Your DCI Revisions - A G7-Related Discussion

[MikeN]

(Disclaimer - this post may be sometimes dry and contain big words. Personal attacks and off-topic posts will be immediately removed, especially ones aimed at members with no contribution to the topic. Again, we're going to moderate the heck out of this topic to keep it on track.)

In all of our G7 discussions to date, a number of fairly well-thought-out alternatives have been proposed in piecemeal fashion, as well as some well-reasoned critiques and defenses of both the status quo and the G7 proposal.

After analyzing the proposal itself fairly closely, and after discussions with folks of a number of viewpoints, it seems like the following questions are the ones that the proposal was/is trying to address -

1. What is DCI?

2. How should DCI be governed/run?

3. Who is the intended audience?

4. How should the corps be tiered/classified?

5. How should the tour be structured?

The purpose of this thread is to lay out an outlined discussion on the real challenges facing DCI. So, present your own proposal and/or thoughts in this thread, addressing those 5 points. You can be as general or specific as you feel you need to. Heck, you can even add which of these you think the current system addresses right now. But let's use this outline as the framework for the discussion.

If you don't feel like posting your proposal directly, feel free to send me your thoughts at mike@drumcorpsplanet.com - I'll be happy to post them, either with or without your name.

Hopefully, by outlining the discussion in this fashion, we might identify either common points of intersection in everyone's thinking, or the fundamental conflicts or barriers that are preventing a consensus.

Mike

[Jeff Ream]

intended audience...keep the existing while adding to it with kids. trying to become American Idol will not work.

current OC/WC model is fine for how corps should be classified

touring...a more regional flavor early on, as it used to be to not only help keep costs down, but also as a way to rebuild local markets not just for the corps, but markets lost forever with the push to nationalization.

how it is governed....competitive placement is the last way to determine it. I think you need a mix of corps of all levels..not just competitively, but also fiscally. OC corps should get some money for their tour, and people with outside marketing experience should be on the Board. A wise man once said the "the best thing about DCI is the directors run it. The worst thing about DCI is the directors run it....so getting some outside voices who can help with marketing, advertising and other areas would be key. Too often corps directors with no experience in many areas that arent running a drum corps are trying to run an organization that requires those skills.

[MikeN]

I'll start by answering my own questions. (And I apologize in advance for the scattershot nature of my responses.) This would be my proposal -

1. What is DCI? This is an important question to answer first, as it colors all subsequent discussions. The status quo is driven by DCI as the ambassador of the "drum corps" activity, in which DCI tries to manage events, run a full-time merchandise store, preserve the history of the activity, etc. The G7 proposal states (p18)

"Drum Corps International is an association and the actual association .. DCI … is a service center. DCI should not be the focus of our concerns and decisions. The member corps are essential and critical to who we are and where we will be."

The hybrid concept that I would propose is that DCI is the sanctioning body for contests and a World Championship. Nothing more, nothing less. I would also propose that DCI's member corps should be made up of those units that attend a regional or Championship and pay member dues. This is a clear philosophical shift, and places a great deal more responsibility on the individual corps themselves. In many ways, this echoes the G7 call for a leaner, meaner DCI. Nowhere in that mission does it call for DCI to be the caretaker or gatekeeper for the entire activity, any more than Bands of America represents the entirety of marching band in America.

2. How should DCI be governed/run? This is where my own thoughts start to creep in. The two extremes currently represented are the status quo, with a 7-director, 3 outsider Executive Board and a full membership voting on major issues. (Yes, I’m simplifying.) The G7 would like the top 7 with two votes, the rest with 1. Honestly, I would like to see a 9 member board - 3 corps directors and 6 outside businesspeople, with the authority to appoint a strong Executive Director with expanded powers. I think the Board would still need to vote on major changes (including rule changes), but I would also submit that if 3 corps directors can convince 6 business folks that a change is necessary, then more power to them.

