Jeff Ream Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 actually the language is ambigious. How's this for making it crystal clear: "paid attendance for finals was 17,whatever". boom. Easily done, all arguments put to rest. And to the person who asked about the regional drawing down attendance with their current format, the regionals have been like that for a while now, and yet attendance dropped from what it was when they went that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 actually the language is ambigious. How's this for making it crystal clear: "paid attendance for finals was 17,whatever". So what? If there is ambiguity in the language, is there actual ambiguity about the meaning? That paid attendance rose? This discussion is entirely silly in the suggestion that DCI is somehow disguising some less-flattering truth. Attendance rose in 2011. The attendance figures given didn't include the large number of members, staff and VIPs who entered the stadium without tickets. Who in his right mind is contending there was some other significant group of people in the seats swelling the turnstyle count? The paramedics? Off-duty ushers? I don't know why DCI didn't report paid attendance. Maybe they just didn't think it mattered. That's not so unreasonable a view, after all. HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecoats88 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 As I understand it, DCI uses different color-coded wristbands for each championship-week event, to give gate personnel a means to identify who is allowed to enter. In recent years, even uniformed corps members have been required to wear such wristbands on their way in to perform. People from corps who didn't make finals would not have been allowed to sneak into finals through the corps entrances. no one from corps needed to sneak in, they wear their wristbands and walk in through the main spectator gates. the wristbands are a free pass into the stadium, no sneaking neccessary. All corps that compete during the week get these wristbands not just those corps performing on saturday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 So what? If there is ambiguity in the language, is there actual ambiguity about the meaning? That paid attendance rose? This discussion is entirely silly in the suggestion that DCI is somehow disguising some less-flattering truth. Attendance rose in 2011. The attendance figures given didn't include the large number of members, staff and VIPs who entered the stadium without tickets. Who in his right mind is contending there was some other significant group of people in the seats swelling the turnstyle count? The paramedics? Off-duty ushers? I don't know why DCI didn't report paid attendance. Maybe they just didn't think it mattered. That's not so unreasonable a view, after all. HH the meaning can be ambiguous yes..it hides what was paid from what wasn't. There can be tickets that were freebies thatwere not in there list. and yes DCI has used flowery language before. Remember the year to year "same" competitions stuff? Or the year the former DCM shows became DCi shows and they flowered thatup to make itlook good? sports teams dont announce how many showed up, they tell how many paid. It's not that hard of a concept to grasp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badoo Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 the meaning can be ambiguous yes..it hides what was paid from what wasn't. There can be tickets that were freebies thatwere not in there list. and yes DCI has used flowery language before. Remember the year to year "same" competitions stuff? Or the year the former DCM shows became DCi shows and they flowered thatup to make itlook good? sports teams dont announce how many showed up, they tell how many paid. It's not that hard of a concept to grasp I don't think "attendance rose in 2011" is a hard concept to grasp either, but here we are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 So what? If there is ambiguity in the language, is there actual ambiguity about the meaning? That paid attendance rose? This discussion is entirely silly in the suggestion that DCI is somehow disguising some less-flattering truth. Again (for what, the fifth time?), I am suggesting no such thing. Attendance at finals went up. When Dan Acheson says it went up 9.2% from last year, you can trust that he is comparing apples to apples. The rest of us may not even know which fruit is which....but we can still be confident that finals attendance went up. As for ambiguity....it is interesting to note how little it bothers you now, but how much it bothers you when someone compares to 1981. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daave Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 What may be lost in the ambiguity is that last year's total for LOS was not announced (to my knowledge). The discussion that has now resulted only confirms what many pointed out last year. The announcement of a 9% increase over last year is a way to finally announce last years numbers. It has been lost in the discussion, I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) actually the language is ambigious. How's this for making it crystal clear: "paid attendance for finals was 17,whatever". boom. Easily done, all arguments put to rest. And to the person who asked about the regional drawing down attendance with their current format, the regionals have been like that for a while now, and yet attendance dropped from what it was when they went that way. One question here... why does any of this really matter to anyone that is not a DCI shareholder/donor? I think they should put this info together, but release only to management of individual corps, sponsors, partners and donors past a certain level. They are actually making decisions based on this data. Why does this info really matter for the folks here on DCP? How does any of this really impact their universe? If I like to go to monster truck pulls, I just care that they're succeeding well enough to keep on going... I don't really care much about how many people came or how many hot dogs were sold. Can they do it again next year? Great! As it is, DCI can do this again next year... and looks like it will be better than this one, not worse.... so... why does anything else matter? Who cares what happened in 81? Edited August 24, 2011 by danielray 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 the meaning can be ambiguous yes..it hides what was paid from what wasn't. There can be tickets that were freebies thatwere not in there list. and yes DCI has used flowery language before. Remember the year to year "same" competitions stuff? Or the year the former DCM shows became DCi shows and they flowered thatup to make itlook good? sports teams dont announce how many showed up, they tell how many paid. It's not that hard of a concept to grasp Professional (and big-time college) sports staffs are laden with highly-paid professionals to account for and publicize such things in a professional way. DCI isn't flush in either category. So DCI isn't as polished in this press release stuff. Big whup! That doesn't mean they were padding the numbers with freebie tickets. And exactly how did this secret freebie program work? They sent all the interns to the mall with batches of tickets just so they could report attendance was up 9%. Really? HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I don't think "attendance rose in 2011" is a hard concept to grasp either, but here we are. it's not. I applaud it. facts and figures without ambiguous language makes it that much better too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.