TOC/G7 Related Discussion

[garfield]

I never said anything about the business model... i am pretty clear.... WGI has more progressive design, is better run and has stronger connection with school programs. They are much more focused on youth than DCI.

Isn't "connection with school programs" part of the business model?

That was a significant part of the DCI 5-year plan (I'd say THE significant part), yet you say DCI's plan was weak. If it's OK for WGI, why isn't the "scholastic" goal legit for DCI?

[garfield]

The solution is to SPEND LESS money.

Drum corps is an arms race. When someone had four marimbas, everyone else coveted four marimbas. When someone went to five marimbas, everyone else coveted five marimbas. Staff members complain if they're presented with an "uneven" field.

Drum corps could make more money, and more money, and even more money, but because they have more money, they'll spend more money.

How much is enough? Just a little bit more.

Making more money will never be the answer as long as managements and staff insist on spending everything they have, and then wanting more money to make the next great leap. You will never hear a corps say, "Hey, we've got enough money, so we're going to dial things back a bit and live within our means." It's just not the nature of the beast.

Self-control is not a concept that is popularly presented as an answer to the ills of the activity. It is perceived as impinging on creative freedom, and those in a position to do anything about it are afraid the other guys will take advantage of it by being the first to bring out electronic bassoons, holograms and levitation jet packs. And because the corps on the "cutting edge" will have those things and the self-control advocates don't have the same things, it will be perceived that they'll be handed a creative advantage that will translate to higher scores and increased adulation for their creative staff. And what staff doesn't want adulation from the masses, or at least the judges?

Just a little bit more. It will always be just a little bit more.

Although I agreed with this at first, I don't think I care what the corps spend so long as the path to challenging the next higher placement for all corps is made as simple as possible. Putting in place those policies that allow the lower corps - every corps - to challenge up the finishing order is much more important than what a corps spends. I just don't want a corps budget to part of the competitive equation.

In today's drum corps, budget directly affects placement. That needs fixed.

[danielray]

Not reading all the pages as busy today but just have to ask:

How do you sell a group of people dressed pretty much the same way (they're called uniforms for a reason), moving in precise patterns, playing together, living your summer by a schedule set by grown-ups (last three you're taking a LOT of orders) and being in a group that costs hundreds of thousands to operate over the year as edgy, cool, non-conformist, etc, etc.

I'm old enought to be almost the target audiences grandfather but sounds like BS to me. Just comes across as "It's cool cuz we say so". Thoughts of George Harrisons scene in Hard Days Night" when meeting the girl who is supposed to be what "everyone wants to be". GHs response "Oh yeah we watch her all the time.... then laugh..".

Uniforms are kind of outdated. Shifting more to costuming could help some. Something more this direction...

Needs to be more of a sense of style.

Edited April 6, 2013 by danielray

[Fred Windish]

As much as anything else, kids need to hear the roar of the crowd.

[garfield]

[/size]

I'm simply say that drum corps is geeky enough as it is... and a push to make Super Band Day isn't helping the situation.

There is an image problem in all of marching music. Until that image problem is addressed, it will have limited potential.

The image thing is pretty real. Needs to be less dorky.

There are lots of geeky band kids out there already that don't march. Let's get them first. Every "corps style" HS marching band out there, no matter how good, is still geeky. Been that way forever and that won't change no matter how you design the show.

[danielray]

Isn't "connection with school programs" part of the business model?

That was a significant part of the DCI 5-year plan (I'd say THE significant part), yet you say DCI's plan was weak. If it's OK for WGI, why isn't the "scholastic" goal legit for DCI?

The plan was weak because it watered down all drum corps, rather than building it up.

It presented ideas, but no tactical or actionable plan.

Also, it was focused too much on getting more people to shows as a way to increase revenue.

I see sponsorship as a way forward, as well as new lines of revenue that have absolutely nothing to do with drum corps. It is possible to generate the same amount of revenue returned to corps through other means in just a few years... by producing mainstream and corporate events and expanding sponsorship.

