Pete Freedman Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) ... Regarding TOC eating up smaller shows, this may not be accurate. We have seen some small shows disappear, but TOC may not be the cause. Shows are expensive. You need to pay performance fees, in some cases provide housing, rent the venue, pay for police and emergency personnel, advertise and countless other small expenses and hope that ticket sales, program books, refreshments and a 50-50 raffle covers the cost. People affiliated with the Bristol July 4th show on the eve of the 4th cross their fingers hoping to make ends meet and would not be able to host the show if the corps were not in the area for the parade. So cost is most likely the key factor some shows are no longer. Well, yes, finance is presumably the vector through which various hardships would cause a contest to fold. The contest wouldn't exist in the first place if the finances didn't support it. So in order for the factors you mention to kill a contest, those costs (or others) must increase, and/or revenues must decrease. Further, to the extent that costs increase at the rate of inflation, revenues can match that increase through increased ticket prices. If fan interest is constant, they should be willing to pay a rate that increases at the rate of wage increase, which I believe does not increase as fast as inflation, so you may have a point there. In particular, since drum corps contests are local, changes in incomes in the region of the show should significantly effect the financial stability of the contest. We've just come out of a pretty tough time economically and the unemployment rate is misleadingly low; "true unemployment" is very controversial, but is widely believed to be much higher. That must affect things too. Still, there could easily be 30 contests that lost a top seed due to the several TOC shows. So both sides of the financial equation may be getting hammered for non-TOC shows. What DCI needs to do is hire Garfield to do a thorough financial analysis of the overall effects of consolidating top corps. Edited September 7, 2015 by Pete Freedman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted September 7, 2015 Author Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) How does one move in and out of a class? The board of DCI can by 2/3 vote relocate a corps to a different class for performance or other reasons. Participation within the organization can be granted or withdrawn by the board by a vote of 2/3. A corps placing in the top 8 is to be installed as a AAA corps for the following season. This is retroactive to 2008. Permanent status UP or DOWN involves the consecutive years of activity Thanks, a reminder of the how utterly confusing the entire G-7 "thought document" was in its design. The second paragraph seems fair equitable and easy to understand from the first sentence. But the second sentence, the retroactivity to 2008, entrenches longevity. And how can "permanent status" have any UP or DOWN movement if their status is permanent? The first sentence says BK plays all TOC shows in 2016. The second sentence might nullify that, but the third sentence may render the clarity useless because the Seven had attained "permanent status" since 2008. As I read the history of the TOC show performances there have only been three new potential entrants into the top 7, and only BK has repeated that feat and actually moved higher than their prior placement. It appears that BK will, with a top 8 finish in 2016, attain "permanent" status (whatever the heck that means - "until the next one makes it not permanent"?) and play at all TOC shows they care to. So what for BK? Money, status, recognition, recruiting, etc. Edited September 7, 2015 by garfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted September 7, 2015 Author Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) Well, yes, finance is presumably the vector through which various hardships would cause a contest to fold. The contest wouldn't exist in the first place if the finances didn't support it. So in order for the factors you mention to kill a contest, those costs (or others) must increase, and/or revenues must decrease. Further, to the extent that costs increase at the rate of inflation, revenues can match that increase through increased ticket prices. If fan interest is constant, they should be willing to pay a rate that increases at the rate of wage increase, which I believe does not increase as fast as inflation, so you may have a point there. In particular, since drum corps contests are local, changes in incomes in the region of the show should significantly effect the financial stability of the contest. I'm real sure that the TOC shows didn't "kill off" any shows and put their poor recipient host schools band programs out on the street. I count roughly the same number of shows with the same level of decline since the TOC was founded. Some of the shows are "home" shows to the top-8 corps and have always been on the schedule. Fan interest is very elastic. Drum corps, for most people, is in the "Consumer Discretionary" category of our economy, not "Consumer Staples". The first the cyclical and the second is not. But we are on the growth side of that equation economically at the moment. I don't think you should limit to your thinking about price increases to just the organic kind of "inflation" we normally consider. As I've come to learn there are also price increases as part of the tour that directly affect the ticket prices that fans pay but are not related to DCI costs. And I think it's fair to presume that the TOC corps believe they can, as a group, charge a higher ticket price simply from demand of their past successes. We've just come out of a pretty tough time economically and the unemployment rate is misleadingly low; "true unemployment" is very controversial, but is widely believed to be much higher. That must affect things too. Very nicely stated. Still, there could easily be 30 contests that lost a top seed due to the several TOC shows. So both sides of the financial equation may be getting hammered for non-TOC shows. What DCI needs to do is hire Garfield to do a thorough financial analysis of the overall effects of consolidating top corps. Actually, it's only 5, or maybe 6 shows, if my view of the schedule for '15 is right, that did not have a top-8 corps because of TOC shows. It's only that number of times during the whole season that another show was happening on the same night a TOC show, and even that ignores the physical limitation of distance between them. I think a case could be made that it's only maybe likely that DCI could schedule a top corps "over there" to help that show anyway. One can imagine the fluidity of the schedule. Oh, and I'm not sure that DCI believes that my phone rings on this end, too. Might be best for all, I suppose. Edited September 7, 2015 by garfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Freedman Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 (edited) Actually, it's only 5, or maybe 6 shows, if my view of the schedule for '15 is right, that did not have a top-8 corps because of TOC shows. It's only that number of times during the whole season that another show was happening on the same night a TOC show, and even that ignores the physical limitation of distance between them. I think a case could be made that it's only maybe likely that DCI could schedule a top corps "over there" to help that show anyway. One can imagine the fluidity of the schedule. The corps are roughly in control of the maximum number of contests they will attend I believe. DCI doesn't force the G7 to attend the TOC shows as additional contests, do they? That would surprise me. They were already attending as many contests as they wanted to, I would think. It doesn't have to be on the same night of course. If the Cadets say, "Sign us up for 25 shows", that now includes the TOC shows, where before the TOC it didn't. I'll take a look at this shortly, by comparing say, 2009 to 2011, before and after introduction of TOC to see number of contests with vs. without a top seed. Ya got me curious! And I understand your point that inflation for a TEP is not necessarily the same as for the economy in general, local or otherwise. So some shows might have been doomed even without the TOC shows, and we can't conclude that the TOC is killing contests. And as you I believe pointed out on another thread, the TEP payouts can be significantly higher when a top corps comes, so it doesn't necessarily make easier for them to pay the bills. Edited September 8, 2015 by Pete Freedman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phd-student-TTU Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I think it has taught us that no matter what, George Hopkins will complain about any and everything...even something he created. Self-fulfilling prophecies are a #####. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted September 8, 2015 Author Share Posted September 8, 2015 The corps are roughly in control of the maximum number of contests they will attend I believe. DCI doesn't force the G7 to attend the TOC shows as additional contests, do they? That would surprise me. They were already attending as many contests as they wanted to, I would think. It doesn't have to be on the same night of course. If the Cadets say, "Sign us up for 25 shows", that now includes the TOC shows, where before the TOC it didn't. I'll take a look at this shortly, by comparing say, 2009 to 2011, before and after introduction of TOC to see number of contests with vs. without a top seed. Ya got me curious! And I understand your point that inflation for a TEP is not necessarily the same as for the economy in general, local or otherwise. So some shows might have been doomed even without the TOC shows, and we can't conclude that the TOC is killing contests. And as you I believe pointed out on another thread, the TEP payouts can be significantly higher when a top corps comes, so it doesn't necessarily make easier for them to pay the bills. No, wait, I'm not being clear. Yes, the corps choose their entire tour. DCI has input and surely suggests, asks, or pleads for corps to go here or there, but the corps have the final decision. In fact, I'm pretty sure DCI runs tour software that displays all 100 shows. Of course, it behooves corps to perform at as many shows as their endurance would allow in order to collect show fees to offset travel costs. And let's not forget "reads" from judges happen at shows... TOC shows are not "in addition to" the normal tour, they are part of their normal tour. Total of 31 shows but 5 of them are TOC shows where profits (as I understand it) are not shared with the rest of the DCI corps. The opportunity for #9 - #12 perform in at least one TOC show was apparent in 2015 and, I suspect, will be more evident in 2016. It appears that corps finishing below the top-12 will not participate in TOC profits. The question is whether there are sufficient additional profits and/or less headaches doing TOC shows than there is on the rest of the tour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 So I wonder what's been proven by the effort since it was reintroduced. Originally, it was devised to allow the G7 corps to produce the shows and split profits only among the participants, and I know several non-G7 corps who were looking forward to learning how to produce shows better than DCI execs on their own. Did the TOC result in: - greater fan enjoyment of show format? - increased ticket sales due to lineup? - increased net income to participant corps? - production elements that DCI can introduce to the wider tour and/or regional shows? Were the shows actually run by the participant corps, or were they DCI produced with elements requested by participant corps? Does the series actually represent autonomous show production by the G7 corps; did they get a fair chance to succeed on their own alongside the regular tour schedule? Responding in order (backwards): - yes, TOC shows have had a fair chance to succeed - yes, the G7 have exercised autonomous show production, but their interest level in that has waned over the years. At one point, the TOC had its own event planner, their own announcer, printed banners, instant encores from each corps and a mass encore at retreat - looks like all of those have been dropped. Small ensembles in the stadium have been reduced in number. Experimental scoring and the TOC series champion are gone too. The format is now basically a DCI show with a few I&E acts beforehand and a memory card game during intermission. - shows are run by host corps - have not seen any of the production elements adopted across the DCI tour - net income to TOC corps has gone up - the effect of lineup on ticket sales would already have been established by DCI prior to the TOC series - fans give mixed reviews on the format differences What has been proven? Nothing I did not already know. For instance, I knew that the format changes were just smoke and mirrors, piled on to distract from the fact that the G7 episode was a money/power grab. I knew that the double speak regarding who could earn inclusion in future G7 events would lead to broken promises, and look how Blue Stars, Boston and BK have been dispositioned. I knew the inmates were running the asylum to a large extent before the G7 episode, and they still are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted September 8, 2015 Author Share Posted September 8, 2015 <snip> What has been proven? Nothing I did not already know. For instance, I knew that the format changes were just smoke and mirrors, piled on to distract from the fact that the G7 episode was a money/power grab. I knew that the double speak regarding who could earn inclusion in future G7 events would lead to broken promises, and look how Blue Stars, Boston and BK have been dispositioned. I knew the inmates were running the asylum to a large extent before the G7 episode, and they still are now. So, if everything unique about the show concept is now gone, the only thing that's left is the fact that participating corps don't share profits with DCI or other corps. Presumably, that means the participating corps make more net. But I wonder if they really have been... If you follow the money in the two show types, one where revenue and expenses are run through DCI then shared at the end of the season via the corps payout structure vs. one where the performing corps share profits after paying DCI to produce the shows (notice the distinction), it's not convincing that the effort was at all worthwhile financially. Especially when one considers the paltry payout DCI affords corps that finish down the ranks. My opinion of the payout structure is that its benefits are HEAVILY tilted towards the top 5 or 8 corps anyway so not sharing with the 9 - 22 placements never cost them much anyway. It also appears as though the Seven were not able to produce "better" shows AND net more money; they apparently only did one of those. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Freedman Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 It could be argued that there should a fifth bullet point in the OP; Did the TOC result in preventing the G7 from quitting DCI and starting their own league? If this was the most critical goal, then maybe DCI didn't really need to meet the others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Holland Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 TOC alienates those who pay into your governing body. G7 did the same. This really is just a money marketing scheme that pumps up some, while collectively (and passively) degrading the rest of the activity. 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.