To many ads? Support ODJT and see no ads!

It's going down...

Dude Walker said:
John,

Thank you for your intelligent & mature response...
Click to expand...

Ahem, speaking of "intelligent and mature responses", let's revisit this recent "intelligent and mature response":

"more fictional blustery than fact"

Dude,

Thank you for your intelligent & mature response... :sqrolleyes:

Shouldn't you be comparing low priced DJs to terrorists?
 
John,

Bob has had every opportunity to support his erroneous statements...

However, predictably....he routinely refuses to support his allegations of "fact".

That is more akin to blustery than any factual evidentiary discussion.

My discourse to you...was directed to you...

Thank you for affirming my earlier statement.

If the shoe fits...?:dontknow:
 
HUH.gif
 
John,

Please define the parameter of your question more clearly.
 
I'm not sure that's possible. Isn't it abundantly clear that I am nowhere near as smart as you and for you to engage me in any kind of debate only lowers yourself to my level and you're a much greater man than that.

Now, isn't it time for you to write another article comparing low priced DJs to terrorists, albeit economic terrorists?
 
John,

Grind your axe elsewhere...

This in not the venue for it.

You may call me (701)234-9492 or PM if you so choose...
 
John, Deep breaths when you're dealing with Dude. :sqwink:

Dude, I'm checking to see if the CDC based it's Communicable Disease Response Plan on the buying habits of engaged couples. I'll let you know if the data indicates that bottom feeders are destroying the wedding DJ biz.
 
Somehow I just knew you'd conveniently gloss over that comparison.

Of course this isn't the venue for it. It's a DJ board, everyone here is either an active or retired DJ, and you compared those DJs that charge low prices with terrorists.

What part of that is inappropriate for this venue? The part about this being a DJ board? Or the part with everyone here being either an active or retired DJ? Or the comparison you made equating low priced DJs with terrorists?

You're right. There's no way this is the venue for it. :sqrolleyes: :sqrolleyes: :sqrolleyes: :sqrolleyes:
 
Proformance said:
Dude, I'm checking to see if the CDC based it's Communicable Disease Response Plan on the buying habits of engaged couples. I'll let you know if the data indicates that bottom feeders are destroying the wedding DJ biz.
Click to expand...

Bob,

...and this supports your earlier statement that...

Proformance said:
The number of marriages post 1970 is UP - way UP.
Click to expand...

...in what way?

Still awaiting any factual supporting evidence to your statement.
 
With all due respect to everyone who has posted, this really shouldn't turn into a pissing match.

Dude raised a good question that effects (could effect), most DJs, and is backing it up with the best data he can obtain...

I'm not a mod, just a fellow member, but I don't think this topic deserved to spiral downhill, like the market :sqwink:
 
Proformance said:
I'll let you know if the data indicates that bottom feeders are destroying the wedding DJ biz.
Click to expand...

Sorry Dude, John, and Proformamnce, this material is just too good to not work with.

Does Proformamnce's statement above mean that bottom feeders are a disease too?

Gee, we'd really be in trouble if we ran into a married bottom feeder.

Folks, its the "Matrimonium-Cattus-Piscis" disease.

Matrimonium = Married
Cattus-Piscis = Cat Fish = Bottom Feeder
 
Dude raised a good question that effects (could effect), most DJs, and is backing it up with the best data he can obtain...
Click to expand...

Rick, it's about making leaps and bounds.

DJs don't sell marriage, we sell parties to people who celebrate them. Census data doesn't tell you how many "parties" there are as a result of matrimony. It says nothing about where those parties are, and what purchases will be associated with them.

Dude you're numbers may be right - but you are using them to make colossal guesses without any valid correlation. If you don't know where and how to find better information - I'm not going to tell you. Welcome to the competitive world stage.

Susor's post in this thread had more economic insight in one paragraph than all of Dude's works combined:

its not just fewer weddings, its fewer "big" weddings. Don't let anybody -- especially politicians -- kid you about where the economy stands and where it is headed. While we don't have huge UN-employment, what we do have is huge UNDER-employment.
Click to expand...

Big Debates? Matt, you party pooper! Why isn't there a "small debates" section?

---------------

John, we should get together. I've got a business proposal that would be great for you! Are you going to be around this long weekend? I'm working Saturday but plan to be home Sunday & Monday.
 
Dude:

Now, time to get serious.

No matter where the figures come from I know that you do a great deal of research and can support your arguments.

The original start was:

When do you think the wedding market will begin to rebound nationally?

Marriage is down substantially...

30% since 1970
Click to expand...

Personally, I have not noticed a decline in weddings in my area but I have noticed an increase in those prospective clients seeking lower prices; hence my decision to concentrate more effort into the "budget" venues (Moose Halls, KofC Halls, Elks Lodges, Firehalls, community centers and so on). This has sparked an increase in my business because I have the prices to support those venues in addition to the fact that many DJs in my area won't work at them.

