Jump to content

"Tour of Champions" 2013


Recommended Posts

Yes, I do; and that is proven true according to their own bylaws and mission statemenmt.

No, I do not; but that is for the collective member corps to decide not me and especially not an elite 7.

A mission statement is not an business structure, it's a goal.

So you don't think the way DCI is currently set up is the best way to move forward. The system you've said encourages those who have more to contribute more and those who have less to contribute less. What incentive do the corps who receive more than they put in to change the system? You don't want the "elite 7" to decide how things should change but they are the only ones with the incentive to change!

Edited by charlie1223
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard back in the day there were thousands and thousands more hills to walk up both ways on.

True... but with urban sprawl, they've been dynamited and there are subdivisions on those hills now.

Edited by BRASSO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does DCI own SoundSport? You just said that the member corps ARE DCI?

DCI is officially the collective of Member Corps; thus the Member Corps Collective called DCI would, for lack of a better word, 'own' SoundSport; that makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCI is officially the collective of Member Corps; thus the Member Corps Collective called DCI would, for lack of a better word, 'own' SoundSport; that makes sense.

So by that token, could any individual or collection of corps go to DCI and say "cash us out, we want our share of what our company here is worth?" Probably not. How would they figure out how much each corps' equity is worth?

I've said before (and will say again) that their business model is a cooperative, even if their actual operation is a standalone company.

Edited by Slingerland
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A mission statement is not an business structure, it's a goal.

But the Member Corps Collective being DCI is written into the bylaws; so it is also their business structure.

So you don't think the way DCI is currently set up is the best way to move forward. The system you've said encourages those who have more to contribute more and those who have less to contribute less. What incentive do the corps who receive more than they put in to change the system? You don't want the "elite 7" to decide how things should change but they are the only ones with the incentive to change!

a) Right now survival, not expansion, should rule the day mainly due to the current market in economic situation. So, if it were up to me I would, for now, scale DCI back to the way it was in the eighties because that is what the market and economy dictates at the present juncture. There is nothing wrong in downsizing to survive; but ego sometimes gets in the way of that occurring (which I believe s the case with the 7). However, if change is needed immediately I would also consider following the lead of the Little League World Series or BOA; where DCI would be completely separate from the corps and DCI would just facilitate competitive venue services for any corps which wants to follow the DCI rules of competition. But, since I believe in the rule of law, this would be up to the current Member Corps to decide, not me.

b) And if the 7 want to go create a for-profit MiM, more power to them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Slingerland' timestamp='1361769844' post='3248875']
So by that token, could any individual or collection of corps go to DCI and say "cash us out, we want our portion of what our company here is worth?" If half of them wanted to take their equity in DCI in leave, how would that work?
[/quote]
I say follow the bylaws. What do the DCI bylaws state on that aspect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said before (and will say again) that their business model is a cooperative, even if their actual operation is a standalone company.

And this is where most everything is fouled up within DCI; they are not following their own bylaw structure; not due to the fault of Dan Acheson, but due to continuous power grabs by certain corps directors.

Edited by Stu
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did NOT know Boston didn't get included until just now. :mad:/>

Keep moving up...

ToC has nothing to do 'at all' with placement at DCI Finals. It has everything to do with a certain seven corps directors attempt at a power grab.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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