TOC/G7 Related Discussion

[cixelsyd]

What new revenue stream has DCI created in the past 5 years that is even equal to even 10% of their earnings?

There should be an aggressive effort to develop multiple, independent revenue streams that are not tied to or dependent on the current product. If the CEO cannot do this, they must be replaced.

The CEO of DCI should be tasked with making new money... period.

But they cannot do that if they follow your previous advice:

DCI should focus on producing events and media.... period.

[ranintothedoor]

For all the comments about the lot:

I agree that the G7 use their pre-stadium warmups to draw people in. It's become its own monster and definitely draws people out of the stadium for the early corps.

I will say though that there is something to be said for standing 10 feet away when all those horn bells are pointed at your head.... *chills*

So yes, a solution might be to have corps come into the stadium, do their warmups on the field, do their show, and then instant encores if they desire. Give all the corps 25-30 minutes slots (less if they don't want to). I would SOOO pay more for a ticket if I could experience corps warm ups AND their shows, but that might just be me.

[danielray]

But they cannot do that if they follow your previous advice:

There are loads and loads of new revenue opportunities within the events and media business.

[garfield]

There are three scenarios...

A) Guys that do the lot only and don't buy tickets.

B) Guys that buy tickets, but watch only some corps in the stadium

C) Guys that buy tickets and watch most corps in the stadium

----------------

Converting A to C requires that ticket prices are MUCH lower (makes absolutely zero sense that ticket prices are so high now...and that so little of the stadiums are actually full).

Converting B to C requires that all corps perform on a more consistent level or do something so unique that it can't be missed. It is completely baffling that lower placing corps are the ones playing it the most safe... when they should be the ones taking the most risk. They have less to lose.

Of course, I know you know that ticket prices at the gate are the low-hanging fruit of revenue, and that that's not your point. You're saying that other revenue sources subsidizing revenue could allow for ticket prices to be reduced by letting DCI get out of the business of, essentially, setting gate prices based on their contract requirements. That would free up the market to set prices. I get that. I wonder, though, about all these super-duper shows that draw people in (rock and roll or Cirque, for example) and their example that DCI should follow to succeed... Don't they still have ticket prices? Isn't the price to see Cirque still quite high despite all of their success? I've not seen a Cirque show recently; maybe they are free now...

However, your "risk-taking" point is a good one, too. Because, while it's easy to put the focus on Dan, it should be considered that punishing the risk-takers is institutional, too, in this case.

The example is Jersey Surf. They took substantial risks last year, and not just on the performance field. They made their first cross-country tour to Texas, an important milestone in the group's growth-at-a-reasonable-cost risk strategy. Jacobs and his kids were excited as hel-l to put on a terrific performance in the Texas heat for a crowd that mostly hadn't seen them. By all accounts, the place was rockin' to Surf's rep, stirring memories, wild applause.

Well, I heard this story that a DCI "official" (because I don't know the details I'm not going to get more specific than that) grabbed Jacobs after their show, congratulated him and his corps on their performance, then promptly told him that if he were really treating his kids well he'd take them to DCA where "that" kind of performance is really appreciated. There were people around, word got out.

Because that story came to me about three-removed from a director, I can't verify its truth. But, if true, how can we ask the smaller corps trying to make a splash to take the risk, if the institutional mandate for show concept is based on an "artiste's" view of the performance as demonstrated by the "top" corps at best, and is completely nebulous and sheet-driven at worst? What, Surf took the wrong KIND of risk? What, it wasn't as clean and polished as any other show there that night? They played old songs? They didn't use mirrors? What? The fans seemed to LOVE it.

By all definition it was a risky show BECAUSE it was Avante-Gard BECAUSE but it was simply fun, engaging, stirring (to older fans), and the kids had a ball riling up the crowd, I'd bet. But it wasn't, apparently, the right KIND of Avante-Gard that's appreciated by the eschelon in DCI.

No where in that story did I hear Dan's name come up and I'd be hard-pressed to believe anyone who suggested that Dan thinks it's his pervue to define show concept, so we have to recognize that possibly institutionally and systemically, risk-taking will not be rewarded in smaller corps. Unless they mimick what the big, winning corps do that's avante-gard. Apparently, in the hallowed halls of DCI, some only want one kind of risk-taking rewarded.

Hard to rationalize that "risk taking" is simply doing what everyone else is told to do.

Maybe the whole house needs a good scrubbing down. Let in a little sunshine and sanitize the place.

BTW, I have to wonder... if the story is true, I wonder if Dan fired the guy? If he could, I suppose. No clue who it was.

(In the end, though, I think Surf got the last laugh; I hear that their souvie sales that night in Texas were off the charts in total sales and with first-time buyers.)

Edited March 6, 2013 by garfield

[danielray]

Of course, I know you know that ticket prices at the gate are the low-hanging fruit of revenue, and that that's not your point. You're saying that other revenue sources subsidizing revenue could allow for ticket prices to be reduced by letting DCI get out of the business of, essentially, setting gate prices based on their contract requirements. That would free up the market to set prices. I get that. I wonder, though, about all these super-duper shows that draw people in (rock and roll or Cirque, for example) and their example that DCI should follow to succeed... Don't they still have ticket prices? Isn't the price to see Cirque still quite high despite all of their success? I've not seen a Cirque show recently; maybe they are free now...

However, your "risk-taking" point is a good one, too. Because, while it's easy to put the focus on Dan, it should be considered that punishing the risk-takers is institutional, too, in this case.

The example is Jersey Surf. They took substantial risks last year, and not just on the performance field. They made their first cross-country tour to Texas, an important milestone in the group's growth-at-a-reasonable-cost risk strategy. Jacobs and his kids were excited as hel-l to put on a terrific performance in the Texas heat for a crowd that mostly hadn't seen them. By all accounts, the place was rockin' to Surf's rep, stirring memories, wild applause.

Well, I heard this story that a DCI "official" (because I don't know the details I'm not going to get more specific than that) grabbed Jacobs after their show, congratulated him and his corps on their performance, then promptly told him that if he were really treating his kids well he'd take them to DCA where "that" kind of performance is really appreciated. There were people around, word got out.

Because that story came to me about three-removed from a director, I can't verify its truth. But, if true, how can we ask the smaller corps trying to make a splash to take the risk, if the institutional mandate for show concept is based on an "artiste's" view of the performance as demonstrated by the "top" corps at best, and is completely nebulous and sheet-driven at worst? What, Surf took the wrong KIND of risk? What, it wasn't as clean and polished as any other show there that night? They played old songs? They didn't use mirrors? What? The fans seemed to LOVE it.

By all definition it was a risky show BECAUSE it was Avante-Gard BECAUSE but it was simply fun, engaging, stirring (to older fans), and the kids had a ball riling up the crowd, I'd bet. But it wasn't, apparently, the right KIND of Avante-Gard that's appreciated by the eschelon in DCI.

No where in that story did I hear Dan's name come up and I'd be hard-pressed to believe anyone who suggested that Dan thinks it's his pervue to define show concept, so we have to recognize that possibly institutionally and systemically, risk-taking will not be rewarded in smaller corps. Unless they mimick what the big, winning corps do that's avante-gard. Apparently, in the hallowed halls of DCI, some only want one kind of risk-taking rewarded.

Hard to rationalize that "risk taking" is simply doing what everyone else is told to do.

Maybe the whole house needs a good scrubbing down. Let in a little sunshine and sanitize the place.

BTW, I have to wonder... if the story is true, I wonder if Dan fired the guy? If he could, I suppose. No clue who it was.

(In the end, though, I think Surf got the last laugh; I hear that their souvie sales that night in Texas were off the charts in total sales and with first-time buyers.)

Surf would be a much better fit for DCA than DCI. DCA would likely be much more engaged with them than DCI.

Why would you fire the guy for stating the absolute obvious?

[N.E. Brigand]

Surf would be a much better fit for DCA than DCI. DCA would likely be much more engaged with them than DCI.

Do you mean the organization or the audience? Surely not the latter: weren't they highly engaged by Surf last year?

[corpsband]

Of course, I know you know that ticket prices at the gate are the low-hanging fruit of revenue, and that that's not your point. You're saying that other revenue sources subsidizing revenue could allow for ticket prices to be reduced by letting DCI get out of the business of, essentially, setting gate prices based on their contract requirements. That would free up the market to set prices. I get that. I wonder, though, about all these super-duper shows that draw people in (rock and roll or Cirque, for example) and their example that DCI should follow to succeed... Don't they still have ticket prices? Isn't the price to see Cirque still quite high despite all of their success? I've not seen a Cirque show recently; maybe they are free now...

However, your "risk-taking" point is a good one, too. Because, while it's easy to put the focus on Dan, it should be considered that punishing the risk-takers is institutional, too, in this case.

The example is Jersey Surf. They took substantial risks last year, and not just on the performance field. They made their first cross-country tour to Texas, an important milestone in the group's growth-at-a-reasonable-cost risk strategy. Jacobs and his kids were excited as hel-l to put on a terrific performance in the Texas heat for a crowd that mostly hadn't seen them. By all accounts, the place was rockin' to Surf's rep, stirring memories, wild applause.

Well, I heard this story that a DCI "official" (because I don't know the details I'm not going to get more specific than that) grabbed Jacobs after their show, congratulated him and his corps on their performance, then promptly told him that if he were really treating his kids well he'd take them to DCA where "that" kind of performance is really appreciated. There were people around, word got out.

Because that story came to me about three-removed from a director, I can't verify its truth. But, if true, how can we ask the smaller corps trying to make a splash to take the risk, if the institutional mandate for show concept is based on an "artiste's" view of the performance as demonstrated by the "top" corps at best, and is completely nebulous and sheet-driven at worst? What, Surf took the wrong KIND of risk? What, it wasn't as clean and polished as any other show there that night? They played old songs? They didn't use mirrors? What? The fans seemed to LOVE it.

By all definition it was a risky show BECAUSE it was Avante-Gard BECAUSE but it was simply fun, engaging, stirring (to older fans), and the kids had a ball riling up the crowd, I'd bet. But it wasn't, apparently, the right KIND of Avante-Gard that's appreciated by the eschelon in DCI.

No where in that story did I hear Dan's name come up and I'd be hard-pressed to believe anyone who suggested that Dan thinks it's his pervue to define show concept, so we have to recognize that possibly institutionally and systemically, risk-taking will not be rewarded in smaller corps. Unless they mimick what the big, winning corps do that's avante-gard. Apparently, in the hallowed halls of DCI, some only want one kind of risk-taking rewarded.

Hard to rationalize that "risk taking" is simply doing what everyone else is told to do.

Maybe the whole house needs a good scrubbing down. Let in a little sunshine and sanitize the place.

BTW, I have to wonder... if the story is true, I wonder if Dan fired the guy? If he could, I suppose. No clue who it was.

(In the end, though, I think Surf got the last laugh; I hear that their souvie sales that night in Texas were off the charts in total sales and with first-time buyers.)

I have a hard time calling Surf's program last year risky. I suppose you could argue that it was a "risk" that drum corps fans would fail to respond to a Bridgeman tribute show but that was IMHO really not much of a risk.

And given Surf's careful approach to responsible growth, I'm not sure it was a "risk" to start the tour in San Antonio. In fact I'm pretty certain Surf's admin had all their ducks in a row before they made that decision and were confident they were ready for the step forward.

I suppose the only real "risk" was that they'd hear the response you reported in the 3rd hand account (ie rumour?) above. Directly appealing to an audience is too often called pandering by some "purists" in the drum corps community.

Edited March 6, 2013 by corpsband

[danielray]

Do you mean the organization or the audience?

DCA is weekend drum corps. Surf is weekend drum corps. Seems a good fit.

Surely not the latter: weren't they highly engaged by Surf last year?

The ones that were actually in the stands then were very engaged. (you can even see this on videos.... stands could certainly be a bit more full).

Anyway, Surf is great.... but what they do is much different, on a very fundamental level, than what top World Class corps do. Is DCI World Class really the best thing for them?

[cixelsyd]

DCA is weekend drum corps. Surf is weekend drum corps. Seems a good fit.

Jersey Surf is not a weekend only program. But do not take my word for it - look at their appearances on tour:

Thu 7/19 Round Rock, TX

Sat 7/21 San Antonio, TX

Tue 7/24 Ocean Springs, MS

Wed 7/25 Hattiesburg, MS

Sat 7/28 Atlanta, GA

Tue 7/31 Salem, VA

Wed 8/1 West Chester, PA

Thu 8/2 Lawrence, MA

Sat 8/4 Allentown, PA

Thu 8/9 Prelims

Fri 8/10 Semis

[BRASSO]

DCA is weekend drum corps. Surf is weekend drum corps. Seems a good fit.

The ones that were actually in the stands then were very engaged. (you can even see this on videos.... stands could certainly be a bit more full).

Anyway, Surf is great.... but what they do is much different, on a very fundamental level, than what top World Class corps do. Is DCI World Class really the best thing for them?

If Jersey Surf decides to restrict its marchers to those under age 22, and continues to do touring, albeit on a limited scale, would you be in favor of ousting Jersey Surf from DCI ? Its just a simple question requiring a simple " yes " or " no " answer it would seem to me. I 'm just curious to see what you believe, thats all.

Edited March 6, 2013 by BRASSO