"...close to 50,000 in attendance..."

[Jeff Ream]

I agree w/Stef Bawk....she actually stated a well known fact. While Stef and I have butted heads over the years, if she wants to take a shot, she'll use much stronger language to do so

[bawker]

What makes it a cheap shot?  Steph and I long ago came to a mutual respect for one another.  We typically DON'T agree on much..  I do not agree with this guy.. therefore by power of deductive reasoning, it's appropriate for me to say of Steph, "She may be inclined to believe {agree with} you."

Nothing cheap or mean intended.

Stef

:)

Okay. Just a little too much inference on my part. Sorry about that.

B)

[Jeff Ream]

that will be 3 floggings for you at DCA and you won't like it

^0^

[felixh]

that will be 3 floggings for you at DCA and you won't like it

^0^

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's for him to decide! :P ....is Stef going to be doing the flogging? B)

Edited August 30, 2005 by felixh

[audiodb]

As is pretty normal with crowd estimation, you count all paid attendees at all events.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, but if a press release is giving only one number with no qualifying description, the connotation is that those are the number of different people that attended the event(s). You don't say that 120,000 people attended a football game in a 60,000-seat stadium just because the stands looked full both before and after halftime.

If you want to report total ticket sales for the week's events, then you must specify "total ticket sales for the week's events".

[ScribeToo]

That's for him to decide! :P ....is Stef going to be doing the flogging? B)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As much as I'm sure he'd enjoy it.. I had to cancel my DCA trip this year because my boyfriend had a housing emergency.. so instead of going to Scranton watching Bucs wipe the field clean.. I'll be in Fond du Lac moving all Mike's stuff from the garage into the new house.

Maybe next year? We'll sell tickets and consider it a DCA event for the week and include the sales in the total attendance number for DCA weekend!!

Stef

[Jeff Ream]

STEP RIGHT UP, STEP RIGHT UP...GET YER TICKETS TO BAWKERS FLOGGING!

[ssorrell]

I really don't think you have a clear grasp on American youth. I think drum corps would probably reach more people in Europe and Asia, which I think DCI should definitly look into, since it is hellbent on expanding.

Do you honestly believe that the same guy who watches hotdog eating contests on espn2 is going to get into the 2005 version of The Cadets or George Gershwin? Yeah, most of your average Nascar dads just LOVED "Dancer In the Dark"; and I'm sure most of the intellectually/culturally comatose American fifteen year-olds would be just as enthralled . Guess what? The teenagers who would be interested in drum corps are already involved in music/band. We need more feeder corps to get younger kids involved in music. Kudos to Colts for maintaining theirs. G R A S S R O O T S. You have to start from the bottom and work your way up; DCI is going about this back-asswards.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although I've argued that the offering of DCI on ESPN2 could bring in a new audience to some degree, why do you believe so strongly that DCI is hellbent on expanding? Because it's being aired on a more major network? Because of the movie theater shows? Isn't it possible that DCI is simply trying to maintain their present audience and possibly bring back former fans that have been lost rather than create a newer fan base? The ESPN2 deal will allow EVERY fan in the USA to see the show, because it's no secret that over the last decade we've lost lots of PBS stations. It certainly can't be a bad thing that more people will be able to watch championships. And the theater shows bring in revenues from the present fan base...I don't think any of us would agree that someone that just happens to be strolling by the theater on a Thursday night will see a marquee for DCI World Championships Quarter Finals would just have to see what that's all about and buy a ticket.

DCI is doing what they can do. It's not their job to create new feeder corps. It's their job to promote what we have. And I and many others think they are doing a grand job.

You don't think I have a clear grasp on American youth? Why, because my opinion differs from your's? Maybe you are a bit out of touch. Maybe we both are off base slightly. But, I've got pre-teenagers in my house and they have lots of friends. I'm very interactive with my kids and their groups of friends, which does indeed include young teenage boys and girls. What experiences do you have with teenagers today and how are your impressions any more correct than are mine?

Edited August 30, 2005 by ssorrell

[MikeD]

You people are so sensitive!!! Please show me where I have called anyone ignorant!!! I ask you to look at the reality of the activity today vs. thirty three years ago and you say I’m making it personal. Would DC have faired any better if it was still controlled by the vets. No one can say with any certainty. Look at the number of corps that existed in 71 vs. today. DCI was formed because the top corps wanted more control of the money and the creative opportunities. The reason they used for this seizure was that under their guidance DC would grow and flourish. Do you really believe DC has grown and flourished under their guidance?

