Petition on the ADW fiasco

Scav · #1 08-13-2007, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SentToStud

I don't feel pushed around. What exactly is the problem? I use Bris and YB and I have no problems at all. I get free DRFs from YB and free Bris pp's at the other. I personally like the fact there is competition in the ADW industry. The inconvenience of possibly needing more than one ADW account is more than offset by the pricing competition that exists by having more than one provider. If you consider yourself pushed around by the ADWs, I think you'd really feel shoved hard if there was no competition.

What exactly is the problem?

The ADW's should have all tracks and not have to pay outrageous fees to get them. Sure they have the 'availability' to get them but they would lose money to take them. They would have to differiate themself by SERVICE and perks instead of TRACKS they care. Arlington Park has every single track possible for simucasting, why should I have to use three separate services, some with only phone wagering and some with retarded rules?

They need to understand that it would be better for the industry and better for the PLAYERS, the people that RUN the industry, that have all tracks on ALL ADW's would be even healthier competition then having to play Arlington/Churchill on Winticket and Saratoga/Del Mar on Youbet. I used to be able to play all four on one friggin ADW, and having to go from screen to screen, it is garbage.

SentToStud · #2 08-13-2007, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scav

The ADW's should have all tracks and not have to pay outrageous fees to get them. Sure they have the 'availability' to get them but they would lose money to take them. They would have to differiate themself by SERVICE and perks instead of TRACKS they care. Arlington Park has every single track possible for simucasting, why should I have to use three separate services, some with only phone wagering and some with retarded rules?

They need to understand that it would be better for the industry and better for the PLAYERS, the people that RUN the industry, that have all tracks on ALL ADW's would be even healthier competition then having to play Arlington/Churchill on Winticket and Saratoga/Del Mar on Youbet. I used to be able to play all four on one friggin ADW, and having to go from screen to screen, it is garbage.

Here's what I think:
1. ADWs should carry the tracks they can agree to a contract on. The fees they pay are not generally outrageous, imo. Rather they're quite modest.
Why should an ADW or a simo facility keep more of the takeout than a host track?
2. It's not as if these ADW-Racetrack contracts are unilateral. If a deal cannot get done between a track and a specific ADW provider, it's just as likely the track as the ADW was the reason a deal did not get done.
3. If every ADW had every track, that would hurt competition. The smaller handle ADWs would get squeezed more and more until they went bust.
4. The only way you will get what you're asking for is if the CDI/Magna platform gains enough traction so that it is the exclusive ADW for those tracks. And that assumes they will somehow pick up NYRA ad DelMar. I don't think it is going to happen.

ceejay · #3 08-13-2007, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scav

They need to understand that it would be better for the industry and better for the PLAYERS, the people that RUN the industry, that have all tracks on ALL ADW's would be even healthier competition then having to play Arlington/Churchill on Winticket and Saratoga/Del Mar on Youbet. I used to be able to play all four on one friggin ADW, and having to go from screen to screen, it is garbage.

No, you should consider yourself lucky, so lucky, to have the right to spend your money with these companies. They treat us customers like they are doing us a favor by allowing us to wager on their blessed tracks.

My handle is way, way down at Tracknet/Youbet-TVG. But hey, there's no problem here....