mingusmonk Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 (edited) One thing that people seem to be missing and why it is very clear that DCI and other corps overplayed their hand... The dangerous assumption here is that MIM would have the same structure, parameters, would play by the same rules. It won't. Aside from concentration manufacturer deals, an independent MIM would be unrestrained. - 200 member corps - no rules... literally... anything goes... electronics, pyrotechnics, lights, whatever Tours would be focused on key scholastic music clusters. DCI tours returning to the same areas would seem to have less of an impact than an unrestrained MIM. These areas are the bread and butter of the DCI tour. A remainder DCI tour with more strict rules and constraints would have a challenge drawing from the same audience if following unrestrained 200+ member MIM corps. The result for them would likely be worse than present. Think about this... If top 7 corps could add 50 more members each (which they can easily fill... no question), how would this impact the quality of the remaining corps? There is a certain reality that is not being acknowledged... What % of performers in corps not a part of G7 had a G7 corps as their first choice? Many could have been cut because of being young, went to another group and stayed (I was cut from my first auditions for a G7 corps). What if these guys were not cut to begin with because the corps had expanded their membership? Just pointing out that for many of these corps, 150 vs. 200 vs. 250... not that big of a difference for the bottom line, as core costs (design, instruction, etc.) are already covered in the 150 figure. It actually is MUCH easier to grow from 150 to 200, than 100 to 150. Great point. I am glad you finally brought this into perspective. I think a handful of people have briefly mentioned size increase, age increase, instrumentation expansion, etc. But thank you for adding the concept on how this means dollars. There should be no assumptions that things will be the same ... on either side. Edited January 11, 2013 by mingusmonk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mingusmonk Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 (edited) Not to mention that BD and SCV (and Cadets with a little tweaking) are entirely capable of having second units march DCI as well, should they chose. 200 + 150, plus winterguard, plus indoor percussion, plus professional sports team drumlines, plus plus plus. Side note worth repeating: Crown, Bluecoats, Phantom, Cavies ... where do you stand in this scenario? G7? G3 plus 4? Edited January 11, 2013 by mingusmonk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 One thing that people seem to be missing and why it is very clear that DCI and other corps overplayed their hand... The dangerous assumption here is that MIM would have the same structure, parameters, would play by the same rules. It won't. Aside from concentration manufacturer deals, an independent MIM would be unrestrained. - 200 member corps - no rules... literally... anything goes... electronics, pyrotechnics, lights, whatever Tours would be focused on key scholastic music clusters. DCI tours returning to the same areas would seem to have less of an impact than an unrestrained MIM. These areas are the bread and butter of the DCI tour. A remainder DCI tour with more strict rules and constraints would have a challenge drawing from the same audience if following unrestrained 200+ member MIM corps. The result for them would likely be worse than present. Sure, they'll have to do something to change what they're offering to make it different than the standard DCI fare. However, if you think this means that you'll have a 250 member BD doing avant-garde "Reflections on a Tutti Turtle en Espanol" with flame-eaters and flying trapeze artists, then I seriously doubt it. In order to sell it, the product will have to be dumbed down . . .no DCI means no brand recognition for most of the lay folks out there. Sure, the insular band world folks will still know who is who, but they may not be so keen on it when they can't rip it off for their own fall and winter programs. Why not? Because if you're going to go big, you're most likely . . .at least at first . . going to have to go towards the "standards" to get people in the door, similar to Blast! Yes, there's the pie in the sky "ANYTHING GOES" artistic nirvana that some folks yearn for that could come from this . . but the bills have to be paid too. The Cadets just might be playing Malaguena and doing "stick tricks" in the dark the first few years to keep the lights on. Yes, there will be some market split between DCI and MIM . . .but hey, DCI can forge relationships with smaller, less expensive venues as well, helping to keep costs manageable. Let MIM go for broke . . .after all, that's the dream, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Boo Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Mark Arnold may possibly be the most level-headed person in the activity today. If I was on a ship negotiating a field of icebergs, I'd be comforted knowing that he was the captain. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCFan Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 What happened to Boston, by the way? It was the G-8 for the past few years, in TOC competition, and suddenly it's the G-7? Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Silly. This is just kid's marching band people. Oh how I wish that were true and that some of the grown ups would figure that out too antway, I would have prefer something more akin to you are either with us or against us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 What happened to Boston, by the way? It was the G-8 for the past few years, in TOC competition, and suddenly it's the G-7? Why? It was never the G-8. It was eight corps performing at TOC shows only so they couldn't be labeled G-7 shows. The 8th was only a compromise in the immediate after-glow of the G-7 presentation in 2010. The 8th was always the runt of the litter, doomed to be thrown to the curb if the TOC concept failed, which it obviously did else we wouldn't be here again. It was 7 in May of 2010, and it's 7 today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fran Haring Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 One thing that people seem to be missing and why it is very clear that DCI and other corps overplayed their hand... The dangerous assumption here is that MIM would have the same structure, parameters, would play by the same rules. It won't. Aside from concentration manufacturer deals, an independent MIM would be unrestrained. - 200 member corps - no rules... literally... anything goes... electronics, pyrotechnics, lights, whatever Tours would be focused on key scholastic music clusters. DCI tours returning to the same areas would seem to have less of an impact than an unrestrained MIM. These areas are the bread and butter of the DCI tour. A remainder DCI tour with more strict rules and constraints would have a challenge drawing from the same audience if following unrestrained 200+ member MIM corps. The result for them would likely be worse than present. Think about this... If top 7 corps could add 50 more members each (which they can easily fill... no question), how would this impact the quality of the remaining corps? There is a certain reality that is not being acknowledged... What % of performers in corps not a part of G7 had a G7 corps as their first choice? Many could have been cut because of being young, went to another group and stayed (I was cut from my first auditions for a G7 corps). What if these guys were not cut to begin with because the corps had expanded their membership? Just pointing out that for many of these corps, 150 vs. 200 vs. 250... not that big of a difference for the bottom line, as core costs (design, instruction, etc.) are already covered in the 150 figure. It actually is MUCH easier to grow from 150 to 200, than 100 to 150. Good points.... but I wonder about the extra cost of moving/housing additional performers. If corps (including at least some of the G7 organizations) are struggling putting their show on the road now... how are they going to afford larger performance units, without a significant infusion of new cash.... and the G7 show model, even if it's radically different than the current DCI model, is not guaranteed to bring in that cash. Even if it's a wonderful show, it strikes me as yet another niche within a niche. I think Bill Cook had it right. If you're going to break away from the current drum corps product/model, go smaller, go pro at a high level (like Blast! did on Broadway)... and "mainstream" the product to attract new customers and keep the cash registers ringing. Of course, not everyone has either Bill Cook's resources or business sense. (And of course, he had built those resources over many years because of his great business sense.) Heck... I guess nothing is guaranteed. Other than death and too many taxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerguy315 Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 What happened to Boston, by the way? It was the G-8 for the past few years, in TOC competition, and suddenly it's the G-7? Why? the 8th was a throw away Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 What happened to Boston, by the way? It was the G-8 for the past few years, in TOC competition, and suddenly it's the G-7? Why? What garfield said, and also: the "G7" are all working together on this plan. Blue Stars and Boston got included in the TOC shows, but they have never been part of the group working on the plan to change the rules/structure of DCI. That's mainly Cadets and Blue Devils, and they've pulled in the other three perennial top performers along with the newest challengers to give them enough weight to have a credible threat. If you go back and look at Hop's 1997 version of this plan, the top tier with the most money and no rules was just supposed to be three or four corps. But if just the Cadets and Blue Devils were going to leave DCI, that wouldn't be nearly as good of a threat. 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.