Slingerland
-
Posts
1,974 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
19
Posts posted by Slingerland
-
-
RE: Whitewater, put 4,000 in the stands for prelims on Saturday day and 9,000 in the stands for the night show, and a college stadium in the middle of nowhere sold 13,000 tickets, vs a one-ticket event in a major metro area selling, let's say 13,000, 15,000 tickets, but with a lease that is undoubtedly much more costly on a per ticket basis.
The big city show is not an improvement, purely from numbers standpoint. The profit margin would be better with a different structure in a different venue. Better profit margin = more money available for the corps.
I keep seeing these references to 'bloated" budgets for the corps with the top budget numbers, and yet, I've looked at a couple of corps' numbers; the vast majority of the funds are going to food, transportation, and insurance, not instruction or management expenses.. When most of the bigger corps are realizing more money on ancillary items like t shirt sales than they are from the performances, it's hard to say that things are in relative balance.
Most members are paying about the same in tour fees across the board, so if you looked at it from a member's perspective, some corps are actually offering better values to their kids than others. Why would we hold up orgs that give less bang for the buck as the ideal?
-
2
-
-
$2million divided by 7 = $285m -- a slip of the Freud perhaps?
/>I guess I didn't think I needed to specify that the monies would be in addition to what the payouts are now, to get a total in the $250-300k range per corps. The $2m amount was derived by taking $110-120k and multiplying it by 18 corps.
Now whose Freudian slip is showing?
-
2
-
-
I think it's only fair to warn people that a Styx tune will be coming their way if they click 'play.'
-
1
-
-
The justification promoted by DCI for declining finals attendance is that more emphasis is being placed on regional shows, and that the total attendance over an entire season is a better indicator of the health of the activity.
Those total attendance numbers have been going up three years in a row, if we're to believe DCI's announcements. And combined with digital "attendance", DCI is reaching more people than ever before.
I understand the position, but it seems like rationalizing to me. DCI Midwest used to sell out in Whitewater in the 70s and early 80s, and DATR in Denver has had years in the past when attendance was as big or bigger than it is now. Allentown has always been a sell-out. Actually, as I think of it, most of those regionals used to be a prelims then finals event, with two different tickets required - the same was true of Midwest and North and most other regionals. As a performer in the late 70s, I can remember seeing 4 to 5,000 in the stands for prelims at Whitewater, then a full house for the night show. Combined total had to be where DCI is in terms of Atlanta now, so it's not really a growth.
The value of an unsold piece of inventory is exactly $0.00 the moment the inventory is no longer sellable. The fact that there are so many unsold, but otherwise sellable, seats at Finals is something that should make everyone at DCI take pause, and make them wonder if the deal with Indy was and is really such a great package after all. I'll keep going to Finals, because it's only a half-day's drive for me, but I could completely understand it if some other fans decided to take a pass on it, since Indy, as a destination stop, doesn't have that much going for it.
That being said, I think you raise some excellent points about looking to the past for guidance (which is not, in any way 'shifting in reverse'). What strategies did DCI employ to help build fan interest?
One that most people won't remember is that they rarely scheduled ALL the top corps into the same shows until Finals week. As much as the current corps would scream, I happen to think that's a superior scheduling philosophy, since it maintains some drama about the head to head matchups. The current schedule means that by the time you get to Finals week, the pecking order (slotting) has been more or less set, so there's little chance of anything truly interesting happening. If it makes the regionals a little smaller but builds fan interest in attending Finals week, it's a win.
I'd really hope that when the Indy deal is done, that they thank Indianapolis and get back to a moving championship. The travel aspect of drum corps was one of the things that appealed to me when i was performing, and it's no less appealing now. Being able to combine a road trip with Finals week is fun. But going to Indy feels a little like going to grandma's house on Christmas. The longer you do it, the less interesting it gets.
Getting Finals back on PBS would be a major accomplishment. That was, to my mind, the signature accomplishment of DCI in their first few years, and the fact that they no longer have as visible a public presence can't be helping. The movie theatre events are great, but they really only appeal to those who are already motivated to buy. There should be ways for people to be exposed to DCI without having to pony up money first.
===
I have been increasingly mystified by this inexplicable expectation being repeated here that DCI should generate enough revenue to cover all the costs of the corps.You're "increasingly mystified" because you're trying to understand something that has never been stated.
