By on October 22, 2006

x07ct_up0011222.jpgLater today, I’ll compose an email to The Truth About Cars’ (TTAC) coterie of writers asking them to select the final candidates for our Ten Worst Automobiles Today (TWAT) awards. Thanks to Mr. Williams’ organizational OCD, our best and brightest will have a most Excel-ent spreadsheet of all the vehicles you’ve nominated, with your reasons for doing so. Frank will collate their choices. By mid-week, we should have both the final 20 and the software we need to throw it to you for a democratic vote. Again, thank you for your help and support. Before the deal goes down, I want to highlight the importance of this award to all of us.

The purchase of a new or used vehicle is the average consumer’s second largest financial expenditure, after their house. While most of us here are pistonheads who’ve elevated this acquisition to something approaching a religious commitment, it’s important to remember that most motorists share neither our passion nor knowledge. To select their next vehicle, they rely on you, their friendly neighborhood automotive alpha, and, increasingly, the new media. JD Power recently revealed that US car buyers spend some six hours on the net researching their next car purchase. That’s more time than I spent to choosing my investment portfolio. (Both shares.)

TTAC has a large influence in this electronic sphere. Google “Ford Fusion SEL.” We’re number one. Google “Chevrolet Aveo.” We’re number seven. The vast majority of our reviews lie within the top 20 Google listings. Yes, we’re still small potatoes compared to the e-tuber mountains called Edmunds.com and kbb.com. But we are still the largest “take no prisoners” automotive review site on the web. Those of you who believe that these e-monoliths equal our commitment to tell the “truth” about cars, consider their reviews of a couple of our TWATs.

Take the Jeep Compass [please], a heavy favorite for a TWAT. Edmunds’ review acknowledges the vehicle's brand betrayal, dismisses it as irrelevant, and then tries to damn the model: “We're not so sure the brand's first crossover delivers what young urbanites are looking for.” And Darwinism is unproven. “The interior of our test car was also plagued with a few fit and finish issues like misaligned trim, manufacturing flash and bunched carpeting.” Plagued with a few? “The result is an interior that screams ‘rental car,’ which is a shame, because the seats are unquestionably comfortable and the driving position is excellent.”

Bottom line? “The Jeep, like the Caliber, is also generally satisfying to drive, quite affordable and sometimes fun. Comfortable, too. But upscale? Fashionable? Refined? Ah, not so much.” Obviously and in relation to their other critiques, Edmunds is not so much enamored with the Compass. Yes, well, why doesn’t reviewer Scott Oldham simply come our and say the Compass blows? Two guesses and the first one can’t have the word “advertising” in it. Hey, at least we got Edmunds to admit that the manufacturer loaned them the vehicle.

Kbb.com hasn’t reviewed the Compass. But they have cast their electronic eyes upon the Uplander, the Chevrolet minivan our reviewer William C. Montgomery called “a half-assed has-been that never was and never shoulda been.” Kbb doesn’t quite see it that way. Their unnamed sage proclaims the interior “one of the nicest you’ll find in any minivan” and “the Uplander is well-suited to the needs of small families.” Fair enough– if you’re a masochist who harbors a near-murderous hatred for your family.

As you’d expect, the situation is even worse in the print media. I just received AutoWeek’s “07 Ultimate Car, Truck and Sport/UTE Buyers Guide,” bundled with my weekly issue. Jeep Compass? “While not ‘Trail Rated,’ the Compass offers many Jeep-like qualities to fend off incursions from the growing number of crossovers.” So that’s alright then. After perusing all the “Our Opinion” summaries of the vehicles named, I found myself searching (in vain) for the words “Special Advertising Section.” And yes, Jeep has a full-page ad within Crain Communications' “ultimate” guide (albeit touting the Wrangler).

Clearly, there’s still a need for an automotive website that’s willing to tell it like it is for the public good and, let’s face it, our mutual amusement. While this article (and our award) are predicated on the theory that by thy willingness to slag-off a loser thy shall be known, it’s important to remember that TTAC is just as quick to identify and praise automotive quality wherever we find it. Despite being banned by BWM from their press vehicles and launch events, we’re happy to declare that we LOVE the new 335i.