I disagree about knowing about the veteran organizations...many of the posts that existed in the 50's and 60's are gone or struggling to get by on fewer and older members today. No way many would be funding drum corps at ANY level as they did back then.

It's not a coincidence, IMO, that the decline in sponsorship of drum corps by these groups happened as the children of the WWII and Korean vets aged out...an the post membership number started to decline.

Just MHO.

Mike you marched at a time the east was full of some really good to great corps. Blue Rock, St. Joes, 2-7 and the Muchachos are just a few of the gone, but not forgotten. The mid-west and west have also lost as many or more top corps. The decimation has been even greater with the small corps. Along with the loss of corps has come an equal loss of shows. I can remember having a show almost every night on tour. Some during the week were very small, maybe 500 in attendance. The weekends were reserved for the big shows.

We seldom had shows during the week in my area. Most of them were on the weekends out here. On occasion, sure, but not the 'norm'.

Yes, sadly many corps are gone...St Joes never made it to the DCI era at all, and the Muchachos were done in by the overage scandal. Blue Rock barely made it into the DCI era...after 71 they were a shadow of their former glory as they had a huge ageout class after 71 (I read about that someplace...maybe their website).

Oh I can hear the great roar from the DCI defenders. It’s not DCI’s fault that corps mismanaged their funds. In reality it was DCI’s insistence that corps tour nationally that caused the financial pressure that led to the downfall of so many. Don’t forget that history tends to repeat itself. The current rise in fuel costs is going to put tremendous financial pressure on everyone next year. It will be interesting see if DCI does anything to address the upcoming crises.

Maybe the 'great roar' is due to understanding the reality of the situation. DCI was made up of the member corps. No way they could force a corps to tour against the will of their admin.

And...most of the approx 40 corps that existed in 1971 were not affected by DCI at all...they were local corps that went bust due to the lots of financial and membership problems, esp in the 70's and into the 80's.

Corps always came and went...the difference in the 50's and early/mid 60's was that as one little corps died another rose up a town or two away. It's not the failures that were the problem, IMO. It was the lack of replacements.

What should have DCI done differently?  Instead of the emphases on national tours DCI should have (be) been promoting regional tours. The devil is in the details, but here is a general idea. The country is split into three regions, west,  mid-west and east. The corps compete in their respective regions until two weeks before finals. At that time each region holds a regional championship. The top three from each region along with three  wild cards (based on score) would advance to finals. The elite twelve would then travel to the location of finals during the final two weeks (competing along the way). Finals would rotate within the regions and DCI would subsidize travel expense for all twelve corps.  D2 & 3 would follow the same model. I & E would still take place, but quarterfinals would be eliminated (saving stadium rental). Prelims could be broadcast just as quarters are now. Anyway this is food for thought.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nothing wrong with your model if that is what the corps would want to do. Igt might save corps some money, but I'm not sure how much. If a group of corps was touring around their region all summer long, they are still "on the road", hence costs of housing and food are the same, and if they are driving from place to place the fuel costs are not that reduced either.

Part of why the touring model became the way DCI operated was the decline in show sponsors...are there enough sponsors waiting in the wings to fill up that many dates in each region?

Mike

[glory]

Although I've argued that the offering of DCI on ESPN2 could bring in a new audience to some degree, why do you believe so strongly that DCI is hellbent on expanding?  Because it's being aired on a more major network?  Because of the movie theater shows?  Isn't it possible that DCI is simply trying to maintain their present audience and possibly bring back former fans that have been lost rather than create a newer fan base? 

I suspect DCI's primary motive in moving the broadcast to ESPN is publicity which it hopes will translate to increased ticket sales, donations and possibly participation. Publicity is more art than science. As such, it warrants a little creative license which is why the 50,000 figure doesn't bother me.

Purists surely get to argue from the high ground when they say the 50,000-number isn't fully accurate. But the publicity game isn't so pure. It's about persuasion and appeal and uses selective disclosure liberally and correctly. It's DCI's responsibility to attract an audience; it's the audience's responsibility to judge the activity - and its publicity - for itself.

DCI might even have as a secondary objective the possibility that this broadcast might someday make a profit. If the ratings in the first year show a larger than expected audience, DCI might be able to sell advertising in subsequent years sufficient to recoup its costs plus some. And that doesn't even take into account any incremental ticket/souvie sales the broadcast might inspire.

HH