Coercion is not a precondition of abhorrence. Even if it was, the publicity value of the show could be seen as leverage with which to coerce potential participants.

The point is, this is a predatory act and it should not be misunderstood as 'fair' or 'ok'.

You're spinning a little bit too much hyperbole. It would be nicer for the entrepreneurs if ABC didn't take a cut but clearly they aren't that nice. However they are getting 15 mins of national exposure to a captive audience - that's worth something.

Doesn't YCombinator give pittance amount of capital for an equity stake in the companies it invests in, with the value proposition being largely in introductions to VCs/Angels and some strategic help? Are they coercive?

Which of the Shark Tank & YC have a better track record by which we can compare?

I'd be curious to see the stats. They do cater to different kinds of businesses, but it would still be interesting.

Shark Tank has a good track record. So does Y Combinator. What's your point?

I think my point is in the details. Whose funding/promotion framework is more successful?