Hi everybody from giovann, in Milano. Everybody knows I am a big Police fan, but it doesn't seem correct to compare Sting and Stewart Copeland careers. They made two different choices: Sting, choosed a very difficult choice, going on with commercial stuff trying to give something new at the same time. Stewart Copeland choosed a completely different way of working inthe music businness. WE ALL KNOW they both got talent, probably less interesting than in the past, but they still have a great technic and they know how to use it. Sting got Universal Records on his back, and when you choose this way of making music, sometimes you have to deal with commercial 'stuff', but that's not important when you know you are doing your job and you are honest with yourself. With Oysterhead Stewart choosed a different kind of promotion, based on live appearances because is the only way to let people know what the project is about; musical skills are the main themes in this project, not melodies or singles riffs. I can't see any reason why someone should compare those two different choices. Everybody knows the commercial stuff is more interesting for a certain number of people and everybody knows stuff like Oysterhead are interesting for a minor number of people, but that doesn't mean someone is better than another. Classical and Jazz music are the 6/7% of the music market, but that doesn't mean such records are less important than commercial music selling more; I would say exactly the opposite! I simply hope Sting, Andy Summers and Stewart Copeland will keep on giving us such interesting records, as we ALL KNOW the three of them never release something not interesting (whether we like it or not!). Ciao ciao Giovanni