DrillmanSop06 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 So, I have been reading it correctly. Danielray wants DCI to throw out the smaller corps just as the G7 proposed! Garfield, on the other hand, is attempting to propose weening the self-relent multi-million dollar corps such as the G7 off the DCI financial teet so that the smaller corps can have a way to grow and prosper within DCI. You'll just post the opposite of whatever he says. It's plain as day what your game is. And it's killed your credibility. He could literally say ANYTHING and you'd argue against it on principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 (edited) You'll just post the opposite of whatever he says. It's plain as day what your game is. And it's killed your credibility. He could literally say ANYTHING and you'd argue against it on principle. See, this is where you are not reading: I have posted that I agree with Danielray's LLC ideas; I agree with his setting quality standards, I agree with his DCI facilitation ideas,; and I have even attempted to find common ground (see my post 792). The only thing which I whole heartily disagree with is his position of DCI dumping out the small guys like they were human waste ca-ca. Edited December 21, 2011 by Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted December 21, 2011 Author Share Posted December 21, 2011 You'll just post the opposite of whatever he says. It's plain as day what your game is. And it's killed your credibility. He could literally say ANYTHING and you'd argue against it on principle. Re-read, starting at #881. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 (edited) its pretty funny that he ( Daniel ) was able to manipulate this many pages of a conversation and basically tell some posters that they don't understand enough for comments to be worthy when the fact is un less you are in a position to make any of it come to life neither is his comments...lol...Bravo Daniel, I think you may have succeeded at what you may have set out to do . Happy Holidays Edited December 21, 2011 by GUARDLING Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted December 21, 2011 Author Share Posted December 21, 2011 its pretty funny that he ( Daniel ) was able to manipulate this many pages of a conversation and basically tell some posters that they don't understand enough for comments to be worthy when the fact is un less you are in a position to make any of it come to life neither is his comments...lol...Bravo Daniel, I think you may have succeeded at what you may have set out to do . Happy Holidays It wouldn't pay to underestimate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted December 21, 2011 Author Share Posted December 21, 2011 DCI is already a very respected and viable entity which has the credibility to become a successful incubator; and I really like that idea. However, playing devils advocate here, what if DCI did become the venue solely for the G7 type caliber corps which would then place organizations like SDCA or DCNA into the role of becoming incubators. How would those organizations gain enough viability, credibility, and financial stability apart from the DCI connection/support to be those incubators? DCI has the brand and, hence, the asset with which to negotiate JV or SPV to benefit the activity, from the top corps on down. SDCA and DCNA don't at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 It wouldn't pay to underestimate. who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted December 21, 2011 Author Share Posted December 21, 2011 What you are proposing sounds like the *reverse* of the G7 proposal. While they were proposing to completely do away with all DCI financial support for the small or up-start corps and direct all DCI financial support to themselves, what you are proposing would be to remove the G7 (or those in their caliber) out of the DCI financial pool (because they are financially self-reliant) and direct DCI financial support to the pool of smaller or up-start corps. This is a very interesting proposal because it does encourage growth into financial independence. Ahhh, but then we are just discussing a theoretical are we not? I mean the current structure would not allow for this vision to transpire; and I do not see the current voting body or board members to relinquish all of their current power to restructure in such a manner. So, how do you propose to overcome that obstacle? DCI grows corps under a consistent model and stays with them until they are ready to develop sufficient relationships outside of DCI to support themselves. While even fully developed corps may remain members, they must agree to redirecting a portion of revenue to the development of smaller corps. Those corps that want to keep all of the revenue they generate on their own may do so, and also receive DCI financial support up to certain levels. But they cannot use DCI's brand unless they are part of a DCI show or are a member corps. The most successful non-member corps are still offered non-financial "bulk buy" and logistics support as all other corps. The key is that DCI develops its own, independent funding sources with partners to market, leverage and fund DCI's mission of growing corps. If DCI is not dependent upon the corps for its funding, then DCI can choose to do as it wishes with its revenues. All corps have the ability to exit DCI and hold their own series of shows, but they cannot use the DCI brand in doing so. DCI must strictly manage its brand and its tour management expertise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted December 21, 2011 Author Share Posted December 21, 2011 who? Umm...anyone? Ya' just never know, now, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Umm...anyone? Ya' just never know, now, do you? or ya do but youre right but also 90 pages shows I think the flock can be lead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts