Jump to content

G7 Update


Recommended Posts

So if this were voted on last year, with the majority of the board only half-way through their term it seems unlikely they would all step down to essentially give their seats away: especially Roman who would go from an Exec Board member to not even being able to vote on things.

On the flip side of that, I can understand the frustrations the 7 directors must feel to not have any seat on the board

2 quit so they have no one to blame but themselves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if this were voted on last year, with the majority of the board only half-way through their term it seems unlikely they would all step down to essentially give their seats away: especially Roman who would go from an Exec Board member to not even being able to vote on things.

On the flip side of that, I can understand the frustrations the 7 directors must feel to not have any seat on the board

I really have no sympathy for the frustrations of the 7...after all, they brought their current position upon themselves.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to spew out a bunch of knee jerk comments and reactions based on posts I read. Admittedly, I have not read the entire thread but my impression is that a vast majority of posters feel the G7 are wrong.

What if they are right?

Having said that...what is the ultimate goal?

  • Is it to be able to run shows? OK. G7 can do that, so can DCI.
  • Is it to run good organizations? Hmmm... G7 can do that. DCI? Well, membership didn't dwindle because of the G7, from what I've read on DCP it was DCI. However, DCI has survived this long.
  • Is it to promote the activity? What good is that if corps are dieing?
  • I saw people complain about entertaining shows. If that's true, then based on postings of every corps and their haters, G7 can leave and problem solved, no?
  • What corps do people really go to shows to see? Be real. It's not the corps that are on first. If that were true, the stands would be just as full at the start of the show as it would be at the end of the show. So.......who are the corps people want to see? I know mom and pops will say they want to see their kids corps and ALL the corps because they all work so hard. Others with no affiliation will say the same thing. Even still, more will say that everybody should watch ALL of the corps because they ALL work so hard. That's fine. But can anybody explain why the crowds at DIV II or lower (are there any?) during championships week is not the same as the World Class corps??
    Sounds like a number in this thread are ready to cavalierly throw away that crowd that shows up at World Class finals. They must be there to see the top acts, no? Okay. Now they are gone. What happens?
  • DCI posted a list of the top downloads, to watched, etc. Those were G7 corps. I think for those that hope they leave, what do they really think would happen?
  • Some have post...if G7 corps leave, they don't get to keep their names. Really? DCI made the corps or corps made DCI?

I'm not advocating pro/con. Just throwing out knee jerk thoughts.

The issue is complex and full of emotion. The wrong choice is to say "buh-bye" to the G7. The rest of DCI will lose IMO.

I don't know what the solution is, but I do agree the top corps should have a say in the activity that they are the headliners in. Otherwise, based on their proposals, they will do to DCI what DCI did to the organizations that preceded it (VFW, etc). I'm sure people supporting corps during those years weren't too keen on the corps leaving to create DCI either. The corps felt they had to for a reason. I wouldn't discount the G7 and their abilities. Those that do will be watching something else in the summers to come I fear.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear G7/MiM/We7/Whatever:

In the words of a great philosopher: "When everyone is special - Noone is."

Think about it, m'kay?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In conjunction to this, did Blast! or Brass Theater even actively try to promote DCI at their events or in their literature (for example, any know if there was something in the program describing DCI & how people could learn more about drum corps)? From an entertainment business standpoint, it wouldn't make a ton of sense to promote another entertainment venue other than yours, and frankly why would they? Star's mission when they did Brass Theater, and later Blast! was not to promote DCI to a broader audience: it was to refine their performance even more and deliver it to a broader, larger audience.

I'd have to go looking for my Brass Theatre literature to find that out, as I don't remember. However, I remember Blast! definitely had info in the program books about how they originated, explaining some about drum corps and DCI.

There was no harm in mentioning DCI and drum corps. Those who were at Blast! would still be around when a drum corps show moved into town. It was Blast! that moved on elsewhere. There would be no competition. Blast! already had their money. They were in no risk of losing anything by promoting drum corps. If they managed to send some people to drum corps shows, those people would possibly talk about seeing Blast! and might possibly encourage others to go see Blast! if it came to their hometowns.

Edited by Michael Boo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear

Are you saying it's more probably that shows without Blue Devils, SCV, Cavaliers, Phantom Regiment, or Cadets would draw more fans than a show that has none of those shows?

I know you aren't explicitly saying that, but I think it takes mountains of supposition to say it wouldn't matter.

I have known people who have run shows annually for a long time (actually, a few different people), and I have heard that years without a "Top 6" corps or Championship winning corps produced less gate & concession $ than years they did. In fact, I used to work with someone who ran a local show for three years.

* One year the highest placing corps was only a Top 10 corps, with the rest of the line-up filled with semi-finalists, quarter-finalists, and Open Class corps.

* Year two had one Top 6/former Champion, and the same exact line-up from the previous season. My friend said the second year, with what they called "a slightly better line-up," made more money than the year before. albeit not a great amount. That show-runner was convinced that it was because of the former Champion, and even commented that the stands really filled up a corps or two before the 'headliner.'

* Year three had the defending Champion, two other former Champions, and almost the same line-up otherwise as the previous two years (i.e. one or two more lower-tiered finalists, a few non-finalist World Class & several Open Class corps). That year the show made significantly more, and he was 100% convinced it made more because of the 'top level' headliners.

He stopped hosting it after the third year.

I talked to another person who had been involved in the activity for decades, and has run many shows over the years. I once asked him about the financials of running a show, and when I asked what kind of profit they organizer made his immediate, non-flinching response was "it all depends on who's performing." He then rattled off some examples of figures based on what corps were there: this was years ago, almost a decade, so I don't remember what he said exactly. But he did say things that were consistent with my example above, but he used corps names. For example (and these are totally made up figures), something like: if you have SCV, Boston, Troopers, PC, and Open Class Corps figure $8k. If you have Cadets, Crown, Cavaliers, Boston, PC and open class corps figure $10k. Add Blue Devils figure $13k.

You're right that there is 'empirical proof' if corps made up of the top achieving corps would outdraw a show full of lower-level finalists and non-flinalists. There's also no empirical proof that Obama would have been able to beat Donal Trump for President, but that is a pretty good bet he would have.

I'm not saying anything at all about probabilities, what I'm talking about is the empirical proof of two TEP who have presented facts about their past shows, even while I admit that their evidence may not be representative of the activity over all.

I'm not smart enough to be able to pick who will win political contests when 100-million people I know nothing about are pulling levers. But my experience as a TEP, as recently as last year, tells me two things:

1. Don't build an expectation of a show's success based on who's in the lineup, and

2. The success of a show is based on many more factors than just who the headliner is.

For example, attendance may increase more when the lineup contains corps that have never appeared at that show before. And, the longer a show is successfully run, the more confident you can be in your attendance assumptions (relating to your friend's three-year experience with a new show). Interestingly, my recent experience with a top corps attending our show for the first time was a net increase of BITS of 97 fans over the prior year. This after significant promotion and expense in broadcasting their appearance. Less than 100 additional fans. Go figure.

Yes, that may have been a one-off year (I doubt it) and there may have been other, unknown factors that led to the results. And that's my point.

My professional experience tells me much the same: Because the stock market was down yesterday (last month, last quarter, last year) then the odds are very high that it will be up on Monday (next month, next quarter, or next year), right?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to spew out a bunch of knee jerk comments and reactions based on posts I read. Admittedly, I have not read the entire thread but my impression is that a vast majority of posters feel the G7 are wrong.

What if they are right?

Having said that...what is the ultimate goal?

  • Is it to be able to run shows? OK. G7 can do that, so can DCI.
  • Is it to run good organizations? Hmmm... G7 can do that. DCI? Well, membership didn't dwindle because of the G7, from what I've read on DCP it was DCI. However, DCI has survived this long.
  • Is it to promote the activity? What good is that if corps are dieing?
  • I saw people complain about entertaining shows. If that's true, then based on postings of every corps and their haters, G7 can leave and problem solved, no?
  • What corps do people really go to shows to see? Be real. It's not the corps that are on first. If that were true, the stands would be just as full at the start of the show as it would be at the end of the show. So.......who are the corps people want to see? I know mom and pops will say they want to see their kids corps and ALL the corps because they all work so hard. Others with no affiliation will say the same thing. Even still, more will say that everybody should watch ALL of the corps because they ALL work so hard. That's fine. But can anybody explain why the crowds at DIV II or lower (are there any?) during championships week is not the same as the World Class corps??
    Sounds like a number in this thread are ready to cavalierly throw away that crowd that shows up at World Class finals. They must be there to see the top acts, no? Okay. Now they are gone. What happens?
  • DCI posted a list of the top downloads, to watched, etc. Those were G7 corps. I think for those that hope they leave, what do they really think would happen?
  • Some have post...if G7 corps leave, they don't get to keep their names. Really? DCI made the corps or corps made DCI?