In short, our readers are our first, last and only priority. We’re proud to be able to serve you with the plain, unvarnished truth about cars. The TWAT awards symbolize and extend that “brand positioning.” Again, thank you for the opportunity to provide this service. 

Since this article was written, we've begun voting on the '06 TWAT awards.

Please click HERE to cast your vote on the final 10. You will be returned to the TTAC home page.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

41 Comments on “TTAC’s Ten Worst Automobiles Today (TWAT) Award: What’s Next...”


  • avatar
    carguy

    All print car magazines should have “Special Advertising Section” printed on the cover or at least “Danger: Glossy Infomercial” (or maybe Misinfomercial?). The web is the last refuge of automotive honesty. Let’s hope the current advertising revenue works out for the guys and gals TTAC as the deep pockets of car companies can be very tempting when you’re an underpaid journalist.

  • avatar
    Luther

    I second carguy sentiments.

    It is sites like TTAC that are driving new car quality.

    Thanks for your efforts TTAC !!! I hope you all get rich while maintianing your integrity. Click on TTAC’s ads people !!!

  • avatar
    allen5h

    All I can say is I hope the Prius makes the final cut.

  • avatar
    dean

    I can’t help but get a kick out of the GM advertising banners I see on this site. I wonder if anyone at GM knows they are buying space on a website that refuses to pull punches in exposing the mediocrity of both their vehicles and their business model.

    Its amusing to see the quotes from Edmunds and kbb. Since I’m not currently in the market to buy a vehicle I pretty much read nothing but TTAC, so I haven’t been exposed to the underbelly of kowtowing auto “journalism.” (Save for the “Driving” section of my local paper which, come to think of it, also reads like a “Special Advertising Section.”)

    Keep up the good work, Farago. I look forward to seeing the 20 candidates and the ten winners (or is that losers?). While I expect that some vehicles on the list may do little other than make TTAC look foolish (the Camry? come on!) the exercise has been entertaining.

  • avatar
    Jan Andersson

    I love this site. I also want to find more sites like The Truth About Microsoft, The Truth About Global Warming, The Truth About The European Union, and so on. Anyone?

  • avatar

    Thanks for the kind words. I will dfo everything in my power to live up to them, and maintain your trust.

    As for the Camry, remember that the selection committee will cull 20 finalists from the readers’ list. While the number of nominations for the Camry or any other vehicle will be noted, it’s but one factor in the judges’ decision. They are free to ignore it entirely.

    When you choose the final 10 by a demoncratic e-vote, we reserve the right to rearrange, drop or add a vehicle, but we will not exercise that right unless you go and do something really stupid, or we detect some kind of crazy ass conspiracy to skew the results.

  • avatar

    @ Dean.
    It would be even funnier if we all clicked on those GM ads. The fine folks in the marketing division would see the referrer.

  • avatar

    After I discovered this website I actually cancelled my subscriptions to every magazine I had and haven’t visited Edmunds.com in nearly two years.

    Well, I still get Autoweek. I’m not sure why. I’m not paying. They just won’t stop sending it to me. At least it has nice spy photos.

  • avatar
    philbailey

    Heck with GM, what I want is to meet my perfect match!
    But I digress. Someone brought up the subject of spy photos. Do they serve any useful purpose? All the big websites go into some sort of frothy mouthed posture every time one is presented. Maybe they paid big bucks for the privilege of feeding and clothing Brenda Priddy et al, yet all I see is acres of wrinkled vinyl or one half of a headlight. The illustrations on the heading of TTAC tell me more. What a waste of time and money the average spy photo really is, or am I just not the enthusiast I used to be?

  • avatar
    starlightmica

    I somehow got 5 free years of Automobile, dragging out into the next decade, but I’m letting Autoweek lapse later this year. And I’m visiting this web site far more often than any other car-related site, which means I had better start clicking on those GM ads.

    Democratic voting? You mean, “vote early, vote often” won’t work? I assume you have to be a site member to vote, what’s to prevent the poll from being flooded by readers of a particular web site, besides locking out new registrants?

  • avatar
    quasimondo

    @ Dean.
    It would be even funnier if we all clicked on those GM ads. The fine folks in the marketing division would see the referrer.

    I doubt it would matter to them. Remember that debacle when they had that website where you could make your own ad for the 07 Suburban/Tahoe?

  • avatar

    Um, nothing.

  • avatar
    Frank Williams

    “You mean, “vote early, vote often” won’t work?”

    Why not? It works for Georgia….

  • avatar
    f8

    I can’t remember the last time I read a car review in an automotive magazine that said something to the effect of “this car sucks”. They’re always holding back, always trying to avoid saying something bad. It’s like an art critique at a kindergarden – you always try to find something nice to say about their scribbles, or you’ll make the kids cry. Except when I buy a car, I’m mostly interested in the bad things one could say about it

  • avatar
    dgduris

    OK! RF,

    Let’s not get all “David E Davis” on us.

    True, TTAC is about the only place north of my bum that tells it like it is about whatever there is to be driven but you’re not changing the world yet.

    Just Google “flying vagina” and click on “images” …no B9 Tribeca there.

    Sorry, couldn’t resist. ;-}

  • avatar
    New2LA

    Like aaronmc, I have also started cancelling print subscriptions. I let my Automobile sub lapse recently. Despite the regular reminiscing by D.E.D. Jr. about what life was like 50 years ago, and Pat Bedard’s rants, there just isn’t much else to whet my appetite.

    MT recently went on a self-improvement plan, going from bottom-feeder fluff for ladies who want to learn about cars to only mediocre. Kind of like GM, they went part-way then stopped.

    I used to think C/D was the best automotive writing there was. They even used the word SH*T at least in at least a couple issues each year, which I always found mighty impressive.

    However – Robert’s website is liberating and it leaves all other pubs in the dust. Funny how you don’t realize just how bad and biased they are until Robert shows us. I can’t wait to see where TTAC ends up in future years (wishing Robert tons of success).

    Even so, I still subscribe to MT and C/D. You see, the print media still has a unique advantage: its uncanny ability to serve as impromptu light reading for the throne. If only I could bring TTAC in there with me… no, I’m not going to bring in my laptop, because I don’t want it to be “flagged”. What happens in the bathroom stays in the bathroom.

  • avatar
    210delray

    I also hope the Camry (and the Impala) don’t make the cut, because it will make TTAC look silly. Just because they’re “boring and soulless” in the minds of some, doesn’t mean they’re in the same league as the Jeep Compass and the GM minivans.

    Besides, there are plenty of other “boring and soulless cars” out there, like the Malibu, Galant, and ’06 Stratus/Sebring, just to name a few in the same market segment.

    I also recall someone asked for a “Ten Worst Cars of All Time” award. Don’t do it. For one thing, it’ll turn into the “Ten Worst Cars since 1970,” because most people posting won’t remember anything eariler. Then we’ll get all the usual suspects — Aztek, Vega-Pinto-Gremlin & Pacer, Citation and other GM X-car clones, Cimarron, Yugo, one of those Japanese mutant cars like the Datsun F-10, and Olds (GM) Diesel. BORING!

  • avatar

    I’m curious what the TTAC staffers think about some of the main stream journalists like Dan Niel. The guy has obviously spoken his mind in the past (didn’t GM pull their ad $$ from the LA Times for a bit after his piece on the G6).

    As for the assertions about the car mags, I think everyone is on board with that, ditto for the sites.

  • avatar

    new2LA writes:
    I let my Automobile sub lapse recently. Despite the regular reminiscing by D.E.D. Jr. about what life was like 50 years ago, and Pat Bedard’s rants, there just isn’t much else to whet my appetite.

    DED was part of the reason I let my sub lapse. Gawd was he boring. It’s too bad, because I did see once an excellent review of the Lexus IS300 that he did. He’s clearly highly competent; just didn’t choose to exercise it much.

  • avatar
    willbodine

    Funny about the decline of the “traditional” car mags. Car and Driver is to me the saddest, simply because it has fallen so low. The copy might as well be printed as submitted by the factories. The 50th Anniv. issue recently was fabulous, but only by showing how great C and D once was. They even reprinted the test of an Opel Kadett from the 60′s that was photographed in a scrap yard. I think it ran several thousand words. Several thousand great words. But not anymore.

  • avatar
    Steven T.

    I used to spend a small fortune on auto subs, but now only take Automotive News (and think hard about renewing each year). I leaf through the enthusiast mags at newstands and will buy an issue if it seems worth the money. That happens all too rarely.

    Thank god for the Internet. In the old days I would have to visit a major library to read the LA Times, but now I can find Dan Neil’s columns with the press of a computer button. Neil is my favorite auto writer these days because he’s unusually courageous and intellectually well-rounded, yet still manages to be such a fun wordsmith. Oh, to play with words as well as he! Neil richly deserved his Pulitzer.

    The market seems wide open for TTAC-type websites that fill in the growing gaps left by the corporate media. This is like the early days of SUVs — I don’t think we’ve yet seen all of the permutations that may someday dominate automotive cyber-journalism.

  • avatar
    Johnson

    This is completely childish and silly.

    First off, what defines “worst”.

    Honestly, if the TTAC staff clearly defined what determines a car being the “worst”, then most of this rubbish would have been avoided. This whole TWAT debacle I think brings the reputation of TTAC down simply because it’s so ambigous.

    Choosing the Camry as a TWAT simply because its “ugly”, or because Sajeev Mehta wrote a biased review on it doesn’t make it so. For shame.

  • avatar
    racerx

    Why is it that the automakers have the US auto mags’ nuts in a vice but not the European (namely British) mags? EVO, Top Gear magazine and CAR all spring to mind as publications that aren’t afraid to criticize or tear a car apart if need be. That alone is reason enough not to pick up the US birdcage liner mags, never mind the writing content, photography and layout – they’re just completely in another league.

  • avatar
    Terry Parkhurst

    Thing is, the worst cars of today are light years better than some of the cars of just 30 years ago. The first Dodge Aspen – why are they bringing that name back? – and cousin Plymouth Volare were known not only for premature rust-out, but for parts falling off – literally.
    Back in the Fifties, the Edsel, which has now shown that anything become collectible if enough time passes and myths grow, was sometimes shipped from the factory with all manner of things not set straight; and it was left up to dealers to take care of such matters. (Source: a Jamie Kitman column in Automobile in which he interviewed an engineer who had worked on the Edsel).
    It seems only the Italian automakers didn’t get with the program. It was, of course, the main reason Alfa-Romeo ended up leaving the States, in the mid-Nineties. Let’s hope that when that marque returns – if ever – we don’t have to place it among the TWAT of 2010.

  • avatar
    tms1999

    Printed magazine business model:

    1. On the newsstand, you pay 5 bucks. Those will cover the cost of paper, ink, (=printing), distribution to the newsstand and profit for the retailer. 0 goes back to the actual media.

    2. As a subscriber, you pay less than 5 bucks, usually a 6 to 2 year subscription for something like 2/3 bucks per issue. It’s cheaper because you can cut the middle man (newsstand profit, and some of distribution, when you have thousands of something to ship, you can’t beat the USPS), and still 0 bucks for the publisher, journalists etc…

    So how do they make money? well, 46% to 68% of the pages are ads, a third-party is paying to print them, paying for your participation as captive audience.

    The rest is divided between opinions (=cheap), reviews (=sponsored by manufacturers, cheap to free) or sometimes big comparo (CTS-V vs M3) which involves some work but not much.

    So the people these ‘journalists’ are really after are the advertisers, they are the ones paying the bills, you don’t want to piss them off.

    Also, as a great side effect, the more they print copies, the more they can jack up the rates of ads. This is why you see a lot more copies on the new-stand than they will sell (and the retailer does not have to pay for unsold copies, how convenient) and also why when your subscription lapses, they still send you the magazine: you count more to the advertiser rate to them that it costs them to send you a copy.

    It is a really perverse model (not to say corrupt).

    Everybody wins: you get cheap magazine, the journalists, editors, printers et al. get a paycheck to eat and pay the bill, and the advertisers get a little bit of your attention to let you know how great of products there are for you out there at the dealership.

    Everybody wins but the truth. The truth suffers a little along the way.

    Though it won’t take more than a test drive to realize the compass (or caliber, or anything of that caliber) with its slightly misaligned panels and bulged carpet, not to mention rattling plastic and wheezy CVT coupled to asthmatic I4, is not as glamorously reaffirming of American quality as some piece of article would want you to believe. But hey, you got a cheap magazine…

  • avatar
    f8

    I think TTAC should have a “review of a review”, where a TTAC writer would pick apart a car magazine review.

  • avatar
    Luther

    Thanks tms1999.

    Just tune out the manipulations of the “push” media.

  • avatar
    jacob

    Actually, I hope Impala makes it to the final cut. It deserves to be there. Why? Park a brand new Impala next to a bunch of mid-90s Camrys, Olds, Chevys, and what not, and it will blend perfectly with them. GM is the only car company that’s offering, in the second half of this decade, a _bland_ mid-90s design. Do another experiment, ask a random layman about what he thinks about the year of production of a parked brand new Impala. I bet a whole bunch of people would never guess that this is a car that’s being currently produced.

  • avatar
    Antone

    I for one, enjoy this site. And I hope to see it grow in time. Keep up the good work!

    As for printed Auto media, I enjoy the British magazine EVO.

  • avatar
    nocaster

    Jan Andersson:

    This is not quite TTAM but close.

    Mini Microsoft

    You have to look at some of the archives for the past year to get a good glimpse inside Microsoft.

  • avatar
    DrVali

    May I suggest that for next years TWATtys that we break it down into segments as the lead-in, and then pick from those winners for the ultimate TWAT.

    Class Nominations
    1) Econoboxes
    2) Mid-Size Sedans
    3) Full-Size Sedans
    4) Luxobarges
    5) Mini-Utes/CUVs
    6) Mid-sized SUVs
    7) Full-sized SUVs
    8) Trucks
    9) Minivans
    10) Sports Cars

    That’s a brief list that would give a top 10 list for us to rank, and you could theoretically stretch this over 10 months (one a month) with the finals about this time next year. It would keep 1/2 of the cars sold in america from being nominated in one or two threads and then make the final discussions more meaty.

  • avatar
    Dilljt

    Among mid-size family cars, the Camry has traditionally been a segment leader due to its refinement and quality even if it’s style and driving dynamics has been less than exciting. And yes, other mid-size cars are just as dull as the Camry. However, because the Camry has garnered such a high reputation for quality, it has been able to set itself apart from other transportation appliances, and the Camry even generally costs more than other cars in its class. In other words, the Camry’s raison d’etre is based on its supposedly high levels of refinement and quality.

    The new Camry fails in this regard. I recently drove a new Camry with only a few hundred miles on it. The seats and dash jingled and buzzed. The interior consisted ill-fitting panels with gaps larger than any car I’ve seen from the last decade or so. Worst of all, the brakes provided so little feedback that quick stops made my heart beat faster than riding on a roller coaster.

    Thus, I (and perhaps others) did not vote for the Camry due to its “boring” persona. The reason that I voted for the Camry is that it fails to serve its sole purpose as a refined appliance piece.

  • avatar
    CellMan

    f8: I think RF used to write ‘between the lines’ or something like that over on jalopnik for a while. He thouroughly disected other articles. An entertaining, but technical read.

    Regarding printed media, I distinctly remember the cover of UK-based Car magazine many years ago. They had a picture of the latest VW Golf with a picture of a huge bright yellow lemon above it. In the article they thoroughly described the new Golf was rubbish. I just felt so satisfied that a magazine could so freely speak it’s mind.

    That’s why I’m here. Keep up the good work at TTAC.

  • avatar
    RicardoHead

    Is the 7-series going to make the TWAT list like it deserves?

  • avatar
    allen5h

    I want to comment about how much better it is to have a place like TTAC where we can debate and discuss cars/rants/etc… Back in the old days, all we had where these car mags where some authoritative voice expressed his/her opinion and the only way you could get anything clarified was by sending them a letter via snail mail and perhaps you could get a response to your query in the next issue.

    I can remember years ago there was a TV interview of one of the editors of the car mags and he said that years ago a certain car brand made some “terrible cars”. If that is how he honestly felt about it, then why didn’t they say that when it mattered the most twenty or thirty years ago in their car reviews when these “terrible cars” where for sale? It didn’t help my oldest brother any when he purchased his new Chevy Vega in ’72, by the time he had gotten rid of that POS he knew he had been had.

    Whereby in the past the car mags where nothing more than rubber stamps of approval for whatever the car companies where building, now a web site like TTAC is the new car buying pause that refreshes.

    I mean even when these car mags are available for me to read for free at the dentist’s office, I don’t bother because they have no credibility and they are worthless to me.

