Steve Browning

And no sign of it drying up.

Time to scale it back maybe?

I can think of two. Andy Baxter had a lovely stripped Precision a while back that I would love to have bought and, back in the 70's I really wanted the mocha Precision in a local music shop. Rosewood rather than maple.

Do my eyes deceive me here?

In fairness, the OP is suggesting the existing rules should be policed thoroughly. The mods state that it is not practical and that seems to be accepted. The discussion has widened to Trigger's broom but that's sort of a separate issue really.

But they don't make cosmetically similar models.

You reminded us (for the umpteenth time - and just as un-necessarily as the first) that a Limelight is not a Fender and I made the point that no-one had said it was. It wasn't intended as anything other than a statement of fact. I wasn't offering any contrary position to yours.

I would have to say a Fender can only come out of a Fender factory myself but the wealth of parts (sold by Fender themselves) make your point a valid one.

Now you're just getting tedious. Not a single person has stated anything to the contrary.You prefers Rics you say?

Exactly, no change.

Limelight don't use all Fender parts. I think some are licensed (necks certainly) but other parts aren't - they don't use Fender pick ups. Either way, they make instruments which Fender would be proud to make!!

I really don't think anyone was disputing the legal point about trademarks. The issue was more about the BC reaction and whether it warranted a ban on sales of instruments which bore decals to which they weren't entitled. The conclusion appears to be 'none'.

On the Moor, by any chance?

We all know. You proposed a similar ban on such things being sold on here (which could be anything, even on the sell anything pages) and this was rejected. What more is there to say. Yes, we implicitly condone it but we don't care. You seem to have one sympathiser as far as I can see but the mods have stated that nothing will be changing. Carry on by all means but it's your head and your brick wall.

So the only solution is to ban all ads for fear of them not being genuine Fenders (or whatever). Is that what you're saying? You haven't provided your solution as far as I can see but forgive me if I'm wrong.

The ones being held out as genuine Fenders by their description in each ad. Remind which of these are.

I think the crux is that there isn't any (as has been explained). Any attempt would be called out within a very short space of time.

I mean no disrespect but that is a bit of a schoolboy error. Limelight is well renowned on this site and it would have been simplicity itself to find out that Limelight don't do that kind of thing. I would be amazed if the original advert had any room for doubt of the authenticity of the instrument (I would think the price itself was a give-away). As I said, I mean no disrespect but the cost of a Limelight relic against the original thing (even a Fender relic) would surely have prompted some questions about the authenticity. Bet it's a great bass too.

Maybe, for clarity, all adverts should, as the very first word, name the manufacturer of any given product. A Limelight would be listed as such and a no-name would also have to be so called. You might want to add that it carries a particular logo but that would be clear (and so would any intention to deceive by default) from any photos. Maybe there should also be a rule that all items for sale have a front and back photo too. People only ask for them anyway.

As well as making the case for Matt I was also going to ask what determined whether the pedal board went on the platform or not. Is it space or did it start off there but moved off. I wondered if the vibration did anything? Not heard of them for that use but love that idea.

You will note I am a little biased but Mesa cannot be beaten, IMHO of course. I anticipate big, fat and warm. Enjoy.

NIce set-up for sure but can you please ask Rory to get Matt Walker back on board because his mum is worried about him.