Official DCP G7 Proposal Discussion Thread

[dbc03]

In truth, if people like Hop didnt make DC into a career, then drum corps staffs might be able to teach corps that could pass the "elite".

Hah, what does this even mean? Are you blaming other corps failures on Hop's success?

[cybersnyder]

I think it's funny that Hop's blog:

http://hopsblog2.livejournal.com/413482.html

Where he quotes Lincoln in an obvious attempt to support the G7 action turns out to be fiction.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/l/lincoln-quotes.htm

How appropriate...

[audiodb]

Then teach me. I admit ignorance of the inner workings of Pioneer.

Wow. Maybe you should read first, and criticize later. Many people in this nation need to learn this....

My perspective is that of a fan. I see Pioneer finish in last place every year,

Every year? False.

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.

You need to get out more, then.

Maybe you consider drum corps to be a charity. I do not.

Doesn't matter what you think....it is a charity. Every single drum corps out there, including your usual example, Blue Devils, relies on charitable gaming and/or charitable giving for a substantial portion of their budget.

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.

So what? Are you implying that other corps are opposed to entertaining?

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.

I understand your viewpoint now. I retract my previous characterization of your attitude toward Pioneer as "ignorance". A more accurate term would be "bigotry". You presume that Pioneer, based on their competitive placement, doesn't try to entertain.

[IntheMood]

Here's a question I can't analyze in the p***-poor PPt, and it's a selfish one.

(sorry to repeat)

I help run a show, and next year it'll be my baby. I freely admit that we worked hard to get a G7 corps to our show (in fact, three of them!) specifically because of the draw that those names have. I'm not ashamed to say that they help us put BITS and pays the bills to "make money". (Duh)

My understanding is that if the G7 splits there's little (read: NO) chance that we'll get one of the G7 to perform at my show. (And yes I know that we can invite non-G7 and pay less to DCI and maybe still "make money" (Duh), but that's not the point. Here it is:)

We, and every Tour Event Partner paid $2700 to DCI to have them. I thought the corps gets all of that, but I've read here it's as low as $2400.

Well how many shows like ours (Wednesday night, typical HS stadium show) does a G7 corps do in the course of the season, 10? 20? I don't know, and correct me if wrong, but let's assume it's 15 stops for "local" shows throughout the season. At $2,400 each that's $36,000 over the season.

In the G7 don't the bigshots make $6800 per show but only do six shows?

So the revenue side is a wash in their vision and they expect to "make money" (Duh) by cutting the costs of DCI and outsourcing.

This is a lot so I'll stop here. Check my facts and thinking, please. I think this is going somewhere...

I do agree that DCI must start marking their brand to the masses in order for there to be long term sustainability. What I mean of brand is this. The NFL is the brand. the Colts are not. 98% of the colts players are NOT from the Indy area, yet they are very involved in the local community.

Most know what happens when one assumes. Well, that is the case with this proposal and many on these boards. One assumes that the average person knows the difference between the G7 Corps and the non G7 Corps. One assumes that the average person knows that BD has won many rings and the Glassmen has not won one yet. When one takes a new-be to a show for the first time. Do you say, well, the first Corps on are not that good so lets stay out in the lot not enter the show until the big boys are on. Or, the first couple of Corps or not that good just wait until the big boys preform. One has just made up that persons mind for them. What happens if that person happens to like the first Corps show better then the last Corps Show? Will they keep silent and not say anything because you told them right out of the gate that the first Corps show is just not that good because you know better then the average person what is a good show and a not so good of a show? I have 273 combat jumps under my belt(1500 feet or less) and without question my best jump was my first, because I did not know what to expect.

My theory is that the average person could care less what Corps is at a Show they just want to be entertained that is why a DC Show should be part of an event NOT the event. For example: BITD most of the weekend Shows that the Glassmen preformed at were part of the local community event that was going on. For most of those Shows not one of the big boys at the time were at the Show, yet for the most part the stands were filled.

If one has not noticed yet, we do indeed have a new Scott Stewart in our mist. His name is Bob Jacobs.

Dean

[audiodb]

First thought: Did 7 corps just hold a gun to DCI's head and say "Change or we leave?"

If they haven't said it yet, that will come soon enough.

Assertion #1: I agree that DCI is in some financial trouble. At one point I know they were in the "red" and don't know where they are now. They may bring in 10 million, but they spend too much on things they just do not need. I do not think they have done enough to make wise investments to help secure their future.

You don't know where they are now, but you agree they're in trouble? The sky is falling!

