Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Nothing to see here  (Read 6508 times)

Offline uburoibob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3262
    • Bob Martin 11:11
Nothing to see here
« Reply #15 on: December 16, 2008, 01:50:01 PM »
Kind of interesting watching the contortions you are going through to cater to a minority audience, rather than trying to extend your demographic to people who will find themselves left with the resources to purchase Parker Flys... Rudy almost saw the light until you guys started listening to an already captive audience tell you how to sell to them (after the factory tour).

Bob

1997 Parker Fly Concert Burnt Butterscotch  -  1999 Parker Fly Artist Custom Hardtail Butterscotch -   1998 Fly Classic in Cherry Red with DiBurro Roland Mod - 2000 Fly Standard Classic in Cherry Red - http://bobmartin1111.com
1999 Parker Fly Artist Custom Hardtail Butterscotch -   2000 Fly Standard Classic in Cherry Red - http://bobmartin1111.com

Nothing to see here

Offline justwatching

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Nothing to see here
« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2008, 02:10:25 PM »
And we've barely scratched the surface! Think we're contorting now. There's still 9 other things to unveil. I can't wait. This much "activity" over a midi guitar, an upgrade to an existing model, and an artists signature model. I personally think the only group that will contort is the old school Parker base. Maybe that's because I know what is coming. But just like the 2008 namm thread, this should be just as interesting. Something tells me I'm going to hear the same old song.[}:)][;)]
carpe vola
And remember, if you are ever lost, you are always directly above the center of the earth.

Nothing to see here

Offline kwcabs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 384
    • http://www.kwcabs.com
Nothing to see here
« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2008, 02:11:19 PM »
Ditto Simon.  I certainly appreciate folks over there working to make things happen, but like you I'm just not happy how.  All of this is in my opinion.... the Gk looks terrible it looks completely out of place.  Now they say the new GK-3 which I assume this is, is faster than previous and overall better, but everyone is right an RMC system is the way to go here.  Not to mention it's probably cheaper because there is a lot less body modification (at least it seems that way)  The control layout on the midi, is especially distracting.  As for this Dragon Fly.  It's a cool name that should be put on a great parker not this thing.  I mean yes, there are a lot of nice options there, but it's basically only a fly in shape and hopefully fretboard material.  The pickup ring looks down right cheap, the controls are less disctracting than the midi but still not great, what do you possibly need that indicator light for???, don't even get me started on the Floyd.  Why in God's name would you take perhaps the most refined and best trem system ever and replace it with the giant hunk a chunk of base metal that came out over 25 years ago???  Boggles me.  To me, if USM is trying to make a fly that appeals to Floyd lovers (and I'm not saying they are) then they should sell them a Washburn or some other guitar that normally comes with one.  

I'm very sorry to sound so critical because I know some people have worked very hard on these, just trying to voice my opinion in such a way to be clear (not that anyone cares about little ol me :P  )

BTW, as for the PM20 Pro I see they've also changed to the "new" style headstock, it looks OK but I just don't see "Parker" when I see that headstock.  Also not sure what this Phenolic Fretbaord is all about, I assume it is not the carbon fiber board on the Fly, so not sure what the real advantage of phenolic would be over just ebony.  Ok I doubt it will ever crack, but it can still build up plenty of grime and I don't think will feel any faster.

You want to wow me with new models then show me something awesome like new colors on the fiber fretboards (yes this can be done).  New woods instead of just the same old paint (yes I give credit for some that have happened this past year, but to my knowledge only 1 the Koa was a new wood everything else was just veneer, and while nice didn't blow me away, but the Koa does :)  Make the RMC with 13 pin a standard option, maybe matching headstock veneers at least on the Ps .  Oh, I'm sorry I rant I rant agghghhgh


Owner of KWCABS guitar speaker cabinets.  We specialize in making simply the best speaker cabinets out there, constructed out of top-quality hardwoods, standard lines as well as custom work.  WWW.KWCABS.COM

Check out my Parker Supreme here www.kwcabs.com/parker%20page.htm

Kurt Wyberanec
Owner of KWCABS guitar speaker cabinets.  We specialize in making simply the best speaker cabinets out there, constructed out of top-quality hardwoods, standard lines as well as custom work.  WWW.KWCABS.COM

Check out my Parker Supreme here www.kwcabs.com/parker%20page.htm

Nothing to see here

Offline mountaindewaddict

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1894
Nothing to see here
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2008, 02:12:38 PM »
quote:
Originally posted by uburoibob
Rudy almost saw the light until you guys started listening to an already captive audience tell you how to sell to them (after the factory tour).

Bob


Bob, could you be more clear here?  I was there and I'm not sure what you were talking about.

Casey

Gear:
Parker P-44, Digitech GNX4, other stuff...
"Remember, if at first you don't succeed, you're doing it wrong."
God Bless!
Casey

Gear: Parker Fly Deluxe, Parker PDF60, Way Huge, Digitech / Hardwire, Line 6, Source Audio,T-Rex, and TC Electronic Pedals, Egnater amps, other stuff... God Bless!

Nothing to see here

Offline 908ssp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6365
Nothing to see here
« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2008, 04:01:03 PM »
Yes I didn't understand Bob's post at all.

I also don't get why anyone is complaining. I honestly don't think there is anything to complain about as long as they offer the stock Fly. They can do anything they feel will sell guitars. If the market warrants these then great make them. I also don't think you guys have a clue sometimes. For instance there is virtually no wood between the bridge pickup and the spring cavity on the Floyd guitar so how else are they going to mount a pickup if not by the most cost efficient means a pickup ring? Plus for all the repeated complaints ad nauseam about not being able to change pickups and then they make it easier and you still complain. [V]

Alex

Alex

[IMG]http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r245/908ssp/ThumbNails/_1010802.jpg[/IMG

Nothing to see here

Offline uburoibob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3262
    • Bob Martin 11:11
Nothing to see here
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2008, 06:57:36 PM »
The post was aimed at marketing folks at Parker and was shop shorthand for this...

To reach out to an audience that they don't have will require a different finesse. Beyond the shredders, etc. To get to the 35-40 plus crowd who have some dough and get them to buy Parker guitars in the same sort of numbers that they gobble down PRS guitars and Fender Collectors guitars etc, Parker guitars, which we all agree are the best guitars in the world need to be made to be desirable. Ads and marketing need to be crafted to create desire in the other 90+% of the market.

All I've seen is marketing aimed at the same people they already have... And this new crop of guitars is even more market-specific. There's a definition of insanity being doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Tailoring your guitars to hope to exploit the existing market base, without concern to increasing market share, is fine, if you are content with the status quo. At one point, it seemed as if Parker wanted to expand its base rather than contract it. Focusing on the minutia of changeable pickups, Floyd Rose whammy systems and straight headstocks does nothing to really push the desirability of these guitars in any direction other than inward. The forum members, from a marketing perspective, are inbred (me included). We're already here. We've already spent on Parker.

There are roughly a million more guitar players out there who would be interested if only the guitars were being marketed and advertised to them, rather than the base Parker is marketing to. During the factory tour, there was an advertising discussion. The summary, as presented to me, was that they were going to back down print advertising and go with a heavier web presence, concentrating on the core base of Parker users (which is sort of funny, cuz print advertising is polling as much more effective these days than it's been in the last 5 years). I kinda scratched my head, as that represents less than 10% of their potential. Much less. I mean, it's what management wanted to hear, I am sure, because the costs associated with that type of marketing are much less.

Anyway, it would appear from what is happening, marketing wise, is that the focus is even tighter and more inward than ever. Shame, cuz it comes at a time where it's incredibly cheap to increase market share. As dollars become tighter, the first thing the competition will do is reign in ad dollars. Meaning that for every dollar you spend that they don't, you get a double bump or better. And ad space deals can be had left and right, right now. AND, when the economy turns around, you retain the market share you've won.

The message SHOULD be reaching out to the rest of the market instead of the guys here on the forum.

Clearer?

Bob

1997 Parker Fly Concert Burnt Butterscotch  -  1999 Parker Fly Artist Custom Hardtail Butterscotch -   1998 Fly Classic in Cherry Red with DiBurro Roland Mod - 2000 Fly Standard Classic in Cherry Red - http://bobmartin1111.com
1999 Parker Fly Artist Custom Hardtail Butterscotch -   2000 Fly Standard Classic in Cherry Red - http://bobmartin1111.com

Nothing to see here

Offline kwcabs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 384
    • http://www.kwcabs.com
Nothing to see here
« Reply #21 on: December 16, 2008, 08:59:34 PM »
Alex I think it goes back to the arguement about devaluing the brand by making the guitar more like others.  The Fly is unique because of the innovations in brought to the table.  Instead of continuing to innovate the company appears to be going backwards.  I have a ton of guitar and have played for quite a while, and at least in my opinion, there is no bridge system that operates as well as the Fly.  I'm not considering things like the Steinberger because that's an alternative tuning bridge, and while also innovative is a different sort.  The Fly bridge is a normal tremelo system for all intensive purposes.  It is smoother, feels better, and stays in tune equally as well without any of the fuss.  I don't have to sell it, you all know it well.  I see a 3x3 headstock that looks like it could be on any guitar popping around, and a FR and things of that nature and I think it lessens what the Fly is or was all about.  Things like adding 13 pin are great.  Why were they able to do that on the Belew and make it looks good, but then we have this???  The Fly is one of the sleakest most elegant guitars to date, many would agree I'm sure, and by doing things like that you take away from its biggest attribute, its look.  Now, yes yes, many would say that is not the most important thing, but from the point of view of what made you pick it up for the first time it certainly is, and that should be one of the main concerns of R&D and marketing because if you take away from that "what is that let's pick it up" mentality, people will never be able to find out what they are missing.  This ties in with the fact that little, or at least seemingly little, has been done with the Fly itself in going on 15 years.  I'm not saying it needs to change, but it can expand, even companies like PRS come out with new interesting color schemes and the like, Parker has definitely lagged behind in general in this area.  Only in the last season did we see anything really "new" and aside from the Koa and the Snakeskin, it was nothing amazing.  I don't have a lot of suggestions, but then again that's not my job.  

On Bob's comment, I'm not sure I understand either because to me, many of these changes and additions have been to grab the new buyer who is used to things like FR and the like.  But I do agree, these guitars are not marketed in such a way as to make them really grow.  Or at least it doesn't seem like they are.  I don't even own a PRS (there is one I want and haven't gotten it yet) but it seems I'm made aware of every new model they make before it hits the streets!!


Owner of KWCABS guitar speaker cabinets.  We specialize in making simply the best speaker cabinets out there, constructed out of top-quality hardwoods, standard lines as well as custom work.  WWW.KWCABS.COM

Check out my Parker Supreme here www.kwcabs.com/parker%20page.htm

Kurt Wyberanec
Owner of KWCABS guitar speaker cabinets.  We specialize in making simply the best speaker cabinets out there, constructed out of top-quality hardwoods, standard lines as well as custom work.  WWW.KWCABS.COM

Check out my Parker Supreme here www.kwcabs.com/parker%20page.htm

Nothing to see here

Offline laughinglarry

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
    • http://www.myspace.com/larrysmithmusic
Nothing to see here
« Reply #22 on: December 16, 2008, 09:35:30 PM »
The Floyd Rose is at the request of the artist.  If I'm not mistaken, that's the Vernon Reid signature guitar.  I understand that Jennifer Batten will be getting her own signature too, as will Dave Martone (once he figures out what he wants).  Those last two were straight off a Dave Martone interview from Six String Bliss.

I think we ALL agree that artist signature models WILL get a new audience.  You don't like the Floyd, fine.  Vernon does.

BTW - I much preferred the SciFly name over DragonFly.  [:p]

As far as RMC versus GK, I know that there are a lot of passionate RMC owners here.  And I don't mean them any disrespect, but why would you put a microphonic HEX system on a guitar with a trem?  It's bad enough if you use the piezo output and trem together.  Now inject all that noise into a synth. [xx(] And again, if you've got to have a factory installed RMC system, there's always the Belew...