As for DCI office functions, I believe DCI should run the business of drum corps guided strictly by its (my proposed) mission statement - what helps DCI put on contests and Championship events? I am actually in favor of the G7 proposal in this case - I think DCI should absolutely outsource as much of the work it shoulders under this plan as possible. But I also think that outsourcing those functions is guided by its mission, which is not to simply subsidize member units for providing outsourced services. YEA!’s event management company, CrownTickets and System Blue will have to compete in a marketplace in order to provide services for DCI. In all likelihood, they can provide it for cheaper to DCI than a private company, and that is to both the corps and DCI’s advantage. However, DCI clearly needs to profit from the arrangement. That's something the G7 proposal does not explicitly cover, and a point I think should be essential in any compromise agreement.

As for Dan and his staff, it again comes down to the dollar - how many people does it take to get the job done. End of story. If Box 5 can manage your merchandise, in-house staff decreases. Same with tickets, clinics, etc.

3. Who is the target audience? Surprisingly, I agree again with the G7 proposal, and my compromise proposal would be to adopt it. Band students, winter guard kids, indoor percussion members – these people are absolutely the target audience. 72% of DCI World Class marching members right now are full time college students. These are kids who have grown up in scholastic marching situations – it is what it is. These are the audience, first and foremost. While it would obviously be nice to add the general public to our bleachers, DCI – and drum corps – will not survive without the marching band kids, and there is nothing that can be said or done that will change that. DCI is peopled with scholastic musicians – that is the core audience that needs to be targeted. Legacy fans are indeed nice, but a youth activity whose overall attendance remains static and whose average age fluctuates between late 30’s and mid-40’s is not one that is growing. And again, with ¾ of DCI marching members currently in college, it just makes sense to go after the high schoolers – with enough repeated exposure to DCI, these are the band kids who will be trying out a few years down the road, and who will remember DCI even after when it comes time to attend DCI events or buy DCI (or corps) merchandise. Which, you will remember, is the goal – for DCI to put on shows and a championship for its member groups.

4. How should the corps be tiered? Again surprisingly, I agree with the G7 proposal. It’s hardly a secret who the championship contenders are. Blue Devils, Santa Clara, Cavaliers, Cadets. Occassionally Madison Scouts and Phantom. Only twice in the entire lives of current marching members has that even been challenged, and Star of Indiana left almost 20 years ago. Yes, there is a separate class of drum corps, and it's been around for a long, long time. I have no issue reclassifying these corps as Division I, Triple-A, whatever you want to call them. (Though it is ironic we left the Division 1/2/3 names behind on a vote from the same folks who are trying to put in a AAA/AA/A system...) I love the Colts. I love Boston. But I also don't think they're going to even be competitive with the Blue Devils this year.

That said, I would propose a relegation system similar to soccer on a 2-year cycle that allows for divisional movement. I admit, I'm still thinking this through - how much weight should DCI give to financials? On one hand, you would like to ensure that you're admitting corps that are going to be around for the long haul. On the other, DCI in this proposal is in the business of putting on shows, not telling individual corps how to run their business. (I admit it - my brain was running out of steam on this point.)

5. How should the tour be structured? I think that DCI, in recognition of the escalating barriers facing touring productions, should put on larger shows, less frequent shows and restrict touring for some corps. In some ways I do agree with the G7 "circus comes to town" mentality - I think DCI would be best served by making their regionals the centerpiece of mini-tours that corps can utilize on a drop in / drop out basis.

This has extra benefits for part-time, local and new Open corps. To use an example from my own backyard, allow our newest corps Genesis the opportunity to do a 1 week Texas tour culminating in San Antonio, or a two-week tour that leads to Denver one week and San Antonio the next. They’d be playing 8 shows instead of 20-30, but members would also be paying significantly less money. This would have the added benefit of keeping corps performing in regionally “local” environments which will allow for deeper roots to develop, and provide a lower entry point for new organizations to build. The only way we will see new drum corps is… well… if there are new drum corps.

For the larger groups, I see no problem with them performing these mini tours in order, forming a summer that’s more or less what they see now. I also agree with the G7, surprisingly, that the big corps *should* be putting on a show on Friday night. Ideally, I think (and I’m lifting from early in the threads) a parade in each regional town on Friday before the contest is a brilliant idea, much keeping with the “circus coming to town” production. I would propose that those Fridays be devoted to a daytime parade (with as many corps as can fit in within a time limit) and a night-time standstill or indoor concert, then Saturdays for a regional competition (whose start time should be adjusted earlier, not later) with intermissions between classes – 3 separate shows, if you will.

