The latest Ganzo Firebird D2 knives

[craytab]

Friend, you don't know my ethnic or religious background, or where my family was early in the last century. For however grave you think my words, making the assumptions necessary to shame me or expect an apology to a group with which I might share kinship takes this to a new and highly inappropriate level.

And a triple down.

 

[craytab]

Yeah, and that's part of why I said early on that I think it's in poor taste on Ganzo's part. However, I don't know the exact difference between taste or expected norms and the legal particulars for all their models. You made an interesting distinction between making copycat knives in a foreign country and selling them in our country. I think there's something to that. I mentioned that they are consistently for sale on Amazon, not because I expect Amazon to be active IP police but because I'd expect there to be some method or recourse available if laws are actually being broken. (Perhaps someone with a better legal understanding could fill us in.)

I'm an avid fan of several Chinese companies making knives and gear under $100. I'm happy to recommend Kizer, Civivi, Bestech, etc. They make really nice knives for the price and don't have these more obvious moral complications hanging around their neck. Of course, that's still pretty recent. When Ganzo launched their original line in 2018, I tried their FH11. Versus the norm for $20-something Chinese-made knives of the time, I was impressed. Unfortunately, the issues under discussion here have kept me from actively recommending them.

One final issue for the crusaders here is a matter of scope. If it is good to make our purchasing decisions based on moral analyses of the companies, what is the appropriate scope for making those decisions. How do we weigh these moral issues? For instance, I demonstrated the difference between copycats and counterfeiters. I find the latter far more offensive. What other moral dimensions should be considered? For instance, if a knife company was on record donating money to a group that was actively campaigning to take away your liberty or violate a natural right that was arguably more fundamental than IP rights; how would that compare?

Trying to change the topic won't work.

Do you know how many times we've come across the "well, these people have done worse!" argument? It is weak at best.

 

[Hackenslash]

[USER=385986]@Hackenslash , while there are obviously more than two tiers, the difference between market tiers seems less "synthetic versus actual" and more a matter of budget. For instance, there are lots of people who only shop within certain budget boundaries. When that boundary is very low, such as $20 or $30, then they definitely won't have most of those originals in their selection pool. In that case, they were not a potential customer at the time of purchase and therefore could not constitute "lost business".

One pro-Ganzo argument I've seen (maybe from Frankie and Bird) involves that group of people. Having that low of a knife budget can be temporary. Sometimes, people start with a budget that low and it causes them to get into knives, acting as a "gateway". As their budget goes up and the originals enter their selection pool, and their knowledge of materials and workmanship expand, their experiences with the copy can influence them to buy the original. I know some people will jerk their knee against this possibility, but I've actually seen it happen twice IRL.

One guy started with a Ganzo copy of the Ontario Rat. It was probably his first online knife purchase. After losing it, he bought an actual Ontario Rat. The other case was more dramatic. The second guy made the jump from cheap gas-station and hardware-store knives to a sub-$20 Spyderco knock-off from Ganzo. He really liked it and to be fair, it probably was a step up in quality for him. That excitement led him to pony up for a Byrd model. The last time I saw him, he was carrying an actual Spyderco. Obviously, this only proves that it can happen, not how often it will happen or how it balances against other consumer decisions.[/USER]

Ok, let's take this step by step and walk through the process. The entire "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" argument holds no water. I'll explain why.

Let's start with a knife acquisition process in a world where clones and counterfeits do not exist.

[B]1.[/B] Casual knife shopper sees a picture of a Hinderer XM-18 and really loves it. Sexy!
[B]2.[/B] Casual knife shopper checks on buying an XM and finds the price is $400. No way!
[B]3.[/B] Casual knife shopper discovers that Zero Tolerance makes some Hinderer knives. Cool!
[B]4.[/B] Casual knife shopper checks on buying an 0562 and finds the price is $200. No way!
[B]5.[/B] Casual knife shopper finds that Kershaw makes some Hinderer knives. Well, alright then.
[B]6.[/B] Casual knife shopper checks on buying a Cryo and is thrilled to find they can get one for $30.
[B]7.[/B] Casual knife shopper buys a Cryo, stays within their budget, Rick gets his tithe and KAI sells a knife.

This is a natural, beautiful process. This is The Circle of Knife-Buying Life.

