Ghost Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 55 minutes ago, Liahona said: it is vastly more expansive and complex than that...that's all I'll say for now... Wonder how big this iceberg is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liahona Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 17 minutes ago, corpsband said: somehow I think if you drag even more corps into this mudpit, the same thing might happen! veritas numquam perit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xandandl Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 (edited) 14 hours ago, BRASSO said: Its also possible.. even likely.. that CC has never had to trigger this punitive clause before in their contract, as no marchers have ever left Crown under these contract terms and transferred to a competitor of theirs. I am surprised by this speculation as over the years I've known Crown kids who have marched their next seasons with BD, several others with Cadets, another with Cavaliers who announced mid season that the person was being awarded a scholarship to pay his way in the arts in the many forms he was involved. Likewise there have been kids who left BD, Cadets, and other corps to march Crown. Sometimes directors mutually accept each others transfer MMs (I'll take yours, you take mine) and work out back due monies on a case by case basis. But just as MMs change, so do administration and corps financial standings. I comment because part of how I know this info is from previously supervising several drum corps scholarship funds, most now defunct, one which awarded to applicants who marched in 8 different DCI world class corps . One fund was super specific as the donors specified the corps and put contingencies that the money was to be used for college tuition and/or marching with that corps only otherwise the monies would have to be repaid. Several situations developed where recipients changed their corps affiliation; only once did a person not repay those funds and has not marched since. In fact, most recipients as older adults later replenished the funds through their own donations. I also was a participant in the original two DCI Rule congresses with their conversations which debated and then crafted the corps transfer policy. Most of that policy is still in effect 45 years later. What is different is that written contracts between corps and members, particularly in their legal aspects, is fairly new within the past twenty years of drum corps. Those contracts vary by State law where the various corps are based. Additional stipulations vary from corps to corps. Perhaps it is time for DCI to revisit or devise anew a standard contract with common understandings and definitions which could be applied for use by any corps. The matter of scholarships is not the same and is different in each example and jurisdiction. That more specific common language, definition, and mutual understanding is needed would be appropriate for each corps but could also benefit the full activity. Edited February 5, 2017 by xandandl 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Dixon Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 at this point I'm not sure what is the point of this discussion yes - trades/swaps happen; folks are released or not released; things are forgiven or not forgiven yes - partially scholarships are awarded with strings attached yes - DCI corps have agreements as a member that members must pay debts before transfers beyond that the debate is just going in circles... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoaDci Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 1 minute ago, George Dixon said: at this point I'm not sure what is the point of this discussion yes - trades/swaps happen; folks are released or not released; things are forgiven or not forgiven yes - partially scholarships are awarded with strings attached yes - DCI corps have agreements as a member that members must pay debts before transfers beyond that the debate is just going in circles... Exactly. This thread needs to be killed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liahona Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 1 minute ago, George Dixon said: at this point I'm not sure what is the point of this discussion yes - trades/swaps happen; folks are released or not released; things are forgiven or not forgiven yes - partially scholarships are awarded with strings attached yes - DCI corps have agreements as a member that members must pay debts before transfers beyond that the debate is just going in circles... and you have every right to just ignore it then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 7 minutes ago, xandandl said: I am surprised by this speculation as over the years I've known Crown kids who have marched their next seasons with BD, several others with Cadets, another with Cavaliers who announced mid season that the person was being awarded a scholarship to pay his way in the arts in the many forms he was involved. Likewise there have been kids who left BD, Cadets, and other corps to march Crown. Sometimes directors mutually accept each others transfer MMs (I'll take yours, you take mine) and work out back due monies on a case by case basis. But just as MMs change, so do administration and corps financial standings. Oh I hear you. I don't want to leave the impression that CC has not had movements of its marchers between other Corps. Boston has had movement transfers of marchers to lots of Corps too.. including from Boston to Carolina Crown. So if my remarks led anyone to believe I did not think otherwise, I apologize for any potential confusion on that point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruckner8 Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 55 minutes ago, BRASSO said: One of the educational things we learned on this thread is that the 99% of DCP'ers that were against " transfer policies " that would impede marchers movement between Corps are learning that least one ( there are others too ) top DCI Corps already has a pretty restrictive " transfer policy" in place for its marchers. Yes, i realize that its couched in a " Scholarship to Payment on Demand Conversion Bill" kabookie format, but make no mistake, it dam sure is a hook on the marcher in attempts to keep them in their Corps. We know this because the only way the " Scholarship to Payment on Demand Conversion Bill " future clause is triggered is when the marcher secures a spot in line with another DCI Corps. The " scholarship " monies need not be payed back to the Corps if the marcher leaves DCI altogether. Only if a " transfer" is made by the marcher to march another DCI Corps. SO... if it looks like a duck... if it quacks like a duck.. if it walks like a duck... guess what ? its a duck. And if this does not have all the trappings of an indirect, restrictive " transfer policy ", then I really don't know what more to tell ya, folks. I get your enthusiasm for some kind of transfer policy. I'd argue that it already exists in that minimal form of DCI policy. What you're arguing for is MORE RESTRICTION as if to prevent Crown from having the policy they have. I can't get behind any transfer policy that restricts corps from being creative about member retention and/or financing. One more thing: there's no such thing as "forgiving dues." Yeah, it might look like that to the member, and a corps may have even used those words. But in the books, that member's cost to the organization is covered, somehow, through scholarship, anon donor, BOD kitty, etc. If a member doesn't pay, it would be written off as bad debt. Thus any "due forgiveness" would have to be dealt with the same way. I don't think that's legal. (You can't really project a bad debt like that. Imagine if they did that for the entire corps...not possible. However, it IS possible to find real scholarship money for every member. ) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 2 minutes ago, BoaDci said: Exactly. This thread needs to be killed Unless theres new info that surfaces, I can see where the thread might have about reached its shelf life epxiration date too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liahona Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 Just now, BoaDci said: Exactly. This thread needs to be killed As I've said before...you must not have read that...only OP "original poster" asks for that...or MODS can decide without any reason...this thread can die on its own like every other thread on these forums...you don't have to read it anymore since you feel it should be closed... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts