So it's the big week

[soccerguy315]

I have now downloaded and read through the G7 Proposal. Looks like I was not far off in my assumptions. I used some similar language regarding 'pay for level of effort' in the OP.

The thing that surprises me a bit is the degradation and outright exclusion of some very good drum corps (BC, BK, BS, GM, Spirit, and so on) from TOC. The proposal states in numbers that the AAA corps are >4x more valuable than the AA ($12500/$3000) who are only worth 1.25x ($3000/$2400) that of the class A corps. Presumably this is because of all the coordination and effort the top seven will have in putting together their TOC production.

The tone of the proposal is much like an ultimatum. "If approved... If not...", "Must happen... If not..."

I understand the motivation but don't believe for a minute that the approach is in the absolute best interest of the activity. I would venture that this plan will further separate those who are the best from the greater drum corps community and pretty much squash any real competitive threat from those outside that exclusive club.

I agree.

I think your perspective on branching out beyond the non-profit may be limited. An alumni group is not even in the field of view for what I was discussing. I am thinking of something that goes above and beyond the BLAST! template. With the talent available in the G7 corps, they should be able to dream something up that we have not even thought of yet.

Near term, I think you are correct. Long term maybe not. BLAST! did not happen overnight either. There is some opportunity to at least explore the option.

I would be fine if they want to explore another performance opportunity or a BLAST like operation. However, I feel strongly that this should not come at the expense of the corps that wish to continue in DCI.

When Star wanted to leave, they left. They didn't demand more money from Boston/Troopers/Pioneer/Blue Stars so they could start a new project.

[Stu]

So my question is: What do you think the G7 will do to invigorate OC, support them in their mission, and help them continue to "outperform" in their missions in the same way BD "outperforms" in theirs? (another hat tip to Plan9)? Please don't speculate on this answer because the G7 say exactly what they'll do directly in their proposal.

Hey skluyuk, here is a hint: Page 12 of the G7 PowerPoint Proposal!

[Scoutnout]

OK, here's your original post and, now that you've clarified your words, it is a little clearer in its intent.

That being said, you said:

"The G7 corps have been building very strong organizations over the last couple of decades."

I suggest otherwise because their 990s don't support the contention. Further, if their organizations were so strong why would they feel the need to keep more marbles for themselves at the expense of all the others?

You said:

"They have strategically saturated and dominated the marching arts market with their name brands and worked diligently to get a product out there for consumption by the literally thousands of marching band programs around the United States (and Japan/Europe for that matter)."

While I concede that BD or Crown or Cadets may have greater name recognition among MB students, the Vaticinate study (Persona) suggests clearly that members choose to march DCI more than to march a particular corps. That conclusion should lead you to believe that DCI has the brand recognition to a greater degree than any one corps. The only "saturation" in the marketplace is the repetitive nature of "BD wins again!" (hat tip to Plan9). I concede you won't get the same cheers for Pio even though Pio's mission is well-fulfilled each year. But to conclude that the G7 corps are "the face" of drum corps is inaccurate in the bigger picture.

Then you said:

"Then the G7 go out and hold clinics to market for their sponsors."

Your connotation is that only the G7 do clinics and sponsors only sponsor G7 corps. That absolutely untrue. Sponsors want their name out there, and they're successful at that if Cadets do a clinic or if Pio does a clinic. It's reasonable to think that Cadets clinic (by example) will cost more to produce than will a Pio clinic, and the sponsors will adjust their support based on that fact and also based on the number of HS kids show up at each.

Then you said:

"Is it really that much of a stretch to think that they will not branch out (in some manner) into the profitable world? It could be 'BLAST!' -like or something else that they dream up."

...and you really threw me, mostly because there is nothing in the G7 proposal that hints that they intend to move away from their 501c(3) status, ala BLAST. In fact, I'd contend that they know they couldn't possibly move to a for-profit model based on taxation alone! They are very deserving of special status that attaining 501c(3) status affords them, the largest single benefit of which is non-taxibility of the amount they have left over after the bills are paid. So you throwing this out there is a curve ball from left field. If it was only your suggestion then you should have pointed it out as such.

You said:

" That means the G7 could play on both sides of the fence as long as there were a separate and distinct venue for the post-ageout era. It would be no different than Bill Cook's Transportation company help fund Star."

I think I get your point here, but this is awfully confusing. How could a G7 corps field both a non-profit venture and a for-profit venture from within the same organization? (It can't.) BD runs "professional" clinics. That's non-profit revenue that supports the corps. Same with Cadets promotion and Crown's ticket service. But none of them are like BLAST!, which was a for-profit venture from the get-go (the long-term viability of which should be self-evident).

Professional "aged-out" members doing a BLAST! kind of thing IS BLAST!. If this is the model for the activity it has some serious long-term viability problems to be addressed before the G7 drag the whole activity in that direction.

So, yes, your original post had some significant "leaps" above and beyond what was presented in the proposal. Hence, the reaction you got from me and others.

Finally, in 2008 you posted that (paraphrasing...your actual post is above) DCI needs to pay more attention to the OC corps, and you backed it up with some calculations of your own that showed the OC corps were actually performing better than WC corps!

So my question is: What do you think the G7 will do to invigorate OC, support them in their mission, and help them continue to "outperform" in their missions in the same way BD "outperforms" in theirs? (another hat tip to Plan9)? Please don't speculate on this answer because the G7 say exactly what they'll do directly in their proposal.

Im noot here to debate on the subject anymore Actually quite tired of it because I have to live with it every day and I dont agree with the G7 which may leave me out of jobs but so be it.

BUT you ask

"if their organizations were so strong why would they feel the need to keep more marbles for themselves at the expense of all the others?"

easy. Its the american way , look at our own government, greed is a part of our fiber , admit it or not.

you also say"Your connotation is that only the G7 do clinics and sponsors only sponsor G7 corps. That absolutely untrue"

You are right there BUT if dollars for a sponsor are scarce or they have to decide for some reason between the 2. Who do you think will get them. Kids flock in droves to a Cadet clinic or BD way before the would to lets just Z corps

Next you say

"I think I get your point here, but this is awfully confusing. How could a G7 corps field both a non-profit venture and a for-profit venture from within the same organization? (It can't.)

They can become a NOT FOR PROFIT , which is not the same as non profit and can still get grants and run a business etc etc. and on top have huge salaries.

You also say:While I concede that BD or Crown or Cadets may have greater name recognition among MB students, the Vaticinate study (Persona) suggests clearly that members choose to march DCI more than to march a particular corps. "

Not true at all, have you taught kids lately? Yes they say they want to march drum corps and in the next breath say exactly who they want to be in. I hear those dreams and with some pipe dreams every year winter and summer and fall.

I actually agree with other things youre saying and Im not debating you just telling you from my experience today what I have personally seen and experienced.

"

[skluyuk]

But to conclude that the G7 corps are "the face" of drum corps is inaccurate in the bigger picture.

I agree with the principle of your statement. However, these corps (whether you are angry with them or not because of the propsal) are literally the faces you see on the DCI posters. I can't think of a single poster where BD, Cadets, Cavies, SCV, BC, CC, or PR are not the principal visual focus of the advertisement.

Your connotation is that only the G7 do clinics and sponsors only sponsor G7 corps. That absolutely untrue. Sponsors want their name out there, and they're successful at that if Cadets do a clinic or if Pio does a clinic. It's reasonable to think that Cadets clinic (by example) will cost more to produce than will a Pio clinic, and the sponsors will adjust their support based on that fact and also based on the number of HS kids show up at each.

Well...now I think you are just messin' with me. Seriously, Nike doesn't dump huge amounts of advertising money into some no-name-recognition guard from the Minnesota Timberwolves (12-70 this year). They give it to 'LeBron' or 'Kobe'. The best. Also, if there is a choice of a clinic given by a G7 group or Pioneer, there is really no contest. No disrespect to Pioneer. They have set an achieveable mission for themselves and are active every year.

I think that the G7 could spinoff some ageout groups that hit the road during band camp season and throughout the fall mb season that might be very successful. Whether they do that in a profit or non-profit status is a business decision.

How could a G7 corps field both a non-profit venture and a for-profit venture from within the same organization?

Don't forget my statement about 'separate and distinct'.

So my question is: What do you think the G7 will do to invigorate OC, support them in their mission, and help them continue to "outperform" in their missions in the same way BD "outperforms" in theirs?

It's clear and almost outright stated in the proposal that the OC will have to fend for themselves. From the proposal: "Corps are independent. We need to care for ourselves." "No real service offered." "No vote."

I think the real issue here is that the G7 feel they have put in the blood sweat tears to claim ownership of DCI. The owner of any business can make whatever decisions they want including an increased take of the profit and trimming the fat so to speak. Problem with that is that DCI is not a business. It is a non-profit organization supporting non-profit organizations. In addition, it supports 24 WC voting member non-profit organizations in addition to however many OC corps are sanctioned by DCI.

The decision to allow this or not is still within DCI's hands. The G7 still only have their votes (not the 2x vote proposed). They are outnumbered. If they want to affect change to reinforce their 'ownership', that can only be done by swaying the majority. That would mean several voting members would have to vote for something that is not in the best interest of their organization. I just can't see them doing that.

America is the greatest country on Earth. The G7 have the liberty to work things out within DCI or leave and doing something else. I would go watch them. I would (and do) attend a regional show too. The world will not end either way unless the Lord says it's time.

[supersop]

Just to clarify the law ...... Many corps have been running FPO's for many years that DONATE their earnings or a portion thereof, to the NPO 501c3 org. Star was built on this premise, having a bus line company, jet fueling contract at the airport and a couple of other businesses set up that were FOR profit .. and sent their earnings to the NON PROFIT.

Cadets did a bus line for a while. I know other corps have other for profit companies that do the same.

THIS IN NO WAY JEOPARDIZES THE 501C3. IT IS A CONTRIBUTION MADE TO A NON PROFIT BY A FOR PROFIT COMPANY.