I also recognize production costs per event in all of this. Beacuse of my business model, I break things out into two expense types; business and personal. Business expenses are the cost of those things specifically needed for the business; advertising, phones, and liability insurance. Since I expect all of the DJs working for me have their own music, transportation, and equipment, I place those into the personal expense category. When I subcontract to another DJ or when one of my partners goes out, all I expect from them as far as expenses are concerned are for them to cover the business expenses; the rest is on them. This means that I can keep my prices lower (actually just a little below mid-range for the area) than my average competitor and keep the market I seek.

All of these factors mean that we are working many weddings. Some of them are second and third for the client. But the national average of weddings being down since 1970 has had no impact.
 
Proformance said:
Census data doesn't tell you how many "parties" there are as a result of matrimony. It says nothing about where those parties are, and what purchases will be associated with them.
Click to expand...

Bob,

The marriage vital statistics offer an illustration as to trend in marriages & as to the age group that you are target.

That takes insight.

Trend is what you can lauch marketing to capture.

Creating a niche market takes resources that I doubt many DJ companies possess.

Then the question comes down to is a businesses marketing strategy proactive or reactive?

As for now... It is the best plausible supply basis for potential weddings.



Proformance said:
If you don't know where and how to find better information - I'm not going to tell you. Welcome to the competitive world stage.
Click to expand...

Bob, your feigned attempt of knowledge of non-existant data is grasping at straws to save face from your earlier comment because a better resource does not exist and the numbers are not up...way up.

You are mis-informed as to alternate credible/citeable marriage statistics repositories. Why? Because states report this information under contract directly to the NCHS which is a division of the CDC. The CDC - NCHS is the main repository for this information.

Check your facts...
 
Dude:

Are these CDC marriages 1st or 2nd marriages?
Are they simple civil judgements?
Are they traditional or same sex?
How many receptions result?
How much is being spent?
What are they spending it on?
Where are the receptions being booked?
Who is the contact person at those venues?
.
.
.
.


I believe you're one of those DJs who stands on the comment:
"you get what you pay for" ?

You're data was free, wasn't it ?
 
Proformance said:
I believe you're one of those DJs who stands on the comment:
"you get what you pay for" ?

You're data was free, wasn't it ?
Click to expand...


Bob, on the contrary.

The information is paid for via taxes and is "freely" available under the Freedom of Information Act.

With regards to your other questions. Specific studies are conducted by the CDC & NCHS at their discretion. One that is currently in the works is sexual behaviour.

The closet report, which is dated, dealing with Marriage, Divorce, and Cohabitation can be found here:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/02news/div_mar_cohab.htm

There is a fundamental difference between data collection and using model cities to speculate market conditions...such as you've suggested.

I will agree with you on one point. The data available via the CDC - NCHS is specific and benchmarked. Other factors need to be taken into consideration to obtain a better overall picture of the current market landscape.

I've read, in detail, reports similiar to the one that you've described. However, the reports appear to use model cities & states without thorough direct market sampling which skews the data into compromised territory.

The closet alternative for more in depth & heavy reading is the Bureau of Economic Census & The Bureau of Labor Statistics.


http://www.census.gov/econ/www/
http://www.bls.gov/

http://www.nber.org/


Please post a link to the report(s) that you refer to. Please extend the courtesy of allowing ODTJ readers the opportunity to individually evaluate the citability/credibility of the source(s) that you refer to and the data collection procedures and processed employed.

That is...if "they" truly exist...
 
Boy has this thread gone multiple directions...

Hmmm, where to start...

John

Reguarding economic terrorism
If you have a problem with Dude Walkers article's in the Diskjockey News, would not a letter to the editor, owner, or publisher of the perodical be a better way to get results?

Better yet, submit a well written response to the John Young for publication of your views?

Performance:

If you have other factual information or resources for attaining wedding related / population statistics that I can garner information from, I would seriously be interrested in getting at it.

While Dude makes logical sense (to my limited business mind) in his propositions and theories, they are just that. Theories and observations.

He asked in the beginning for our observations and thoughts. You stated he was basing his observations on incorrect data and that weddings were up.

Is this truly based in factual info, or supposition on your behalf. I recall on several occasions you called Dude, and myself out on other thread(s) requesting verifible information and "prove it" statements. Should not the same accountability be returned?

Dude you're numbers may be right - but you are using them to make colossal guesses without any valid correlation. If you don't know where and how to find better information - I'm not going to tell you. Welcome to the competitive world stage.
Click to expand...

With holding correct information which may help others? How does this lend credibility to the information you do give out?

I, and some others here are fully capable of making (and wanting to make) decisions based on credible info. While we may disagree with the "end picture" or what the info states and represents, facts are facts.

Again, chat board rhetoric is just that. Often taken with a grain of salt, and (I) often bring lots of toilet paper; as there is usually plenty of wiping to do afterwards. :sqwink:

Goodnightdj

Your example is commendable, and probably the exception.

You have figured a way thru sub contracting, requiring other dj's to do the "dirty work", and absorb major costs and liabilities. The result is allowing you to be successful and profitable at a lower rate.

The truth is you had a idea, planned, researched, and implimented it successfully, and inexpensivly. That is a business owner.

Most dj's, unfortunately, don't and aren't. :sqfrown:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top