How should the small/outsider press distinguish itself from the academic or mainstream presses? Are there areas where the small press should emulate the mainstream press?

Michael Grover: The small press should distinguish itself from the mainstream press by publishing real poetry with blood, soul, and feeling left in it. Stuff that has not workshopped it all out as academics do. Leave some meat on those bones!

Mikael Covey: The big boys thrive on non-fiction and genre. Those don’t interest me much. Nor am I interested in the facts of life, unless I can make ‘em up myself. I’m an idealist who believes that literature can and must change the world. So for me, indie presses oughtta operate from that perspective. Ferlinghetti started City Lights to publish his friends - the Beats, and perhaps to change the world. He accomplished both, re-the Hippie green/peace movement.

Great literature has a great impact on society. Indie presses must be the finder and promoter of great literature. The big boys aint interested. But great literature will also have great selling power, if the indie’s will find it and promote it properly. Unfortunately I don’t think they’re interested. They wanna emulate the reliable formula of publishing saleable genre.

From my outsider perspective, we must force the indie’s to take note of us via the internet. We must force lit bloggers to pay attention to on-line lit, not just NY Times best sellers. Damnit, they don’t need any help! But we - us on-line writers - we gotta work together in a concerted and persistent effort to continuously promote each other. A world wide writers’ alliance, if you will. Look around - the world needs us.

David Blaine: I believe that the mainstream press is as much a part of the corporate world as Exon or Haliburton, and as such, they are focused on making a profit. Their lips may say it's about art, but their actions say it's about business. I can't say I blame them. They have responsibilities as a business and they need to make decisions that address those responsibilities.

Now the indie press is comprised of many independents, thus the name. Getting them to operate in concert wouldn't work and isn't even something I would suggest. I believe that the most successful independent presses are more focused on the artist and the art than the market and the profit. They can't operate in the red, not for long anyway, but projects that would break even or make a small profit can be considered successful for a small press, while a commercial entity such as Norton or Scribner needs to double or triple their investment to stay in business.

The commercial press has devolved to the point of marketing the same old formulaic crap over and over again. People buy it because of massive advertising campaigns that include shill reviews in pretentious organs such as the New York Times and the New York Review of Books. I may not fault the commercial press for making profitable decisions, and I may not fault them for excluding good literature that isn't able to earn the requisite profit margins, but I do fault them for this almost predatory marketing.

Where I think the small press might emulate the commercial press is in their selection of artists to work with. Regardless of whether a writer is going to appeal to a mass audience or a small one, it's essential to avoid working with fractious personalities, prima donnas, and outright assholes. Small press should be about the art first and the artist second.

The number one problem with nearly every person in the U.S., maybe the world, is we all want to be rock stars. Some even take that Nickelback song seriously.

Aleathia Drehmer: Mikael, I will agree with you that what we do on-line is fairly important as we move forward in this century. I am old-fashioned in the sense that I still love the feel of an actual book in my hands to read. It feels better and more personal, but more and more people are using the internet as their main tool for everything--reading, writing, shopping, news and entertainment. The big boys are not really taking advantage of this as much as they could (though The New Yorker on-line is pretty spiffy).

The small press lacks the funding to really promote publications but if we had a better system, money would be of no concern. I find that there can be quite a bit of selfishness in the small press as if it were a competition to the finish line. I have always been a firm believer in promoting the work of my peers and I do it every chance I get. We can succeed better in this business by lending a helping hand instead of pushing people away for the sake of getting there first.

My thought on this matter, though small press has been good to me so far, is that most of us are striving to go beyond this phase of publishing. Don't we eventually want a larger market and funding to spend our time writing instead of schlepping away at a nine to five? The biggest problem I see between the presses is maintaining an integrity to the work once you leave small press and move forward. I think the independence could get lost and not being able to write what you need to or want to will be a personal and creative burden. I think there are great things about both kinds of presses.

David Blaine: Aleathia, there are some who are trying to use the small press as a minor league club on their way to the big leagues, and some who would just like to avoid the big leagues. Let's face it, if you got a contract with Norton they would tell you what to do. That's pretty much what indie artists want to avoid.

But as for the feel of a book, I hear you there. And it's more than the feel. How much can you really read on a screen before you go blind? And how can you curl up in an easy chair with a scotch or a beer and get really comfy with a laptop?