Now, let's include an environment where clones and counterfeits are available. Let's start over at step #7:

[B]7.[/B] Casual knife shopper looks on LiarExpress and finds a "Rock Handlebar MX-81" that looks just like the XM but only costs $40
[B]8.[/B] Casual knife shopper buys an MX-81. That Cryo seemed kinda dinky anyway.
NOW, please note that damage has already been done to Rick and KAI. They didn't sell a knife out of this deal. That damage does not go away, regardless of the future actions of Casual knife shopper.

At this point there are three possible future actions by Casual knife shopper:
[B]A.[/B] Casual knife shopper buys more clones and counterfeits. That MX was a smokin deal!
[B]B.[/B] Casual knife shopper does not buy more clones and counterfeits. All they needed was one knife anyway.
[B]C.[/B] Casual knife shopper is "redeemed", saving up for and buying a real XM.

A logical and realistic consideration of these three outcomes leaves "C" as the least likely to occur. Even if "C" can occur with equal frequency to "A" and "B", a 33% outcome is not an acceptable return to justify the purchase of the clone in the first place. For crying out loud, one of the equally possible outcomes does [B][I]ADDITIONAL[/I][/B] damage to the legit manufacturer. THERE IS NO NET BENEFIT GAINED FROM A REDEEMED GANZO BUYER SCENARIO! NEVER! Any potential positive is swallowed up by an equally possible future negative! This can not be argued. It is fact.

The only way that a Redeemed Ganzo Buyer scenario can work is if it is looked at as a singular, stand alone action. If this event, and only this event is considered, one can be duped into thinking that an initial bad can lead to a future good. But the purchase of a clone is not a singular event. It happens every day, over and over and over. When the clone purchases are viewed correctly as a population of events, there's no way an intelligent person can separate the minor good outcomes form the overwhelming bad ones. The net effect is always bad for the maker.

This "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" scenario is an insult to anyone who has enough intelligence to see through this BS. Please don't insult our intelligence by bringing weak sauce arguments like that. YouTube reviewers need to stay on YouTube and try not to offer critical thought.

 

[Eli Chaps]

Ok, let's take this step by step and walk through the process. The entire "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" argument holds no water. I'll explain why.

Let's start with a knife acquisition process in a world where clones and counterfeits do not exist.

[B]1.[/B] Casual knife shopper sees a picture of a Hinderer XM-18 and really loves it. Sexy!
[B]2.[/B] Casual knife shopper checks on buying an XM and finds the price is $400. No way!
[B]3.[/B] Casual knife shopper discovers that Zero Tolerance makes some Hinderer knives. Cool!
[B]4.[/B] Casual knife shopper checks on buying an 0562 and finds the price is $200. No way!
[B]5.[/B] Casual knife shopper finds that Kershaw makes some Hinderer knives. Well, alright then.
[B]6.[/B] Casual knife shopper checks on buying a Cryo and is thrilled to find they can get one for $30.
[B]7.[/B] Casual knife shopper buys a Cryo, stays within their budget, Rick gets his tithe and KAI sells a knife.

This is a natural, beautiful process. This is The Circle of Knife-Buying Life.

Now, let's include an environment where clones and counterfeits are available. Let's start over at step #7:

[B]7.[/B] Casual knife shopper looks on LiarExpress and finds a "Rock Handlebar MX-81" that looks just like the XM but only costs $40
[B]8.[/B] Casual knife shopper buys an MX-81. That Cryo seemed kinda dinky anyway.
NOW, please note that damage has already been done to Rick and KAI. They didn't sell a knife out of this deal. That damage does not go away, regardless of the future actions of Casual knife shopper.

At this point there are three possible future actions by Casual knife shopper:
[B]A.[/B] Casual knife shopper buys more clones and counterfeits. That MX was a smokin deal!
[B]B.[/B] Casual knife shopper does not buy more clones and counterfeits. All they needed was one knife anyway.
[B]C.[/B] Casual knife shopper is "redeemed", saving up for and buying a real XM.

A logical and realistic consideration of these three outcomes leaves "C" as the least likely to occur. Even if "C" can occur with equal frequency to "A" and "B", a 33% outcome is not an acceptable return to justify the purchase of the clone in the first place. For crying out loud, one of the equally possible outcomes does [B][I]ADDITIONAL[/I][/B] damage to the legit manufacturer. THERE IS NO NET BENEFIT GAINED FROM A REDEEMED GANZO BUYER SCENARIO! NEVER! Any potential positive is swallowed up by an equally possible future negative! This can not be argued. It is fact.

This "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" scenario is an insult to anyone who has enough intelligence to see through this BS. Please don't insult our intelligence by bringing weak sauce arguments like that. YouTube reviewers need to stay on YouTube and try not to offer critical thought.

My friend, if it wasn't so dang early in the morning, I'd crack a beer and read that all over again with a big ole smile on my face.

 

[danbot]

One final issue for the crusaders here is a matter of scope. If it is good to make our purchasing decisions based on moral analyses of the companies, what is the appropriate scope for making those decisions. How do we weigh these moral issues? For instance, I demonstrated the difference between copycats and counterfeiters. I find the latter far more offensive. What other moral dimensions should be considered? For instance, if a knife company was on record donating money to a group that was actively campaigning to take away your liberty or violate a natural right that was arguably more fundamental than IP rights; how would that compare?

People make purchasing decisions based on moral considerations all the time. It's one of many considerations to a serious purchase.

 

[craytab]

People make purchasing decisions based on moral considerations all the time. It's one of many considerations to a serious purchase.

Yup. And since this is a hobbiest forum, and these choices aren't exactly life sustaining, with the amount of choices out there it is very very easy to not chose ganzo (remember, ganzo is the topic of this thread Chronovore ).

 

[Insipid Moniker]

I do still like some of the original designs Ganzo has brought to the market. Especially when they first launched the FH line, the value for the dollar was pretty good.

To be perfectly frank, this is the most important part of your statement, because your defense on Ganzo and attempts to justify or excuse their actions all hang on this. You want to buy X or Y model and not feel castigated for doing so. That's why you're leaning on the fact that many of us may own knives from sources we don't realize are doing the same things Ganzo is. Otherwise you would immediately see the weakness in that argument. We don't excuse crimes because there are many other criminals we don't know about who are also committing them and that doesn't lessen the severity or impact of their actions.

 

[Chronovore]

Ok, let's take this step by step and walk through the process. The entire "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" argument holds no water. I'll explain why.

Let's start with a knife acquisition process in a world where clones and counterfeits do not exist.

[B]1.[/B] Casual knife shopper sees a picture of a Hinderer XM-18 and really loves it. Sexy!
[B]2.[/B] Casual knife shopper checks on buying an XM and finds the price is $400. No way!
[B]3.[/B] Casual knife shopper discovers that Zero Tolerance makes some Hinderer knives. Cool!
[B]4.[/B] Casual knife shopper checks on buying an 0562 and finds the price is $200. No way!
[B]5.[/B] Casual knife shopper finds that Kershaw makes some Hinderer knives. Well, alright then.
[B]6.[/B] Casual knife shopper checks on buying a Cryo and is thrilled to find they can get one for $30.
[B]7.[/B] Casual knife shopper buys a Cryo, stays within their budget, Rick gets his tithe and KAI sells a knife.

This is a natural, beautiful process. This is The Circle of Knife-Buying Life.

Now, let's include an environment where clones and counterfeits are available. Let's start over at step #7:

[B]7.[/B] Casual knife shopper looks on LiarExpress and finds a "Rock Handlebar MX-81" that looks just like the XM but only costs $40
[B]8.[/B] Casual knife shopper buys an MX-81. That Cryo seemed kinda dinky anyway.
NOW, please note that damage has already been done to Rick and KAI. They didn't sell a knife out of this deal. That damage does not go away, regardless of the future actions of Casual knife shopper.

At this point there are three possible future actions by Casual knife shopper:
[B]A.[/B] Casual knife shopper buys more clones and counterfeits. That MX was a smokin deal!
[B]B.[/B] Casual knife shopper does not buy more clones and counterfeits. All they needed was one knife anyway.
[B]C.[/B] Casual knife shopper is "redeemed", saving up for and buying a real XM.

A logical and realistic consideration of these three outcomes leaves "C" as the least likely to occur. Even if "C" can occur with equal frequency to "A" and "B", a 33% outcome is not an acceptable return to justify the purchase of the clone in the first place. For crying out loud, one of the equally possible outcomes does [B][I]ADDITIONAL[/I][/B] damage to the legit manufacturer. THERE IS NO NET BENEFIT GAINED FROM A REDEEMED GANZO BUYER SCENARIO! NEVER! Any potential positive is swallowed up by an equally possible future negative! This can not be argued. It is fact.

This "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" scenario is an insult to anyone who has enough intelligence to see through this BS. Please don't insult our intelligence by bringing weak sauce arguments like that. YouTube reviewers need to stay on YouTube and try not to offer critical thought.

The "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" scenario is one possible avenue in the flowchart of consumer decision-making. I mentioned that I've seen it happen twice in real life. Therefore, it exists as a real path leading to an actual sale. The question is how many people actually end up going down it.

While I appreciate the flavor details of your flowchart, your conclusions assume a counterfactual. You can't know how many of the people who ended up buying the clone would have bought the original instead. There are additional branching paths at each step including choices like "decide not to buy anything", "stick with a knife you already own, "borrow a knife", "buy a used knife from your cousin", etc. There are additional considerations for those who do buy the clone such as how happy they are with the performance of the clone. Depending on the answer, that group could just as easily have been "lost" to a box-cutter, a $5 gas-station or hardware-store knife, an Eafengrow with fake steel, or an M-Tech. Of course, you don't know how many of those people would have bought the original instead either.

 

[danbot]

The "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" scenario is one possible avenue in the flowchart of consumer decision-making. I mentioned that I've seen it happen twice in real life. Therefore, it exists as a real path leading to an actual sale. The question is how many people actually end up going down it.

While I appreciate the flavor details of your flowchart, your conclusions assume a counterfactual. You can't know how many of the people who ended up buying the clone would have bought the original instead. There are additional branching paths at each step including choices like "decide not to buy anything", "stick with a knife you already own, "borrow a knife", "buy a used knife from your cousin", etc. There are additional considerations for those who do buy the clone such as how happy they are with the performance of the clone. Depending on the answer, that group could just as easily have been "lost" to a box-cutter, a $5 gas-station or hardware-store knife, an Eafengrow with fake steel, or an M-Tech. Of course, you don't know how many of those people would have bought the original instead either.

So, because there are many things we don't (or can't) know, we should just disregard the things we do (or think we do) know and accept the clones as a fact of life and move on without criticism or concern?
Is copycatting an imaginary harm?

 

[Eli Chaps]

These are luxury items. Again, no one needs a Ganzo. They only want a Ganzo.

When you just want something, then moral considerations are much easier to consider.

You just want a Ganzo and are doing your best to excuse this desire and mire it in murkiness rather than just accept that you are willing to buy knives from thieves. Some people actually do just say that or similar and move on.

 

[Hackenslash]

The "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" scenario is one possible avenue in the flowchart of consumer decision-making. I mentioned that I've seen it happen twice in real life. Therefore, it exists as a real path leading to an actual sale. The question is how many people actually end up going down it.

While I appreciate the flavor details of your flowchart, your conclusions assume a counterfactual. You can't know how many of the people who ended up buying the clone would have bought the original instead. There are additional branching paths at each step including choices like "decide not to buy anything", "stick with a knife you already own, "borrow a knife", "buy a used knife from your cousin", etc. There are additional considerations for those who do buy the clone such as how happy they are with the performance of the clone. Depending on the answer, that group could just as easily have been "lost" to a box-cutter, a $5 gas-station or hardware-store knife, an Eafengrow with fake steel, or an M-Tech. Of course, you don't know how many of those people would have bought the original instead either.

OMG, you are flailing, my friend. You're arguing against a fact. I did not refute the existence of the "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" scenario. Instead, I proved to you that RGB does not matter. If you identify an infinite number of potential outcomes to the purchase of a clone knife, it still doesn't matter. The existence of clones and counterfeits has already done, and will continue to do, damage to legit manufacturers. Please go re-read what I wrote.

 

[Chronovore]

To be perfectly frank, this is the most important part of your statement, because your defense on Ganzo and attempts to justify or excuse their actions all hang on this. You want to buy X or Y model and not feel castigated for doing so. That's why you're leaning on the fact that many of us may own knives from sources we don't realize are doing the same things Ganzo is. Otherwise you would immediately see the weakness in that argument. We don't excuse crimes because there are many other criminals we don't know about who are also committing them and that doesn't lessen the severity or impact of their actions.

I really wish people would stop conflating my attack on the vigor of the crusade against Ganzo with a defense of Ganzo. I'm not saying that Ganzo is good. I've actually condemned their copying. Because I've been doing my best to carry on a fairly civil debate with a whole bunch of people for a long time, with very little assistance or appreciation, and despite a bevvy of mischaracterizations, insults, and unkind words; I'm obviously past any emotional need to "not feel castigated" here.

It's like having a gang of Vegan friends who go on and on about how meat is the devil. I'm trying to explain that yes, there are problems with factory farming. They need to be taken in context with the history, regulatory environment, economic landscape, etc. There are things that should be improved. There are practices that should be stopped. Yeah, I bought the extra bad high-cruelty bottom-shelf hot dogs once or twice. I can understand why some people choose to eat them but I won't recommend it. All I want is for this gang to take things down a notch; put some of that incredible energy into more fully exploring the claims and arguments being made from different angles; and vie for a little more charity and civility as they explore debate with people who love a common interest enough to put up with it this long.

 

[Insipid Moniker]

I really wish people would stop conflating my attack on the vigor of the crusade against Ganzo with a defense of Ganzo. I'm not saying that Ganzo is good. I've actually condemned their copying. Because I've been doing my best to carry on a fairly civil debate with a whole bunch of people for a long time, with very little assistance or appreciation, and despite a bevvy of mischaracterizations, insults, and unkind words; I'm obviously past any emotional need to "not feel castigated" here.

It's like having a gang of Vegan friends who go on and on about how meat is the devil. I'm trying to explain that yes, there are problems with factory farming. They need to be taken in context with the history, regulatory environment, economic landscape, etc. There are things that should be improved. There are practices that should be stopped. Yeah, I bought the extra bad high-cruelty bottom-shelf hot dogs once or twice. I can understand why some people choose to eat them but I won't recommend it. All I want is for this gang to take things down a notch; put some of that incredible energy into more fully exploring the claims and arguments being made from different angles; and vie for a little more charity and civility as they explore debate with people who love a common interest enough to put up with it this long.

The thing is A. you are defending Ganzo. I'll happily say that I don't think you're a shill or fanboy of theirs, but what you are doing is unquestionably defending them. B. You reference our common interest, but that's exactly why our condemnation of Ganzo is so harsh and uncompromising. This is a company that is harming the reputable manufacturers and companies that make our common interest what it is. Without manufacturers like Spyderco, Benchmade, Kershaw, and in the newer generation, WE, Reate and Kizer, the knife world wouldn't be even a tenth of what it is and companies that cut corners with ethically dubious practices harm the companies that are bringing innovation and variety to the market. If Ganzo entirely stopped making clones and using the Axis lock (because, frankly, the fact that it's out of patent is pretty unimportant to me when you stole it well before then) and concentrated entirely on original designs MAYBE I would give them a chance, though even then it would take a long, long, long time to erase the stain on their name, but until then they are actively preying on the people that make 99% of what interests me about this hobby possible and I will condemn and reject them in the strongest possible terms.

 

[danbot]

It's like having a gang of Vegan friends who go on and on about how meat is the devil. I'm trying to explain that yes, there are problems with factory farming. They need to be taken in context with the history, regulatory environment, economic landscape, etc. There are things that should be improved. There are practices that should be stopped. Yeah, I bought the extra bad high-cruelty bottom-shelf hot dogs once or twice. I can understand why some people choose to eat them but I won't recommend it. All I want is for this gang to take things down a notch; put some of that incredible energy into more fully exploring the claims and arguments being made from different angles; and vie for a little more charity and civility as they explore debate with people who love a common interest enough to put up with it this long.

I don't think I have mischaracterized your arguments. Apologies if I have. But I have considered many different arguments that have been made here over the years and still, none of them have allowed me to justify a compromise on this issue.

 

[craytab]

I really wish people would stop conflating my attack on the vigor of the crusade against Ganzo with a defense of Ganzo.

Not possible because the end outcome is a defense of ganzo.

I've been doing my best to carry on a fairly civil debate with a whole bunch of people for a long time, with very little assistance or appreciation

Take a second and think about why that is.

