Medalist hull

[caustic]

You still won't come back to your infamous "they" name conspiracy that you have never proven, as if Flying Eagle management was the puppet master in all this. To the sane, it looks like a company continuing to grow and expand, finding the right niche in the market. At no time has any distributor hidden the origin of the shells.

"They" would be the common denominators - the owners of the factory, and the people who were there along the shepherding process. While the name has changed, the owners of Wudi/Starline/WWoR/Wintech/King have not.

That's because "they" are manufacturers. They have had many distribution partners in the 27 years they have been making boats. Congratulations on knowing a few. BTW....their world medal tally in that timeframe is higher than somebody else's we know.

As you have been so vocal in saying, multiple times in the past, apparently good boatmakers are just the ones who are in the "right" races. So, by your metric, they're actually not that successful.

"Distributors", eh? I guess that's how you choose to define it. I don't see Empacher changing their name for "distributors", or Filippi. Or Vespoli. Or Sykes. Or Pocock. Or Hudson. Or, well, I hope you get the point.

Normal companies, when they grow and expand, keep their names, or slightly modify them.

Really?
Datsun-->Nissan
Jerry's Guide-->Yahoo
KPMG Consulting-->Bearing Point
Philip Morris-->Altria
Andersen Consulting-->Accenture
Bell Atlantic-->Verizon
oohh....here's one:
Pacific Aero Products Co.-->Boeing

And exactly zero of your examples suit the situation at hand. Nice straw man. None of those are example of larger companies phasing out their brand for that of the smaller company or brand that they purchased. Honestly, the majority of those are an existing company changing their brand name not even including buying a smaller company. And even further, none of those companies have shown a cycle of re-branding themselves repeatedly within 20 years when the market takes a disliking to their names.

And you might want to brush up on your Chrysler/AMC/Eagle/Mitsubishi theories. It's a little more complex than your seven brain cells can manage.

Where did I call it a conspiracy?

Where did I say you did? The poo puzzle that is you is starting to come together....always start with the edges.

I don't want to bring this too far off topic, but basically, the above quote makes two very wild assumptions, of which you are prone to make for the sake of argument. In this case, both assumptions are completely wrong, but hey, it makes for amusing reading for folks.

All I did was state a fact - the Eagle Talon and the Mitsubishi eclipse are the same car. I stated a second fact - that the Eagle Talon was discontinued while the Eclipse was not, due to market demographics. Right above you call this a "theory", despite it being fact. Based on your predilection to assume that I'm some sort of conspiracy theorist, I took this to mean either A)you think I assume there's something nefarious going on, or B)that in fact these two cars were not produced in the same factory and sold under both brands. I assure you that I assume no evil conspiracy existing between Mitsubishi and Chrysler (who owned AMC which sold the Eagle brand at that time), nor do I contest the factual basis of those cars.

I used it as a business case example, and one that's pretty similar.

Not even close. Not even in blood-related-parents-caustic-land.

Same product-made-in-the-same-factory-and-sold-as-two-different-things is pretty dang relevant in this case. King and Wintech are made in the same factory, by the same people. Sure, change the trim and the paint color, but it's still the same hog.

I never said anything about it being a conspiracy, but instead a decision based on what the market dictated, and them taking advantage of that.

You sly dog. Always out-strategizing that dopey Lee Iacocca.

You know, seeing as you haven't saved a billion-dollar company from bankruptcy, I'd rather affiliate myself with Lee Iacocca than a dope from Philly. So, I'll take that as a compliment.

Citation needed. Please show me where in this thread I have stated that there exists a conspiracy. I see nothing of that sort. All I did was make a reflection on how Wintech is phasing out their brand in favor of King, which, by all means, when you take out the moneymaker products out of your lineup, and offer them only in one that's got a different name, sure as hell looks like that trend.

Similar to Wintech taking advantage of a market indicator - people like Kings, Wintech buys King. Why not just rename Wintech to King, and VOILA! They are now a respected boat brand with a historic cache, and have successfully hitched onto the coattails of quality that King established a decade ago when he was building boats completely unrelated to what they produce, before he went out of business the first time.

We've seen your grasp of history and reality on that subject in previous posts. North Korea is looking for an archivist. You fit the bill. I bet magical pandas are right up your alley.

I'm really not sure what this particular comment has relating to this thread, so go figure. Aside from the fact that you like insulting me, but hey, whatever.

Say...If we all ponied up the dough, would you embark on of those solo ocean rowing adventures? Every time you return, just let us know and we'll fund it again. Maybe we could put a credit card down to refresh the account and save the paperwork. Could have benefits for all parties....and you might actually learn something if you can refrain from talking to yourself.

But, if folks are intent on pooling cash to support a cross-Atlantic venture, i'd suggest you donate it to the OarNW guys instead of me. They'll actually be rowing across the Atlantic, and they are supporting a good cause.

I think you're missing the point of this project, sport.

Well, *I* am trying to discuss the topic in the thread. *You* are trying to make it somehow about me. As much as I know you love me, it's not about me. So, if you're gonna pony up some cash for a rowing venture, I figure I'd at least put out a cause to do it for.

[gdoyle]

As you have been so vocal in saying, multiple times in the past, apparently good boatmakers are just the ones who are in the "right" races.

It is a convenient and well understood checksum. Certainly any boatmaker who might want to put together some sort of...say....marketing white paper...would want to include world competition statistics if they were claiming superior performance against competitors who have demonstrated such qualifications. Now if their angle was durability, value, specific utility for any audience below that standard, I suspect it's not as important. But any broad claim of "faster" really begs consideration of the full spectrum of competitive levels.

So, by your metric, they're actually not that successful.

As long as their record leaves a longing lump in your throat...

"Distributors", eh? I guess that's how you choose to define it. I don't see Empacher changing their name for "distributors", or Filippi. Or Vespoli. Or Sykes. Or Pocock. Or Hudson. Or, well, I hope you get the point.

Yeah, I can't imagine any reason why an Asian company might have difficulty cracking into the membership ranks of that countries club. Rowing is so diverse, nonjudgmental, and eager to accept new concepts.

On a related note, I will offer up the following. In my dealings with small manufacturers in India, Pakistan and China---they are among the most humble and earnest business people you will ever come across. All they want to do is earn more business. If you have a concern or complaint about something, they want to fix it, they want to learn.

exactly zero of your examples suit the situation at hand. Nice straw man. None of those are example of larger companies phasing out their brand for that of the smaller company or brand that they purchased. Honestly, the majority of those are an existing company changing their brand name not even including buying a smaller company. And even further, none of those companies have shown a cycle of re-branding themselves repeatedly within 20 years when the market takes a disliking to their names.

From the very start, Flying Eagle sought out distribution partners in established rowing countries to whom they would supply their products. Advancing their own name in the consumer market was not important, only their relationship with distributors mattered. I guess you have a stiffie for a corporate brand badass. This is simply a different animal and you can't wrap your head around it due to your resentment at their ultimate success after years of faithful service under a "non-traditional" approach.

All I did was make a reflection on how Wintech is phasing out their brand in favor of King,

And since that is not the actual case, it helps clearly reinforce your reputation as the insightful paste eater almost everyone has come to enjoy on these boards.

which, by all means, when you take out the moneymaker products out of your lineup, and offer them only in one that's got a different name, sure as hell looks like that trend.

I am highly skeptical that the Medalist was the most profitable model or the cash cow in the WinTech lineup. Now, if you had argued it was dropped because its availability was undermining King sales, that might have been a very reasonable theory.

[caustic]

As you have been so vocal in saying, multiple times in the past, apparently good boatmakers are just the ones who are in the "right" races.

It is a convenient and well understood checksum. Certainly any boatmaker who might want to put together some sort of...say....marketing white paper...would want to include world competition statistics if they were claiming superior performance against competitors who have demonstrated such qualifications. Now if their angle was durability, value, specific utility for any audience below that standard, I suspect it's not as important. But any broad claim of "faster" really begs consideration of the full spectrum of competitive levels.

A flawed checksum, since no one has yet proved beyond any kind of acceptable level of rigor that a particular brand is fundamentally faster than any other. You have subscribed to the weekend-warrior marketing, much like with how many folks buy bicycles. Go buy that carbon fiber time trial bike and try commuting to work on it - you'll hate every minute of it. Or, you could buy the bike you need for your purpose, and you'll be fine. There are *many* bike builders who choose not to market towards racing, knowing that 99% of bike buyers won't race.