Larry

2000 Fly Deluxe Single 2, '98 Fly Classic, '97 Fly Deluxe (with GK-2A), '07 Steinberger GM-7TA, '89 Strat Plus, '92 Les Paul Custom, Ibanez Silver Series (Strat), Epiphone Dot, '65 Mustang, Yamaha BB3000AF, Peavey Foundation, Hamer Cruisebass
http://www.myspace.com/larrysmithmusic
www.myspace.com/karmagenerator

Nothing to see here

Offline 908ssp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6365
Nothing to see here
« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2008, 09:52:43 PM »
Well the last two responses were kind of opposites which KW point out [not Larry's]. I really don't know specifics of marketing but I do interact with an awful lot of guitar players through the web. And a magazine ad isn't going to sell any of them a guitar. Joe  Bonamassa actually playing a Fly might but an ad showing Jimi Hendrix with a Fly wont.

Not making changes because you're too good to change doesn't get you new buyers. Making changes to attract new buyers seems logical. It is obvious to me that as much as I have no need for it the potential Fly buyer is also often the guitar synth player so building a better synth guitar is a natural way of finding new buyers. Now that isn't a huge market but that doesn't mean you should ignore it and it is especially open to many of the Fly attributes. What Synth they use is something that should be considered and there are many facets to that decision, none of which are addressed by any of the critics except looks.

The Floyd is a necessity of expanding farther into the shredder market. But combining that with a synth is fine for a artist special but makes it too expensive to get much market share. Personally I have no need for a Floyd but it seems obvious from the complaints about the Fly trem not staying in tune lately that the Floyd might be an improvement for some players.

Now as far as the PRS buyer I think Parker has already done that and it is only going to have a limited success as this is a much harder nut to crack. All the season and special wood guitars are aimed squarely at the PRS buyer. The PRS is a horrible playing guitar but its perceived quality and beauty and that it has become a player in many current bands has given it credibility. It is that exposure that makes a difference once the quality and pretty woods fall in line.

Can the Strat and LP market be opened to the Fly? Honestly I don't think so. You're not going to tell them they don't know what a guitar should sound like. They know what they want to sound like. That is not to say a small portion can not leave the hero worship and make out on new ground. But the less change they have to swallow the easier it will be so a Single Cut that looks more a LP than Fly and sounds like a LP too is going to be easier to sell. Etc.

And it is about selling guitars not some high minded fight for principle or ethic just plain old selling guitars.

Alex

« Last Edit: December 16, 2008, 09:57:15 PM by 908ssp »
Alex

[IMG]http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r245/908ssp/ThumbNails/_1010802.jpg[/IMG

Nothing to see here

Offline justwatching

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Nothing to see here
« Reply #24 on: December 16, 2008, 09:54:07 PM »
Wow larry, you pretty much covered my retort. thanks! yes it's an artists guitar. Everything from the floyd to the pick up ring, are to his specs.
But I have a serious question for Bob. Where have you seen Parker marketing? Did i miss a meeting or something.
carpe vola
And remember, if you are ever lost, you are always directly above the center of the earth.

Nothing to see here

Offline Ipp0n

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
Nothing to see here
« Reply #25 on: December 17, 2008, 12:21:32 AM »
quote:
Originally posted by justwatching

But I have a serious question for Bob. Where have you seen Parker marketing? Did i miss a meeting or something.


that was what i was asking myself.  i remember when parker first came out.  they were so different that all guitar players new about them immediately.  but now that time has passed, they are old news--actually no news.  there is much less of a wow factor.  the fact that they were so different was the only reason i knew about them to begin with.  i played guitar for about 15 years, then quit and really focussed on other instruments.  then, i got the fire in me to start playing again.  so, i needed a new guitar.  when i began my search, i was looking at prs--and i had made up my mind that was what i wanted.  but as i did more and more research, and played more and more of them, i just was not satisfied.  so, i moved on to G and F, which i never liked, and now after trying them again i remember why.  so, i decided to search for something else--something new.  then, after 6 months of searching, i saw a fly on ebay.  and i remembered back to when i first saw them.  i had forgotten that they even existed, and none of the stores i went into had any--but they all had PRS, G and F.  i remember, back then, i was not ready for such a different guitar, so i did not pay them much mind at the time.  but something told me to try one out.  i went to the only parker dealer in the greater kansas city area and played one.  needless to say, i fell in love--and the rest is history.

my point to all of this is that nowhere did i see advertising for parker.  my exaustive research led me to them.  i saw all sorts of advertisements for PRS, F, and G.  i do not believe that most people are going to go through the types of troubles that i do when making purchases--i am an extremely astute and calculated buyer(mostly because i am a 33 yr old, broke a$$ student!).  so, for this scenario to happen to the average buyer looking for a new guitar is probably unlikely.  now, parker might be a glaringly obvious option for parker owners, or guitar gurus who know how special they are, but i believe for the rest of the guitar playing world, they are more of a novelty or nothing at all.  i know...blasphemy![}:)]  so, to increase sales, outside of the couple dozen they may sell to us, some fundamental changes must be made.  although i am not interested in FR at all anymore--thanks to the fly trem--there is a huge market for them.  it makes sense to me to bring parker to the "outside world" through changes like this, no matter what we think it will do for our future parker purchases.  but, i pray that they keep some traditionals on the line for those of us who love them for the way they are.[:p]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLYCO...so easy to play, a caveman can do it.

'08 DELUXE

Nothing to see here

Offline Nefarius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
    • The Nefarius Homepage
Nothing to see here
« Reply #26 on: December 17, 2008, 04:33:37 AM »
laughinglarry: "If I'm not mistaken, that's the Vernon Reid signature guitar."
The image file is named vreid.jpg so that's kinda likely ;)

Parkers are iconic and have very loyal fans so I guess it's only natural that they try to defend what they perceive as a true Parker. Sometimes those discussions are funny, sometimes they're very taxing. But as long as the quality stays top notch I see no reason not to experiment. And if Vernon wants to have his beloved Floyd Rose, so be it. Sure, it's not versatile like what we're used to and can be a true pain in the ass but it is the most tuning stable thing and if a FR-Parker attracts new players, great. If the 3+3 headstock gets Les Paul fans convinced, great. Even if some or maybe many don't like the new ideas... give them at least the chance to fail. Ken's design was radically new back then and needed time. Allow new radical ideas to happen, dump those that don't work out and keep the ones that do. Parker players shouldn't have to be reminded to keep an open mind when open minds gave birth to the very thing you're trying to defend. Try, analyse, adapt, redesign, test, try again...

It's evolution, baby. Don't try to fight it or you'll be extinct. [;)]

Greetings...
Nef

Nothing to see here

Offline uburoibob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3262
    • Bob Martin 11:11
Nothing to see here
« Reply #27 on: December 17, 2008, 07:04:24 AM »
quote:
Originally posted by 908ssp

Well the last two responses were kind of opposites which KW point out [not Larry's]. I really don't know specifics of marketing but I do interact with an awful lot of guitar players through the web. And a magazine ad isn't going to sell any of them a guitar. J



Alex,

Indeed your two lines at the beginning point out that you don't know the specifics of marketing. Ads don't sell guitars. Ads, branding ads, don't SELL anything. Nobody ever says "I bought this because of the ad" if it's a well done branding ad. They work on the subconscious and they do a MUCH better job of growing and sustaining sales across a brand than all the Musicians Friends catalogs with their 85% SALE THIS WEEK ONLY ads ever do. Sales and marketing are at complete odds with each other most of the time. Marketing involves long term goals - sales are very short term (typically 30 day cycles).

The best indication that ads are working are that YOU, the customer, don't think they are. Believe it or not, there IS a lot of science to it. Same with your motorcycles. There's more to the desire you have for a Ducati than its component or assembled parts. It's your desire for the finest 2 wheeled motoring experience. Your belief that the machining is blah blah blah. That the way the paint is applied is blah, blah, blah. Believe it or not, it's their long term marketing that preconditioned you to believe those are real values. And it carries over into just about anything you own, as well as your political and religious beliefs. Marketing, when its firing on all cylinders, is you waking up in the morning and wanting something, believing that you know WHY you want it. And not knowing what created the need to know WHY you want it in the first place. Right now, and for the last 15 years, Fender gets the importance of strategic marketing. Their meteoric rise has nothing to do with the quality of their guitars.

I'll grant you your ignorance of the marketing world, and try not tell you why I think an old Indian blows a Ducati out of the water, even though I've never even ridden a motorcycle.

Bob

1997 Parker Fly Concert Burnt Butterscotch  -  1999 Parker Fly Artist Custom Hardtail Butterscotch -   1998 Fly Classic in Cherry Red with DiBurro Roland Mod - 2000 Fly Standard Classic in Cherry Red - http://bobmartin1111.com
1999 Parker Fly Artist Custom Hardtail Butterscotch -   2000 Fly Standard Classic in Cherry Red - http://bobmartin1111.com

Nothing to see here

Offline guitarmanuk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 847
Nothing to see here
« Reply #28 on: December 17, 2008, 07:16:32 AM »
I, for one, am happy to see these innovations as long they are not there to dilute the original.  As Nef said it was the early inovations that pulled us all towards these amazing guitars in the first place.

As for marketing, I can't comment on the state of that in the USA.  In the UK it was p1$$ poor, but I don't blame Parker for that, I blame the, now defunct, distributor.  Hopefully Parker will find a new UK distributor that has the same passion for the guitars that we all do.  Perhaps all the UK members could form a consortium to take this on [;)] [:D]

www.dancineasy.co.uk - wedding/function band
www.saxandguitar.co.uk - sax and guitar duo
www.kimcypherband.co.uk - jazz/funk/blues/reggae band
David

1997 Parker Fly Classic transparent Teal Green
1997 Parker Fly Concert Butterscotch

Nothing to see here

Offline 908ssp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6365
Nothing to see here
« Reply #29 on: December 17, 2008, 09:34:37 AM »
quote:
Originally posted by uburoibob

Indeed your two lines at the beginning point out that you don't know the specifics of marketing. Ads don't sell guitars. Ads, branding ads, don't SELL anything. Nobody ever says "I bought this because of the ad" if it's a well done branding ad. They work on the subconscious and they do a MUCH better job of growing and sustaining sales across a brand than all the Musicians Friends catalogs with their 85% SALE THIS WEEK ONLY ads ever do. Sales and marketing are at complete odds with each other most of the time. Marketing involves long term goals - sales are very short term (typically 30 day cycles).

The best indication that ads are working are that YOU, the customer, don't think they are. Believe it or not, there IS a lot of science to it. Same with your motorcycles. There's more to the desire you have for a Ducati than its component or assembled parts. It's your desire for the finest 2 wheeled motoring experience. Your belief that the machining is blah blah blah. That the way the paint is applied is blah, blah, blah. Believe it or not, it's their long term marketing that preconditioned you to believe those are real values. And it carries over into just about anything you own, as well as your political and religious beliefs. Marketing, when its firing on all cylinders, is you waking up in the morning and wanting something, believing that you know WHY you want it. And not knowing what created the need to know WHY you want it in the first place. Right now, and for the last 15 years, Fender gets the importance of strategic marketing. Their meteoric rise has nothing to do with the quality of their guitars.

I'll grant you your ignorance of the marketing world, and try not tell you why I think an old Indian blows a Ducati out of the water, even though I've never even ridden a motorcycle.

Bob


You're right I don't know how advertising works.  I do know that reputation, peer pressure, and hero worship influence purchases if there is something deliberate that can be done to address these and if that is called marketing then I do see a value in it.

Also it is pretty obvious that if new models with changes are being made that people need to be made aware of it and that seems to me to fall under the term of marketing.

Marketing wasn't the intended discussion of this thread. But the idea that marketing instead of changes is misguided I think. Marketing of changes makes more sense to me as then you have something to tell people they haven't heard.

Guitar playing isn't all that different than other products based on tools. Look at the endorsements of shoes by pro athletes as one example huge sums are spent in the belief that it makes a difference in sales. Look at the participation in auto or bike racing. My point is Adrian and Vernon are both quirky players not known for their "tone" if that is the only kind of major player that endorses the Fly what does that say?

Alex

Alex

[IMG]http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r245/908ssp/ThumbNails/_1010802.jpg[/IMG