This should be so obvious to these guys, that it baffles me that they aren't exploring it.

[danielray]

There are lots of geeky band kids out there already that don't march. Let's get them first. Every "corps style" HS marching band out there, no matter how good, is still geeky. Been that way forever and that won't change no matter how you design the show.

The biggest reasons why some kids that have an interest in participating don't....

1) Too #### expensive

2) They want to march in a top corps or not at all

This is reality.

If drum corps was less expensive, there would be greater parity... which would help to resolve #2.

Efforts should be focused on generating more revenue from non-drum corps sources in order to bring the costs down. That really should be the priority... rather than wasting time on trying to get more milk from the same old cow.

[garfield]

The plan was weak because it watered down all drum corps, rather than building it up.

It presented ideas, but no tactical or actionable plan.

Also, it was focused too much on getting more people to shows as a way to increase revenue.

I see sponsorship as a way forward, as well as new lines of revenue that have absolutely nothing to do with drum corps. It is possible to generate the same amount of revenue returned to corps through other means in just a few years... by producing mainstream and corporate events and expanding sponsorship.

This should be so obvious to these guys, that it baffles me that they aren't exploring it.

I think you're just debating because I know you see this...

If you get more people to shows doesn't that, in and of itself, increase the chances that a major sponsor will be interested? The activity simply doesn't generate enough eyeballs to attract big-dollar sponsorships. Your solution is correct, except you have it place wrong. It's step two, not step one.

[garfield]

The biggest reasons why some kids that have an interest in participating don't....

1) Too #### expensive

2) They want to march in a top corps or not at all

This is reality.

If drum corps was less expensive, there would be greater parity... which would help to resolve #2.

Efforts should be focused on generating more revenue from non-drum corps sources in order to bring the costs down. That really should be the priority... rather than wasting time on trying to get more milk from the same old cow.

And how does this relate to drum corps being "edgy"? Edgy = less expensive? No, corporate non-related funding makes it less expensive. But you won't get that until you increase the number of eyeballs in the stands. Which was exactly, as you point out, a main focus of the 5-year plan.

Current DCI ---> increase show attendance = increase eyeballs = greater chance for sponsorship.

Equals lower fees.

Kids' desire to only march one corps is a failing in DCI's marketing. They neglected to interview the kids in Oregon Crusaders and, instead focused all the attention on the winners. It's the Crusaders and OC that the vast majority of HS marchers relate to, not BD or Cadets current members.

DCI needs to focus on marketing the kids' experience at all levels of corps. For all the talk among the top corps about not caring about where they place, they sure push hard for DCI to place all of its marketing emphasis on placement.

Edited April 6, 2013 by garfield

[danielray]

Again, you're focused on the entertainment as a basis for kids to do it as if entertainment inspires them to march. No, it doesn't. Attaining another level of excellence inspires them to march. If you're suggesting that making drum corps "edgy" creates a significant enough gap between it and their HS band, and that will get them involved, I disagree unless you can show me how "edgy" creates a step up from their HS band (there are plenty of "edgy" HS band shows every year). If you're suggesting that what kids actually play is more challenging because drum corps is "edgy", I'd like for you to prove that. I'd suggest that what OC kids play is significantly more difficult that what the vast majority of HS bands play. It has nothing to do with "edgy", it has to do with technical writing and teaching capabilities of each corps.

EVERY single drum corps was, at one point, a "couple-hundred-thousand"-spending corps. And their parents were in the stands and buying souvies when they were. The only chance to be a "Top" corps (sans a Bill Cook solution) is to first be an OC corps spending a whole lot less than the finalists.

I have never seen an edgy high school band. ever.

Open Class is not all that far ahead of high school marching band. Pretty much every state out there has high school band programs that are as good as many OC corps. States like Texas, California, Indiana... have loads of bands better than a lot of OC corps. This is just fact.

There is just not enough distinction between OC programs and high school band programs in most places.

But... where I do think there is a great opportunity and unfulfilled need... is community marching programs for kids say 6-14 years old. I don't understand why people are not creating these in local communities?