99.99% of boats sold are for practice, club use, private enjoyment, and non elite racing. That's where the market lies. If you want to judge boat success based on such a small and not even profitable demograpic, and not on boats sold, that's your choice. I can think of a few boatbuilders who are certainly doing very well, and they don't try to court a loss-leader like elite teams. Your logic is like saying that because Chevy keeps winning the Winston cup, we should all stop buying all the other car brands. Or because Lance Armstrong won the TdF on a Trek, then we should buy a bike just like his to go MTB riding, or riding to the store to get groceries. In the cycling world, those people are called "Freds", and derided because they're buying a bike not based on what they want to do, but based on what people are telling them they should buy.

"Distributors", eh? I guess that's how you choose to define it. I don't see Empacher changing their name for "distributors", or Filippi. Or Vespoli. Or Sykes. Or Pocock. Or Hudson. Or, well, I hope you get the point.

Yeah, I can't imagine any reason why an Asian company might have difficulty cracking into the membership ranks of that countries club. Rowing is so diverse, nonjudgmental, and eager to accept new concepts.

I can think of several Asian companies that have had no problem cracking into markets dominated by American brands. But they did it by making good products. And they didn't change their names multiple times either. I'll fully agree that the myth of "cheap crappy asian products" is largely defunct - especially because damn near everything we buy is produced in Asia. but Wudi/Starline/WWoR/Wintech/King has had a mediocre historical record. So they have *a lot* of work ahead of them if they want to become an established brand. The first step being to not change their name so many times.

On a related note, I will offer up the following. In my dealings with small manufacturers in India, Pakistan and China---they are among the most humble and earnest business people you will ever come across. All they want to do is earn more business. If you have a concern or complaint about something, they want to fix it, they want to learn.

Most folks around the world are like that. But then most folks don't drop their brand and change their name to try to erase a checkered past, and then repeat that multiple times.

exactly zero of your examples suit the situation at hand. Nice straw man. None of those are example of larger companies phasing out their brand for that of the smaller company or brand that they purchased. Honestly, the majority of those are an existing company changing their brand name not even including buying a smaller company. And even further, none of those companies have shown a cycle of re-branding themselves repeatedly within 20 years when the market takes a disliking to their names.

From the very start, Flying Eagle sought out distribution partners in established rowing countries to whom they would supply their products. Advancing their own name in the consumer market was not important, only their relationship with distributors mattered. I guess you have a stiffie for a corporate brand badass. This is simply a different animal and you can't wrap your head around it due to your resentment at their ultimate success after years of faithful service under a "non-traditional" approach.

Seeing as I don't see any Flying Eagle/Wudi/Starline/WWoR boats laying about in droves, I'd be hesitant to agree. I see folks rowing - and winning races in - 20 and 30 year old Hudsons, Pococks, Vepoli, and Empacher boats a *lot*. In the 12 years I've rowed on the West coast, I have not actually seen a Flying Eagle branded boat, nor a Wudi, nor a Starline, nor a WWoR boat at any race. I don't see new clubs buying the old Flying Eagles off of other clubs to have a cheap boat to help start their crew, because those clubs don't *have* those old boats to sell, or even donate.

You get more customers by becoming a recognizable brand, and you become a recognizable brand by having a long history of quality and good service. People won't trust your brand if they don't know it. They won't buy it if they don't trust it. Changing the name repeatedly destroys trust, and thus makes people not want to buy.

People buy Apple computers because they have a reputation for making a unique product that is actually pretty high quality, albeit expensive. You don't see Apple selling their products in international markets under a different name.

Buying the King brand is a similar tactic that other companies have done to attempt to buy a reputation, instead of earn it. RCA was a great brand, and when they went out of business, other companies adopted their brands and sold products that were pretty poor quality in an attempt to buy an existing customer base and their loyalty. You really don't see too much RCA stuff these days, and what you DO see is only tangentally related to what RCA originally made when they were a quality brand. Same thing with Westinghouse, Bell & Howell, Zenith, etc. etc. etc.

All I did was make a reflection on how Wintech is phasing out their brand in favor of King,

And since that is not the actual case, it helps clearly reinforce your reputation as the insightful paste eater almost everyone has come to enjoy on these boards.

Says you. It's a fact that Wintech has stopped making Wintech Branded 8s. Soon, it's gonna be the 4s. That right there is probably 70% of their business, now under a different brand. It won't be much longer before the 2s and singles are all King brand too. Then VOILA! King!

which, by all means, when you take out the moneymaker products out of your lineup, and offer them only in one that's got a different name, sure as hell looks like that trend.

I am highly skeptical that the Medalist was the most profitable model or the cash cow in the WinTech lineup. Now, if you had argued it was dropped because its availability was undermining King sales, that might have been a very reasonable theory.

It *was* undermining King sales, by existing as a less expensive alternative in a small and limited market. How? Simply by existing as a brand, and also by reducing their profit potential when people choose to buy the less expensive model instead of the more expensive one. Why spend more money for a King, when you're just getting a Wintech? Why not buy the Wintech for a lesser price? Or why not just by a brand that's been around a while, and you can trust to stick around? Rowing shells are not cars.

8s are economically the moneymaker for any boatbuilder - they offer the best amount of profit per pound of material and per hour of labor. That's why a lot of boatbuilders focus on selling big boats. That's why big boats get new models so frequently, whereas their smaller boats get upgrades at slower rates.

[gdoyle]

Wow, caustic....that damn near looks like I took five minutes off the end of your life. How do I get five years? 10? How much to get you to bust your plumbing now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbgyppGqBgg


To avoid running three pages, I'll just address your lunacy by short ordered list rather than quote tennis.

1. Absolutely hilarious that you now want to claim "faster/stiffer" is old hat marketing that doesn't matter anymore. Really? Should I shame you with an another retrospective and recent ad survey of boatmakers, especially one in particular, who still cling to that "silly" notion? What's your blood pressure these days, pizza king? I'm not sure you can handle it.

2. Stinking hernia laugh riot that the cycling world calls their chuckleheads "Freds." FYI, in rowing, we call ours "Caustics."

3. WinTech/King has had an incredible last few years. Ultimately that is what bugs you. Flying Eagle has been making boats since 1985, but in WinTech/King they have finally found a distributor relationship that has matured the product line and developed consistent sales in a long-desired major market. It's not their boats that anger you. It's their success. It's every picture of the U23 crews racing them to medals. It's their sponsorship of the NGB. Do I have to say it? They're living the dream you wished for someone else. C'mon, tell us how you really feel.

4. WinTech didn't just "buy" the King brand. They brought in Graeme King to make his signature hulls. Like Ford and Shelby, perhaps. Back to this case, the King model is doing well (deep breaths, caustic....) and has made some of the WinTech models in one boat class irrelevant.

5. WinTech has not stopped making the WINTECH branded "International" model in their 8+ lineup. Still available, still WINTECH. They are making "International," "Competitor," and "Club Racer" models in their other boat classes, all still branded WINTECH.

Was your college a "diploma mill" or a "puppy mill," caustic? I'd like to know whether we should burn your papers, or roll them up and smack your nose with them.

[southernrower]

Hopefully it is safe to go into the water on this thread. Can anyone help me? For $6k diff between the Int'l 8+ and the King 8+ you get what?

- the riggers looks similar
- is the seat the same?
-the hull design is different I assume but what is different in the construction?
- I like the paint better on the King but I am not sure that matters?

Hopefully you get where I am going with this. I have heard big Wintechs have lamination, warping, and pieces and parts problems (although I cannot prove it). If these are truly problems for those with more experience than I, does the King have similar construction techniques and just a different hull design?

[caustic]

Wow, caustic....that damn near looks like I took five minutes off the end of your life. How do I get five years? 10? How much to get you to bust your plumbing now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbgyppGqBgg

I'm really not sure how this has anything to do with this discussion.

To avoid running three pages, I'll just address your lunacy by short ordered list rather than quote tennis.

1. Absolutely hilarious that you now want to claim "faster/stiffer" is old hat marketing that doesn't matter anymore. Really? Should I shame you with an another retrospective and recent ad survey of boatmakers, especially one in particular, who still cling to that "silly" notion? What's your blood pressure these days, pizza king? I'm not sure you can handle it.

I never said boatmakers shouldn't market. I said you shouldn't believe all that they say as being a measure of success.

I never said anything about "faster/stiffer" or whatever in my post at all either. All I said was that if you want to judge boat builder company success based on a flawed metric or on marketing fluff, by all means continue to do so. However, in the real world, company success is determined by boats shipped, and income earned.

