Official DCP G7 Proposal Discussion Thread

[corpsband]

You've been stretching with every one of your posts, but I'm concerned you'll hurt yourself with this one.

So four months of the G7 holding their own separate meetings to develop a proposal to take over voting rights, the majority of DCI operations, and boatloads of $$$ did NOT affect trust among the membership (who immediately voted to change the composition of the board due to this conflict of interest)....as much as leaking the story to the media did?

There's nothing unethical about preparing a proposal outside the rest of board. Um that's how virtually all "proposals" are developed. As for what that proposal contains: I haven't read it! I don't *know* what it says. If you have it in front of you please forward me a copy! I'm anxious to see what it says.

[Jeff Ream]

The whole reaction to the G7 story is classic mob mentality. It really doesn't matter what the facts are because the narrative has taken on a life of it's own. People hear a few facts and (because it's an emotionally charged topic) begin to "fill-in" the details. Soon what started as speculation becomes "common knowledge". The cycle of speculation to pseudo knowledge continues repeat.

I wonder how the G7-haters will feel if what comes out of the G7 proposals is:

• more shows with top corps
  
• more corps on the west coast swing
  
• more crowd-focused programming
  

Will they say "we over-reacted" or will they say "thank god we shut down the part where the G7 takes over DCI" ?

or maybe a lot of people have heard more than what was publicly printed in PR statements, articles and press releases, and have said it out here.

[garfield]

Not sure if I'm in the several others but I'll respond:

IF a proposal passed that:

redirected DCI controlled funds flowing currently non-G7 to corps to G7 corps

and

took over the administration of DCI

and

demoted the non-G7 corps to second class status

I would be angry and betrayed by the leadership of the G7. I would not have *not* engaged in the hysteria and hate speech that's been in evidence here. I would not have threatened to punish the members for actions taken by corps administration.

BUT not a single proposal has come before the membership for a vote. AND not a single proposal has passed.

What HAS happened is the G7-haters have creative a narrative out of thin air, "filled" in the details of the proposals with their imaginations, each iteration more detailed than the last. Not only are there accusations flying about here with no basis in fact, their are motives ascribed to these actions which are pure speculation. Jumping to conclusions doesn't come close to describing it.

So I'm not giving G7 the benefit of the doubt so much as withholding my judgment until I actually know the details of the G7's proposal. I'm not for or against something I know so little about.

From the DCW article:

"In the reorganization concept, the G7 corps would get two votes in DCI legislative matters, with the other corps receiving one or none." Let's see, 7 votes times 2 each is...wait for it...14, and a majority! That's not "taking control"?

"to essentially take over the administrative leadership of the organization by receiving more authority on legislative matters."

"If the presentation were to eventually be accepted as a proposal, those corps would also conduct their own shows in major cities on Fridays and Sundays during the DCI tour and potentially receive a higher percentage of all tour revenue."

As far as "demoting" is concerned is it really reasonable to suspect that they would use that phrasology in their presentation? Aren't they, by definition, separating themselves from the others and suggesting that, by themselves, they generate more revenue? But just in case you have doubt, again from the DCW article:

"He told the board and those in attendance how the seven corps believe they are the “act” -- the primary reason people attend shows -- and they should be compensated accordingly for their worth to DCI."

So what you're basically saying is that because this is an article in DCW you don't believe it's real. (DCI has already issued a statement. Don't you think they'd issue a denial/correction to the formidable DCW and Steve Vickers?

And because it's only a "presentation" and not a proposal it's not really a threat? Can you name me a few other recent changes that also started out as presentations and ended up being proposals that passed? Oh, I see, this time it's different.

It's like buying a stock because it's hot and being the last buyer before the correction hits.

Yeah, go with that.

[Jeff Ream]

No one said he's printing factually incorrect material. But a lot of that article is phrased as speculation and possibility -- not as hard facts. I've already posted examples. There's a clear editorial slant to the reporting. There's nothing improper about that but you should recognize the article for what it is. There's a reason the "anonymous sources" chose to use DCW for their outlet.

sure...because DCI wouldnt publish it, and the G7 wouldnt publish it. Just like Hugh Sloan wanted to help Bernstein and Woodward, but knew he couldnt get the White House PR machine or the CREEP committee to put it out there.

and remember, as Obi Wan Kenobi said:

Obi-Wan: Your father... was seduced by the Dark Side of the Force. He ceased to be Anakin Skywalker and *became* Darth Vader. When that happened, the good man who was your father was destroyed. So what I told you was true... from a certain point of view.

Luke: A certain point of view?

Luke: Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view. Anakin was a good friend. When I first knew him, your father was already a great pilot. But I was amazed how strongly the Force was with him. I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi. I thought that I could instruct him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong

[Jeff Ream]

The above is not necessarily in conflict with the G7 proposal, all of the hand-wringing DCP rhetoric aside.

The G7 group operated 10% within the structure of DCI.

At this point I personally have not decided what parts of the proposal I agree with...or not. I do think that the negative hyperbole in these threads has pretty much obliterated rational analysis.

the premable doesnt say that it's good for 7 to have all the power and the by far biggest chunk of the money. they may claim it's best for dci, but where is the market research to prove that point?

[Jeff Ream]

That's not paraphrasing that's rewriting.

I submit that the "leakers" have done more harm to DCI than any proposal has. How can a board member express himself honestly when that trust is violated at will ? *Everyone* speaks differently when they are in public. It will be very difficult to repair the trust broken in DCI. *This* put DCI in jeopardy more than any proposal.

and I'm going to say they helped save DCI from a hostile takeover. Look...if it were just these shows..yeah maybe. but add in the rearrnaging of how DCI is to be run, the increased voting power etc...sorry, I don't buy it. It set off my BS alert in more ways than a politicians speech does.

[cmdiddle]

BAC, Madison, Troopers and the rest of WC may be losers in all of this, but does anybody honestly think that they would refuse an opportunity to join the G7? Outside of my heartfelt concern for all of the OC corps and any WC corps openly stating that they would refuse to join the G7, I've pretty much had it with this "me first" mentality that corrupts everything good about drum corps.

[Jeff Ream]

For you folks that follow DCA and have been around a while, thought that hit me while responding somewhere else:

"Just keep thinking of 1993 DCA with all this... Only 13 corps showed up for Prelims and instead of breaking up, the DCA powers that be realized they needed to change things. Irony is they became more inclusive of the non-top corps and it worked. Here G7 is going the opposite way."

Wonder if anyone else had this thought.....

yes. but sadly, not many over here follow DCA like we do.

[Jeff Ream]

There was a time about 25 years ago when every region had a G7.

Lots of corps. Lots of shows. Lots of moms and dads buying tickets. Great.

Here's the problem: it isnt 25 years ago.

We know what happened: the "lets do first tour and compete for Regional Championships and then do the DCI tour afterwords" was replaced by the "what if we took the big show on the road and had everybody tour all summer and played the biggest stadiums in the country" idea.

And what we got is what we got. Or, more accurately, what we got left is what we got left.

And, news flash, it is a pretty awesome product.

Looking at the G7, its kinda like the Blue Man Group . It is unique and exciting and people have proven that they will pay top rate to see it and experience it.

Unlike the Blue Man Group, unfortunately, there isnt a real way to leverage it.

Blue Man can go to a new location. train 3 new people and a production staff and present their product in that new location without sacrificing the first. The Blue Man Group can, literally, be in two places at once...or four places at once. Tonight there's a Blue Man show in Orlando, in London, at the Luxor, and the traveling show nationwide. Premium locations, premium experience, full house. That's leverage.

This is what the G7 is trying to capture. Where/how is the best way to leverage the names? the production? the organizational capabilities? the education opportunities? the uniqueness and excellence of the drum corps presentation and fan/student experience? That is the question.

