Tracks reluctant to spend money for HDTV broadcasts

[algobbi]

Only five racetracks – Keeneland, and the four tracks owned by Churchill Downs Inc. – have purchased high-definition television cameras and the equipment necessary to broadcast in the HD format, while only a handful of betting locations have invested in the equipment necessary to view the HD signals. That’s a woeful number when compared with other sports, which have embraced high-definition television to the delight of their fans and customers, despite the higher costs.

Racing, meanwhile, continues to struggle with the expense required to transmit in HD. On Tuesday, Robert Evans, the chief executive officer of Churchill Downs Inc., said that Churchill spent $1.2 million at each of its tracks to upgrade cameras and equipment for high-definition broadcasting, and it currently spends $750,000 a year to enable high-definition transmission of the signals to 42 betting locations. That’s out of 1,600 betting locations worldwide. Evans said that he didn’t know why he was throwing that $750,000 “down a hole,” and Roberts said that he has a meeting with Evans next week in which he expects Churchill to pull the plug on its HD transmissions.

http://drf.com/news/tracks-reluctant-spend-money-high-definition-tv-broadcasts

[Whos the Cowboy]

The tracks profit margins are small or nil so the expense of broadcasting in HD is a waste

[WaquoitNBroadBrush]

There are nearly 300 screens in the Sports Haven teletheater in New Haven, Conn. I believe two of them are HD, both at the bar. All the sets in the carrels are 1990s-vintage analog sets. HD is nice, but it's not going to attract any more people to the building. It certainly won't help anyone pick more winners.

[Rick1323]

Racing is shortsighted as usual. The TV signal generates 5 times more handle than the on track crowd. But the attitude is that gamblers are stupid, they will bet anyway. We treat them like crap and they ALWAYS bet anyway.

[gravano]

Definitely a bad move.

It's an advantage to have your track in HD at a place like a sports book when the potential gambler has thirty screens to choose from.

[Apollo]

Bettors don't care about picture quality. I've watched tens of thousands of games and races in Las Vegas race and sportsbooks over 25+ years. I can't remember one distinct complaint about the picture quality. I imagine it's happened, solely due to the numbers game, but it's never been a theme.

They want the logical event on the proper screen, and the sound available when appropriate. The most frequent shout -- by open lengths -- is "Sound!" when an important race begins silently for no reason, other than employee ineptitude.

Now, if a section of the screen is cut off, which happens when these genius networks ram an HDTV signal through analog sets, bettors absolutely care. It's been a problem this season, specifically with FOX Sports. I've watched more plays minus a QB and games without the score and time visible in the past 12 weeks than a quarter century combined.

[Songofthesword]

Bettors don't care about picture quality. I've watched tens of thousands of games and races in Las Vegas race and sportsbooks over 25+ years. I can't remember one distinct complaint about the picture quality. I imagine it's happened, solely due to the numbers game, but it's never been a theme.

They want the logical event on the proper screen, and the sound available when appropriate. The most frequent shout -- by open lengths -- is "Sound!" when an important race begins silently for no reason, other than employee ineptitude.

Now, if a section of the screen is cut off, which happens when these genius networks ram an HDTV signal through analog sets, bettors absolutely care. It's been a problem this season, specifically with FOX Sports. I've watched more plays minus a QB and games without the score and time visible in the past 12 weeks than a quarter century combined.

speak for yourself.

one of the main reasons I really dont' play NYRA all that much is the feed quality is just horrible, especially compared to fair grounds or Arlington.

Now, I would be lying if I said I take advantage of teh HDTV.. I don't, I use xpressbet. But there itself is why I never took advantage of it, maybe if they did more than just offer it to twinspires.... in other words maybe it would have worked out better if everyone had access to the same feeds instead of trying to force feed everyone to use twinspires. Even stated, fair grounds, arlington, calder, even non HD, are better quality than Aqueduct and some others.

I mean but track feed quality, to me is of the utmost importance.

I mean is there was ever a company, an industry that just doesn't get it. 85% of your handle comes from off track. What's the first thing we need to cut.. I know, let's cut signal quality!


And gravano has a point too. It's a SELLING POINT if anything. Keeneland gets played before anything when they run, that's the main reason why. Churchill in the middle of the summer, is competing with Monmouth, Louisiana Downs, Hoosier Park, Woodbine, Belmont.... Give me a reason to bet your track over the other tracks. The mantra run the races, they will gamble has to go. To me at least, the track feed quality, is a huge selling point and makes my entire experience that much more enjoyable.


You can't tell me you don't get more enjoyment out of the higher quality audio and video at keeneland than you do other tracks.

Places like ESPN, are coming out with all types of HD programs, for people who don't wager a dime on their events (at least through them), ju8st so they can enjoy the event more, we take it away.