"Tour of Champions" 2013

[N.E. Brigand]

When you create a new legal entity in the US, you have a statutory minimum capital contribution of partners that is pretty much meaningless and has nothing to do with actual intent. For example, we recently created a new entity that had the partner contribution set at I think $10, and then was capitalized with a million the very next day. It makes sense to do it like this as formation and capitalization are often separately defined tasks.

Initial capitalization is general symbolic and is later replaced by an updated cap table/share structure once any additional capitalization takes place (mechanics of this varies a bit based on legal entity type and state). It is not all that common to do initial capitalization beyond a symbolic sum upon actual formation. Symbolic to start, then drop in real money when you actually need to do something.

OK, but the January letter from "the 7" to the rest of DCI made a point of noting that they "have each contributed $3250.00 to the cause", as if that number was supposed to show DCI how serious that "the 7" were about Music in Motion.

I concur with Brigand; if initial investment is nothing more than symbolic, and therefore almost meaningless, why such a proud and pompous announcement by the G7 to DCI describing their rather paltry symbolic investment?

That characterization probably has a lot to do with preconceived notions on the part of particular readers.

FWIW, here's the pertinent snippet from the original:

"We have been meeting every Thursday for the past 6 months via phone. For the most part we have discussed our plans for 2013 and the 6 events we are managing. We have each contributed $3250.00 to the cause, and we are aware that we will need to do more in the coming months."

Seems pretty clear they understand that the amount contributed is far short of the eventual contributions required.

Well, I elided the rest of the quotation deliberately, because "we will need to do more" seemed like such incredible understatement that I though including it did nothing to make "the 7" look any better. The cited amount was so small* as to make the letter's specificity risible. Compare to danielray's comment that I have bolded above. Did daniel and his partners send out a press release announcing that they had each contributed $10 to their new venture?

*Small, and yet possibly more than one or two of the corps should be spending on speculative endeavours. Quoth garfield when the letter was leaked:

I'd like to know if Crown had to borrow the $3,250 they had to pony up to be part of this new "venture".

(And they're not alone in that struggle...)

Carolina Crown

Revenue and Expenses

[...]

Revenue less Expenses

2009: $17,454

2010: ($7,249) a loss

2011: ($1,664) a loss

[corpsband]

Well, I elided the rest of the quotation deliberately, because "we will need to do more" seemed like such incredible understatement that I though including it did nothing to make "the 7" look any better. The cited amount was so small* as to make the letter's specificity risible. Compare to danielray's comment that I have bolded above. Did daniel and his partners send out a press release announcing that they had each contributed $10 to their new venture?

*Small, and yet possibly more than one or two of the corps should be spending on speculative endeavours. Quoth garfield when the letter was leaked:

Q.E.D.

Even more telling, despite the current circumstances that the G7 and DCI (quite unexpectedly) find themselves, this thread rolls on.

Edited February 27, 2013 by corpsband

[N.E. Brigand]

Q.E.D.

Even more telling, despite the current circumstances that the G7 and DCI (quite unexpectedly) find themselves, this thread rolls on.

I'm not quite sure quod you think you've demonstrated. Can you explain?

And what are the "unexpected" circumstances to which you refer?

[fsubone]

They're the corps people follow for sure.

I would posit that if another corps is innovating, but no one is paying attention, some would argue that they are not innovating...

...or something like that.

I mean, I've seen examples of one marching ensemble doing something innovative. Then the next year, We see one of the big boy corps do it. All of a sudden it's "innovative" when the big name corps does it, but when the marching band or lower placing corps do it, it's completely ignored.

So, maybe the top corps are innovating, maybe not. Maybe they innovate sometimes and then at other times they're trying but it falls flat. Either way, they're certainly the one's who are going to get credit for things they do more than the other groups.

Maybe because innovation really is nothing without success? Like how someone mentioned Teal Sound earlier. They used a guitar in their pit, and I think Spirit used a bass in their pit the same year. Neither corps did great competitively, so we really don't see them being used. But if someone like BD or Cadets had put a bass guitar in the pit, and won with it, we probably would be seeing more of it. No one wants to copy an unsuccessful person. It's like when people were trying to figure out the automobile. There were lots of cars with three wheels, no pedals, and a tractor tiller arrangement for steering. But the Model T came out with a normal wheel and a couple of pedals, and now that's the only standard arrangement you see out there. Because it was successful.

[Jeff Ream]

87 SCV was bando and full on velveeta. Bando cheese is not exactly recent, but is instead a rather well aged variety.

odd, i don't find much bando cheese in that show. especially since no one is talking about magical things happening when they play their trumpet

[Jeff Ream]

I agree with your larger point, but to be honest, the attendance thing is hyperbole (the Rays are the worst-attended MLB team, but still average 19,000 a game - 7k to 8k average at a minor league park is considered a major crowd).

I've always felt that Open Class (or whatever you call it; Chist Jesu, OpenClass and World Class are bad handles) should be the wild west as far as programming and promotions go. MAKE them more fun than they are, and different from what WC does, give the directors the options to make their own rules, and let them rip. Long term, I'd imagine that today's Open Class and Sound Sport will merge into one concept, which would seem like a natural progression.

But right now, Open Class is being marketed as being just a "lite" version of World Class, which is a mistake.

