Customer Comments on Tracknet Dispute

There is no shortage of opinion on the web regarding the Tracknet/Mid-Atlantic Coop dispute. (For background, you can read HANA Reports here. Jeff has been following it.)

Good customer service? Is this what companies in racing should be doing, especially with handle down? You be the judge:

From our comments section:

"It is Sunday January 3rd ... Due the the tracknet dispute I can not watch Santa Anita, Fair Grounds, or Gulfstream unless I drive over 200 miles to a track that just canceled their live card due to weather conditions. I am just one person but that is $100 of handle that won't be played today."

From Mike at Paceadvantage.com:

"The player either goes offshore, enjoys his/her rebate and uninterrupted wagering signals and probably does not return to onshore pools. Or the player says screw this, I'm tired of the bs and decides to spend his/her dollar on something other than racing. Neither option is good for the game and the industry has no one to blame but themselves!"

A HANA Member, again via Pace:

"It makes sense only to Tracknet, who (mistakenly) believe that handles will be restored once the signals become available to the mid-Atlantic tracks. Tracknet is banking on player's short memories and their general unwillingness to venture out of their comfort zone (and play new tracks). Tracknet does not seem to understand that rather helping them to achieve the objectives of increased handle and revenue, their behavior (greed and lack of appreciation for the customer) is actually serving as a catalyst to do the opposite, which is to enable players to try and enjoy other tracks not represented by Tracknet. Perhaps Tracknet does not understand that In business, it is easier to retain existing customers rather than attract brand new customers or win back those who left disgruntled."

Rich Bauer, Trackthieves.com.

"This is the issue that has been whirling around for years with tracks withholding their signals, etc. I mean, when they do this they're saying, "We don't want you to have our product, unless you pay through the nose, get on your knees and beg and kiss our ass in the process."

This is NOT OK in my book and I gladly do without their product."

A Horseplayer via Pace:

"I am so angry over this nonsense. I been playing horses for 37 years and am ready to walk away from playing horses because of this impasse mess."

Frequent commenter, ITP, a player and horse owner:

"Questions for someone/HANA to ask Daruty next time they talk to him.

1. Will Tracknet tracks agree to pay the same rate to Mid-Atlantic tracks for their signals that they want them to pay for Tracknet signals?

After he answers NO......

2. How is that fair?

3. Many of the Tracknet tracks don't take any (SA,GG,etc), or only take a few of the Mid-Atlantic signals so.......Why do you expect tracks to pay more for your signal when money is only going "one-way" which is against the basic fairness of "track to track" simulcasting agreements?"

Jeff Platt, HANA President, about a month and a half ago:

"Fast forwarding about a month from now... unless this thing is resolved... and it may not be...

Gulfstream, Oaklawn Park, Santa Anita... as things stand right now those signals are going to be impacted by this."

Mike412 on the HANA board:

"I've stated before that I'm a 30 year old horseplayer that wagers a considerable amount of money. You'd think racing would want to keep me around. They say they do, but their actions speak otherwise. This impasse is the final straw for me personally. If it doesn't get resolved by the time Gulfstream and Santa Anita begin, I walk away. It's actually not walking away, but more like being pushed out the door. Simple as that."