Glassmen

[garfield]

While I understand your underlying frustration, and it is justified ( DCI could use more people with Finance and private Bus. Mgt. experidence and skills), non profits by their very structure are not designed with the same goals in mind as that of a For Profit Business. The goals of a For Profit Business is to attract investors and capital sufficient enough with its services or product offerings to both grow the company and return good investment returns to investors, or stockholders that find financial appeal to the company's offerings to the consumer. The mission of a non profit is entirely different, as its goals are different. As such, most of the Non Profits ( but not all ) tend to pay their top executives much less than the For Profits. Thus private business For Profits, generally attract much higher talented managers and executives to run their operations. As for DCI, if paid staff wanted a career where they are paid well, DCI, as a non profit entity, is not the place to do it. So, you generally get what you are willing to pay for.

I'll challenge this statement on a couple of levels. Brasso, you did an admirable job of describing the goals of for-profits but you didn't do the same for your non-profit example, you just said they're different. What are the goals of a non-profit drum corps, how does it differ from for-profits, and what impact does that difference have in the management of the BOD and overall corps?

While I fully agree that you get what you pay for, I also know that this is not a complete description. The extent of my experience tells me that the most successful non-profits are run by experienced, successful for-profit managers, and the fact that they are successful gives them the time to dedicate to their passions. There are lots of successful business people who have connections to drum corps; many whom marched themselves, and who have reached the point in their careers where they can dedicate some personal time to giving back to the activity instead of running their businesses. In most cases, those members are older and don't require payment to serve as a board member. "Getting what you pay for" is important for a salaried position like an Executive Director. But, in a board member, success, passion, time, and expertise are the keys to success. Good management isn't necessarily measured by the fee that's paid.

The problem is that most drum corps directors don't want to face the reality that his board might not agree with him and might prevent him from doing something he wants to do. In the formative days and months of a budding drum corps dream, the dreamer typically looks for "support" from people who believe as he does ("Hey! That could work!"), and he asks them to sit on his "board". It's easy to feel confident when you have an agreeable board who only want to see you succeed but, in reality, have no idea how to help in that process let alone tell you that you might be wrong.

An ex-father-in-law once told me: "If you want to know the easiest way to do something, ask a lazy man".

In parallel, if you want an effective BOD, find the people who say it can't be done and put them in charge of doing it.

You can't pay enough to get that kind of dedication.

[garfield]

The boards of directors of non-profits are often composed of local business leaders, and often there is a "give/get" policy for the board members, meaning that they are expected to donate or successfully solicit donations of at least some minimum amount.

And this is, IMO, a critical point of failure. It is an insult to ask a successful businessman who wants to donate a significant part of his very expensive time to then also open his checkbook to support a "charity". Most good BOD don't think this way because it's just another method of begging that the ED's staff fails at so is shifted to the BOD. It doesn't solve the problem AT ALL, IMO.

A successful BOD will work to make the enterprise self sufficient without either their own personal contribution or on a dependency on single source of funding.

A BOD that is expected to pony up their own dollars to fund the operation is not a risk-management structure, it's just another funding source. BOD members who enjoy the publicity of supporting a non-profit but only fulfill their required tithing to be on the board is failing in his fiduciary obligation to the the non-profit. Those members should be summarily dismissed (once they fulfill their contribution quota of course) and replaced with someone who has never given a dime to the non-profit he serves.

[cowtown]

Fund raising, alumni relations, tax structure, focusing on achieving the mission of the non-profit as the primary goal

[garfield]

And on the other side of that we have Ted "I don't even hum" Swaldo who basically saved Bluecoats, brought his biz skills to the table, and look at what we eventually got from this this year.

And, of course, Bill Cook, who never get credit for running Star like a business back when it wasn't fashionable to do so.

Add in Academy and PC....BOTH of whom refused to tour outside their regions until they could hack the finances for a national tour....rather nice change compared to a new corps touring itself into oblivion going to Finals the first year.

Thus endeth the lesson.

[garfield]

Not so sure money always leads to success. Unless this has changed since 2012, Bluecoats' spending is on the lower end of the top 12. Also while BD and SCV have higher budgets, they also have higher travel expenses, and while it is an essential expense, it's not a show related expense, by that I mean instruction, instruments, props, etc.

I'd agree, but his point stands as a major hurdle. If you can't raise $1.5million at the outset and $750m each year thereafter, you're not being realistic about what it takes to compete.

[BRASSO]

I'll challenge this statement on a couple of levels. Brasso, you did an admirable job of describing the goals of for-profits but you didn't do the same for your non-profit example, you just said they're different.

.

So little time. I should have gone into more detail in explaining the goals of the non profits. I could have been tired that day, who knows.. and only said " they're different ". What was I thinking, huh ?

No can do now however, as I 've forgotten what the question was yesterday that I was supposed to provide more detail on.

[N.E. Brigand]

And this is, IMO, a critical point of failure. It is an insult to ask a successful businessman who wants to donate a significant part of his very expensive time to then also open his checkbook to support a "charity". Most good BOD don't think this way because it's just another method of begging that the ED's staff fails at so is shifted to the BOD. It doesn't solve the problem AT ALL, IMO.

A successful BOD will work to make the enterprise self sufficient without either their own personal contribution or on a dependency on single source of funding.

A BOD that is expected to pony up their own dollars to fund the operation is not a risk-management structure, it's just another funding source. BOD members who enjoy the publicity of supporting a non-profit but only fulfill their required tithing to be on the board is failing in his fiduciary obligation to the the non-profit. Those members should be summarily dismissed (once they fulfill their contribution quota of course) and replaced with someone who has never given a dime to the non-profit he serves.

While there does seem to be a shift underway--in n.f.p. theatre, at any rate, which is what I know best--toward a model where the staff does more of the solicitation, I repeat that it is and long has been standard practice for non-profit boards to "give and get" donations. Going back many decades, I mean. The shift in progress means that the organization has to hire more development staff to do the fundraising. Our organization didn't even have a development staff until the late 1970s, I believe: prior to that, anything beyond ticket sales (which often accounts for only about half the income: there are very few n.f.p. theatres in this country whose ticket sales cover more than 60% of costs) came almost entirely the board giving or asking their friends to give. Coaching one's board members to feel comfortable "making the ask" has been a regular part of the development staff duties for years. You may find it to be a failure, but it became the standard operating procedure because it worked. And our board members aren't donating to us, then they're just giving that money to someone else who asks.

[IntheMood]

Sal....No hell no and no again. I would point a finger at myself before I would ever point one at Sal. I knew how bad it was and I did not raise my voice loud enough to the Alumni so maybe we could of stopped the bleeding. I am so sorry I did not do that. I do think about the what ifs more then I should. Again, from the bottom of my heart and soul I am so sorry.

Pointing fingers and placing blame does no good today. The Glassmen Family must heal and come together under the GAA so that we can move forward as one. I will no longer play the blame game.

In no way shape or form do I talk for the GAA. My views and ideas are mine alone. This is the second time that the Glassmen have folded do to money issues. The Alumni stepped up to the plate bitd. The Alumni can do the same today under the GAA. Do to the high cost of start up and maintaining a DCI World or Open class Corp putting the Glassmen back on the field under DCI is not an option at this point in time. I do feel that there are options that the GAA could fund, maintain, and sustain long term.

Our history can be traced all the way back to the Maumee Demons. Who by the way were a good all age Corps. I feel that the GAA should explore the DCA community. Where we could start a "weekend Corps" where one can feel free to go to whatever show they choose. Or just do weekend shows. Another option would be DCA mini Corps. Have you seen the list of Corps who will be competing this year? it would b an honor to have the Glassmen name announced along with those other great names in Drum Corps history. Another option would be sound sport and or drum battle. There is one more option. The GAA could choose and do nothing and just be a name.

Edited August 22, 2014 by IntheMood

[BRASSO]

I don't pretend to know why we no longer have the Glassmen, nor pretend to know what it will take to get them back. I only know what I read and hear on things, and Lord knows thats not always accurate in this day and age.

I wish the Corps the best, and it they can beat the odds and someday return in some form, that would be great.

[Caviecub]

The loss of the Glassmen is sad. My family had a sentimental attachment to them, as my dad was born and raised in Toledo. They were gaining steam back late 90's/early 2000's. Would love to see them get back on the horse someday.