garfield Posted November 29, 2011 Author Share Posted November 29, 2011 I think DCI in some places is "broke". I think they realize that too. But no, not everywhere and you'd be surprised who the DCI directors reach to for insight on the average paying fan or band instructor. and again, you miss much of the replies in this thread: Most aren't saying DCI needs a total overhaul. Just some tweaking. But hey why acknowledge that when it cuts into your rant? Most important is the rationale of living hand-to-mouth every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 you forgot vague and partially insulting, otherwise you pretty much nailed it No, no.. I'm fully insulting.... just it only partially understood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 29, 2011 Author Share Posted November 29, 2011 I also can pick and choose what I want to answer. But hey good luck to you. If it's a success and the right people think you or the plan is worth listening to . I win either way. Oh don't go away mad. In fact, don't go away at all. Winning? Is this personal for you? What about the kids, I say? What about the kids? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOBSMYTH Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 ...The corps' cut from DCI isn't assured until the season ends in August. Makes it a little difficult to plan, doesn't it?... Picking a nit: Not sure where you got this concept - it is just not true. The corps get a fixed amount for every appearance. They know that amount right now for next year - 2012. The second major component of the payments to the corps is based on placement results from prior years. Again, with the 2011 results already in the books, they can calculate their 2012 money from DCI right now. Every World Class corps should have no problem putting together the DCI pay part of next year's budget before audition camps - every year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 30, 2011 Author Share Posted November 30, 2011 Picking a nit: Not sure where you got this concept - it is just not true. The corps get a fixed amount for every appearance. They know that amount right now for next year - 2012. The second major component of the payments to the corps is based on placement results from prior years. Again, with the 2011 results already in the books, they can calculate their 2012 money from DCI right now. Every World Class corps should have no problem putting together the DCI pay part of next year's budget before audition camps - every year. So DCI knows right now what the regionals and finals attendance will be for next year? I agree with the concept concerning local shows because the TEP pay the contract amount, but DCI doesn't know the gate at the regionals/finals until they're done, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 No, no.. I'm fully insulting.... just it only partially understood. or ignored. I mean you can only "red" someone so much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Ask Bob Jacobs if he'd like the assurance of being able to finance his first trip out west. I know for a fact that his plans have been in the works for months already and his ability to pay for it has been primary on his mind. I'm sure it's the same for most corps. The corps' cut from DCI isn't assured until the season ends in August. Makes it a little difficult to plan, doesn't it? In what sense? Appearance fees are already set and scheduled. Of course, some revenue sources are variable (souvie sales, home show profit, etc.), but giving all that away to some other entity in exchange for regular payments....well, like most annuities, you give up a portion of the money to get that predictability. The agreements that Dan is talking about would be legally binding, with consequences. There was no such thing in the G7 actions. Legally binding on what entities? Corps can come and go as they please (and sometimes, they "go" for reasons beyond their control). No amount of contracting with DCI is going to change that, and contracting with individual corps is not going to end well. And if that investor can make use of the licensing to generate money to guarantee payments to corps? I understand your concern on the surface, but I think you underestimate the motivatiions of said "private investors". Without knowing who the hypothetical "private investors" are, one cannot presume much about their motivations. Good idea! But why do you suppose that, if it's such a good idea, that more souvie booths don't carry rain gear? I believe more of them do now. As corps merchandising operations evolve and mature, they eventually add all the "good ideas" to their product selections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Anyway, back of the napkin calculation scribbles out to something like a $15M commitment over 5 years. $8M in cash in the first 2 years, the rest in increased revenues and partnership deals. It should come from no more than 3 people (more than that, other challenges come into play). So, if you are up for making a minimum commitment of $2M in cash... and meet the criteria under 501 of Reg D, do PM me. Otherwise, not much point to go into the mechanics or motivations... but to just focus on potential effect or outcomes. Oh, now you're seeking individual "investors". Giving up on corporate sponsors already? DCI has already been down the sugar-daddy road (i.e. Bill Cook). First problem with seeking financial salvation from a rich individual is that their $upport lasts only as long as the activity enchants them (i.e. Bill Cook). And then what? This is not a suitable long-term plan. Your previous tack of establishing side businesses to fund DCI has more promise in that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 30, 2011 Author Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) In what sense? Appearance fees are already set and scheduled. Of course, some revenue sources are variable (souvie sales, home show profit, etc.), but giving all that away to some other entity in exchange for regular payments....well, like most annuities, you give up a portion of the money to get that predictability. I recognize that BobSmyth has an "inside track" that i will defer to, but he's yet to respond to my regional and finals questions. Until he does, I still contend that those grand-daddy money-makers are unknown at this point and, hence, the corps' share of those revenues is yet unknown and unplannable. Legally binding on what entities? Binding on both sets of parties - the corps and DCI, and the investors (otherwise, how do you attract an investor?). Corps can come and go as they please (and sometimes, they "go" for reasons beyond their control). No amount of contracting with DCI is going to change that, and contracting with individual corps is not going to end well. They can now because the corps ARE DCI, but when you get private money involved they'll have obligations that prevent them bailing without a "penalty". Without knowing who the hypothetical "private investors" are, one cannot presume much about their motivations. Quite true here (as I've said earlier) but, as Daniel said (and I fully agree from personal experience) return on investment does not always mean a financial return and, most likely, the "investor" that would be attracted would have motivations more aligned with DCI than I think most would presume. I believe more of them do now. As corps merchandising operations evolve and mature, they eventually add all the "good ideas" to their product selections. It's been raining at shows for 40 years yet they are just now stocking ponchos? What does this tell you? Edited November 30, 2011 by garfield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobrien Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 It's been raining at shows for 40 years yet they are just now stocking ponchos? What does this tell you? That the activity has always appealed most to the hopelessly optimistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts