LabMaster

My point was that you have a better chance, through dc or band, of being a “pro” musician or dancer, than making it to the “Pro Athlete” level through athletic programs in towns or schools. The number of people making it as a pro athlete are less than one half of one percent, if even that much.

Then you don’t understand my point if you think I’m agreeing.

Funny. Pro marcher. Ha ha. You don’t do drum corps specifically to become a pro. But you know that, you’re just being argumentative for the sake of arguing. There are many former DC people who go on to become pro teachers, musicians, choreographers. DC was just a fun thing to do and helped them with their future endeavors.

Your chances of becoming a musician or dancer are far better than becoming a pro athlete. You may even have a better chance of getting a scholarship for music or dance that getting one for sports too.

It appears the funds they had for the failing bus co. were “reallocated”. So possibly no money lost by not being able to shop around. Bus breakdowns would have more cost impact than making a change I would think. Plus it was in Indy (championship week). Less drive time needed at that point. Seems a right decision was made given the circumstances.

I know. I was just joking with you. I appreciate your commentary during the season. It’s always balanced and fair. Just wanted to be sure you didn’t forget them lol. Sad about Cadets and hope there isn’t another to sit out as the rumor is out there.

Gonna need a bigger truck. I’m guessing there isn’t anything in the DCI rule book governing the definition of a truck.

Corps weren’t on the road for 8 weeks last year. 6 for most. Fewer for others.

It’s already been shrunk. Last season was 6 weeks long. Shorter for some corps. Number of shows also was reduced. Look back. That is a small part of the answer. Why don’t we offer more money generating ideas? Not just lip service. Real executable achievable ideas.

Please go back and look at the charter corps of DCI. I challenge you to prove they were all the richest corps serving the richest corps. Boston for one was far from rich. And within a few short years some of those corps were no longer around or were struggling. That alone confirms they were not all rich. Please let’s not have revisionist history here.

DCI had absolutely nothing to do with the demise of local corps in eastern Massachusetts. Organizations that supported local corps simply did not want to support them any more. It is a fallacy to believe otherwise. Amvets, VFW, American Legion, churches just let corps fizzle out. Contributing to that was the growth of many many other things kids wanted to do. Sports expansion was a huge alternative to local corps. Many more participatory opportunities for many more kids. 135 corps in eastern Mass. in the early 70’s. Gone by the 90’s and it wasn’t DCI that did it.

What I see here is never ending commentary about cost cutting. Cut tours, cut shows, limit busses, trucks, staff and so on. What needs discussion and new ideas (achievable ideas, not pie in the sky, what ifs) is creating revenue streams. How do corps create revenue streams? What does it take? How does a corps actually go about it? Saving money requires having money to save. Corporate sponsorships: no need to limit to music companies, uniform companies. There are companies who support the arts. Find them, approach them. They don’t need a huge payoff, just an association with a group may be enough. Wound a transportation company be a sponsor? A trucking company? A bus company. Provide them an incentive to help. Tax break for them to help a non profit youth org.? Food companies too. Donations of food, services. Grant writing. You don’t need pro writers, you need to learn how to write them. Do it yourself. It is being done by some corps. Cutting costs is all well and good and very necessary, but corps struggle with money coming in and they can’t rely on tuition, camp fees and the like. Teach corps how to find money and how to create sustainable revenue streams. Then teach them how to manage money and be fiscally responsible. Visibility around spending for and within an org., has become critical.

It’s quite possible with the options they were faced with, someone may have thought, “nah, we’ll be ok, let’s keep going”. Then sensibility prevailed and another thought was presented “ahh, remember SCV last year? How did that delay go”? Ripping the band aid off now is the better choice in the long run. The blowback now is nothing like it could have been had they waited longer.

