cixelsyd

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... )

So because you only refer to multiple people as dinos, should we be relieved?

So far...

Yes. That is why I am particularly curious as to what ideas you have regarding genuine revenue.

Still waiting for your ideas on revenue.

They also need housing for 3-4 weeks of spring training... because many of the corps members are not local.

You sure? The Academy prop required 30 people to push it around. (At one show, it was stuck on the field and would not budge until they upped that to 36 people.) Blue Knights had a prop that needed to be disassembled/reassembled just to get it in/out of most stadiums. You always knew they were in the show as soon as you got there, just from the riveting noises coming from behind the end zone. (Imagine if we had this many people spending this much time on member safety issues, instead of prop management.)

Not true. Plenty of people post that food, fuel and housing are concerns. But those are more essential costs.

Actually, the first thing "attacked" in these discussions is usually "dinos".

As I said on the DCI CEO thread, and will repeat here... you could cut travel expense by touring less, and you could cut housing expense by recruiting locally. These ideas have already been dismissed. Less people will march under those circumstances, and then we WILL have a revenue problem. We need food. So what is left?

Almost invariably, when "revenue" is brought up today, it is not revenue generated by drum corps programs. Instead, it is "revenue" from external sources. Oh, if we could just have more of other people's money, problem solved! There are a few examples of where a drum corps can generate revenue from related resources (like how Star of Indiana ran a bus company to put their assets to greater use; several other corps have done this too). CrownTickets. BD Entertainment. USBands. Not seeing opportunity for explosive growth in those established ventures. What innovations are you suggesting?

They might not have the agency to think ahead. You know, about how that extra truck is going to impact costs the next time fuel costs double. Same thinking ahead might not have occurred in the recent past as drivers transitioned from volunteers to hires... or as the need for drivers multiplied when driver hour regulations tightened.

I realize this post was not directed toward me... yet. But in anticipation: 1. If the bigger items are essential and cannot be trimmed, then you have to look at the smaller items. 2. When we just had this same discussion on the new DCI CEO thread, I listed a wider variety of non-essentials for consideration. That list included two-month tours, truckloads of pit percussion, and the complete catalog of band brass instrumentation... not just the unlimited electronics and props. The main reason I usually focus on electronics and props is because they seem like the least painful cuts we could make. Prospective marchers will not quit DCI if there are no props/tarps anymore.

If you want to have a serious conversation, telling people to "shut up" is a funny way to start it off. I understand the issue fully. Drum corps is wicked expensive. Some of that expense is unavoidable. The rest of the expenses all have their constituents who shriek the instant you suggest cutting their favorite luxury. Deny, deflect, or just disrupt any further discussion. Evolve? I have been hearing the phrase "evolve or die" in defense of every costly change to drum corps. Sorry, but when "evolve or die" becomes "evolve and die", it is not evolution.

True. One thing that can happen, though, is if enough WC corps drop out, DCI might become more amenable to OC corps seeking promotion to fill lineup vacancies. After 2006, three WC were lost, and Academy was able to dictate terms for their transition to WC.

I cannot say specifically. According to the press release, expenses were "managed within expectations", but "budgeted fundraising amounts did not materialize as anticipated". So they are literally telling us its not a spending problem, its a revenue problem.

What should we be more surprised about? - Cadets calling off 2024 - press release saying "its not a spending problem, its a revenue problem" - only two hours into this thread, people are defending/deflecting about non-essential expenses such as props and electronics

It is abundantly clear that this post pertains to other posts here. It says so in the first phrase. And I still do not see survivors making posts like that here. Not even one. Instead, survivors seem to have the best and most thought-out ideas for improving things. So how is that "victim blaming"?

Ugh - do not remind me. I have one of those at my place of work. None of us say anything because he is retiring. But he has been retiring for six years, on and off.

In case clarification is needed: 1. The only people I engage with regarding "burn to the ground" are people who use those words. 2. I do not believe any rational person thinks "burn to the ground" is the preferred solution (or even a solution). It is something people say when so frustrated that they think there is no solution. 3. In all the eventful years of such topics in this activity, I do not recall EVER hearing a survivor use those words.

Which is it, then? 1. If it were that simple, and leadership felt the same way, we would not be having this discussion. 2. If we burn a top corps to the ground via an abuse lawsuit verdict (financial penalty), that suggests money is worth more than people in practice. 3. Why a top corps? Are you implying that leadership feels only people in top corps are worth more than money? That is funny, because... 4. ... reviewing DCI actions, I would have to conclude people in lower corps are considered worth more than people in top corps.