Richard

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the 12-9 vote was done to restructure the board of directors. All the same, it would be interesting to know which other 2 corps were complacent with the current BoD setup. Don't take this out on DCI directly. They're the good guys here and stand to lose as much from this as any of us. This is a much more reasonable course of action.

Good question. If I were a betting man, I would wager a hefty sum that these groups believe that once free of the constraints of DCI (or once they are in full control of DCI and can recreate it as they wish) they can warp the on-field product into something that will attract a greater number of NEW fans to the activity to offset the alienation of the current "hardcore", passionate fan base (i.e. DCP, traditionalists and anyone else that wants drum corps to proliferate at all levels). I would bet that they want to do something Blast!-esque that will have wide (or wider) mainstream appeal than traditional drum corps/marching band. They are well aware that they'll be ####### on a good percentage of the current fan base, but I don't think they believe the current fan base can and will continue to support drum corps for the next 10, 20 or 30 years. Hopkins, Gibbs, Glasgow, etc...they're nothing if not shrewd businessmen. They must believe there is a much bigger market out there for something more artsy/sensational than there is for what we know to be drum corps. That's why they're pushing in this direction. All the on-field changes tie back to that, that must be clear by now. They see this as their only option for continued growth and survival. If it excludes all the other corps, then so be it. They're all looking out for themselves and not the activity, which again, I have no problem with, but they can't (ethically) do it under the auspices of DCI. That's why this whole thing reeks. They want to use DCI's current status in the marching community and parlay it into their vision for a future enterprise. That's not cool. And that's why the fan base needs to collectively say "if you're going to do this, we're going to walk". I know that strategy didn't work with amps and all that nonsense, but this is bigger. This is the fate of the activity. It sounds dramatic, I know, but a failure to recognize it now could be catasrophic.

Indirectly meaning I'll still attend shows. I just won't buy their merch or make any other contributions to those individual organizations. Continuing to support those groups is in effect supporting proposal that is destructive for the drum corps activity.

What's wrong with that? The implication is clear that these groups believe themselves to be superior and the only reason fans attend shows. Some people have decided to show these groups that they're not worth their support. The intent to either leave or take over DCI is very evident from these groups, and you can count me among those that will not support them (directly).

Right, for those 7 groups it's an excellent business decision. For the activity of drum corps, not so much.

What about tigger2's account from a few pages back? What about audiodb's assertion that the DCW article is the watered down version of what happened? I'm sure many people on here speaking out against this have their own sources and have used the DCW article and other accounts here to corroborate with what they already heard. I've seen no conflicting information, it's the same story from all non-G7 sources.

But the segregation will never give Pacific Crest the opportunity to compete on those other corps terms. Not only that, but the added votes for those other corps would mean that PC would have to operate on their terms. I wish I could be as optimistic as you are that this is being done for the betterment of all corps, but I can't see that happening. How is Crown taking over ticketing good for Pioneer? Essentially, the proposal would let the G7 completely run DCI - administratively (which is currently done by DCI staff) and as the voting entities (where currently all world class corps have an equal vote). How is that good for drum corps?

Hah, well we're discussing the future of the activity and not just instrumentation. In other words, #### just got real. And seriously, everyone who thinks this is a good idea is focused 100% on the on-field aspects of the proposal. That's NOT IMPORTANT compared to the off the field administrative changes being proposed. Yes, the G7 are "the draw". I'll even cede that the lower corps have benefitted from the success of the G7. Is it fair? Not entirely, but that unfairness, to me, is worth the continued existence of the other 40-something drum corps. Matt, it sounds like you're saying that because fans don't turn out in droves to see Open Class corps, then those corps aren't self-sustaining and shouldn't exist. If so, your viewpoint seems firmly aligned with that of the G7. There's nothing wrong with that, I just happen to disagree because I love drum corps and want the opportunity to exist for as many members as possible.

Thank you for a very insightful post.

You're confusing competition with administration. Right now those corps have an equal say in the direction of DCI as the G7. Right now those corps receive revenue equal to the G7. The proposal significantly shifts the voting power and revenue to the G7. Hence the talk about the rich getting richer. Too much of this discussion is occurring from a pure fan viewpoint. Yeah the new shows and west coast touring is great and all, but the power/revenue shift is not ok and will be detrimental to the activity. How can you claim otherwise? Because Crown wins brass they deserve to run the ticketing for all of DCI, and because Mandarins are only a semi-finalist they get their voting privileges reduced? On-the-field performance should have ZERO bearing on decision making for the DCI enterprise.

