TOC/G7 Related Discussion

[cixelsyd]

If anything, the problem right now is that there is no clear voice, no central message, and, it appears, no set of basic business principles that guide their decision making.

Well, we know why that is!

A business that can't succinctly boil their purpose and position down to a single, actionable sentence, is a business that's lost its way.

Any entity that allows itself to be bullied into boiling their purpose and position down to a single, actionable sentence is an entity that has lost their way. Unless it is one doozy of a run-on sentence.

[garfield]

I won't have time to catch up on this new thread until tonight ($1 to cixelsyd for restarting it), but wanted to get this down before I forgot it.

This morning on a cable business channel, Warren Buffet made this comment when speaking about the "new" JCPenny and its current executive staff, and how difficult it seems to be for JCP to get traction to grow themselves.

" When you start arguing with your customers about what they want, you have a prescription for disaster."

He went on to say that "Business questions are not the same as economic questions and, generally, the business answers are better answers than the economic answers."

Seems awfully appropriate to keep those two points in mind when talking about restructuring what the customers experience from drum corps.

[Slingerland]

What? The 990 thread I read, IIRC, showed that several of our top corps are spending noticeably more.

IN 2011, Troopers and Bluecoats had more or less the same expenses (about $850k). Also in that range were Boston, Glassmen, and Madison. There was no significant difference in the program expenses among a wide array of corps. If you use SCV or BD, you have to acknowledge that both corps also have a range of other programs that get figured into their overall organizational expenses, so aren't easily compared.

I suggest the European soccer leagues as a possible model because it does the best job of being clear with audiences and sponsors that there are varying degrees of excellence on display, but they still allow for teams whose performance improves to be promoted to the premier league, while providing a path for teams who've lost their edge to keep competing while having some pressure put to bear to step their games back up. At the same time, for those teams whose owners aren't able or interested in making a push for premier status, they have a league that is well-respected, where they are competing with other teams at their own level for a title, rather than being a 23rd or 29th place team in a bigger league. Not sure why anyone would object to using a model that works quite well in other consumer-oriented competitions.

in terms of the "how it would work", there are number of methods. You could use an overall points system to help determine standings, you could use the sudden death model (where the top 16 at Quarters becomes next year's premier league - I think that's actually the worst choice, since it allows one performance and one set of judges to have too much sway), etc. But first you have to commit to embracing the reality that DCI has at least two, and probably three very distinct levels of proficiency out there, and that failing to do a better job of aligning the corps into meaningful divisions makes it harder to tell the public and potential sponsors just what it is they're seeing.

A major brand sponsor is someone whose name and logo is prominently featured on the product, and who pays an amount of money for their sponsorship that is commensurate with the size of the activity. For a $10 million marketing and events company, a major sponsorship would be at least $100,000 in cash every year. I know a number of the brands who are currently with DCI, and they're all great folks, none of whom are paying DCI anywhere near those amounts of money. Anyone who isn't aware of the amount of money that companies spend on events sponsorship is someone who should be kept far away from the decision making process.

But you have to be able to show those potential sponsors very clearly who and what they're sponsoring. The NCAA gets sponsors for their products because they're pushing the best college athletes; most high school leagues don't get corporate sponsorships like that because...they're high school leagues. That's not to say that they aren't 'good', but that they aren't the same as the Div 1 college leagues. Most high school team supporters wouldn't be offended by pointing that out, but in drum corps, they do.

DCI's outside charitable support in 2010 was $330k, a little less than 4% of their total revenues. YEA's was $360k, about 9% of their total income. One member corps brought in more charitable support than DCI did. That's not a sign that DCI has a major base of outside support for their non-business related activities.

Edited March 4, 2013 by Slingerland

[BRASSO]

Well, we know why that is!

Any entity that allows itself to be bullied into boiling their purpose and position down to a single, actionable sentence is an entity that has lost their way. Unless it is one doozy of a run-on sentence.

ALL successful enterprises have a " Mission Statement ". It spells out what they fundamentally believe in as an organization, why they have collectively come together, and what they strive to attain, ie what their organizational goals are.

DCI has a " Mission Statement ". That mission statement to my knowledge has not fundamentally changed since DCI's inception 40 years ago.

One assumes that upon acceptance into the membership of DCI that all Corps and their leadership teams are 100% on board with the 40 year " Mission Statement " of DCI. If they are not, then we have a problem that needs to be addressed and addressed sooner rather than later, imo. In the end, a house divided against itself can not stand. Fundamentally, all members must be on board with an organization's established " Mission Statement ". Otherwise there is confusion and ultimately choas and thats not good for anybody. DCI is NOT about to alter their 40 year Mission Statement of what they believe in as an organization. Thats simply not in the cards. The question then becomes are those few individuals that appear to be operating outside the bounds of this Mision Statement going to remain outside of this " Mission Statement " adherence, and how long are other members in DCI going to permit them to operate with their actions outside the bounds of DCI's " Mission Statement ". I believe we will find the answer to this sometime within the next 12 months.

Edited March 4, 2013 by BRASSO

[Slingerland]

Maybe its time for DCI to bring in new blood now to look to the next few decades for planning and where it sees itself in 10, 20, 30 years.

I'd totally agree with this. But be warned that any new blood, if they come at it from a pure outsiders' perspective, would likely have ideas even more radical than anything that either the G7 or a few of us like Daniel Ray and myself have suggested.

[normy diploome]

Re: Slingerland and "A major brand sponsor is someone whose name and logo is prominently featured on the product, and who pays an amount of money for their sponsorship that is commensurate with the size of the activity. For a $10 million marketing and events company, a major sponsorship would be at least $100,000 in cash every year. I know a number of the brands who are currently with DCI, and they're all great folks, none of whom are paying DCI anywhere near those amounts of money. Anyone who isn't aware of the amount of money that companies spend on events sponsorship is someone who should be kept far away from the decision making process".

But haven't we been down this avenue before? And the results were very tentative!

The youngsters (born since 1980) among DCP may not realize or remember that there were corps which were corporation sponsored and marched as advertisements! Some were for corporation employees such as the brewery corps: the Hamm Indians in the Twin Cities and the Ballentine Brewers from Newark, NJ. The Blue Stars were originally the First Federal (Bank) Blue Stars of LaCrosse, Wisconsin. And 7-Up (the soda/pop company and it's bottling division) for many years sponsored The Babylon Islanders (NY) which gave DCI/WGI?DCA Tom Beresford.

Yes, Hopkins' YEA has roped in Yamaha for the Yamaha Cup band championships and the Marine Corps for the Annapolis show, but what other corporation is going to find our activity a large enough audience for their advertising?

I guess if you keep a suit in the closet long enough, the style comes back in fashion???

[BRASSO]

I won't have time to catch up on this new thread until tonight ($1 to cixelsyd for restarting it), but wanted to get this down before I forgot it.

This morning on a cable business channel, Warren Buffet made this comment when speaking about the "new" JCPenny and its current executive staff, and how difficult it seems to be for JCP to get traction to grow themselves.

" When you start arguing with your customers about what they want, you have a prescription for disaster."

He went on to say that "Business questions are not the same as economic questions and, generally, the business answers are better answers than the economic answers."

Seems awfully appropriate to keep those two points in mind when talking about restructuring what the customers experience from drum corps.

There is also the assessment among a few that the DCI "customer" most values the highest placing Corps or Corps. I would posit that the " value " that one would ascribe to the Madison Scouts, Jersey Surf among " the customer " , ie the public, is at the very least on par with ( if not, perhaps even higher ) than that of the Blue Devils, a much higher placing DCI Corps.

People who come out to DCI show competitions understand that they'll probably be different talent levels present. I've never seen this as a " problem " that the customer wants changed in some fashion. They seem ok with this as near as I can tell. Its a non issue it seems to me. The " customer " that buys a ticket has very clear, readily understandable " wants ". They simply want to enjoy themslves with the spectacle shows put on in front of them. Unless they have a connection to the Corps in some personal way, the placements are far down the list of what is important to them. When they attend a show for the first time, it becomes easily and quickly apparent to them that the " less talented " Corps perform before the break, and those after the break are considered potentially higher placing units. I see it as no problem for " the first time customer ", as no first time customer has ever expressed that sentiment of " confusion " to me. What I typically hear is why such and such a Corps finished so low in the scores and placements when in their opinion as an outsider they had " more customer value " in the entertainment quotient for them than the much higher placing Corps they watched in show performance.

Edited March 4, 2013 by BRASSO

[MikeD]

And 7-Up (the soda/pop company and it's bottling division) for many years sponsored The Babylon Islanders (NY) which gave DCI/WGI?DCA Tom Beresford.

Yup...their unis were 7-Up green...pants and jacket, if I recall, with 7-Up orange and white trim. They wore a 7-Up patch on their shoulder as well.

[Slingerland]

what other corporation is going to find our activity a large enough audience for their advertising?

Look at the demographics of who does drum corps, who has life experience that should lend itself to drum corps viewing, and who watches drum corps already.

You've got a number of demos in there that are in the range of what consumer brands like like Target, McDonalds, and other mainstream companies like to see. The right ages, the right incomes, the right priorities (education and hard work) and the element of friendly competition. Did you participate in performing arts in High School? Then DCI has a product that you might relate to (and nearly 40% of all American high school kids ARE participating in performing arts programs in school).

DCI needs to consider not how much they have, but how much potential value they're sitting on. Garfield brought up W Buffet; Buffet's strength as an investor is looking at brands and companies that have unrealized value, not those that are already at the top of their game. It's my contention that DCI has a lot of unrealized value, but they are afraid of exploiting it to the fullest because it would necessarily involve selling some elements of their package harder than others.

The game plan should be to get the product cleaned up and clarified enough to make it understandable to your potential sponsors, with the understanding that you're asking them to be part of the expansion of the product and brand, rather than delivering them a ready-made item. Sell them on the unrealized value and potential of the product, and be willing to do what you have to do to help them - and yourself - realize the full potential.

Edited March 4, 2013 by Slingerland

[BRASSO]

I'd totally agree with this. But be warned that any new blood, if they come at it from a pure outsiders' perspective, would likely have ideas even more radical than anything that either the G7 or a few of us like Daniel Ray and myself have suggested.

I don't envision any " outsiders" coming into positions of authority in DCI. They might be hired as consultants, but in the end DCI will more than likely... for good, bad, or indifferent... go about its business utilizing those that have been fully marinated in the activity. I don't see DCI ever giving up its control authority to " outsiders ". If " radical ideas " were recommended, I think the DCI board would nix those " radical ideas " in a heartbeat.

I also don't envision any in the G7 giving authority to run things to " outsiders " either should there be a split up. If they ever hired " outsiders " and they provided what Gibbs and Hopkins believed were " radical ideas " for them, they would likewise dismiss then out of hand. The G7 will live or die on their own accord should there be a split up, imo.

Edited March 4, 2013 by BRASSO