garfield Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 I believe my remarks are self explanatory. But for further clarification for you, I said the DCI Finals that was shown on tape delay on ESPN to the Drum Corps fanbase was free to the fanbase, and that DCI decided to forego the costs of the production of the telecast to ESPN ( that DCI would pay for ) and transfer ( at least to some degree ) DCI's costs of that, to their current fanbase ( via pay per view subscription to DCI ) Their fanbase that did not want to pay for the Finals telecast would thus no longer have it available to them. As a result, far fewer people ( both fans and non fans alike ) the last few years have seen the DCI Finals than at any time in DCI's history. We know this, because the TV exposure DCI had on TV ( PBS, ESPN ) was far, far greater than the pay per view and the select cinema theatre exposure ( AMC theatres alone, and in only in select AMC theatres, as well ) DCI has chosen for itself now. As usual, your comments are perfectly clear and self-explanatory to you. So thanks for clarifying your point. So, your point is that, because DCI ended broadcast (PBS or ESPN) of finals, a greater proportion of existing fans of the activity are getting "direct contact" via PPV and less "non-fans" are getting exposure to drum corps (or "DCI Drum Corps" as you call it). It never seemed rational to me to spend money on ESPN in the first place as, it is my presumption, that relatively few first time viewers on ESPN become fans. It makes ultimate sense to me to eliminate broadcast in favor of marketing to the best potential fan base, that being school music programs. Plus, if DCI did, in fact, shift it's spending from broadcast to PPV, then that's more efficient spending because PPV is immediate payment whereas broadcast is a residual benefit, if any at all. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 (edited) As usual, your comments are perfectly clear and self-explanatory to you. So thanks for clarifying your point. So, your point is that, because DCI ended broadcast (PBS or ESPN) of finals, a greater proportion of existing fans of the activity are getting "direct contact" via PPV and less "non-fans" are getting exposure to drum corps (or "DCI Drum Corps" as you call it). It never seemed rational to me to spend money on ESPN in the first place as, it is my presumption, that relatively few first time viewers on ESPN become fans. It makes ultimate sense to me to eliminate broadcast in favor of marketing to the best potential fan base, that being school music programs. Plus, if DCI did, in fact, shift it's spending from broadcast to PPV, then that's more efficient spending because PPV is immediate payment whereas broadcast is a residual benefit, if any at all. I never made a judgement assessment comment one way or the other on the merits of DCI changing their method of distribution of their Finals show to the public. You did. Which is fine, and your assessments of the merits or lack thereof on it is so noted. I merely pointed out the change by DCI from its decades long TV broadcasting model in its distribution model. The new distribution model chose to forego that TV distribution model to that of broadcasting distribution model via pay per view subscriptions to DCI and an arrangement with AMC for some select theatres for its DCI distribution. The fact that the DCI Finals is now seen by both fewer fans and non fans alike than at any time in DCI's history is something DCI seems happy with from all indications. My guess, they knew and anticipated what the loss of national TV exposure would mean, and thus its no surprise to them ( nor us ). So if DCI is happy, and its small niche fan base is happy, whats not to like ? Nothing, as near as I can tell from my observations. And that would be a value judgement anyway. I only pointed out what the change was, and its resulting consequence in regards to DCI's Finals Nite national audience exposure, thats all. I took no position on whether or not having less national exposure for the Finals Nite show is a good or a bad thing. Thats for others to decide for themselves. Edited August 25, 2015 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 They didn't build the stadium for Manning. They built it for the city... and I quote from the press release on the new 10 year extension with the city: Visit Indy President & CEO Leonard Hoops stated, “The World Championships have a significant impact on Central Indiana, and DCI’s partnership with Indy will generate more than $115 million in economic impact over the next decade. This event annually brings thousands of talented and passionate drum and bugle corps performers—and their friends, families, and fans—to Indy while helping support the more than 75,000 people in our region who benefit from tourism for a paycheck. Over the course of a year, Lucas Oil Stadium will host more days of competitive marching music events than it will football games. When we built the stadium in 2008, we were the first city in the country to design the environment with marching music in mind.” guess they need to sit high when groups play Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 I believe my remarks are self explanatory. But for further clarification for you, I said the DCI Finals that was shown on tape delay on ESPN to the Drum Corps fanbase was free to the fanbase, and that DCI decided to forego the costs of the production of the telecast to ESPN ( that DCI would pay for ) and transfer ( at least to some degree ) DCI's costs of that, to their current fanbase ( via pay per view subscription to DCI ) Their fanbase that did not want to pay for the Finals telecast would thus no longer have it available to them. As a result, far fewer people ( both fans and non fans alike ) the last few years have seen the DCI Finals than at any time in DCI's history. We know this, because the TV exposure DCI had on TV ( PBS, ESPN ) was far, far greater than the pay per view and the select cinema theatre exposure ( AMC theatres alone, and in only in select AMC theatres, as well ) DCI has chosen for itself now. looking at the ESPN ratings, i doubt the casual viewer saw the show on and stopped to watch 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenoris4Jazz Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 They didn't build the stadium for Manning. They built it for the city... and I quote from the press release on the new 10 year extension with the city: Visit Indy President & CEO Leonard Hoops stated, “The World Championships have a significant impact on Central Indiana, and DCI’s partnership with Indy will generate more than $115 million in economic impact over the next decade. This event annually brings thousands of talented and passionate drum and bugle corps performers—and their friends, families, and fans—to Indy while helping support the more than 75,000 people in our region who benefit from tourism for a paycheck. Over the course of a year, Lucas Oil Stadium will host more days of competitive marching music events than it will football games. When we built the stadium in 2008, we were the first city in the country to design the environment with marching music in mind.” guess they need to sit high when groups play I wonder if the delays in construction had to do with changes to the final construction that affected the acoustics. I recall lots of immediate complaints about the sound both with the roof open and closed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xandandl Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 (edited) The nay-sayers/purists/loyal opposition who challenge stats and attendance figures should have no worries with John DiNovi's most recent coup. After his SoundSport journey with his lepruchan Acheson at his side this Spring, John's name should be changed to McNovi. http://www.dci.org/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=33500&ATCLID=210292397 Several years back I had the opportunity to have gained a ticketed seat for the All-Ireland Finals and can vouch that the place is packed to the rafters, sometimes folks even hanging on them to get a good view of this internationally televised game. I'm sure your local Irish pub will let you in to the screening room if you first have your "full-Irish" breakfast before you down the pint. In typical modern day DCI fashion, the Dubliners team flag is checkered blue, Mayo (God help us!) is Santa Clara red and green. Whether "Up the Dubs" becomes the new chants at DCI shows is yet to be seen. Edited August 26, 2015 by xandandl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barigirl78 Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 It never seemed rational to me to spend money on ESPN in the first place as, it is my presumption, that relatively few first time viewers on ESPN become fans. It makes ultimate sense to me to eliminate broadcast in favor of marketing to the best potential fan base, that being school music programs. What never made sense to me is how people say DCI had to buy their way onto ESPN. Other sports don't pay to get broadcast on ESPN. It's the other way around. ESPN pays for the rights to broadcast the sport. If indeed, DCI had to pay its way to get a TV network to broadcast them, it is kind of sad. BTW--I work with TV ratings and have access to Nielsen. The telecast on ESPN2, 9/5/07, was estimated to have 507,000 viewers with a median age of 43.8. 54,000 was the estimate for ages 15 to 24. About half of all the viewers were between 35 and 54. Despite being on a sports network, the audience was 56% male 44% female. Most sports are 2/3rds male. Were these half a million viewers "existing fans"? Who knows? First you'd have to define what an "existing fan" is. Is it someone who had to attend or watch at least one show that season? Is it someone who participated in the past and was just coming back to watch out of curiosity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Windish Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 (edited) What never made sense to me is how people say DCI had to buy their way onto ESPN. Other sports don't pay to get broadcast on ESPN. It's the other way around. ESPN pays for the rights to broadcast the sport. If indeed, DCI had to pay its way to get a TV network to broadcast them, it is kind of sad. BTW--I work with TV ratings and have access to Nielsen. The telecast on ESPN2, 9/5/07, was estimated to have 507,000 viewers with a median age of 43.8. 54,000 was the estimate for ages 15 to 24. About half of all the viewers were between 35 and 54. Despite being on a sports network, the audience was 56% male 44% female. Most sports are 2/3rds male. Were these half a million viewers "existing fans"? Who knows? First you'd have to define what an "existing fan" is. Is it someone who had to attend or watch at least one show that season? Is it someone who participated in the past and was just coming back to watch out of curiosity? Viewer statistics remain a mystery to me. I know how Nielson works, but don't think everything revolves around their little boxes. Maybe you can help provide answers to these questions: 1. How long (minutes) does one need to watch to be considered a viewer? 2. Because thousands of bars have something ESPN tuned on during all business hours, with no one ever changing the channel, is that kind of casual viewership counted? It would seem, statistics like these are extrapolated from a much smaller sample. By the way, the common belief is that DCI did purchase the airtime. I can't confirm this. Edited August 26, 2015 by Fred Windish 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 Fred few years back we were selected somehow to be a "Nielson family" for a week. From what I remember we had a log book of what we watched and IIRC as long as we actually stopped and looked for a bit (IOW no channel surfing) we were supposed to log that as a "view". So we could have multiple views for the same time period. We don't watch much TV so certain "Music Choice" channels (not sure if part of what Neilsen wants) and NHL were ranked pretty high by our log. And for all that we got 5 $1 bills for our services..... Barigirl my understanding is DCI could not get enough sponsors/commercials to pay for the DCI telecast, so DCI had to pick up the tab. For MLB, NFL, etc the prices charged for commercials make up for the telecast and rights to broadcast. (Notice I didn't say NHL... sigh) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xandandl Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 Fred few years back we were selected somehow to be a "Nielson family" for a week. From what I remember we had a log book of what we watched and IIRC as long as we actually stopped and looked for a bit (IOW no channel surfing) we were supposed to log that as a "view". So we could have multiple views for the same time period. We don't watch much TV so certain "Music Choice" channels (not sure if part of what Neilsen wants) and NHL were ranked pretty high by our log. And for all that we got 5 $1 bills for our services..... Barigirl my understanding is DCI could not get enough sponsors/commercials to pay for the DCI telecast, so DCI had to pick up the tab. For MLB, NFL, etc the prices charged for commercials make up for the telecast and rights to broadcast. (Notice I didn't say NHL... sigh) well, I'm still waiting for the NHL commercial from Hershey who haven't yet named a chocolate bar after the Bears either! On the otherhand, kudos for Enterprise for all they do, plus a sponsor of WGI as well. Their discount code from the guard folks works nationwide. 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.