I've stated repeatedly that DCI should be able to provide MORE than they do, not the complete cost of producing the product. But right now, if the 990s are to be believed, DCI and performance fees are providing something near 12 to 18% of the cost of producing their shows, depending on the corps' budget and their tour appearance fees. $900,000 to produce a show, including transportation, food, insurance, etc, etc, and DCI is providing $130-180k to most of the organizations performing. Sorry, but that's a ridiculously low return for the amount of time, effort, and money that they put into providing the product.
At the same time, the marching members are providing 30% of the expenses involved in their own season. Would it be outrageous to suggest that DCI endeavor to provide at least the same amount of return to their member corps via performance fees? Another $2 million in funds cleared for payouts every year would allow DCI to pay each member corps somewhere between $250 & 300k - still a long way from what they have to spend to create the product, but a big improvement over the current situation.
-
2
-
-
As has already been demonstrated, costs vary quite a bit among the corps who tour all season. Regardless, if anyone has a problem with the cost/revenue balance, I think both sides of it ought to be looked at.
Not as much as one would suppose, given the relatively large range of scoring from top to bottom. As demonstrated this past season, it's perfectly possible for a corps in the 16-19 range to have a budget as big as a corps who places in the top 5 or 6.
There isn't enough money coming in to DCI, and 15,000-17,000 paid at Finals isn't a sign of success. Those 12,000 seats that used to be sold but aren't now are worth at least $600-800k on just that one night.
-
So DCI is a place which provides a level of excellence for music students to push themselves to 'a level of excellence they can't touch in the rest of the world'; a level of excellence greater than Eastman; greater than the Royal Academy; greater than Julliard; greater than Le Conservatoire de Paris; greater than Berklee; greater than North Texas; greater than Tisch; ... Okey Dokey!!!!
Funny, I've been to recitals at Juilliard and Berklee, and had friends who studied both places, and at no time did any of the performers get up and start moving across the stage at 180 bpm for 11 minutes while they were playing.
Drum corps is a music sport. Music and movement. To do it well requires a special set of skills that a lot of other gifted musicians might not be able to handle. i've seen great horn players who literally couldn't figure out how to play and move at the same time get cut, despite their musical talent.
And in the pits, the demand is absolutely as much as they're going to be asked to do at Juilliard or Kentucky (great percussion program). Want to know what a professional concert percussionist does more than anything? Count rests. Drum corps kicks that particular form's arse when it comes to demand.
Wanna try again?
-
1
-
-
your point of view is always from the top down, we are discussing an activity that is in the business of building young men and women,...........not just an elite group of them,..............
I'm talking about a business as a business. If money changes hands, and someone pays cash for a product, it's a business.
DCI is there to sell events and distribute funds, however best they can. The rest of their mission is contingent on them doing a kicka__ job of selling and distributing. They DO this so that the drum corps can afford to stay in the business of providing a place where teenagers and college aged musicians can have a place to push themselves to a level of excellence they can't touch in the rest of the world.
I'm sorry, but there's no credible evidence out there to show that the biggest 14 or 18 or 20 corps are going to scale themselves back to doing a 6 day tour on a school bus with a bread truck to haul all the equipment. That being the case, I don't waste time pining over an ideal that can't and won't ever happen. National tours cost what they cost, and the amounts being spent by most of the full-summer tour corps are fairly consistent across the spectrum. Either DCI has to find a way to increase the amount of revenue coming in OR come up with a marketing strategy that increases the overall exposure for the drum corps at all levels (so that individual corps can leverage that exposure to sell their own products better), but hoping that the corps whose presence sells most of those tickets DCI uses to stay in business that they have to turn themselves back into mom and pop corps from the 60s isn't the solution.
-
this
So you guys are saying that everything is fine with DCI, despite the fact that over half of the regular Finalist corps have approached the rest of the org and said "look this system isn't working.'
Any speciality retailer facing the possible loss of half of its most popular brands is a retailer who has problems, regardless of whether you support the brands in question or not.
DCI's fees to their top corps don't come close to covering the costs of getting their kids down the road. Not "paying the staff" or "covering Wayne Downey's bar bill", but "covering the costs of food, insurance, fuel, and transportation." But don't worry; their fees to their lowest ranking corps don't come close to covering THEIR expenses for getting their kids down the road either, so at least they're equal that way!
There isn't enough money coming in to make DCI work. Either the revenues need to increase, or the costs of running DCI need to be cut significantly in order to increase payouts. Since I'm not sure what can be done on the latter half of that formula, it puts us back to trying to come up with a way to increase revenues at the top and boost the payouts.
-
And to not only be fair, but realistic, most everyone in the outside world is way more interested in Matt Flynn and Maroon 5 than SCV. That said, the G7 can learn a lot from this company;
?? last I checked, Zildjian's not being told to give Istanbul Agop a cut of every cymbal they sell
Great family business. And very, very, very competitive. They come by it honestly, as their cousins at Sabian can contest.
-
1
-
-
Except it's NorWELL.
-
Ah, but do they also deserve more money from DCI to help them pay for better designers and better conditions for performers--which makes it easier for them to win?
Which came first, their excellence or the payout for winning top prize?
I'm curious, do any you really old timers remember if DCI had a prize-money structure in place in the earliest days? Was winning in 1974 worth more than placing 9th?
-
1
-
-
To summarize, everybody wants to be in charge in order to make their changes, but nobody is certain they have the right answers.
An outside eye sometimes is the best friend in the world. DCI and their member corps have to be in agreement that some impartial outside evaluation of the product and message is in order. Right now, everyone's just seeing the world from their perspective, and as we know, their perspective, while informed by their own experience, isn't necessarily in line with what the larger world might see when they look at drum corps.
-
You must have missed the memo... MikeD, and dozens of other DCP posters have said quite clearly on a number of occasions that " we can't compare DCI with the Pro leagues ".
I do agree with you however that there ARE models that the NCAA and the Pros have adopted in a number of areas that seem to work well for them that at the very least should be studied and explored by DCI without dismissing out of hand. For example, I don't see how it is possible for us to believe that we can have less placement stagnation without at least SOME degree of restriction of talent flow between Corps or compensation for developing such talent. I know thats not popular to think about in some quarters on here as needed " change" but absent that, I 'd like to hear what others are offering up as ideas other than " have other Corps work harder " so they just might be able to overcome the 30 year entrenchment at the top. Not knocking the Blue Devils, but do they get most of their marching talent from within their own developed " feeder Corps " ? How many of the Blue Devils marchers in any given year came to the Blue Devils with prior DCI marching and touring experience ? 2% .... 5%.... 10%... or is it much higher ? is it much higher than the Corps in the 14-20 placement range ? The answer to these questions provides at least some insight as to the dilemna we face when we say we embrace " change " and would like to see a time when ( " comparing the NFL " ).. " on any given Sunday... " ( anyone can win )
My point was purely about other organizations have turned themselves around from being lackluster to being stellar. What other aspects of their operations were being compared?
I could have also added Apple (best buy of my life was Apple at $21 a share in the early 2000s
), Disney, Ford (numerous times), Marvel Comics (once in Chapter 11), etc, etc, etc. Anytime you have a faded brand, and are treading water or shrinking, you have an opportunity for reinvention. People have to see this as an opportunity, as much as a threat.I don't disagree at all that a large part of the stagnation has to do with the repetitive nature of the competitive field. So....what can be done to goose the performance at the lower end of the spectrum so that it's less likely that a G7 corps will win every night if they happen to be in a show?
Someone else here suggested that a major overhaul of the judging system might be part of that solution, and I would go on record as saying that I think that's a capital idea. Put the emphasis on technique, uniformity, execution and actual audience engagement over "design", and you stand the chance of seeing some of the corps at the 8th-12th rank find their ways up the ladder into a higher tier of competitors, and have a chance to do a better job of impressing the newbies enough to keep them around for awhile. BUT that would also mean that the onus would be put on those in the bottom half of the competitive field to step up their games too, as many of them come out with programs that are a little "me too" rather than "take another bite of that hot dog and our hornline will jam it down your throat!"
-
3
-
-
Okay. The NHL expanded to 30 teams; the NFL to 32. What about expanding DCI membership to 32 corps?
Absolutely, as long as each of those new corps bring additional value to DCI, with ownerships that buy their way in , and provide additional revenue to the organization, rather than just providing another mouth to feed. Just like in the NFL and NHL.
