TOC/G7 Related Discussion

[Slingerland]

My sanguine view of DCI's performance is based on the fact that, in 2000, DCI's gross revenues were just under $6million. Their current revenues (as, by extension, their payout to corps) represents a little more than 5% annualized growth since 2000.

And the profit margin in that time, in both percentage and real dollars? Finals attendance (a big thing, since Finals week is the biggest money week of the year)? Are they on PBS, as they were that year?

There are more factors to consider than just overall gross revenues. If the costs to the corps were all up by 5% a year or more in the same time frame, that could be worrisome.

I should probably clarify and say that I don't see them as "failing", the way that the G7 proposal posits. That was, and is, wrong. They're doing a fine job of managing the existing base.

The question is whether there's a strategy in place to not just keep up with inflation, but to open new avenues to audience development and the new dollars that come from that development. SoundSport...yeah, maybe. Eventually, though that strikes me as something that might be more popular in Asia than here, since there's already more of a tradition for it. But they DO have an existing product that shouldn't be that hard to communicate to an American audience, since most Americans have seen musicians on a football field before.

They just haven't necessarily seen how good some of those musicians can be. There's the challenge.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Slingerland

[garfield]

And the profit margin in that time, in both percentage and real dollars? Finals attendance (a big thing, since Finals week is the biggest money week of the year)? Are they on PBS, as they were that year?

There are more factors to consider than just overall gross revenues. If the costs to the corps were all up by 5% a year or more in the same time frame, that could be worrisome.

I'm not saying they're failing. They're doing a fine job of managing the existing base. The question is whether there's a strategy in place to not just keep up with inflation, but to open new avenues to audience development and the new dollars that come from that development. SoundSport...yeah, maybe. Eventually, though that strikes me as something that might be more popular in Asia than here, since there's already more of a tradition for it. But they DO have an existing product that shouldn't be that hard to communicate, since most Americans have seen musicians on a football field before.

They just haven't necessarily seen how good some of those musicians can be. There's the challenge.

So let me clarify: You've said on several occasions here that DCI's two mandates are to organize shows and sell media. Is that correct?

So do either of those two mandates include increasing attendance (the variable that actually accounts for revenue)?

Said another way, if DCI scheduled 10 extra performance venues during the season, but attendance stayed flat, would you then say DCI succeeded in their mandate of organizing shows?

The fine point is that I don't think it's wise to confuse product with platform. "New Coke" had a great platform for extending its reach to consumers. Problem is, very few liked the new product.

Edited March 5, 2013 by garfield

[garfield]

And the profit margin in that time, in both percentage and real dollars? Finals attendance (a big thing, since Finals week is the biggest money week of the year)? Are they on PBS, as they were that year?

There are more factors to consider than just overall gross revenues. If the costs to the corps were all up by 5% a year or more in the same time frame, that could be worrisome.

How do you define "profit margin" here? What they pay out to corps? What they have left over after they pay out to corps? What they net before they pay out to corps?

If DCI did their job during that time by providing a tour of shows, and the corps costs to attend those shows rose more than the 5% growth of DCI, is that DCI's problem? Is it in DCI's mandate to keep up with corps costs?

Yes, there's more to consider than just overall gross revenues. "Mission" would be one of those at the corps level. At the DCI level, tour schedule, payouts to corps, and media sales are their mandate.

Somewhere in my files I have the DCI 990 from 2000 (geek that I am). I'm willing to bet (while I try to find it) that payout to corps increased as gross revenue did. But, again, if that increase didn't keep up with corps costs, is that DCI's problem?

[Slingerland]

So let me clarify: You've said on several occasions here that DCI's two mandates are to organize shows and sell media. Is that correct?

So do either of those two mandates include increasing attendance (the variable that actually accounts for revenue)?

Yes. And yes.

More attendance means more people buying tickets to drum corps shows, means more t-shirts being sold, means more people saying "I'm going to the drum corps show tonight," means more people talking about the product that DCI is there to sell.

If more people are paying to see what you do, even if the overall gross doesn't go up, you would still count that as a win, because the ancillary benefit of having more overall butts in the seats is a good thing. And here's your hypothetical for a hypothetical; would you rather have DCI sell 15,000 tickets to Finals at $75 each, or 30,000 tickets to Finals at $37.50 each? The gross dollars would be the same, but the overall success of the event would be judged superior by doubling the number of butts in the stadium, because those butts have additional value outside of just their ticket price.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Slingerland

[garfield]

They just haven't necessarily seen how good some of those musicians can be. There's the challenge.

I disagree. Making them CARE about how good the musicians can be is the challenge.

It's just kids doing summer marching band, right?

[garfield]

Yes. And yes.

More attendance means more people buying tickets to drum corps shows, means more t-shirts being sold, means more people saying "I'm going to the drum corps show tonight," means more people talking about the product that DCI is there to sell.

If more people are paying to see what you do, even if the overall gross doesn't go up, you would still count that as a win, because the ancillary benefit of having more overall butts in the seats is a good thing. And here's your hypothetical for a hypothetical; would you rather have DCI sell 15,000 tickets to Finals at $75 each, or 30,000 tickets to Finals at $37.50 each? The gross dollars would be the same, but the overall success of the event would be judged superior by doubling the number of butts in the stadium, because those butts have additional value outside of just their ticket price.

You missed my point. Where in DCI's mission statement are they charged with filling stands? Their job is to organize a tour. The product, and what gets fans into those stands, is what's put on the field, and DCI has ZERO control over that (except for judging guidelines, of course).

According to you and others, the only mission that's important for DCI is to maximize the payout to corps. So your math equation above is a net zero difference in payout to corps.

Or do you contend that DCI would be "fixed" if drum corps had twice the attendance with exactly the same revenue and payout to corps?

[garfield]

There is a flaw in this logic that, again, misses the point of the discussion about whether or not DCI is "broken". I'm not convinced.

This post, and much of your contention in most of your posts, is that, competitively, the corps aren't best served by being in the same league. That contention might be true if competitive placement were the single driving force behind the activity. But I don't recall having read any corps' mission statement or description of their program in the 990s competitive placement is the driving force behind why these corps exist.

As evidence, I went looking at several corps' 990's and web site mission statements. Here's what I found:

Madison 990: "To provide a program for youth in music and performance training through a positive environment."

Madison web: "For over 75 years the Madison Scouts has developed and shaped young men's lives through musical enrichment and performance arts. Values such as honesty, integrity and accountability are taught and practiced through the activity that is modern day drum & bugle corps. A commitment to personal excellence and altruism serves as the foundation for the ultimate goal of teaching our members important life changing skills that will guide them now and in the future."

Blue Stars 990: "The BS provide the membership with education and performance opportunities in the area of performance arts to help them to deveop life skill. Members learn though teamwork, dedication, a strong work ethic, setting goals, and discipline, that success can be achieved."

Blue Stars Web: same

Colts 990: "To use music and excellence to teach each other about success in life."

YEA: "To support the development of life skills in life through their participation in the performing arts."

Yea! Web: "Drum corps is an activity which attempts to do much more than provide a performance opportunity for students or entertainment for the audience. Through the drum corps experience, students will learn useful life skills such as leadership, goal-setting and teamwork, among others. The Cadets curriculum includes opportunities for students to exercise their potential not only as musicians, but as complete human beings."

Phantom 990: "Youth education and performance activities"

Phantom web: "The Phantom Regiment is a youth organization dedicated to the development of self-esteem and self-reliance. It encourages team work, sportsmanship, civic pride and contributions of one's personal best to a group effort. These lessons are learned through a musical and marching activity in which there is a blending of the arts and athletics."

Troopers 990: "Drum and bugle corps of young people to act as ambassadors for the state of Wyoming…"

Troopers web: "To provide a youth activity with positive educational experiences that promote the growth and development of specific life skills consistent with the Trooper Tradition of Excellence."

BD Web: Music and the performing arts connect youth with their culture through a common language crossing generational, social, and racial barriers. The activities that a young person pursues influences the type of person he or she becomes. The experience that comes with participation in a performing arts organization builds discipline, character, pride, and self-confidence at a crucial age and forms the springboard to even greater achievements in adulthood.

BD Performing Arts programs permanently enrich the lives of young people through a commitment to youth development and performance excellence while providing enjoyment for our local community and audiences worldwide."

I'll challenge you to find a corps mission statement that says, or even paraphrases: "The mission of XXX-corps is to win DCI finals championships", or "Failure to win DCI finals championships, or to place competitively in its upper ranks demonstrates our failure as an organization to teach youth the "life lessons" that will carry them throughout their lives".

