Why won't DCI follow this type of path?

[garfield]

I really think the guy has a point; think about it. Exxon-Mobil gets massive exposure through the PGA which is a well-known charitable contributor. DCI DOES in fact make its sponsors look good and thus the resale value but that's a market on a totally minute scale by comparison. Whereas band instrument sales are directly associated with DCI, Exxon has no connection to the PGA except that when someone looks at what Exxon's outreach is, they see that they're "doing good for the world." They're doing what DCI is doing but they're doing it to the public at large, not to a market that already "covets" the DCI product.

Ok, maybe you're touching on an issue that drumcat meant but didn't express very well, IMO. Are you saying that DCI knows how to make music sponsors look good but doesn't know how to make non-music sponsors look good?

I'm not a marketing wiz, but I'm not sure how either PGA or DCI "makes" XOM look good. Isn't it the product that makes them look good?

So, while DCI's product is very good, and could make XOM look good (finals in Valdez, AK, anyone? :-), there simply aren't enough eyeballs in drum corps for XOM to waste it's marketing budget supporting drum corps.

Gee, maybe I am a marketing wiz!

So, obviously then, for any global entity for which drum corps is not even a rounding error, there's no hope of getting sponsorship.

Hmm... me thinks then... isn't the best source of non-music sponsorship the local corporations in the towns where drum corps shows are held?

EDIT: BTW, I recall DanielRay describing his endeavors with Microsoft than included a substantial influx of funds and technology so MSFT could prove a concept. I realize MSFT is not a "global entity" of course, but I'll play along.

/sarcasm

Edited April 10, 2014 by garfield

[Fred Windish]

I'm always a bit cynical, and in cases where people have a chance to spend someone else's money, even more cynical. In the case of large corporate sponsorships, like ExxonMobil, a huge number of big company people PLAY GOLF themselves. For some, like high-level marketing people, golf can be one of the primary activities for their work week, like glad-handing at cocktail parties. It's where deals are made.

Another upside for big corporate types are all the high-end perks that come with sponsorship of 'glamour' events. Nothing beats being treated by the PGA (and media types) like royalty. Add in valuable comp tickets that come with sponsorship packages, too. All free to splash around to current and potential clients who value the comped items even more. The whole thing really works.

Many corporate sponsorships of high-focus events are not as altruistic as it seems. Mostly, the person receiving the pitch to become a sponsor asks "OK, now what can you give to ME?" That can go well beyond just 'nice feelings.'

Edited April 10, 2014 by Fred Windish

[drumcat]

Neither am I, apparently.

So you are talking about business growth, not activity growth. Problem is, DCI has been focused on business growth to the exclusion of activity growth. That is how we ended up with an activity that shrank from 400 to 40. While the DCI office has done a great job of growing business (the task with which their bosses, the BOD, have charged them), the entire DCI hierarchy has allowed the activity to contract severely.

Activity growth would increase overall revenue on both sides of the sideline - more members paying dues, and more spectators buying tickets. It could even roll us back to a more comfortable position on the cost curve.

I agree with you on this. If there were more corps, there would be more revenue. I just happen to believe that the market is saturated at about 20 full corps.

If you use the tired "400 to 40" argument, you have to include the rise of academic bands, and the thousands of high schools who added or vastly improved a marching ensemble over that time.

As a thought exercise, consider this: If every current corps had 150 kids, and there were effectively 40 corps... or heck, even 60... how much would that gain the activity? You're still whittling down to 25 and 12, and being 37th place doesn't allow you to be stable.

If you wish to grow by making more corps, you have to come up with a business model where corps #39 is self-sustaining and isn't hurt by its placement. There are a lot of smart people that have tried to figure that out under the 11 minute summer format... many who know way more than we do, and they haven't done it yet. For this reason, I'm concluding that there aren't going to be more drum corps.

Second thought exercise: What if drum corps were limited to "one bus" / 54 kids, and all shows were on a basketball arena or stage? Maybe that's too radical a departure, but would you get more participation?

I encourage you to look at WGI's percussion competition today. There are hundreds of drumlines participating, and they more closely resemble corps of yore in size and budget. It is the "good ol days" right in front of us. They are the 400, not the 40.

