Marching Roundtable: DCI’s Role in Corps Financial Stability

[Stu]

The point relates to this: which of the two examples you gave above is best suited to assure the financial stability of DCI, the organization?

I agree with you; but your point begs a question: Which has more relevance; DCI as an organization or the top Corps which compete? Brian France, CEO of NASCAR, once told Tony Stewart that he needs NASCAR far more than NASCAR needs him; and that Tony should adjust his attitude or leave the sanctioning body. Tony acquiesced and dialed down his arrogant attitude quite a bit. That indicates the organization of NASCAR is what is relevant not the performers. However, Dan apparently cannot say such a thing to Hopkins or Gibbs. And if Dan as CEO of DCI cannot say that type of thing to those two then maybe DCI 'as an organization' is not that relevant (which, of course, was a subtle contention of the G7 architects).

(And I think you need to demonstrate that "Fraternal Collective" and "responsibility" are inextricably linked, but I get and concede that point to you.)

It is the Fraternal mindset to take care of one another. Whether you are a Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia or a Mason/Shriner; give each other that secret handshake and you can rest assured you 'will' be taken care of to the best of the ability (no mater what).

[cixelsyd]

Even this loose association has rules to play in WC and financials are reviewed upon application to WC. It seems to me that that's the moment when "duplicating" the good business practices could be enforced. And they are, presumably, as part of the admission process. But to subsequently ignore financial solvency until a problem is evident - and only then on the instigation of some outside event - for an organization that is so deeply dependent on each corps' ability to finish the season doesn't sound like sound business practice in and of itself.

Maybe not. But we have not established just how deeply dependent DCI is on the ability of each and every corps to fulfill each and every tour appearance. More on that below.

It sounds as though I could run a brothel to fund my corps and DCI doesn't care, which I agree with because I want to choose how I fund my corps. But if I run a profitable whore-house and petition for WC entry (and am granted permission) the year before prostitution is outlawed in my state, DCI wouldn't get involved until my corps folded unless someone at DCI was paying attention to the changing laws of my state.

Yes. Now, substitute "bingo" for "brothel", and the accuracy of your statement becomes even more clear.

Again, it seems to me that to protect the interests of DCI and its revenue a system of financial review needs established. Burying the head in the sand and hoping there are no problems is not an effective way to protect the performance income of even the loosest association.

I'm not blaming Dan, per se, because we all know that DCI is the corps. But if the corps charge Dan with producing revenue for the corps it seems responsible (and job-protecting) to implement a system that protects his ability to produce income every year, not just upon the corps' first year.in WC.

To that, I would suggest that the system might accomplish that even when a member corps folds, provided it does not happen in the middle of tour like the Teal Sound situation.

And how much income does DCI lose? There are other corps wanting more shows that can fill in when someone drops out of the lineup. If the change takes place in the preseason, there may be no loss of income to DCI. Mid-season, maybe only a handful of show sponsors require a refund for getting one less corps, in the cases where no other corps can fill in at such short notice.

Especially when so many corps run so close to the edge of solvency in their annual income and expenses.

Drum corps has always been like that, and still is today to some degree. It is a pre-existing condition as far as the DCI evaluation process is concerned. Maybe that is why the existing member corps do not want DCI evaluating their finances. We might be surprised which corps would not pass, even corps like - oh, someone is knocking at my door again.

[garfield]

I agree with you; but your point begs a question: Which has more relevance; DCI as an organization or the top Corps which compete? Brian France, CEO of NASCAR, once told Tony Stewart that he needs NASCAR far more than NASCAR needs him; and that Tony should adjust his attitude or leave the sanctioning body. Tony acquiesced and dialed down his arrogant attitude quite a bit. That indicates the organization of NASCAR is what is relevant not the performers. However, Dan apparently cannot say such a thing to Hopkins or Gibbs. And if Dan as CEO of DCI cannot say that type of thing to those two then maybe DCI 'as an organization' is not that relevant (which, of course, was a subtle contention of the G7 architects).

Tony doesn't sit on the BOD of NASCAR, does he? Is Brian France at the behest of the drivers?

Look, Stu, I agree with your sentiment but I don't think you're accurately seeing what DCI IS according to what Dan said in this interview. Dan, himself, the CEO of DCI, says that DCI is NOT fraternal in the sense you imply (even though the definition of fraternal does not include any expectation of "care" as you use it below). It is an association, and one that has no power, and one that has chosen not to get involved in the finances of any individual corps (except under circumstances discussed earlier). Each does not look after the other in any formal sense and it is not proactive in trying to save a corps from itself or from outside attack.

Your description may be what you think DCI should be, but it clearly is not what DCI actually is.

It is the Fraternal mindset to take care of one another. Whether you are a Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia or a Mason/Shriner; give each other that secret handshake and you can rest assured you 'will' be taken care of to the best of the ability (no mater what).

Apparently, each corps' "Fraternal" obligation ends with that secret handshake. Instead of "we got your back", the secret handshake is only accompanied by "Good Luck. See you in August".

[garfield]

Yes. Now, substitute "bingo" for "brothel", and the accuracy of your statement becomes even more clear.

Yea, I thought about using bingo as the example but it wasn't enough out of the ordinary to make the point.

And how much income does DCI lose? There are other corps wanting more shows that can fill in when someone drops out of the lineup. If the change takes place in the preseason, there may be no loss of income to DCI. Mid-season, maybe only a handful of show sponsors require a refund for getting one less corps, in the cases where no other corps can fill in at such short notice.

Hmm...I think you need to think this through a little farther. "Other corps waiting..."? Really? Are there a bunch of corps waiting to perform that aren't now performing? Who? Where are they? Are these corps that would draw as many as a corps that folds? (Now think that through before you answer, please.)

And, no, you can't claim that "only a handful of show sponsors" require a refund... EVERY show sponsor is refunded the fee they paid for a corps that doesn't perform. Regardless of whether a corps folds prior to, or during, the season DCI cannot collect a fee for that corps. Worse, there are a little more than 100 shows in a typical year. With fewer corps in the lineup to spread across those shows only one of two things can occur. Either fewer corps will be scheduled per show or there are fewer shows. No matter how you work the math both of those result in DCI collecting less income. Either a TEP will not hold the show because they can't attract enough audience to pay the fee, or DCI will schedule fewer shows because there are fewer corps.

No matter how you do the math, fewer corps equals a smaller audience and lower income into DCI as well as a shrinking activity that becomes less and less relevent with each folded corps. DCI's business structure is based on organizing shows for income. Fewer corps equals fewer shows (or less revenue from the same number of shows) equals less revenue for DCI.

Drum corps has always been like that, and still is today to some degree. It is a pre-existing condition as far as the DCI evaluation process is concerned. Maybe that is why the existing member corps do not want DCI evaluating their finances. We might be surprised which corps would not pass, even corps like - oh, someone is knocking at my door again.

"...to some degree."? If you actually meant to use that description, I think you'll be shocked to see how endemic the income problem is among today's even most "successful" corps. Ahh, I see you hinted as much in your second sentence. I agree that there probably is, to some degree, a hesitance to modify the DCI by-laws to allow review because it would expose that in any year, virtually every corps is but one calamity away from not being fiscally viable.

[BetoSuave]

Rex was saying the other day that organizationally DCI is kinda like major league baseball in that it is an association of competitors - except without the money, without a commissioner that actually governs, without owners that are successful proven businessmen, without significant media exposure, and without a dedication to a farm system that develops a steady stream of players and broader fan base. Other than that they're pretty much the same. It does have the stereotypical Yankees and Indians.

Edited November 8, 2012 by BetoSuave

[garfield]

Well, if that is the case, then a huge oxymora of information is being transmitted by Dan because he previously stated in his DCI website response to the G7 proposal that the DCI Mission Statement claims DCI is a 'Fraternal' organization. He said, and I quote: "Others may contend that this is a dark moment in Drum Corps International's 38-year history, which in its very own mission statement claims to be 'a cooperative fraternity of its member drum corps'."

Just caught that you're misreading this quote of Dan's, Stu. "Others..." contend that the mission statement claims to be a cooperative fraternity..." Dan didn't say that HE claims that, he says "Others" claim that and they also claim that it's a dark moment...

And to pick a nit with your contention of how DCI and the corps should act even if they were described as a "cooperative fraternity", I offer:

Definition of COOPERATIVE

: an enterprise or organization owned by and operated for the benefit of those using its services, and

Definition of FRATERNITY

: a group of people associated or formally organized for a common purpose, interest, or pleasure

Given that nowhere, in either definition, does it suggest or imply a way of acting towards one another, I fail to see the validity in claiming DCI and/or the corps should cooperate (a verb) with one another, or treat each other "as brothers" as the word "fraternity" implies from its common usage as a college reference.

Again, I agree with your desire that drum corps be all puppy dogs and balloons with each other, but I think your implying traits on the structure and actions of the members is above and beyond what is laid out in DCI's by-laws.

Again, just picking nits because Dan has told us what DCI is and is not. We can wish it to be different, but we can't imply that it is anything other than what Dan says it is.

EDIT: Oh, and this, just to cement the point:

Definition of ASSOCIATION

: an organization of persons having a common interest

That is all.

