A Modest Proposal

[scheherazadesghost]

.

Edited June 13, 2023 by scheherazadesghost

[C.Holland]

18 hours ago, jwillis35 said:

You are correct about this, but you have to admit that some of the staff salaries have gone way up. Mostly those of designers and caption heads. If the corps can afford it then fine, but how many have been playing the keep up for the sake of competition and not really adhering to the best interest of the corps and its future well being? I don't necessarily have an answer to that, just a question. 

You’re paying for peoples time. 10k to 20k for a for a season isn’t unreasonable. A season is between 850 and  1100 total hours per person depending on your role as an educators and designers.  Some in open class got 5k.  Most of us got barely 1500 for the entire season.  10k divided by 850 is not even $12 an hour. 15000 divided by 1100 is under $14 an hour.  That’s not even minimum wage. And that’s before taxes. 
 

 Chill out with the “overpaid staff”.  Heck now, larger staff still cost the same, we just spread the pot of money out for who’s available so the kids paying 4500 always have someone in front of their bell. You’re not paid when you’re sitting at home or band camp. 

Edited December 15, 2022 by C.Holland

[2muchcoffeeman]

22 hours ago, scheherazadesghost said:

The answer here isn't to reduce staff or their pay, although it's a common tactic in non profits.

The answer is to fix the revenue side of things so you can afford to pay your staff well and keep them happy...

"Fix the revenue side."

Well, sure. Every business that ever existed wants to "fix revenue."

If only. As Steve Martin said: "YOU can live like a millionaire! You say: 'Steve! How can I live like a millionaire?' First: Get a million dollars."

Here's one way to fix revenue: Charge each member $10,000 for tuition. Here's another: Open another bingo hall, or two, or three, or ten. Or, how about this to fix revenue: Book another $1 million in grants, because of course all you have to do is put the number in your revenue budget and the money will come in.

Does VMAPA have a revenue problem? Their 2020 revenue -- the COVID year -- was $2 million. In 2019 its was $6 million. In 2018 it was $5.6 million. In 2017 it was $5.3 million. I don't think VMAPA has a revenue problem. Their revenue is 2, 3, even 4 times that of other WC corps who manage to drag themselves through a full tour every year with enough money in the tank to cover the bills, if barely.

It's interesting:

Here we have an iconic organization that has come to a decision forced by financial catastrophe. Whether their hand was forced suddenly, unexpectedly, by forces out of their control, or whether it was something that could have been foreseen, planned for, and managed without cancelling a season, I don't know and I suspect 99% of the people raining hellfire down upon VMAPA right now don't know, either. Time, and audits, will tell the story.

Either way, whether it was slow motion or a recent crisis, it's clear there has been a profound financial malfunction. The patient has flatlined. Yet there are those who look at the surface-level financial detail that is available for public inspection and shrug: Eh, their spending on labor looks about average. Eh, all they need to do is fix revenue. Everyone is gnashing their teeth and rending their garments over the lost season and the disappointed members, yet there is this strangely serene assessment of the financials that drove the organization to this point of no return in the first place.

Every for-profit and nonprofit is always seeking ways to lift revenue, but it's a matter of planning strategically, making investments and placing bets, because it costs money to make money. It's a long game. It's not a matter of turning on a faucet.

So when the tough times come, the prudent response is to trim spending and preserve resources. To my eyes, knowing what I know now, this sure looks like an organization that didn't do that with enough urgency.

 

Edited December 16, 2022 by 2muchcoffeeman

[scheherazadesghost]

.

Edited June 13, 2023 by scheherazadesghost

[cixelsyd]

On 12/14/2022 at 11:09 PM, jwillis35 said:

You are also right about the uniforms. I think Bluecoats members paid something like $85 for the uniforms they wore in 2016 but I am not positive. Most of these one-time use uniforms are fairly cheap and are usually built into the tuition the members are paying. 

And everyone complains about tuition being too high.  Try suggesting anything to reduce that cost, though, and there is a loud constituency declaring that line item untouchable.

[lowend]

How much would it save to drop back to 128 members?

[Terri Schehr]

17 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

And everyone complains about tuition being too high.  Try suggesting anything to reduce that cost, though, and there is a loud constituency declaring that line item untouchable.

Like I said, everyone wants drum corps to survive but no one wants to change anything. 

[Terri Schehr]

Just now, lowend said:

How much would it save to drop back to 128 members?

Some of open class and lower placing world class corps. That’s what it will save. 

[lowend]

2 minutes ago, Terri Schehr said:

Some of open class and lower placing world class corps. That’s what it will save. 

Which means it would never happen.

[Terri Schehr]

2 minutes ago, lowend said:

Which means it would never happen.

You are correct ding ding ding.