You add teams to your league when doing so creates benefit to the existing members of the partnership. DCI would probably love to be in that position, but right now, there just aren't enough experienced, qualified corps management teams and boards of directors to make it feasible. But if you can convince another 6 or 8 corps to step up their programs to the point where they are committed to funding a national tour, hiring a good staff, and going out there with 140-150 kids who are ready to compete at the highest levels, absolutely, go for it.
-
1
-
-
The problem that DCI has however is that there really seems to be no enterprise quite like this one to model themselves after. And thats the rub, imo.
Totally disagree. There are any number of enterprises who were once either failing or dead in the water or stuck in low gear (like DCI), and have been revitalized with new thinking. The idea that DCI is somehow sui generis is a fail.
DCI could look at the NHL (even with the lockouts, a much bigger operation now than 20 years ago) or the NFL, both of which were once stale or failing operations, but got turned around with a dose of fresh blood and a desire to grow their businesses rather than accept second rate status.
And you seem to have misunderstood the task. I didn't tell you to look at Sears as a model of what to do, I asked you to come up with an analysis of why they're faiing. They might have more in common with DCI than you think.
-
So since I mentioned the infamous "Schlitz Example" earlier, here's a side conversation that might have some benefit here.
I just hired you as a consultant to map the turnaround of an iconic American institution. I want you to fix Sears.
===
They were once the biggest retailer in the world, but now they're dead in the water. Same store sales are flat or falling, closing massive amounts of stores hasn't helped improve the bottom line, and their online business, while better than nothing, isn't taking the place of what they used to do in catalog sales.
Here's what they have that's working. Land's End. Inexplicably popular, but profitable, so a win is a win. But the Sears stores themselves? not so much.
So what's the problem? Market position? Product mix? Messaging? Locations? Store design? All of the above?
And then what are the one or two major steps that need to be taken to get people wanting to check out Sears again.
Tolstoy famously said that all happy families were alike, but unhappy families are unhappy in their own way. But I've always found that unhappy businesses are pretty much all alike. Something they're doing or saying, or NOT doing or saying, is failing to turn up prospects, and converting those prospects into customers.
So, in broad strokes, figure out what Sears has to do in order to make themselves vital again. Then see if that solution (or a similar solution) is the same thing that would put some coal in DCI's furnaces.
(Since I posed the question, I'll also pose an observation; the biggest problem, to me, is that Sears is a generalist concept in a specialized world. If I'm shopping for tools, I'll go to Home Depot. Appliances, an appliance store. Tires? NTB (originally owned by Sears, ironically enough). They're still acting as the world's biggest mid-price general store, at a time when people want to either go to a category specialzed big boxes like Dicks, or Lowes, or price leaders like W-M, or the half-step up from W-M with Target.
In this case, trying to be everything to everyone has left them without as strong a product message or attitude as they need. I'd say the same is true with DCI these days.)
-
Yes.
Its called DCA.
It pretty much works as designed.It fills the need for those who won't, or can't, spend a lot of money on their urge to do Drum Corps and has a loyal fan base that likes the product. It might not be everyone's cup a tea, but its been around longer than DCI and has been more organizationally more stable than DCI. It does follow the model of keeping expenses down for Corps, staff, and fans by keeping " touring " to a minimum. It fills a niche. And DCA's longevity of almost half a century in business now clearly demonstrates that its business model that it has chosen for itself works as intended.
DCA's annual budget is quite literally 3% of DCI's budget. It's a lot easier to be 'stable' when the demands on your pipeline are relatively small.
But I think you'd find many people would be all in favor of part-time junior corps forming an alliance in the DCA direction, if DCA is interested in having them join. So there's really no disagreement here.
But the national touring corps' expenses are what they are, and are largely driven by expenses that the corps themselves can't control (fuel, insurance, cost of food). The fact is that the national tour, the 24/7 high-intensity experience, is what they're there to provide their members, and changing that model would more or less take away one of the big things that drives members to audition for those corps in the first place.
-
...a realistic approach would be to scale back the expenses of the entire activity where it can be sustainable for a maximum number of corps; then keep it at 'that' level while making adjustments for future growth.
Ok. How?
Is there some special discount code that can be applied to everyone's insurance bills that will lower them from $50,000 or more to a few thousand dollars? A special fuel pump where diesel is still $1.10 a gallon?