I'm not advocating pro/con. Just throwing out knee jerk thoughts.

The issue is complex and full of emotion. The wrong choice is to say "buh-bye" to the G7. The rest of DCI will lose IMO.

I don't know what the solution is, but I do agree the top corps should have a say in the activity that they are the headliners in. Otherwise, based on their proposals, they will do to DCI what DCI did to the organizations that preceded it (VFW, etc). I'm sure people supporting corps during those years weren't too keen on the corps leaving to create DCI either. The corps felt they had to for a reason. I wouldn't discount the G7 and their abilities. Those that do will be watching something else in the summers to come I fear.

I don't really go in for knee jerk reactions, so most of your post is irrelevant to me. I will make one comment, though.

At this moment, the top corps have just as much say in the activity as any other corps. They have the same one vote at the annual meeting. What appears to be happening now, though, is that this group of 7 corps want to have ALL the say. That, in my mind, is unacceptable.

I suppose we'll see soon what's in the minds of the other corps.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really go in for knee jerk reactions, so most of your post is irrelevant to me. I will make one comment, though.

Interesting. Most posts on DCP are knee jerk reactions, no?

At this moment, the top corps have just as much say in the activity as any other corps. They have the same one vote at the annual meeting. What appears to be happening now, though, is that this group of 7 corps want to have ALL the say. That, in my mind, is unacceptable.

[ following post not pointed at RockyGranite - just a general post]

I look at it this way. Go to DCI's web page.

What do you see?

You see the corps that want to have a say about how their product is used by an organization that is touting their corps product. The G7 when I just looked...was the front page.

One would have to assume that's the attraction. Those corps on the front page. Yes, I have knee jerk reaction posts and we can all word parse to our hearts content (me too :) ) The reality is, the G7 corps are the main attraction. Assuming those corps leave won't have an impact is ludicrous.

For those that want to feel like they have some semblance of control over the top corps is frankly, IMO, stupid. They have nothing.

Having said that last statement, it's in the best interest of all corps to work together. However, to try to shut out the top tier corps for whatever reason isn't going to work.

The top tier corps, frankly, are the main attraction.....and they know it. To ignore that fact is well.....[ no more knee jerk reactions ].....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. Most posts on DCP are knee jerk reactions, no?

[ following post not pointed at RockyGranite - just a general post]

I look at it this way. Go to DCI's web page.

What do you see?

You see the corps that want to have a say about how their product is used by an organization that is touting their corps product. The G7 when I just looked...was the front page.

One would have to assume that's the attraction. Those corps on the front page. Yes, I have knee jerk reaction posts and we can all word parse to our hearts content (me too :) ) The reality is, the G7 corps are the main attraction. Assuming those corps leave won't have an impact is ludicrous.

For those that want to feel like they have some semblance of control over the top corps is frankly, IMO, stupid. They have nothing.

Having said that last statement, it's in the best interest of all corps to work together. However, to try to shut out the top tier corps for whatever reason isn't going to work.

The top tier corps, frankly, are the main attraction.....and they know it. To ignore that fact is well.....[ no more knee jerk reactions ].....

Again...I really don't go in for knee jerk reactions. Heck, I think I'm too new in this whole thing to do something like that. Now, what others do is, of course, their business. They can jerk their knees as much as they want.

Anyway, I don't think anyone wants to "shut out the top tier corps". If anyone wants to shut out any corps, it seems the 7 are the ones with that desire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cancer must be removed from the body as quickly as possible. Narcissism is a terrible thing and to an organization like DCI Hopkins represents a cancer. The folks at YEA are crazy to have a guy with his obvious lack of any moral compass leading it. The longer DCI puts up with his antics, the more the cancer will spread.

A man who runs a performing arts non-profit has no moral compass leading him... lulz

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...