Official DCP G7 Proposal Discussion Thread

[PioneerWebmaster]

That's fine, and Pioneer provides a great opportunity for kids to march, but I have yet to meet anyone in person who gets excited by or for a Pioneer show.

I'm sorry... I guess all those years when people were standing up and clapping at the end of Pioneer shows I thought they actually liked us... I guess the people clapping in time to Gary Owen as we left the field were just helping to make sure we got off the field in time for the next corps... Oh well... I completely understand now!

[soccerguy315]

Right but if the whole point of the G7 is the AAA-only show format then it makes sense to have only 8 per season.

Exactly.

So, logically, you agree that the votes of the Greedy7 will have more to determining who gets a shot at the AAA shows than performance on the field?

[corpsband]

Oh STOP yourself. You missed the point. Listen up. I didn't say "...means 'operate at a loss'".

DCI, in fact, DID a heck of a lot with the $10million that came in. DCI, the entity, should have a cushion to get the organization through the hard times but the rest of their cash flow should be spent on DOING THINGS in the area that they support. DCI has done this for nearly 40 years and they only now have a $500-thousand cushion and you suggest they aren't operating as an effective non-profit? Pure bunk.

Perhaps you'll change your opinion of a non-profit, maybe not. But, if you don't, I strongly suggest you not start a "non-profit" yourself.

You said "non-profits are not in the business of making money". You couldn't have been more clear. Sorry you misspoke.

Oh...and show me where I said DCI isn't operating as an effective non-profit. Cause I missed it.

And I know a smidge about non-profits (having served on as an officer on the board of a little one). So...yeah.

Edited May 27, 2010 by corpsband

[GMichael1230]

I'm sorry... I guess all those years when people were standing up and clapping at the end of Pioneer shows I thought they actually liked us... I guess the people clapping in time to Gary Owen as we left the field were just helping to make sure we got off the field in time for the next corps... Oh well... I completely understand now!

I cant wait to see Pioneer, always have, always did......Pioneer is just as important and relevant as "the Cavaliers" .......Everyone has their place and entertainment value is in the eyes of the beholder........

G

..enjoying ALL corps for 30+ years now

[soccerguy315]

Another part of the PowerPoint proposal that has not gotten much discussion (other than the pictures representing non-G7 corps) is the mock-up poster on page 64.

Maybe I'm interpreting many things on that poster the wrong way, but it seems very confusing.

Here are some various parts which I do not understand:

"No more warm up events for the World Championships. They ALL count now!

Each show will help determine who will walk away with the coveted DCI WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP Title"

-What the heck does that mean???? I heard something about cumulative scoring.... does it mean that the scores will affect performance order at Championships? From just looking at the poster, it looks like actual scores would be affected. No one is talking about this, why???

"....YOU can impact the Race to the Championships by helping decide the World Champion in Indianapolis!"

-Same as above..... how will audience voting have an effect on the championships in Indianapolis?......... very confused!

"Shorter Competitive Shows"

What?.... never seen another mention of this either.... does it mean less corps at the show? How is a longer competitive show a bad thing?

I'm usually the last person to assume conspiracies and things like that, but from what they put on this poster, it's almost like this is a glimpse into a G7-only league of drum corps. If not, why would they have worded things the way they did? Someone obviously put some decent amount of time into making this poster (looks a lot more professional than the rest of the powerpoint), so they had to have put some thought into the wording on it.

What are your thoughts?

Tez, I did not go back to check the proposal, but I have read it a few times. My impression is they were going to create an entirely new trophy. The G7 trophy or something.

[garfield]

Then teach me. I admit ignorance of the inner workings of Pioneer. My perspective is that of a fan. I see Pioneer finish in last place every year, then I come to DCP and read directors and instructors from Pioneer state that there is more to drum corps than competition. That's fine, and Pioneer provides a great opportunity for kids to march, but I have yet to meet anyone in person who gets excited by or for a Pioneer show.

For all I know, Pioneer might be the wealthiest corps out there. Maybe they have more resources at their disposal than any other corps. I'm open to this possibility. But even if this is true, it's completely irrelevant. What matters is how those resources are used. I included the words "willing" and "presence" in my previous post for a reason. Pioneer may be fiscally stable, even thriving, but as a fan I don't see Pioneer willing to use their resources to grow their product. Character development is not a spectator sport. I can appreciate Pioneer's role in "supporting adolescent achievement towards the pursuit of excellence in all areas of their lives", but that by itself is not going to earn my dollars. Offer me something in return. Entertain me. Entertain the people I bring to the show. How else are we going to add new fans?

Maybe you consider drum corps to be a charity. I do not. In the debate over amplification and electronic instruments, I have always maintained that no one should spend money on drum corps if the product no longer entertains them. I value drum corps for the entertainment it provides. I consider drum corps to be entertainment. The G7 corps have just submitted a proposal which states unequivocally that they too believe drum corps to be entertainment. I have not heard Pioneer's statement on this proposal - but in the ten years since I have been a fan, Pioneer's words and actions have not demonstrated to me that they hold as a priority the crafting of an entertaining brand with national appeal. This is why I believe Pioneer's interests to be at odds with the interests of a forward-looking corps like the Blue Devils.

Man, clear as a bell. Were you captain of your debate team, or speech class?

Well, I must feel a little more charitable than you but not when it comes to the corps finances.

But when Pioneer does a show they get $1100. When BD does a show they get $2600 (I've heard various amounts on this point; what I know is that we pay DCI $2700 to have them). You may say Pio should get less and BD should get more.

I guess that's where I feel a little more charitable than you, but that's OK. What's not OK is when BD wants to take all the marbles and put that much more pressure on Pio. You said it yourself - in their arena you have respect for what they do. Isn't it worth "putting up with" their show and giving them a few dollars to do that good?

I'd say yes.

Edit: sorry, bad grammar. Hate it!

Edited May 27, 2010 by garfield

[corpsband]

Exactly.

So, logically, you agree that the votes of the Greedy7 will have more to determining who gets a shot at the AAA shows than performance on the field?

Not at all. To me it seems that corps who finish 1st-8th would be performing in those shows. The BOD option should be used only in exceptional circumstances where one of those corps in the top 8 cannot perform in AAA the following year. It seems a reasonable explanation for allowing the "promotion via board vote" alternative.

[soccerguy315]

Assertion #6 (a, b, c): Change within DCI is needed, but not entirely the way they describe. I believe we have become closed and have not allowed individual corps to control more of the resources around them (local shows, media, web-based solutions, marketing). DCI has been trying to market for everyone, control sales of audio, video, and internet media for all the corps, and they have been charged with running a large national tour and have been doing so by using expensive facilities and services.

My view of DCI is that it is nothing more than a promoter of the entire activity, not a manager of it. They should schedule DCI-sanctioned shows only, including Finals, market those shows, sell tickets, and do their best to promote the entire activity. When it comes to the web, I know we all like a one-stop shop, and the DCI web site is nice. It's nice to have a general place where all fans can go, but managing all those assets (audio, video, media serves, and more) is realy not what they are there for. Distributing funds in an appropirate way to all the corps has become an issue.

I understand that there are those that wish for DCI to be more social or communal in its approach, but the ONLY way it will survive is if the corps are goverened by their repsective boards and that they operate in a manner best for them, not DCI. It's not DCI we need to stay healthy, it's the corps. DCI is simply a non-profit helper that governs judging and the larger shows (like regionals and finals).

What I would like to see: more free market. DCI can certainly sell DVDs and Audio CDs of Finals, since they do run the larger shows, but the corps (who have to pay for the copyrights to perform a lot of their music) should also have the right to record their performances and use those how they wish (within the law) to better promote their organization. This whole centralized web-site approach is not going to work, as nice as it seems. It will ultimately lead to weak and poorly run corps wanting even distribution of funds and other perks, and DCI is not in that business. It is not a charity. If a corps cannot function within its community and of its own organizational structure, then it can't tour and take part. For too many years DCI has chipped in to help struggling corps complete a tour. It got to the point where poor management was given a free ride when they should have been told to go home and face your organizations BOD.

To some extent, I think this is what Assertion #6 is stating, and they do seem to want DCI to scale back on its office and expenditures. But I think a more open market is really needed. They infer that promoting shows must only be done by either DCI or the corps. I would like this to be more open. Have DCI set the guidelines for operating a drum corps show, but allow others to promote and run shows. DCI should only run a few shows (regionals and finals). The corps can perhaps run 1 or 2 shows, mostly local. But other shows are needed. The more the better, and more money in the pockets of the corps. The benefit to an open market here is this: it's not your cash that operates the show, it opens a market for people who have some great ideas but who are not with a local corps or with DCI, and it allows school-systems to get in on the act, perhaps helping them to make some needed cash for their bands and the arts in general.

Here is my issue... DCI only does what the corps tell it to do. They all have a vote in how DCI is run. You can't blame "DCI" because DCI is just doing what the corps want. If the corps want something else, they have the ability to do that.

[3rd_Star_Brigade]

Here is my issue... DCI only does what the corps tell it to do. They all have a vote in how DCI is run. You can't blame "DCI" because DCI is just doing what the corps want. If the corps want something else, they have the ability to do that.

No, all Div I/World Class corps have a vote. Open Class is ignored and is not paid (to my knowledge).

[garfield]

You said "non-profits are not in the business of making money". You couldn't have more clear. Sorry you misspoke.

Oh...and show me where I said DCI isn't operating as an effective non-profit. Cause I missed it.

And I know a smidge about non-profits (having served on as an officer on the board of a little one). So...yeah.

I didn't mis-speak and I was clear.

When you say "I made money on that deal" are you speaking of the cash you swapped or your profit?

When someone speaks of a company being profitable, they say they "made money".

When someone asks if you "made money" last year, are they asking literally? Of course not. They're speaking about your general financial situation. Do you answer "Oh, I did great! I earned $100,000 and I spent $100,000!"

This reminds me of the guy standing on the corner, making change. Give him a dollar and he gives you four quarters. When someone asked him how he made money he answered "Oh, I make it up in volume".

So don't parse my words into "Sure, I made money. Got a printer going in my basement right now!" We both know what I was talking about and, in context, DCI made money up to 2008.

Oh, and 26 years in the investment/securities/economic analysis industry here. I know a thing or two about "making money".

And I'm on three non-profit foundation boards and run the investment portfolios for all three. And not "little" ones.

(sorry. I'm not advertising for a job)

(as in Pfffttt!)