But audio, now there's a medium to look into for the electronic age.

As we start to upload our voices reading our own work, people can take us portable with mp3 players the size of postage stamps. We could go with them on the bus, on their morning jogs, or on their lunch breaks. Perhaps a book in multiple formats including print, e-book and mp3 cd would be a bundle people would pay for.

Paul Corman Roberts: Much of what the small press (SP) suffers from, in terms of the competitive egos, presses working at odds and enormous wastes of money and time, also plagues the Big Press (BP)...I've known writers with big houses who, despite their own professionalism, wind up bitching and moaning about how long its taking to get their book to market, or being asked to re-edit or re-write chapters, or how little of the book sales they are going to see.

The BP do have their "boutique" imprints which can be all about "art" or "literature" but still very much designed to pull in $. So their shit is obviously economically and subjectively elitist. But the SP can be just as elitist, but its mostly all ego and no $. Not to be a capitalist pig or anything (and how many REAL commies or how man REAL Democratic Socialists do we have in this group anyway?) but I'm much more in favor of the $ over the ego....this really helps the writers much more than having their asses kissed...which the writers all need of course, to keep plugging away, but it don't keep the heat on and the rent paid. Contrary to popular belief, I doubt any of us does our best work at 3 am on a park bench in December.

The SP can practice a better economic model, a co-operative, that benefits more of the writers and workers associated with the enterprise. The BP is forever lost in the self-eating machine of plutarchal and oligarchal capitalist model. A REAL free market capitalism would benefit the small indies...but that's not the reality we get to work with.

And this is just my own thing, but I'd like to see the small press get a lot more involved with using hemp paper (yeah, I know how much it costs...now anyways) to cut down on environmental waste, and maybe help a few more farmers get some work. Heil Humboldt.

Michael Grover: If we are not happy with the small press, whatever there is only one thing that we can do about it. Stop bitching and build our own. Talk is cheap.

Mikael Covey: Outsider Writers did a great thing with the Micheline poetry book prize. Perhaps this could also be done with short stories and novels. As to the question of small press versus mainstream. Why don’t we compile a list of small presses, contact them and ask them to partake in this discussion? Litkicks did that in their discussion of book pricing and got some good responses from publishers, agents, and authors.

Pat King: Mikael,

I think there will be further explorations of this topic and I'll keep that in mind. A few people in this discussion are small press publishers, though.

A lot of what people have already touched on, I agree with. Small presses are where it's at right now but they don't have any money.

I'd like to see the small press get better organized, distribute better, be more creative about getting stuff into the public's hands. I don't want the small press, or at least the small press that I'm involved with and have known for the past six or seven years to be some sort of minor-league for the major publishing houses. This has happened before, notably when publishers were grabbing up 90's zine writers. But it was, for the most part, the writers themselves and not the scene as a whole that got recognized.

I want to see some sort of breakthrough for this new literature. I want it to be recognized as a whole....a genre of sorts. Like punk rock or the Beat Generation.

Is this too much? Have I gone too far? I wonder about that sometimes. I'd be lying if I said the thought of quitting Outsider Writers to focus on my own writing and get my own stuff out there hasn't crossed my mind at least once. I mean, I could be writing a LOT more if I didn't have this project to work on. But I believe in it, and I believe in the small press scene as a whole and I want to work for it as much as I do myself.

Is this a crazy pipe dream? Am I whistlin' Dixie here? Obviously I don't think so or I would have gone solo by now.

I'd like to hear what others think about this. Does anyone else think that there's a way for the small press scene as a whole to break out?

Joseph Smith: Pat King asked: How should the small/outsider press distinguish itself from from the academic or mainstream presses? Are there areas where the small press should emulate the mainstream press?

I have to say that, as a (very) small publisher who's currently in the midst of trying to sell his press's first release, these are non-concerns.

As I've come to learn over the past few months, creating books (writing, designing, and printing) is easy--selling them is the hard part. It takes time and energy to jump through the hoops and over the obstacles that the industry has erected. Do you want to waste yours trying to create co-ops and organizations with people who mean well but either don't play well with others or talk a lot but deliver little?

In my experience, the best thing the small press can do for itself is to forget about trying to change the world, publish books, and learn how to sell them. That may sound cynical, but if the small press can make that happen (particularly the last part), then the world (or at least the publishing world) will change. Isn't it ironic....

