Jeff Ream Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 DCI is about DCI. It's not about the public. Neither are the fans, which are band parents, music educators and alumni. It's a closed activity that has no choice but to perform in a public venue. If there was a way out of that, they would. Additionally, band has NEVER been about the public in recent memory EXCEPT FOR on the collegiate level. Other than band parents, nobody cares about the band. It's hot dog and rest room time at football games and band contests are only the kids parents. Shows are not designed to entertain the public. Therefore, music educators and the attitude of the "club" are creating their own death. Because, every time a music conductor stands up to a microphone and says "write your legislatures" - yeah, okay...we ran out of toilet paper, where's that band letter. The Boston Pops will NEVER go away. Your local orchestra playing that hour long symphony - yeah, why would anybody representing the general public sit through that "really technically hard" crap? Same with DCI. The novelty of the uniforms, movement and music outside get's old in the second half of the second corps on. Oh wait, let me wait until Crown comes on because they do this really cool move. Yeah, okay. DCI will not grow and they are such destruction"ists" that they #### off their alumni. Imagine if college football (I would call them successful) F'D' you'd their alumni? How do you think that would go. This is why musicians and musical organizations are poor broke. This is why pop/rap/and other genre's succeed - they PLAY what the music public wants - if it doesn't sell - they bail out on it because IT IS ABOUT THE GENERAL PUBLIC. So, they sell out stadiums (Garth Brooks) while DCI plays with themselves and feels all good about how much they're doing for the world - which is nothing outside of themselves. a rather blunt assessment, but there's some kernels of reality in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I still cant believe that in this day & age with 300+ TV channels that DCI cant get one of them to broadcast Finals. With the way the internet/cable is going. It's probably better to invest DCI in an online platform anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 With the way the internet/cable is going. It's probably better to invest DCI in an online platform anyway. Please clarify your comment as it's a little confusing to me. Do you mean that DCI should focus on delivering their product online? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) Please clarify your comment as it's a little confusing to me. Do you mean that DCI should focus on delivering their product online? Yes, but I did not mean "exclusively" online as in no live performances. I don't think getting DCI on tv should be a goal for DCI. Something outside of the fan network that has the potential to reach a wider audience. I think it would be cool if DCI made a deal with Netflix for example. Edited February 27, 2014 by charlie1223 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Yes, but I did not mean "exclusively" online as in no live performances. I don't think getting DCI on tv should be a goal for DCI. Something outside of the fan network that has the potential to reach a wider audience. I think it would be cool if DCI made a deal with Netflix for example. Ok. Thanks for the clarification. I can agree; DCI has already done television and it's time to find something more to reach a larger audience. I guess Netflix could be an interesting path to take, but there's a good bit of drama with Netflix versus all the big ISPs right now and we don't know what that's going to be like in the future for sure. As far as other options, I'm still leery about Internet Video and potential usage caps problems from Internet Service Providers. That's area is getting worse, not better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 All things being equal... DCI Finals being on TV ( live or tape delay ) is infinitely better for the exposure of the activity than not to be on TV. I think this point should be inarguable it seems to me. Take a poll of all the current marchers in DCI this year, ask them if they'd want DCI to be broadcast on TV or not. Can we agree that over 95% would prefer that DCI be televised on TV than not be televised on TV ?.... As for the costs, the costs can not be absorbed now because the activity does not have the numbers of followers willing to underwrite the costs, and potential corporate sponsors that could easily underwrite the expense, have decided its not a wise investment of their dollars vs. expected return on investment. So there you have it, and thats where we are right now regarding the loss of TV exposure for the DCI Championships that were once in existence for a few decades. No, I would say this is incorrect, or at the very least illogical: all things are NOT equal. The cost to put DCI on TV in an era where PBS is not an option and there are hundreds of cable channels who would only air something for a (fairly high) price. There is little/no evidence beyond anecdotal that DCI on TV creates exposure that creates revenue. I would suspect that the vast majority of viewers of DCI on TV are people who either already no about the activity and spend money on DCI, or already know about the activity and choose to not spend money on DCI. Either way, DCI is FAR better off producing their own subscription service, and reaping quantifiable benefits ($$). The TV landscape has changed so dramatically that prices have risen to broadcast. When DCI was on ESPN they were getting ratings comparable/greater than some mainstream sports broadcasts, greater than NHL, and "exceeded expectations" ratings-wise. So the TV followers/viewers of DCI exceeded followers/viewers of NHL. The costs are high because it is expensive to "lease" broadcast time from any national cable network. DCI in its peak attendance would still not be able to afford modern broadcast costs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 No, I would say this is incorrect, or at the very least illogical: all things are NOT equal. The cost to put DCI on TV in an era where PBS is not an option and there are hundreds of cable channels who would only air something for a (fairly high) price. There is little/no evidence beyond anecdotal that DCI on TV creates exposure that creates revenue. I would suspect that the vast majority of viewers of DCI on TV are people who either already no about the activity and spend money on DCI, or already know about the activity and choose to not spend money on DCI. Either way, DCI is FAR better off producing their own subscription service, and reaping quantifiable benefits ($$). The TV landscape has changed so dramatically that prices have risen to broadcast. When DCI was on ESPN they were getting ratings comparable/greater than some mainstream sports broadcasts, greater than NHL, and "exceeded expectations" ratings-wise. So the TV followers/viewers of DCI exceeded followers/viewers of NHL. The costs are high because it is expensive to "lease" broadcast time from any national cable network. DCI in its peak attendance would still not be able to afford modern broadcast costs. and...in order to gain advertisers to foot the bill....there may be demands to change how the product is presented. no one wants that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Yes, but I did not mean "exclusively" online as in no live performances. I don't think getting DCI on tv should be a goal for DCI. Something outside of the fan network that has the potential to reach a wider audience. I think it would be cool if DCI made a deal with Netflix for example. The thing with that is partnering with other companies (Netflix, iTunes, whomever) = substantial revenue loss as those companies would want a (fairly large) cut of the profits. Why should that be a goal when currently DCI gets ALL of the profits from their Fan Network service? I think the goal should be for DCI to continue to improve Fan Network's quality live streaming, and forget about spending money trying to deliver their product in more ways. It seems glamorous for DCI to be on Netflix, but the logistics of that are likely nowhere worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 and...in order to gain advertisers to foot the bill....there may be demands to change how the product is presented. no one wants that Exactly: that great point is a whole other point of contention entirely! When DCI was on ESPN there seemed to be a LOT of unhappy fans who didn't like the non-show segments, and who REALLY didn't like edited performances. There would be no escaping that if DCI were on TV in any form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Exactly: that great point is a whole other point of contention entirely! When DCI was on ESPN there seemed to be a LOT of unhappy fans who didn't like the non-show segments, and who REALLY didn't like edited performances. There would be no escaping that if DCI were on TV in any form. let's be honest.....drum corps fans would ##### no matter what 1 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.