below, any benefit not captured by our measure of debt benefits is also captured in our cost of debt functions (and will enter these functions as “negative costs”). For example, the disciplining benefit of debt that causes cash-rich firms to commit to paying out free cash flows and “run a tight ship” is captured in our costs functions. By comparing our “all-in” estimate of the cost of debt to explicit measures of default costs, we can estimate the magnitude of non-default costs of debt. Our estimate imply that agency and other non-default costs are approximately the same magnitude as default costs.

[attachimg=769,493]113664[/attachimg]

Figure 1: Marginal benefit and marginal cost curves of debt for Alltel in 2006. The intersection of the two curves reflect the optimal amount of debt (point A). Having debt below the optimal amount results in too little debt (point B) and having debt above the optimal results in too much debt (point C). The shaded and dotted areas reflect the cost to underlevering and overlevering, respectively.

Given these firm-specific estimates of cost and benefit of debt functions, we can estimate firm-specific optimal capital structures. In undergraduate economics we learn that market equilibrium occurs where demand equals supply (i.e., where the demand curve intersects the supply curve). Analogously, in our setting, the optimal capital structure occurs where the marginal benefit of debt function intersects the marginal cost of debt function. Thus, for any given firm, we can determine its optimal debt choice as the debt ratio located at the intersection of the firm’s marginal cost and marginal benefit of debt curves.

For example, consider the marginal benefit and marginal cost functions to Alltel in 2006 (shown in Figure 1). The optimal amount of debt for Alltel in 2006 occurs at the intersection of the marginal benefit and marginal cost curves (at point A in Figure 1). If Alltel were to use too little debt (e.g., at point B), the benefit of using more debt would be greater than the cost of using more, so the company could increase firm value by using more debt. If a firm uses too much debt (e.g., at point C), the benefit of the last dollars of debt are less valuable than the costs, so the company could increase firm value by reducing its debt usage to point A. We are able to explicitly quantify the dollar cost of being underlevered (the shaded area in Figure 1 if Alltel were to use B amount of debt), as well as the cost of being overlevered (the dotted area if Alltel were to use C amount of debt). We also calculate the net benefit of debt, that is, the amount of firm value contributed by the optimal use of debt. We find that for the average firm, the net benefit of debt (i.e., benefits net of costs) equals about 3% of market value, while the gross benefits of debt (i.e., benefits ignoring costs) are about 8% of firm value. For some companies, the benefits are much greater.

Being able to make specific, firm-by-firm debt policy recommendations is an important addition to the current state of affairs. Though much progress has been made in capital structure research, empirical academic research tends to use reduced form regressions to identify the factors that are correlated with debt ratios. While this approach can make directional predictions related to corporate characteristics (e.g., firms with collateral use more debt on average), it does not explicitly separate out the benefits and costs of debt to facilitate predictions about optimal debt ratios, nor can the reduced form approach precisely quantify the cost of suboptimal leverage. Theoretical capital structure research can be used to derive an optimal debt ratio and to provide qualitative predications about capital structure. However, in order to keep the model tractable, most models focus on one or two costs or benefits of debt.

In our approach, we use actual capital structure choices to implicitly back out the cost of debt, and this estimated cost of debt encompasses all the ex ante costs that affect corporate financing choices. All else equal, companies that do not use much debt often face large costs, which translates into a “high” cost of debt curve in our approach. Reassuringly, the costs implied in our analysis are consistent in sign with the costs estimated in other empirical research. With the estimated cost and benefit functions we can determine directional (sign) effects, for example, whether firms with collateral face lower costs of debt (and therefore use more debt). Moreover, with our cost-benefit framework, we can make explicit recommendations about optimal capital structure, estimate the value added by using the model-recommended amount of debt, and address other issues that are described below.

【字数1259】


本帖子中包含更多资源

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
发表于 2013-1-31 21:00:07 | 显示全部楼层
占座走起!
发表于 2013-1-31 22:04:42 | 显示全部楼层
(1)1:45,The primary purpose of the passage is to discuss the possible affect of S, a budget cut in automobile industry conducted by Congress. The budget cut has disappointed investors and may cause millions of people to lose their jobs.
(2)1:32,The primary purpose of the passage is to disclaim that the uncertainty of the budget cut has hurt many investors, making them less confident in investment.
(3)1:51,The primary purpose of the passage is to present the experiment launched to develop the effect of negotiation on meal table. The methodology is discussed, but the result is unknown.
(4)1:43,The primary purpose of the passage is to discuss the results of the experiment and another experiment. The experiment shows that people negotiating during meal achieved higher profit. Another experiment was launched to check whether it was the eating that increased the profit and the result turned to be so. A probable explanation is that the eating increases the glu level which helps people make right decision.
(5)1:43,The primary purpose of the passage is to censure the big four banks that mis-sell products to customers, most of whom cannot get the compensation. The banks either pass the cost to customers when the interest rate increases or receive higher payment when the interest rate decreases.
(6)7:40,The primary purpose of the passage is to explore a mode to recommend the optimal debt structure. The benefit and deficiency of debt are discussed and the methodology of the article is presented-to estimate all kinds of cost of debt and choose enterprises of certain size as samples. Then a model is built which reflects the intersection of two curves which turns out to be the optimal debt structure. Finally, the author discusses the solidarity of the methodology and points out several other advantages.
发表于 2013-2-1 12:18:02 | 显示全部楼层
2'10''
about Job Crisis

1'40
the cut of the automobiles company may hurt the employees; many company show confidence to deal with the problems. but result is not good.

4'30
whether issue the layoff analysis still not come into an consistent

2'
it is a customer to discuss with dinning, but whether this is helpful in a negotiation. With this problem, a professor make a study.

2'40
eating during negotiation will improve the outcome, while share the same labor task can not. Experts gives to reasons concerning biological area. One is that eating can incease the glocuse, helping  control prejudge and aggressive behavior.

2'15

Dizzy

11'
how much debts should a company gain to get largest profits. There is not an optical modle to value this.

Recently, a new debt-benifit framework was build to offer optimal piont to various companies , based on the analysis of several key factors.

In the modle, there are two curve, one is the marginal benifit, another is the mount of the debt, when it is on the consection piont, company will gain the largest benefit.
发表于 2013-2-1 13:38:26 | 显示全部楼层
1'21''
1'05''
3'07''
1'42''
2'10''
1'35''
4'44''
发表于 2013-2-1 18:09:40 | 显示全部楼层
1'32''
1'29''
2'17''
1'34''
1'45''
1'25''
好长……吐血了……

7'35''
今天的文章都好长啊……而且这篇文结构简单,风格跟g很不合啊……

introduce the use of a model to determine the proper debt ratio.

1.breif introduction of the model(assumption,principle,basic idea)

2. the benefit of the model and how it could be used.


发表于 2013-2-1 23:59:03 | 显示全部楼层
1.(02'06'')the threat of automatic reductions looming seems to make the defense contractors scary,but industry executives are confident and say the "sequester" will not happen
2.(01'57'')Contractors say they cannot account for possible sequestration costs,because they still haven't been able to identify how much that would impact
3.(02'36'')are business deals improved when people discuss matters over a meal? two experiments are conducted to expalin this question,the greatest profits are created by discovering the max profit outcomes for joint venture, but not by merely considering their own company's profit.the author consider the value created by both companies.
4.(03'06'')the results of the first two experiments show that eating together while negotiating created increased profits compared with those who did not eat;the author designed a third experiment and found that negotiators who shared a common task did not create better outcomes;the result was different from what the author had expected---trust level did not increase;other factor that improve the negotiation outcome:biological factors maybe;continue to find out the reasons why eating together would improve the productivity of discussion
5.(01'44'')The UK’s four biggest banks must review thousands of past sales of interest rate and pay compensation in a “significant” number of casesobstacle(03'02'')
obstacle
main idea: introduce a new approach
structure:
raise question:How much debt should a company use, and how does the use of debt affect firm value? how theoretical reaearch answer to it
transition:an approach that allows us to make specific recommendations about the optimal amount of debt that any given firm should use
==>how does this approach work, introduce a model and use some examples to explain it
发表于 2013-2-2 00:57:14 | 显示全部楼层
2'09 the sequester cuts take effect in the nationwide and reduce a great number of jobs,which arose widely controversy.
1'44 President Obama taken "encourage action"to delay the sequester and more action is worked out by the congress.However,the cost of sequestration cannot be affirmed yet.
2'30 A research in order to figure out are business deals actually improved when people discussed important things with a meal.First group of people negotiated in a restaurants or in a conference room without a meal,second group of people negotiated in conference rooms with or without a meal.
3'10 Research shows that the group with meals have greater profit than the group without meals.The author did a third experiment,which set some other things to do while negotiating.Finally resulted in a less profit.It can be infer that a meal can supply negotiators more glucose to improve the discussion
2'14 Big four banks and something about sompensation scheme
10'04 The passage introduce a new approach to help firms determine how much debt should a company have for the best profit.The optimal debt,also the optimal capital structure,is the equation of the margin cost and margin benefit.If margin cost is greater than benefit,the debt is too much.If it is a less,the debt is too little.
发表于 2013-2-2 09:25:05 | 显示全部楼层
1‘42
1’33
1‘59
3’05
2‘21
5’46   有点小难度啊~
发表于 2013-2-2 10:25:50 | 显示全部楼层
谢谢spencerX 嘻嘻 来补一补作业吧!
SPEED
Time1(2:21)
Time2(1:48)
Time3(1:50)
Time4(2:11)
Time5(1:30)
OBSTACLE(7:27)喔~~~难啊~~
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-3-29 07:48
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部