BRIS and TSN

[anotherdave]

This might have come up before, but are BRIS and TSN owned by the same group? Their websites are almost identical in look, the software they offer are very similar. They charge my credit card on the same day. They both have the 3 types of packages. I know the files are somewhat different (for example: .drf versus .eg).

When I waiting for my form to come up on their sites TSN and BRIS show up within an hour or two of each other.


Always been curious...

thanks

[Dick Schmidt]

Yup, same folks own them both.

Dick

[Rick Ransom]

Dick,

Why do they keep two web sites? Last time I checked they had different prices on some PPs. Why compete with yourself?

[Tim]

Rick,

I don't remember and don't know the details. Here is what I do remember.

In the early 80's selling handicapping information by computer was in its infancy. Bris and Computer Sports World were the only commercial sellers around. BRIS was only available through a dialup modem. In those days I believe that most of their revenue stream came from the breeding side of the horseracing. By the way, if you want to experience frustration try downloading data at 1200 baud with the telco dropping the call every few minutes.

When the internet came along in the early 90's Happy Broadbent started TSN. I don't know what his business plan was but Bloodstock Research was now selling handicapping information through two retail operations. TSN on the internet and BRIS as a dialup service.

I don't know why, but instead of converting BRIS dialup subscribers to TSN as they migrated to the internet Bloodstock Research decided to set up a BRIS web site. I don't know if their thinking was to create multiple product lines or if they created a two headed monster by mistake.

I'm willing to bet that Bloodstock will eventually merge the two operations into one.

Tim

[GR1@HTR]

Why two companies?

Answer: IMHO, Sales and Marketing.

Same reason why Anheuser-Busch has several different flavors...ie Budweiser, Michelob, and Busch.

[andicap]

I'm not 100% certain, but I was under the impression the ownership is not entirely the same, that maybe different members of the Broadbent family have various stakes in each company.
Just a hunch, not sure.

[MikeH]

Before DRF and Equibase merged their 2 databases (when Crist bought DRF), the DRF database was kept in fifths, while the Equibase data was kept in hundredths. TSN used the Equibase data, while BRIS used the DRF data. Equibase, most likely, made different sales and licensing agreements with their customers than DRF did.

[takeout]

Yeah, I think it was mainly because of the two different databases.

I was playing a small track, CT, when the DRF/Equibase thing was going on. They both had a chartcaller at the track at that time (even though the DRF had already quit paying the clocker and pulled CT out of its publication) and it was really weird as sometimes the beaten lengths wouldn't agree between the different PPs depending on whose data they were made from. I was using BRIS PPs made with DRF data and quickly realized that they sometimes had as many as twenty wrong trainers names listed! The Equibase data seemed to have them right so I started getting them from TSN out of necessity. They're pretty much the same now, I think.

What a mess that whole thing was/is. I still don't understand what's going on with the DRF/Equibase thing. Seems like after the dust settled that there should've only been one of them left standing. It appears that a former ownership of the DRF basically tried to gut it and kick it to the curb. Frankly I'm surprised that they're still around, although I doubt that players at major tracks ever had any real problems during all of the chaos that was suffered at some of the minors.

[Rick Ransom]

I knew about the data source differences that existed in the past, but that hasn't been the case for years. They should have merged by now. It seems inefficient to me but that seems to be the rule rather than the exception in horse racing related businesses.

DRF has an agreement (contract) with Equibase to get their data from them now (hey, there's the exception). Equibase says they aren't competing for the same customers as DRF, because they're targeting the novices with their fancy graphics and simplified PPs in the programs. And, as others have pointed out, they're selling a lot more of them than DRF is.

I don't think racing "newspapers" and the thing of the future. Look at a greyhound program sometime. There isn't much of a market for racing "news". How many people do you see reading the articles in DRF? By the way, I'm not putting down DRF writers here. I happen to like reading their stuff and some of them are great guys. But I think it would be wise for them to consider that they may have to find another line of work 10 years from now.

[Lefty]

Seems smart to me. This way they're getting both ends of
the market. Keystone beer and Coors made by same people, taste the same but Keystone's cheaper. I'm sure there are many more marketing examples. These people are smart.

[Tom]

TSN and BRIS speed fiures and pace numbers do not match, therefore, one must be better that the other, and I would assume they know which it is, or at least suspect. And yet they still sell both. Isn't this a breech of ethics?
D'oh!
What am I thinking?
Data-whores don't have ethics-just greed!
Tom

[andicap]

They don't match but are their differences the same?
It is befuddling why they do that. There's got to be some weird reason.

[Rick Ransom]

Tom,

That's news to me. I always assumed they were the same. Does anyone know what might account for the differences?

[takeout]

I guess you can't move any PPs today without having some kind of numbers in them. Numbers are like... well, let's just say everybody has a set. I doubt that there's much difference in them except for the fact that they all do them a little differently, maybe because of some copyright infringement or something like that? I'm totally guessing.

[Rick Ransom]

How about this: Maybe the adjustments were different originally because their data was from different sources and they just left it the same. If that were the case, it would mean that TRN should be more accurate since their data provider didn't change.

[Larry Hamilton]

There is another problem, that is in fact, insidious. Look carefully at the technique of listing a name: trainer, owner, jock, breeder...
one might be Smith, Joe A. Jr., another might be Smith, Jr, Joe A. a third might be Smith, Joe or Smith, J and occasionally you will see this one Smith, JJoe...you know there is an error, at least you think so....

The point is, you can build a map from one db to the other with names as the rules are obvious, but you cant do the same thing with pace and par numbers.

This problem with the names, which I called insidious, must have been intentional to force you to buy one or the other db.

[takeout]

Sounds feasible to me. I have a friend who is into numbers and he told me a long time ago that they were different at BRIS and TSN. He used to use BRIS but now uses TSN. This thread got me curious so I emailed him but haven't heard back yet. I wanted to know if he switched because he liked their numbers better, or why. This was all quite a while back and he could've been freaked out over the wrong trainer listings (as I was) and changed way back then. I've always wondered if those wrong trainer names made their way into the American Racing Manual. I imagine they did. I guess some trainers got credit for a few wins that they didn't deserve and vice versa.

[takeout]

Originally posted by Rick Ransom
I knew about the data source differences that existed in the past, but that hasn't been the case for years. They should have merged by now. It seems inefficient to me but that seems to be the rule rather than the exception in horse racing related businesses.

Amen! I should probably start a new thread entitled "Equibase, DRF and BRIS/TSN" but it's kind of all intertwined and I'm more than a little confused about the whole thing and have been for years now.

It appears that over time BRIS & TSN have performed some type of Vulcan mind meld with their information and now are on the same page so to speak. IOW, it doesn't matter which of them you buy PPs from, you're going to get the same info. That wasn't always the case and is a somewhat recent development, (within the last year?) I think. BRIS's site says: "Information as to races, race results and earnings was obtained from result charts, Copyright (C) 2001, Daily Racing Form, Inc." I guess this is a weird way of saying that they use Equibase data now because DRF no longer generates the results charts - right? What are they copywriting, the format? This is where it usually starts to make my head hurt, but as the man said: "You ain't seen nothin yet."

Maybe someone can help me out with this one about race conditions. I see this all the time. It seems to be only concerning the races with non-winners 1 or 2 in so many months, etc. Mostly claimers but I see they are writing some of these in allowances now, so they probably won't agree either. The last example that I noticed went exactly like this:

TSN PPs had it as 5000n13m
DRF PPs had it as (5-4)n1y
DRF results chart had it as non-winners of a race in 5 months

Now, assuming that the results chart is right, (and heaven help us all if they start screwing up the results charts) they've both got it wrong. How can DRF have it wrong in their PPs when they have it right in their own results charts??? How can BRIS/TSN have it wrong when they're getting their info from Equibase who employs the chartcallers??? I need an aspirin.

[takeout]

Originally posted by takeout
DRF results chart had it as non-winners of a race in 5 months

Oops! I messed up. Make that non-winners of a race in *4* months.

Same deal though. Both of them are still "lying" but that puts BRIS/TSN about 7 months closer to the truth than DRF. I think my eyes are starting to glaze over. ;)