Edited November 8, 2012 by garfield

[Jeff Ream]

Rex was saying the other day that organizationally DCI is kinda like major league baseball in that it is an association of competitors - except without the money, without a commissioner that actually governs, without owners that are successful proven businessmen, without significant media exposure, and without a dedication to a farm system that develops a steady stream of players and broader fan base. Other than that they're pretty much the same. It does have the stereotypical Yankees and Indians.

I wouldn't go as far as saying MLB is led by successful businessmen to be honest.

and hey, once Music In Motion Inc or whatever they incorporated themselves as bail come August, we'll see who needs who because to be honest, some of them are the worst business people in DCI.

[Stu]

Just caught that you're misreading this quote of Dan's, Stu. "Others..." contend that the mission statement claims to be a cooperative fraternity..." Dan didn't say that HE claims that, he says "Others" claim that and they also claim that it's a dark moment...

And to pick a nit with your contention of how DCI and the corps should act even if they were described as a "cooperative fraternity", I offer:

Definition of COOPERATIVE

: an enterprise or organization owned by and operated for the benefit of those using its services, and

Definition of FRATERNITY

: a group of people associated or formally organized for a common purpose, interest, or pleasure

Given that nowhere, in either definition, does it suggest or imply a way of acting towards one another, I fail to see the validity in claiming DCI and/or the corps should cooperate (a verb) with one another, or treat each other "as brothers" as the word "fraternity" implies from its common usage as a college reference.

Again, I agree with your desire that drum corps be all puppy dogs and balloons with each other, but I think your implying traits on the structure and actions of the members is above and beyond what is laid out in DCI's by-laws.

Again, just picking nits because Dan has told us what DCI is and is not. We can wish it to be different, but we can't imply that it is anything other than what Dan says it is.

EDIT: Oh, and this, just to cement the point:

Definition of ASSOCIATION

: an organization of persons having a common interest

That is all.

Sorry Garfield; you are wrong. This is not parsing words but actual language structure. The comma has meaning in his sentence; the comma separates what people believe (this is a dark moment) with why they believe that (the DCI mission statement). "(what they believe) Others may contend that this is a dark moment in Drum Corps International's 38-year history,(why they believe it is a dark momenbt) which in its [DCI] very own mission statement claims to be 'a cooperative fraternity of its member drum corps'."

[Pete Freedman]

Rex was saying the other day that organizationally DCI is kinda like major league baseball in that it is an association of competitors - except without the money, without a commissioner that actually governs, without owners that are successful proven businessmen, without significant media exposure, and without a dedication to a farm system that develops a steady stream of players and broader fan base. Other than that they're pretty much the same. It does have the stereotypical Yankees and Indians.

This is what blows me away about this. Mr. Acheson claimed in the interview that DCI is an association and not a league, and that he is a president (or executive director, or whatever) and not a commissioner. The interviewers, being yes men and having no idea what the difference is, predictably failed to follow up on that. But Mr. Acheson referred throughout the interview to that distinction as the reason his hands are largely tied, and that he routinely has to explain this to parents.

So I looked up the definition of a sports league. It is .... an association of sports teams, that runs the sport. In other words, it is a league of teams. The managers of the teams can't run the sport themselves, so they hire a commissioner and office staff to do it. They do this because it gives them more authority over the sport than the previous arrangement, in which an outside organization ran the sport. This is of course, exactly the DCI model and history.

So next I wondered, well maybe Mr. Acheson just means the corps don't give him as much authority as league commissioners typically get (still misleading, but not by too much).

This led me to read this article on the Commissioner of Baseball, the first of which was Kenesaw Mountain Landis, who kicked posterior all over the league for decades. I see no evidence that Landis had any less statutory power then does Mr. Acheson. They allowed him to ban players right off the bat, because that's what they wanted him to do. But to me it looks like he (Landis) may well have made his own authority, so to speak. His force of personality seems to be the big difference between himself and Mr. Acheson. Mr. Acheson doesn't seem like the kind of guy who, for example, would form alliances with enough corps to get tough with the rest. But that's what you would need in order to do the things people on DCP want, like banning unapproved clips and auditing moribund drum corps.

Can anyone provide a link to the legalese specifying Mr. Acheson's powers? Otherwise we're all just spitting into the wind.

[Pete Freedman]

Sorry Garfield; you are wrong. This is not parsing words but actual language structure. The comma has meaning in his sentence; the comma separates what people believe (this is a dark moment) with why they believe that (the DCI mission statement). "(what they believe) Others may contend that this is a dark moment in Drum Corps International's 38-year history,(why they believe it is a dark momenbt) which in its [DCI] very own mission statement claims to be 'a cooperative fraternity of its member drum corps'."

My vote is:

He means 'in its very own mission statement claims to be "a cooperative fraternity of its member drum corps."' by itself is a true statement.

I couldn't find the mission statement on the web though...

Edited November 10, 2012 by Pete Freedman