I think you got it wrong. Cadets didn’t let down supporters as much as supporters let them down. And the CEO let them down by not being open and honest with the BoD about finances. There are corps who have expanded their base of op’s that still have supporters who enjoy the corps and support it well. Maybe Cadet alums could help more, but it seems there are conditions with their support. Like going to Erie is a problem (because Allentown needed to be in the rear view). Could they have returned to Garfield? Would the alums empty their wallets then? I get, to an extent, the restraint, but imo, if you truly care about the org, you let some things be and provide support. Holding back has the corps in the position they are in. What seems to be a most significant element of the decision to suspend is a lack of incoming revenue. In any way. Lots of contributing factors, but no plan to generate revenue is crippling. Hopefully they can be back at some point.

It is getting clearer that a couple of critical factors got Cadets to this point. First was Unchecked and unreported spending by the former CEO. When the BoD became aware, fairly recently, how serious that was. Secondly it was coupled with the CEO not working towards having or creating any substantial revenue streams. The prospect of having no money coming in, other than member fees and tuition, the plug was pulled. Debts had been paid, frugality in the corps production was adhered to, but the unchecked spend and no revenue prospects was too much to move forward for 24.

I believe passes are limited.

It took a while to build up Bostons BoD because it’s what it took. You increase a BoD by asking people to be on it, once the “starter” board, if you will, is in place and your mission to establish a sustainable foundation is clear and committed. Once you reach that point, with all board members functioning in roles they take on or are experienced in, progress can be made. It takes commitment and institutional discipline. Having a large board that allows tasks to be shared, does help lessen each board members personal time commitment. And board members do not have to be geographically restrained. That enables virtual board meetings along with a few in person meetings throughout the year.

New Director? For Cadets? I don’t know that there is a Director. They need an entirely new BoD. This one HAD to be aware of the situation. If not, then they are incredibly incompetent. As far as people being in the dark; in some cases until you know it’s not going to work, you need to keep functions like it will. If you put things on hold, waiting for things to clear up, you could be so far behind in preparing for the upcoming season, you end up in a bad position for moving forward from the previous year. Not one aspect of anything like this is good. Da?$? If you do, Da?$? if you don’t. This imo, was avoidable.

If the BoD is larger than a handful of people, and diverse in their backgrounds, then the work required won’t come close to their spending 20 hours/week running a corps. And a BoD doesn’t run a corps anyway. You can spread their work out and let an BoD oversee the corps management and support the corps as needed. There are corps out there where this works and works well. What corps not set up this way can do, is meet with and learn from corps that are being successful with this set up. Help IS available. But there are corps out there too, who feel they know better and don’t listen. Pride, ego, hubris, whatever it may be, they don’t reach out. There is also the flip side where a BoD may have been asked for help by corps management, or otherwise made fully aware of the challenges and support needed, and has not provided help and has not reached out to get help to support their org. And oddly enough, corps alums who could help, don’t, because in their minds, the corps in some way offended them. Maybe it was by changing unis, performance style, location, whatever it may be, support is held back because things changed and not to their personal liking. So the current corps suffers. Minds and attitudes need to change. BOD structure may need to change. Be larger to expand resources. Diversify thought and sourcing options primarily for sustainability. Be financially creative and innovative (all legally of course). Don’t minimize revenue streams and opportunities. Bring smart people into the fold.

Since this is the staff merry go round what becomes of Cadets staffers?

That right there cannot be overstated. Creation of sustainable revenue streams is lacking in many orgs. Reliance on only a few sources of revenue is not sustainable. Diversify the portfolio. Expand the BoD’s to expand diversity in fundraising and creativity in fundraising. It’s what you would do with your personal wealth management, why wouldn’t the same thinking apply to corps financial resources? Then manage it with smart spending. Live within your means.

Hope we hear similar reports from other orgs. We just had an incredible year for corps performances and hopefully we have another. My wish for all corps is to be smart, be safe, be amazing.

So blame DCI, when he was lobbying (successfully) for the costly changes and the ensuing arms race? Gas wasn’t the issue when the significant cost impacts began. The “model” was created by the corps.

Forgetting anyone? An oversight I’m sure. I had to look BAC at it a couple of times to be sure they weren’t there.

Couldn’t open the link.