So, the real question for the small press (if you ask me) is: How can we invent new ways to publicize and sell small press books? Or, to get back to Pat's question, perhaps inventing these new ways--is the way the small press can distinguish itself.

David Blaine: Mikael, thanks for mentioning the Micheline contest. We have discussed the possibility of having book contests for other genres in the future. As they say in the TV biz, stay tuned.

Joe, Have you read Plug Your Book? Did any of those ideas of online marketing seem viable to you?

I don't think there is any shortcut to marketing books that doesn't cost a ton of money. I'm pretty sure a successful marketing plan is going to require as much effort from the author as it will from the publisher.

If the author isn't at least known well in his local area, chances of getting readings/signings, newspaper publicity, spots on local radio and tv and such are pretty slim. And if you can't capture the author's home town, going state and national are a tough row to hoe.

I'd also like to know what an indie publisher would consider success for their books. How many sold copies of a chap book (of poems or short stories) do you consider a success? How many does it take to break even, or make money?

Joseph Smith: David Blaine: No, I haven't read that book. I'll check it out.

I agree that there are no shortcuts to marketing books and that traditional marketing programs are expensive. I also agree that authors need to be just as involved as published when it comes to selling a title.

Moreover, everything you've said about readings, publicity, the author's home town, etc. is true. I work in publishing and have recently spent a lot of time picking the brains of friends and colleagues who work in the industry, so feel like I have a good idea of what I'm talking about. I could learn more, of course, but I'm not completely in the dark.

However, I still think that there are new marketing tricks out there for small publishers -- and I'm not just talking about the online world. I'm talking ways to connect with actual human beings. It's just going to take some creative thinking to figure out what those methods are. Of course, what might work for one small publisher might not work for another....

Mikael Covey: Okay, now we’re getting somewhere - how to make it big as a small press. Well, if you’re in the business, I trust you know what you’re doing. I don’t, but my suggestion is to come up with a mega-best-seller, like one of my books for instance. Sell a million hardback copies, movie deal, we all get rich. Any takers?

J. D. Finch: What's the difference between indy (small) and mainstream (large) presses/publishing? Business. Speaking for myself, I have no interest in business. I'm about the writing and editing -- I wouldn't even consider keeping books or doing the other things that are necessary to keep my Whirligigzine thing going as a business.

From what I have seen in the small press you basically bust your ass just to not go broke. Pretty much nobody makes a profit and you should only kill yourself if you intend to get to the size of a Soft Skull, Akashic, etc. Of course there's no guarantee that that will happen, no matter how much effort you expend in the business end of things.

Don't forget that big publishing makes its nut on bestsellers and blockbusters. An amazing number of titles that even biggies like Knopf etc. publish sell less than 1,000 copies. So even though Mikael might have been joking, there's truth in what he says -- sell a bestseller or die, if you want to be a big publishing success.

But many small presses -- and I'm not talking about a couple poets who get together to sell a few chapbooks under some company name: can you even call that a small press? Seems more like an offshoot of the zine world, unless you're selling 1,000 copies of a chapbook a couple times a year -- are run by people who have more passion than business sense. If I take the Whirligigzine into publishing other stuff -- and I'm thinking about it -- I'll need someone for promotion, someone to take care of the financial end, etc., etc.

In fact, I've got my eye on someone to handle distribution, etc. -- he's got a small press out on the west coast that I think could do a good job of getting the word out, promo, distro, etc., but that is a step that is down the line. Right now I'm bootstrapping and doing my own promo -- economics is certainly a factor -- and I'm hoping to start a fire that I can continue to feed with future Whirligigzine efforts.

Pat King: J.D., I think you made an excellent point about current indie publishers being a lot similar to the zine publishers of yesteryear. Joseph Smith (Manual Publishing) came from that scene.

In the late 90's and even continuing a bit today, zine writers went through a period where they were bought up by bigger indie and sometimes mainstream publishing houses and the scene itself got a little attention.

Could we see something similar in the outsider scene? Possibly, though like I said before, I'd like to see the scene make its mark on its own, rather than with the help of bigger publishing houses. Because, ultimately, many of those zine writers had a book published and then faded back into obscurity.

Joseph, I think is on the right track when he says that we need to come together and figure out new ways of distribution and promotion. It will require a lot of thinking, partying and pow-wows but I think that we're smart enough to come up with something. The work is quality and cutting-edge and new. That's already there. But we need to come up with some good old fashioned Gorilla (sic) techniques to draw in more non-writers, to get the work read.

David Blaine: I think in the online world they call this viral marketing, and when it happens, it looks like pure genius, but I think most of the time it's a case of being in the right place at the right time.

This marketing sub-thread might be a good topic for its own roundtable.

I think Pat meant we need to implement guerilla tactics, although if people still won't buy, gorilla tactics might work.

OK, JD mentioned selling a thousand copies of a chapbook, is that realistic? Are there presses doing that?

Where I see this conversation headed is towards marketing more books and making more money. Not for purpose of a profit so much as to just be able to do more things that cost money, like perhaps pay authors, and pay the publisher's mortgage?

Then the fine line between indi and commercial is how can we preserve the artist and her integrity. Selling a mass market best seller probably involves a lot of creative compromise.

One idea I'll toss out for small press marketing is author exposure. I've noticed some authors appear in the same zines over and over, nearly every issue. But the names that catch in my head are the authors who appear widely in the small press. They aren't just in every issue of A, B or C. They're in D, F, M, O, and P too. In fact you can pick up nearly any small press publication and find Lyn Lifshin.

If you don't have a bombshell book, maybe having a bombshell author is as good?

To go back to that farm club anaology, "Hey, we just signed the next Corso and Ginz and we're going to kick your ass this year."

Maybe.

Aleathia Drehmer: Not to imply bombshell status at all, but I try to spread it around too. I am constantly looking for new places to submit because I think it gets tiresome to see the same five people in a zine over and over again. It makes small press feel really, really small. It is strange but I have noticed when submitting that there are different factions of small press writers, at different tiers of magazine/ezine quality. Another name I see everywhere, across the board, is Arlene Ang. I think the biggest key to exposing yourself is understanding your own material really well and being able to recognize where it does and does not fit in with small press publishers. This takes time and a bit of research....and the understanding that your work has some variance.

I think forming bonds with people around you in the small press community is helpful as well. If you have other writers that are willing to post bulletins for you, and vice versa for them, then essentially you have not one network but two. We all know that word of mouth is the biggest influence in just about every art form. Who do we trust when we want to read something or see an exhibit? the big wig we know is out to turn a profit or the little guy that saw the show or read the poem and said "this will blow your head off" ? I know I would go with the little guy because it made them feel something, they didn't have an agenda. The best marketing, the best possible avenue for small press is grassroots. Plant seeds, let them grow.

Pat King: Yeah, sending stuff out everywhere is good if you're a poet......but for a fiction writer? I dunno if that would work so well. Unless you write a lot of micro-fiction type stuff then you're not producing anywhere near the quantity that a poet is.......and any way, a lot of poets that spread the love like that seem to be ONLY interested in getting their name out there. Often their work could use a lot more.....work.....

Aleathia is one of the few poets who puts a lot of work out that's also quality work. But I don't see that a lot.

No, I'm not sure that's really the answer. It's all drawing from the same eyeballs. The eyeballs are divided among the magazines they support and read more often, but it's still the same batch of struggling writers and poets. The point, I think, is to expand and get new eyeballs.....

OK, that's getting a little gross. But I think I've made some sort of point.

Aleathia Drehmer: I can see what you are saying about it being harder for the small press fiction writer to move pieces around. I know first hand it is more difficult to write a good piece of fiction. The process is longer and more intensive. But there are some very talented fiction writers out there today chilling in the wings of small press. I think focus needs to be a bit more centered instead of the poem being the dominator all the time. People that can successfully write both poems and fiction will have the leg up.

I think maybe I was misunderstood in my previous comment, when I talked about "spreading it around" because I meant to new eyeballs. I am still awaiting my rejection from The New Yorker and some top university journals. I think breaking the barrier is the hardest thing because it is a new market, so to speak. And the thought of leaving the comfort of a circle of magazines where everyone knows you is daunting. This is the only life we have and to waste it circulating yourself on a small track seems wrong.

The leap for wanting a new audience, in my opinion, has to come from a place that is centered around making art and wanting to share it, not necessarily the name. I have a friend that constantly reminds me "you are not the poem" and this helps to keep me grounded, and allows me to find some confidence to move into new territory.

David Blaine: One thing that has always struck me is how receptive non-writers are to my work, as compared to writers. It's as if other writers view me as competition, and the non-writers are just more open to being entertained by my work.

Presenting your work at non-traditional venues might be a way to go. Like at an arts fair instead of a book fair. I know the Detroit Symphony Orchestra (No Detroit jokes plz.) has a poet in residence, and yes, she cusses and slams and the whole nine yards.

People buy books every day that we'd never touch. Jewel wrote a book of poetry, Obama and Clinton have their books out. Yuck. So maybe we're going after the wrong audience with our literature. Fiction or poetry.

Michael Grover: Ass kissing, name dropping, people published for favors. The way I see it we can be part of the problem or part of the solution.

J.D. Finch: David Asked: "OK, JD mentioned selling a thousand copies of a chapbook, is that realistic? Are there presses doing that?"

David -- I hope my point above implied that selling 1,000 chapbooks is pretty much an impossibility for the likes of us -- indy writers with only the most basic of support systems behind us. It can be done, but only if you fill the chap with the best of the best on the poetry scene. I think most "Myspace Poets" don't have a chance of making that kind of number. There are exceptions like S.A. Griffin and his bunch, etc., but they are few and far between. (And yes, I know he is more than just a Myspacer.)

The fact is if a poet is not published by a university press like Ahsahta, or given a helpful push/attention by Poughshares or one of the other lit journals, the work is only going to be seen by the other poets, who really don't give a damn, as David states above. The Internet is a big place and the little networks we set up more often than not don't grow beyond us, leaving the world at large ignorant to our talents and glories.

I agree with him that, unfortunately, the apathy of other poets and writers would seem to show that the Utopian publishing co-op that has been mentioned here is pretty much a hollow pipe dream. Just look at the negative comments we have gotten on the site -- it's a fair percentage of the total. Bottom line? I really don't see a hell of a lot of cooperation. Anyway, the poet/writer usually doesn't want to join a club -- just look at the time we are putting in hashing out this roundtable question. Wouldn't it be better, more productive and more satisfying to write something creative?

Another problem is that the rawness and honesty of what most outsider poets write won't sell to John and Joan Q. Public. You mention Jewel. You might also remember Rod McKuen, who years ago was the king of the trite and maudlin verse. People ate it up because it was as easy to take as a message on a Hallmark Card. Yak.

So no, we probably can't sell 1,000 chapbooks. But I think part of the excitement is that every so often someone does. And that hope keeps a lot of us going.

Mikael Covey: I think lit discussions are great; and very productive. When we share ideas, it's like the glow of the morning sun. Ah, if everyone could only feel that warmth, what a world...

Melissa Hansen: "How should the small/outsider press distinguish itself from from the academic or mainstream presses? Are there areas where the small press should emulate the mainstream press?"

Hmmm...thanks to all for contributing to this discussion; I've enjoyed and learned from your responses. I don't even know if I should be replying, because I'm not sure of my answer. Not so articulate, I assure you. I think that I need a little more experience, and it seems to be happening quickly, in "the small press". I've only started publishing my work last summer...prior, all I did was write and stick words in dark drawers.

What I do think that the small press should continue to do is not emulate what the academic print journals, and so forth, often do: No simultaneous subs, and yet you must wait six months for a response; 6-7 of your best fucking poems taking a 1/2 year nap on pins and needles. What's great about the small press, and I'm talking about online publications at this point, is that often the response time is short enough, and sometimes if you are not chosen, the editors still respond and let you know! I love that.

I personally would like to try my hand sending stuff off to the big guys: The New Yorker, etc. Actually years ago I sent a story to The New Yorker, and they sent me back a hand written rejection, but asking me to send more work in...It's still on my fridge, but I've yet to submit...that was pretty nice of them though- small press like. Anyway, there is something to be said about these gorilla publishers, which include members of OW, who by creating e-zines, are disseminating art for all at no charge. It's lovely. Like most it seems, I prefer to read in print, I get so sick of reading online, but at least it's a choice, extremely accessible and free. And then you can decide after reading enough of one's poetry or stories, if you want to buy a Chap or a full manuscript; the machine keeps itself moving in this way, though not without blood and tears. Editors work hard for no $$$.

I think as writers and readers, we might want to try and have a foot in each pool. Support and keep small press alive and functioning by reading and contributing, and taking the time to try the academics and big guys out, just so they know who you are eventually as well. I think...

And I want to thank Pat for taking time out of his writing to help run this joint (and the rest of you, and you know who you are) OW seems to be moving forward and is a great gift to the small press. OW is why I started getting published in the first place. I came across OW and scanned the calls for submissions and realized not everyone writes all the time, send your shit out Melissa, and look at all the choices...

You know, now I don't even know if I answered the question.

Jack T. Marlowe: I think that the small press already distinguishes itself pretty well
from the academic/mainstream press. For one thing, the "smalls"
--for the most part--accept submissions by email. Those who don't
take subs by email need to catch up with the times. Another sore
point is the time that some zines take for responding to subs. As
Melissa pointed out, some of 'em take 6 months to respond. For
writers who aren't exceedingly prolific, that's a long time to have
your work on hold. And I'm not gonna say what I think of the ones
who don't respond at all. For the most part, the small press zines
are diligent and timely in responding, though.

One big way that the small press can do better in distinguishing
itself from the mainstream: avoid cronyism. It's no secret that
some zines publish work sent in by other editors, by friends, or
by "brand name" poets--even when the work isn't good quality.
I understand why they do it, but it doesn't reflect well on the zines
that do it. All subs should be subject to the same standards. As
an assistant editor, I have to be honest about what I do. Some-
times that might mean passing over work sent in by friends, or by
writers whom I have great respect for. That's just my personal
goal, anyway.

Another issue--one that I'll probably get crucified for bring-
ing up--is proofreading. Apparently, quite a few zines don't
do it. While it's really a writer's responsibility to edit and
proof his/her own work, a zine's staff should be able to
catch stuff that the writer missed. Not just typos or wrong
punctuation, but misused words. Unfortunately, a lot of
writers don't know the difference between 'to' and 'too,'
or 'their,' there' and 'they're.' And then, there was the
time that one of my friends came up with 'sandwitch.'
I jokingly asked him if that was a term for someone who
casts spells at the beach! He wasn't amused.

I realize that some writers will say that readers will figure
out what they meant, but why should they have to figure it
out? Reading shouldn't be a chore. If we respect the art
of writing and our readers, why not make the effort to do
the job of editing and proofreading? That might attract
more respect for the small press, too.

Aleathia Drehmer: Jack, I think you make a very valid point about the cronyism of small press. It gets tiring to see the same five names circulated around, and it does also bother me when they get published and I read the work and think "ok...so that really wasn't your best." I know that when I send in work, if I know the editor or staff, it is my hope that they would have the courtesy to pass over my work if it weren't good enough and have the balls to tell me so. I only have two friends that call me out when my work isn't up to par, the rest get out the bicycle pump and get to inflating my ego. I don't want that and I have to think that the writers that are in this for the art and for the long haul only want to show the best of themselves. The rest might be looking for their 15 minutes.

This has been my biggest beef with small press and it has made me look to larger circles and more mainstream press because at least I am not known there and if I get something accepted, I can be sure it was based on my merit and work, not on who I know. Having said all this, how do we get editors to be more above the board and honest with themselves about work they accept?

Mikael Covey: Jack Marlowe and Aleathia speak truth. That’s refreshing, perhaps rare. Edgy raw salacious. Is there a hip modern cool wanna be read by young hip modern cool readers zine, that isn’t looking for the ultimate in edgy raw salacious? I dunno. I wanna read stories and poems that are good stories and poems. For me, they don’t need to be edgy raw or salacious. If life is a movie, I’ll use that as an example. Sin City is a great movie, Field of Dreams is better.

Jack T. Marlowe: Mikael, I gotta admit that I've been guilty of "edgy raw salacious"
...but I try not to let myself be limited to that (or by it).

Michael Grover: Jack's right there is too much cronyism. As a new editor that is something I hope to undo. I do realize I cannot change the whole system only our little space of it. I feel I can judge everything equaly with no prejudice and the co-editor Devin does not really know anyone but if he did I believe he would still be level headed. I hope I'm not too late to get that in. I'm not saying we will not publish the usual suspects, I'm just saying if we do they had best come with good stuff.

Pat King: Hey, thanks everyone for participating.  This was a great discussion!

Last update : 26-01-2008 20:48

Average user rating

   (0 vote)