IMO, Open Class isn't marketed period. Some of that falls on DCI yes. Some of it also falls on the OC corps themselves

[Jeff Ream]

Minor league teams usually play in smaller venues, so it may be easier to sell out, but as someone who has taken groups to see the Red Sox's farm team, the Pawtucket Red Sox (Fenway is a bit out of the price range for church groups and youth programs), you have an excellent point about marketing. At McCoy Stadium in Pawtucket, parking is easy to find, alcohol is contained, and there are all kinds of family friendly activities, and teh action is good enough to satisfy baseball lovers. They do a good job at explaining what is happening so the game is taught and there are often injured guys from the Red Sox getting in training to return to the major league team. Even someone who is not a baseball fan, especially a kid, will have a good time.

Now if we look at Open Class shows, often they are more reasonably priced. The shows are sophisticated, but are often a bit more audience friendly. We often see younger members performing their hearts out which makes teh activity seem more accessible to potential future members in attendance, namely high school students. Also some of the soloists are phenomenal and the only reason they are not in a World Class corps is often due to scheduling or finances. Also, the rivalries can be real. The rivalry between 7th Regiment and Spartans or Blue Devils B and Vanguard Cadets is just as heated as that of Crown and BD. Like minor league teams, Open Class has a great deal to offer but attendance is often sparse and as you mention, not marketed.

Open Class needs and deserves more attention, and if you live near a venue where an Open Class show is being held, attend. I know of baseball fans who attend Little League games, Babe Ruth games, high school, college, and American Legion games, as well as minor and major league games. The joy is in the game from pure to professional. As along time drum corps fan, I like to think I go not just to see those in contention of a DCI World Class title, but also Open Class, DCA, and anything in-between. I just wish there were more corps.

IMO, the OC tour is way out of the way. I can find far more minor league baseball in a 3 hour drive than I can find an OC show. In fact, I think the nearest OC show is 4+ hours away....in the middle of nowhere NW PA.

[jjeffeory]

Maybe because innovation really is nothing without success? Like how someone mentioned Teal Sound earlier. They used a guitar in their pit, and I think Spirit used a bass in their pit the same year. Neither corps did great competitively, so we really don't see them being used. But if someone like BD or Cadets had put a bass guitar in the pit, and won with it, we probably would be seeing more of it. No one wants to copy an unsuccessful person. It's like when people were trying to figure out the automobile. There were lots of cars with three wheels, no pedals, and a tractor tiller arrangement for steering. But the Model T came out with a normal wheel and a couple of pedals, and now that's the only standard arrangement you see out there. Because it was successful.

You make a very good point!

My take is that innovation is innovation regardless of its success on the field. Possibly analogous to high art? The bigger named groups will always get more recognition for doing something innovative than the little guy, but if there's something truly innovative, I believe that it can garner the little guy some attention. Unfortunate really...

[jjeffeory]

87 SCV was bando and full on velveeta. Bando cheese is not exactly recent, but is instead a rather well aged variety.

I'll completely disagree. At the time I thought it was totally bad ### and not at all bando OR cheesy.

SCV '87 was theatrical, yet powerful and sophisticated at the same time. It was certainly a culmination of the things learned about show design from the '84-'86 shows

I've seen some bando shows from bands, and nothing they were doing compared to that show or any of the top shows that year....

Now, VK '87 was cheesy. I wouldn't call it bando though.

I'm amazed at how different people see the same show in a different light.

[cixelsyd]

Ok. Class division should be based on competitive placement, and the size of an organization's funding and membership pools.

That is quite a change from your previous contentions. You said earlier that DCI would not be marketable to sponsors unless it was clear they were presenting the top X number of corps. A league based on multiple factors like that will not necessarily have the "top X" corps.

Hardly "outmoded", since that's how it's done most other activities that promote competitive activities, from European soccer leagues to the NCAA to Major League Baseball (who have the National & American Leagues, but don't have those teams playing against teams in the farm leagues).

I find it fascinating how all those people who objected to major league sports comparisons earlier are silent now.

I think we have already discussed the American leagues here recently. Some are more egalitarian than you infer. Others are not, and they suffer on that account. As for soccer, that is a different animal because pro soccer clubs typically participate in national and international tournaments in addition to their league play (i.e. top English Premier League clubs compete with other top European clubs in the UEFA Champions League). That creates an incentive for the national league to pay their leading teams more, to enable them to become more competitive internationally.

DCI corps do not advance to any higher competitive tournament, so they do not have that purpose for paying their top groups more.

Putting like competitors in the same leagues with their peers is done because for most normal people, it makes sense.

When it does make sense, sure. In a lot of cases, it is done because there is a concrete reason why the competitors are similar. For instance, a high school league has 14-18 year olds because those are the ages found in those schools. Little league sports have more specific age divisions. Some leagues divide based on school size.

In DCI, we have had size divisions in the past, but not anymore because there is not much demand for it (few corps of that size). We have never had age divisions within DCI because there has never been demand from a set of corps with a distinct and different membership age.

Of course, I should also mention that everything in this post so far is much ado about nothing, because the DCI divisions are very nearly in competitive order anyway. There is hardly any crossover, so why the fuss?

And in terms of why the discussion should be looked at from a business standpoint, it's because it IS a business that we're talking about. DCI is a business. Pure and simple. It's in the business of selling tickets and recordings, and returning the profits to the corps who provided the shows that they sell.

No, DCI is not simply a business. They are also a mission-driven organization. They may be in the business of producing events, selling tickets and media, and returning revenue to the corps, but they are ultimately in those businesses to satisfy their mission of supporting member corps and preserving the drum corps activity.

If DCI was a pure business without the mission, there would be a billion better products and markets in which to do business.