TV Can’t Save Drum Corps

[Slingerland]

In all, I don't think LOS is horrible, even if the sound stinks, if it's the proper location geographically.

I've had seats where the sound was good, I've had seats where the sound was awful, all at the same price. It's a crap shoot as far as that goes.

But if Finals is only drawing 16,000 people, despite being in a central location, what does that tell us about how the fan base views that particular combination of location and venue?

To your larger point, yes, I agree. It can be wherever as long as the overall audience for what the members do is increased, however that has to happen.

Edited April 24, 2013 by Slingerland

[BRASSO]

I think there is no better measure of relevance than the number of people who participate in the activity.

Agreed.

Based upon this criteria, DCI needs to roll up their sleeves and come up with ways to try and get back to a " number " that is 20% of what it used to be... then 30% in numbers of what it used to be... then hopefully go from there upwards. The more marchers, the better the chance they bring their family and friends out to some of the shows.

Edited April 24, 2013 by BRASSO

[cixelsyd]

(As an experiment, I'd be curious as to what would happen if DCI would take ONE year out and move Finals week to Madison or Philly or Pasadena again. If the paid attendance popped up 10,000 seats, would that give them the evidence they need not to renew the Indy deal?)

No. They know that attendance would be higher - but costs would be more dramatically higher.

Why is finals attendance such a big deal to you... especially you? You went on for weeks about how DCI needs to return more money to the corps. Now you argue against one of the methods of doing just that. Staging DCI in Indy cuts costs more than revenues, allowing DCI to return more money to corps.

Finals is not the only show on the schedule, or the balance sheet. Emphasis has shifted from finals to making major events lucrative throughout the season. This is one idea that top corps, other corps and the DCI office actually AGREE on.

If you are so determined to avoid a renewal of Indy as the DCI championship site, then do like Jeff Ream says and submit a bid. Otherwise, it would take a sea change to get DCI to sacrifice profitability just to boost in-person attendance at one specific show.

[Slingerland]

Why is finals attendance such a big deal to you... especially you? You went on for weeks about how DCI needs to return more money to the corps.

Because of something called "business." Here's how it works.

The more people you have coming into a store, the more money you're likely to see from that traffic flow. I've heard, very reliably, what DCI made at championships last year - a respectable, but not spectacular number. If they went to another location that cost them $200,000 more for stadium rental, but brought in 10,000 more attendees at $50 each, they would have netted another $300,000 for the exact same event, and - even more importantly - given the individual corps another 10,000 potential live customers standing in front of their souvenir trucks. If 40% of those new people bought $50 worth of merchandise, that's another $200,000 in gross income for the corps who had booths there - and I doubt any of them would turn their nose up at adding another $9,000-11,000 to their souvenir gross sales for the week.

Put those two factors together, and it makes having more people at Finals week a good thing for the corps. Why would anyone not want to look for ways to give the individual corps a shot at making another $20k-30k from their season's work?

Indy might be cheap, but at a certain point, thinking cheap can kill you. Ask K-Mart.

Edited April 24, 2013 by Slingerland

[dieselfume]

Most of the discussion about TV seems to center on the concept of what TV can do for drum corps; more fans, more corps, more marching members. However, the real issue is what drum corps can do for TV, or more correctly, advertisers sponsoring TV fare. The purpose of advertising is to make money for the advertisers. Does drum corps offer a sellable product? Evidently, at present, what's being offered is not enough. Something has to be changed if the goal is TV coverage. Is drum corps ready to theme shows to specific advertisers? Is drum corps ready to restructure the basic eleven minute show? Whatever the answers are, the activity is, at present, locked in the trap of wanting change but not any discomfort associated with such change.

.

Edited April 24, 2013 by dieselfume

[cixelsyd]

Because of something called "business." Here's how it works.

The more people you have coming into a store, the more money you're likely to see from that traffic flow. I've heard, very reliably, what DCI made at championships last year - a respectable, but not spectacular number. If they went to another location that cost them $200,000 more for stadium rental, but brought in 10,000 more attendees at $50 each, they would have netted another $300,000 for the exact same event

That is a lovely scenario. However, it is at the very least an oversimplification, if not a distortion of the nature of the Indy deal.

The DCI deal with Indy is a package deal which, in addition to the stadium use, also includes the DCI office facilities and all kinds of other provisions. The dollar value of the cost savings to DCI goes way beyond just the stadium rental.

I also quibble with your attendance projections. I could see a one-shot move probably selling 5,000 more finals tickets (8,000 if in a suitable California venue), but not 10,000 in my estimation. And keep in mind that those are one-year pops in attendance; the law of decreasing returns applies whether DCI stays at a site for a second year, or even if DCI constantly rotates sites.

So maybe we are looking at DCI paying $200,000 more in stadium rental and $100,000 more in other costs post-Indy, and getting (at first) 5,000 more finals fans at $50 each, for a net LOSS of $50,000 the first year, and bigger losses in subsequent years. Admittedly, this is still oversimplified, but it illustrates how the numbers incentivize DCI to make a deal like this.

and - even more importantly - given the individual corps another 10,000 potential live customers standing in front of their souvenir trucks. If 40% of those new people bought $50 worth of merchandise, that's another $200,000 in gross income for the corps who had booths there - and I doubt any of them would turn their nose up at adding another $9,000-11,000 to their souvenir gross sales for the week.

