Heavy handidness of the greedy music industry

[Kane]

Screw the RIAA. They made that poor girl's mother pat them $2000 to leave her aloone. They're like the damn mafia. They need to be taught a lesson.

[Nattydread]

I will admit it is wrong to down-load and swap music online. But the music industry was begging for this to happen for years. They have spent decades 'milking' the music cash cow...bilking people out millions of dollar...while stiffing many of those who actually make the music. Def Jam..and all these black record labels were not created becuase these entrapeneurs were idle people. It was created because these guys became desperate to get the money that was due to them for thr work. (That was how it was created...what it has grown into...thats another story).

Now we see the same crooks prosecuting 12 year olds for downloading music.

story.news.yahoo.com/news...g_music_11

For years we have the ability buy a single song..without buying the entire useless CD..but these greedy folks held back to make more money. The result...Kazaa, and all these file sharing packages.

Who did these people think they were going to prosecute? Bob the single guy making $75,000 a year who could afford to buy CD at $20 a pop!

I'm not sure ya'll were aware one of the tactic they tried was..after you bought the CD..you couldn't load it onto your Computer..or copy it for your personal use. A friend of mine was a victim of that several years ago with a CD he bought. So If one were to play by thr rules..you'd have to buy the same song several times! And if you are as old as I am..thats after you bought the CD to replace the old vinyl you already had.

And they wonder why people go to Kazaa!

My music buying day has been over since the early '80's (last time I bought a CD). But it still infuriates me when I see these fat rich bastards pretending they are starving. Yeah ..now that they have only one yatch to water ski behind life is getting really tough!

There are too many people coming between the artist and the consumer! The party is over..and some of these useless bastards have to go!

The greed of the industry has undermine the very quality of the music itself...if I were to buy a recent CD today..it will never be by a local artist!

There is just no way I will pay for these over-night... over hyped.."jessica lynch" type.....American idol ... goons! And I'm not that old!

Anybody want to hear a real modern artist honing her craft listen to snippets of this gal...(I like the track "temporary madness")..lol

www.jodiebrookewilson.com/
________
nice tits Cams (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/webcam/medium-tits/)

[Bootletronn]

They should price CD's reasonably so people wont need to download music. A CD costs around 10-20c to produce and is then sold at a massive mark-up. It is the record companies that are loosing thamselves money, not file sharing. In my opinion, if they want to rip people off then they deserve to lose money. Greedy Bastards.
________
vaporizer store (http://www.vaporshop.com/)

[Billybob]

Here's a comparison:

What if there were a new invention, that you only needed to buy once, that completely illiminated the need for nails. Would the nail insustry of America sue to protect thr market?

The sharing of files on the internet is PROGRESS. Why should we hold back progress just so Michael Jackson can make millions more off of The Beatles?
________
Mazda l platform (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Mazda_L_platform)

[The Truth Hurts]

It would be fine as long as you never wanted to have any other type of nail or fastening device ever.

Your hypothetical device would kill incentive to make any advances in that field from then on.

Keeping the state of the art stagnant is not progress.

Suppose that your same invention enabled anyone to take the product of whatever *you* do for a living (whatever that is) and not have to pay you for it. Would you be as quick to call it progress?

Or suppose someone could just take the fruit of your labor by force without paying for it. Is that progress also? Why should someone pay you if they can get it for free?

The concept of intellectual property exists to benefit the public by giving an incentive to creators to create and share thr work. Take away that incentive and you lose thr creations. That is not progress.
________
VAPORMATIC (http://www.vaporshop.com/vapormatic-vaporizer.html)

[Billybob]

This is something that an estimated 60million people in this country and around the world do. You can't stop that.

Isn't the burden on the MUSIC INDUSTRY to counter this new market, and make a product actually WORTH buying? Or is it easier to sue everyone? I'm guessing with the state American corporations are in, it's easier to initiate legal action than actually be innovative.

This is a good example of how money runs this country, and people's rights mean nothing next to industry interests.
________
Ford Endura-D Engine Picture (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Endura-D_engine)

[Nattydread]

...consider I want a car to drive to work. Now suppose the auto industry somehow rigged things so that I need to buy a car to go to work..another car to go to the super-market...another car to go to home-depot...and another to pick up my kids after practice.

And now suppose that not only do I have to buy these different cars..but they all should be a Hummer with a 300HP engine...way more than I need!

Thats what the music industry wants to do if allowed to thr own device! I will have to buy an ENTIRE CD for one song. I'd then have to buy the CD again electronically if I wanted play it on my MP3...and I'd have to physically have the CD to play on my computer (cause I can't copy it) ..and if I have this CD in my car..my wife would have to wait until I'm home to play it on the CD player!

But whoa..it doesn't stop there..look at what Apple is rolling out ..there ITunes...seems you can buy only one song for a buck. Only one catch...YOU HAVE TO BUY A MAC first!

And as a consumer I don't want to hassle with which company owns what CD ..blah-blah-balh...Just Like going to the CD mart to buy any CD, when I go online I expect to see all the songs available. Because you can bet only the very popular main stream songs are available on these sites.

And it all comes down to..TOO MANY USELESS PEOPLE HAVE TO GET A CUT ..between the artist and the consumer!

If its online..$1 a song is still too much..but at l its better than what we have now!

This time..GREED AIN'T GOOD!
________
Hot box vaporizer review (http://www.vaporshop.com)

[WantaghDem]

"A CD costs around 10-20c to produce and is then sold at a massive mark-up."

I have no idea how much it costs to produce a CD, but I seriously doubt that the production, packaging, distribution, marketing and retailing of a music CD is ANYWHERE as low as 10-20c.

This doesn't even factor in the costs of actually writing and recording the music. Which, everyone on this thread seems to forget, is INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. The sale price of CDs has MUCH less to do with physical production costs than it does with providing both fair compensation for the artist and profit for the record company.

Using your logic, bootle, we should only be paying $4 or $5 for hardcover books, which, after all, only cost a few dollars to print and bind. You completely leave out the compensation of the artist who created the work!

And natty - you contradict yourself. First you say that one MUST buy an entire album in order to get to that one song....and then you complain that Apple's iTunes lets you purchase a SINGLE song instead of the entire album!

Your analogy about cars couldn't be more off the mark. It would apply if you were talking about CD PLAYERS - if a music CD purchased for your home stereo would not play in your car stereo, your computer, your walkman, your DVD player, etc. - and you would have to purchase a separate cd for each of these devices - then you might have a somewhat-applicable analogy. But that's not what they're going for - that's paranoia. Artists and record companies simply want the same copyright protection afforded to every other work of art, regardless of the medium and technology involved.

According to your logic, we should be able to purchase only the chapter of a book that we hear is "good" and not the entire book!

The only people who are making these arguments seem to be people who have no experience creating and marketing a work of art - and who seem to want something for nothing!

The artist who created the work, and the company that took the risk to produce and market the cd, should be fairly compensated for every copy sold. That's the bottom line - that's where we need to start when we look at the technology and the lawsuits and the attempts of both sides to muddy the issue.
________
ESSENTIAL VAAAPP VAPORIZER (http://essentialvaaappvaporizer.com)

[The Truth Hurts]

No one needs recorded music to get to work. It is a luxury. No one is forced to overpay for a CD.

The proper response to the RIAA trying to pervert the market is to not buy the product.

It is not a legitimate excuse to take what one doesn't own.

Not that it applies to this particular post, I also have a healthy dose of skepticism whenever someone tries to justify pirating by saying that the RIAA rips off artists. I have never heard one of those people advocating sending any money to the artists. They just seem to want to do an even bigger job of ripping off the artists by paying them nothing.
________
Bondage live (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/webcam/fetish/bdsm/)

[Nattydread]

"According to your logic, we should be able to purchase only the chapter of a book that we hear is "good" and not the entire book!"

Very wrong on this one pal.
A song like a book can stand on its own.
A chapter in the book = a verse, a note, or a chorous in the song. And yes that cannot stand on its own.

A song stand on its own. For example..Leaf Garrett (a white guy) sang a very soulful song in the 70's. You put that track on at a house party and brothers(blacks) would be running to find a lady! If that DJ ever made a mistake and miss that track...he'll be killed. Because nothing else on the album sounded even close to the ONE SONG! Here you have that soulful song mixed in with yodelling on the one album! There are many other such cases! Thats why VH1 did a production on ..ONE-HIT-WONDERS. Thats why country artist cross over..because of that one song they did. It stands on its own and set them apart! Nobody outside of country listeners knew who Shania Twain was until she had that ONE CROSSOVER HIT!

And I only want that one song..not the entire CD!



"And natty - you contradict yourself. First you say that one MUST buy an entire album in order to get to that one song....and then you complain that Apple's iTunes lets you purchase a SINGLE song instead of the entire album!"

not a contradiction. Again in many cases the music is bundled such that you have to buy the entire CDfor a single song. Apple Itunes have some..pish-posh single song sale..but I'm not going to buy a MAC..or any of thr compatible devices for that matter. I already have a Cd player, an MP3 and a windows-based computer. And the knock on apple's ITunes selection is that its very narrow, becuase they have to navigate the diffferent copy rights law they cannot give you a comphrehensive selection.


"Your analogy about cars couldn't be more off the mark."

Again you're not understanding the situation. The music industry made an attempt to rigg thr CD's so that you could not copy it. Usually you can burn copies of a CD..or what many people do is download it to thr computer..and compile songs to burn a CD. You can then listen to the music on your computer..have a copy in your car and another copy at home. When you cannot copy the CD..where does that leave you? Thr attempt failed..because people figured out that if you used a marker along the edge of the CD you would be able to copy it.


"The artist who created the work, and the company that took the risk to produce and market the cd, should be fairly compensated for every copy sold."

That is the point....THE ARTIST should get paid! But if you were like me who attempted to replace your old collection of vinyl you found in many cases that...ZERO...'nada'..ZILCH...went to the artist. Because many of those artist in the past were screwed by deals they signed back then.

But whoa..it gets worst...these greedy bastard did not replicate what was on the vinyl. In many cases..they had different songs. A deliberate effort to seperate the hits..so you had to buy several CDs to get a collection of a particular artist hits. And when you do get a particular song and play the CD..the song was edited (or shortened)..so off you go again trying to get that sweet 4 minute version of the song you liked so well when it was on vinyl. I even bought those box-sets of a certain artist and found it deficient. I swear..I probably paid for some guys beach house in the 80's when I attempt to replace my vinyl set. I eventually gave up.

Finally I don't know what a CD costs to produce. I also stated that file sharing is wrong. What my contention is..is that the technology is here to do the right thing..but because of greed it may not happen.

Much the way the cable companies bundle thr package and say ther pay for 50 channels or do without ..these greedy bastards are doing the same thing in the music industry. And yes..its a choice..thats why I no longer buy music..since the early 80's I've decided to do without!


________
hotTangerine (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/hotTangerine/)

[Billybob]

Does everyone know how the internet works? It's DECENTRALIZED, which means that it doesn't exist in any one place. The internet exists in the computers of everyone who uses it, including the larger companies individuals who have larger servers.

With this in mind, the internet acts like a gigantic community of people sharing information. So please explain to me how my sharing of a Beatles song with someone in Texas (or Singapore, for that matter) is somehow "wrong" or "immoral". And please also explain how the 60 million or so estimated people who use that service are now criminals. Should we lock them all up? Should we drag each and every one of them into court? Or should we set a few examples, in order to scare people away from this act which is so evil. I think all of those scenarios seem rather fascist to me.

Isn't the country supposed to adjust itself to the will of the people? When up to 1/4th of the country engages in a particular activity, why is it that the music industry still somehow takes priority? Could it be because money outwghs democracy every time? And don't give me the "those poor musicians" logic. It's not like Britany Spears is getting paid any less because of this (nor any other artist). It's the music industry that's pissed because they can't report an increase in profits to thr shareholders. And they know that the easiest option is to SUE.

What I think is happening here is another step in a large reorganization of the world community. It's convenient, MUCH faster and more efficient, and can be used to share anything and everything with anyone or everyone.

I mean really, when you can talk one-on-one with people in Iraq, you don't need a government to tell you what's going on over there. And when you share music with someone anywhere in the world, you don't need to buy a CD.

That said, I always buy CDs that I like. CDs have much better audio quality, and ALBUMS are a different animal entirely. Would you download Dark Side of the Moon in individual songs, of varying quality, NOT linked together like the album? Just a thought.


________
KTM 250EXC (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/KTM_250EXC)

[Billybob]

Are we so brainwashed by corporate America, that it's our responsibility to see that they make money off of us?


________
Ford falcon (north america) history (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Falcon_(North_America))

[The Truth Hurts]

"So please explain to me how my sharing of a Beatles song with someone in Texas (or Singapore, for that matter) is somehow 'wrong' or 'immoral'."

You aren't sharing it. You are making a copy and giving it to them. It is no longer shared property. Each of you has a separate functional copy.

Sharing, i.e. saying "come on over and listen to this great song" is no problem.

Illegal copying is a problem.
________
Cheap Easy Vape Vaporizer (http://vaporizer.org/reviews/easy-vape)

[WantaghDem]

First, my friend, you are wrong about copying CDs. It is not your right - nor should it be - to copy CDs to have one in your car, one at home, and one at the office. You are cheating, and you are stealing, and you are no better than someone who shoplifts. Actually, worse, since they take the risk of bng caught...you do what you do in secret.

"And the knock on apple's ITunes selection is that its very narrow"

Yeah, narrow. It's been out - what, three months? - and it already has 200,000 songs. And they have ALL FIVE MAJOR RECORD LABELS. ALL FIVE. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. It will eventually have many millions of songs.

Yes, you need Mac for iTunes Music Store. You don't need Mac for thr {superior} MP3 player, iPod...they make a Windows version.

Slightly off topic: for someone so interested in music, and computers, you really really really should get off the Windows junk and onto a real computer such as a Mac. And besides, the Mac chip can run virtually ANY operating system....so if you can't let go of that cheap piece of crap that Gates churns out, you can run Windows on your Mac until you are properly weaned!


________
Medical Cannabis (http://medicalmarijuana.us/)

[Billybob]

So, why isn't the recording industry sung the CD burner manufacturers?

WantaghDem, we agree on many issues, but why are you falling for this? Copy and sharing music files is a development that came about because PEOPLE wanted that function. What right does the music industry have to tell you what you can do with a product you bought from that AFTER you bought it?

Another aspect of this that people seem to ignore is the role of media consolidation in the music industry. If you haven't noticed, radio stations (with exceptions, of course) play crap these days. You know how everybody jokes about how radio stations play the same 10 songs over and over again? Well, that's because the big record companies have million dollar deals with radio stations to play only these songs. Where do you go to hear songs that aren't on the playlist? The industry seems to be severely hampering this art form. It's all about money to them (go ahead, deny it), so why shouldn't people respond by creating a medium (downloadable music and file sharing) that's money-free? Are we so brainwashed by Capitalism that we attack any idea that a corporation says is unprofitable?

We really are turning into robots, aren't we?
________
B-series (north america) (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Mazda_B-Series_(North_America))

[Nattydread]

Wrong again....remember cassette tapes? The law allowed you to copy tapes from vinyl/tapes ..as long as you used it for your personal use and was not distributing it or selling it! This law remained in place with the advent of CD technology.

If copying music for personal use was such a crime the easiest way to stop it is to outlaw the machines that can do it. Why did we have cassette recorders..in fact at the end of its run they had record feature on cassette for your car!
Trust me on this one...this practice is not what sacres the big wigs in the music industry.


What the internet did was allow you to not just distribute music to your 5 buddies in the nghborhood...but to millions of people globally. And yes..that is wrong...I said that many times above! That is what scares them!

My views are some where between your view...that says all executive in the music industry are angels...and Bottleman who says file sharing is legal.

What I'm simply trying to say is..the old days of the cash cow attitude is should be over. When napster was around that was a clear sign. The people who knows more about this than you and I kept saying back in '97/'98 that rather than fight the technology the music industry ought to embrace it and use it to thr advantage. But they do not want to let go!

Whoa..Apple has 2,000 songs..really? Go find this singer
Jodie Brooke Wilson....please! Let me lay this on ya pal...AMAZON will have a more comphrehensive list than apple!

The American music appetite is very trendy..not mine.
In fact I no longer listen radio anymore because they play the same 6 songs over-and-over from coast to coast.

If you want a change of pace go check out www.jazzfm.com/index.php

So if you are into top 40 and all the stuff you see daily on MTV..ofcourse its great! But thats not my taste..so even when we had everything at Tower records ..it was a chore for me to find select music...with Apple...I wouldn't even bother trying!
________
MAINE MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES (http://maine.dispensaries.org/)

[WantaghDem]

natty - please tell me where I said anything close to the following:

"...your view...that says all executive in the music industry are angels..."

I never said anything close to this. I have said that breaking copyright is wrong in all circumstances for all reasons at all times, and that artists - ARTISTS - should be fairly compensated for thr art.

"This law remained in place with the advent of CD technology."

You have a misunderstanding of digital copyright law. You are allowed to make a single BACKUP copy of a music or software CD, and ONLY ONE. You are not allowed to use both simultaneously.

"If copying music for personal use was such a crime the easiest way to stop it is to outlaw the machines that can do it."

Well, that might be true if it were correct, but it isn't. Copying music CDs is a BY-PRODUCT of a recordable or rewritable CD. Your logic would have us outlaw cars because they can kill people when used irresponsibly or illegally.

"Whoa..Apple has 2,000 songs..really?"

No, they don't have "2,000" songs. Apple iTunes Music Store has TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND SONGS.

From ALL FIVE MAJOR RECORD LABELS.

IN other words, the industry is "getting it." It's STILL illegal - and wrong - to copy CDs. Period.

"AMAZON will have a more comphrehensive list than apple!"

I don't even know what this means.


________
OREGON DISPENSARY (http://oregon.dispensaries.org/)

[Nattydread]

Are you trying to say the average guy who has a computer, a CD player, MP3 device, and a car should buy an artist production several times? If I want to hear one song..I should buy the whole CD multiple times? That sounds even worse than what the executives are suggesting..because I believe they would be satisfied if you bought it just once!

And are you ignoring the fact that since CD technology was here there is a significant percentage of CDs out there from old artist who gets ZERO..ZILCH from these sales? So there goes your theory of supporting the artist.

And finally...I am sure that apple's selection is main-stream music..I said I do not listen to main stream/trendy music. I know it would be woe-fully inadequate. Also...I'm not about to buy any of thr product (Mac, hand-held) to buy thr music.
________
Nevada Marijuana Dispensary (http://nevada.dispensaries.org/)

[WantaghDem]

You made three HUGE assumptions in your last post that are based on nothing...they are BAD assumptions

"Are you trying to say the average guy who has a computer, a CD player, MP3 device, and a car should buy an artist production several times?"

Never said anything close. Instead of telling me what I MIGHT be saying, deal with what I AM saying. You buy it once, and you BRING IT TO YOUR CAR, THEN YOU BRING IT TO YOUR OFFICE, ....you get the idea.

"And are you ignoring the fact that since CD technology was here there is a significant percentage of CDs out there from old artist who gets ZERO..ZILCH from these sales?"

Your argument holds no water for two reasons - one, we don't know what that percentage is...anything would be wrong, but it may be less than one percent. Second, the MAIN reason why they haven't recved payment, if anyone hasn't, is that they signed away thr rights when they made thr records. Copyright owner paid, copyright owner gets rewarded.

"And finally...I am sure that apple's selection is main-stream music.."

This means that you have not been on iTunes Music Store, but you are making this assumption anyway. This is bad, natty, even for you.

They plan to have SEVERAL MILLION SONGS within the year. Sounds like a WIDE VARIETY OF MUSICAL STYLES to me.

________
Cumshots (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/17/cumshot/videos/1)

[Nattydread]

For decades it was a known fact that most people after buying an initial copy of a song made multiple copies for thr personal use. This was known to the music industry and who had no problem with it.

The problem they had back in the days of cassette and vinyl was boot-leggers who would make and sell the music.

Nobody walks around with thr stack of CDs in tow...at l I don't know of any. Whats worse is...knowing that many CDs carry only 1 or 2 songs you care to listen to..that could end up bng some load to hog around.

You burn one CD you replace maybe 20 original copies!Yep that would be some wght to hog back and forth between my car, my stereo in the living room and my computer upstairs! And ...then how do I get it on my MP3 player...if I'm not allowed to copy it? Oh..I'm sorry..I should buy IT AGAIN..what was I thinking!

And if I'm jogging with my discman and while listening to Earl Klugh...should I stop and get my Kenny Lattue CD out of my bag-pack strapped to my back? Do you know anybody who actually do this?

Maybe you should look for work in the music industry..because here you have a money making scheme thats even more agressize than the greedy executives!


True I have no number on the percentage of artist bng screwed. But I can tell you this....in the old days..many of those guys ther sign that contract or flip burgers..because there were'nt that many options. I guess in your mind that makes it right.

In addition, I know that during the 80's and 90's it became a thriving business to reproduce old music because of the wealth and numbers of the aging baby boomers..so I'd say it is significant. In fact we saw radio stations popping up that targeted 60's 70's and 80's music only.

A million songs on ITunes? Look...even when it was wide open in the music stores, and CD-Now online (now bought by amazon) I had trouble finding some of the stuff I had on vinyl. If I was still buying music why would I try Itunes where even 'main-stream-music' junkies are complaining is too limited. And again...I would not buy any of Apple's gizmos for this service.
________
VanitBeauty (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/VanitBeauty/)

[WantaghDem]

nattydread wants what he wants, when he wants it, and can give no particular reasons other than laziness or lack of accountability.

natty wants to do whatever he wants with his music, and will accuse anyone who disagrees that they are shills for the man.

OK, since you just think this way, and have nothing to butress your argument, I think that we're done.


________
Jailbroken (http://jailbroken.org/)

[WantaghDem]

I don't know why you choose to argue with me. You know I'm much more intelligent than you and everyone else on these boards, but thanks for the opportunity to be able to prove it again.
________
Vapir oxygen (http://oxygenvaporizer.com)

[MisterEd]

Quote:I don't know why you choose to argue with me. You know I'm much more intelligent than you and everyone else on these boards, but thanks for the opportunity to be able to prove it again.

You THINK you are more intelligent. Big difference.

All the really intelligent people I have ever met, do not go around claiming to be smarter than everyone else, since they are above that.

Only selfcentered, arrogant, egocentric, selfrighteous fools feel the need to declare themselves superior to others.

People like you are the reason I've grown bored with this board and are the reason I'm not posting anymore. I try to have reasonable discussions and they are ruined by the likes of you.
________
LHS (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Chrysler_LHS)

[WantaghDem]

I didn't write this post...and I couldn't have written it.....no matter what you think of me and my posts, NONE of the posts that I have placed on this board come anywhere NEAR the level of arrogance that this poster is attempting to place at my feet. Sure, I will destroy someone's argument, and if they insist on using lies or poor logic or just whine that they want to be "right" - I will use the term moron or idiot or point out the fact of thr ignorance. I have NEVER posted something like this - a personal attack without ANY connection to a post, or to a particular argument, or to a particular point a poster has made.

And when someone says something like, "Hillary Clinton worked for bin Laden in the 80s" I will often point out this person's idiocy. But I have never posted such a thing as the weak attempt above, and I never will.

And in this instance, I clearly told natty that the argument was over, and I have dropped it.

There is someone on the board who is doing this childish and amateurish thing - posting as me, and then saying some of the stupidest things on this board. You, unfortunately, were the first person to actually be fooled by this. The only way around this is to register, which I won't do for various reasons. And, of course, to point out now and then that it wasn't me.

If you read the content of my posts, you wil see that I am unafraid of letting you know what I think about an issue, and what I think about your argument. And I'm not afraid to claim credit where it's due me - even loudly, on occassion. However, I would never post such a thing - and then disavow it. There would be nothing in it for me....I'm not twelve years old, ringing door bells, running away, and then snickering like a dumb version of Beavis & Butthead (if that's even possible).

I just didn't write it. A jealous person who obviously cannot argue with me on thr own for whatever frighteningly sad reasons has been doing this off and on. And it's sad, and it's pathetic, and it's plain dumb. It doesn't upset me - obviously, since no one really thinks that it's me - but it does bother me that someone is out there who would do something like this. They are undiagnosed and untreated, and that's sad.
________
Ship sale (http://ship-sale.com/)

[Reality]

for wantaghdem: Even if you didn't write the response to natty (and it sure sounds like you), Mr.Ed depicts you precisely. The shoe is a perfect fit regardless.
________
Kawasaki ZX600M (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Kawasaki_ZX600M)