Dance Articles > Australian Dance Champions ejected from Nationals for wearing Freedom to Dance sash

Discussion in 'Dance Articles' started by Alskling, Dec 11, 2011.

  1. toothlesstiger

    toothlesstiger Well-Known Member

    It looks to me like someone is making more money than someone else, and that someone else is jealous. Sticks are not very effective without some good carrots.

    Start putting on a competition that's so good that being banned means you miss the best....
     
  2. Joe

    Joe Well-Known Member

    ftfy. ;)
     
  3. DancingJools

    DancingJools Member

    The dispute between the two major organizations is much more complex. A major sore point was the issue that amateurs in certain countries were allowed to teach and earn significant money, while other countries did not allow that. In essence, there was no distinction between professional and amateur dancer, and professionals felt their livelihood threatened by this. The WDC (the professionals organization) began imposing (rather timid) restrictions on who can call themselves amateur and dance as such in WDC competitions, and things escalated. This fight began about 10 years ago. The forceful decisions, specifically boycotts and penalizing dancers for participating in certain comps, was more the policy of WDSF affiliates (the amateurs organization), and began about 4 years ago.
     
  4. toothlesstiger

    toothlesstiger Well-Known Member

    If you understand the complexity of the issue, I would be very happy to find out more, even in PM. but otherwise, what you say there still seems to boil down to money and somebody wanting to make sure they get what they think is their fair share of the pie.
     
  5. DancingJools

    DancingJools Member

    What else would be really worth fighting over - other than money and power, I mean? :) Of course it's a struggle over power of representation and ultimately power of earning revenues.
     
  6. toothlesstiger

    toothlesstiger Well-Known Member

    In which case both sides are treating this like a zero-sum game, rather than trying to figure out a way where everyone can benefit. A pox on both their houses. :p
     
  7. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    I'll just guess:

    Probably each side has a good way to assess the rate at which the overall pool of available resources could grow or shrink, and doesn't come up with an encouraging answer.
     
  8. toothlesstiger

    toothlesstiger Well-Known Member

    The pool of resources to support a dance governing organization, sure. But the number of dance organizations is going to have little affect on the available resources for dance professionals.
     
  9. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    Well, the organizations funnel the raw resources into actual revenue streams, no?
     
  10. toothlesstiger

    toothlesstiger Well-Known Member

    For the organizations, maybe. Dance professionals make their money teaching dance and dancing. The number of people taking dance lessons is hardly a function of the governing organizations. Making a living is not at issue. Who gets to be the judge that gets competitors willing to pay very high rates for lessons is at issue. ;-) But then again, rectifying that issue means that the really lucrative lessons would go away. When competitors could possibly make the full circuit of Blackpool judges, they might very well do that, but when you expand the pool of judges globally, nobody has the time to make that circuit, and the goose that lays the golden eggs is gone. Please don't be offended by my armchair analysis, I'm just thinking with my fingers. ;-)
     

Share This Page