Put those two factors together, and it makes having more people at Finals week a good thing for the corps. Why would anyone not want to look for ways to give the individual corps a shot at making another $20k-30k from their season's work?

Just to be clear, I agree wholeheartedly with this aspect of your POV (again, not the exact numbers, but philosophically). My gut reaction to the deal back when it was announced was similar to yours.

What you are missing, though, is that part of the whole idea was for DCI to shift emphasis from finals and spread it throughout the season. The strategy behind making this deal was to grow focus events all over the country and market them as destinations that the Indy-haters (among others) would choose to attend in greater numbers. All your bellyaching about lost customers, corps sales and DCI revenue at finals are compensated for by additional customers, corps sales and DCI revenue at other events. And the added benefit is that sales are now better distributed across an array of events, such that a problem with one event no longer threatens a 1993 Jackson style disaster.

If you want to see finals move around again, you will need to consider their whole balance sheet, and make a better case.

By the way, where is DCI supposed to get the money for this change? I recall you insisting that DCI should raise money to pay the corps more, raise money to hire some super-salesman-CEO, and raise money to get drum corps back on TV. This makes 4 major capital ventures you want now. Which should we do first? Could you give an order of priority for those? Thanks.

[garfield]

Because of something called "business." Here's how it works.

The more people you have coming into a store, the more money you're likely to see from that traffic flow. I've heard, very reliably, what DCI made at championships last year - a respectable, but not spectacular number. If they went to another location that cost them $200,000 more for stadium rental, but brought in 10,000 more attendees at $50 each, they would have netted another $300,000 for the exact same event, and - even more importantly - given the individual corps another 10,000 potential live customers standing in front of their souvenir trucks. If 40% of those new people bought $50 worth of merchandise, that's another $200,000 in gross income for the corps who had booths there - and I doubt any of them would turn their nose up at adding another $9,000-11,000 to their souvenir gross sales for the week.

Put those two factors together, and it makes having more people at Finals week a good thing for the corps. Why would anyone not want to look for ways to give the individual corps a shot at making another $20k-30k from their season's work?

Indy might be cheap, but at a certain point, thinking cheap can kill you. Ask K-Mart.

Which prompts me to again ask: What's the point of TV? Broadcasting that the activity even exists, i.e. "exposure". If that's the case, then I think the TV presentation should focus not on who wins finals, but on the personal stories of the kids and staffs so that those potential MM's can relate to the those shown on the screen.

I think the lowest-hanging fruit of TV could be to get participants, not fans. Chopping up a show and sacrificing the performance would not greatly affect that effort. The lowest-hanging fans are the relatives and friends of MM's, and they will come as a result of expanding participation.

I could see letting a cable producer chop up broadcast of a regional with the intent of introducing potential MM's to the activity and that we actually have a "store". But if the activity is against cutting performance time down to the requisite 9 minutes, they should not pursue having finals broadcast until/unless the cable network can justify extending the time-between-commercials to 11 1/2 minutes.

Of course, focusing on the goal of raising participation necessarily demands we address the lack of places where they can, or want to, march. With the top corps now turning away talent, we necessarily have to agree on where the emphasis of "growth" in MM's needs to be placed.

[perc2100]

Because of something called "business." Here's how it works.

The more people you have coming into a store, the more money you're likely to see from that traffic flow. I've heard, very reliably, what DCI made at championships last year - a respectable, but not spectacular number. If they went to another location that cost them $200,000 more for stadium rental, but brought in 10,000 more attendees at $50 each, they would have netted another $300,000 for the exact same event, and - even more importantly - given the individual corps another 10,000 potential live customers standing in front of their souvenir trucks. If 40% of those new people bought $50 worth of merchandise, that's another $200,000 in gross income for the corps who had booths there - and I doubt any of them would turn their nose up at adding another $9,000-11,000 to their souvenir gross sales for the week.

Put those two factors together, and it makes having more people at Finals week a good thing for the corps. Why would anyone not want to look for ways to give the individual corps a shot at making another $20k-30k from their season's work?

Indy might be cheap, but at a certain point, thinking cheap can kill you. Ask K-Mart.

Ah, but you're making assumption that attendance would be dramatically different: maybe attendance would be significantly higher, but maybe it wouldn't. What if there were only a thousand or so more people at finals? A nice but fairly negligible difference in attendance. That's $50,000 more in ticket revenue, but doesn't come close to covering the extra cost of stadium rental.