A world in which the members are all local, and live at mom and dad's on the weekdays, until late July, when they go out on their 10 day "summer tour?"
We all did that. It was 1960s and early 70s drum corps. Like muscle cars that got 12 mpg on $.29 gas, it was fun back in its day, but its day passed a long time ago.
I mean, there ARE cheaper ways of doing drum corps with mostly local members, but those corps are designed to be part-time, rather than full-time. Force every drum corps to adhere to the part-time, locals only model, and you can kiss national touring corps goodbye - or more likely, you can kiss at least 15 or 17 of the top corps goodbye, as they'll take off to form a new organization.
The old model simply doesn't work, and making changes designed to cheapen production doesn't have a long history of success in this world. It's why Schlitz is still held up as an example in business classes of the dangers of going cheap, rather than going bigger and better. They thought they could cheapen their way to survival, and they killed the brand instead.
The way forward rarely involves shifting into reverse, except for cases of purest survival, and even in those cases, it's usually the first step toward putting up the "going out of business" sign. Ironically enough, as I think of it, my moniker here is another example of the dangers of cheapening, rather than committing to growth. A once dominant brand, killed by a drive to make it cheaper, rather than make it better.
-
2
-
-
A discussion we can have via PM that would be VERY interesting, IMO.
Sorry, you lifted your skirt before the edit.
/>Too many worms in that particular can to want to get into.
Let's just say that I'm not sure that some of the noise the last few days doesn't include a few guys out back sharpening their shears.
-
Where's the market going to close tomorrow? I don't know. But I can tell you when it will fall. I know that will be the day after I make that big buy I've been putting off!
Unfortunately true for too many.
Where will the market close Friday? It was 14,329 at close today. Jobs report comes out tomorrow morning...
14,368, give or take a few points.
-
I wonder if William Faulkner was thinking of that 1942 Orson Welles film or the 1918 Booth Tarkington novel on which it's based (where that line originally appeared, although the character's name there is not Eugene), when he wrote:
"The past is never dead. It's not even past." (Requiem for a Nun [1950])
I suspect Faulkner was channelling Shakespeare ("what is past is prologue") rather than responding to Tarkington/Welles' character. While both are accurate sentiments, I'd prefer to hang with the guy who's looking ahead rather than the one with his eyes fixed on the rear view mirror.
-
I realize you were referencing Dan's comments but the bolded above, which apparently reflect your views, is nearly verbatim of what Dan said in prior posts. And I mean down to the phrases.
So I wonder if you two are being fed the same talking points; you both seemed ultra-concerned about not being branded elitists, and use words and phrases that are eerily similar. Granted, it's possible for two people, literally on opposite sides of the world, to view the activity the same way (Dan and I have done it many times here), but you two sound like you're reading off the same cue cards.
Add in that your shared comments are remarkably similar to comments coming from the Seven inside the DCI Board room and... well...
I'll just leave it there for now.
So two people who don't know each other look at the same situation and see the same problems and potentials, and it's a sign of collusion? (I hadn't actually looked at what Daniel wrote in its original form except for the one about the utopian ideal of 18 competitive corps; I was simply responding to the selected quotes).
You'd be surprised how many people who make their livings in the real world by looking at problems and potentials would look at DCI and draw the same conclusions. In a world in which the competition for available consumer dollars is getting tighter, not looser, you need to go big or go home, and refine your message to the point where no one can mistake what it is you're trying to sell them. DCI's message is a muddle now, in part because it's trying to pretend like it's a glorified band booster program rather than a major league events promoter.
I've pointed out several times that I thought the G7 powerpoint was misguided in both tone and concept. That doesn't mean that it was completely without merit as a tool for initiating a discussion. Simply saying 'they're greedy" without taking the time to investigate their position with an open mind isn't a sign that one is somehow more pure. Acknowledging that they might have some good points does not, by the same token, mean that one necessarily support their solution to the problem. We can agree that your dog is ugly without me necessarily agreeing that your suggestion to euthanize the beast is the best solution to his ugliness.
You want some elitism? Ok here's a great quote from a piece of film arm that isn't part of the Die Hard series.
