TOC/G7 Related Discussion

[Jeff Ream]

Oh, gee I didnt see that coming. What, by far, and it isn't even close, is the largest revenue stream for the NFL? Television revenue. It is shared. And even the game ticket revenue is shared. Without it, small market teams would be gone.

Yes you are correct that teams keep their teamwear and hot dog money. And they can also (and do) come up with clever schemes such as seat licensing fees, which the team keeps. These things closely correlate to a drum corps' souvie stand revenue and fundraisers, which the corps keeps.

So I stand by my claim. DCI evenly distributing the money taken in from contests does have a "real world" counterpart, the exceedingly successful NFL. BTW, the NFL doesn't have the problem of the same couple teams repeating as champion over and over and over and over. This is thought to be due to revenue sharing.

DCI could learn a lesson from this. But, DCI, being a consortium of corps, doesn't have the forward thinkers the NFL did when they hired Pete Rosell. Their individual greed (at least "the 7")seems to be getting in the way.

actually you are both right. For you ,some of it is shared. For him, not all of it is shared.

win/win

[danielray]

Well Daniel Ray? Asked a direct question, and you dodge again.

Why should the people who put DCI in a position to where it's "broken" be allowed to run it?

Jeff, I've addressed this several times.

DCI has never been structured in a way where any group of a few individuals had control of much of anything. Just because someone is sitting there and just because they propose something, doesn't mean they are actually the ones driving the strategic direction.

DCI is structured as pretty much a design/manage by committee approach, where you take ok ideas and make them worse, not better... as each idea must be morphed to appeal to every segment of a diverse spectrum of interests.

On top of this, execution falls to the DCI management team. You could have the most brilliant strategy in the world, but... if comes down to execution... and no corps are actually in an execution role.

[cixelsyd]

I think there should be an early window of time where corps have exclusive rights to sell seats... as much as they can sell... best seats (in addition to blocks) on a first come first served basis.

Once that window closes, then DCI pushes out the remainder.

Who sells which seats? Oh, I know... the top corps get to sell the best seats. Is that what this is about?

This gives a strong incentive for corps to get more aggressively involved in the sales process.... even for shows they are not at!!!

What does that mean? Would a TEP no longer get the revenue from their own show? If Blue Knights host a show, rent the venue, provide the manpower and take the financial risk, they should get to sell the tickets and make the money. Why should any other corps (particularly a corps not in the lineup) have any claim to that sales revenue without any skin in the game?

If your idea gets passed, I am starting a corps. My "corps" will copy the DCI.org schedule page, and "sell" tickets to every DCI show.

[danielray]

except of course, you want the best corps to go first, then the rest right?

I don't much care, really.... just as long as they are sold.

[cixelsyd]

This is NOT correct.

The NFL does not re-distribute ticket revenue. It doesn't distribute teamwear revenue. Nor does it distribute concession revenue from the games. All the revenue each team earns... they get to keep.

It DOES distribute TV revenue (because of the vastly differing values of advertising in various TV markets). DCI's TV revenue....um.....

never mind

Sounds analogous to what DCI would be, if DCI payouts to member corps were equal. Corps who host shows keep their ticket revenue. Corps who sell merchandise keep their revenue from that as well.

[cixelsyd]

Jeff, I've addressed this several times.

DCI has never been structured in a way where any group of a few individuals had control of much of anything.

Probably a good thing, in hindsight.

Just because someone is sitting there and just because they propose something, doesn't mean they are actually the ones driving the strategic direction.

Curious, then, as to who you believe has been driving the strategic direction of DCI.

From where I sit, it certainly looks like a few G7 directors have been the drivers. Not only have they been making most of the proposals, but their proposals have been implemented as proposed. Overall, they have gotten everything they want except the proposals that give them governing control and/or reduce DCI membership to some smaller number of corps. Meanwhile, ideas from others are blocked from implementation, like the 5-year business plan from 2009. We also see resistance to the SoundSport/Drumline Battle ideas.

DCI is structured as pretty much a design/manage by committee approach, where you take ok ideas and make them worse, not better... as each idea must be morphed to appeal to every segment of a diverse spectrum of interests.

On top of this, execution falls to the DCI management team. You could have the most brilliant strategy in the world, but... if comes down to execution... and no corps are actually in an execution role.

Really? Who was in the execution role for the TOC show format ideas, then? Whose kids performed those pre-show solos and ensembles? Who were those people performing the mass encore on that video linked a couple of pages back?

[cixelsyd]

I don't much care, really.... just as long as they are sold.

Well, if that is your concern, then we need not bother with the best seats. The seats that need to be sold are the ones outside the 15 yard lines. Show me some corps who can sell those seats, and we can talk about a program to incentivize their participation in the selling process. That would be a far more productive use of time than having top corps bully DCI into coughing up the Friends of DCI seating block.

[MikeD]

excellent point. DCI could also institute a salary cap of sorts. A spending cap maybe. That, plus revenue sharing, could reshape the landscape in a positive manner.

An underlying assumption would have to be that...what's good for one is good for all. Current corps directors seem to be far from thinking that way though. Imagine....what's good for Pioneer is good for BD?

Pio can spend just as much as the BD today, so what is the problem?

[MikeD]

Well Daniel Ray? Asked a direct question, and you dodge again.

Why should the people who put DCI in a position to where it's "broken" be allowed to run it?

It is just as possible that DCI would be worse off without the decisions made by the majority of the board, not just those few as you like to claim, had made different decisions over time. Events beyond the control of the BOD can have a huge impact on DCI. Just look at why there are so few corps left at all...why so many failed through the late 60's through the early 80's...that had nothing to do with bad DCI BOD decisions, and everything to do with a changing society, poor economy and decline of the VFW, AL and CYO nationwide.

[garfield]

It is just as possible that DCI would be worse off without the decisions made by the majority of the board, not just those few as you like to claim, had made different decisions over time. Events beyond the control of the BOD can have a huge impact on DCI. Just look at why there are so few corps left at all...why so many failed through the late 60's through the early 80's...that had nothing to do with bad DCI BOD decisions, and everything to do with a changing society, poor economy and decline of the VFW, AL and CYO nationwide.

Yes, a BOD membership that, apparently, was stacked with Seven sympathizers. Witness the two at-large members who, after leaving the DCI board in 2010, are now on the BOD of a Seven member.