Plus, the other logistical hassles of moving finals:

* travel costs for DCI staff

* finding a venue for Open Class events

* finding housing & rehearsal sites for all of the OC and WC corps

* ensuring the city is 'welcoming' to the drum corps fans who make the trip from out of town (i.e. good, available hotel rooms that are affordably priced and close to the 'action')

Plus, what you don't address is that DCI is focusing not JUST on making profit at Finals, but on making profit at ALL DCI-sponsored events. This seems to be the case the last several years, where attendance is up across the board at the other DCI events. In essence, this puts even more butts in seats + even more folks potentially buy souvies all over the country, nearly every weekend of the summer: not just for three days at Finals.

You're right, thinking cheap isn't always the best business strategy, and if DCI thought cheap and ONLY thought about Indy/Finals, then I would agree with you. But since DCI is strategically focusing on, what, half a dozen DCI focus shows + Finals week, and seemingly doing well (by their press releases, DCI is touting that numbers are high and profitable at ALL of their events summer-wide), perhaps they're doing something right. Indy is not perfect, by any means, but it's also not the worst place DCI Finals have been held. If DCI is being financially successful in Indy, as well as doing very well at all of their other events, maybe they shouldn't jump to change things

[perc2100]

Which prompts me to again ask: What's the point of TV? Broadcasting that the activity even exists, i.e. "exposure". If that's the case, then I think the TV presentation should focus not on who wins finals, but on the personal stories of the kids and staffs so that those potential MM's can relate to the those shown on the screen.

I think the lowest-hanging fruit of TV could be to get participants, not fans. Chopping up a show and sacrificing the performance would not greatly affect that effort. The lowest-hanging fans are the relatives and friends of MM's, and they will come as a result of expanding participation.

I could see letting a cable producer chop up broadcast of a regional with the intent of introducing potential MM's to the activity and that we actually have a "store". But if the activity is against cutting performance time down to the requisite 9 minutes, they should not pursue having finals broadcast until/unless the cable network can justify extending the time-between-commercials to 11 1/2 minutes.

Of course, focusing on the goal of raising participation necessarily demands we address the lack of places where they can, or want to, march. With the top corps now turning away talent, we necessarily have to agree on where the emphasis of "growth" in MM's needs to be placed.

I still have mixed feelings on this angle. While I partially agree with you, I think we delve into potential exploitation mode if this type of thing happens. I think a limited episode series that followed several members from Spring - Finals week would make for interesting TV. If they started filming in May they could have episodes ready to air August maybe: during the 'dead zone' of programming. If they did, say, 6-8 episodes they could run it through to Fall premier week. They can advertise it as a cross between Glee & America's Got Talent and show off-field stuff, rehearsals, & performance clips.

Now, that would quite potentially sink to "reality TV" trite, and I doubt any corps or DCI would want to give up any sort of editorial control of the content that would air on TV. That could lead down a slippery slope for sure, but if we're being serious about wanting to put the activity on TV just broadcasting Finals will do nothing except please fans who are too cheap to buy Fan Network, go to Finals, or buy the DVD's.

I'm not sure if TV networks would be interested in that, and I'm not sure DCI would be interested in what TV networks would want to focus on. I know MTV was looking at doing something similar a few years back, and actually contacted our HS marching band about participating. They were filming mostly in the summer, but regardless we were not interested in giving up editorial control of HS kids on TV. Maybe there would be a market for this on TV, but would producers want to air what would make DCI & its corps happy? Would DCI want to produce a show that backs off of the focus from performance/competition and focuses on the 'human interest' side of the story: even if that human side delves into relationships, discouragements, frustrations, etc?

[perc2100]

I still have mixed feelings on this angle. While I partially agree with you, I think we delve into potential exploitation mode if this type of thing happens. I think a limited episode series that followed several members from Spring - Finals week would make for interesting TV. If they started filming in May they could have episodes ready to air August maybe: during the 'dead zone' of programming. If they did, say, 6-8 episodes they could run it through to Fall premier week. They can advertise it as a cross between Glee & America's Got Talent and show off-field stuff, rehearsals, & performance clips.

Now, that would quite potentially sink to "reality TV" trite, and I doubt any corps or DCI would want to give up any sort of editorial control of the content that would air on TV. That could lead down a slippery slope for sure, but if we're being serious about wanting to put the activity on TV just broadcasting Finals will do nothing except please fans who are too cheap to buy Fan Network, go to Finals, or buy the DVD's.

I'm not sure if TV networks would be interested in that, and I'm not sure DCI would be interested in what TV networks would want to focus on. I know MTV was looking at doing something similar a few years back, and actually contacted our HS marching band about participating. They were filming mostly in the summer, but regardless we were not interested in giving up editorial control of HS kids on TV. Maybe there would be a market for this on TV, but would producers want to air what would make DCI & its corps happy? Would DCI want to produce a show that backs off of the focus from performance/competition and focuses on the 'human interest' side of the story: even if that human side delves into relationships, discouragements, frustrations, etc?

There have been minor documentaries corps have produced over the years with similar themes: Troopers did one the year they made Finals, I think. Cadets did one in 2000 that focused on a couple of members from Nov. auditions - Finals night. It all felt a little bland to me, though there were awesome moments in the docs. I think a limited series could work, and make awesome TV: but DCI/corps might not be willing to pay the 'price' of what some of those stories might be