|
Here is the biggest problem in solving this. As you can see by the poll results, there is no unanimous choice. Personally, I think if you think it out, the only result that makes complete sense is the minimum wager the track uses for each specific bet. Every other option has issues or has some subjectivity attached to it.
So if the industry went ahead and made this a priority, which option do they pick? Will horseplayers still complain?
And then there is cost. I'm pretty sure that it can't be costly for individual tracks to pay a programmer to get onside, but still there is a cost.
As for the option picked, I think that any of these four options will lead to customer satisfaction within weeks. Anything is better than the way it is right now.
As for cost, that is a tricky thing. Will fixing this problem lead to more betting? Will it prevent anyone thinking of quitting from quitting? I don't have the answer to this one. In other words, if it was your business would you spend even a few hundred dollars or so on something that leads to no improvement on the bottom line?
Personally I would, because customer satisfaction is important for Goodwill. But tracks on tight budgets may feel differently, and it isn't like the horse racing industry is into Goodwill, or so it seems.
__________________
|
