cixelsyd

And those corps, as a result, were not the ones with perennial voting rights making decisions that increased costs.

Yes... but compared to persuading people to cut costs, this should be a snap!

It is important that we understand where we are and how we got here, if we want the Cadets and similar corps with us perennially. Drum corps have been taking years off, or folding permanently, for as long as there have been drum corps. That is the nature of things when an organization relies on charitable fundraising. When that charity fades, or when costs escalate beyond its ability to keep up, the corps cannot continue. Meanwhile, new corps might form just as often as old corps fail. For many years, that is how things went. That all changed in the 1970s. Why? Because that is when the cost of operating a competing drum corps shifted from "under control" to "escalating". Some of that was self-inflicted. The one major activity response to the situation (the formation of DCI) was to add more costs. DCI was founded to make touring sustainable. Fifty years later, you can certainly claim they did that - but only for a limited number of corps. What did that do for the rest? DCI was formed by the richest/most ambitious corps, to serve the richest/most ambitious corps. Only the richest/most ambitious corps have ever had voting power on their decisions. As a result, DCI has spent their 50 years with an institutional bias toward creating more self-inflicted cost escalation that the richest/most ambitious corps thought they could afford. Fifty years later, you can certainly claim they could afford it all - but only a limited number of corps. What did that do to the rest? I think I will stop there, because if this does not sink in... well, we are sunk.

Where the numbers get filled in.

And only the ones that thrive can vote... and only while they are thriving. The DCI system was broken from inception.

No. Actually, I was not asking anything from you until you started categorically rejecting every single idea of mine. Then, I asked you for better suggestions. That explains a lot. It is the sum total that causes it. The "small stuff" is part of that. Pile on enough "small stuff", and it can be a big part of the whole.

And since we apparently need a reminder, "the product" is a competitive league of 39 corps. Or that is what it was last week... now, it is a competitive league of 37 corps. Soon to be 36, if rumor proves out. I contend that "the product" has already been bastardized. It used to be "marching music's major league", a sampling from among hundreds of corps in local/regional/national circuits. Now, there are too few corps (by your admission) to even modify any portion of the season to be more region-centric. That was the real "thousand cuts". All I am asking about is cost control. Can we have a dozen little cuts? Or maybe start with one?

Perhaps ContraFart is correct and the Cadets were wise to call off 2024. Maybe that is actually the solution. The best way to make a dent in operating costs is to stop operating. Granted, this also makes a dent in revenue with no member fees coming in... but as has been pointed out, member fees only cover 50% of costs, so that is a net win, right? The other revenue ideas about resale of equipment, props, etc., can be fully executed since they are not being used. Even the member experience benefits, as the goal of zero abuse complaints will be achieved in 2024. This is a win/win/win!

This. All of this. Well, except the CD part. DCI stopped making them because it was not worth the... cost.

This is precisely the cost-dismissive attitude that has driven hundreds of corps out of the activity, and led to the bind that the few remaining corps now face. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard someone affiliated with one of the "haves" advising a "have-not" to get out, rather than even allow their cost concern to be discussed. Whether it was meant as literal "advice" or not, apparently more and more corps have done as suggested. Now even a couple of the "haves" are taking that advice. Sure. It is the total cost, including non-essentials like those you keep naming, that are making corps fold.

Sure, they know. But not sure they care. In fact, I will go farther and assert that DCI decision making has been biased against proper accounting for cost impacts for all its 50 years. That is because in DCI, the costly decisions have always been made by the elite subset of corps who can afford them. Anyone can look at the track record of drum corps over those 50 years and see the hundreds of corps who have dropped out, often citing costs in their post-mortems. Even today, if information on this forum is correct, corps like SCV and Cadets who sit out a year will lose their voice and vote for a year... and only the corps who can afford perennial extravagance will decide each January what the future will bring. If it seems I focus on cost more than revenue/fundraising, it is due to the apparent need for someone to speak to that side of the equation.

You are entitled to that opinion. Cadets cannot afford 2024. That is not an assumption - they told us that in a press release. Not all props are sold after use. Not all equipment is sold either, and that which is will not be worth the same amount as it was pre-season... so resale is unlikely to recoup cost unless an endorsement deal is so special as to compensate for that, which is a privilege only certain top corps ever have. Good for them. Bad for the other corps, of which there are fewer and fewer. I do not claim to know precisely how far out of balance Cadets are financially, so therefore I cannot (and do not) say whether any one of these line item costs (or any combination thereof) will be enough to bring them back to perennial feasibility. I can only suggest consideration of ideas generally, and with more vigor as corps financial failures become more frequent and higher reaching in the DCI aristocracy. What? Folding up shop for the season completely ends the member experience. I think medically-induced coma would be the more appropriate analogy for being out for a year.

Oh, so you need context? A little deja-vu from 11 years ago... Like I said, this is not the first time I have proposed other cost cutting ideas.

Charitable good fortune... like any other civilian drum corps that has ever existed.

I have said nothing about costumes being a cost problem. The whole idea of single-season disposable costuming is at least cost-neutral, probably a demonstrable cost saving vs. maintaining traditional uniforms over the years, and definitely more practical for washing while on tour. Corps can still choose costuming that looks uniform from year to year if they want; if they do not, that is simply a design choice with no cost implications. I am not posting on Facebook or Reddit. If you have issues with what is being posted there, say something there. Do not conflate me with them.

Hold on a second. You posted over and over that we should all be pushing for revenue-side solutions. And you do not even have one suggestion? I do not think there is a revenue-side solution to this. And if you have nothing to offer to refute that, then it is time you stopped assuming that other people without revenue-side solutions are really just prop-hating dinos.

No one said that the smallest line item was the biggest problem. But if it is the most solvable problem, it might be worth mentioning up front.

We most certainly have. In particular, I have suggested numerous other cost-cutting ideas, and not for the first time. And I have explained why those other ideas do not resonate, since other expenses are more essential and their costs less or un-controllable. You seem totally dismissive to all this, as to acknowledge what we are actually saying would ruin your narrative.

Calling BS. I am going through this thread from the start. Here are all the first mentions of causes, in order:

How do we know your argument is in good faith? You have accused more than one poster here of this, ignored all their responses to the contrary, and simply doubled/tripled/quadrupled down on the character attacks. You deny that these costs are worth cutting, but you have not offered any alternate ideas for cost cutting. You deflect by calling for more focus on the revenue side. I have asked you 3 or 4 times for your ideas about revenue, with no response. You disrupt conversation with name-calling and ageist bigotry directed at posters whose ages you do not even know. Like I said before... deny, deflect and disrupt.

I suspect the reason pretty much no one does this is because most of the members will quit. We have to realize that kids are not just joining corps X... they are joining a DCI competitor, with certain expectations that go along with that. To change that model, the whole league has to change.

Earlier posts in this thread suggest another WC corps has already decided 2024 is out... just not announced yet.

No. If that were true, this thread would demand we bring back military inspections and American flag presentations, and complain about dancing, costumes not being truly uniform, and bugles even having valves in the first place.

Since everyone wants to increase "revenue", but no one will offer a specific idea... allow me. Suppose we challenge that assertion? For 11 weeks of housing, 4 meals a day, expert instruction in music/movement, and cross-country travel too, $5000 is a bargain. It is a bargain at twice the price. If we are to address this from the revenue side, then how about we charge members something closer to what this experience really costs?

And do keep bringing it up. In this specific case, however, a corps is telling us they do not have funds to operate their 2024 season. I am therefore skeptical that they would have funds to invest in professional development/grant-writing at the moment. For that matter, they first need to fill the open ED position. (Though a candidate with non-profit development/grant-writing skills would be a plus... )