I have never said that you should buy any brand based on their marketing fluffle. And the "whitepaper" as you like to always poke fun about, is not only pushing 10 years old now, but it was actually distributed so that other folks could do the testing on their own and see what results they had. There was nothing in that article at all that was false or misleading. It was a test, and the results of that test. you'll notice that at no time afterwards was there any marketing fluff from that company saying 'See! We did our own internal test and won! BUY OUR BOATS'. None. At. All.

Please stop trying to lie and put false words in my mouth.

2. Stinking hernia laugh riot that the cycling world calls their chuckleheads "Freds." FYI, in rowing, we call ours "Caustics."

Baseless insult that has nothing to do with anything relevant to this thread. De rigeur for how you "argue".

3. WinTech/King has had an incredible last few years. Ultimately that is what bugs you. Flying Eagle has been making boats since 1985, but in WinTech/King they have finally found a distributor relationship that has matured the product line and developed consistent sales in a long-desired major market. It's not their boats that anger you. It's their success. It's every picture of the U23 crews racing them to medals. It's their sponsorship of the NGB. Do I have to say it? They're living the dream you wished for someone else. C'mon, tell us how you really feel.

Greg, as I have seen a whole lot over the years here, you believe whatever you want. You don't let facts get in the way of belief.

If having a company change their name multiple times is what bugs me, then yes. That does bug me, because from personal experience I know that companies that do that a lot are often not companies that people should do business with. If they're so "incredible", why not stick with one name?

Explain how a distributor matures a product line. Kalil doesn't tell Budweiser how to change their beer recipe. If the beer sucks, it's not Kalil's fault. It's Budweiser's. So, either these are "distributors", and have little to no effect on the design of the products, or else they are not distributors, but something else - something that allows them to have enough business influence inside the manufacturing company to dictate design changes and to approve cost expenditures. At that point, that's no longer a distributor/manufacturer relationship. it's more of a subsidiary/parent company relationship.

Seeing as neu-King is barely 2 years old, and their boats have been out for barely a year, I fail to see how that is classified as being 'incredible". And Wintech themselves has not been 'incredible'. Get back to me in 10 years. Based on past experience, that's about 5x longer than the last King iteration, give or take a little.

4. WinTech didn't just "buy" the King brand. They brought in Graeme King to make his signature hulls. Like Ford and Shelby, perhaps. Back to this case, the King model is doing well (deep breaths, caustic....) and has made some of the WinTech models in one boat class irrelevant.

The boatbuilding industry is not a big one, and something like this is not something that went under the radar of everyone else. They bought King. Simple as that. King is pushing 80. He's not doing much in the hands on field of it, he's looking for retirement. King was shopping his brand out for a few years before Wintech bought it - he approached several other boatbuilders who chose to NOT buy them.

King made beautiful wooden boats, and his brand was built on that. He built wooden boats for many years. When we went into composites, he was out of business in relatively short order. That should tell you something - If you know how to build one thing, that doesn't mean you know how to build another.

5. WinTech has not stopped making the WINTECH branded "International" model in their 8+ lineup. Still available, still WINTECH. They are making "International," "Competitor," and "Club Racer" models in their other boat classes, all still branded WINTECH.

Has not stopped making them.....yet.

Was your college a "diploma mill" or a "puppy mill," caustic? I'd like to know whether we should burn your papers, or roll them up and smack your nose with them.

*sigh*. You read like an open book. Too bad you're all pop-ups and no big words.

[gdoyle]

You know what, caustic? Reality is the best punishment for you. I can't top that, but I can outline it:

1. You make nothing.
2. You coach nothing.
3. You win nothing.
4. No one you know knows anything.
5. If they did, they would still lie to you.
6. You are here solely for the entertainment of all other sentient creatures.

[lt.wolf]

Graeme is in his 60's. He is hands on in every design. We (he and I) went thru the Harvard boathouse and measured the King 4's they had. At the same time we also went thru and took measurements of the other hulls they had. He wrote all these numbers down in great detail and then wanted feedback on what coxswains thought of the room and comfort they had in the Kings and the other fours. We then went to RBC where he spoke to the Brookline coach during a demo row. He then asked what each girl weighed and their height as they got into the boat so he could be sure the boat was the right fit for them. While watching the practice he answered questions and talked rigging. If you think he is not involved in the process you are incorrect.

If you want to ask Graeme a question or two let me know and I will pass along his email to you.


http://www.quantumracing.com/graeme-king.php

[midweight]

Caustic, do you know Graeme King? I haven't had the honor, but I'm surprised that you would casually assert that someone who did what is obviously a labor of love, over a long period of time, would just sell out.

Maybe mine is a boy scout view of the world, and people in it, but I guess I believe that work which exhibits an extraordinarily high level of integrity reflects a level of integrity in the man himself. Just sayin'.

[caustic]

You know what, caustic? Reality is the best punishment for you. I can't top that, but I can outline it:

1. You make nothing.
2. You coach nothing.
3. You win nothing.
4. No one you know knows anything.
5. If they did, they would still lie to you.
6. You are here solely for the entertainment of all other sentient creatures.

I love how when you can't assail fact, you assail people. This is why I bought my Crokers from the Canada rep.

[caustic]

Caustic, do you know Graeme King? I haven't had the honor, but I'm surprised that you would casually assert that someone who did what is obviously a labor of love, over a long period of time, would just sell out.

Maybe mine is a boy scout view of the world, and people in it, but I guess I believe that work which exhibits an extraordinarily high level of integrity reflects a level of integrity in the man himself. Just sayin'.

I actually know a former employee of King's, who, after having left working for him, moved west and rowed out of my boathouse for a while. King's a, well, unique personality to say the least. He started by copying boats, and just being more diligent with the details. He's had his share of crazy ideas that flopped too. Remember the triple front fin?

There comes a time when any person who, as they get older, will realize that they don't have the capability to work as hard as when they were younger, or are not able to keep the same high level of quality because of the rigors of age. King's old. He wasn't even really doing a lot of hands-on work back in the Quantum days either. This was his chance to try to re-create the legacy of his brand and get some retirement money out of it as well. Hell, if I was in his shoes, I'd probably do the same thing.

And have you ever wondered why King left Australia? Why didn't he stay there to build his business? He would have been bigger than Sykes is right now, potentially.

[gdoyle]

I love how when you can't assail fact, you assail people.

When you refuse to accept facts that everyone points out to you repeatedly, then, YES.....it becomes about you.

This is why I bought my Crokers from the Canada rep.

How much to buy them back? Or to get you to tape over any distinguishing marks? Seriously. I saw that Row2k photo of you "rowing" with them, and I cringed. Took a week of metamucil just to clear me out.

I actually know a former employee of King's, who, after having left working for him, moved west and rowed out of my boathouse for a while.

Rules #4 & #5: No one you know knows anything. If they did, they would still lie to you.

King's a, well, unique personality to say the least.

So.....how can we get you to truly say THE LEAST? Is that even possible? Without violating one of the Commandments?

He started by copying boats, and just being more diligent with the details. He's had his share of crazy ideas that flopped too.

Rule #1: You make nothing.

Remember the triple front fin?

You might want to investigate that a bit more. It was actually well regarded by many. What disappeared was the market for wooden eights.

There comes a time when any person who, as they get older, will realize that they don't have the capability to work as hard as when they were younger, or are not able to keep the same high level of quality because of the rigors of age. King's old. He wasn't even really doing a lot of hands-on work back in the Quantum days either. This was his chance to try to re-create the legacy of his brand and get some retirement money out of it as well. Hell, if I was in his shoes, I'd probably do the same thing.

Caustic, fear not. Your legacy of abject howling stupidity shall remain intact, regardless of your age. In fact, it seems to be increasing with every post you make.

And have you ever wondered why King left Australia? Why didn't he stay there to build his business? He would have been bigger than Sykes is right now, potentially.

Gee....let's think....where were wooden rowing shells in more demand in the 1970s and 1980s? Not to mention Graeme's stint as Harvard's boatman might have just lured a young man to consider possibilities he would not have known otherwise had he stayed home.

But....in pondering what might have been for you, Caustic....

Have you ever wondered why you tried rowing? Why didn't you stay in your parents' basement criticizing nonrowing people who work hard? You would have been bigger than Perez Hilton, potentially.

[lt.wolf]

Hey guys , I am getting request to shut it down here from the gallery.

[iwantmorepies]

What? No way. You know how hard it is to find a good old-fashioned flame war on the Internet?

New topic: EVOLUTION ISN'T REAL.