MikeD Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 We agree with this. I'm pretty sure that DCI doesn't want to get any " smaller ", as its " too small " now as it is. I'm not sure you would find that to be a universally accepted thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted March 5, 2013 Author Share Posted March 5, 2013 The current situation is simply a temporary compromise to see if the marriage is worth saving. Is that your opinion, or is it what you are hearing from the G7 directors themselves? There needs to be some considerable change moving forward for DCI to remain both a viable and profitable vehicle.The situation can only be solved by viewing and acting more objectively and taking emotion out of the decision-making process. Then all hope is lost. Again, this is why I am a very strong advocate of engaging a top-tier consulting firm that would perform an objective analysis of the situation complete with recommendations. This would then be used to recruit the sort of management team that could take this to the next level, that could bring in the team members, capital and partners necessary to truly grow the activity. Correction - grow the business, not the activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted March 5, 2013 Author Share Posted March 5, 2013 I gotta say Garfield, all due respect, because I know you're a serious man, but the fact that you're even questioning the logic of the value of increasing the number of actual customers for the corps is just nonsensical, and so completely divorced from the basics of market principles as to be ....incredible. The ticket price isn't "the audience" - people are the audience. People who are independent beings with their own access to capital. Bring more of them into the room and give them an opportunity to do business with the drum corps, and you've succeeded far beyond just keeping the same old people and raising their ticket prices. Whether you intend to or not, you're starting to argue the opposite of reality; that somehow DCI would be better served by a smaller audience that was paying more per ticket. I challenge you to find a retail analyst or consultant would sign on to that particular petition when it comes to a mass consumer good. So you now admit that, contrary to your previous assertions, that the role of DCI should be more than just organizing events and selling media? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 ...I am a very strong advocate of engaging a top-tier consulting firm that would perform an objective analysis of the situation complete with recommendations. This would then be used to recruit the sort of management team that could take this to the next level, that could bring in the team members, capital and partners necessary to truly grow the activity. I do not see any scenario in which DCI continues to exist (let alone thrive) if it remains a non-profit activity and within the current structure. The current model is not sustainable and is decades out of date. Ahhh.. but I am going to contest something here. The mission of a corporation has to be clear for a consulting firm to yield correct results; and it is very clear that you have a personal agenda and desire to seek out a top-tier consulting firm 'not' to help DCI with creating a better business plan that will enhance the mission of providing services to corps which can responsibly engage in DCI (irrespective of their competitive class and elite status), but to actually seek out a consulting firm to completely re-organize DCI into an exclusive 'best of the best' elite system similar to the one desired by the G7. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielray Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Ahhh.. but I am going to contest something here. The mission of a corporation has to be clear for a consulting firm to yield correct results; and it is very clear that you have a personal agenda and desire to seek out a top-tier consulting firm 'not' to help DCI with creating a better business plan that will enhance the mission of providing services to corps which can responsibly engage in DCI (irrespective of their competitive class and elite status), but to actually seek out a consulting firm to completely re-organize DCI into an exclusive 'best of the best' elite system similar to the one desired by the G7. I want DCI to continue to exist and to thrive and to showcase performances that are not only the best in the world, but where the bar is continually raised each year. I also want to there to be opportunities for kids to participate on all levels and do feel that corps that may not be in part of this top tier could possibly be better served by an organization that was 100% focused on their needs. I am not an elitist when it comes to drum corps, if you think so... you really don't know me at all, but just make assumptions. This weekend, for example, I am teaching marching and brass to village kids... who are nowhere near the level of any group in drum corps.... yet. :) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Again, most of the contributions to DCI were connected with ticket sales and are not actually contributions in a true sense. But, with YEA, what do you actually tangibly get out of the contribution? A month or two reprieve from solicitation emails? :) No, they just keep asking anyway! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Whether you intend to or not, you're starting to argue the opposite of reality; that somehow DCI would be better served by a smaller audience that was paying more per ticket. Well, if DCI is the Rolex of marching/music, maybe....nah, never mind! ...he said, leaving out the 'mass consunmer good' part of the statement, just to make a joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Windish Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 I sure wish this continued discussion involved many new voices, BUT . . . we can only work with what we have! Here's a question . . . Is finding a product formula that causes a greater amount of paying customers to attend drum corps events live our most important challenge? Developing new corps, reducing operational costs, having less predictable scoring, finding more corporate donors, making sure the activity's management is the best available, are all positive developments, but what's really the bottom line here? I mean, the SINGLE most important contributor to this activitiy's continued existence. To me, that answer is "Yes." Selling more tickets to live events. All the rest builds from there. Certainly, the rest can help, too. Further, who cares if the activity sells not just to music majors, family and friends, but also to bricklayers in Slovenia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Fred, on that last point, it was the Board who directed DCI to target marching members and families, with the understanding that it was more cost effective to go after potential fans who a) would already "get" what DCI is and b) might become marching members themselves. The idea being that FMM's would make better long-term fans. Based on the small bits of data that occasionally get released, I'm not sure the FMM's are becoming better and reliable ticket consumers - the average age is still far higher than recent age outs. But it did come down a fair bit over the years, so there is definitely some effect. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 And one point to remember about the overall G7 issue, and this is one that Dan (our Dan, not Acheson) has alluded to here as well - the G7 have said in all of their communications that they feel the current system is untenable. It's not something they've been ambiguous on. Garfield has shown that DCI is slowly growing in returning $$ to the corps, but I'm guessing that it's not at the rate that the corps themselves consider acceptable. I guess what I mean is, remember that the G7 feel they're reacting to a situation, not creating it. In that context, their moves make sense as well. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts