Systemic Structural Risk and Too Big To Fail

[Stu]

Just go back and re-read and verify where you think I said that the other corps would fail without the G-7. I did not.

Yes you did. Here you go:

And that's the whole point of the question; this activity is not like free enterprise competition (by some views) in that if the G-? split off the entire structure would fail and "competing" corps would not have the opportunity or structure to advance up to replace those who left.

Would the structure to organize and produce shows remain for the scrappy, little competitors if the G-? took off and deprived DCI of their "drawing power"?

Edited January 24, 2012 by Stu

[DrillmanSop06]

Yes you did. Here you go:

It's clear you just want to fight. Hush, silly.

[garfield]

Yes you did. Here you go:

You didn't bold "by some views", which is clearly not the same as "in my view".

And you conveniently added "insignificant" to my phrase where I had not.

DrillMansop has it right in this case, Stu.

[Stu]

It's clear you just want to fight. Hush, silly.

Silly is the best thing anyone has called me in a while; thanks!!! Anyway, I do not want to fight as much as I just want the G7, and those who want to continue this G7 bolting banter, to either go ahead and pull the trigger to leave DCI, or move on within the context that they are just not that high and mighty.

[Stu]

You didn't bold "by some views", which is clearly not the same as "in my view".

And you conveniently added "insignificant" to my phrase where I had not.

DrillMansop has it right in this case, Stu.

Easy fix to this, because after weeks of research you certainly can make an informed decision: Do you agree with the D-Ray, Hop, Gibbs, etc.. and align your resources with them on splitting DCI? Or do you agree with Mark Arnold, Chris Komnick, Dan Achison and the rest of the current DCI Board on keeping DCI intact? This many weeks is ample enough time for you to compile enough information to make that decision. Or are you going to continue to waffle?

[garfield]

Silly is the best thing anyone has called me in a while; thanks!!! Anyway, I do not want to fight as much as I just want the G7, and those who want to continue this G7 bolting banter, to either go ahead and pull the trigger to leave DCI, or move on within the context that they are just not that high and mighty.

I believe it!

Anyway, I just want DCI to have prepared in the event the day comes where the they find themselves without their primary income generators. A "succession plan" per se, to allow the rest of the corps to continue to compete.

Without a circuit to perform in, their "scrappy" determination won't help much.

[audiodb]

But I didn't ask if there was SSR among drum corps, I asked if there was SSR in DCI and if the TBTF corps (defined as those who would bolt from DCI) are, in fact, crucial to the survival of DCI. I surely agree that a single "failure" has little impact on the function of DCI, but I'm more interested in the effect on DCI if the G-? bolt.

Well, since you went there....

If the Gx leave DCI, DCI and their corps will continue on just fine, regardless of what the value of x is....7, 8, 12, 17. The entire world-class could leave DCI, and the remaining corps in DCI (i.e. open-class) would be just fine. How do we know this? Well, that's essentially what happened back around 2003-2004 when DCI gave division II/III the balanced-budget mandate.

How DCI would adjust to right-size their schedule and budget would vary depending on how many corps leave. But I have no doubt that DCI would make the appropriate adjustments and continue on. Furthermore, the quality of life for the corps that stay with DCI would be maintained in year 1, and would then increase in years 2 through eternity.

But you didn't address what, if anything, can be done to prevent DCI's collapse if the G-? do bolt. What firewalls can be put in place to protect the other 36 or so corps from the contagion of the G-? bolting?

Nearly all corporate B'sOD are charged with protecting the organization from the folly of a single division of the company, person, or entity. What has (can) DCI do to protect itself from destruction at the hands of the few, if destruction is, in fact, the end result?

Oh, you really are going there. Alright, here are a few thoughts off the top of my head.

We've seen several circuit-level splits of varying levels of hostility over the years. The formation of DCI itself was one; the DCM/DCI episode of 2002-3-4 was another; DCA's early years had various split factions boycotting each other; even the G7 proposal shows some of what might be coming. Learn from them.

Expect the departing corps to pull out completely, boycotting all DCI events. Expect them to immediately go after every DCI contest venue, woo every DCI tour event partner, and offer show access to remaining DCI corps with no strings attached (yet). Expect them to stage competing events in close proximity to DCI major events on the same dates. Also, expect that for those organizations with feeder programs, the feeder corps will side with the parent corps whether it makes sense for their own program or not.

What to do? Two big things:

1. The immediate concern is to stay up to date on contracts....in fact, get them signed before that big explosive meeting when everything hits the fan. DCM nearly lost their championship venue in the aftermath of the DCM/DCI affair, as the splitting DCI corps directed DCI to call first thing Monday morning after their final DCM meeting and book it for whatever weekend DCM was planning their event. If I was running the G7, I'd already be talking to the Texas Bandmasters Association about why my circuit's event should be the feature of their convention instead of DCI's San Antonio focus show, and why the BOA Summer Symposium should partner with us instead of DCI. Keep that back door closed.

2. And the thing no one here has been talking about (until now)....copyrights. Audio/video of the DCI corps are copyrighted by DCI, and only with DCI's permission can corps use those recordings of themselves. DCI's founders set things up that way for a number of reasons....back in the day, revenue from the initial DCI recording sales effort is what kept DCI alive. One of those reasons is more apparent today than ever before, as I keep hearing from offline sources that collective DCI ownership of the audio/video archive now serves as the glue holding DCI together. Depending on who you ask, it could be the main reason the G7 didn't already leave DCI, as in the event of a hostile split, they would lose access to their own historical A/V recordings.

Thinking longer-term, don't allow too much of DCI's power to reside in too few hands. Voting rights should not be cut back to fewer corps. The DCI BOD should not be made smaller. Keep vital infrastructure in the DCI office....do not subcontract it out to individual corps. Proposals with any of those three preceding components in them should raise a red flag. Groom as many corps as possible into show hosts, and spread the show-hosting wealth as evenly as possible among them. Same principle applies to clinics, and any supplemental performance material beyond the competitive field shows that is used to promote DCI events.

Oh, and be careful about proposals for restructuring DCI or changing how it is governed. Make sure DCI's mission remains in place, and that incentives remain aligned with it. Control of DCI's assets and intellectual property must remain with DCI, so as not to permit a Gx group to use copyrighted DCI materials.

[Stu]

I believe it!

Anyway, I just want DCI to have prepared in the event the day comes where the they find themselves without their primary income generators. A "succession plan" per se, to allow the rest of the corps to continue to compete.

Without a circuit to perform in, their "scrappy" determination won't help much.

If the internal revolt against Hop/Gibbs has not already caused that preparedness to occur (for a possible bolting by the arrogant corps directors), then those non G7 corps IMO deserve to fail!!!

[garfield]

Well, since you went there....

If the Gx leave DCI, DCI and their corps will continue on just fine, regardless of what the value of x is....7, 8, 12, 17. The entire world-class could leave DCI, and the remaining corps in DCI (i.e. open-class) would be just fine. How do we know this? Well, that's essentially what happened back around 2003-2004 when DCI gave division II/III the balanced-budget mandate.

How DCI would adjust to right-size their schedule and budget would vary depending on how many corps leave. But I have no doubt that DCI would make the appropriate adjustments and continue on. Furthermore, the quality of life for the corps that stay with DCI would be maintained in year 1, and would then increase in years 2 through eternity.

Oh, you really are going there. Alright, here are a few thoughts off the top of my head.

We've seen several circuit-level splits of varying levels of hostility over the years. The formation of DCI itself was one; the DCM/DCI episode of 2002-3-4 was another; DCA's early years had various split factions boycotting each other; even the G7 proposal shows some of what might be coming. Learn from them.

Expect the departing corps to pull out completely, boycotting all DCI events. Expect them to immediately go after every DCI contest venue, woo every DCI tour event partner, and offer show access to remaining DCI corps with no strings attached (yet). Expect them to stage competing events in close proximity to DCI major events on the same dates. Also, expect that for those organizations with feeder programs, the feeder corps will side with the parent corps whether it makes sense for their own program or not.

What to do? Two big things:

1. The immediate concern is to stay up to date on contracts....in fact, get them signed before that big explosive meeting when everything hits the fan. DCM nearly lost their championship venue in the aftermath of the DCM/DCI affair, as the splitting DCI corps directed DCI to call first thing Monday morning after their final DCM meeting and book it for whatever weekend DCM was planning their event. If I was running the G7, I'd already be talking to the Texas Bandmasters Association about why my circuit's event should be the feature of their convention instead of DCI's San Antonio focus show, and why the BOA Summer Symposium should partner with us instead of DCI. Keep that back door closed.

2. And the thing no one here has been talking about (until now)....copyrights. Audio/video of the DCI corps are copyrighted by DCI, and only with DCI's permission can corps use those recordings of themselves. DCI's founders set things up that way for a number of reasons....back in the day, revenue from the initial DCI recording sales effort is what kept DCI alive. One of those reasons is more apparent today than ever before, as I keep hearing from offline sources that collective DCI ownership of the audio/video archive now serves as the glue holding DCI together. Depending on who you ask, it could be the main reason the G7 didn't already leave DCI, as in the event of a hostile split, they would lose access to their own historical A/V recordings.

Thinking longer-term, don't allow too much of DCI's power to reside in too few hands. Voting rights should not be cut back to fewer corps. The DCI BOD should not be made smaller. Keep vital infrastructure in the DCI office....do not subcontract it out to individual corps. Proposals with any of those three preceding components in them should raise a red flag. Groom as many corps as possible into show hosts, and spread the show-hosting wealth as evenly as possible among them. Same principle applies to clinics, and any supplemental performance material beyond the competitive field shows that is used to promote DCI events.

Oh, and be careful about proposals for restructuring DCI or changing how it is governed. Make sure DCI's mission remains in place, and that incentives remain aligned with it. Control of DCI's assets and intellectual property must remain with DCI, so as not to permit a Gx group to use copyrighted DCI materials.

Excellent post, Audio. Salient points, well thought out, and no personal jabs.

[audiodb]

And that's the whole point of the question; this activity is not like free enterprise competition (by some views) in that if the G-? split off the entire structure would fail and "competing" corps would not have the opportunity or structure to advance up to replace those who left.

Would the structure to organize and produce shows remain for the scrappy, little competitors if the G-? took off and deprived DCI of their "drawing power"?

Yes....because individual corps cannot deprive DCI of their "drawing power". It really is DCI's drawing power....a consequence of DCI being an established league of national/world level championship competition for drum corps.

A closed-circuit club of any number of disgruntled ex-DCI corps could not possibly take that away from DCI. The only way a Gx league could achieve long-term viability would be by establishing their own national/world level championship competition. That can only happen if they open up their private club to the rest of the activity by holding open contests where membership in the Gx is available to those who qualify competitively.

Without a legitimate open competitive model, the Gx would last for only 2-3 years as a private club. If they aren't already aware of that fact, they would be come year 2 when their ticket sales drop.

That said, there's another suggestion for DCI to guard against systemic risk....attach incentives to DCI membership to discourage participation in rival circuits. Not exactly the same as a "boycott", but rather, making a DCI corps' pay largely contingent upon loyalty, such that trying to compete in both circuits would be giving up more DCI $$$ than they could make from the Gx.

Edited January 24, 2012 by audiodb