TOC/G7 Related Discussion

[danielray]

Then, they came down off of the ladder and started fashioning the ladder into weapons to begin beating the drums of change again.

They never stopped wanting to play under any conditions other than their vision.

Bump membership to 200 and no limitations on instrumentation (read woodwinds). It's coming.

Will they be duped again?

How many times must one be beat over the head with a ladder that was offered, before you realize you're being hit?

Woodwinds are never coming. It is a sort of a running joke...

Woodwind instruments are simply impractical and cost prohibitive.

Anyway, why have any limits on numbers? If one corps wants to have 500, why not? Why limit them?

[garfield]

In other words, DCI is just fine, they don't need to do anything, and the mix that exists now is sufficient.

Because if you want to say that the O15 approach - don't change anything to make the product better, don't force us to step up our games - is a viable solution, then that's what you've proposed. Status quo.

15,000 paid at Finals, no television deal, no major sponsorships, no hope of making drum corps anything better or bigger than it is now. Whew, that was hard.

At the lowest competitive tiers, drum corps is perceived as marching band. Good marching band, but notthing that can't be seen in any number of community bands in high schools across the country. That's fine; those drum corps are really there to teach their members how to play the game, not to compete to win. That's an excellent reason to exist, and it should be supported by everyone, but it isn't necessarily saying that those teaching corps are national draws, or the corps that the activity wants to showcase to a wider audience, simply because it wouldn't necessarily do much to improve the public's perception of what too many still see as "marching band.'

Anyway, I suspect no one's minds are going to be changed by anything here, so there's probably not much point going further with this discussion. IF DCI limps through another year or two with no significant improvement in reach or revenue, even those at the bottom will start to realize that status quo isn't going to cut it, and maybe they'll be ready to try something really radical with the potential at their fingertips. But it's going to take SOMEone in the mix to step up and say "here's a direction for actual, rapid, sizable growth" not "if we all spend $1 less a month on copying, we can survive another day."

You don't need my word for it. Even DCI agrees that they are not "fine".

You should re-read (or read) the DCI 5- year plan that was summarily rejected by the Seven. It contains many, many proactive solutions to the problems you present.

Don't have a copy? I'd be happy to send it to you. Just PM me.

Then maybe you'll stop claiming that the O-15's position is that everything is just fine.

But, I suspect you'll simply revert to your opinion that the DCI plan is unworkable, or won't attain the goals laid out there-in.

Then you'll say Dan is a weak leader because of the plan.

Your script is well known. The question is whether you can revise history to prove that the 5-year plan would not have worked, even though it attempted to address the needs of all corps and the activity simultaneously. Having never had the chance to implement the plan we'll simply never know if it would have worked.

[danielray]

Tony Schlecta provided stone cold, decisive leadership with decades of experience. That is precisely what the DCI corps directors wanted to move away from. They will not go back.

I had to google who that was...

Anyway, this is about how relevant drum corps then is to drum corps now.

[

Edited March 18, 2013 by danielray

[danielray]

You should re-read (or read) the DCI 5- year plan that was summarily rejected by the Seven. It contains many, many proactive solutions to the problems you present.

...

Then you'll say Dan is a weak leader because of the plan.

It really was a weak plan. Well, less of a plan than something you might work up if you were trying to ask Roman Blenski to prom.

[garfield]

[/size]

It really was a weak plan. Well, less of a plan than something you might work up if you were trying to ask Roman Blenski to prom.

Nice.

Another pejorative post designed to belittle and beat down the positions of those who believe that Roman has value to add to the activity.

If you want to make your claim impactful and meaningful, you'll address the specifics of the plan, not cast dispersions at those for whom you, personally, have little respect.

Is this the type of comment that describes how the VC business works? Is "bludgeon" the only operative word in your playbook?

[garfield]

Here, let me provide you with one element of the 5-year plan:

"The Participation Assessment Development and Education Committee (PAD) will tak a lead role to develop in 2010 and implement in 2011 an aggressive corps operational and artistic growth support plan as an extension of the participation review process. While respecting the autonomy of each organization, engage management and staff proactively rather than sit idly by. Opportunities exist to utilize DCI hall of Fame talent to offer development for aspiring instructors and designers. Deploy successful fundraisers, transportation experts, and business management advisors along with board development specialists. Commit a DCI staff position to corps development support."

Now, tear it down and prove how this is just another part of a "weak" plan.

[danielray]

Nice.

Another pejorative post designed to belittle and beat down the positions of those who believe that Roman has value to add to the activity.

If you want to make your claim impactful and meaningful, you'll address the specifics of the plan, not cast dispersions at those for whom you, personally, have little respect.

Is this the type of comment that describes how the VC business works? Is "bludgeon" the only operative word in your playbook?

Roman really does some great things for kids....respect for that. But, what he does is fully different from major league.

The reality is that a disproportionate amount of DCI's attention seems to be focused on appeasing Roman and Mark Arnold.

DCI is a business, not a charity. It needs to focus attention on cashflow... period.

[Jeff Ream]

Stop and think about it for a second...

Regardless of how you may wish to interpret any justification, how successful is any CEO going to be that had been fired due to lack of confidence/decisive leadership upon being reinstated?

It is a bad situation made worse. There is no probably path to success here.

Dan is a really nice guy. That is actually the problem. DCI does not need a nice guy in that role right now. They need a stone cold executive with decades of experience running an events company producing in the range of $40-50M+ annually.

There is no possible path to growth for DCI, and subsequently member corps, without this type of highly-experienced and decisive leadership.

actually, Dan is a nice guy. And he'll chuckle when he reads this, but he can be a dick when needed. The problem is DCI's rules do not let him. And when you have a schism like DCi does, the only thing you can do is either a) try to be mr nice in the middle or b) call their bluff and tell them to leave.

Honestly, it's time for option b if this comes up again after this season.

[Jeff Ream]

Yes, but to Daniel's point (maybe?), if you DO make clear strata (make it official), it gives more corps a chance to "win something" or be competitive. What was Serf's reward, other the recognition they got at every show, and now in threads like this? If there was a way to stratify by dollars spent, I'd be on board (and I've said this a long time ago). IOW, it should "mean something" to win the "Less Than $350,000" Championship. Then again, wasn't this what Div II/III tried to do?

I dunno...no one's going to change human behavior, that says "I want to perform at the highest levels of [activity X]." For Drum Corps, that means Top 6 (Or higher!) 600+ tr out every year for those top 6 corps, so we know 2000 kids are being either pushed down, or pushed out.

To your point, we need MORE CORPS, with less lofty goals, that still TEACH EXCELLENCE, but know they're only spending $350,000 to make it happen. It's a different goal; different need. They should BE THRILLED when one of their own members makes it to BD the next year! If they're offended, then that means they wish they were a "Big Boy!" THAT DOES NOT WORK.

Surf's reward was more applicant interest than ever, and placing towards the top in souvie sales.

Yes, beating the almight out for bucks.

imagine that

[danielray]

Here, let me provide you with one element of the 5-year plan:

"The Participation Assessment Development and Education Committee (PAD) will tak a lead role to develop in 2010 and implement in 2011 an aggressive corps operational and artistic growth support plan as an extension of the participation review process. While respecting the autonomy of each organization, engage management and staff proactively rather than sit idly by. Opportunities exist to utilize DCI hall of Fame talent to offer development for aspiring instructors and designers. Deploy successful fundraisers, transportation experts, and business management advisors along with board development specialists. Commit a DCI staff position to corps development support."

Now, tear it down and prove how this is just another part of a "weak" plan.

How is it weak?

Here's my alternative plan... not 5 year... but 5 minute plan...

"Hire really ####### great salesperson. Incent heavily."

Whole plan.

What's he going to sell? Sponsorship? Tickets?

I don't know... but who the #### cares... as long as they are SELLING... not thinking about planning to possibly maybe do something ... someday.

Close something. Anything. Increase revenues.

The last thing DCI needs is another ####### committee. Name one great thing that any DCI committee has ever done?

Committees aren't plans.... suggesting to form a committee is definitely not leadership... it is punting and making it look like actual work.