SkyRyder_FMM Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 the corps. they want it. they figure out how to pay for it The corps that are flush with cash (i.e., 2 corps in CA with significant bingo operations) can pay for it. The rest scramble to find a way to pay to remain competitive and relevant. It's called a death spiral. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortAndFast Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Like what? I noticed that corps #8 always has far fewer butts in seats than corps #9. I guess corps #9 "sold more tickets", then. Funny....it doesn't matter who #8 and #9 are, and it's true every year. At least, every year there's an intermission between those two corps. Perhaps this only tells me how many people got caught in the nacho line, and couldn't get back past the ushers during #8's performance....or how many people's flights to Indy were delayed....or how thick the traffic is around LOS on a Thursday evening....or how many people can't get Friday (or Thursday, if not local) off to travel to Indy....or how many people skip Thursday now that Friday has 25 corps instead of 17. So say there were 250 people in the stands when Blue Saints started things off. Does that mean the Blue Saints sold 250 of the 6,647 prelim tickets? And if 6,647 tickets sold, but only 6,600 people actually sat in seats, what corps sold the other 47 tickets? Please....you can't tell me anything about what corps "caused" which tickets to sell. Fact is, many people buy a ticket to see a whole event. Once there, they might watch everybody....or if they can't sit still that long, and they have some way of knowing who the best corps are (like DCI placements that almost never change from day to day), then they are more likely to be in their seat when those better corps are on. That does not equate to tickets sold. OK, here are two situations where you really can say a specific corps "sold X tickets": 1. Corps each get a block of seats from DCI, and they sell the tickets to their parents/boosters. At least here, the corps is doing the selling. 2. In rare cases, a single corps stages an event all by themselves (i.e. Academy's early June stage show). Then, there's no doubt that every ticket buyer is there to see Academy's performing ensembles. No offense, but that's really straining. Obviously the corps don't literally sell the tickets, it's a question of who motivates fans to pay money for the show. If you didn't go to your seat with your paid for ticket to see Group X, then it's a pretty good guess that you wouldn't have paid for a show that included only Group X and lower. At most Regionals it appears that more than half the audience does not wish to see any groups outside the Top 12. I'm not saying it's right, it's just the reality of what appeals to the people who buy the tickets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) The corps that are flush with cash (i.e., 2 corps in CA with significant bingo operations) can pay for it. The rest scramble to find a way to pay to remain competitive and relevant. It's called a death spiral. I rue the day those 2 corps field 2 world class corps each & possibly knocking two more corps out of the top 12. envy of years of dedicated hard work is not a great trait. Edited August 23, 2012 by Kevin Powell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 No offense, but that's really straining. Obviously the corps don't literally sell the tickets, it's a question of who motivates fans to pay money for the show. And as this thread demonstrates, the "who" in question is often not any specific corps. Many people just want to see a DCI contest. If you didn't go to your seat with your paid for ticket to see Group X, then it's a pretty good guess that you wouldn't have paid for a show that included only Group X and lower. Wrong again. I know folks who skipped the 9-15 block Thursday because they knew they would see them all Friday. Now who's straining? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Elite, as in some groups are the best, is fine; and any corps which can rise to the top 12 is an Elite corps; and I have absolutely no problem with that fact. "Elitism", however, as in the condescending ego driven belittling attitude by the perceived superior toward the perceived inferior is what I despise. It appeared in the G7 proposal; and it appears in some postings within this thread by those defending the G7 Elitism. That is why I have stopped engaging in this thread and why I did not take the bait in the spin-off thread. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Elite, as in some groups are the best, is fine; and any corps which can rise to the top 12 is an Elite corps; and I have absolutely no problem with that fact. "Elitism", however, as in the condescending ego driven belittling attitude by the perceived superior toward the perceived inferior is what I despise. It appeared in the G7 proposal; and it appears in some postings within this thread by those defending the G7 Elitism. That is why I have stopped engaging in this thread and why I did not take the bait in the spin-off thread. If you are calling me out... I've been defending both sides and spun off a thread to discuss the financial aspect of this AND whatever else. I do defend those California corps because they have done an amazing job at setting a great example. They should not be called out for excellent business management. I also think the G7 talk is over and no longer an issue. The corps outside that block have representation and can all learn and grow. ALL THE CORPS are great. Are there issues... yes. But that can be resolved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) If you are calling me out... I've been defending both sides... Engaging in the academic exercise of Dissoi Logoi, arguing both sides, is a good way to determine what you personally accept as the most solid position. And that is where it should remain; an academic exercise of self-exploration. Nevertheless, if one uses this philosophy within an actual public debate, or in this case a public forum thread, it takes on a completely different purpose; and that purpose typically leads down the path of baiting or trolling. But even if one engages in Dissoi Logoi within a real (as in non-academic) debate out of an honest reason, no matter how hard they try, the person's true views are still ultimately reviled in how they present both sides of the argument which in turn comes across as a perceived attempt at deception. Therefore, it is always wise to avoid utilizing Dissoi Logoi within a debate outside the acdemic arena and stick with presenting the position in which is truly believed by the person. Edited August 23, 2012 by Stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) yup... no long discussion needed. There is one issue that has a double sided dilemma. That is where I've been truly looking at the issue. Rigid defenders of those outside the so called G7 need to see both sides. Both sides are right. Simply if there is a problem with the way shows distribute money - DCI will vote on it. Dissio Logoi was appropriate in this due to both sides containing a conflicting ideology - I was clear on that intent. Both sides are right - Both are wrong. Edited August 23, 2012 by Kevin Powell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Powell Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 no baiting or trolling or conspiracy against you and corps. Finances is simply a long passionate debate. I would still like your contributions in the other thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) ... I would still like your contributions in the other thread. No need to continue debate here or any other thread; my position has already been clearly put forth in this thread. NASCAR, for example, has limited expenses for their teams by limiting outrageous cost for engines, tires, testing at tracks and wind tunnels, and number of cars on one team; all which are to keep the big teams like Hendrick and Rousch from putting the smaller teams out of business; and they even tell drivers and owners that they can leave any time they want because they need NASCAR more than NASCAR needs them. Why? Well, who wants to see seven cars race in NASCAR and if a person cannot see why that is a problem then that person is rather dumb. Therefore, the G7 corps directors should either downsize for the financial stability of DCI and the other corps that are attempting to be financially responsible (which would be the G7 looking out for the best interest of the collective in which they volunteered to be a part of), or leave to do their own bells, whistles, increased multimillion spending thing and not place those burdens on the other fiscally responsible corps in DCI who cannot go that direction without financial collapse (which is what Star did). I will support either scenario. But what I will not do is engage in any Dissio Logoi exercise to support the G7 continuing to expand DCI into collapse for all but the G7. You say that, "Both sides are right - Both are wrong". While it may be true that there are legitimate stances on both sides, the issue itself certainly is a right-wrong issue; and I stand firmly with the fiscally responsible non-G7 within DCI, and by the way, I would stand with the G7 in the for-profit world outside of DCI if they pulled a Star. Edited August 23, 2012 by Stu 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.