Proposed DCI Reorganization

[danielray]

...and the huge amount of money to sustain that single-centralized organization would come from where?????

This sort of thing could be done with a solid web-based application (could be built for under $10,000) and part time resources to sort of manage the effort.

[danielray]

Somewhere other than DCP I hope!

Careful what you wish for...

[danielray]

those three circuits have a training process in place. USSBA does online videos. TOB has a judges clinic and weekly education going on every week. Cavalcade has a judges clinic, not sure what they do from there.

Here's where I see one issue...USSBA and Cavalcade share judges. TOB does not.

so since the sheets are different in USSBA and Cavalcade, that can cause confusion. Each circuit has great judges. each circuit has judges you want to shoot when you see them.

Sounds kinda like DCI, WGI, DCA...right? Oh and they do training as well.

No judging system will ever be perfect, and you can train til you're blue in the face. All it takes is someone ###### at their score to raise a stink and then "your judges suck".

Now...in WV there's TOB, which the WVMEA has endorsed. And then there's these mom and pop shows where your buddy can come in and judge if you want him to, no real criteria, whatever they feel like saying that night goes.

Some bands love TOB. Some bands refuse to do TOB and do the mom and pop.

and several bands that do both ##### about both.

There's another circuit in NWPA where they bring in big names and the bands have no say what the scoring system is, they find out about it in late august after they've designed their shows.

yet they still go, because it's local. Some have started exploring other circuits ( TOB, PIMBA).

youcan cry standardized all you want, there will still be issues, and in circuits where band directors have say, they, kinda like DCI's BOD, won't want to give up that say.

and we've seen how well standardized testing has worked in the schools

Random thought.... digital video is getting cheap enough and distribution practical enough that it could be interesting to start to get judging videos instead of tapes.

What I mean, simple sort of video cams clipped to glasses or visor of a judge that follows their field of view. You can then see what they are looking at.. follow their focus/attention.

Could provide better context to comments.

[audiodb]

Restructure is needed to most effectively go after sponsorship and external sources of revenue.

With out restructure, potential is limited and risk associated with each individual effort is not compartmentalized, but falls directly on the parent.

Point is simply that DCI has grown to a level where their current structure is not ideal and must be reevaluated moving forward (growth is limited and risk is higher without restructure).

So there's no risk now?

You are not making sense, Daniel. If restructuring is necessary for risk management, then isn't it necessary now? Why would it only be necessary to cope with your ideas for external revenue pursuits? Are they that risky? Perhaps we should drop the idea of going after revenue outside the activity if it is that risky a proposition.

And what happens if one of these risks goes bad? It sounds nice that DCI the non-profit might be 'insulated' from a lawsuit against the DCI for-profit arm....but if the for-profit arm gets sued out of existence (and that's where most of the DCI money is), can DCI survive?

I've given you ten chances to sell me on this concept. You almost had me at chance #9, but now you've snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

[danielray]

So there's no risk now?

You are not making sense, Daniel. If restructuring is necessary for risk management, then isn't it necessary now? Why would it only be necessary to cope with your ideas for external revenue pursuits? Are they that risky? Perhaps we should drop the idea of going after revenue outside the activity if it is that risky a proposition.

And what happens if one of these risks goes bad? It sounds nice that DCI the non-profit might be 'insulated' from a lawsuit against the DCI for-profit arm....but if the for-profit arm gets sued out of existence (and that's where most of the DCI money is), can DCI survive?

I've given you ten chances to sell me on this concept. You almost had me at chance #9, but now you've snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Limited Liability Company

[danielray]

So there's no risk now? You are not making sense, Daniel. If restructuring is necessary for risk management, then isn't it necessary now? Why would it only be necessary to cope with your ideas for external revenue pursuits? Are they that risky? Perhaps we should drop the idea of going after revenue outside the activity if it is that risky a proposition.

To answer your question... yes... there is risk now. Debts or liabilities associated with one revenue activity are connected with all other activities and revenues streams. This should be separated in order to independently protect individual revenue streams.

And what happens if one of these risks goes bad? It sounds nice that DCI the non-profit might be 'insulated' from a lawsuit against the DCI for-profit arm....but if the for-profit arm gets sued out of existence (and that's where most of the DCI money is), can DCI survive?

If it goes bad... you deal with it just as you would if it were an independent business.... you don't have to have revenues from one successful area of the business compensating for lack of success in another.

Let's say DCI gets into the T-shirt business under the current structure....

They are killing it selling some clever t-shirts online that are a parody of some popular brands. They are making millions (if you think you can't make millions selling t-shirts online... check out Threadless). They get sued for trademark infringement by one of the brands. Though they tried to defend as parody, they lose and are hit with a multi-million dollar judgement.

Under the current structure, such liabilities would fall on the whole org... and it would basically be lights out.

Under the proposed structure, this venture would be compartmentalized in a distinct LLC and that entity would have liability. Other activities and revenue sources are protected and preserved.

Edited October 26, 2011 by danielray

[KeithHall]

Starting to sound like....dare I say.....RAMD?

[Stu]

This sort of thing could be done with a solid web-based application (could be built for under $10,000) and part time resources to sort of manage the effort.

WOW!!! $10k would cover the software application, paying people to maintain the database, paying for the training and certification of judges, paying for the flights, meals, housing, and fess for judges to attend contests to complete their certification process, all of which will be required for a QUALITATIVE system of training/certification... or, will it just be the "part time resources to (sort) of manage the effort" like you stated which will do nothing more than yield inferior results at best?

[danielray]

WOW!!! $10k would cover the software application, paying people to maintain the database, paying for the training and certification of judges, paying for the flights, meals, housing, and fess for judges to attend contests to complete their certification process, all of which will be required for a QUALITATIVE system of training/certification... or, will it just be the "part time resources to (sort) of manage the effort" like you stated which will do nothing more than yield inferior results at best?

Let's put it in this context...

Say you are a firm that is contracting qualified and certified IT contractors to clients and providing a system for both quantitative and qualitative feedback on the performance of the contractors.

You maintain the database of contractors and facilitate the engagement... but... you are not responsible to train the contractors, pay their flights, meals or salaries... you are just simply facilitating vetting qualifications and past performance, and facilitating engagement with the client.

It could be possible to add an additional layer into this where the client is paying to the agency for all fees, travel, per diem, etc., which is then distributed to the contractor.

In either case, all issues that you mentioned are covered. I can't imagine what he was describing would be a group simply offering all these services for free.

[garfield]

WOW!!! $10k would cover the software application, paying people to maintain the database, paying for the training and certification of judges, paying for the flights, meals, housing, and fess for judges to attend contests to complete their certification process, all of which will be required for a QUALITATIVE system of training/certification... or, will it just be the "part time resources to (sort) of manage the effort" like you stated which will do nothing more than yield inferior results at best?

The quality is separate and two-fold. The quality of the judging effort is separate and distinct from the quality of the system that collates judge data, show data, circuit data, and provides the mechanism for the judges being at the show in the first place.

Local judges, qualified to judge MB circuits according the the circuit rules and requirements would be far superior to flying in judges. Certfication and continuing ed is commonly done online and via webcast now by the major circuits, and in most industries. That the judge has finished training and is part of the judging pool is the only data that the organizing system needs.

The pool of available judges would be distributed from a central organization. Those judges offer up their services to the different circuits according to which ones they care to judge, and attaining certification to judge that circuit comes from their completing the required training.