    I do not know if TTAC will have any influence with the car companies, but I sure hope that will be the case. You see, most car companies are not any good at figuring out what to build and how to build it. And this symbiotic relationship between the car companies and the car mags has not helped the industry much. Instead, web sites like TTAC are needed to whack ‘em upside ‘head with a two by four to get them to understand what people want to buy.

    What I want is greater choice of competent moderately priced four door sedans with sweet shifting manual trannies. Call me an idiot if you want but this is what I like to drive, and I will gravitate towards those manufacturers who build what I want. (If Honda can do this then why can’t anybody else do this?)

    I do not know how many whacks with the two by four car manufacturers will have to take, but eventually they will have to start building products that I and others want to buy. Like any other business, it is either that or close your factories for good. It is as simple as that.

  • avatar
    Speed McQueen

    I predict the factories will close first, since the UAW’s leadership would rather destroy the industry than make the concessions necessary to put the manufacturers back in the black. Everyone at TTAC is commenting about styling, performance, and reliability, which is great and true, but what’s really killing the American car industry? Grid-lock, union entitlement, and poor dealership service.

  • avatar
    f8

    I predict the factories will close first, since the UAW’s leadership would rather destroy the industry than make the concessions necessary to put the manufacturers back in the black. Everyone at TTAC is commenting about styling, performance, and reliability, which is great and true, but what’s really killing the American car industry? Grid-lock, union entitlement, and poor dealership service.

    Unions are not at fault for a decades-long streak of poor design, branding, and engineering decisions. If American car companies made reliable, good-looking, and affordable cars, they wouldn’t have to worry about not being able to pay the unions because they would have never lost so much market share to the Japanese.

    You can have the best sales team on the planet and the best workers in the industry, and your business will still fail if your product sucks. People only consider American cars because they are cheap. If I can get a Caliber for say $14K, or a tC for $17.5K, I’ll at least consider the Caliber. Do you think anyone would buy a Caliber or a Cobalt if it cost exactly as much as a Scion tC?

    I’m not going into the trucks/SUVs in my example though, but lower price is a big factor in why American cars sell, especially with all the rebates and special deals

  • avatar
    GMrefugee

    RF-
    “Fair enough– if you’re a masochist who harbors a near-murderous hatred for your family.”

    I get it that the GM minivans are even less than average but that attempt at humor was over the line, IMO.

    Any other vehicles you recommend for the proclaimed family haters among your readers such as me?

  • avatar
    JimHinCO

    I’m pretty happy with this site…since no punches are pulled…folks just need to remember that opinion is not the same as fact. :) What car is perfect for me is one within budget, sporty, yet refined, can handle well in the snow, take the hills of the mountains with ease, and get decent gas mileage (to soothe the environmentalist within me). Something completely different than a family might need, etc.

    I am a bit perplexed at the “unbiased” claims made by the site. Sure, you aren’t biased to advertisers or car companies, but you are certainly biased toward juvinille sayings and clever coin phrases (everyone who drives a truck is compensating for his penis size, driving a mini-van or SUV strips a man of masculinity, etc.) to make a point that isn’t fact…but instead just opinion (not even educated opinion).

    However, all that being said, the feedback option to keep dialogue open between the author (or other site contributors) and the readers (us) is incredible. If big car companies had this kind of forum…I doubt they’d of made some of the idiotic mistakes they’ve made. Obviously their employees either aren’t in touch or are afraid to tell the King that his new set of clothes are indeed invisible.

  • avatar

    Must pay more attention.

    1. We’ve defended Minivan Man many times. NONE of our authors have dissed him. Or her.

    2. We’ve defended SUV’s many times, in many ways. Mr. Montgomery joined the staff after one such pro-SUV rant.

    3. The truth can be fact or opinion or a little of both. We ALWAYS say something good about ALL vehicles, with the possible exception of the Chevrolet Uplander and Kia Rio, and that’s only fair.

    4. Style is not bias. You can be biased with style, but that’s not the same thing and I sure don’t see much of that in the car press.

    5. Thanks for the compliment. I think.

  • avatar
    Jim H

    Robert:

    We are paying attention…perhaps you missed it.

    To quote:
    “I still refuse to buy into the mentality that dictates the need to ride around in a giant, uncomfortable, poor handling penis-substitute because one day a year you take the kids jet skiing. ”


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India