danielray Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) For one thing, to serve the other 80%....kids that aren't at a HS with a competitive marching band program. I've always wondered why people just tend to invent statistics.... then pretend they are real. On top of this, I don't really see that there are loads of kids out there that are dying to do drum corps because their school doesn't have a marching band program. Chances are, if they didn't have a marching band program at their school, there is not a good chance they even know what drum corps is (unless introduced to them through a relative, etc.). I dig drum corps, I really do, but there are plenty of other valuable things for kids to do these days. It is not worth creating loads of mediocre corps out there so kids can have a marginal experience. Better for kids to get involved in some other activity that provides a higher level and quality of experience. Edited December 1, 2011 by danielray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Yeah! We don't need shows with more than 3 corps. For that matter, we don't need all those shows either. We need shows with more top level corps.... fewer shows... larger stadiums. The future of the activity isn't in loads of little shows with massive parity between corps. Seriously, people get too emotional about this sort of thing and do not think objectively, as a potential attendee from OUTSIDE the activity might view it (which is what needs to be done if the activity is going to grow). You don't have the NY Phil, LA Phil, BSO, Chicago Symphony on a ticket along with the Ypsilanti Symphony Orchestra, Des Moines Symphony, and Paducah Symphony Orchestra and pretend they are all in the same class. It is just not reality and not fair to either segment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted December 1, 2011 Author Share Posted December 1, 2011 A bit more than 10, but we really don't need as many as now. Better to have fewer corps all performing at the highest level. There are some corps out there right now that aren't even on the level of the average school marching band. This isn't the fault of the kids that are participating, but the staff of the organization. There should be a minimum standard for participation. Disagree here. I think you mean "higher" level, right? Otherwise, you'll carry this argument through even after we only have 12 corps left. 12th will be today's 17th. A kid who's never marched before and finishes his first season in 6th place in OC is most certainly performing at his highest level. That's part of the value of the lower placement corps - providing the stepping stones for someday attaining the bigger leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 DCI absolutely is a concert tour. The ONLY thing it has in common with a league is that these concerts are adjudicated and scored. Absolutely everything else about it, structurally, organizationally, logistically, etc. is a concert tour. Apparently, we don't see eye-to-eye on this either. Individual corps don't simply think they have a higher worth than some, this is a verifiable fact. Hardly anything you say these days is a fact....much less verifiably so. Want to know the best current indicator of an individual groups contribution to ##### in the seats? Look at their merchandising revenues... there is a direct correlation between an organization's merchandising revenues at a given show and their audience draw. And your proof? You cannot keep pretending that all are equal or even should be equal. To the part I bolded....what more can I say? Obviously, you view these corps as if they were rock stars, their pursuits and fortunes independent of the competitive activity they have resided in for all this time. If that were true, the corps would (should) develop pursuits (and fortunes) outside of DCI. This is not reality, and this distorted thinking reinforces poor business decisions that cause problems down the road.Also, if an organization's competitive potential is directly tied to performance revenues and they are not able to cover the gap through other means, this is a management issue of the organization itself... not DCI. The idea of paying corps more equally, rather than on their ability to contribute to revenue only reinforces poor management and doesn't strengthen the organizations themselves. If there's any "distorted thinking" here, it is in the part I bolded in your quote. You still speak as if only individual corps create revenue, when the competitive league itself is largely responsible for the revenue. People pay to see contests....that's the reality. Take any corps out of the competitive context of DCI, and who would pay to see them? Who would be in the corps? Where would they perform? How would they fund their program? Would any of these aspects be improved over the DCI experience? If any corps had valid answers to these questions, they could (should) leave the confines of DCI and achieve what they want on their own terms. Star of Indiana came to that point, and left DCI to do other things. If these top corps were all that you say they are, they would have left by now too. How confident am I that the difference between top tier and other corps are simply a management issue? I'd volunteer to step into any corps out there, any corps... even the lowest placing corps open class... and, without having to put in any personal cash, get them on the level of top 8 of world class within 3-4 years. Please, show us all how it's done. You need contact information for the corps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Disagree here. I think you mean "higher" level, right? Otherwise, you'll carry this argument through even after we only have 12 corps left. 12th will be today's 17th. A kid who's never marched before and finishes his first season in 6th place in OC is most certainly performing at his highest level. That's part of the value of the lower placement corps - providing the stepping stones for someday attaining the bigger leagues. I was speaking about the gap between the top world class corps and the lower ranking world class corps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 We need shows with more top level corps.... Yes, that's the problem. We only have eight top-8 corps! If only we had 10, 12, even 15 top-8 corps, then everything would be so much better! fewer shows... larger stadiums. The future of the activity isn't in loads of little shows with massive parity between corps. You need a number of geographically-distributed shows for at least two reasons: - corps need paydays spaced in practical travel segments - fans don't all travel infinite distances, so you need shows in different places to reach them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 I've always wondered why people just tend to invent statistics.... then pretend they are real. Less than 20% of US high schools have competitive marching bands. For college, make that 0%. I think it's safe to say that 80% of kids in that age demographic don't have a competing marching band at their current school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 Less than 20% of US high schools have competitive marching bands. For college, make that 0%. I think it's safe to say that 80% of kids in that age demographic don't have a competing marching band at their current school. Not accurate... but... Anyway, back and forth with you doesn't really do much for me. I get you are not in sync with my pov, but trying to convince you doesn't really do much for me one way or another. I'm ok with you just carrying on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted December 1, 2011 Author Share Posted December 1, 2011 We need shows with more top level corps.... fewer shows... larger stadiums. The future of the activity isn't in loads of little shows with massive parity between corps. Seriously, people get too emotional about this sort of thing and do not think objectively, as a potential attendee from OUTSIDE the activity might view it (which is what needs to be done if the activity is going to grow). You don't have the NY Phil, LA Phil, BSO, Chicago Symphony on a ticket along with the Ypsilanti Symphony Orchestra, Des Moines Symphony, and Paducah Symphony Orchestra and pretend they are all in the same class. It is just not reality and not fair to either segment. Yuck, Dan. Bad example and flawed, IMO. We classical fans don't even think in terms of having more NY Phil's, BSO, etc. We simply think in terms of having more classical music. I grew up with the Cleveland under Szell (arguably among the best of its time) and yet I still go to see the fledgling Columbus Symphony and fight for its survival (Google my name). It's the same with the OC vs WC comparison or, for that matter the G7 vs. everyone else example. Does the CSO play as well as Vienna? Hardly. Would I be happy if the CSO folded and to hear any live classical I had to drive to Cleveland or Cincy? Hardly. Local shows ARE profitable and put the activity in more people's back yards where it's convenient to support it. Classical isn't competitive in the way DC is. The biggest difference is that Classical thinks it's entitled to be supported publicly just because. At least those of us in this argument agree that DC has to earn and pay for itself - something classical has never (and will probably never) agree to remake itself.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartans87 Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 The DCI board voting on contest rules is like the McDonald's board voting on the menu. It's absurd. Your kidding, right? The board of McDonalds, like many other boards, is there to keep the vision and focus of the organization, and to change that vision and focus, as necessary. While they may not directly vote on a menu change, do you think they don't know of the changes planned? It goes directly to the direction of the brand for which they sit on the board. That board knows what the company is doing, and so should the board of DCI. Plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts