Is DCI broken?

[Jeff Ream]

Depends who is on the track I guess! I am not sure they care about the forest anyway.

The implementations you speak of have not really had a huge negative effect on the big corps. The number of shows has remained relatively steady for the last 30 years for them, (low to mid 30's), per season. They seem to have all the cash needed for new props, uniforms, equipment vehicles, electronics, admin staffs etc.

Don't get me wrong, I am happy to see ANY drum corps survive, or even prosper. I really don't blame the big corps for protecting their organizations. There is certainly alot at stake for them.

Unfortunately many expect DCI to protect and grow the ACTIVITY outside it's current membership of Corps. That does not seem to be on the agenda. In fact, they don't seem capable of protecting some of the current World Class Corps.

I believe new organizations outside of DCI, smaller regionalized organizations, will be needed to see any growth in DRUM CORPS. Just don't see that happening in the near future.

I expect DCI to work as a collective for DCI...and they can't even agree to do that

[Jeff Ream]

Instead of worrying about things like adding woodwinds to drum corps (not wise), and instead of debating the use of synths and amplification and narration and you name it (none of which seems to be doing much), I think it's time the activity tried to gain show sponsors, tried to build more corps, and did its best to invigorate interest in the activity. Regionalization is one way to make it affordable for new corps to get some traction into the activity without having to raise too much in those beginning years.

thank you

[jasgre2000]

I keep seeing people say that DCI should "look out" for all the corps. I'm not exactly sure what people mean by that. I certainly think that it is appropriate for there to be some basic financial oversight of corps, to protect the members from getting ripped off. My understanding is that the members have to pay quite a bit of money to participate in these corps. Are the members of Teal Sound going to get reimbursed? I hope so. I think it is entirely appropriate for DCI to have some financial disclosure requirements, and for corps to be required to show they can make it through a season financially. If we weren't talking about young people, I wouldn't care as much. Adults can bear the risk of dealing with financial problems. It isn't fair to put teenagers in that situation.

With that said, I don't see how the financial auditing requirements can be that extensive. Auditing isn't cheap, and doing an in depth audit of every corps every year just doesn't make sense financially. Require the corps to disclose their financial state, and if they are caught filing inaccurate documents, penalize them in some way.

To the extent that people are suggesting that DCI should be "acting collectively for the good of all the corps," that WILL be the downfall of DCI if that ever becomes the policy. I love it when people here compare DCI to the NFL, as if they are even close to comparable. They aren't. The NFL is the best run competitive league in the world, and no other league even comes close. There are certain things they do that are certainly worth emulating, but there are ALSO certain things they do that no other competitive league could do. Take "revenue sharing," for example. I have seen some throw that around as a solution to financial problems of some corps. It works in the NFL, why not DCI? It won't work for DCI because DCI doesn't make money. Revenue sharing in the NFL was implemented for the purpose of competitive balance, not for the purpose of increasing revenue throughout the NFL. When the NFL decided to share 75% of its revenue between all the teams, they didn't do it because they thought it would increase their profitability ... at least not directly. They did it because they believed parity would improve the sport. It worked wonderfully. The NFL is more competitively balanced than any other sports league in America. Teams from Green Bay Wisconsin and Buffalo New York can compete for Super Bowls for this reason. Over the long run, it has paid off and the parity made the sport more popular and probably even increased revenue league wide.

Sounds like a great thing for DCI to do. The only problem is that DCI wouldn't survive five years if it did it. You see, taking money from the corps that are "getting by," and giving it to the corps that are poorly managed and "not getting by," just makes it harder for the teams that are "getting by" to continue to "get by." I don't think there are any corps that are raking in huge profits. Taxing those corps for the benefit of the others will only result in less financial stability for all. Revenue sharing will not work in an activity where every member organization is struggling to get by.

Is regionalism a solution? I don't think so ... at least not formal regionalism. Many corps already limit their early tour schedule regionally. As far as I know (and I very well could not know), corps aren't forced to travel all over the country. If a corps can't afford to make a nationwide tour, then they should be smart enough not to do it. Let their membership know up front what the corps is able to do, and then be financially responsible. If you can't afford a tour on the other side of the country, like Boston and Phantom apparently could this year, don't try to do it. I don't think DCI needs to impose regionalism. Now, if DCI can make it easier for smaller corps to be competitive while staying close to home, then I am all for that. But DCI does not need to be the financial babysitter of these organizations.

So what is the solution? This will sound harsh, but the solution is obvious. You let the corps that cannot survive financially fail. Propping up inefficient corps is akin to throwing money into a fire pit. It doesn't do any good for anyone, except for the corps that is dragging everyone else down. I don't think the Teal Sound is "too big to fail." It is economic darwinism. Letting the weak and inefficient corps fail allows room for other existing corps, and perhaps even new innovative corps, to succeed. This has been shown in the real world over and over again. Failure sucks for those involved, but it is not always a bad thing. Those that survive will get stronger. As long as there are some safeguards to protect the members of the corps, I think this is inevitable and healthy.

Just to be clear, I am not trying to make accusations about the leadership of Teal Sound. Sometimes unforeseen, and unfair, events happen that cannot be overcome. Life isn't fair. Trying to make life fair doesn't usually work. That could very well be what happened in this case. Hopefully Teal Sound can pull their way out of their current situation and be stronger for it. If not, it will truly be a sad event. That doesn't mean it wasn't an inevitable or healthy event though. We shouldn't be throwing the baby out with the bath water here.

I am also not trying to say that there isn't anything DCI could do to make it easier for corps to be financially sound. There are certainly many, and I have commented on them a couple times. I think the DCI business model could use a lot of improvements.

End of rant (sorry).

Edited July 12, 2012 by jasgre2000

[Schimmy]

The Shakers had a policy of requiring abstinence from its members. This policy turned out to be the downfall of the religion. How can you maintain a religion when there aren't any new members?

The same thing is happening with drum corps. I have been asked several times by interested people what it would take to start a new drum corps in California's Central Valley, which is loaded with talent and enthusiasm. My answer always is, "first you get two million dollars".

Drum corps has seen many corps come and go, but there have been very few corps starting up in the last two decades. Without any new members it is only a matter of time before the activity atrophies into a very small few. With less and less corps the interest will wane and those few will find it harder and harder to get quality members which will increase the decline.

DCI as an organization needs to make sure they are doing everything they can to monitor the economic status of all DCI corps to make sure they are fiscally responsible. I don't know the details of what happened to Teal Sound but I do know that there was plenty of warning; you just don't wake up on tour one day and realize that you don't have transportation anymore, or that you don't have the funds to pay for the transportation.

As far as keeping performances in regions, that won't help anything. After one long road trip it doesn't really matter what part of the country you're in (with the exception of the west coast), as most of the shows are have similar distances between them.

[Rifuarian]

The same way Cascades should of planed on there equipment truck being rear ended last year, YOU CAN'T. You can have a emergency fund but does that ever have enough in it to cover something major?

I have also been thinking (correct me if wrong) by missing a show because of the bus problem doesn't that mean they also lost performance money too? Doesn't every penny on tour count.

I do agree that until we have facts about what happened it is all just rumor, and speculation.

It had better have enough to cover something major. If doesn't then you shouldn't be out on the road. But time and again corps ignore this basic principle and the end result is always disaster.

[shostahoosier]

When did the last regional circuit die (was it DCM?)? I feel like regional circuits were better for smaller corps...and since there were more Div II/III corps in existence, it was easier to have a regional circuit because you could "pad" your show with more performing units.

I'm not sure you could string one together now because there are so few Div II/III corps, so the World Class Corps are spread pretty thin.

What is interesting though is that California has so many corps right now. Could it be because they essentially have a regional touring model? A lot of the corps don't even go up to Washington or Oregon anymore.

[Spartans87]

I too believe the regional model is necessary to promote the growth of the activity, and I think it could also be done in a way that allows the larger corps to tour more nationally. We already have a few non-western corps go west each year, or have the western corps come east, so why not let the "G-7" corps do just that? Smaller organizations stay more local/regional, but bring in the corps that can afford to travel more, and desire to do so, to be sprinkled in to the regional shows?

None of this is perfect, or fully thought out, but it would be nice if the "powers" would consider the ideas some of us older fans/alums, and really vet the idea and see if something positive can come from it. One thing we all have in common, is a love and passion for the activity, and a desire for it to be more sustainable for a long time. I feel 100% confident in that statement.

[MikeN]

First of all, the rules don't say anyone has to "keep up with the Joneses". We've had corps enter world-class with an assortment of corps sizes, budgets, and tours. The most notable among those (Mandarins, Pacific Crest, Academy and Jersey Surf) are all still with us.

All of whom had to fight to create and keep regional tours. All of whom had to deal with competitive and "peer" (for lack of a better word) fallout for it. But as you said, all of whom actually ended up better for it. You and I agree on that point. But they're still not competing with the big corps.

DCI wants its corps to travel nationally, else selling Tour Event Partners on 4-corps shows gets a little silly. That push to have every corps tour like the Blue Devils (well, not this year - 24 shows ) is what I'm talking about.

2. And what exactly killed Teal Sound? Do we know that it was anything other than a freak bus contract gone bad.

Not for me to speculate. Not gonna touch it.

1. If you think paying top corps more and showcasing them in their own special shows is the answer....well, DCI is already doing that.

I look at this from a competitive and tour perspective. I'll name names - I don't see the benefit of making Pioneer, Teal Sound, Jersey Surf, etc compete with the Cavaliers, Blue Devils and Crown. It makes no sense. No more than making Revolution, Forte and Genesis compete with the Crossmen. We get in OC/WC that there's a clear difference in quality, mission and resources - there's no reason we can't draw a second line in there as well. (As DCI had previosly for how many years?)

2. I can't imagine how you would think any of the rest of that G7 proposal would help a corps in Teal Sound's position. Taking away shows? Taking away pay? Taking away voting rights?

What on earth does voting rights have to do with it? Taking away shows actually equals taking away operational costs. I'm not getting the economics that doing 31 shows is more profitable than doing 16.

Sorry, I may not have been clear earlier, in referring to the G-7 proposal, I was addressing the idea of splitting off the top groups into their own tour - that's really all. As for pay or no pay, etc, I have no ideas on that front. However, I do think adding a "middle class" to DCI would be a good thing for all.

Mike

[Jeff Ream]

All of whom had to fight to create and keep regional tours. All of whom had to deal with competitive and "peer" (for lack of a better word) fallout for it. But as you said, all of whom actually ended up better for it. You and I agree on that point. But they're still not competing with the big corps.

DCI wants its corps to travel nationally, else selling Tour Event Partners on 4-corps shows gets a little silly. That push to have every corps tour like the Blue Devils (well, not this year - 24 shows ) is what I'm talking about.

Not for me to speculate. Not gonna touch it.

I look at this from a competitive and tour perspective. I'll name names - I don't see the benefit of making Pioneer, Teal Sound, Jersey Surf, etc compete with the Cavaliers, Blue Devils and Crown. It makes no sense. No more than making Revolution, Forte and Genesis compete with the Crossmen. We get in OC/WC that there's a clear difference in quality, mission and resources - there's no reason we can't draw a second line in there as well. (As DCI had previosly for how many years?)

What on earth does voting rights have to do with it? Taking away shows actually equals taking away operational costs. I'm not getting the economics that doing 31 shows is more profitable than doing 16.

Sorry, I may not have been clear earlier, in referring to the G-7 proposal, I was addressing the idea of splitting off the top groups into their own tour - that's really all. As for pay or no pay, etc, I have no ideas on that front. However, I do think adding a "middle class" to DCI would be a good thing for all.

Mike

how does taking away shows take away operational costs? the corps can't just turn around and go home. they have to stay somewhere and eat and travel to the next gig.

expenses don't go down. income goes down

[MikeN]

Am I missing something? How does doing a two-three week regional tour and then maybe a trip to Finals cost as much as a 8-week national tour?

Mike