Why won't DCI follow this type of path?

[Stu]

Would potential members WANT such a summer experience, enough at the top level to keep the quality high? The corps still has to transport, feed and house the corps all summer, regardless of what they are actually doing.

What about the rest of the WC corps, esp those that do not have the infrastructure in place to become some sort of entertainment conglomerate. Are there enough corporate-style events to keep all of the corps busy doing non-competitive events for some portion of the summer? And again...housing, meals, transportation, rehearsal facilities...it gets harder and harder to find space for a night or two to house corps. Where would they find housing space for an extended period of time? Would they make money enough to pay for their costs at these events? Would members want to participate in such an activity?

Part of this, and this is what NASCR figured out, is that at some point the quality occasionally gets so high it cannot be financially supported. The cars, technology, etc.. in NASCAR have all been downgraded, and will continue to be downgraded with the new engine rules, simply because even a multi-'billion' dollar industry like NASCAR could not continue to support the financial demands of that increasing quality within their activity. You do not see Jimmie Johnson or Matt Kenseth as drivers, or Hendrick or Roush as team owners, leaving their activity due to the rules curtailing expenses do you? Yes they are in it for the money, but they also have an intense love for the activity in which they engage and have a deep desire to help others also engage in that activity as opposed to wanting it all to themselves. And they also have a governing body which tells someone like Tony Stewart to take a hike or get in line when a driver gets uppity. Get the picture now of why I am getting more concerned about DCI?

[Stu]

You also must remember that NASCAR is not a curcuit where a bunch or race teams banded together to create a league, one they control.

NASCAR is an independently owned organization that allows teams to compete using their rules. They give the teams input into competitive rules because they choose to, not because they are bound to. You could argue that the top few teams have more influence, but they really don't due to the way the France family runs NASCAR.

And this goes to show you that an independent agency governing an activity is way more caring and way more altruistic to ‘all’ who engage in the activity than one in which the governing body only consists of those just looking out for themselves.

[SkyRyder_FMM]

That is the hope. And I want something like SoundSport of the WGI Winds thing to blossom so as to help small up-starts. But with as fluid of a structure SoundSport currently has it is sort of like trying to form soemthing solid out of wet oatmeal.

Yes; all-summer national touring is very hard on finances; especially with smaller WC corps. Not saying that DCI would agree to this because it is retroactive but at least it would bring down costs without destroying competition…. A DCI regional tour sysstem until independence day, and a DCI national touring system from July 5 ending at Championships certainly would bring travel and touring costs down drastically; and I contend it would not bring down the competition aspect, but it would increase the parity of competition by allowing smaller corps to use more of their current resources on the performances instead of operational expenditures.

Regional touring or national touring - doesn't matter much. Once you start the bus lease, the meter is running. Once tour starts, you feed the kids whether you stay regional or travel national. Housing costs don't change. The one potential savings is fuel. Typical fuel costs for a 12,000 mile summer tour for a World Class corps is approximately $75K for the entire fleet. Some of that is baked into the bus lease, and the rest is covered by the corps. If corps went to regional touring, that might save at most about $15K in fuel, based on the current prices.

The only way to significantly reduce costs is to:

• Llimit touring - but this also limits revenues
• Limit spring training - fewer days housing and feeding the kids = savings
• Reduce the amount of equipment (i.e., shrink the pit, the electronics, the props, and the guard equipment) - anyone that thinks corps are making profits of the sale of used equipment does not understand the numbers, and anyone that thinks electronics are inconsequentail has not paid the bills
• Reduce the number of vehicles - ever increasing pits and props mean larger, and more vehicles, and thus significant increases in costs (the vehicle itself, fuel, insurance, storage, drivers, etc.).
• Hire local staff - stop paying to fly staffs in from all over the country
• Reduce the membership size so we can run on smaller, cheaper busses

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not advocating these things. But if you want to cut expenses, these things will do it. The others discussed will not have a meaningful impact.

[Stu]

Now, that said, why is there not a centralized purchasing division in DCI through which ALL corps are supplied with souvies, food, transportation, and fuel? Some directors see themselves as master-marketers and business negotiators, but actually prevent the activity as a whole from benefiting from centralized purchasing, IMO.

The only way to significantly reduce costs is to:

• Llimit touring - but this also limits revenues
• Limit spring training - fewer days housing and feeding the kids = savings
• Reduce the amount of equipment (i.e., shrink the pit, the electronics, the props, and the guard equipment) - anyone that thinks corps are making profits of the sale of used equipment does not understand the numbers, and anyone that thinks electronics are inconsequentail has not paid the bills
• Reduce the number of vehicles - ever increasing pits and props mean larger, and more vehicles, and thus significant increases in costs (the vehicle itself, fuel, insurance, storage, drivers, etc.).
• Hire local staff - stop paying to fly staffs in from all over the country
• Reduce the membership size so we can run on smaller, cheaper busses

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not advocating these things. But if you want to cut expenses, these things will do it. The others discussed will not have a meaningful impact.

Thank You!!!! Now would others please join in the brainstorming on how DCI could possibly cut expenditures for their touring corps!!!

Edited April 4, 2014 by Stu

[SkyRyder_FMM]

A few things:

1) you're right: the answer is MASSIVELY complex. We can likely all agree on that

2) the real question is WHY is attendance at the macro level down (IF it is)? DCI had record attendance at some of their large shows, an increase in Championship week, huge amounts of theater ticket-buyers, and even made money live-streaming Finals this year. In other words, from a DCI business stand-point is attendance looking like a major problem if the shows they operate are successful?

If by "macro level" you mean local shows, is there any data that indicates this is a) legitimate (i.e. across the board AND hard data and not observational anecdotes) and b) a growing trend of decline over multiple seasons? If there is hard data, there are so many variables for independently run shows that could affect attendance, it would be very difficult to equate decline to something like, "damm you G7!"

3) you talk about Competitive Disparity, but throughout the history of DCI there have been very few Champions. Even during the tic era, where sheets were radically weighted towards performance and not design, there were 'only' 5 corps who won (with only 2 corps winning 9 out of 12 Championship years during the DCI Tick era). Conversely, in the last 12 seasons, 5 corps have won the Championship: BD 5, Cavaliers 3, Cadets 2, Phantom & Crown 1 each. That is fairly similar (though for whatever reason the Championships seem a little more spread out than 72-83).

If there is a perception of competitive disparity, it was no less equal at any time throughout DCI History.

Over half of hte audience is comprised of friends and family members of the kids ont eh field. Fewer corps will have a direct correlation on the number of butts in seats. An increase the number of corps and kids participating in existing corps would have a direct impact on attendance. This is not new info. The directors of the corps have known this for decades. The surveys done over the years prove this out again and again.

[fsubone]

I agree that they need to be compensated well; I was just reminding Jeff that not all in DCI are doing it out of artistic altruism and volunteering but many adults do get compensation.

Fair enough. I don't think staff members or directors can afford to spend all summer doing this activity as a volunteer. Was probably easier BITD when a corps stayed at their home site for most of the summer, and went on tour for a week or two twice during the summer. I remember talking to alums who would work during the break between first and second tour in the 70s to have spending money. Now with a 70+ day tour, minus whatever time they take off, staff members don't really have time to work outside of it, except when they go teach band camps/set up their own programs for the fall

[fsubone]

• Limit spring training - fewer days housing and feeding the kids = savings

Or take up the model from the Blue Devils, where kids have to rent an apartment or find a local family to house them, since they don't provide housing. Probably cuts some costs.

[Stu]

Or take up the model from the Blue Devils, where kids have to rent an apartment or find a local family to house them, since they don't provide housing. Probably cuts some costs.

Cut costs for the corps by ‘downsizing? Nope.By changing the camp schedule? Nope. By changing the competitive rules? Nope. By changing the tour schedule? Nope. But cut costs down on the corps by merely transferring those costs over increasing the financial demands of the youth performers to be involved? Yep. Interesting concept in how to cut costs.

[Stu]

Fair enough. I don't think staff members or directors can afford to spend all summer doing this activity as a volunteer. Was probably easier BITD when a corps stayed at their home site for most of the summer, and went on tour for a week or two twice during the summer. I remember talking to alums who would work during the break between first and second tour in the 70s to have spending money. Now with a 70+ day tour, minus whatever time they take off, staff members don't really have time to work outside of it, except when they go teach band camps/set up their own programs for the fall

And many people associated with DCI seem to be blind that this is the problem. To sustain a 4 bus, 2 semi-truck, souvie truck, lead vehicle, with insurance, food, travel and hundreds of people, including paid staff, winter/spring camps, 70+ day summer tour schedule, ad infinitum… you must have the revenue stream to support such an endeavor; and when the revenue stream is not there for the 'majority' of the organizations involved it is imperative that the governing body either find out a way to help increase the revenue or find a way to downsize and cut costs. And if NASCAR was able to see this type of an issue as a huge problem for their teams then so can DCI do this for their corps if they would just care enough to do so.

Edited April 4, 2014 by Stu

[Stu]

How can you evaluate parity by looking only at champions?

Like this: In 2013 a small underfunded NASCAR team with driver David Regan won a race competing against current and former Cup Champions; that would be like Cascades beating all of the G7 at a show. In 2011 a small underfunded NASCAR team with driver Trevor Bayne actually won the Daytona 500; that would be like Jersey Surf winning the DCI Championship again competing against the G7. Where is that type of competitive parity within the ranks of DCI?

Edited April 4, 2014 by Stu