Stu Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 (edited) I don't think there needs to be a limit to the number of corps.... if there were a hundred... would be cool.... just as long as they met minimum standards. Financial review would be pretty simple... what are obligations, receivables, cash on hand.... vs. cost of operations/tour. Done. Then why not just state that if corps like Spirit of Newark, Racine Scouts, Legends, etc.. can pass muster they will be accepted instead of degrading them with condescension? Edited December 21, 2011 by Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Agreed! That is exactly what happened to Crown. I am not saying you are wrong, I am just saying that to me Surf is a great corps (whether OC or WC) who cares more for the interests of the local youth than in winning a DCI WC ring. I think our disagreement is with the definition of success within the WC status. Well, when you're 25th from the top, but 16th from the bottom.... you're OC. They are an excellent model for OC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 (edited) Well, when you're 25th from the top, but 16th from the bottom.... you're OC. They are an excellent model for OC. Ok, I can compromise with that; setting a competitive placement cut-off point defining who is WC and who is OC sounds reasonable. This limits the number of WC but allows for an unlimited number of OC corps. Question, what if BDB happens to finish 15th (or in the top 12 like Magic did). Would BDB then be considered in the competitive ranks of the WC? Edited December 21, 2011 by Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Danielray: Also, please address my post 921 before you can cry deep sea fishing again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Then why not just state that if corps like Spirit of Newark, Racine Scouts, Legends, etc.. can pass muster they will be accepted instead of degrading them with condescension? Ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Question, what if BDB happens to finish 15th (or in the top 12 like Magic did). Would BDB then be considered in the competitive ranks of the WC? Then they could be WC if that was in line with the goals and finances of the organization. YEA used to put out 2 WC finalist corps. Can be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Well, this is interesting.... I suggest the parties be split into "member" corps and "non-member" corps. Member corps must abide by the socialist rules and be willing for DCI to spend a certain amount of money on small-corps development BEFORE the "winnings" pool is established and distributed to the corps. Non-member corps are not required to share their revenue and are able to develop any program or partnership outside of DCI that they wish. Member corps may use the DCI brand in all agreed-upon ways. Non-member corps may not use the DCI brand except is DCI sanctioned ways, shows included. If non-member corps wish to have a competition between themselves they surely may, but they can not use the DCI brand in doing so. Only DCI member corps may use the brand. DCI agrees to support non-member corps up to prescribed limits, but only after the funding of the development bucket to support member corps. The actual construction of the development bucket is another topic but it's goal, simply, is to foster the fastest-possible development of it's member corps to compete against the top corps for the championship, regardless of who that might be, member or non-member. Minimum requirements, such as Stu's above, could be agreed upon in order to attain DCI support. Ingenious. An original idea for realigning DCI's incentives in a constructive way. Of course, it'll never happen....but just having this concept on the table for discussion is quite valuable. Remember, the premise is that corps that don't go along with the socialist development ideas of DCI are free to strike deals with JV partners to develop their "non-related" businesses. As those JVs become successful the corps become less and less dependent upon the revenue from DCI, to the point where, when they are at their maximum attraction, they actually pay DCI for the privilege of marketing themselves under the DCI brand. So if the G7 mantra was correct, and they really are "the draw", then they have the option to prove it by choosing non-member status, and keeping all those dollars that they supposedly draw in personally. Brilliant! They'll jump at the chance, if they really believe what they're saying. Oh, wait.... I see this clearly in my head and have probably done a poor job of introducing it here. But the premise is that DCI's brand is it's most-powerful asset, I'd say that phrase alone does a fine job of introducing the concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Then they could be WC if that was in line with the goals and finances of the organization. Your response indicates that it would be up to the BD organization to declare BDB as WC, not DCI, no mater where BDB placed in WC competition. Did I read that correctly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 It is the top performing corps that bring in the cash. OK, we get it....you'll never learn. Top corps are the draw, blah blah blah. Perhaps if you repeat it often enough, others will believe it. Good luck in that endeavor. Hmmm...."top performing corps"....something's missing. Don't take my word for it... just look at the difference in endorsement deals for the top corps vs. next tier vs. OC vs. bottom of OC. OK, let's look at that. For decades, endorsement deals were limited to corps with single-digit finals placements. In the past decade, they've spread throughout world-class, and even open-class corps are getting endorsements. So by your logic, those lower-placing corps have become bigger draws over the past 10 years, and deserve a bigger slice of the DCI pie. Hmmm...."top corps"....still think something's missing. Anyway, you pull revenue away from the corps actually generating the revenue to give to the corps that aren't... you will not have any top corps going along with this Robin Hood type scenario. It is a non-starter, as they would pull out.... and the whole thing crumbles. There you go again...."top corps". You know what's always missing when you say that? DCI. What you (and the G7) are really saying is that "top DCI corps" attract attention. And thus, that's the problem with the empty threat of corps leaving DCI....once they leave, they are no longer "top DCI corps". Ask yourself this... right now, some of the strongest partners for DCI are the manufacturers. Will they will not stick around if the top corps are gone? If they're gone, they're not "top DCI corps". Whichever remaining DCI corps prevail competitively will reap the benefits accorded to "top corps". And if they thought that corps below a certain level were something they were going to get behind, you'd already see them doing killer endorsement deals now. Again, endorsement deals extend throughout world-class, well into open-class. For that matter, DCA corps are getting endorsement deals. How is that possible? Your "top corps" were never in DCA. As it is, there is a huge gap in the level of endorsement deals between the top corps and the rest. Make that past tense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 So if the G7 mantra was correct, and they really are "the draw", then they have the option to prove it by choosing non-member status, and keeping all those dollars that they supposedly draw in personally. Brilliant! They'll jump at the chance, if they really believe what they're saying. Oh, wait.... While I am leaning toward agreeing with Garfield's vision, this aspect is the la-la land area. The G7 were big talkers in their proposal, attempting to be big bullies betting that their puffing of chests would cause the others to bow and bootlick. But when the other corps called their bluff they knew that they really had no other place to go; because they also knew deep down that they were still little tikes in the grand scheme of things who could not make it on their own, therefore they need to siphon off as much as possible from DCI. Nevertheless, even though they did not have enough power to run complete rough shot over DCI, as long as they have a way to derail a plan for DCI like Garfield's they will certainly take that route. Moreover, I have read in these postings about the need for benevolence in leadership; well, where is that benevolence exhibited by the self-proclaimed leadership of the G7? Answer: it is non-existent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts