As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

It’s been nine years since Intuit released a version of Quicken that was both fully-featured and designed to run on Apple’s hardware and operating systems. The Quicken Essentials for Mac bridged a technology gap between Quicken Mac 2007 and the Windows versions of the software, but many important pieces were missing.

Intuit has no announced their plans to release Quicken 2015 for Mac, and the software is available for pre-order beginning today. I had a chance to take a look at Quicken 2015 for Mac earlier this week. I am not a Mac user; I’ve been using Quicken Deluxe or Quicken Home & Business on Windows for years, and I’ve upgraded every year except this past year. But every time I’ve written a review of the latest Quicken product for Windows, I’ve heard from many readers who have been dreaming of a Quicken Mac version that contains all the features of the Windows version that can be run natively in OS X.

And that’s what Intuit is presenting today. It’s a complete re-write of the Quicken codebase (as it would need to be because of the requirements of OS X). And sometimes, from an application development perspective, when you’ve been modifying the same code for two decades, it’s good to start from the beginning with a fresh codebase.

Mac users will like the improvements. The interface borrows from what has worked well in Quicken’s mobile versions, and in fact, Intuit is also releasing an update mobile application for Quicken (the 2014/2015 mobile app).

The Quicken 2014/2015 mobile app.

Intuit promises the new mobile app will provide faster syncing between your desktop financial information and your mobile. A new feature allows you to easily take a snapshot of your receipts and enter the information for easier entry as a transaction, either on the spot or later. There are many mobile applications that allow you to organize your receipts, but if you’re a Quicken user, this built-in feature is essential.

Quicken 2015 for Mac desktop.

The sleek new interface is a welcome change. This overview screen shows how Quicken has improved its budget tracking features over the years, and most newer Quicken users are interested in tracking a budget. Quicken has really focused on household spending, and this has been seen more in the recent versions of the Quicken mobile app, and the same approach is now being featured in the desktop version of Quicken 2015 for Mac.

But the new version also finally gives Mac users powerful tools for tracking investments. It’s been almost ten years since a version of Quicken for Mac was able to do anything more than track investment balances. Like Windows users, Mac users can now track not only the balances in investment accounts, but the transactions as well. The investment features of the latest software are finally on par not just with the Windows version, but with users’ expectations for fully-featured personal financial management software.

Mac users can now track gains and losses, investment performance over time, and other important facets of all types of investment accounts, from stock trading portfolios to 401(k) retirement accounts.

Automatic upgrades for one year.

Intuit is trying something new with Quicken 2015 for Mac. When you buy the software, you will receive free, automatic software upgrades for one year. This is somewhat similar to how the Windows version works. Every time you open the Quicken software, the software checks to see if any new updates are available. There’s an important difference, however. The Windows updates are only bug fixes. And as most Quicken for Windows users know, there are undoubtedly bugs that need to be fixed with every new version.

However, with Quicken 2015 for Mac, the updates throughout the year will also include new features. According to Intuit, they are closely listening to their community of Mac users to determine what features to include. Any new features for one year will be automatically rolled out to all Mac users.

What’s missing from Quicken 2015 for Mac.

Intuit prioritized the features to include in the software based on feedback from Mac users. But as this is a new piece of software, built from the ground-up, and because Intuit is keeping to a release schedule, there are many interesting features available in the Windows version of Quicken that have not yet found their way into this new release for Mac users.

For instance, there is no calendar view of upcoming bills. The Mac version doesn’t include a debt reduction planner, something that many Windows users have found useful or at least interesting. Quicken for Mac doesn’t support some types of investment transactions, particularly those dealing with employee stock purchasing plans (ESPP). That would have been a deal-breaker for me. The retirement planner and goals planner are among some of the Windows features that are still missing from the Mac.

You can, however, vote on the features you’d like to see added to Quicken for Mac 2015 throughout the year. Intuit plans to listen to its community of users as much as possible, and implement the features that are most desired.

Final words.

For a Mac user that is serious about his or her finances, Quicken 2015 for Mac is a must buy. There’s always the alternative of running Quicken for Windows on a Mac through emulation, but the new interface makes the native version more appealing, but only if you don’t need the features that are currently missing from the Mac version.

The new software is an amazing improvement over what has previously been available for Apple’s operating systems, and the integration with mobile is a advantage worth the upgrade for users still hanging onto Quicken Mac 2007. Furthermore, any version of Quicken is much more feature-rich than any other financial management software available.

Intuit’s own (through acquisition) Mint has captured the interest of a new generation of financially-minded individuals and households, but Quicken holds so much more power, and as someone moved beyond basic budgeting and spending tracking to grown-up financial needs like investing for retirement or being the head of a household, Quicken is an essential upgrade over Mint.

Not surprisingly, having the Intuit team take me through a demo of the software earlier this week has piqued my interest for the latest Windows upgrade. I skipped Quicken 2014 for Windows, and I’ve been reading that users are still having problems with this version. I’d like to see some of the interface improvements and underlying technology fixed with the next version for Windows. It would be great to see a ground-up rewrite of the code, just like the Mac version, but with a tight yearly upgrade cycle, I doubt that will be the case any time soon for Windows users.

How to buy Quicken 2015 for Mac.

Quicken 2015 for Mac is available today for immediate download from Intuit, the Mac App store, or Amazon.com. If you prefer receiving software in a box in CD-ROM or DVD-ROM format (does anyone?), the software will be available in October in retail locations.

The price today is $74.99.

Quicken 2015 for Mac FAQs.

Here are some of the questions I’ve received so far.

Can you edit investment transactions?

Yes. Unlike Quicken Essential for Mac, the investment features are implemented the same way as all other accounts, so you can add, edit, and delete transactions. The software does more than just track your investment balances.

Can you import old data?

Yes. You can import data from any previous version of Quicken for Mac or Windows into Quicken 2015 for Mac.

Give us your feedback.

Once you’ve downloaded the software and have had a chance to import your data (or begin from scratch), let other potential users know about your experiences. I’ve had a chance to look at the software from afar, and I like what I see, but I don’t have a Mac to run the software for myself. Do you like the new features, and do they work as expected? Are you missing the few aspects of the program that are available on the Windows version but not yet on Mac?

The images in this post were provided by Intuit.

{ 5 comments }

Banks typically look for every possible instance to charge customers to fees. That’s why it’s particularly important to stay aware of your bank account balances. With the increasing popularity of automatic payments (outgoing) or automatic withdrawals (pulls), a poorly timed deposit can result in overdraft fees or insufficient funds (NSF) fees. A few years ago, I took a survey of the different ways banks process their customers’ debits and credits, and saw how easily it would be for banks to trap customers treading close to low balances in a maze of fees.

For example, let’s say you have $500 in your checking account at the beginning of the day on September 1. You could have previously written a check for $600 to pay your September rent, you could have an automatic withdrawal using your debit card scheduled for $300 to pay your electricity bill on the first of the month. You go to the bank after work and deposit $500 into your checking account.

Some banks would process the rent check first, generating one overdraft fee of $35. This would be followed by the $300 automatic withdrawal, processed during the ACH batch, but now your balance is a negative $135, so you receive a second overdraft fee and a balance of a negative $470 before your overdraft coverage comes from your savings. Finally, the bank processes your deposit, giving you a balance of $30.

Had the bank processed the deposit first, you would have saved $70. And if the payments were returned rather than covered through overdraft fees, you might have caused problems with your landlord or your electric company. Banks justified these techniques with two specific claims:

  1. Larger withdrawals should be processed first because they usually represent more important payments, like rent and mortgage payments.
  2. There’s no consistent way for banks to know what time an automated transaction is received, and thus most transactions should be processed in batches at night.

Consumer groups have criticized banks for this approach because it isn’t consumer friendly, it’s designed to maximize profits at the expense of customers, and it’s rather easy to improve. And after class-action lawsuits and guidance by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureaus, more banks are improving their procedures.

Wells Fargo is in the process of making some positive changes. Again, I’m a long-term customer of Wells Fargo, or to be more accurate, I’ve been a customer of a string of banks that, through a series of mergers and acquisitions, has ultimately (so far) become the bank known as Wells Fargo.

As of August 11, Wells Fargo no longer posts checks and automatic payment transactions (ACH) from highest to lowest value. Instead, the bank will post transactions based on the date and time the bank receives them. It still isn’t as simple as it sounds. Wells Fargo doesn’t post these transactions immediately. That happens during the same nightly batching process. Each branch has a cut-off time for deposits, but you may not see that cut-off time until you visit the bank or ATM.

Cash deposits and transfers made before the cut-off or after the cut-off and before batch processing begins will be counted as available when other transactions are posted during the batch process. Check deposits might not clear the same day, however. After the any qualifying deposits are posted, Wells Fargo will process debit card purchases, ATM withdrawals, account transfers, online bill payments, and teller-cashed checks based on the time the transaction occurred.

Then, Wells Fargo pays your checks and automatic payments. This is the category that used to be prioritized by value, from high to low. Now these will be processed in the order the instructions were received by the bank, and if no time information is available, they will be processed from low value to high.

Wells Fargo has some additional changes coming in September. More transactions will be considered “pending withdrawals” during the day. Previously, you wouldn’t be aware of pending withdrawals during the day, but now, Wells Fargo will mark them as pending withdrawals as soon as they are received, and reduce your available balance immediately. The withdrawals will still be processed during the nightly batch. If you look online, you’ll be able to see pending withdrawals beginning September 19.

While these changes do reflect some improvements and perhaps some clarity over the old system, there are still certain instances where customers can find themselves with multiple overdraft fees or returned payments.

Even diligent people make mistakes with their financial accounts. But the best way to avoid having to deal with these issues is by taking a sensible approach to account balance maintenance:

  • Know how much money is in your bank account.
  • Don’t write checks or initiate automatic withdrawals using money that isn’t in your account and available today.
  • Keep track of your finances so you don’t have any questions about whether your payments will clear your bank account.
  • Always keep a solid buffer in your checking account. Choose a buffer amount that covers your weekly transaction volume.
  • Set up an alert (with your bank, with Mint.com, with Quicken, or with some other tool) to alert you if your balance is low.

Wouldn’t you know it, I found myself dealing with an overdraft fee recently. Yes, even people who write about personal finance make mistakes. To be honest, as budgeting became less of a necessity for me, I let some of my financial guard down, and haven’t been tracking my finances as closely as I used to. For many years, I looked at Quicken on a daily basis, but I haven’t done so in a while. I’m trying to get in the habit of checking my transactions once a week, but it’s going to take me some time to improve the accuracy of my transactions over the last year or so.

For more information on Wells Fargo’s new posting order policies, you can read this PDF.

Were you ever stymied by the way your bank processed your deposits and withdrawals over the course of one day? Are these changes by Wells Fargo significant improvements?

{ 0 comments }

If you’ve been online in the past week or two, you have no doubt seen viral videos of strangers — and maybe even your friends — dumping buckets of ice over their heads. There is a charitable cause behind these videos. Most, or at least some, of the cold, soaked folks are accepting the challenge to support the ALS Association, a non-profit organization that provides support for research, assistance for people with Lou Gehrig’s Disease (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis), and coordination of care, and the organization advocates for its cause through political lobbying.

Does dumping ice on your head have anything to do with curing a disease, and does it matter? I suppose the answer to both questions is no. There seem to be some disagreements about who started this latest craze. People have been dousing themselves with water to bring attention to causes for a while, but someone wishing to support the ALS Association caught onto this idea and it has certainly captured a lot of people’s attention.

And it’s working. According to the ALS Association, the organization has received $22.9 million in charitable donations between July 29 and August 19. For some context, that collection compares with just $1.9 million raised during the same time period last year, during which time no viral video was asking people to support the ALS Association. That is massively impressive. Good job, everyone who donated.

Still, more questions need to be asked. The ALS Association explains that the increase in donations come from both existing donors — those who have historically supported the organization — as well as 453,210 new donors. Presumably 453,210 persons or thereabouts were inspired by the video to do something they wouldn’t have otherwise done. And existing donors might have increased their normal contributions to be part of the frenzy.

How much of the $22.9 million has come from these 453,210 individuals? Are we looking at a case where a small group of major donors seized the opportunity to help the organization manifold, while your average ice bucket warrior kept their contributions slim? Does the organization even know what to do with $22.9 million?

Before I contribute to an organization, I like to know a little more about it, beyond the mission statement, beyond the marketing. The most important thing is whether the organization is a good charity, and that could mean many different things. Is the organization’s mission in line with something I’m passionate about and interested in? Are the executives taking care of the money they receive?

In the case of the ALS Association, the non-profit’s 11 executives earned $1.8 million in salary for the tax year ending January 2014. Another $950,000 was spent by the organization for marketing consultants. The organization raised a total of $23.6 million in funds that year, and only $363,000 of that was from government grants. During that year, only two individual donated more than $5,000 to the organization; one contributed $5.75 million and the other gave $500,000. While this doesn’t guarantee how people donated this year, it does seem like a good portion of contributions come from small donations like those that might result from a campaign like the ice bucket challenge. This is encouraging.

Here’s the organization’s explanation for the $5.75 million contribution:

In December 2013, the association received a bequest totaling $5,750,000, establishing a term endowment according to designations made by the donor. The proceeds of this bequest are to be maintained by the association in an endowment fund for a period of ten years. Earnings from the fund are restricted to support research and may be spent on a current basis.

The ALS Association’s total expenses in the last fiscal year wee $26.2 million, up from $25.7 million the prior year. These expenses include research grants, patient and community services, public and professional education, fundraising, and administration. Those administration expenses are 7.3% of the total. Charity Navigator, a company that rates non-profit organizations, comes up with a different result of 11% using the prior year’s financials, but considers that to be relatively efficient and provides the organization with an overall four-star rating.

The CEO received total compensation last year totaling $362,458. Is that the right price to pay for a non-profit CEO for a company with annual expenditures of more than $25 million? Maybe. Or maybe knowing the CEO is in a financial position those with ALS would like to find themselves in makes the idea of supporting the organization less tasteful. I do know that running a non-profit organization like the ALS Association is complex and difficult, yet an established organization certainly takes advantage of the willingness of people to support that organization — whether it’s smart people and consultants to advise the CEO or whether it’s the corps of thousands of volunteers who assist non-profit organization through some of the less sophisticated tasks of operating the programs.

Taking all things into consideration, the ALS Association seems to be on solid financial footing and is actively working towards its mission. The money raised by the organization has historically been distributed through grants from the ALS Association to groups doing the hands-on work in research in care, hospitals and universities. Judging by their financial disclosures, their IRS Form 990, and their reviews, you can feel confident giving to the organization.

There has certainly been some criticism in social media about the ice bucket challenge. Many challengers passed along the message by asking that the people they “nominate” either dump a bucket of ice water on their head or donate. This has stirred backlash — other people believe that people should donate regardless of whether they want to record and share a video of an impromptu ice shower. And there are always a good percentage of people who take the challenge, sharing videos with their friends on Facebook, without even mentioning ALS or otherwise identifying the purpose of the video.

But if the numbers can be believed, it’s working. It doesn’t even matter that some people are dumping water and maintaining the virality of the cause without donating or without mentioning ALS. In this case, it’s working, because the medium is so large, the message is getting through. Assuming the ALS Association is not behind this, and that it is a true grassroots campaign, this is a beautiful situation for the organization. Usually, you have to spend a lot of money on marketing to raise funds like this, and companies that handle the fundraising often take a significant piece of the revenue.

For example, hiring a company to handle telemarketing keeps some of the most important outreach work for an organization manageable, but a company that raises $133,000 might keep $111,000 for itself, leaving only $22,000 to the organization it’s working for. $22,000 is better than nothing, but it’s just a portion of the total raised.

In this case, I have to side with the supporters of the ALS ice bucket challenge, not the critics. In other cases, yes, acting foolish on social media in support of a cause, without even mentioning that cause, could backfire. People who have no concept of charity will naturally join in on the fun when they see their friends and strangers doing it. It reminds me of the planking meme from a few years ago. There was no organization to support, just a feeling of inclusion in a popular movement. Luckily for ALS, the penetration of the ice bucket challenge meme is so high that even if 60 percent of video participants have no idea about ALS and neglect to donate money, the benefit to the organization is still fantastic.

If you do choose to participate, you should focus on ALS and give to charity yourself, to the extent that it fits in with your budget, whether it’s $1, $5, $100, or more. Then again, if you don’t give, even if you don’t mention ALS, in this case you are likely still helping the organization. However, you could look at the recent figures and determine your $100 amid a haystack of $22.9 million in one month has diminishing returns for the organization this year, and might do better for an organization that receives much less public attention — at least this month. There are many ways to look at the situation to determine whether you should participate and donate.

