Dear Mr Daruty

[betovernetcapper]

Hi Scott,
In today's BloodHorse,

TrackNet president and chief executive officer Scott Daruty said he understands the frustration felt by bettors, but believes it was unfair the new content provider has been singled out as the enemy.

“It’s ironic to me, because that’s our goal, too,” said Daruty of TrackNet’s stated premise of making racing content available outside the exclusive contract environment operated by rival TVG for the last 10 years or so. “In an ideal world, every account wagering company -- including TVG, Youbet, Churchill, and Magna – would have access to all racing content. And then the customer could choose which provider suits them best.”

Please let me explain why I view you as the enemy. It's along the same lines as why some African Americans had a few reservations about George Wallace. I'd like the simulcast signal available to all licensed ADWs And yes, kind sir, I'd like to have a rebate.
.
Hope this clears up the irony for you. BTW while these comments reflect only my personal world view, if you'd like further player insights, please feel free to contact me directly.
.
your friend,
Richard Young
betovernetcapper

[JustRalph]

you actually think that is better than the original? Are you kidding me?

You equate this with race relations?

[chickenhead]

I think it deserves a much more serious response.

[Maji]

These guys are shameless :mad:

[betovernetcapper]

Maji-I love your avatar :)

[rrpic6]

Maji-I love your avatar :)

Betov: you need some diversion...I'll take Ralph's avatar over all.

RR

[betovernetcapper]

:lol: You got that right

[Indulto]

I think it deserves a much more serious response.Are you talking about bonc's post or Daruty's remarks?

bonc,
This isn't about man's inhumanity to man. It's about greed, power, and screw the horseplayers, horsemen, and competing ADWs.

Yes they are discriminating against the small bettor. When they say they'll give rebates to players who bet $1 million a year, they aren't just saying "we're taking care of our best customers," they're also saying that their other customers don't count, and aren't entitled to a fair shake.

And it isn't just that it gives rebated players an edge over their competition by subjecting them to higher effective takeout, the rebated money isn't going toward purses either.

So when they squeeze out innovative startups like PTC who not only courts smaller players, but provides wagering platform features they can't match, they figure that whatever action they can keep from away from the new guy will automatically go to them.

It's that state of mind of your organization that we're protesting, Mr. Daruty. It's really simple. We want to be able to make any wager offered at any track through the ADW of our choice, and make lower effective takeout available to all players. If all tracks can't or won't lower takeout directly as some are currently experimenting with, then everybody is entitled to rebates and the resulting larger handle should benefit horsemen as well as the ADWs.

So cut out the doublespeak, and understand that we're finally getting serious. The longer you let this fester, the more hostility from all segments of the industry that will be generated in your direction.

You're now on notice.

[rrpic6]

Indulto:

Excellent post! Go print it, stick it in an envelope and mail it to the schmuck.

RR

[chickenhead]

thats more along the line of what I had in mind. Well done. :)

[betovernetcapper]

Indulto-perfect get a stamp and send it to Scott :)

[BillW]

thats more along the line of what I had in mind. Well done. :)

When did rebates become part of this? We better get it together and understand what this is about. The original petition was about ADW's not having all tracks available to offer to their customers, not about restricting ADW's as to how they compete.

Original petition:

We as players are offended and disgusted by the wrangling that TrackNet, TVG and other content providers have engaged in with regards to the simulcast signals. We believe that many executives in the business overlook the fact that without us, the racing industry would cease to exist.
.
The operation of a race track and the ability to conduct inter-track simulcasting of racing events is a privilege not a right. We request that the Jockey Club, the NTRA and all powers that be immediately intervene to mediate the disputes that are destroying this great game.
.
We demand that all licensed racetracks, simulcast facilities and ADWs
be accorded immediate access to all simulcast signals at rates that are fair and equitable to all, the tracks, the horseman, and the players. Let the customers decide who to reward with their business.
.
In the absence of responsible action, horse player boycotts are a certainty.

We better get focused or we'll fall flat on our face.

[bigmack]

For what it's worth betovernetcapper/Richard,

As there are 400+ co-signers on the initial JC thrust, perhaps you/we would be best served if you run any future letters and/or correspondance through the board to get input. Interjecting a George Wallace reference in a letter towards the cause might be a bit tangential.

Let's remain patient, focused & rationale in our pursuit as changes for the better might very well be attainable through our actions coupled with recognition by the industry for the need of change.

Thanks for your efforts. Real good can come from all of this if we maintain composure.

[BillW]

Mack,

I agree, well said.

[betovernetcapper]

OK-Let me explain the George Wallace reference. In my youth I was a liberal and active in the civil rights movement. I went on marches an was part of a group that drove food and clothing for strikers in Mississippi. It really wasn't a fun time.
.
Anyway George Wallace and some others would make speeches and say things like "I don't know what the problem is-we like our Negros" and it was always clear as a bell to me that these guys didn't get it. When I read Daruty's statement it was clear to me that Daruty didn't get it.
.
In any event please note my close of the letter.





BTW while these comments reflect only my personal world view,

[chickenhead]

When did rebates become part of this? We better get it together and understand what this is about. The original petition was about ADW's not having all tracks available to offer to their customers, not about restricting ADW's as to how they compete.

We better get focused or we'll fall flat on our face.

I see the two as part and parcel. Or are we just talking about ADWs that don't rebate? I guess I see it as slightly broader than just allowing ADWs to carry the signals. To me the point is allowing competition, not specifically rebates, but in essence allowing whatever the ADWs see fit to offer, whether they be rebates, services, features, etc. No track should be restricting those things.

But, I certainly don't mean to speak for anyone other than myself. It's quite possible I'm in the minority.

We better get focused or we'll fall flat on our face.

I couldn't agree more. I've suggested repeatedly we all take our time to discuss these things, in depth, before trying to take any actions. If keeping quiet is what best helps this thing move along successfully, I can do that too.

[turfnsport]

Let's remain patient, focused & rationale in our pursuit as changes for the better might very well be attainable through our actions coupled with recognition by the industry for the need of change.


There's your avatar.
MikeD