Assertion #2: Agree and Disagree here. I agree that we all love the "headliners." That is truly what can help sell a show. BUT it's not the only reason, and if we treat it that way, those G7 corps will be the ONLY corps left. You never step on your children, for one day they may grow up to be someone special. Carolina Crown recently, Spirit of Atlanta in the 70s, Star of Indiana in the 80s, and others have at one time been outsiders and up-and-comers. This whole G7 bond and the rules that keep corps in that group will make it almost impossible for new up-and-comers to take shape. Note to G7: I love your shows, but get over yourselves.

Assertion #3: Again, I agree that marketing the top corps is a way of helping to promote a show. I disagree that you should get more say so. Decisions need to be made by smart people who care about the activity. Moving the activity forward does not depend on the few, but it depends on the many who are willing to share and offer their help.

Assertion #4: I do like this. Over the years we have moved away from one of the benefits in having such variety, class structure. The average fan just doesn't get World Class vs Open Class. They easily understand A, AA, AAA becuse so many of our sports and band competitions have used the same method. It may sound mean if you think of it in certain terms, but in reality it is very fair and really helps all the units. I don't want fans in the stands thinking that an 80 piece corps was expected to compete with 150, or that a young and small 40-piece unit was expected to be judged in the same class with an 80 or 150. I DO NOT like the name associations (Tour of Champions for AAA). So if you're just a "National Touring" you will have a tough time marketing yourself against the mighty "Tour of Champions."

We'll have to agree to disagree here. As I study the activity's history, I grow increasingly opposed to stratification for the sake of stratification.

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.

I don't think that is an accurate characterization. DCI (and let's remember, DCI is the corps) looks at each of these items and assesses whether it is better to put their eggs in the DCI basket, or let individual corps do their own thing....or some combination of the two. More on this below....

Edited May 27, 2010 by audiodb

[audiodb]

My view of DCI is that it is nothing more than a promoter of the entire activity, not a manager of it.

Huh? The member corps run DCI. DCI can only do what the member corps allow it to do.

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.

It's both. And frankly, if an organization that runs a drum corps feels they are not served by their involvement in DCI, perhaps they should just explore other avenues in addition to (or instead of) DCI.

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.

The corps do have the right to record themselves, and a number of them are doing so. But if you're talking about recording themselves during DCI contests....that would not be possible. There's no time for each corps to set up their own A/V recording equipment with multiple cameras and a field-mic array (in the middle of a show). That would be silly. That's one reason why recording of contests is done through DCI.

Another is copyrights. While the corps get rights to arrange and perform their music, the rights to distribute physical recordings (mechanical license) are a separate matter. Again, it would be silly for the corps to be forced to do that separately and sell individual CDs/DVDs with only 11 minutes of content....that's why DCI compiles A/V products filled to capacity with multiple corps performances. It also makes sense that DCI be the licensee for these products, so that we don't lose access to legacy media as corps fold.

This whole centralized web-site approach is not going to work, as nice as it seems.

But that's not what it is. The corps do merchandising too. In fact, that's what is so ingenious about the Fan Network....they've created a service that is marketed through both DCI and individual corps' Web portals.

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.

What are you talking about? The Fan Network was set up to reward individual corps for their marketing efforts. APD sales were set up to return 100% of the money to the individual corps whose APD sold. Since then, as I understand it, the corps voted to change all that and divide the money per DCI revenue sharing, which is not equal distribution either....so I fail to see your point.

It is not a charity.

Actually, the drum corps are all charities. Not one of them survives without charitable gaming or charitable giving.

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.

Some G7 corps fall into that category. Whether your sink-or-swim approach is wiser or not, the G7 selection process is certainly not the right way to go about it. A better idea would be to apply the evaluation process to the existing world-class corps, instead of just the ones recently promoted from open-class.

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).

That's basically all they do now. DCI runs about 15 events, and other tour event partners run the other hundred. The market is open.

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.

I see school bands running shows, and/or teaming up with corps to run shows. That's already happening.

It's a musical competition. It's not broadway, nor is it a symphony concert. I want to yell and cheer at a show, I want entertaining shows, I want to root for my favorites, and I want a winner and placings and scores. The latter drives interest and dialog and debate, and all of that is good.

On that, we certainly agree.

[DC Guy]

JW ... you know of what you speak! :tongue: :tongue: :worthy: :worthy:

So I just read through the G7 document and I have so many thoughts running around in my head that I am not sure I can effectlvely communicate them at this time.

First thought: Did 7 corps just hold a gun to DCI's head and say "Change or we leave?"

Assertion #1: I agree that DCI is in some financial trouble. At one point I know they were in the "red" and don't know where they are now. They may bring in 10 million, but they spend too much on things they just do not need. I do not think they have done enough to make wise investments to help secure their future.

Assertion #2: Agree and Disagree here. I agree that we all love the "headliners." That is truly what can help sell a show. BUT it's not the only reason, and if we treat it that way, those G7 corps will be the ONLY corps left. You never step on your children, for one day they may grow up to be someone special. Carolina Crown recently, Spirit of Atlanta in the 70s, Star of Indiana in the 80s, and others have at one time been outsiders and up-and-comers. This whole G7 bond and the rules that keep corps in that group will make it almost impossible for new up-and-comers to take shape. Note to G7: I love your shows, but get over yourselves.

Assertion #3: Again, I agree that marketing the top corps is a way of helping to promote a show. I disagree that you should get more say so. Decisions need to be made by smart people who care about the activity. Moving the activity forward does not depend on the few, but it depends on the many who are willing to share and offer their help.

Assertion #4: I do like this. Over the years we have moved away from one of the benefits in having such variety, class structure. The average fan just doesn't get World Class vs Open Class. They easily understand A, AA, AAA becuse so many of our sports and band competitions have used the same method. It may sound mean if you think of it in certain terms, but in reality it is very fair and really helps all the units. I don't want fans in the stands thinking that an 80 piece corps was expected to compete with 150, or that a young and small 40-piece unit was expected to be judged in the same class with an 80 or 150. I DO NOT like the name associations (Tour of Champions for AAA). So if you're just a "National Touring" you will have a tough time marketing yourself against the mighty "Tour of Champions."

Assertion #5: Not sure how I feel here. Most shows are already long enough. People have lives. Now you want to provide more encores and after-show concerts. Usually, by the end of a show I am beat. My ears hurt, I have seen enough drum corps for a while, and I want to get something to eat and drive home. All this marketing by way of pre-show, post-show, mass-band, mass-corps kind of stuff just makes me thing you are turning to desperate measures to save your arse! Here's an idea: if there are 8 corps at the show, stay on schedule, shoot for being done in 2.5 hours, stop all the pre-show/post-show "Festivities" that have frankly caused thousands of young fans to spend more time in the parking lot because they came to see one or two shows ONLY. Get down to the facts and start the show on time, design fun and entertaining shows that capture the audience, announce scores and be done with it. I'll give you more money to give me a shorter contest with more entertaining shows and quicker scores. Oh, and let's get back to the winner takes all, meaning they get to play the ENCORE! Competition drives this activity in many ways, and we want to see the winner play the encore. There's your marketing of the best corps!!!

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.

General thoughts so far:

In the old days, it was fine when DCI held championships in Whitewater, WI or Ithica, NY. For some reason we have moved to bigger = better in all that we do. Marching 150+, championships in NFL stadiums, a need for schools with 3 practice fields and the best facilities, 1-month long spring training at colleges and universities where a lot of space, food, and transportation is necessary, and a national tour that simply does not allow corps to tour locally for a while before heading out of state. Local communities do not know what to support because they don't even know it exits (the corps).

What matters most is that there are healthy corps to compete. Who sponsors the show and what stadium it occurs in are not as important. Drum corps will always be around if there are healthy corps with entertaining shows. It's not a matter of them walking away from DCI, because they ARE DCI. The member corps govern DCI, and I understand they want a different governing structure. In that sense I agree with them, but how to get it and where it should take the activity is where I disagree. This whole notion of marketing the activity as a sport, or as Marching Music's Major League, is not working. It's a musical competition. It's not broadway, nor is it a symphony concert. I want to yell and cheer at a show, I want entertaining shows, I want to root for my favorites, and I want a winner and placings and scores. The latter drives interest and dialog and debate, and all of that is good. Saving your arse with pre-show and post-show massed-band-type encores and feel-good "We are the world" artsy fartsy let's all support the arts crap is just a bunch of cheese-ball icing on a cake that hasn't been cooked!!!!

Freud said "Know theyself."

Who are you? A drum and bugle corps

What do you do? March and play music

What do you wish to accomplish? Teach music and drill, compete, try to win and beat our rivals.

Market that!

More on the rest of this G7 document later.

JW

[jjeffeory]

Oh yea, audiodb. I'm with ya on this! Great responses.

Wow. Maybe you should read first, and criticize later. Many people in this nation need to learn this....

Every year? False.

You need to get out more, then.

Doesn't matter what you think....it is a charity. Every single drum corps out there, including your usual example, Blue Devils, relies on charitable gaming and/or charitable giving for a substantial portion of their budget.

So what? Are you implying that other corps are opposed to entertaining?

I understand your viewpoint now. I retract my previous characterization of your attitude toward Pioneer as "ignorance". A more accurate term would be "bigotry". You presume that Pioneer, based on their competitive placement, doesn't try to entertain.

[jwillis35]

I think it's funny that Hop's blog:

http://hopsblog2.livejournal.com/413482.html

Where he quotes Lincoln in an obvious attempt to support the G7 action turns out to be fiction.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/l/lincoln-quotes.htm

How appropriate...

Actually, I didn't know that either. I guess I always thought Lincoln said that. In either case, it's still a good set of quotes and it certainly is at the core of a free enterprise. "You can't strengthen the poor by weakening the rich" is a very true statement.

Clearly, the G7 seem to want is more control and there seems to be all kinds of reasons they have banded together and developed this document. All the member corps already control DCI, but now you have 7 corps that want even more control. And if, and when, another corps can break into the Tour of Champions class (3 years in the top 8) then they, too, can have more control. Unfortunately, I see this as a model for the rich weakening the poor. I believe the G7 are trying to strengthen their position in the overall activity, hoping this will lead to change and growth and prosperity for DCI. But I also believe that this could hurt the middle pack (AA class) and the smaller corps (A class and Open Class). They need to be careful.

If a corps were to be of sound finances, great management, and strong competitive balance within the governing structure of DCI, a structure they have helped to setup, then they have done well for themselves and can be envied (yes), but it would be wrong for us to say "give the other corps some of your money and talent and staff." And I am not sure this has ever happened, just using it as an example. But if 7 of those corps decide to overhaul the system to meet their needs first, then that control that they wrestle from the other corps can ultimately hurt the weak. It's fine when the strong become that way on their own, it's another thing when they must alter a system to become stronger at the risk of hurting others.

Now having said that...

There are some very good ideas in that proposal. The idea of classes (A, AA, AAA) is solid. I have not liked the Open Class vs. World Class idea, but they need to keep it at A, AA, AAA. I do NOT like the idea of attatching names to each class, like National Touring corps or Tour of Champions. There are corps in the Tour of Champions class that have never been CHAMPIONS. But I do like having general classes without the descriptors. Having winners in 3, maybe even 4, classes allows us to hand out more trophies and to judge each class of corps differently and perhaps more appropriately for their level and ability.

The idea of class AAA shows (Tour of Champions shows) is OK as long as there are not many of them. This would be somewhat like the Masters in Tennessee at MTSU. I think only the top 8 go to that show, but it's the top 8 as they stand from the present year. You can't do too much of that because you have to give the AA corps a chance to knock-off the AAA corps. What needs changed here is for that 3-year rule to be dropped. If you finish in the top 8 then you are AAA or Tour of Champions for that year and the next until such time that your average points (say after 1 or 2 regionals) no longer have you among the top 8. But all corps should have a realistic shot at moving up. This is probably one of the main sticking points of this document. All of us want to see every corps have a chance to move up and better its ranking, as well as better it's financial structure.

I disagree that just because you finish top 7 or 8 that you should have more say at the Board of Directors table. The governance structure of DCI does need some work, but I would go in a totally different direction. That's another argument.

I hate the idea of the Tour of Champions encores and mass-corps performances and what not. That whole thing was nice in 2004 when corps that REALLY have been champions at one time or another toured out west and did some mass-corps performances and some stage productions. But doing this every year doesn't make sense to me. For the most part, it takes away attention from the other corps (A, AA). It takes a boat-load of time to do these things, and corps really just want to focus on their shows and competition in the summer.

Competition is at the CORE of what this activity is about. Market that! All this extra junk is pointless. I want one ENCORE only after a show, and it should be from the winner.

I do like that they want to move shows along, and that is good. I often feel that events are just too long for the average fan, so adding more marketing, encores, mass-corps performances and the like just does not sound fun. I believe the average fan wants to see entertaining shows, competition, scores, and one encore, and they want it in about 2 to 2.5 hours. We all have lives. The mass-corps playing of America the Beautiful at Finals is nice because it's a one-time thing for a special event.

There was a lot of debate the other night about how DCI should use its finances and what kind of financial shape it is in. I honestly have no idea of their financial health at this time. I think the ESPN deal hurt them for several years when they pulled out but still had to pay some $200,000 for that 3rd year in order to pay off the contract. I personally think we have too many shows at big stadiums. Stadium cost is an issue; and how we marekt, and to whom we market, is an issue.

[audiodb]

That's the point! The Cadets have been one of the few corps to really do their own thing (and they have been attacked for it), but because of it they have been relatively healthy and stable.

Earlier in this topic, someone mentioned that it was the Cadets that required a loan from DCI to make it through 2007. Perhaps a better example of health and stability could be found.