Official DCP G7 Proposal Discussion Thread

[corpsband]

Cite your source.

Observation.

[BOBSMYTH]

Assertion #1: Drum Corps International is in danger fiscally.

This assertion is foundational to much of the rest of the entire proposal. You have to buy into this assumption and a lot of the rest flows.

TOO BAD - IT IS NOT TRUE.

Drum Corps International, Inc. is not in danger fiscally. Looking at the 990 reports through the years, there have been up years and there have been down years. I have it on very good authority that DCI had a solid year in 2009. This occurred in the midst of a very troubling economy that hurt almost all companies in this country.

You have to remember something - somewhere between 25% - 30% of every dollar DCI brings in gets passed through to the corps (with the majority of the money going to the G7 corps). In other words, DCI is not designed to make huge profits or to retain large reserves. DCI makes what it needs to put on the events and cover its other expenses - the rest goes right back out.

The only thing going on at the DCI organizational level that endangers the revenue and profit generating ability of DCI is the G7 proposal.

[Jeff Ream]

if we saw OC cast aside and realized AA or A corps were not getting a lot of work...and dying...yes

*Maybe* if this proposal were further along than it is now I'd agree. Suppose for a moment that instead of leaking the proposal had remained behind closed doors and that the only part that emerged from it for a vote were:

(a) additional top 8 shows under the proposed format

(b) two top 8 corps make the west coast swing every year

© the top 8 create some sort of outreach to HSMB as part of (a)

Would you be outraged?

[corpsband]

if we saw OC cast aside and realized AA or A corps were not getting a lot of work...and dying...yes

bah you cant even answer a question. your supposition was clearly "NOT" in my list.

[Baritone13]

This is my first post since November I believe. As such, I am a few days late on reading this information.

Anyone who remembers me probably knows where my loyalties lie as I have done a poor job concealing them.

Its very clear what's going on here. Slowly but surely the "big boys" are trying to eliminate the "lower tier" so that they can have more money and spotlight. There's really no way around it, that's what it is. Its survival of the fittest or richest or whatever you want to call it. There was a time when there were a plethora of corps, and slowly one by one, they started dying out, folding, until today where we have less than 50 competing in DCI (less than 25 in "World Class"). Exclusivity has been harder to maintain when only 10 corps are not in finals. That doesn't mean that those corps that aren't are any less talented or work any less than those in the top. Hell, the Blue Devils had the time in 2008 to take the whole corps to the movies to see the Dark Knight on opening night. A staff member (who marched Cadets) once told me a story about in 2000 or 2001 I believe, the Cadets, Crossmen, and Blue Devils were sharing a housing site. Cadets' wake up was at 7:30, Crossmen's was at 8, Blue Devils was at 9:30. It would seem as though everyone who isn't or wasn't a member of a non top-8 corps assumes that lower placement is directly correlated with a lack of work, a lack of worth, and a lack of talent. This is simply not the case. There was a thread a while ago about "Competitive Inertia" which basically said that once a corps started winning they kept winning by virtue of the fact that they had always won before. And thats what this proposal uses as justification for thinly veiled discrimination against corps that are generally in lower scoring ranges.

I was angered at the restructuring of classes proposal, but when I read the slide about distribution of votes I was openly insulted. Taxation without representation is a very familiar concept in America, something against which we founded our nation. I know that DCI has nothing to do with American government, but I know there are corps out there who feel disenfranchised. I'm glad Dan Acheson wrote that letter opposing the "egoism and self-righteousness" of the G7 corps directors.

Suffices to say, I and (I believe) many more people will stop marching if this passes. Unfortunately that will only give the G7 what they want.

Say what you want about me, I don't really care. I won't be posting anymore anyway.

[Richard]

*Maybe* if this proposal were further along than it is now I'd agree. Suppose for a moment that instead of leaking the proposal had remained behind closed doors and that the only part that emerged from it for a vote were:

(a) additional top 8 shows under the proposed format

(b) two top 8 corps make the west coast swing every year

© the top 8 create some sort of outreach to HSMB as part of (a)

Would you be outraged?

Saying that "it's only a proposal"doesn't carry a lot of weight with me because of the divisive nature of it. The damage has been done.

The way you write it, it's just extra shows on the schedule which is pretty mundane. There was no outrage over the Triple C show prior to the G7 debacle. The show format its not the sticking point here, the money/power grab is, and that's the part of the proposal that it's proponents choose to either ignore or downplay as something that can simply be removed in the next draft.

[soccerguy315]

I reserve the right to be outraged if and when the time comes. If a corps blasts its way through the ranks like Crown has done the past few years, and it's obvious that the corps belongs at the AAA level, then I think it will be just as obvious to us the fans if the board chooses to artificially keep that corps from joining the club. You seem to have already assumed that this will happen. I'm willing to wait and see.

fair enough. I only think it will happen because they put it in the powerpoint that they could do that. Why include the ability to do something that you are never going to do?

If Blue Stars finish top 8 this year, they will have earned their AAA spot on the field

Edited May 25, 2010 by soccerguy315

[Plan9]

Had to jump back in for this one...

In 2003 The Powers That Be (TPTB) said "We need amps"... and in 2004 there were amps. Many folks said "I don't like amps, and I don't think that I will still go to shows". Lots of people said that there were not that many people really leaving, that DCP was in no way an accurate microcosm of the DCI fan base, etc.

In 2007 TPTB said "We are moving finals to Indy for 10 years!"... and in 2008 they went to... well, ok, in 2009 they went to Indy. Many folks said "I don't like indoor shows" or "10 years in the same town???!?" or whatever. Lots of people said that they were being selfish or whatever.

In 2008 TPTB said "We need electronics!" and in 2009 there were electronics. Many more folks said "I don't like electronics, and I don't think that I will still go to shows." Lots of people said "DINOSAUR!!!!" and "Don't let the door hit you in the ### on the way out" etc.

(I could go on... you get the idea)

All along we were told that it was all good, that fans were flocking to the shows, that the activity was doing just fine, etc. Sorry, I have eyes. I SAW the crowds at QF in Indy, and I KNEW that we were in trouble. Now, amazingly, audiences are down. That was in the presentation, and therefore can be counted as at least one reason for the mess. Now Jeff may not be able to prove that a change or group of changes was directly responsible for the declining audience numbers, but Occam's Razor states that these changes most likely in fact DID result in the audience reduction.

Oh, and "every single change was voted on by the membership" <> every change was supported by the membership.

Actually, Occam's Razor states "that the simplest solution is usually the correct one"....i.e. Gas prices, ###### economy, DCI events lower on Mazlow's Hierarchy of Need (vs food and mortgage).

[jjeffeory]

"Corps are NOT the same. Those who drive sales through excellence and entertainment ability deserve to be rewarded."

Hey G7, blow it out your #####!

This smacks of self-preservation. Remember when corps used to help each other out instead of trying to stab each other in the back over a stupid competition.

I like to think what George Hopkins, he who last year stated when his corps was in 4th place, that The Pursuit of Happiness was more than the game on the football field, that it was about the brotherhood, entertainment, legacy, etc. thinks of his own idiosyncratic hypocrisy.

I guess George cares more about the paycheck to get him boarded on weekly flights and dozen Starbucks coffees from his YOUTH ORGANIZATION with the wine and golf fund raisers than he does about the kids in Open Class that have no other activity that keeps them safe and productive (SpiritNJ, Blue Saints, Dutch)

Yeah Cadets kiddos, your BAND director is a nice guy.

Also, Excellence and "entertainment ability" are two separate things. Excellence is "always" found in the G7 corps specifically.

"Entertainment ability" is inherent in ALL the corps. Why separate that out and give it a label? The implication is that the G7 corps have more "entertainment ability" than other corps, which is disingenuous at best.

Some of these corps fall somewhere other than the top in this category, imho, leading to "Entertainment", which is very much a subject hit or miss for all the corps.

[corpsband]

Saying that "it's only a proposal"doesn't carry a lot of weight with me because of the divisive nature of it. The damage has been done.

The way you write it, it's just extra shows on the schedule which is pretty mundane. There was no outrage over the Triple C show prior to the G7 debacle. The show format its not the sticking point here, the money/power grab is, and that's the part of the proposal that it's proponents choose to either ignore or downplay as something that can simply be removed in the next draft.

What evidence do you have to suggest that this isn't exactly what proposal may emerge from this whole hullabaloo ? This entire thing is *not* happening in a vacuum. The entire voting membership has to approve it. I'm not ignoring the controversial points but I also fully expect them to be as unacceptable to the rest of the membership as it is to most of DCP! It may in fact be possible that the entire proposal was pitched among the G7 as "we'll ask for the moon but realistically get a few things we want". Obviously that would have been a serious miscalculation added to this entire debacle.

My point is that many are viewing the proposal as some sort of manifesto instead of a starting point for discussion.

And if it's weened down to something that *is* acceptable to the membership then there's an excellent chance that most of DCP would feel that way too (well that's probably going too far given the reactionary atmosphere here!) .

I wholeheartedly agree that damage has been done. What I'm suggesting is that it need not have. If you're truly interested in what's best for drum corps, what's the best course to follow? Outrage? Or engagement?

Edited May 25, 2010 by corpsband