DO the current mm's in DCI worry about it's possible demise as much as veterans do?

[olddrummer34]

This forum could be handed the strongest competitive season in decades and half the posters would still trip over themselves trying to write the activity’s obituary.

There is a reflex here; see a challenge, inflate it into a collapse narrative, repeat until it sounds profound. It’s not analysis anymore; it’s a hobby. And it’s exactly why the people actually teaching, designing, and marching couldn’t care less about what gets said here. This place has zero credibility with the people doing the actual work.

If the goal were really “saving the activity,” this space would look very different. What it actually does is perform outrage and pessimism for an audience that already agrees.

At some point the doom-posting says more about the posters than it does about drum corps.

[Jeff Ream]

14 hours ago, waliman4444 said:

Respectfully, I see all of your responses as to the health or lack thereof, in DCI..Is it possible that my initial question has gone off on a tangent and away from the simple yes or no that I was seeking?..and by simple I mean comments you've heard from current mm's as they prepare for next season and beyond..thank you...peace

i honestly think the kids care about their upcoming year. and thats it

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, Terri Schehr said:

That’s true. Most of them I know never attend a show after they marched their last show. 

and thats a huge problem, and one that may have gotten lip service, but i don't think has really been researched. grasnted fewer shows now doesn't help. But with fewer corps, you have fewer alumni to hook in for decades. granted 30 years from now they'll be the "get off my lawn crowd", but as the alumni of corps from the 70's and 80's stop coming around for a myriad of purposes, there isn't that next generation of alumni to replace us.

[olddrummer34]

Just now, Jeff Ream said:

and thats a huge problem, and one that may have gotten lip service, but i don't think has really been researched. grasnted fewer shows now doesn't help. But with fewer corps, you have fewer alumni to hook in for decades. granted 30 years from now they'll be the "get off my lawn crowd", but as the alumni of corps from the 70's and 80's stop coming around for a myriad of purposes, there isn't that next generation of alumni to replace us.

You don’t magically “run out” of alumni because the total number of corps dips. You generate new alumni based on participation volume and visibility, not nostalgia math from 40 years ago. World and Open Class still produce thousands of alumni every single season. All-Age is expanding. 

Also, alumni disengaging over time isn’t new, and it isn’t fatal. That’s been happening since the 1960s. The difference now is that younger alumni engage differently, digitally, socially, financially, and episodically instead of showing up to VFW halls every Friday for 50 years.

Fewer shows doesn’t equal fewer future alumni. And fewer legacy pipelines doesn’t equal collapse. It just means the engagement model is changing, whether people here like it or not.

The real danger isn’t a shrinking alumni pool. It’s pretending the only valid supporters are the ones who came up in 1985.

[Jeff Ream]

55 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

I refuse to accept that.

We have heard numerous times that comparable youth experiences charge double what drum corps does.  Now the news tells me that people are paying significantly more than drum corps fee levels just to send their kids to a device-detox camp.  No travel, no expert instruction in music or movement, no performing in front of cheering crowds - just the minimum necessary to interrupt a smartphone-social media habit.  Drum corps can do that too, and cheaper.

When I reviewed budgetary data from 50 years ago vs. today, I found that corps membership dues have not increased at the same pace as overall budgets.  To apply your logic, that suggests that the membership market has not been willing to pay for the improved member experience.  Is that your final answer?

40 years ago corps advertised dues around $500. Now it's over $5000. thats a huge hike

[waliman4444]

If we assume that, as in many fields, evolution takes place, then are we witnessing an art form on the brink of evolving to something else more appealing to a generation of professional performers that may see this activity as a temporary credential on their resume?..not that that would be a negative but rather their generation's prerogative?

[Jeff Ream]

42 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

Along these lines... the optimist says:

... while the pessimist says:

These could both be true.  But if so, is drum corps only sustaining itself by undercharging its membership?  Is modern drum corps popular on its merits, or is it just a Black Friday bargain right now?

a lot of kids audtition to say they did it. one camp fee is not the same as a full summer commitment

[Jeff Ream]

28 minutes ago, olddrummer34 said:

DCI sells more tickets than ever before. There is more auditionees than ever before. Just stop with this "I guess it's just not as cool as  it was when I participated." 

well.......do they sell more tickets? there's fewer shows. cite evidence of your claim.

 

and there's more audtionees, but there's fewer corps. so is it paying off?

 

i too try to find positives, but there's mathematical realities that aren't helping your claims.

[cixelsyd]

16 minutes ago, olddrummer34 said:

DCI sells more tickets than ever before. 

If this is even true, it only testifies to the increased market share of DCI now that there are no other drum corps circuits operating in parallel.  Meanwhile, it is obvious that there are far fewer events and "tickets" today versus yesteryear, and that even in the near-term, the number of events (and therefore, "tickets") under current DCI operation is on a downtrend.

Quote

There is more auditionees than ever before. 

The number of "auditionees" is partly a function of the ability/willingness of people to travel to audition sites, partly a function of the ability/willingness of corps to stage auditions at multiple sites, partly a function of video auditioning, and most important of all, a function of double-counting people who can now audition for multiple corps simultaneously.  Therefore, any claim of "more than ever before" is inherently dubious.

While number of auditionees does still matter, number of participants is more important.  And it is demonstrably clear that there were more participants in drum corps back when there were 10 times as many corps.

[olddrummer34]

1 minute ago, cixelsyd said:

If this is even true, it only testifies to the increased market share of DCI now that there are no other drum corps circuits operating in parallel.  Meanwhile, it is obvious that there are far fewer events and "tickets" today versus yesteryear, and that even in the near-term, the number of events (and therefore, "tickets") under current DCI operation is on a downtrend.

The number of "auditionees" is partly a function of the ability/willingness of people to travel to audition sites, partly a function of the ability/willingness of corps to stage auditions at multiple sites, partly a function of video auditioning, and most important of all, a function of double-counting people who can now audition for multiple corps simultaneously.  Therefore, any claim of "more than ever before" is inherently dubious.

While number of auditionees does still matter, number of participants is more important.  And it is demonstrably clear that there were more participants in drum corps back when there were 10 times as many corps.

It is true. You are trying SO HARD to be negative about this. It's sad and kind of funny.