garfield Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 There is already revenue sharing in the form of show fees. A lot of the less successful corps are likely getting higher fees by performing in a show with the more successful corps than they would be getting if the successful corps were not there. Translation: "less successful" corps get paid when they perform in a DCI show, but don't get paid from DCI when they have a show of their own. This is true. See the previous post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peel Paint Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 (edited) I was talking to a parent who has a kid marching this summer, as well as the last 3 summers. She was worried about affording one more year of corps for her daughter and said it was a shame that it costs so much. Considering that we have had 3 or 4 corps end their summers early, is it even possible that DCI could/should set up a system where the revenues were shared in such a way to help situations like this? Thoughts? DCI revenues are already shared with the DCI corps. If you're talking about taking from the "rich" corps to support the "poor impoverished" corps, there is no chance of this quite frankly socialist idea (from each according to ability, to each according to need) happening, because top corps which tend to be in better shape financially have more say in DCI policy than the other corps because of the way the DCI board is structured. In fact, many here would argue that the G7 proposal of a few years back was something of a proposal in the opposite direction because it proposed keeping the strong corps afloat at the expense of the weak--that proposal did not pass when the majority of corps shot down the attempted power and money grab--but it shows what the top corps were thinking at the time. And even if the underworld did freeze over and your idea somehow came to be enacted, it might keep more corps afloat, but it wouldn't reduce the fees this parent has to pay. Those two items--corps financial stability and member fees--are only tangentially related. Really what has to happen to keep more corps afloat is for the members to actually pay their dues--something that struggling corps have reported is a problem--and for the families, alumni, and fans of each corps to get more involved in fundraising for their corps. It is not the responsibility of either DCI or the "rich" corps to do this for them. Edited August 4, 2012 by Peel Paint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 Translation: "less successful" corps get paid when they perform in a DCI show, but don't get paid from DCI when they have a show of their own. This is true. Please correct me if I am wrong but it is my understanding that: a) Open Class corps get paid from DCI when they compete in WC/OC combined shows. b) Open Class corps do not get paid from DCI when they compete in OC only shows. c) It is becoming increasingly harder for OC corps to be included in shows with WC corps. Am I wrong on any of these? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 Interesting observations about your research: Notice who the top *7* are in operational expenses; Notice where those *7* typically place in DCI competitions; notice that those *7* were the organizations which created the G7 plan; ... I agree Stu, because I believe that numbers on a balance sheet tell a tale. What's even more interesting is to look not at the expense line, but look at the revenue lines for each corps. There-in (and in most cases) you'll find the amount of income to the corps from DCI productions. I'm not certain that the list above would be drastically different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 this quite frankly socialist idea Oh good grief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 Please correct me if I am wrong but it is my understanding that: a) Open Class corps get paid from DCI when they compete in WC/OC combined shows. b) Open Class corps do not get paid from DCI when they compete in OC only shows. c) It is becoming increasingly harder for OC corps to be included in shows with WC corps. Am I wrong on any of these? Nope, all of these are correct to best of my knowledge, and I can confirm, personally, numbers 1 & 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 DCI revenues are already shared with the DCI corps. If you're talking about taking from the "rich" corps to support the "poor impoverished" corps, there is no chance of this quite frankly socialist idea (from each according to ability, to each according to need) happening, because top corps which tend to be in better shape financially have more say in DCI policy than the other corps because of the way the DCI board is structured. In fact, many here would argue that the G7 proposal of a few years back was something of a proposal in the opposite direction because it proposed keeping the strong corps afloat at the expense of the weak--that proposal did not pass when the majority of corps shot down the attempted power and money grab--but it shows what the top corps were thinking at the time. And even if the underworld did freeze over and your idea somehow came to be enacted, it might keep more corps afloat, but it wouldn't reduce the fees this parent has to pay. Those two items--corps financial stability and member fees--are only tangentially related. Really what has to happen to keep more corps afloat is for the members to actually pay their dues--something that struggling corps have reported is a problem--and for the families, alumni, and fans of each corps to get more involved in fundraising for their corps. It is not the responsibility of either DCI or the "rich" corps to do this for them. This! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 I agree Stu, because I believe that numbers on a balance sheet tell a tale. What's even more interesting is to look not at the expense line, but look at the revenue lines for each corps. There-in (and in most cases) you'll find the amount of income to the corps from DCI productions. I'm not certain that the list above would be drastically different. Agreed, but finding a "revenue" number that appears to be reported consistently is next to impossible. Crown, for example, lists their sponsored shows as separate line items, but the profits (such as they are) from those shows go to support the corps. Other corps don't report their shows as separate program activities. I found the expenses line to be the most reasonable single line item on the 990 to compare the corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 Oh good grief. Good grief or not all you want, it is a true statement. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peel Paint Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 in reply to my reference of "quite frankly socialist idea"… and I did say where that was coming from... Oh good grief. The DCI Board would characterize this idea way that way and in stronger language than that. I'm not in favor of the G7 idea in any way, shape, or form, but shifting money by DCI policy from a corps with a solid revenue-raising program to a struggling one is not a path to success for drum corps generally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.