G7 - What is going to happen next?

[byline]

The letter writing idea stating that a person will withhold funds until the corps, Regiment in this case, stops supporting the G7 idea only works for people who have already been sending in donations over the years; a corps will feel the impact of lost revenue. However, a threat, or promise, by someone who has never donated anything will not have that much of an impact, because the corps was not counting on receiving any donation from that person anyway.

Except that the corps doesn't know that for a fact. A person who might have donated money, but decided not to because of this whole G7 fiasco, is money lost. I think even if it's only potential money, that has to get their attention in an economy where every dollar counts.

[DrillmanSop06]

If you're at the show and you're booing, you already paid the money and it's too late. ;)

[Stu]

Except that the corps doesn't know that for a fact. A person who might have donated money, but decided not to because of this whole G7 fiasco, is money lost. I think even if it's only potential money, that has to get their attention in an economy where every dollar counts.

I am not saying that people should not write the G7 directors. However, from a business stand point, a company that sells widgets for 1 dollar each, while marketing to all 300 million people in the United States is a goal, they cannot project a 300 million dollar revenue will be generated. Lets say that 2 million people are buying those widgets. It will hurt the bottom line of the company if 1 million of them spend their money elsewhere and the other 1 million write letters and stop buying widgets. It would be wise at that point for the company to attempt to appeal to those people. But if 2 million potential buyers who have never bought the things write that they will not buy them in the future, a) no real or projected revenue will be actually lost by the company, and b) the company still has 296 million other people in which to market to that are potential buyers.

On a different note, it appears to me that the problem stems from the fact that there have been some attendance drop concerns at DCI shows over the past few years. At first, DCI tried to gain back the audience that were for some reason leaving through titles like Summer Music Games or Marching Music Major League; and for many other reasons that marketing did not bring the attendance numbers back up. DCI then tried to appeal to band programs by switching to Bb horns; that did not bring up audience numbers. So, DCI then attempted to attract new audience members through marketing technological advancements; that also does not seem to be bringing the audience numbers back up with new fans, but it does seem to be irritating the traditional audience still attending shows. Therefore, DCI is in more of a marketing dilemma than a technological vs old school dilemma.

[garfield]

The letter writing idea stating that a person will withhold funds until the corps, Regiment in this case, stops supporting the G7 idea only works for people who have already been sending in donations over the years; a corps will feel the impact of lost revenue. However, a threat, or promise, by someone who has never donated anything will not have that much of an impact, because the corps was not counting on receiving any donation from that person anyway.

As thoughtful as your remarks are, you missed the boat on this one, Stu. PR's appeal clearly states they need NEW donors to join their club, etc. They need to pack their coffers with enough to spend the chunk they want to on a new food trailer and not end up at zero left over. If their existing fan base could have supported the purchases without new money they would have bought the kitchen by now.

Don't you think?

Another thought is the the PR board may understand that if they hang on the G7 coat-tails (and I'm sorry, they are. 9th place does not signify "elite" status as the G7 defines it), that their potential pool may take a hit and/or show attendance won't go up and/or income will go up. They're probably nervous about spending the money in case things don't go as planned.

I'd be trying to raise as much as possible now, too, if I was about to deplete my cushion to near zero, especially during these crazy times.

[garfield]

I am not saying that people should not write the G7 directors. However, from a business stand point, a company that sells widgets for 1 dollar each, while marketing to all 300 million people in the United States is a goal, they cannot project a 300 million dollar revenue will be generated. Lets say that 2 million people are buying those widgets. It will hurt the bottom line of the company if 1 million of them spend their money elsewhere and the other 1 million write letters and stop buying widgets. It would be wise at that point for the company to attempt to appeal to those people. But if 2 million potential buyers who have never bought the things write that they will not buy them in the future, a) no real or projected revenue will be actually lost by the company, and b) the company still has 296 million other people in which to market to that are potential buyers.

Stu, my friend, you're missing the point (and your numbers made my eyes twitch, and I'm a finance guy!).

The letter campaign is correct, but it needs to be directed at the NON-G7 corps. Someone here has described a letter campaign to be as one pushing an elephant in the a** with your pinkie, and that's probably true. I don't have any thoughts that I'm going to change Gibbs' or Hopp's mind; in fact, I'm so convinced that's useless that I'm not even going to try.

Instead, I've been amazed at the responses from non-G7 directors. I've written, now, 3 thoughtful emails discussing specific issues in the proposal. Not ranting. Just discussing, and being sensitive to their limited time by writing short sentences.

If the non-G7 directors know that the fans are behind them and won't abandon them if the G7 (or G3 or whatever) bolts, then that gives them the confidence to vote down the proposal and finally stand up to the "Elite".

Write to the non-G7 directors. If you use MS Word you can build the list once from the DCI website (takes 10 minutes) then type a thought and mail-merge blast it, personalized, to all the non-G7 at once. I've invited any of them to ask me to stop corresponding and none have done so. I've gotten dozens of responses, and offers to speak over the phone. Responses range from "I didn't know that..." to "I wasn't aware that is in the proposal. Let me check that out...". I've gotten "definitely against" to "Sadly, if they go there's nothing we can do."

If you want to do something proactive to save this thing, write the directors and don't make them form their idea based on just this year's souvie sales. Let them know that there are problems to be fixed and you like DCI's plan, and that you'll stop by their souvies at each show.

Give them the strength to say NO! to the G7 and stop this 20 year madness, and that you'll support them if they do.

You'd be surprised how positive response you get back.

On a different note, it appears to me that the problem stems from the fact that there have been some attendance drop concerns at DCI shows over the past few years. At first, DCI tried to gain back the audience that were for some reason leaving through titles like Summer Music Games or Marching Music Major League; and for many other reasons that marketing did not bring the attendance numbers back up. DCI then tried to appeal to band programs by switching to Bb horns; that did not bring up audience numbers. So, DCI then attempted to attract new audience members through marketing technological advancements; that also does not seem to be bringing the audience numbers back up with new fans, but it does seem to be irritating the traditional audience still attending shows. Therefore, DCI is in more of a marketing dilemma than a technological vs old school dilemma.

The dilemma is which do they market to, the old skool or the newbies and youngsters. They've been convinced to make all the changes you iterated and it's not worked, so this is just the pimple turning white and about to be popped. The reality is that all the changes that were to fix attendance didn't and this bru-ha-ha - that THEY created in their hubris - has the potential to pop the pimple and pull the curtain back on the Great OZ, while they (we) shout "I'll be dammed! The Emporor has no clothes!".

The more we can point that out to the wavering G7 and non-G7 corps the better.

Write the letter.

Then write again.

The sky ain't fallin'!

Edited July 3, 2010 by garfield

[Liahona]

Instead, I've been amazed at the responses from non-G7 directors. I've written, now, 3 thoughtful emails discussing specific issues in the proposal. Not ranting. Just discussing, and being sensitive to their limited time by writing short sentences.

If the non-G7 directors know that the fans are behind them and won't abandon them if the G7 (or G3 or whatever) bolts, then that gives them the confidence to vote down the proposal and finally stand up to the "Elite".

I really think that your reasoning here is a better idea than trying to take on Goliath. I honestly think unfortunately though that there will be a VERY SMALL percentage that will actually take the time to write. I think most folks are lazy at heart when it comes to doing work that they figure others will do for them instead. It WILL be unfortunate and can turn out to bring about a very unwanted outcome .

I propose that...IN JUST ONE POST..(if not done already) that someone should take the time to write a form letter with fill in the blanks...provide the main bullet points of the proposal for them to include and comment on and provide all the emails for the directors... I don't think people are mindless...JUST LAZY with myself included.

[Peel Paint]

Liahona, I understand where you're coming from in suggesting a form letter for the lazier fan, but the problem for me is that it's too easy for the recipient to disregard the same message sent by more than one person. Corps directors really won't take those as seriously. Better to put it in your own words. I know, I know, many people won't bother, but still, the easier you make it for multiple people to send the same message, the faster the corps directors can hit DELETE.

[garfield]

Liahona, I understand where you're coming from in suggesting a form letter for the lazier fan, but the problem for me is that it's too easy for the recipient to disregard the same message sent by more than one person. Corps directors really won't take those as seriously. Better to put it in your own words. I know, I know, many people won't bother, but still, the easier you make it for multiple people to send the same message, the faster the corps directors can hit DELETE.

Yeah, can't agree more.

It's gotta come from your heart.

Not a form letter.

The corps directors seem to want the engagement.

Just keep posting here and reminding people. It'll work.

[soccerguy315]

Honestly, I think this is the best -- and by far the most reasonable -- approach. Money talks, and your letter will reach the intended target, rather than harassing volunteers or booing young people who have nothing to do with this decision. If enough people do what you did, then I think the message will be heard loud and clear.

and taking the souvie ppl's time is also costing the corps money. And as you said, money talks.

[soccerguy315]

If you're at the show and you're booing, you already paid the money and it's too late. ;)

Nah, I will still very much enjoy the products on the field. The ticket to the show is money spent for my entertainment.