Or anything like that.

Your premise is that kids join a drum corps in order to win finals, or be competitive with those who do. It is not. Kids want to be a part of a WC corps to tour the country and perform not just at local shows but also regionals and world championships.

You seem to contend that all kids want to be a part of only the top-12 or 16 in order to be competitively comparable with the top corps. I would contend that, for a majority of kids, geographic proximity to their homes is equally, or more, important. Many kids who don't have a corps relatively close to them will choose to not participate at all. For those kids, building more corps in more locations, that can travel the country on the tour is the best solution to get them involved. That would be contrary to your plan of limiting the number of touring corps.

Finally, your solution to segregate the corps and limit the lower end to a lower league would be a death knell. Even at the lower ranks, many corps get significant in-kind assistance from corporate partners. Your solution would likely concentrate corporate support in the upper "leagues" and deny those lower-placing corps the corporate support they need.

In addition, your idea of pushing the lower-placing corps into a "minor league" will cause a "lesser than" reputation that would likely turn-off kids who participate for the chance to be a part of the WC tour structure and competitions.

Competition and winning, or placing high, at finals is not a driving force for most corps. Directors teach that personal excellence doesn't come from a placement, yet you seem dogged in defining corps by that very placement. Life-lessons is not taught by finals placement; if it were then more corps would have that goal as part of their mission statement. For many (most? all?) corps, competitive placement is simply a means to an end of teaching life-lessons, instilling work ethic, teamwork, time management, self discipline, commitment, goal-setting, etc.

Is that to say that corps that don't score highly fail in those goals? Maybe you say yes. I'd bet most of those kids would say "No".

If the activity places such little emphasis on competitive placement, why is the cornerstone of your "solution" competitive placement?

Again, once a prostitute and a john define the situation, the rest is just negotiation.

I'm not convinced that you've defined the situation, let alone the correct solution.

You didn't address much in this meaty post. Please do.

[danielray]

- that is hogwash. Friends of DCI, volunteers, grants - DCI has had plenty of charitable support. Of course, given the G7 demands for cost cutting and attempts to fire staff, I would expect pursuit of charitable income to be the first effort to fall by the wayside. It would be disingenuous to point to something DCI cut at the urging of the corps, and then say "look, the corps do more of this than DCI, therefore DCI sucks!".

Friends of DCI is basically a ticket scheme to get ticket advance revenues instead of being 100% locked into the timeline of the ticketing provider.

Not sure I understand you. DCI has a long list of corporate sponsors, and some are pretty big companies. Maybe if you gave an example of the kind of big sponsor a corps is hooking that DCI cannot attract, that would make it more clear.

The size of the company is irrelevant, it is their actual level of engagement that matters.

Who cares of a company is a multi-billion dollar company if they pony up less than $50,000?

[Slingerland]

You missed my point. Where in DCI's mission statement are they charged with filling stands? Their job is to organize a tour. The product, and what gets fans into those stands, is what's put on the field, and DCI has ZERO control over that (except for judging guidelines, of course).

According to you and others, the only mission that's important for DCI is to maximize the payout to corps. So your math equation above is a net zero difference in payout to corps.

Or do you contend that DCI would be "fixed" if drum corps had twice the attendance with exactly the same revenue and payout to corps?

If DCI's actions and marketing involve helping the corps create larger audiences for their work and more revenue through the additional exposure, than they have created additional revenues for the corps. Put 30,000 people in a stadium where they can buy t-shirts, and the overall number of t-shirt sales will likely increase over an event where there are just 3,000 people in the stands.

Grow the number of people who paid something to watch a show, put more people in contact with the corps, and you've created a bigger audiences for the corps' products overall. I don't know how to put it any simpler than that. More people going to drum corps shows = more money available to the activity, because the pool of customers is now larger.

The only way to argue that that isn't likely is to engage in a type of magical thinking that ignores the reality of how people act and the truths of the market when it comes to consumer products. The more DVD decks you sell, the more DVD's you'll sell, because you've created a larger market for the ancillary goods (or in that case, the necessary goods).

The more people you put into a stadium watching a drum corps show, the more people you'll have who talk about what they saw and the more potential donors and patrons you deliver to the corps themselves.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Slingerland

[danielray]

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.

There is never a bigger bully than the market. It is the market, alone, that requires such concise direction.