Jump to content

G7 part 2, Eletronics Boogaloo


Stu

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, craiga said:

Jeff, I have made this assertion before on another thread.  Knowing many of the movers and shakers on the BAC board personally (I marched with some and taught with others) I can tell you that a turning point in Boston's trajectory came in the year when BAC DID, in fact, qualify to be in the TOC shows but was not let in.  There were some people in Boston who were so angry, so furious at this obvious block that they literally committed to do WHATEVER it would take financially to thrust the organization into the upper tier. 

That anger was harnessed and became known as "Building A Champion".  While some outsiders scoffed,  the BOD was doubled in size, community based educational programs were acquired and grown, the formidable resources of the corporate/financial sector within the City of Boston as well as the city itself were brought into play, and the BAC/Inspire Arts budget was quintupled in 3 years. 

As I have said before, the G7 proposal ignited the fire.  And, here's what is NOT common knowledge....more than a few of BAC's current board members who are now extremely successful in their 50's and 60's remember a time many years ago when there were some forces in the activity trying to keep Boston out (then it was the top 12).  In those days, these people were just struggling teenagers off the streets of various eastern Mass cities and towns....what could they do?

I guess now they feel like they are empowered to do something about it.  The summer of 2017 was just the opening salvo.

 

I LOVE EVERYTHING ABOUT THIS POST!

And then they capped it off by hiring away the staff from the chief instigator of the effort to keep them out.

Watching Hop suggest the G7 was an actual solution: Astounding.

Watching BAC be blocked from the group:  Disturbing

Watching BAC's show stick a hot poker in the G7's eye:  Entertaining, funny, and enjoyable

Watching BAC hire away Cadets staff:  PRICELESS

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MikeN said:

They did? Who said that?

Mike

MiM was trial attempted apart from DCI and could not generate much revenue apart from DCI, could not secure much sponsorship apart from DCI, and it flopped.

Edited by Stu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, garfield said:

I LOVE EVERYTHING ABOUT THIS POST!

And then they capped it off by hiring away the staff from the chief instigator of the effort to keep them out.

Watching Hop suggest the G7 was an actual solution: Astounding.

Watching BAC be blocked from the group:  Disturbing

Watching BAC's show stick a hot poker in the G7's eye:  Entertaining, funny, and enjoyable

Watching BAC hire away Cadets staff:  PRICELESS

Yes, great for Boston!!!! Of course there will likely be some G7 hacks at some point who will attempt to claim that this was the G7 plan all along; to place out there such an outrageous proposal that it would put a fire under some corps.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Stu said:

Yes, great for Boston!!!! Of course there will likely be some G7 hacks at some point who will attempt to claim that this was the G7 plan all along; to place out there such an outrageous proposal that it would put a fire under some corps.

Well, yes there will be.  And I will agree with them.

In fact, I think this was their point all along...

I just disagree with their method, if not necessarily their message.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, garfield said:

I LOVE EVERYTHING ABOUT THIS POST!

And then they capped it off by hiring away the staff from the chief instigator of the effort to keep them out.

Watching Hop suggest the G7 was an actual solution: Astounding.

Watching BAC be blocked from the group:  Disturbing

Watching BAC's show stick a hot poker in the G7's eye:  Entertaining, funny, and enjoyable

Watching BAC hire away Cadets staff:  PRICELESS

Karma, Earl  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, garfield said:

Well, yes there will be.  And I will agree with them.

In fact, I think this was their point all along...

I just disagree with their method, if not necessarily their message.

I'm confused here.  Wasn't the message one of exclusion, rather than inclusion?   I know you're a big advocate of growing the pie, lifting all boats. It seems as if the G7 proposal.. the message... was not about that.

Hey... I don't have a doctorate in drum corps methodology, so I could be wrong here.  LOL.

Edited by Fran Haring
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, garfield said:

Well, yes there will be.  And I will agree with them.

In fact, I think this was their point all along...

I just disagree with their method, if not necessarily their message.

Remember New Coke was to replace Old Coke; then the Old Coke consumers railed hard, and the company went back to the old formula but with a new look.  That seems like a great marketing tool, a wonderful ploy, planned out, executed with brilliant success to increase sales of the old formula Coke with a new look.  However, the intent by the company was to actually replace the old formula because at that time their market share was plummeting and various blind taste tests indicated that the public wanted a different taste.  The result of the consumers rallying around the old formula, the company dropping the new formula, and now Coke is making profit with a new look to the old formula was done…. by accident.  But wouldn’t it be nice if the truth was that the Company had that marketing ploy in mind all along?  (see also the accidental result of the G7 plan)

Edited by Stu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Fran Haring said:

I'm confused here.  Wasn't the message, in a sense, one of exclusion, rather than inclusion?   I know you're a big advocate of growing the pie, lifting all boats. It seems as if the G7 proposal.. the message... was not about that.

Hey... I don't have a doctorate in drum corps methodology, so I could be wrong here.  LOL.

See what I just wrote about New Coke and Old Coke.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Stu said:

See what I just wrote about New Coke and Old Coke.

I hear ya... I remember the conspiracy theories about it being a planned move. 

Edited by Fran Haring
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fran Haring said:

I'm confused here.  Wasn't the message one of exclusion, rather than inclusion?   I know you're a big advocate of growing the pie, lifting all boats. It seems as if the G7 proposal.. the message... was not about that.

Hey... I don't have a doctorate in drum corps methodology, so I could be wrong here.  LOL.

No, you're definitely correct about their intent to wrest control, but the impetus that got them to that point is the seeming perennial placements and very little movement of most corps.

Again, I don't agree with their method, but the message to "GET BETTER AND CHALLENGE!!" is one we should all support, IMO.

 

Many of us scream and moan in these parts about the seeming glacial movements in placements and the lack of competition in the ranks but, to solve that, I really can't justify asking the "Top Corps" to dumb down their productions to create the competition.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...