ChampionChip Sucks!

[jmaccelari]

 

Actually to pool the number of chips in circulation would probably damage competition.

 

 

 

A significant part of the value of a timing company would be the number of sportspeople who own its chips and the general acceptance.

 

 

 

If you owned CC and I started a timing company called Jules Timing' date=' how would you feel if I told my customers that they can just use their CC chips?

 

 

 

It's not right, and the judge agreed with CC.

 

 

 

Also, you have to ask whether WT is selected purely on price/merit. WT and PPA share a common director. WT is contracted to provide timing for PPA. WT is a for-profit entity. PPA is a non-profit entity.

 

 

 

[/quote']

I doubt it will affect competition. Service providers will then have to

compete in service rather than lock in. This would lead to better

competition. The customer loses with lock in, CC win...

 

But it looks like CC don't give a rats arse about the customer...

 

The chips are bog standard TiRIS chips - anyone can buy them, so

why can't anyone read them? The information is open to anyone with

a LF RFID reader...

 

The "judge" never "agreed with CC" - it never went to court as WT

did not want a fight (apparently CC are quite aggressive) and

backed down before it went that far...

 

We all know the politics with WT, but at least I have NEVER had this cr@p

with them...

 

[Jules]

Come on Jeremy, let's start our own timing company. Can't call it J&J though, cos there's already one of those in the industry

[scotty]

CC might be quicker via results , but i have found their dealing with queries lacking, i have yet to have a reply to a query. CC might have more detail regards stats but if you have more than 1 chip registered you cannot see your resluts combined unless you pay extra whereas WT all your results show irrespective of the which chip you use.

[DaLoCo]

By this I assume that if I have a WT chip and an event is timed by CC my time will not be recorded......aw crap

[Barend de Arend]

 

Wow! Seems to me that the HubSA should have some sought of "representative body" where they can approach organisations like CC and tell them off. At least they would have a substantial following as opposed to just one guy like "jmaccelari" getting no where in a hurry here!

 

Good luck brother' date=' I think you gonna need it!

 

[/quote']

 

Hmm, a rider's union.  I think TheHub is close to that right now.

 

The problem here is that the customer of the chips (us, cyclists) is not the same as the customer of the mats (race organisers.)  CC (or WT, or anyone else) can tell us off, because the race organisers pay them, and force us to use (and pay for) the chips.

 

What we need is to split that: one company sells chips (and *proper* mounts/velcro, whatever.) and a completely different company does the mats.

 

Then we gotta decide if it's us, the race organisers, or the CSA that's a customer for a timing database.

 

OR we need a way to get the race organisers to hold the timing mat companies liable if the third party (us, cyclists) are unhappy.  CSA, I think that's your job.

 

You can tackle it in two ways:

- You rent a chip, yearly, with your cycling license (along with an anual race number, please!) and pass timing complaints on to the CSA.

- You rent a chip per race from the race organisers.  You hand it back to get your medal.

 

[Danger Dassie]

Jmaccelari; You;re serious, you were told to "F**** off" ? Just like that, in those words?

Crazy, not to mention completely unacceptable!

[EigerSA]

 

Wow! Seems to me that the HubSA should have some sought of "representative body" where they can approach organisations like CC and tell them off. At least they would have a substantial following as opposed to just one guy like "jmaccelari" getting no where in a hurry here!

 

Good luck brother' date=' I think you gonna need it!

 

[/quote']

 

Hmm, a rider's union.  I think TheHub is close to that right now.

 

The problem here is that the customer of the chips (us, cyclists) is not the same as the customer of the mats (race organisers.)  CC (or WT, or anyone else) can tell us off, because the race organisers pay them, and force us to use (and pay for) the chips.

 

What we need is to split that: one company sells chips (and *proper* mounts/velcro, whatever.) and a completely different company does the mats.

 

Then we gotta decide if it's us, the race organisers, or the CSA that's a customer for a timing database.

 

OR we need a way to get the race organisers to hold the timing mat companies liable if the third party (us, cyclists) are unhappy.  CSA, I think that's your job.

 

You can tackle it in two ways:

- You rent a chip, yearly, with your cycling license (along with an anual race number, please!) and pass timing complaints on to the CSA.

- You rent a chip per race from the race organisers.  You hand it back to get your medal.

 

Renting the chip seems the best way forward to me.

 

But I was thinking more in terms of service... as in a representative meets with these guys saying "us 300 odd cyclists who aren't happy, sought your problems out or we'll boycott this event, or that organisation... that sought of thing.

 

Either which way something should be done, service in this country is fast becoming a distant memory!

 

[Barend de Arend]

 

But I was thinking more in terms of service... as in a representative meets with these guys saying "us 300 odd cyclists who aren't happy' date=' sought your problems out or we'll boycott this event, or that organisation... that sought of thing.

[/quote']

 

OK, who do you represent? (I guess fun riders -- pros care about 1st, not sub-3)  Who else? timing chip customers.

 

What is the problem?  Bad service by CC.

 

Who's responsible? CC CEO.

 

Who can fix it? the people that *choose* to use ChampionChip: event organisers.

 

[jmaccelari]

 

Jmaccelari; You;re serious' date=' you were told to "F**** off" ? Just like that, in those words?

Crazy, not to mention completely unacceptable![/quote']

Nope it was a "polite f**** off".

 

I was basically told no ways and "have a nice day":

 

"The result will NOT be updated as your chip was NOT attached correctly."

and

"Have a super afternoon."

 

That was my interpretation.

 

[Danger Dassie]

Ah ok, with the quotation marks I thought they'd literally told you to eff off.

 

Still, can understand your feeling though. Had a similar incident, albeit not with CC.

[jmaccelari]

 

The problem here is that the customer of the chips (us' date=' cyclists) is not the same as the customer of the mats (race organisers.)  CC (or WT, or anyone else) can tell us off, because the race organisers pay them, and force us to use (and pay for) the chips.

 

What we need is to split that: one company sells chips (and *proper* mounts/velcro, whatever.) and a completely different company does the mats.

 

Then we gotta decide if it's us, the race organisers, or the CSA that's a customer for a timing database.

 

OR we need a way to get the race organisers to hold the timing mat companies liable if the third party (us, cyclists) are unhappy.  CSA, I think that's your job.

 

You can tackle it in two ways:

- You rent a chip, yearly, with your cycling license (along with an anual race number, please!) and pass timing complaints on to the CSA.

- You rent a chip per race from the race organisers.  You hand it back to get your medal.

[/quote']

WT were prepared to do exactly this. Buy your chip from anyone and let the

companies compete on service/price.

 

CC were not prepared to do so and threatened to take WT to court so the whole

thing died out. The chip users (us) lost out, but CC have protected their "turf"...

 

Yay! Way to go CC!!!

 

[EigerSA]

 

But I was thinking more in terms of service... as in a representative meets with these guys saying "us 300 odd cyclists who aren't happy' date=' sought your problems out or we'll boycott this event, or that organisation... that sought of thing.

[/quote']

 

OK, who do you represent? (I guess fun riders -- pros care about 1st, not sub-3)  Who else? timing chip customers.

 

What is the problem?  Bad service by CC.

 

Who's responsible? CC CEO.

 

Who can fix it? the people that *choose* to use ChampionChip: event organisers.

 

In reality it would be a difficult thing to achieve. First you'd have to get the hubbers to agree on a common cause (which is all but impossible if you read some posts). Second you'd have to identify a common foe, like the race organisers or the CEO. Quite a daunting proposition for anyone. I guess at the end of the day, that's what sites like "Hello Peter" are there for.

 

[jmaccelari]

 

 

YADA YADA YADA' date=' I saw you sitting on the front feet up reading the paper and having a drink, so its only fair that the stoker who did all the work get the credit

[/quote']

Now you know why my stoker keeps on cramping!!!

 

[Barend de Arend]

 

 

In reality it would be a difficult thing to achieve. First you'd have to get the hubbers to agree on a common cause (which is all but impossible if you read some posts).

 

No' date=' you don't.  You just have to (a) get the original complainant to complain to the event organisers, OR (b) submit some kind of petition.

 

The rest of TheHub doesn't have to get involved.

 

You assume you need a lot of people.  I don't think you do.

 

 

 

Second you'd have to identify a common foe, like the race organisers or the CEO.

 

I've done that for you.  Lodge an official complaint with the event organisers (because only they can fix it), but the foe is ChampionChip.

 

 

 

Quite a daunting proposition for anyone.

 

 

It shouldn't be daunting.  You escalate one step at a time.

 

 

 

 

I guess at the end of the day' date=' that's what sites like "Hello Peter" are there for.

[/quote']

 

That's for AFTER you tried the proper escalation:

1. speak to ChampionChip direct (done, no help)

2. speak to the ChampionChip contact boss.  ChampionChip CEO (has anyone tried ???)

3. speak to ChampionChip's paycheck (the event organisers)  And you tell them the ChampionChip CEO was rude to you.

 

Only AFTER you've told me you've done all three, should you go to a public forum (Hello Peter, Radio 702, toy-toy in the streets)  You shouldn't go directly to mob justice.

 

 

[jmaccelari]

 

That's for AFTER you tried the proper escalation:

1. speak to ChampionChip direct (done' date=' no help)

2. speak to the ChampionChip contact boss.  ChampionChip CEO (has anyone tried ???)

3. speak to ChampionChip's paycheck (the event organisers)  And you tell them the ChampionChip CEO was rude to you.

 

Only AFTER you've told me you've done all three, should you go to a public forum (Hello Peter, Radio 702, toy-toy in the streets)  You shouldn't go directly to mob justice.

 

[/quote']

Agreed. I have contacted Mr Hechter, but from Sue's cocky response, the tales

I have heard about him and what Hubber have said here, I have little hope...

 

After that I'm writing to the cycling magazines...

 

After that I start toyi-toying...

 

[Jules]

 

WT were prepared to do exactly this. Buy your chip from anyone and let thecompanies compete on service/price.CC were not prepared to do so and threatened to take WT to court so the wholething died out. The chip users (us) lost out' date=' but CC have protected their "turf"...Yay! Way to go CC!!! [/quote']

 

 

 

Jeremy, seems you have some insight into this. But I have to ask why was WT prepared to compete on pure service alone? Was it because they knew they could rely on their PPA appointments. Also, did it perhaps have something to do with the fact that acceptance and distribution of CC chips was superior?

 

 

 

By the way, I don't think it was just a threat of going to court. If I remember correctly, they actually obtained a court order?

 

 

 

I agree though: the best solution would be to split the chip distribution from the actual timing. I reckon there must be an opportunity for a third player like Spectrum to enter the road racing space and kick some WT and CC butt!