Some of the other criticisms of the challenge don’t really stand up to scrutiny. Is it a waste of water? The amount of water needed for the challenge is negligible, but could be seen as a waste in areas where there is a drought. Is it a case of “slacktivism,” where people can feel good about “supporting” an organization without really doing anything? Maybe, but if so, just throwing money at a problem is the same thing — the real charity is donating time and effort. What I don’t like is that this is an indicator of how culture is changing from an externally-focused, doing-good model to a look-at-me-I’m-doing-good model. Celebrities are jumping in on the craze. I’ve even seen friends use the ice bucket videos to market their businesses or “personal brands.” The self-centered trend runs counter to altruism, empathy, and charity, so it’s interesting to see this combination of people drawing attention to themselves in addition to the disease.

Will you do take the ALS ice bucket challenge? Donate to the ALS Association here.

{ 0 comments }

Fair Isaac Corp. is changing the FICO score calculation, and many consumers will have higher credit scores as a result. The FICO score is still the most widely used measure of a consumer’s creditworthiness. The current calculation is called “FICO 08″ and the new calculation to be rolled out soon is called “FICO Score 9.”

Banks rely on credit scores like the FICO score to determine whether to lend money to consumers and how much to charge borrowers for that privilege. Overall, the higher credit score you have, the lower loan interest rate you may qualify for. FICO isn’t the only game in town. Lately, it’s been seeing some competition from products like VantageScore. VantageScore recently updated their own scoring algorithm to better reflect risk, and because this score is backed by the three credit reporting bureaus, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion, it has been gaining traction among banks and lenders.

The update to FICO is Fair Isaac’s response to the new VantageScore algorithm. FICO’s new scoring approach, FICO Score 9, prevents certain behaviors from negatively affecting scores.

Accounts that have been transferred to collections agencies and have been repaid are dropped, so these accounts are no longer factored in. Previously, an account that had been in collections but has been repaid remained a negative factor in calculating a FICO score.

Medical debt won’t negatively affect your credit score as much. FICO now believes that medical debt has little to do with creditworthiness and risk. Most people find themselves in medical debt not because they are bad at handling loans, but because they were ill-prepared for a major medical expense. Sometimes, even the best emergency funds can’t handle immediate medical expenses.

Yet, presence of medical debt can certainly be a problem when a person is considering taking on more debt, which is why a bank would look at a credit score.

These changes, plus an alleged new technique for diving the creditworthiness from consumers without a credit history, are purported to be good for consumers in general. And for those who fall into the above categories, scores will undoubtedly increase. Increases scores, in theory, have great advantages for consumers. Debt becomes less expensive. If you qualify for a better mortgage rate by 50 basis points (or 0.5 percentage points), you could save tens of thousands of dollars over the life of the mortgage. This is significant savings and could be a fantastic benefit. It could help more people reach financial independence or debt-free living sooner — or at all.

This is a very optimistic outlook. Maybe Fair Isaac has consumers in mind — and considering part of the impetus for these changes were recommendations from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, there is definitely a pull in favor of a large portion of Americans, those who borrow money sometime in their lives. But Fair Isaac doesn’t deal directly with consumers for the most part; banks do. And banks have a way of turning anything good for consumers against the consumers.

New regulations to protect consumers? Banks charge additional fees. Lower rates available on mortgages? Fewer consumers qualify for credit. Extremely low rates for banks borrowing from the Federal Reserve? Extremely low interest on savings accounts. New, higher credit scores for a portion of American borrowers? The potential results seem clear: Higher loan interest rates, a higher standard for lending, fewer loans, or a combination.

Does a bank look at raw credit scores or percentiles? From a financial perspective — and these are companies in the financial industry so they know all about evaluations from a financial perspective — it doesn’t make much sense to evaluate loan applicants on raw numbers. Percentiles hold the keys to decision-making.

Let’s saw a university based its applicant acceptance solely on SAT scores. The SAT scores its test on a scale up to 800. When I was in high school, there were two SAT tests, math and verbal, for a total possible score of 1600. A score of 650 out of 800 in math would have been very good, and would have qualified the test taker for a good percentage of universities. That score might have been in the 90th percentile, so scoring a 650 in math means you’ve performed better than 90 percent of the population.

The SAT company changes the test, though, and in one year, perhaps they made the test easier. The same person who received a 650 might now receive a 680. That sounds like an improvement, but because the test has changed, now that 680 is the lowest score necessary to be in the 90th percentile. Your score improved but so did everybody else’s. Colleges aren’t just going to admit more students because more test-takers scored 650 or above, they’re going to move the cut-off to remain with the 90th percentile.

And that’s how I expect things will work with credit scores as well. There’s some leeway because the scoring change does not result in an across-the-board credit score increase. Only a portion of consumers will benefit from increased scores. But even though increased scores are limited to people who fall into those categories, the percentiles will change. Some people will probably see a benefit in the form of lower loan rates or a higher potential for qualification, but it won’t affect the overall amount banks are lending. The pool of money ready for loans won’t get bigger, at least not due to this change. If banks loan more money next year than this year, that would have happened regardless of Fair Isaac’s meddling.

With the new score calculation, there doesn’t appear to be a way for any consumer to see a lower credit score. Of course, some consumers will see lower credit scores over time, but that would be a result of their particular behavior with credit rather than the scoring algorithm change.

Some people win, some people will lose. And the people who lose will be those who weren’t affected by the score change, in other words, those who don’t have medical debt or haven’t had collections.

Another factor to keep in mind is that interest rates are still historically low. Experts have been predicting the rates would increase ever since the Federal Reserve Board began lowering them. Eventually those experts will be correct. Interest rates could go up at the same time more people have higher credit scores.

You can’t see your own FICO Score 9 yet. You can find out your FICO scores under the previous version of the algorithm by visiting MyFico.com and ordering “FICO Standard” products for each of the three credit bureaus. Because each of the three bureaus could contain slightly different data about a consumer, there could be a different FICO score for each bureau, even under the same FICO 08 calculation.

With the introduction of FICO Score 9 to lenders, consumers don’t yet have the ability to see exactly what lenders who use FICO Score 9 see. That puts consumers at a disadvantage yet again, just as when FICO Scores were not available to the public, and you were never able to know your own credit score until you applied for a loan. I expect Fair Isaac will begin allowing consumers to buy their scores using the FICO Score 9 algorithm eventually, but not before the lenders get a glimpse of the overall data and can make new decisions.

I decided to order my FICO 08 scores from all the bureaus. Previously, I had only monitored my score for free using CreditKarma, and the score reported there, my “TransUnion New Account Score,” has remained 790 for a long time. CreditKarma also reports a VantageScore of 874 for me, down from 886 a few months ago. MyFico charges $19.95 for each score, but I found a discount code (S1403STL20FST) to reduce that price.

Within seconds, I received my FICO 08 scores from each bureau: 807 from Experian, 806 from Equifax, and 806 from TransUnion. I expect little change between FICO 08 and FICO Score 9 for me since I don’t fit any of the above categories. But, if I had medical debt, my score could potentially increase by 25 points.

What do you think about these changes to the FICO scoring algorithm? Will it have a positive effect for consumers? What are your credit scores? (You can share them anonymously if you like.)

{ 2 comments }

Beware the Inspirational Story or Your Wallet Will Suffer

by Luke Landes
Story

Storytelling is powerful, and is the smart marketer’s tool for separating consumers with their money. Watch out for inspirational stories.

3 comments Read the full article →

How Depression Threatens Financial Well-Being

by Luke Landes
depression

Depression prevents people from making what other would consider “logical” financial decisions.

7 comments Read the full article →

15 Actions Families Are Taking Today to Make College More Affordable

by Luke Landes
Graduation

Sallie Mae’s recent report explains the results of the latest survey on how American families pay for college.

8 comments Read the full article →

Naked With Cash: Betsey S, June 2014

by Luke Landes
Betsey - Naked With Cash

Betsey offers her mid-year financial update for Naked With Cash.

1 comment Read the full article →

Naked With Cash: Laura and Leon, June 2014

by Luke Landes
Laura and Leon - Naked With Cash

Laura and Leon present their latest financial update for Naked With Cash.

0 comments Read the full article →

Naked With Cash: Brian, June 2014

by Luke Landes
Brian - Naked With Cash

Brian shares his mid-year financial update for his latest Naked With Cash report.

0 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 52612345···50100150···Last »