GUARDLING Posted November 16, 2014 Share Posted November 16, 2014 I'm not sure the young audience ever chose PBS. I was just at the upper end of "Sesame Street's" target audience when it came on the air and about the target age when "The Electric Company" premiered and I was a major bookworm who loved the library, but would often switch the channel to watch reruns of "The Flintstones" when my parents were not looking (only educational television was a reason not to be outdoors after school). While I watched DCI when the broadcasts were live (1976-1980, can't recall if 75 was live) and later the taped versions (1982 until ESPN), I know I did not see announcements on PBS from regular viewing to whet my appetite. I know some high school students are addicted to "Downton Abbey" but even today, PBS is not where you find a young audience. In my opinion, the theater experience is perfect for a young audience. Depending on the theater, a lot of great things happen. For one thing, the kids interact with each other. Adults share their experiences and hear what is happening today. Lines at concession stands can build community and I've never seen old cranks and snooty kids arguing old school/contemporary. Most kids appreciate someone caring about their musical activities and most adults enjoy talking with good kids. Perhaps all this sounds like "Mr. Rodger's Neighborhood" drum corps style, it but the theater broadcasts do a great job at presenting drum corps and growing the audience. I totally agree. Lets hope that theater continues to grow otherwise it will indeed fade away also Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 16, 2014 Author Share Posted November 16, 2014 PBS drew the geek crowd with all the British sitcoms back in my college days. In grad school, they made major inroads with the 20 somethings running Tales of the City, but then the "moral police" threatened their federal funding because "OMG GAY PEOPLE ARE IN THAT SHOW" so that was the end of that. Now that there's a niche channel on cable for every niche, PBS has a harder time picking up the niche audiences. I wonder if one of those channels like Arts and Entertainment would cut a deal for DCI? We had this discussion years ago and still I can only respond one way to the suggestion: "Punkin Chunkin". But let's stay on the theater idea because that's really happening. Might you be suggesting that DCI should stop expanding the theaters in favor of A&E or similar? Theater attendance is real. I'm more curious of whether it's actually a success, and success to me mean long, sustained profitability at consistent growth rates. I'm not throwing stones - I go the theater every year, too, and I'm glad it seems to be profitable - but I wonder why the previous expansion seemed to slow in the last year shown? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KVG_DC Posted November 16, 2014 Share Posted November 16, 2014 Yeah. The theater thing is probably the best way to go. A&E might get more eyeballs in homes for awhile but probably not have the higher ceiling the theater model has. Besides, it's more fun to watch on a big screen with a collection to crowd of like minded fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickhaltsforlife Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 What is more important? More eyes? Or more revenue? Does more eyes guarantee more revenue? Not at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 What is more important? More eyes? Or more revenue? Does more eyes guarantee more revenue? Not at all. True, but there's a better chance of more revenues with more eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickhaltsforlife Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 True, but there's a better chance of more revenues with more eyes. Agreed... but DCI history tells us that the more revenue part never really happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 17, 2014 Author Share Posted November 17, 2014 Again, I wonder why the growth in the number of theaters and eyeballs grew at such a smaller rate than in previous years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Again, I wonder why the growth in the number of theaters and eyeballs grew at such a smaller rate than in previous years. MAybe more went to championships, maybe more saw it on their computers. I know of alot more people who did home parties for the events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Agreed... but DCI history tells us that the more revenue part never really happened. I do not ever recall DCI expecting to make profits from PBS. I think they were grateful for the exposure. As some have mentioned, some PBS affiliates hoped to make money at pledge time, but I'm fairly certain most markets did not expect DCI broadcasts to be a cash cow. ESPN seems to have been a disappointment revenue wise, and while the filming was excellent, especially compared with PBS, in my opinion the ESPN coverage has a cold feel to it. PBS did capture the spirit of drum corps better than ESPN. Looking back, Pay Per View would have been a good option. I know it worked for the Metropolitan Opera for a while, though not forever and the Met is using the theater broadcasts rather than PPV. As I've stated already, TV may not be the answer. While the Bill Cook/Star of Indiana story begins with his seeing a PBS broadcast, and I am sure drum corps did get new members due to the broadcasts, i don't know of the broadcasts drew in new fans who would later become donors to either DCI or PBS. When the PBS broadcasts began, cable, if it existed in many markets was in its infancy. When ESPN took over, there were far more options, but still limited to what we have today. With PBS, PBS made the offer and DCI was glad for the exposure. With ESPN, revenues were hoped for, but again exposure was at least an equal hope. As far as the theaters are concerned, revenue is a significant priority. However if you look at the ticket price and the length of the theater broadcast, tickets are very reasonable. Longer opera broadcasts do cost more, so while the profits are helpful, even in the case of the theaters, exposing people to drum corps is still a priority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 (edited) Shaking my head that PBS and revenue are in the same sentence. Let's not forget that DCI was only a few years old when Finals started being shown and always thought what DCI got was nation wide exposure. (Who has made money off of PBS?) And my idea of ESPN was it ws supposed to be a sales pitch for new members considering the sides bits I saw where showing what it would be like to be in a corps. As for judging what went on in the 70s by todays needs (revenue) is trying to say the apples stink because they don't taste like oranges. Edited November 17, 2014 by JimF-LowBari 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.