Well having played one or two and having decided that they are not that much better (if at all) than what I already could get elsewhere, and much cheaper, and the fact that they are ugly (to me), then I couldn't justify buying one. Guitars are very ephemeral things and it's hard to pin down what makes any one work for you on an individual basis. But given how ugly I think they are, they would have to be 'spectacularly' better, before I'd buy one. Guitars are things of beauty and very few musicians can be truly unconcerned about aesthetics. Artists, on the other hand, have to be. Jimi, Beck, Page, Vai, Satriani, et. al. are all well aware of the the link between image and music. Maybe it shouldn't be like that, but it is.
Hey, but if Parkers float your boat buy one. If you've got the money good luck to you. But to return to Jouni's original question. The point is that Fenders have, for better or worse, a certain aesthetic appeal, that's largely now down to association. But they sound great as well, are built to last, and they are quite cheap really, particularly if you pick up a good Mex one. Each to their own....

Losty, check out the Parker website, he makes a lot out of the kinda of woods they use, which kinda goes against the thrust of the piece Jouni posted....