(I would eschew indoor stadiums altogether – not for acoustics, but cost. Much cheaper to rent a 30,000 seat stadium for a 10k-spectator regional - or a 25k Finals - than a 60,000 seat dome. I think DCI has really outspent itself over the years to get stadiums that look pretty, but are way over the top for what is needed. Look at 2008 - Bloomington's IU stadium was a relative dump compared to Foxboro or Lucas Oil. But it had good parking, reasonable acommodations, a pretty setting and a completely full home side, which set up one of the most emotional finishes DCI ever saw.)

Especially with this emphasis on regional competition, corps could adopt a "home base" for the week and travel from there. Just to use the Texas example again, Austin is 3 hours from Dallas, 3 hours from Houston and 90 minutes from San Antonio. Arranging regional hubs around a central point might allow corps to save significantly on travel.

I rather like the idea of a top division season-long Race for the Championship. You want the fans to become invested in the entire season and multiple regionals - not just one night in August. Honestly, though, I could care less about instrumentation and judging - I'll take flak for this, but I think that's the *least* of the problems facing DCI right now. I do think, however, that any idea that gets the fans more invested in the process, whether it be season standings, text votes or fan favorites - is a *good* thing.

So, there's my proposal. I apologize for the fragmented nature of the thoughts - in many ways, I'm still clarifying in my own head how I would try to sell it. I'd clearly like to hear your thoughts, ideas or counter proposals, though - that's why the thread is here.

Mike

[MikeN]

intended audience...keep the existing while adding to it with kids. trying to become American Idol will not work.

First, thanks for the thoughts! Second, sorry - gotta call you out here. Of course "adding kids" is the goal, but attendance is flat - how would you do it?

how it is governed....competitive placement is the last way to determine it. I think you need a mix of corps of all levels..not just competitively, but also fiscally. OC corps should get some money for their tour, and people with outside marketing experience should be on the Board. A wise man once said the "the best thing about DCI is the directors run it. The worst thing about DCI is the directors run it....so getting some outside voices who can help with marketing, advertising and other areas would be key. Too often corps directors with no experience in many areas that arent running a drum corps are trying to run an organization that requires those skills.

See my proposal - I agree with you that DCI needs more outside experience. But I'd say about pay for OC, where's the money going to come from? They're not generating a ton right now - folks just aren't attending. How do you adjust for that? Reduced payouts?

Mike

[Glenn426]

Since I havent posted my thoughts on the G7 proposal itself anywhere else Ill go ahead and post here in this non-flame environment.

I think the main component of the G7 proposal is fixed around the Talent (G7 corps) being unhappy with the amount of money that DCI (Management / Owners) is bringing in compared to the amount of money that the corps bring in.(All of this screams to me of the Players strike in MLB or the proposed Standoff in the NFL in 2011.) And the G7 corps got together and thought, Hmm how could we justify getting more money for what we do, without seeming unfair or greedy. And they came up with the Model of having the 7 corps do "special" Value-added shows where their profits for doing the shows are almost 4 times the amount they would regularly get from a normal show. And to maximize the amount of money they get from these shows, they limit it to only the 7 corps. Justifying it by saying that they are the top talent and the top draw, and other corps would not attract the maximum amount of people. (read; MONEY)

The G7, also unhappy with DCI, about the amount of money they made, and other issues like Indianapolis, look to severly decrease the operational power that DCI has. Proposing to cut non-essential staff, and bacially "trim the fat" off of DCI to the point that they are doing the bare minumum operational things that the G7 would not be able to handle themselves. All in the name of justifying that DCI is "wasting money" that could be going to the Corps.

The proposals of having 2 votes per G7 corps is to protect themselves after this happens, from the other non-G7 corps who after looking at their 990's and looking the G7's 990's would scream foul. But at that point having relinquished their power to the G7 would be powerless to do anything about it.

________________________________________________________________________________

_

Being that my views of the reasoning behind the G7 proposal, Here are my proposed changes;

---DCI does in fact need to reason and negotiate with ALL of the corps to insure that the "talent" remain happy and a viable/ functioning organizations. BUt it is not as big an increase as the G7 have proposed. If they are rumored to each earn a reported $2,400 for each show I say increase that by $1,100 to $3,500 per each show for each corp.

--- Dci Regionals (Saturday) shows change format to become a Value added events. Regionals become the big draw, and the Must see shows. To include, Fan freindly Demostrations in the Parking lot. Some planned hands on exhibitions in the stands where small samples from the corps interact with the fans. But this includes all corps. All corps understanding that they need to be "more fan Friendly" on these Saturdays. And each corps provides at least "value added" Product to the saturday show. (exp. BD Drums and allows and interactive session where fans all able to drum alongside "the line". The cadets allow fans to do a visual Basics Block with the fans.) Each corps are creative and get to showcase something that is "special" about their corps. All of these activities are in the lot, in the stands, during intermission. So there is a show, away from the field. hence value added. Corps would also get a higher cut for each regional. ($4000)

--- and Finally, Corps based on their finishing order get "compensation" in decreasing value from 1st place.

1st $15,000

2nd $12,500

3rd $10,000

4th $7,500

5th $6,000

etc..

This is just an example (values be higher or lower, based on what is feasible for DCI)

With this model the Corps are rewarded for finishing higher and excellence. But it is spread out around all of the corps. (similar to the NFL, where the winners of the Super Bowl receive major compensation)

Following this business model I think all points are addressed that the G7 have. The Fans get a closer experience and Regionals become mega shows where the majority of the "band" audience attends. THe corps get a bigger piece of the pie, Therefore allowing the corps to relief some financial stress while maybe being able to lower corps fees?? And the "talent" and excellence are rewarded.

Everyone is happy, Everything is fair, Drum corps continues to be something that everyone can enjoy and cheerish and support.

[Jeff Ream]

First, thanks for the thoughts! Second, sorry - gotta call you out here. Of course "adding kids" is the goal, but attendance is flat - how would you do it?

See my proposal - I agree with you that DCI needs more outside experience. But I'd say about pay for OC, where's the money going to come from? They're not generating a ton right now - folks just aren't attending. How do you adjust for that? Reduced payouts?

Mike

how would I keep the current attendance or reach out to some of those lost ( I realize you wont get them all back)?

current audience, I would say enough changes for now. let things settle. maybe for some of the older audience...gasp...repeal a few changes.

DCI did a great job trying to retain those core fans from the lows of the mid 90's while adding to it in the late 90'searly part of the decades. But...now if attendance is flat...maybe it's time to own up and admit all of the changes werent necessarily the best. It's ok to say you're wrong..and DCI ( aka the corps) doesn't do that well, if at all...look at Lucas Oil.

as for OC generating...well..no offense, but if you keep them stuck in places like Nebraska or the upper reaches of Michigan, yeah you won't generate any money. and yes, I realize OC can do a lot more to market themselves, but a little love from DCI wouldn't hurt. And, IMO, more could appear at WC shows...you want to get them exposure, there's a great way to do so.

[Plan9]

I'll start by answering my own questions. (And I apologize in advance for the scattershot nature of my responses.) This would be my proposal -

1. What is DCI? This is an important question to answer first, as it colors all subsequent discussions. The status quo is driven by DCI as the ambassador of the "drum corps" activity, in which DCI tries to manage events, run a full-time merchandise store, preserve the history of the activity, etc. The G7 proposal states (p18)

The hybrid concept that I would propose is that DCI is the sanctioning body for contests and a World Championship. Nothing more, nothing less. I would also propose that DCI's member corps should be made up of those units that attend a regional or Championship and pay member dues. This is a clear philosophical shift, and places a great deal more responsibility on the individual corps themselves. In many ways, this echoes the G7 call for a leaner, meaner DCI. Nowhere in that mission does it call for DCI to be the caretaker or gatekeeper for the entire activity, any more than Bands of America represents the entirety of marching band in America.

2. How should DCI be governed/run? This is where my own thoughts start to creep in. The two extremes currently represented are the status quo, with a 7-director, 3 outsider Executive Board and a full membership voting on major issues. (Yes, I’m simplifying.) The G7 would like the top 7 with two votes, the rest with 1. Honestly, I would like to see a 9 member board - 3 corps directors and 6 outside businesspeople, with the authority to appoint a strong Executive Director with expanded powers. I think the Board would still need to vote on major changes (including rule changes), but I would also submit that if 3 corps directors can convince 6 business folks that a change is necessary, then more power to them.

As for DCI office functions, I believe DCI should run the business of drum corps guided strictly by its (my proposed) mission statement - what helps DCI put on contests and Championship events? I am actually in favor of the G7 proposal in this case - I think DCI should absolutely outsource as much of the work it shoulders under this plan as possible. But I also think that outsourcing those functions is guided by its mission, which is not to simply subsidize member units for providing outsourced services. YEA!’s event management company, CrownTickets and System Blue will have to compete in a marketplace in order to provide services for DCI. In all likelihood, they can provide it for cheaper to DCI than a private company, and that is to both the corps and DCI’s advantage. However, DCI clearly needs to profit from the arrangement. That's something the G7 proposal does not explicitly cover, and a point I think should be essential in any compromise agreement.

As for Dan and his staff, it again comes down to the dollar - how many people does it take to get the job done. End of story. If Box 5 can manage your merchandise, in-house staff decreases. Same with tickets, clinics, etc.

3. Who is the target audience? Surprisingly, I agree again with the G7 proposal, and my compromise proposal would be to adopt it. Band students, winter guard kids, indoor percussion members – these people are absolutely the target audience. 72% of DCI World Class marching members right now are full time college students. These are kids who have grown up in scholastic marching situations – it is what it is. These are the audience, first and foremost. While it would obviously be nice to add the general public to our bleachers, DCI – and drum corps – will not survive without the marching band kids, and there is nothing that can be said or done that will change that. DCI is peopled with scholastic musicians – that is the core audience that needs to be targeted. Legacy fans are indeed nice, but a youth activity whose overall attendance remains static and whose average age fluctuates between late 30’s and mid-40’s is not one that is growing. And again, with ¾ of DCI marching members currently in college, it just makes sense to go after the high schoolers – with enough repeated exposure to DCI, these are the band kids who will be trying out a few years down the road, and who will remember DCI even after when it comes time to attend DCI events or buy DCI (or corps) merchandise. Which, you will remember, is the goal – for DCI to put on shows and a championship for its member groups.

4. How should the corps be tiered? Again surprisingly, I agree with the G7 proposal. It’s hardly a secret who the championship contenders are. Blue Devils, Santa Clara, Cavaliers, Cadets. Occassionally Madison Scouts and Phantom. Only twice in the entire lives of current marching members has that even been challenged, and Star of Indiana left almost 20 years ago. Yes, there is a separate class of drum corps, and it's been around for a long, long time. I have no issue reclassifying these corps as Division I, Triple-A, whatever you want to call them. (Though it is ironic we left the Division 1/2/3 names behind on a vote from the same folks who are trying to put in a AAA/AA/A system...) I love the Colts. I love Boston. But I also don't think they're going to even be competitive with the Blue Devils this year.

That said, I would propose a relegation system similar to soccer on a 2-year cycle that allows for divisional movement. I admit, I'm still thinking this through - how much weight should DCI give to financials? On one hand, you would like to ensure that you're admitting corps that are going to be around for the long haul. On the other, DCI in this proposal is in the business of putting on shows, not telling individual corps how to run their business. (I admit it - my brain was running out of steam on this point.)

5. How should the tour be structured? I think that DCI, in recognition of the escalating barriers facing touring productions, should put on larger shows, less frequent shows and restrict touring for some corps. In some ways I do agree with the G7 "circus comes to town" mentality - I think DCI would be best served by making their regionals the centerpiece of mini-tours that corps can utilize on a drop in / drop out basis.

This has extra benefits for part-time, local and new Open corps. To use an example from my own backyard, allow our newest corps Genesis the opportunity to do a 1 week Texas tour culminating in San Antonio, or a two-week tour that leads to Denver one week and San Antonio the next. They’d be playing 8 shows instead of 20-30, but members would also be paying significantly less money. This would have the added benefit of keeping corps performing in regionally “local” environments which will allow for deeper roots to develop, and provide a lower entry point for new organizations to build. The only way we will see new drum corps is… well… if there are new drum corps.

For the larger groups, I see no problem with them performing these mini tours in order, forming a summer that’s more or less what they see now. I also agree with the G7, surprisingly, that the big corps *should* be putting on a show on Friday night. Ideally, I think (and I’m lifting from early in the threads) a parade in each regional town on Friday before the contest is a brilliant idea, much keeping with the “circus coming to town” production. I would propose that those Fridays be devoted to a daytime parade (with as many corps as can fit in within a time limit) and a night-time standstill or indoor concert, then Saturdays for a regional competition (whose start time should be adjusted earlier, not later) with intermissions between classes – 3 separate shows, if you will.

(I would eschew indoor stadiums altogether – not for acoustics, but cost. Much cheaper to rent a 30,000 seat stadium for a 10k-spectator regional - or a 25k Finals - than a 60,000 seat dome. I think DCI has really outspent itself over the years to get stadiums that look pretty, but are way over the top for what is needed. Look at 2008 - Bloomington's IU stadium was a relative dump compared to Foxboro or Lucas Oil. But it had good parking, reasonable acommodations, a pretty setting and a completely full home side, which set up one of the most emotional finishes DCI ever saw.)

Especially with this emphasis on regional competition, corps could adopt a "home base" for the week and travel from there. Just to use the Texas example again, Austin is 3 hours from Dallas, 3 hours from Houston and 90 minutes from San Antonio. Arranging regional hubs around a central point might allow corps to save significantly on travel.

I rather like the idea of a top division season-long Race for the Championship. You want the fans to become invested in the entire season and multiple regionals - not just one night in August. Honestly, though, I could care less about instrumentation and judging - I'll take flak for this, but I think that's the *least* of the problems facing DCI right now. I do think, however, that any idea that gets the fans more invested in the process, whether it be season standings, text votes or fan favorites - is a *good* thing.

So, there's my proposal. I apologize for the fragmented nature of the thoughts - in many ways, I'm still clarifying in my own head how I would try to sell it. I'd clearly like to hear your thoughts, ideas or counter proposals, though - that's why the thread is here.

Mike

Mike,

Great complete thoughts here. I don't have time this afternoon to reply point by point, but I may have time tonight.

I just would hope that responders treat this thread as it was intended, a disection of the questions asked in first post. I think, like Mike's response, if we treat the parts of the proposal and the questions Mike poses as separate components...we stand a good chance of analyzing this beast.

If this turns into yet another rant thread, we have lost an opportunity to get clarity.

Thanks Mike.

Edited May 27, 2010 by Plan9

[bawker]

If this turns into yet another rant thread,

That won't happen.

[DC Guy]

1. What is DCI?

Historically, DCI has been a group of corps directors deciding on tour planning, judging, and marketing. It has evolved to an organization that puts a majority of its effort into promoting it's headliner shows (i.e., Indy, San Antonio, Atlanta, etc.)

2. How should DCI be governed/run?

DCI, IMHO, should be restructured to remove all corps directors from the Board of Directors. It should be run by a board who is passionate about the drum corps activity, has a mix of the business skills that are required to run a multi-million dollar organization, and no ties to any of the participating corps.

3. Who is the intended audience?

Parents/family/friends of the participants. Drum Corps Alumni. Other musicians (i.e., marching bands).

4. How should the corps be tiered/classified?

1) Nationwide touring corps; 2) Regional touring corps; and 3) local corps.

5. How should the tour be structured?

Only those that are able to safely and can afford to tour nationwide will be allowed in the Nationwide circuit. Corps that can only afford to safely travel in their region will be allowed to join the Regional tours. All other corps should be restricted to a reasonable distance for their shows.

[David Hill]

I appreciate the intent of this thread a great deal. Mike, I hope that, even in this take, that it is appropriately serious.

What if the G7 proposal went through the way-back machine?