Log In



   Stay logged in?

Forgot Password?

User Status




Recover Password

Username or Email:

Change Image
Enter the code in the photo at left:

Before We Continue...

Are you absolutely sure you want
to delete this message?

Premium Membership

Upgrade to
Premium Membership!

Renew Your
Premium Membership!


Premium Membership includes the following benefits:

Don't let your Premium Membership expire, or you'll miss out on:

  • Exclusive access to over 1,400 video demonstrations of patterns in the full bronze, silver and gold levels.
  • Access to all previous variations of the week, including full video instruction of man's and lady's parts.
  • Over twice as many videos as basic membership.
  • A completely ad-free experience!


Sponsored Ad

+ View Older Messages

Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by Telemark
9/15/2010  12:45:00 AM
UKA, then.

One thing I did read in the IDTA's magazine with interest was the breakdown of the Association's income (as presented by the CEO in his address to the AGM). Many will assume that the activites (and income) are dominated by Ballroom & Latin: far from it. Freestyle, Ballet & Tap come 12&3, accounting for 49.5% of all income. Ballroom only accounts for 4.43% of income (and Classical Sequence just 0.6%). The Latin figure wasn't given this year, but last year's comparatives were Latin 15.89% & Ballroom 9.73%). So for Ballroom income to have halved (as a proportion of income) in just 12 months is a dramatic change, but one that wasn't actually commented on in the speech.

A secondary thought is that perhaps it is time that 'Classical Sequence' was no longer a 'core subject', with its own Associate, Licentiate & Fellowship qualifications, admitting newcomers to 'Full Member' status. Perhaps a single 'Diploma' (like Salsa & Argentive Tango) would be more appropriate? But this is off topic.
Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by terence2
9/15/2010  1:42:00 AM
I believe the BR lost its financial dominance in the late 50s early 60s.

Also duly noted, IDTA mag. is quite deficient on BR in comparison to past editions ( UKA has more diversity and very good articles by comparision )..
Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by silver
9/15/2010  6:48:00 AM

Working in law enforcement, with the more interesting offenders in society, I can tell you that there are men out there who look WAY better in women's high heel shoes than the majority of real ladies! Some of them are pretty hot looking. But, when the time comes when you realize that a certain person isn't a lady, you experience various reactions. It can be shocking and disappointing at the same time. :)
Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by belleofyourball
9/16/2010  12:21:00 AM
I can't disagree but they have to get those shoes at specialty shops. I've never seen ballroom shoes that would fit any of the men I know and I can't imagine a RayRose is a size 14.
Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by interested
9/16/2010  5:06:00 AM
A secondary thought is that perhaps it is time that 'Classical Sequence' was no longer a 'core subject', with its own Associate, Licentiate & Fellowship qualifications, admitting newcomers to 'Full Member' status. Perhaps a single 'Diploma' (like Sal

Can I ask you to expand on your thinking behind this ?

Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by Telemark
9/16/2010  5:46:00 AM
Taken directly from the IDTA website:

Individuals, who gain a professional dance teaching qualification with the IDTA and are accepted into membership of the Association, may enter their pupils for IDTA examinations at amateur, performer and professional levels in the appropriate branches.

Professional teaching examinations are available in eight core subjects - four of which are termed Ballroom Branch subjects and these are: Ballroom, Latin, Classical Sequence and Freestyle.

A qualification in any of the 'core' branches confers full membership, and the right to enter pupils in ANY style.

With Classical Sequence representing very nearly zero % of the Association's income stream, it seems to have disproportionate representation as a 'core' subject. There is only one Salsa or Argentine Tango Diploma qualification, but Associate, Licentiate & Fellowship levels for a commercially moribund style. this just seems a bit over the top, but the issue is really of no interest to anyone outside the teaching profession.
Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by interested
9/16/2010  10:30:00 AM
Perhaps you should air your views on this on the Queensland Sequence Forum, as I know you are apt to do - that'll give 'em something to howl about, and it'll give the rest of us some good entertainment.
Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by Telemark
9/16/2010  2:35:00 PM
I think you overestimate the entertainment value of such exchanges.

I've made a reasoned point, and you are free to agree with me, disagree, or simply go and read something more interesting. Over to you.
Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by interested
9/16/2010  4:11:00 PM
Well you haven't given any reason yet. That's what I wanted you to expand on. Do you think sequence events are run at a loss at the expense of other branches. Personally, I doubt that that is true, even if the events are fewer in number and less well supported. No-one will run these things at a loss. And, beyond benefiting from sponsored events, I don't really see how the income generated by a branch translates into anything meaningful for its members, in any branch, so, no, I don't think it should be linked to their membership entitlement. Apart from which, most people qualified in sequence (at least to a high level) are qualified in other branches anyway.
Re: Not in Atlanta
Posted by Telemark
9/16/2010  11:47:00 PM
Well you haven't given any reason yet.

I have. I have suggested that for a branch of the Association to have, in its teaching qualification structure, parity with three others (Ballroom / Latin & Freestyle), and yet only generating 0.6% of the Association's revenue (mainly from Medal Tests), is perhaps rather odd.

But, as I suggested, this is not something that really is of concern to anyone outside the memebrship. Certainly, I am not attacking the Modern Sequence world. Perhaps that is a world that could do with its own qualification structure (the IDTA doesn't offer any Modern Sequence qualifications, except for amateur medal tests). The Classical Sequence world is a different world, a very small one, and there is, by and large, NO Classical Sequence presence in the ordinary social dancing scheme.

What does the Associate modular syllabus consist of? Five modules: Waltz Module, The Royal Empress Tango Module, Fylde Waltz Module, Britannia Saunter Module & Premier Two Step Module.

At a guess, only 1-2% of the social dance community could dance ANY of them, and the proportion of sequence dancers who could do better wouldn't be much higher. The small proportion of sequence club leaders and teachers who have any dance qualifications at all are probably qualified in other branches (most typically, Ballroom), and the few that actually hold Classical Sequence qualifications can dance them, but plough a lonely furrow.

Feel free to disagree.

+ View More Messages

Copyright  ©  1997-2018 BallroomDancers.com