Stu Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 2 hours ago, garfield said: I started to argue that there are some "younger" corps that have bucked that trend (Crown) but "many, many years" is a bit undefined here. No, I guess you're right. Wait. No, that's not true. Oregon Crusaders are a young corps that has jumped onto the scene and has neither age nor a "Sugar Daddy" to account for their success. I would count the Cascades, as well. Academy? Yes, they'd qualify, too. But I think you're mostly right. a) The Oregon Crusaders are not a 'young' corps. They had their inception in 1971; in 1972 the Father of one of the Founders, again a Father secured a large donation from a major food company which is now Smuckers (maybe not a typical Sugar Daddy but at least capital from a sugar based company ); and for various reasons the corps has been re-organized a few times over the past 30 years. In 2007 it was re-organized into what we have today. I suggest taking a hard look into the bios of the business minded people who were influential in that most recent process. b) The Academy is, to me, the corps in which all new-hopeful corps should study. And again, look hard into the business related people involved, especially on the Board level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 2 hours ago, ouooga said: This is the part I have issue with. I agree, this is how it's traditionally been done, which completely ignores innovation for tried and true. I can't ever imagine a time in any business venture where "we've tried every idea, there's no more effective ideas left" is an acceptable answer. The one of those that has the most legs today is Business Ventures, and I feel this is the most untapped source of funds by all corps and nonprofits in general. Yes, starting a bus rental company or an airline fuel depot costs way more to start than a corps has on its own. But for a new corps to start a small business while simultaneously starting a Sound Sport corps, and growing both of those over time is incredibly feasible. The legalities of a non-taxed entity 'doing business' by competing in the open market place against business that have to pay corporate income tax is the overwhelming issue that has to be addressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 1 hour ago, garfield said: Excellent. All good suggestions, and thanks for the description of the kick that got things going. My question is, what WAS the tenor of the organization prior to the wake up call? Can you describe why it took a venerable corps like BAC so long to get the message that the Seven were trying to send? Were they not listening or were efforts misdirected? Per the highlights above, can you provide some expansion on the notion of "investing" to "return dividends"? If a nascent organization is struggling for capital to fund the next overnight trip, where does "investing" fit in? I smile confidently when I read your comments about the board size. Curious: how used to sit on the board and how many do now? How has the character and culture of the BoD changed? I appreciate your insight; BAC is an old "Phoenix" who faced the same problems as a new organization, but had some roots already planted deep. It's an apt example. Yea, in the G7's view, it's "See, we were right, weren't we?" Heh. Funny how that works, isn't it? BAC may have the resources to 'invest' and mimic BD, but I am not sure a group on the lower end of the competitive spectrum can move in those directions unless we are talking about a corps with an individual financial backer. And it takes public recognition of being associated with something that already has some semblance of success, or a personal desire for the group or activity, to secure professionals of that caliber to pull off a high-yielding income for a drum corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Here is a suggestion: Unless you are able to put together a Board and Administration of business-minded successful people who understand that The Corporation is actually a non-profit 'business' which in turn facilitates the activities of a drum corps, then don't even think about trying to start-up a corps to engage in DCI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, ouooga said: Q: Does anyone have any cool ideas to help fund drum corps? . So far on this thread ? No. Everything that's been mentioned as ideas on this thread for several pages now has been done before, as near as I can tell from my readings of all the ideas mentioned here. Edited March 21, 2017 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Tuma Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Off topic but I would enjoy hearing more about effective boards of directors of corps. Maybe I should start a thread. From some quick glances I've found boards as small as six individuals (really!) to BAC's large board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 7 hours ago, ouooga said: ... Q: Does anyone have any cool ideas to help fund drum corps? ... I can't ever imagine a time in any business venture where "we've tried every idea, there's no more effective ideas left" is an acceptable answer. Funding within the world of non-profit has been, is, and always shall be like this exchange in the movie Argo: Tony Mendez: "There are only bad options; it is about finding the best one" CIA Director:"You don't have a better bad idea than this?" Jack O'Donnell: "This is the best bad idea we have sir; by far." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 9 hours ago, Stu said: a) The Oregon Crusaders are not a 'young' corps. They had their inception in 1971; Not really. The corps that began competing in 2000 under the name "Southern Oregon Crusaders" was a new corps with no connection to the 1970s Oregon Crusaders. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, cixelsyd said: Not really. The corps that began competing in 2000 under the name "Southern Oregon Crusaders" was a new corps with no connection to the 1970s Oregon Crusaders. Just because a corps re-locates or re-starts or is re-founded does not sever their connection to the past. Also, all information that I posted about the Crusaders was drawn directly from their website including the following: The original Oregon Crusaders was founded in 1971 by brothers David and Ron Jones... They wanted to have a Willamette Valley drum corps and originally wanted it to be named the “First Militia Oregon Crusaders” after the historical First Militia of Oregon, but only “Oregon Crusaders” stuck as a name... As the years went by and Ron and David aged out, the corps went dormant, but the designation “Crusaders” was again picked up in 1999 by Rick Wise who, re-founded what was then called the “Southern Oregon Crusaders” based out of Medford, Oregon. Dan Perry was also instrumental in this re-starting of the Oregon Crusaders... Bill Perkins relocated the corps to the Portland Metro area in 2002 and officially renamed the corps the “Oregon Crusaders” after the original Clackamas-based corps So, yes really; the 2000 corps certainly did have 'a connection' to the 1971 Oregon Crusaders 'according to their own official website'. Edited March 21, 2017 by Stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 1 hour ago, Stu said: Just because a corps re-locates or re-starts or is re-founded does not sever their connection to the past. Also, all information that I posted about the Crusaders was drawn directly from their website including the following: The original Oregon Crusaders was founded in 1971 by brothers David and Ron Jones... They wanted to have a Willamette Valley drum corps and originally wanted it to be named the “First Militia Oregon Crusaders” after the historical First Militia of Oregon, but only “Oregon Crusaders” stuck as a name... As the years went by and Ron and David aged out, the corps went dormant, but the designation “Crusaders” was again picked up in 1999 by Rick Wise who, re-founded what was then called the “Southern Oregon Crusaders” based out of Medford, Oregon. Dan Perry was also instrumental in this re-starting of the Oregon Crusaders... Bill Perkins relocated the corps to the Portland Metro area in 2002 and officially renamed the corps the “Oregon Crusaders” after the original Clackamas-based corps So, yes really; the 2000 corps certainly did have 'a connection' to the 1971 Oregon Crusaders 'according to their own official website'. No, this is not right. While the facts you present are true, it is not true to state that the present-day corps shares anything at all than a history with those earlier versions. And you may not have considered that a current day corps (not necessarily OC) might want to intentionally sever ties with past leaders and/or programs specifically to start fresh. Those first iterations were not successful, which pretty much shoots holes in your premise anyway. 1 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.