If BD could headline ON ITS OWN and produce a 90 minute to 2 hour show ON THEIR OWN, they could take that show on the road out West, have Cadets do it in the East and so forth. But (#1) they do 11 minutes...90 would get pretty long, tiring, old, cumbersome and (#2) theyd lose the competitive aspect which is what this is all about. Sooooooooooo...you NEED the corps to get together to give you the 2 hours and the competition.

Dont we have that already? Not really. For $15-$20, I'd pay to see BD and/or SCV and a slate of Open or All-age groups. No Problem. That's where we are (and struggling to stay afloat).

For $25-$45, I'd better be seeing a Championship of some kind or at least a bona fide contest that has 5 or 6 corps fighting for position instead of the 5 or 10 point spreads down the sheet where the show is pretty well decided ahead of time. DCA seems to have captured this sweet spot. Good contests, good corps, lotta ticket sales.

For $50-and up? You have to give me the best and put me in a position to make a decision:

For or against " the concept", can you tell me with a straight face that if you saw a flier that said Drum Corps Show TONIGHT, featuring:

Blue Devils

Cadets

Santa Clara Vanguard

Carolina Crown

Phantom Regiment

Bluecoats

Cavaliers

..that you wouldn't look for the 800 number immediately and go grab a pair of tickets? This kind of lineup is a fan's dream and isnt that kind of the point? You want to see the best, you clamor for "better" lineups, well here you go. Tickets are $50. Hmmmm.

Their politics or their methods might stink but the idea doesn't. The BIG 10 wants to expand? They make a bold move. Everyone else takes a pretty quick inventory.

DCI still has a property, even if the G7 defects:

Madison Scouts

Glassmen

Blue Stars

Boston

Blue Knights

Troopers

Spirit

Crossmen

Academy, etc

...not exactly sisters of the poor. And DCI has a foothold built over 40 years. This could get interesting.

It could end up like AFL vs NFL, Luke Skywalker vs Darth Vader, Boise State vs Oklahoma...and the underdog thing adds to the fun and the conversation.

Dark Helmet: So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

[Jeff Ream]

what's horrible about it? ok...if you aren't G7, you have no say, you're frozen out of events, and if you are Open Class, you're ####ed period.

2, Dan, they guy who helped lead DCi back from the mess Mesceone left behind and Mitchell made worse, is cast aside. Why? is it salary alone? doubtful. They want his power.

2, cut infrastructure...sure, cause YEA can manage events, Crown can manage tickets, BD can manage clinics, and no one else gets #### from the cut.

yeah that's not bad

I've read the proposal. If it all comes true (based on credible anonymous sources?), then what we'll have is:

-) Summer activity exactly as it is today, except a few shows where the G7 will be the only corps

-) Changes to DCI's admin, which will reduce costs (share it across the G7) [this may include tenure of DCI director]

Seriously, all negative rhetoric aside, wtf is HORRIBLE about this? DCI is nothing more than an organization designed to market drum corps, and act as a central agency of rules and regulations. Dan Acheson has NO POWER. The members run the entire thing. Now, Dan has great ideas about drum corps, and that has made him an effective marketer, but he has zero POWER now...they can't really take any more away from him, but they can remove him...at ANY TIME! Administrative cost sharing is common during slow economic ties, part of "tightening the belt." IT HAPPENS, sheesh. The G7 is being magnanimous by sharing it amongst themselves, since they know they're the only ones that can afford it! If it were totally fair, Pioneer would be sharing too, right?

The G7 shows. This seems like so much win, I can't fathom the people railing against it. It gives the G7 an opportunity make a few more dollars, and gives THE AUDIENCE SOMETHING IT WANTS. In most business circles, that's called WIN-WIN. Dayum. The rest of the week will continue the boring, average, poorly-run shows we've come to know and love.

I missed the part where it said "G7 wants to break away from DCI." From the negative tripe posted the last few days, I expected that headline. I was actually a little disapointed.