If growth in drum corps units is what you want, go visit Dayton. If you want drum corps to grow in popularity, start getting viral drumline videos on youtube shared year-round, get on Letterman more often (hurry), show up for community activities outside of July 4th, identify with communities, and become a treasured part of cities in the same way pro sports franchises get fought over crossed with the sponsorship of local and regional companies that want a wholesome image.

The DCI Office isn't going to do that, as it can't. If you can't keep the Glassmen around enough that their site turns into a crap blog, where do you see this going? I think everyone would be better off if we had 15 Blue Devils rather than 400 rag-tags.

[drumcat]

Ok, maybe you're touching on an issue that drumcat meant but didn't express very well, IMO. Are you saying that DCI knows how to make music sponsors look good but doesn't know how to make non-music sponsors look good?

I'm not a marketing wiz, but I'm not sure how either PGA or DCI "makes" XOM look good. Isn't it the product that makes them look good?

So, while DCI's product is very good, and could make XOM look good (finals in Valdez, AK, anyone? :-), there simply aren't enough eyeballs in drum corps for XOM to waste it's marketing budget supporting drum corps.

Gee, maybe I am a marketing wiz!

So, obviously then, for any global entity for which drum corps is not even a rounding error, there's no hope of getting sponsorship.

Hmm... me thinks then... isn't the best source of non-music sponsorship the local corporations in the towns where drum corps shows are held?

EDIT: BTW, I recall DanielRay describing his endeavors with Microsoft than included a substantial influx of funds and technology so MSFT could prove a concept. I realize MSFT is not a "global entity" of course, but I'll play along.

/sarcasm

Again, you're missing the point.

Golf is being used to improve the public image of XOM. Your Valdez mention is exactly why XOM is spending the money.

Golf isn't shunning them for being a "bad fit". They accept it, and do good with the money.

Fans don't begrudge golf for taking their money.

DCI doesn't need a massive oil company, but they could be helped by someone else.

Imagine someone like ADP contributes 4 million dollars over 3 years for DCI to become the ADP Marching Series. Would you be ok with that? If not, I would question where you really stand.

[Stu]

Garfield: I have volunteered with a few PGA events and have spoken to a few marketing people who sponsor those events. While they are advertising non golf products to the fans at the events and on broadcasts to increase their own bottom line, the PGA ‘makes them look good’ with all of the local and charitable donations PGA does in the communities and nationally.

[garfield]

Garfield: I have volunteered with a few PGA events and have spoken to a few marketing people who sponsor those events. While they are advertising non golf products to the fans at the events and on broadcasts to increase their own bottom line, the PGA ‘makes them look good’ with all of the local and charitable donations PGA does in the communities and nationally.

Don't you have a corps to run? One that's on the verge of financial default?

[Stu]

Don't you have a corps to run? One that's on the verge of financial default?

Back at ya!

[garfield]

Garfield: I have volunteered with a few PGA events and have spoken to a few marketing people who sponsor those events. While they are advertising non golf products to the fans at the events and on broadcasts to increase their own bottom line, the PGA ‘makes them look good’ with all of the local and charitable donations PGA does in the communities and nationally.

Are you trying to convince me that, just because XOM advertises on the PGA tour, that the general public views XOM as supporting PGA charities?

Really? That's what you're trying to say?

You and drumcat are drinking some pretty powerful tea, and it's making your brains scramble, IMO.

[garfield]

Exxon Mobile doesn't give two craps about what charities the PGA sponsors.

They care about selling oil products and protecting their image.

Let's keep the real world in focus here, eh?

[Stu]

Are you trying to convince me that, just because XOM advertises on the PGA tour, that the general public views XOM as supporting PGA charities?

Really? That's what you're trying to say?

You and drumcat are drinking some pretty powerful tea, and it's making your brains scramble, IMO.

Nowhere did I say, nor did the marketing people I spoke with say, that they sponsor PGA events 'just’ because it makes them look good; but it certainly is an integral part. It is also a part of the reason why many sponsors help out with Punkin' Chunkin'. Yes, they get advertising out to many viewers and fans at the event to help their own bottom line. But the WCPCA, in part, makes the sponsors 'look good' because the WCPCA proudly and publically states that they provide for youth scholarships and help many other noble charities. Again; that certainly does make the sponsors 'look good'.