"Old times? There aren't any old times. When times are gone, they're not old, they'redead.There aren't any times but new times." - Eugene in The Magnificent AmbersonsDCI is stuck in the past, and many here seem to be stuck there with them. But the world has moved on from mom and pop drum corps, with kids getting peanut butter sandwiches three times a day, and jamming them aboard a school bus that wouldn't be able to pass a state inspection without a $10 bill handed over with the form to the inspector. The amount of money DCI can distribute is not keeping up with the expenses of doing the activity. If there are other suggestions out there besides finding a way to make it more sellable to potential fans, or alternatively, growing the fan base enough so that the corps themselves can make more money by selling those new fans their merchandise, then everyone will be interested in seeing them.
But there doesn't seem to be a strong commitment to either idea right now.
-
4
-
-
Ummmm.... sorry, but he certainly did make that claim. Read the following and you will see that the D-Ray does clam that 18th to 1st 'on any give night' is both realistic and possible:
"Would be" is a phrase that inherently states an ideal, a goal.
If you don't think it's a good goal, to have 18 corps who, over a sampling of seasons, could have wide swings in placement and competitiveness, then you're more or less saying that even 18 is an unrealistic number of units for true "world class" competition. Maybe the cut off should be...what? 8? 10?
But a league in which the communication leads not with "these are all great competitors" but "only a couple of these 18 have ever actually won, and most of them aren't expected to be competitive for the top" isn't necessarily a league worth having.
-
But that is not the claim by D-Ray. His claim that 18th to 1st is not only possible, but actually realistic where all corps are so equal that 18th to 1st would happen 'on any given day'. All I want is for him to show real-life examples where 18th to 1st has ever happened within drum corps or even in 'any' major subjective contest system.
I don't read his comments that way at all. He's simply calling for a model in which overall competitiveness is increased by greatly increasing the quality of what's out there in the current middle range of the pack. My position is that a drastic change in either the judging system or how the numbers are handled could help in this.
He's also calling for an increase in variety, something that it seems even the old timers on here would like to see too. I look at some of the corps in the lower half of the activity and wonder why they're all seeming to play it so safe, offering "lite" versions of shows that are being programmed at the top, and uniforms that are just cookie-cutter from the Uniforms R' Us collection.
If you think it's ok for DCI to muddle along with a very predictable line up of "best, better, and good" corps, who are more or less unchanged from year to year, then you're welcome to that opinion, but in terms of building fan interest and strengthening the overall activity, I don't see it as a good thing.
TOC/G7 Related Discussion
in DCI World Class Corps Discussions
Posted · Edited by Slingerland
According to the numbers, the two organizations' expenditures are very similar. Take out Cavaliers' WGI program, and factor in the higher expense of insurance and rentals in a major urban market vs a much smaller town, and they're not far away from each other.
But I find it interesting that you're acknowledging that you don't really know what the budget breakdowns are. I have to wonder if this is a situation similar to the average American taxpayer, who is so completely in the dark regarding our national budgets on that they believe that cutting foreign aid to "only 10%", for example, will have a big effect on the bottom line. It wouldn't, since foreign aid is already only about 1% of our overall expenses.
Look at the reported numbers, and you see that a few corps ARE reporting more in merchandise sales profits than performance fees (including Cavaliers, according to their 2011 990). Why anyone would get snarky about that is a bit of a mystery.
===
My point regarding Whitewater and the other 70s/80s regionals had to do with DCI's claims that overall attendance is up because of Atlanta, et al. My guess is that it's more or less the same, because of the two-event nature of the old school regionals. But it's possible that a case could be made that the regionals might do well to go back to the old format, where you have 75% of a full roster of past finalists, and are playing in college stadia rather than domes. As an experiment, go back to a prelims/finals on the same day format, just for the fun of it. 15 corps show up, and only 8 make the night show, and you've given people a reason to attend both events.
My central points are all pretty consistent. DCI, as a model of efficiency for passing through the dollars created by the drum corps' products, isn't working as well as it could and should. If it was, several of the biggest names in the association wouldn't be talking about bolting. Either they're going to need to figure out a way to increase their efficiency (increasing the amount of cash available), they're going to get serious about working with the corps to make more sellable products (they have "an artistic director", supposedly; is he actually approving everyone's show concepts and designs?), or they're going to have to find ways to start bringing in a lot more outside money to support the activity than they do now.
Any of the three would be fine, a combination would be best. But SOMETHING needs to get moving, and sooner rather than later.