SynthLine09 Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 I have always loved the idea of incorporating lighting into the marching arts. But man...even a small, modest lighting rig is EXPENSIVE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 Lighting?? Ughh. Next: laser lights, fog machines, prerecorded music, electronic field instruments Sounds like the movie "Drumline" to me. If you've seen it, you know the scene - where the car drives onto the field and some famous rapper jumps out of the car and starts performing with the marching band as the accompaniment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 But I'll have you think of this: The million-dollar budget corps receive a much greater portion of gate and DCI profits for the season. In fact, some of the top corps income statments show that 20% of their season's budget comes from gate and payouts. In the lower end of just World Class, gate/payouts represent low single digits on the income statement. So, bully, you say, they deserve it because they are "the draw". That's a debatable, but unproven, contention. Apart from that, it's clear that the top corps are taking "out" of the activity a substantially larger portion of "activity income" than the smaller corps. This is a double edged sword. Sword Side One - Better ranked corps draw MORE people to shows. They get paid more for putting more butts in the seats. Sword Side Two - Lower ranking corps feel they deserve an equal share of the pull. This creates envy within the ranks. Both are actually correct in their thinking - just polar different philosophies. I do know if it is a Rock Show - You pay the head liners more money than opening act. I'm thinking the lower ranked corps need to work harder to become headliners. That is what Rock Stars do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 But I'll have you think of this: The million-dollar budget corps receive a much greater portion of gate and DCI profits for the season. In fact, some of the top corps income statments show that 20% of their season's budget comes from gate and payouts. In the lower end of just World Class, gate/payouts represent low single digits on the income statement. So, bully, you say, they deserve it because they are "the draw". That's a debatable, but unproven, contention. Apart from that, it's clear that the top corps are taking "out" of the activity a substantially larger portion of "activity income" than the smaller corps. There are more examples of this when you start talking about corporate sponsors. Better ranked corps get sweeter deals on drums, horns, unis, and other equipment. Is it "RIGHT"? I have to say yes because it is a better exposure deal for the Corporate Sponsor. This is another route to take the financial discussions on how to pay for lighting. Give exposure and brand recognition to the lighting companies through corporate sponsorship deals. AGAIN - people will say that this is unfair simply out of envy. The better ranking corps will get better deals. It is not unfair, it is actually best practice for the Corporate Sponsor. They are simply looking for the most bang for their buck. I hate it - but it is a reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mn trumpter guy Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 This is a double edged sword. Sword Side One - Better ranked corps draw MORE people to shows. They get paid more for putting more butts in the seats. Sword Side Two - Lower ranking corps feel they deserve an equal share of the pull. This creates envy within the ranks. Both are actually correct in their thinking - just polar different philosophies. I do know if it is a Rock Show - You pay the head liners more money than opening act. I'm thinking the lower ranked corps need to work harder to become headliners. That is what Rock Stars do. Yes... except it's not only a question of 'working harder.' An open class corps can work their patooters off, but they won't have the equipment, members, or staff to put on the same production as a world class corps- simply in terms of numbers. Without money, the corps will have nowhere to work, much less getting people there to work in the first place. Historically, the corps that do the best in DCI are the corps that are the best funded. They are the best funded, so they win, and this garners them more funding. If we keep giving the winners more and more of the earnings, the smaller groups will die out, as has been happening for the last 12 years. In the year 2000, there were something like 46 Div II/III corps alone, plus 20-some in Div I. Now there are 36 total. On the other hand, if the winners were not compensated head and shoulders above everyone else, would they all of a sudden stop competing? I have my doubts that the Blue Devils, Cavaliers, or anyone else would say "well if we're not payed X, Y, and Z, we just won't field a show this year." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 (edited) everyone works their patooters off. There is no question about that. Compensation for patooter work is a major issue. This one is an extremely difficult issue because both extremes are correct. Edited August 21, 2012 by Kevin Powell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cache_Money Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 (edited) I know very well the issues of starting a business. Multiply that problem times ten or more when start a non-profit that has absolutely no revenue stream. SO... tell me your solution to the failed business structure of drum corps. I state it this way because more fail and struggle than survive and strive. TELL ME ON THIS NEW THREAD. A NEW THREAD IS HERE. "Failed business structure"? It's no different now than it's been since DCI was formed. It's just that it's gotten more expensive (due in part to all the new toys). The sources of revenue are show tickets, member fees, sponsorships and any little sidelines (like bingo) that corps can run. Are there other revenue sources out there ripe for the taking? DCI would love to hear your ideas. But to merely say "you need to be profitable" or to "find a better business model" is not helpful at all. Edited August 21, 2012 by Cache_Money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some Random Drummer Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 Another thing to consider if lighting ever makes it into drum corps . . . the earlier a corps goes on the field, the more difficult it would be to achieve the desired lighting effect, because of the sun. Imagine taking the arguments about performance order and slotting now, then magnifying them by ten because (X corps') lights were less effective in the evening sun than (Y corps') lights in the dark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortAndFast Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 (edited) On the other hand, if the winners were not compensated head and shoulders above everyone else, would they all of a sudden stop competing? I have my doubts that the Blue Devils, Cavaliers, or anyone else would say "well if we're not payed X, Y, and Z, we just won't field a show this year." That was the core issue of the G7 controversy of 2010. For some values of $X, it's certainly true. It very much appears that the G7 is stuck in what biologists call a "Red Queen Race" - running faster and faster to stay in the same place. How much more did the 2012 Cadets cost (inclusive of everything: staff, food, travel, uniforms, props, instruments, ...) compared to 2002? 1992? 1982? Yet in all of those years they accomplished much the same thing: prepared a field show of suitable quality to contend for the DCI championship and took it on a national tour. Sure, they could add lights, fog, woodwinds, lasers, dancing bears, trampolines, and a partridge in a pear tree. But unless it unlocks new revenue, it's just driving up the costs of entering the same competition with the same players year after year. I wonder what any of the top groups see as the end game here? Edited August 21, 2012 by ShortAndFast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 "Failed business structure"? It's no different now than it's been since DCI was formed. It's just that it's gotten more expensive (due in part to all the new toys). The sources of revenue are show tickets, member fees, sponsorships and any little sidelines (like bingo) that corps can run. Are there other revenue sources out there ripe for the taking? DCI would love to hear your ideas. But to merely say "you need to be profitable" or to "find a better business model" is not helpful at all. that is a fair statement. What was the yearly operating expense of a Corps in 1972? Make it a top 12 to keep this easy. 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.