It's like having a gang of Vegan friends who go on and on about how meat is the devil. I'm trying to explain that yes, there are problems with factory farming. They need to be taken in context with the history, regulatory environment, economic landscape, etc. There are things that should be improved. There are practices that should be stopped. Yeah, I bought the extra bad high-cruelty bottom-shelf hot dogs once or twice. I can understand why some people choose to eat them but I won't recommend it. All I want is for this gang to take things down a notch; put some of that incredible energy into more fully exploring the claims and arguments being made from different angles; and vie for a little more charity and civility as they explore debate with people who love a common interest enough to put up with it this long.

You should get out of the analogy business.

 

[Danke42]

I really wish people would stop conflating my attack on the vigor of the crusade against Ganzo with a defense of Ganzo. I'm not saying that Ganzo is good. I've actually condemned their copying. Because I've been doing my best to carry on a fairly civil debate with a whole bunch of people for a long time, with very little assistance or appreciation, and despite a bevvy of mischaracterizations, insults, and unkind words; I'm obviously past any emotional need to "not feel castigated" here.

It's like having a gang of Vegan friends who go on and on about how meat is the devil. I'm trying to explain that yes, there are problems with factory farming. They need to be taken in context with the history, regulatory environment, economic landscape, etc. There are things that should be improved. There are practices that should be stopped. Yeah, I bought the extra bad high-cruelty bottom-shelf hot dogs once or twice. I can understand why some people choose to eat them but I won't recommend it. All I want is for this gang to take things down a notch; put some of that incredible energy into more fully exploring the claims and arguments being made from different angles; and vie for a little more charity and civility as they explore debate with people who love a common interest enough to put up with it this long.

There is no Crusade. For that to be a viable talking point you would need to be able to point to the threads started by all your current sparring partners boasting how they hate Ganzo and are going to crush them. You won't find one of those.

Further; posters like you are much more like the idiot Peta activists & militant vegans. You know the ones who keep trying slip in their agenda sideways at the dinner table.

 

[Chronovore]

OMG, you are flailing, my friend. You're arguing against a fact. I did not refute the existence of the "Redeemed Ganzo Buyer" scenario. Instead, I proved to you that RGB does not matter. If you identify an infinite number of potential outcomes to the purchase of a clone knife, it still doesn't matter. The existence of clones and counterfeits has already done, and will continue to do, damage to legit manufacturers. Please go re-read what I wrote.

I read it more than once. I'm not sure that you understand my response. The issue isn't an infinite number of potential outcomes to the purchase of a clone knife. It's that your conclusion is based on a counterfactual. For a loss to have occurred due to the clone, the people who ended up buying the clone would had to have bought a legitimate knife from said company had they not bought the clone. This is a counterfactual. It's not real because it didn't happen. It's a guess about what could have happened if things were different. Said guess is subject to all those other branching paths and all sorts of other unknowns.

 

[Eli Chaps]

I read it more than once. I'm not sure that you understand my response. The issue isn't an infinite number of potential outcomes to the purchase of a clone knife. It's that your conclusion is based on a counterfactual. For a loss to have occurred due to the clone, the people who ended up buying the clone would had to have bought a legitimate knife from said company had they not bought the clone. This is a counterfactual. It's not real because it didn't happen. It's a guess about what could have happened if things were different. Said guess is subject to all those other branching paths and all sorts of other unknowns.

Goodness knows, Hackenslash doesn't need my help, but the point is that if the clone didn't exist to begin with, they wouldn't have that choice to make and would have to buy the original.

 

[Hackenslash]

I read it more than once. I'm not sure that you understand my response. The issue isn't an infinite number of potential outcomes to the purchase of a clone knife. It's that your conclusion is based on a counterfactual. For a loss to have occurred due to the clone, the people who ended up buying the clone would had to have bought a legitimate knife from said company had they not bought the clone. This is a counterfactual. It's not real because it didn't happen. It's a guess about what could have happened if things were different. Said guess is subject to all those other branching paths and all sorts of other unknowns.

This isn't working. I'm discussing the fact that the sun rises in the East and you're wondering what the impact on the color wheel would be if the sky were yellow rather than blue. We're both discussing the heavens, but on two totally different scales. There's a fundamental disjoint.

I'll come back when I'm as smart as you.

 

[danbot]

Does anyone know of any Ganzo clones of WE, Reate or Kizer designs?