Slingerland Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 What is the approach to them to give them the confidence that the next guy (or team) who brings proposals, controversial or not, are trustworthy in a way NOT like the G7 leaders? I appreciate all of your concerns, Dan, and agree that it'll be an uphill climb. In terms of what it would take to convince them that a strong executive division is in their own interest....well, we're wired to pack mentality. What you really need are 4 or 5 influential voices among the voting membership, representing a range of sizes and regions, who can serve as vote getters within their own constituencies. The corps are going to have to invest in personnel who can help them create a stronger primary product, a bigger range of participants and audience members, and the type of sponsors who can afford to underwrite the expenses of getting Finals back on tv. I kind of split the difference between Daniel and Jeff R here; I think the product is a weakness at present (sometimes, not always), and that you can't discount the need to appeal to adults too. The audience for pro skiing is primarily 40s and 50s adults, even as the participants are the ages of their kids. Because of that, you have companies like Red Bull AND Volvo signing up to sponsor downhill events, even though the two brands are selling to two completely different demos - the activity is what ties those two groups together. Commit to the idea of bringing in a strong leadership team with a proven track record (and I'd agree with Daniel that they'll have to be recruited; you don't want the guys who apply for the gig), and hire a headhunter who has experience filling those types of positions with other organizations. Then make sure you give the new team at least 3 years to start showing some results. But management by committee, with a relatively weak executive, has already shown itself to be a less than sterling success. It's not anyone's 'fault' - its just how it worked out. Time to try something new. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 (edited) double post Edited March 22, 2013 by Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 ... How does one convince a narcissist to not be one? You are presenting that question to the D-Ray? Really? Think about that for a moment and you will catch my drift! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 It is about sponsoring events that other kids watch.... not about adult fans. They are not as valuable to sponsors as youth. Youth are VERY tough to get and DCI has a very solid and unique segment of the youth market. yes, but there's a finite number of kids that will watch Dan. We aren't football or hoops...we're band. We're punchlines in the American Pie movies. We aren't even Drumline the Movie. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 I appreciate all of your concerns, Dan, and agree that it'll be an uphill climb. In terms of what it would take to convince them that a strong executive division is in their own interest....well, we're wired to pack mentality. What you really need are 4 or 5 influential voices among the voting membership, representing a range of sizes and regions, who can serve as vote getters within their own constituencies. The corps are going to have to invest in personnel who can help them create a stronger primary product, a bigger range of participants and audience members, and the type of sponsors who can afford to underwrite the expenses of getting Finals back on tv. I kind of split the difference between Daniel and Jeff R here; I think the product is a weakness at present (sometimes, not always), and that you can't discount the need to appeal to adults too. The audience for pro skiing is primarily 40s and 50s adults, even as the participants are the ages of their kids. Because of that, you have companies like Red Bull AND Volvo signing up to sponsor downhill events, even though the two brands are selling to two completely different demos - the activity is what ties those two groups together. Commit to the idea of bringing in a strong leadership team with a proven track record (and I'd agree with Daniel that they'll have to be recruited; you don't want the guys who apply for the gig), and hire a headhunter who has experience filling those types of positions with other organizations. Then make sure you give the new team at least 3 years to start showing some results. But management by committee, with a relatively weak executive, has already shown itself to be a less than sterling success. It's not anyone's 'fault' - its just how it worked out. Time to try something new. note that Dan is "weak" because of the bylaws in place...voted on by the corps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 yes, but there's a finite number of kids that will watch Dan. We aren't football or hoops...we're band. We're punchlines in the American Pie movies. We aren't even Drumline the Movie. You are correct Jeff. No matter what we do in an attempt to change our image as an activity THIS which is currently running on network television is how we are viewed by 99% of the public. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted March 22, 2013 Author Share Posted March 22, 2013 I keep trying to explain this point... but here it goes again... The money is not really in show revenue. It is in sponsorship... Show revenue is worth millions annually. Regardless of how enthusiastic you are about sponsorship, it makes no sense to dismiss the value of show revenue. The most financially stable drum corps out there get most of their revenue from other sources that have absolutely nothing to do with drum corps, ticket sales, donations, etc. Unless you count gross receipts from bingo (which is not what I would call "stable"), I cannot see how any corps (other than Cadets/YEA!) is getting "most of their revenue" from sources that have nothing to do with drum corps. Once you account for the most common drum corps related revenue sources: corps member dues DCI appearance fees DCI revenue sharing revenue from hosting DCI shows corps merchandise sales donations to the corps - you have already accounted for "most" revenue. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted March 22, 2013 Author Share Posted March 22, 2013 It is about sponsoring events that other kids watch.... not about adult fans. They are not as valuable to sponsors as youth. Youth are VERY tough to get and DCI has a very solid and unique segment of the youth market. I thought only the open class corps and Pioneer had "youth", while most WC corps are exclusively young adults. This raises several questions. a. Which demographic are the sponsors really looking for? 19-21? Or 18 and under? (Or both?) b. If 18 and under are a vital part of the deal, maybe open class is of more value to sponsors than world class. c. Since WC is such a narrow age band, you might need open class to close this deal. No longer wise to remove them from DCI, then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted March 22, 2013 Author Share Posted March 22, 2013 No. Not suggesting anyone follows anyone else. Suggesting that someone that has a proven track record in the events space, on a scale well beyond DCI, would come in and take care of the operations... so corps can focus on doing what they do without having to really get into the kitchen of DCI. They just focus on running their own orgs, doing their thing and receiving checks. That will never happen as long as the 7 are in DCI. Half of their directors insist on being in the kitchen. Look at what is going on now. DCI was founded with this mentality, has operated for 40 years with this mentality, and shows no signs of changing that mindset any time soon. If DCI corps directors wanted out of the kitchen 40 years ago, they would have put their tour plan out as a proposal to VFW, AL, World Open, U.S. Open, etc., and let the high bidder run the shows and send them checks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slingerland Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 (edited) That will never happen as long as the 7 are in DCI. Half of their directors insist on being in the kitchen. Look at what is going on now. Fill us in. What IS going on now? The Board now has the 8+1 model - has anything significant changed in the last few months? No one in the G7 would blanche at the idea of a strong executive team coming in who could expand the market for drum corps and help the activity find major sponsors. It's dumb to think they would. If Gibbs and Coates and Hopkins got bigger checks at the end of the season, because DCI was more successful at shaking money from the trees, then they'd give a #### about how it happened. it would free them up to worry about their local issues much more than whether DCI was going to be able to break even for the year or not. Edited March 22, 2013 by Slingerland 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts