This thought just came to my mind and I thought it might be good to suggest it in ballet talk. Forgive me if this idea has already been suggested and discussed before. Here it goes.
In the past there were not as many people and companies who did ballet as now ,so there may not have been a need for such a thing. Now that ballet has become so popular and so many people and companies do it, Is it not better to have one central classical ballet organization that watches and manages everything related to ballet in the world, like the FIFA of football (soccer).
Just a thought .
What do you think?

What would the purpose of such a board be? The governing boards in sports set rules,policies and standards.
Also they act as courts where disputes and possible infractions are investigated.

I'm not sure how this would relate to ballet. And how would it be funded?

Even though some performers are trying to transform it in a gymnastic event, ballet is an art and not a sport; in football any team “needs” another team to play with and also common rules and events: a ballet show is not a competition and, in my opinion, the companies can be more independent.
Ballet doesn't need an organisation to decide the dimension of the stage or how many second you should maintain an arabesque, as the FIG (Federation International of Gymnastic) does, so I think that probably the general cost benefit ratio of a ballet world federation would be close to bankrupt…

I guess there could be an international association to promote ballet - actually there are. I don't think there could be an international authority over all ballet; think of the fights over the superiority of the various styles that have developed over time.

Every country in the world represented on the Olympics committee, which -- like most such organizations -- tends to become highly politicized. Consider the effects of such a system on ballet, especially if it sets out along the slippery slope of aesthetics.

A group consisting of the leadership of important companies, however, could actually be quite helpful in promoting ballet internationally -- or even just within the US. A focus on funding, plus sharing and assisting with productions, coaching, choreography, technical aspects, music, etc., as well as encouragement of touring, could be benefits. I've often wondered about major companies actually "adopting" one or more smaller companies -- a version of the "alliance" sytem among international airlines, auto companies, etc.

In the absence of a Ford Foundation grant, or a Federal government deeply committed to the classical arts, this doesn't seem to be in the cards.

This is a great idea, bart, and there's no need for any sort of external governing body to do it.

Consider America's two majors (I know there are other companies that are major also, I'm just referring to companies with the ability to pay big corps bucks). They have a marked advantage in hiring bright young talent ($$$, security of non-trivial union contracts, travel to major dance venues, prestige), but, at least in the case of one of the two, this fine young talent can anticipate spending their stage lives as swans or among the friends of whatever Prima Ballerina. Or at least delaying their time of stardom for quite a few years.

Now it may be seen as risky to pop a corps girl into the role of Aurora (with 4000 tickets to sell...), especially to an AD whose efforts may be pressed into fundraising rather than talent judging (or who may lack this skill). Yet these promising youngsters could be farmed out (to borrow a baseball expression) to associated regional companies (for free of course, so these companies could in fact expand and upgrade at NO COST) to get major soloist and even principal role experience. This could be a win-win-win situation for major-regional-dancer. There might be a problem for a dancer who is a local Prima, perhaps losing a few performances. But the upgrade could translate in a company's selling more tickets, having more performances, becoming more financially viable. At no cost. And some of these young dancers might grow into the company they've been working with and chose to stay.

Sounds like the old Tony Bliss argument to make the Joffrey into an "American Wing" kind of laboratory company for ABT.

Thank you very much every body for your replies. I guess it was not such a good idea, but would it not be good if the major companies in the world formed something to protect and promote ballet? Personally I thought ballet world might benefit from few changes as a whole, but there is no way to do that as a whole because ballet is completely under the responsibility of each company and most companies are (quite naturally) more concerned with business and money rather than ballet or art or creativity. As a result the fate of ballet depends on the taste of the ADs of the time of each company and its business. The variety of styles are getting less and less in ballet anyway. For example Royal Danish ballet is taking more and more dancers from outside every year who are not trained in the bournoville style. Where is the English style now? Paris opera is becoming less and less like a classical company every year. Russian companies are busy creating one night stars with the Sylvie guillem imitations. Would it not help if the companies agreed to give chances to new choreographers in classical vocabulary every year or to have certain standards of how many classical works they should perform every season. I think it might help to keep the variety of styles too. Who regulates all those versions of swanlakes , nutcrackers and changing of the musical scores? What whould Petipa or Ivanov think if they saw all those changes done to their ballets. Would it not be good to have something that acts like the guardian of ballet.

For some reason, I'm reminded of the meeting a few years ago between the artistic directors of some of the world's top companies, ostensibly to bounce ideas off each other; was it at this meeting that it was discovered that there was a lot of overlap in what was being performed by each company (eg, everyone was doing Sleeping Beauty that year)?

I mention this because it might be a possible outcome from having a central organization that there might be instances of every company in the world performing the same things at the same time, possibly in the same way. Distinctions between company styles and repertoires might be lost.

However, being able to promote and fund classical ballet is, of course, always a good idea.

There are collegial organizations (like Dance/USA) that exist to foster better communication between companies and to offer mentoring and outright education for things like marketing. I know that there is a certain amount of informal discussion that goes on about programming, but these things are usually seen as specific to the home community of the company -- the idea that you would present a work primarily to draw a 'tourist' audience is more familiar in the visual arts (and in opera -- think of those 'have Ring, will travel' enthusiasts). I know I travel to see dance, and know others who do as well, but we are not really seen as a large enough contingent to be statistically significant.

Unfortunately, an umbrella organization that was charged with promoting ballet as a whole would most likely be seen as drawing resouces away from individual companies -- funding is always a core issue...

Mostly off-topic: One "shared" marketing idea -- obviously passed around at some Ballet Director convention or other -- is the idea of bundling 3-ballet programs under a single unifying title.

"Dazzlingly Dramatic" -- "Vibrant Virtuosity" -- "Powerful, Primal, and Provocative" -- "Light-hearted and Lyrical": these are just a few of the "Abominable Alliterations" adopted by a single company, Ballet Florida, over the past two seasons.

I think that even if companies worldwide were interested in centralization, it would be very dangerous to consolidate power that way. If anything, centralization would lead to more stylistic homogeneity than there is now. Where would Bournonville style be if Vaganova, for example, were to be chosen as the training and style to preserve?

I fully agree that this is the real danger and a very serious one. I think it was worth bringing up though, because it's something we should be aware of as a big smiling pitch possibly occurring all of a sudden. I just don't want to go to ballets that remind me of Rite-Aid, Filene's Basement and Bed, Bath and Beyond.

Ah Filene's basement.

I think they remaindered "Birds of America' down there. Poor thing, nice feathers though.

Did Kirstein's Filene's money, which financed Balanchine, come from a time before or after Filene's Basement?

I just did some more Googling and so have decided to Stop Worrying and Love the Rite-Aid just like it was a nice little neighborhood drugstore. I had not known that Filene's was something old and noble and Balanchine-oriented from Boston, but that makes everything about globalization all better now.

Maybe the World Ballet Government should be in Davos so John and Teresa Kerry can go there, plus the Paul Newmans, etc.