Note from Exec. Dir. of Music City

[N.E. Brigand]

Fair enough. How does it work now? Does DCI tell all the corps, "These are the 100 local DCI-sanctioned events. Please schedule yourselves into them as you see fit?" (Or is there currently more direction from DCI as to how it shakes out?) And if it does work that way, are there ever shows for which no corps sign up?

[Stu]

Fair enough. How does it work now? Does DCI tell all the corps, "These are the 100 local DCI-sanctioned events. Please schedule yourselves into them as you see fit?" (Or is there currently more direction from DCI as to how it shakes out?) And if it does work that way, are there ever shows for which no corps sign up?

Sue Kuehnhold, David Eddleman, et al at DCI corporate attempt to accommodate corps show and touring requests 'to the best of their ability'; I have even seen Sue work her heart out to help. But it all boils down to who is going to pay for the show sponsorship at each venue on what shows get what corps. For specifics on how this is accomplished you might ask an event partner like Garfield. Nevertheless, DCI is not going to, nor should they, 'force' any corps to stay local if a particular corps Board desires their corps to travel extensively. And while DCI might help youth to get home who are in trouble due to an irresponsible drum corps staff, DCI will not, and should not, be responsible for the mismanagement of any individual corps who overextended their own abilities like Teal, Glassmen, Forte, Revo, reincarnated VK, etc... Accountability not to overextend thus falls on the individual corps Boards not on the DCI Corporate level. This is why I have so much respect for Mark Richardson and the Board of The Academy; they have never overextended themselves for the sake of punching into the WC top 12, and they have at times actually limited their touring schedule to stay in the financial black which competitively hurt them. And 'that', imo, is way more important than going $300,000 in the red for the sake of competition like the Glassmen did.

[N.E. Brigand]

Thanks for the explanation.

As regards corps finances, I think I am in basic agreement with you, though because I would like to see more financially successful corps, if there are ways DCI can help to make that happen (without hurting other corps or the league), I'm all for that. And if there are structural reasons that prevent some corps from serving their mission in a financially prudent way, then I want those obstacles removed. And thinking perhaps hypothetically: suppose Academy retention/recruitment numbers go down next year because of their lower placement this year, and that they placed lower this year because they didn't spend enough money this year on necessary designers and staff ... would they have been better off going slightly into the red this year in order to place higher and thus get more members next year?

[Jeffe77]

The regional model would benefit smaller and newer corps. Good points made regarding forcing corps to a schedule. My questions is why was that not an issue before the mid 90's. I understand DCI was divided into different regions like DCM, etc, interesting that when DCI got away from that structure corps started to fold even more. Granted corps were already starting to fold, but look what happen to attendance in the late 90's and that's when the economy was starting to thrive, so you can't blame on it on that. I'm not saying that getting away from that structure is the sole reason for drop in attendance and more corps folding, but what I'm saying it's a big a factor IMHO. I think this is an issue that needs to be looked on top of other issues that affect growth of DCI.

The PGA in my view wouldn't be a good comparison when the turnover of the bottom 90% of golfers is extremely high. Only a small percentage win. hmm, in that perhaps it maybe

[Stu]

As regards corps finances, I think I am in basic agreement with you, though because I would like to see more financially successful corps, if there are ways DCI can help to make that happen (without hurting other corps or the league), I'm all for that.

As much as I deeply despise the G7 proposal I do not fault Hopkins for looking out for the best interest of The Cadets first above other corps. That is also why I see a huge conflict of interest in corps directors, or any corps board members for that matter, serving on the Board of DCI.

And if there are structural reasons that prevent some corps from serving their mission in a financially prudent way, then I want those obstacles removed.

The touring 'obstacle' boils down to sponsorship capital. A show sponsor forking out the investment capital to put on a DCI show deserves to get a return on investment. I mean if I forked out the capital to fund a show I would certainly want to maximize the audience draw from securing as many well known WC corps to compete in the show I could get. This is what most in the activity fail to grasp; when it comes to show sponsorship it is about business not about art.

And thinking perhaps hypothetically: suppose Academy retention/recruitment numbers go down next year because of their lower placement this year, and that they placed lower this year because they didn't spend enough money this year on necessary designers and staff ... would they have been better off going slightly into the red this year in order to place higher and thus get more members next year?

That is a question for Mark Richardson; but imo I say a big NO! Why? Because the reliance on 'projected dues' to pull a corps out of the financial red based on 'hopeful' youth auditioning because of a corps former competitive placement is the type of risk which has folded many corps.

[Stu]

The PGA in my view wouldn't be a good comparison when the turnover of the bottom 90% of golfers is extremely high.

Take a closer look at the PGA Tour 'corporate structure' and I think your opinion will change. The PGA Tour Charity work is phenomenal; and they not only support the top level Fedex Cup but they have a very healthy Web.com tour which is designed for golfers not yet ready for the main tour as well as other lesser known tours which are just as important. Most people just focus on the top level Fedex Cup, and focus on just the winners at the top, and have the false belief that the golfers who do not make the final Fedex Cup cuts at each tournament are hopelessly caught in the 'turnover' pit of supposed despair.

[Stu]

Only a small percentage win.

So what! This applies to every, and I mean every competitive activity; that is what makes true winning so 'extraordinarily special'. The idea that everyone 'deserves' to win, imo, is bunk!!! Only those select few who have accomplished something at a very high pinnacle level 'deserve' to be called winners.

[fsubone]

Uh.... most Open Class corps stay mostly local for the first chunk of their tours. The California corps don't leave on tour until the third week of July or so, same with the Northeast corps. There usually are smaller shows that can accommodate them until they go out on full tour. While I wish there were more opportunities for them, the system as of now is better than nothing.

[garfield]

That you are an individual capable of affording buying tickets even when you exhibit in this down economy is lucky for you. Most in this economy, particularly the youth for whom the activity is supposed to be a growth forum, aren't that fortunate. Please look at the larger picture beyond the width of your own wallet. Thank you for what you do and contribute.

I think you're looking at DLB and SS from the standpoint of the performers, but you're missing a key element in the rationalization of the DLB/SS project: revenue.

Is it a goal to organically grow competing units? Yes, definitely.

Is it reasonable to think that SS/DLB units will sprout drum corps across the country? Not in my opinion.

Is it an expectation that some kids who do DLB/SS will go on to march in existing corps? Yes, certainly.

In the aggregate, however, DLB/SS are vehicles to produce revenue for DCI. The altruistic reasons are all good ones, but all such success of DLB/SS results in increased revenue for DCI.

In order to have an "official" SS/DLB competition, it will be required to purchase the "show pack" from DCI. That will include paying a fee to DCI. (Nothing that I'm aware of says you can't have a brass or drum group at a show and not have it be an "official" DLB/SS competition.

A local TEP who wants to have a DLB/SS competition during his show will require payment by the performers in order to pay the DCI fee and generate a profit for the show. This profit will allow DCI to charge more for the corps they are providing to the TEP. The DCI show contract fee has been going up every year recently (my suspicion is because of pressure by the BOD to get paid more per performance). A TEP could make a little profit on SS/DLB to help pay that fee in two, primary ways: by attracting fans of the DLB/SS performers who might not otherwise come to the show, and by charging a fee to DLB/SS groups for the chance to perform before a crowded drum corps audience. Not charging the DLB/SS performers eliminates one of those revenue sources.

At our DLB contest this season, we charged each performer the cost of our cheapest ticket ($15), but we secured sponsors to give away free, cool chotskies (drum keys, t-shirts, hats), to all performers, got each corps souvie booth to offer a discount on purchases, and gave away $100 cash plus gift certificates to local music stores to the winners. We even gave each a coupon for a free hot dog, chips, and drink at the concession stand. Total cost per performer: about $15. Total value of what each performer got: more than 3 times that amount plus the winner's prizes. We had three drum lines perform - about 60 kids total - and identified about 130 group tickets sold that were directly attributable to those three groups. So 70 full-price tickets were sold to the DLB groupies (parents, etc). Average ticket price: about $23, so we sold about $1,600 more in tickets, the performers were well-"paid", and they got to perform in front of a sizable audience filtering in to see the drum corps show.

Revenue is the reason for DLB/SS, not altruistic visions of new corps popping up (although we all want that to happen). To think "free" in any part of the DLB/SS process misses the point.

Next year the plan is to hold the DLB earlier in the day as "prelims", with the final two appearing before the packed stands while scores are being tabulated. That's the big draw for the performing kids and asking them to save up $15 ($25, $50) over the next 10 months for the chance to perform in front of that crowd is not asking much, IMO, even from the "skinny wallet" crowd you claim is the norm. (And, for the record, the parents of the kids I saw this year would happily pay that fee to keep their kid involved in the activity, so I doubt your claim that a paying a fee to perform is asking too much.)

[garfield]

In regards to some of the questions asked I'll offer the following thoughts and opinions. ALL corps (not just open class) need performance opportunities and as much compensation for performing as possible. In general I think it should be the goal of DCI to sell as many tickets at as many shows as possible so that the maximum amount of revenues can be shared with the individual corps as fairly as possible. Scheduling is an area that I think could use a fresh approach. For example it may or may not be the best plan to have 20-something of the nation's best corps in San Antonio on the same day. Scheduling possibilities leading up to and following such a day is limited. Corps not part of that scheduling (Music City for example) have no performance opportunities for several days, so are not able to help sell tickets to drum corps shows during that time period. Music City had to travel from Nashville to Oklahoma (too far to travel in one day) just to keep the performance drought at six days. So this was a very expensive trip (the corps received $1,000 to appear in the show), but otherwise the corps would have gone 9 days without a performance opportunity. Members and staff would have gone stir crazy.

Some contradictions are obvious in here, Keith. First, "...as much compensation as possible." More revenues shared among all corps as fairly as possible. Got it. But what prevents MC from participating in an OC show while WC is traveling to the regional shows? Are there enough OC corps that are willing to travel to have an OC only show in a region that best stages those corps for the next available opportunity to perform at a WC show? MC drove 700 miles for $1000? So was it for the money or for the performance opportunity to avoid going "stir crazy"? Could you have, instead, found a performance opportunity (show or stand up) to avoid going stir crazy?

For long term success of the drum corps activity, I think exposing as many people to the activity as possible is important. Putting together show line ups that smaller markets can support would be great. For example, if a wealthy music industry individual in Nashville had been exposed to the drum corps activity once a year when he/she was growing up in small town Tennessee, it would be far easier to seek their support of a drum corps in Nashville. Maybe he/she grew up in a town that could support (meaning the local high school band could make money hosting) a drum corps show consisting of 5 corps who in the previous year placed 5th, 20th, 25th, 35th and 40th. In general I think LOTS more drum corps tickets could be sold (and therefore more revenues generated) if the elite corps were willing to approach scheduling more creatively and be okay with performing for an occasional smaller audience than they're accustomed to. Music City has performed in open class shows where the stadiums were almost empty. That is not positive for anyone.

"Smaller markets" connotes lower ticket prices, ala an OC show. But those types of shows don't generate much revenue, do they? In my experience, your fictional lineup is not out of the ordinary. It's common to have one top 6 corps, 4 top-20 corps, and an OC corps or two at a show. Your contention that it's the "elite" corps that prevent more shows from being scheduled is off the mark, IMO. The "elite" corps get paid the same whether they are performing with other top-12 corps or only with OC corps. The DCI/TEP contract is based on the each corps' prior-year performance standing and the time of year of the show, not whether they perform with other WC or OC corps.

Speaking of open class, I don't think being branded "second class" benefits any corps. It is fine if show X in HUGE MARKET, USA includes only the top 10, 15 or 20 corps from the previous year, but the open class designation doesn't help anyone. The thought just occured to me that this thread appearing in the "open class" forum means far fewer people will even see it. On a somewhat related note, the whole notion of judging the open class corps on a different point scale is confusing to fans, members, parents and even the judges I would argue.

Regarding the role of DCI's executive director, I'm pretty sure Dan Acheson would not want to serve in a commissioner/dictator role. The G7 (I use the term fondly!) have mostly very valid concerns and good ideas in my opinion. They wouldn't field such great drum corps if they didn't have mostly great ideas. I think Dan understands that the best answers are usually down the middle of the road somewhere.

Lastly I'll add that it was my observation that the experiences of the Music City members were even more positive and they seemed to have more fun than I ever imagined possible. There is something inherently amazing about young people coming together to learn a drum corps show and taking it on the road. I hope the climate changes to one that encourages the growth of such a wonderful activity.

I mostly agree with the rest of your post, but I'm doubtful that "better scheduling" would have lessened your burden with MC. There simply aren't enough corps to support the expansion of the local show circuit as you see it. If "the performance" is what's necessary to avoid going "stir crazy" then revenue can't be the driving motivation. If maximizing revenue is the main driver, then the fact is that DCI charges more for WC corps because they draw the biggest crowds. As an OC corps, therefore, you are dependent on local TEP's being able to field a WC show and schedule OC at those shows.

A typical WC 8-corps show can easily cost $25,000 that the TEP must post up-front (and take all the weather-risk). And even if DCI could find more TEP's to hold shows, are there enough WC corps to perform at them?

EDIT: I did a quick check of the 2013 schedule, searching for shows within 500 miles of Nashville and I found 19 shows (I noticed there's no show in Nashville ), only four of which MC performed in. Why was MC not performing at all 19 shows? Would "better" scheduling have helped MC when the corps didn't participate in the shows already available?

Edited September 16, 2013 by garfield