I read this whole #### topic. Anyone familiar with my posting history knows I usually come down in opposition to those like Jeff, audiodb, BRASSO, etc...but not this time. I believe this will change the activity more than anything since the inception of DCI, and not for the better. A few points to consider: 1. There are multiple perspectives here: - Fans - G7 Corps - Non-G7 Corps - The entire jr corps activity For the fans, this is great, Bruckner8 has espoused on how awesome it would be to see the top corps duke it out in a new and entertaining competition structure. This is a VERY naive and selfish viewpoint though. For the G7 corps, this is great. More money, more performance opportunities, more brand equity, more glory. For the non-G7 corps, it's the opposite of all that. For the activity, it's disasterous. The viewpoint of Bruckner8 is SO shortsighted. As many have said, this leaves the non-G7 corps with crumbs. 2. Anyone who thinks that Hopkins et al are doing this for any reason than to make their organizations more profitable and sustainable is beyond naive. Any good director acts in his or her organization's best interest. Hopkins pretty clearly believes that creating this weekend spectacle is the first step on the pathway to increasing the audience for his group and groups like his. That's the same reasons he's wanted more design freedom: to create something that will attract more non-marching arts affiliated fans to the activity. It's a fine vision and I bet whatever it ends up being will be tremendously entertaining (think Blast!), but the problem is they're planning on effectively bankrupting DCI (stealing their fanbase and member base) to launch this venture. 3. This is the big one that no one is talking about. From the DCW article: "The presentation included ideas to minimize the DCI infrastructure in an effort to reduce overhead and increase corps payouts -- focusing on adjudication initiatives, among other things -- with other DCI administrative functions being distributed to the G7 corps." Think CrownTickets instead of TicketMaster for ALL DCI shows. Do you know how much effing money the G7 corps stand to make on this by performing this hostile takeover of DCI? Quite frankly, this all scares the #### out of me. These groups should just pack up and leave if they want to do their own thing, but without taking all they can from DCI. DCI would be well-suited to kick them to the curb and move forward with BAC, Blue Stars, BK, Glassmen, Madison, Crossmen, hopefully Cavies and the rest of the remaining corps as the face of DCI. It won't be easy, and I'm sure in time more organizations will get greedy and lose sight of the well-being of the ENTIRE activity (as these 6.5 have), but I believe that's DCI's best chance for survival.

Justin Bieber FTW

Yeah, corps never get a lower placement than the year before. It's in the rules.

I did the whole retreat thing throughout the season and it was a pain in the balls. Trust me, no one was complaining when they would cancel a retreat because bad weather was rolling in. After a show, I just want to get out of uniform and do some serious eating.

Yeah my post was actually an extremely tongue-in-cheek reference to all the "Crown is the new Star" talk last year, although I made no effort to denote that. But there's a common thread here (at least brass-wise): Donnie Van Doren. The more his teaching methods spread and are adopted by more corps, the better the collective product on the field will be.

Blue Stars is the new Crown.

You can make the same comparison for DVD prices. This is nothing new. DCI does not benefit from the economies of scale like large production companies do. Personally, I think this is AWESOME. I can't wait to add this to my Blue Smoke Blu-Ray as the foundation of my DCI Blu-Ray collection! Ballin.

While I take issue with your usage of the total number of corps as a metric for DCI's success as an organization, I'll set that aside for the time being. In reference to your above reference to the tide turning: I believe it has already been turned in the past 10+ years. Surely the DCI decision makers of yester-year made some damaging mistakes, I won't dispute that, but carrying that distrust forward to the current leadership is unfair, in my opinion.

Please explain what it was then, and how it was that.

