cixelsyd Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Interesting for sure and i get what you are saying but my question would be is....what makes one think that a very popular ( by whatever def. ) corps actually sells more tickets... Well, what makes one think that high placing corps sell more tickets? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 (edited) Well, what makes one think that high placing corps sell more tickets? I understand that argument BUT traveling on tour it's pretty easy to see that OC literally performs to empty stands...lower WC corps is better but not much...as soon as those top corps are ready to perform the place packs....Ive always said , many speak about supporting ALL corps BUT don't put their money where they mouth is. The only way lower class corps will make an impact if financial...pack those stands and DCI CAN"T deny. There are a few here who have marched open class and just ask them how hard it is to perform with no one there. I know , remembering BITD t was kind of the same BUT I do think worse now. The lot draws more than lower class corps...sad but true. Edited February 19, 2014 by GUARDLING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Just to be a jerk... We've all read how drum corps exist "for the kids" (read: students, performers, young men and women who sweat all summer for a product which is pleasing for them and for the general audience). Is it just me, or is this discussion (and others like it) suddenly gravitating toward a point of drum corps existing for the audience? Again, my lack of clarity and/or foresight comes back to bite me in the butt. You are most right, Garfield. I meant to imply "solely" for the audience, which it seems is the direction many posters appear to be heading. As a public school band director, of course my first and foremost responsibility is to the children I am responsible to teach. NOT the school board of education...NOT the parents of the students...NOT the audiences which attend our performances/concerts...but the students. Sorry...didn't mean to bristle here. Please excuse my insouciance. There is a genuine question in there. In theory, a performing art need not exist for an audience. But in practice, it will not exist unless it can cover its costs - and an audience is an important element in paying the bills. Take scholastic band vs. drum corps. Where school band programs are tax-subsidized, that gives them the ability to operate in perpetuity with or without a paying audience. The drum corps activity has no such institutional funding base. With what drum corps costs these days, revenue from their audience is required to keep it afloat. Drum corps is still about the kids... but the audience has to be part of it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 (edited) double post Edited February 19, 2014 by Stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 ... In theory, a performing art need not exist for an audience. But in practice, it will not exist unless it can cover its costs... And in reality, not in theory, not in perception, but in tangible reality, most of those who have this elitist academic ivory tower ‘art actually need not exist for observers’ mindset many times fail to receve funding and thus look to the government so as to force me as a tax payer into subsidizing their non-audience ‘performing art’. This beyond churns my stomach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott St Sinclaire Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 (edited) Its sort of like the difference between the Academy and AFI awards (where its chosen by peers and experts) and the golden globe awards (where its chosen by the public...but experts really choose in the end anyway) I would say, I strongly disagree with such an asinine proposal. It would only dumb down the activity to the lowest common denominator... for the most part, seasoned, cultured individuals would always say the artistic and design savvy is always the more entertaining... Edited February 19, 2014 by JohnZ inappropriate comments removed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 ...The lot draws more than lower class corps...sad but true... It is not that corps who go on early are ‘bad’. In fact, most ticket buyers who have actually went into the stadiums to watch corps like Jersey Surf and 7th Regiment are well pleased. The accountability of enticing more people in this day and age to hang out in the lot during the first half of the competition, instead of heading into the stands, is square on the shoulders of the top-corps. The staff and members of the top corps could on their Facebook pages, in their blogs, and face to face, promote the show, the competition, the other corps on the field, the activity itself but nope; instead they (on their Facebook pages, in their blogs, and in face to face encounters) tell people “Come see the real show before the show. Come see the only corps which matter up-close and personal in the lot; then follow us, the real show, into the stadium”. And unless one wants to be obtuse, there is no denying that this informal but actual promotion of ‘come see us in the lot while neglecting to see the early corps’ does exist... sad but true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 I understand that argument BUT traveling on tour it's pretty easy to see that OC literally performs to empty stands...lower WC corps is better but not much...as soon as those top corps are ready to perform the place packs.... First of all, that is not what I see at shows. What I see is that the first corps to perform generally sees about half the eventual peak audience, because people do not all arrive on time (work, traffic, etc.), and those who do cannot all get in on time through the entry gate bottleneck. The stands gradually fill quite a bit, then we have an intermission. Nearly everyone walks out to get food, souvies, visit the restroom, and so forth. The first corps on after intermission performs to less audience than the preceding corps, because of people not returning from intermission on time. The subsequent corps in that post-intermission block see the peak crowd because not only have all latecomers now arrived, but there are no longer any lot warmups competing for fan attention. It is like this at every evening show on the DCI tour. I know better than to judge the popularity of a corps early in the lineup or first on after intermission based on how many empty seats I see. But we are not talking about seats. The question was about tickets. Once someone buys that ticket, it is quite an extrapolation to guess at what compelled them to buy that ticket based on how they allocate their time while at the event. By that logic, I would guess that people pay admission to amusement parks primarily because they enjoy waiting in lines. The lot draws more than lower class corps...sad but true. The lot is free of charge, and thus really does say nothing at all about what sells tickets. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 No - all captions are subjective. (And as Jeff Ream will be quick to point out, they were all subjective even under the tick system.) An evaluation of "entertainment" is therefore no more subjective than any other caption. I think the distinction we are dancing around is that an "entertainment" caption would not see the kind of predictable, consensus agreement from show to show that is obtained in other captions these days. And that scares some people. Honestly, I don't think you'll see a change, just as the entertainment caption in DCA has really had no change. it's impossible to quantify. The judge can't keep track of all thats going on out on the field, and guage how an audience is reacting when they are a) behind the audience and b) usually up high and removed from them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Well, what makes one think that high placing corps sell more tickets? the number of people out in the lot watching them until they go on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.