Jump to content

stop the corps folding


Recommended Posts

True or false:

Any rule change that increases uncertainty in championship rankings, necessarily punishes the current top corps hugely.

False!!! Unless, of course, you want to mainly support a monopoly type system then the answer would be true. Within any competitive environment, whether it be competitive athletics or the world of capitalistic business, the rules and regulations should support 'impartial fairness' amongst all entities involved so that any entity can achieve success or failure via said competition. In sports the underdog, via rules and regulations, should have an equal shot at the title as the top dogs (ie see the past few years in NCAA Basketball with Butler having a shot at the title, or when in NASCAR Alan Kulwicki won the title as a low-budget single owner/driver); and in the world of business the small underfunded corporations should be able to bite into the profit margins of the top dogs through fair marketing practices and thus become more and more profitable and successful via rules and regulations which promote fair competition (ie see the rise of Samuel Adams Beer Company). Rules supporting a single organization in a monopoly situation, or rules which support impartial fairness of competition; those are your choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1376928618[/url]' post='3314647']

Here's one idea that may have been suggested on other threads:

Since drum corps is the only performing art I know of that normally debuts a show when the quality isn't there yet ("Opening night", indeed!). That is, the first few weeks of competition are not very impressive yet.

So, arrange for all or many corps to have a move-in location within 200 miles, say, of a designated town. This location(s) become a drum corps village of sorts. The first few weeks of competitions are mostly held at these practice fields.

I like your idea up to here. I want to build on your idea from here. Congratulations because i think this is brilliant. All the corps in Open Class park for a week at the weekend regional site. Like what happens at championships. I would hold these at the home area site...AREA...not town of the competing corps. They deserve the audience and the community/area deserves the show. The clinics, the community and corps activities during that week...awesome. All the corps travel/village together. No reason to tour in Birminghamwhen there is no corps there. Let the top 12 be your advertisement. I think this plays well into DCI requirement of OC start ups. I think OC should be included at one or two DCI shows on a Friday/Saturday format like Allentown or I would not be opposed to a single show being WC/OC the entire show to guarantee an audience...but i lie the idea of the Friday/saturday so the OC can watch the WC shows.

Edited by Freedom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As mentioned before, unnecessary spending on equipment, props, electronics, etc. is not the issue here... it is food, gas and housing costs.

The solution isn't a spending cap, but smarter spending and max tour spend based on previous year's financials. This all should happen at the PLANNING stage.

The cost of touring is pretty well understood by most groups that have been at it for many years. This should be put into a financial model that is available to all organizations to help plan better.

There should be levels of touring (within each performance class) where these levels are expense driven and according to number of persons (including staff), days on the road and miles driven.

Group I ($700k+) - X days, X people, X miles

Group II ($500k - $700k) - Y days, Y people, Y miles

Group III ($300k - $500k) - Z days, Z people, Z miles

Group IV (under $300k) - local only + optional finals trip

Individual corps should be required to submit a season/tour budget of what they can reasonably spend (with margin of error of 15-20%) that does not exceed 70% of their income (after cost of sales and core operating expenses). Debt load should also be factored in.

Tours are then planned within the window of that budget, forcing organizations to spend more wisely and save some for growth and unforeseen circumstances.

Been staring at this all day. Intriguing.

Days, people, miles...they all translate to costs. So, question:

What percentage of a corps program expense should be dedicated to the total cost of touring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

False!!! Unless, of course, you want to mainly support a monopoly type system then the answer would be true. Within any competitive environment, whether it be competitive athletics or the world of capitalistic business, the rules and regulations should support 'impartial fairness' amongst all entities involved so that any entity can achieve success or failure via said competition. In sports the underdog, via rules and regulations, should have an equal shot at the title as the top dogs (ie see the past few years in NCAA Basketball with Butler having a shot at the title, or when in NASCAR Alan Kulwicki won the title as a low-budget single owner/driver); and in the world of business the small underfunded corporations should be able to bite into the profit margins of the top dogs through fair marketing practices and thus become more and more profitable and successful via rules and regulations which promote fair competition (ie see the rise of Samuel Adams Beer Company). Rules supporting a single organization in a monopoly situation, or rules which support impartial fairness of competition; those are your choices.

How about the BCS? Allows everyone an equal shot at the top? I know we shouldn't compare DCI to sports, but in this case it's kind of apt. The BCS schools are the ones who always have a consistent shot at the title every year, in comparison to the top DCI corps who always have a strong shot at the title. Call it this way: Alabama=BD, Florida=The Cadets, Ohio State=The Cavaliers, Oregon=Crown, Stanford=SCV. Go into any football season, and you'll see the same basic names at the top of the predictions and the early rankings. Same with DCI. Every year, the predictions say one of the above corps will win, and stats bear this out. Yes, a corps like Bluecoats(Boise State/NIU) can sneak in and crash the party, but it's not a permanent move.

So yes, there are some systems where every technically has an equal shot at the title, but DCI is not one of them. PC or Colts aren't going to come out one year on fire and smoke everyone on the field, and 2 point the Blue Devils because they had a good show Finals night. Just not realistic. Nothing at all against those two corps, they're just two that came to mind. While in the NCAA Basketball world, you see an underdog appear every few years, (Butler, Wichita State, etc.) But how many of those schools end up winning, compared to the normal power schools of Duke, UNC, Florida, UCONN, Kentucky?

DCI isn't a monopoly situation, it's just that the best rise to the top. I highly doubt anyone would want to knock down the top corps just to make the bottom corps seem better. Not every corps is equal, or attracts equal talent or staff. This is a competition, and the corps that has the best design and best talent will invariably win. That's just how competition works. No use leveling the field in the name of fair play if it removes that competitive aspect. We'd just end up with Animal Farm, "All corps are equal, but some are more equal than others."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^to continue my previous thought^^^

Now that you all understand how to read the Form 990 for each corps (tongue.gif/>), let's look at a couple of examples.

Bluecoats, according to their 2012 990 showed total Program Expenses of $973,044, of which $436,959 was spent on Program Travel. That's almost 45%.

Whereas Boston Crusaders' 2012 form showed they spent $1,066,512 on Program Expenses and $417,895 of that on tour ($101,255 on Travel, $215,541 on Vehicle Lease, and $101,099 on Food Expense On Tour). That's about 39%.

And Carolina Crown's 990 shows they spent $1,394,233 on Program Expenses, and $689,900 of that on Program Travel. That's about 49%.

Somehow, the difference between them feels about right spending-to-placement-wise.

But what if each corps traveled less?

How would one "manage" tour costs besides simply a spending cap?

Edited by garfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

False!!! Unless, of course, you want to mainly support a monopoly type system then the answer would be true. Within any competitive environment, whether it be competitive athletics or the world of capitalistic business, the rules and regulations should support 'impartial fairness' amongst all entities involved so that any entity can achieve success or failure via said competition. In sports the underdog, via rules and regulations, should have an equal shot at the title as the top dogs (ie see the past few years in NCAA Basketball with Butler having a shot at the title, or when in NASCAR Alan Kulwicki won the title as a low-budget single owner/driver); and in the world of business the small underfunded corporations should be able to bite into the profit margins of the top dogs through fair marketing practices and thus become more and more profitable and successful via rules and regulations which promote fair competition (ie see the rise of Samuel Adams Beer Company). Rules supporting a single organization in a monopoly situation, or rules which support impartial fairness of competition; those are your choices.

Except when the payout schedule is etched into stone by the top dogs.

Why don't the smaller, underfunded corps simply band together and state, flatly, that they are worth more payout than they're getting?

Edited by garfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been staring at this all day. Intriguing.

Days, people, miles...they all translate to costs. So, question:

What percentage of a corps program expense should be dedicated to the total cost of touring?

You also need to fit in the cost of hauling more equipment around. The pit as it currently exists requires an additional truck / trailer that we had pre-pit, regardless of whether you were in a DCI finalist corps or a small regional corps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You also need to fit in the cost of hauling more equipment around. The pit as it currently exists requires an additional truck / trailer that we had pre-pit, regardless of whether you were in a DCI finalist corps or a small regional corps.

That shows up in the total dollars spent on travel...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, you'll notice that "housing costs" don't show up identified as such in any 990.

Most local shows don't "charge" for housing. The local host pays for housing out of the proceeds of the show. DCI doesn't charge a "housing fee" in their contract. At regional shows, housing is arranged for by DCI and paid for by DCI out of the proceeds of the show.

Corps directors don't arrange housing at shows and they don't pay for housing at shows unless they stay over before or after a show, or unless they arrange a layover between shows. That rarely happens because corps are either at a location at which they can stay a couple of days longer, or they're on their way to a show site where they can stay a few days prior to the show. Those cost negotiations are usually handled between the corps and the show host.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...