It's not the existence of the critics that bothers me, it's the extent to which they perpetrate a falsified negative image of the activity to those who are less informed. And that's exactly what those who are steadfastly opposed to electronics and modern show design want: more people to believe that DCI is misguided and to join the legion of loud complainers. So they’ll find something to nitpick about each of DCI’s decisions to perpetrate that image of a bumbling organization. Now I know that sound pretty far-fetched and nefarious, but it's human nature to want to be proven right, either through facts to back up statements or through like-minded contributors who will agree with you and tell you that you're right. I enjoy every time Bob comes on here and says good things about the direction DCI is headed because it validates my viewpoint. I enjoy many of perc2100's, glory's, Kamarag's, and select others' posts because they often agree with my viewpoint. It feels good to feel like you're right, even if you being right involves your favorite hobby/activity struggling to survive. So if someone truly believes that amps and electronics are driving away enough fans of the activity to hurt it, then they’ll take some secret satisfaction if they’re ever proven right. Of course no one will admit to that because it's such an embarrassing and selfish viewpoint, but it's human nature. And there’s a difference between voicing your opinion (e.g. “I hope they take steps to improve the sound in Lucas Oil Stadium because there is significant room for improvement”) and blasting DCI (e.g. “LOS sucks, what a stupid and asinine decision it was to sign that contract.”). And if voicing your opinion was the true concern, wouldn’t it be better voiced to DCI directly? Instead of coming here to a handful of posters who will say “you’re right, it does suck and DCI is stupid. Why don’t they just admit how stupid they are? Gosh!”? ANYWAY, I don’t expect perception to change. People will complain about DCI’s every move unless they repeal electronics, stop “prancing around the field” and “play a hummable melody” (whatever that means). I’m just going to fire back about it and try to point out that those criticisms are based on nothing other than “I don’t like it because I don’t like it” and if the critics agreed with the product on the field then they would complain significantly less. Also, given the options for dealing with critics, I think it’s pretty clear that the BOD has chosen option 1 (ignore them) when it comes to show design and rules proposals. Which is, low and behold, something that is ALSO frequently lamented here (“the BOD doesn’t consider what the fans want!”). The fan roundtables and things of that nature are certainly a commendable attempted olive branch from DCI (despite the fact that the hostile relationship has been significantly one-sided), but I would bet I could give similar responses as DCI would if the gripes on here are at all indicative of what they’ll hear at the roundtable. What topics do you think would be raised? I’d guess mostly these: - Fans: “Lucas Oil Stadium sound sucks” - DCI: “We’re working to improve it and trying quarters with the roof open” - Fans: “Amps and Electronics are driving away large percentages of your fan base” - DCI: “There are many factors that cause fans to leave the activity of which some may be a&e, but we are not seeing a widespread migration of fans away from the activity.” Now, here on DCP those explanations are usually followed up with a series of “yeah, but…”s (e.g. “yeah, but having the roof open for only part of the show is unfair!”), and then a series of rational explanations that could possibly and may very well likely reflect DCI’s thinking for those decisions (same example: “well a/c challenges and performers’ comfort make opening it for the whole show infeasible”). But those explanations are usually dismissed until a representative of DCI explains them. Now a lot of good could and hopefully will still come out of these roundtables, because fans often have great ideas and suggestions like audiodb’s suggestion to have a corps do some sound tests at LOS during spring training. I certainly did not think of that, so I can see how DCI might not have either (and that’s the barometer I use for likelihood of DCI taking something into account, is it something I, as an inexperienced individual, would have considered? If yes, then I’m trusting their experience). But yeah, there could be some great brainstorming and idea sharing that goes on, just don’t expect them to repeal electronics because fans at a roundtable are going to anecdotally claim that the activity is dying. I guess you’re right though, I should stop coming here because I obviously don’t like the product and what good does it do for me to complain about something over which I have relatively little control, right? I swear I’ve heard that before somewhere… Lastly, credit to Bob for handling the often embellished negativity with considerably more tact than I, although I benefit from not being a representative of DCI in that regard.

I think it's ironic that the overblown reaction to the judges' article resulted in the cancelled publication of subsequent articles, which incited further negative reactions. Can you imagine how frustrating that must be for Bob and his ilk, when seemingly every attempt to address fan concerns yields yet another negative reaction from the online drum corps community? I'll continue to say what I've been saying: the over-the-top skepticism and criticism is largely unwarranted, yet it continues until someone like Bob personally comes on here and explains why specific perceptions are incorrect. DCI has earned significantly more credibility than it is regularly given. I'm not saying we all have to move to AchesonTown and drink the kool-aid and never question anything, but before we react negatively to something we should take a step back and try to be more rational about it. But the gripes will of course continue, and I'll echo what perc2100 said a few posts back: so much of the complaining stems from personal distaste in modern show design (and the rule changes that permitted that design), so it's not going to stop no matter how frequently it proves to be baseless.

This only speaks more to my point about many on DCP overreacting to DCI's every move, and their propensity to view those moves in a negative light. That type of reaction is so unwarranted. Is it not?

The headline? "Passing judgment on Lucas Oil Stadium: Drum Corps International adjudicators sound off on the home of DCI's World Championships" That was conflicting information? And what did you expect for criticism? They acknowledged the acoustic shortcomings, explained that the venue did not impact their ability to adjudicate, and even added the qualifier that they had the "best seats in the house" and that it might not have been the same experience across the stadium. I think it's pretty clear that the intent of the article was to explain that the environment did not have any impact on the judging at championships, as explained by championship week judges. Any inferences along the lines of "the judges say it sounds good" are pretty far off-base in my opinion, and that's often what the article is summed up to contain, incorrectly so. Anyway, this whole point of contention was brought about because I said that there is only so much DCI can do to appeal to everyone and asked what your expectation of them is. You responded that show design, amps and electronics have pushed many away, and that DCI can garner more forgiveness for mistakes and less criticism by admitting to those mistakes and attempting to fix them. I inquired if there was anything to which DCI should be “owning up” currently, and you responded about the acknowledgement and addressing of the sound issues at LOS. We agree they have acknowledged the issue and appear to be taking steps to address it. So I ask again, what should DCI be doing? All I’ve gotten from your responses is that they shouldn’t publish articles from which readers could draw questionable inferences.

How is this conflicting: