Lottery Director also announces expansion of Mega Millions into new state
The executive director of the Massachusetts Lottery said offering games with larger jackpots will attract more players, increasing revenues for cities and towns while diminishing demand for casino gambling.
Joseph C. Sullivan said Wednesday that the lottery plans to consolidate MassMillions and Megabucks, both Massachusetts-based games, into one game with bigger jackpots, in an attempt to attract more players.
The lottery also plans to expand the multistate MegaMillions game into one more large, densely populated state to create even more players and revenue for high stakes jackpots. Sullivan would not identify the state, but said it would be the last one added to MegaMillions.
Appearing at a meeting of the Greater Haverhill Chamber of Commerce in North Andover, Sullivan said the additional revenue should cool legislative efforts to bring casino gambling to Massachusetts. The Massachusetts State Lottery generated $4.1 billion during the last fiscal year, with $889 million of that going to cities and towns, he said.
"You don't want to kill the golden goose," Sullivan said. "Casino gambling would definitely do that."
Sullivan said it would be foolhardy for the Legislature to allow casino gambling in Massachusetts. While the Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun casinos in Connecticut generate $16 billion a year in revenue, Connecticut receives about $400 million of that money, he said.
"We get one-fourth of the Connecticut casino revenue with our lottery games, but return twice as much to the state for distribution to cities and towns," Sullivan said. "It doesn't make much sense to change that success formula."
Sullivan also said Keno, the lottery's fastest-growing contest, will add games featuring simulated horse and car racing. Presently, the game resembles bingo.
I'm all for getting rid of 6/49 Mass Millions and keeping 6/42 Megabucks with increased payoffs for lower prizes, a bonus number and a cash option. If they make it 6/45 or something like that without other big changes, what's the point? I'd rather lose going for a huge MegaMillions jackpot than face almost as bad odds going for much less money in the boring "new" game. Now is the time to make real improvements if they are going to. How can they lure people against enormous MegaMillions jackpots - by making it fun even if you don't hit the jackpot.
Personally, I would go back to 6/36 like Megabucks was when it started and have winners every week or so, even if the jackpot won't set them for life. I'd advertise it as the game where there are actually jackpot winners every week. Seeing "no winner" week after week after week is pretty demoralizing. If I'm going to lose, why not lose going for MegaMillions? If the jackpot is always going to be low compared to MegaMillions, they need to have a game where there are winners for all to see.
The new game IMO should have a different matrix than the games it replaces so that everyone filling out betslips for the current games is aware of the new game.
Mass doesn't need a "super" jackpot game; if they want a "bigger" in-state game, create a 6/50 with no bonus ball, lengthen the annuity to 30 payments WITH A LONG-OVERDUE CASH OPTION, keep the $3,000 and $100 prizes in the current 6/49, but make 3-of-6 pay $5.
Otherwise, make the new game 6/43, with the same prizes as the 6/42 except pay $5 for matching 3-of-6, and lengthen the annuity WITH A CASH OPTION.
I e-mailed MUSL and they believe it'll be CA joining Mega Millions.
That presumably would mean CA joining NY and TX in requiring Mega Millions players to choose cash/annuity when they BUY the ticket, with the other states using the "proper" rules.
Yes, I agree - it is now impossible for any other lottery game to compete with Mega Millions or Powerball in jackpots anyway, so they have to make other jackpot games more inviting in other ways. Hot Lotto shows how to do it. Long odds of winning the jackpot, but reasonable odds of winning something - 1:16. Where in Megabucks, the "easier" of the 2 games, the odds of winning the lowest cash prize (the free ticket being a worthless prize, in my opinion) are 1:555. Pretty lousy, and I'm glad they've been losing money.
Let's hope they don't blow it. But if they do, so what - there's always MegaMillions.
>Mass doesn't need a "super" jackpot game; if they want a "bigger" in-state game, create a 6/50 with no bonus ball, lengthen the annuity to 30 payments WITH A LONG-OVERDUE CASH OPTION, keep the $3,000 and $100 prizes in the current 6/49, but make 3-of-6 pay $5.
I don't think TN will join MM because of the way they ripped Rebecca Paul when leaving Georgia.
Of course if there is another $300,000 bonus in it for her to get a multi-state game running by such and such a date and MM can let her join the fastest, then you better believe it will happen.
Did you know that no one has hit the Mass Millions jackpot in 19 months now!
When will this merge of Megabucks & Mass Millions begin and what they will re-name it as? "Mega Millions" would have been perfect, but they can't use that now since they re-named the Big Game. Will there only be two drawings instead of four?
I also wonder what they will do about all their customers who have season tickets for each game as they are right now?
IMO the lack of a cash option has a LOT to do with the fact there has been no jackpot winner since June 2002.
I would imagine those DUMB enough to purchase season tickets for the two lame-duck games (whenever the changes are made) would be given a refund for the leftover drawing(s).
At that time, Mass should also expand the MASS CASH (currently 5/35) to four drawings a week, probably with a new format (fewer numbers?).
Why would players want to get rid of Mass Millions? It is the only lottery I know of that is currently a fair bet. Your expected winnings is greater than the cost of a ticket ($1?).
Over how many years will the $49.2 million jackpot be annuitized? Why are sales so low for a lottery with such a high expected payout?
Quote:Originally posted by LottoBuddy on February 22, 2004
Why would players want to get rid of Mass Millions? It is the only lottery I know of that is currently a fair bet. Your expected winnings is greater than the cost of a ticket ($1?).
Over how many years will the $49.2 million jackpot be annuitized? Why are sales so low for a lottery with such a high expected payout?
They are thinking of getting rid of Mass Millions because the sales are so low. It is suffering the common lottery disease "jackpot fatigue". Only very large jackpots stimulate sales.
To answer your second question - why low sales with a high expected value? Because most players do not understand expected value and if they do, they do not base their buying decision on it.
I agree that it seems stupid not to offer a cash option. Is the 20-year annuity at least guaranteed (like Powerball) even if you die or the state claims bankruptcy?
Does anybody know of a lottery pool that I can join for Mass Millions that doesn't charge extra fees?
massachusetts should extend their annuity period to 30 years, and offer a cash option of at least $1 million. that way, the annuity value would be greater, and there would be bigger rollovers in terms of the annuity value. either that or make all their games offer a lump sum jackpot instead of just mass cash. a lot of customers choose the cash option. on an average day in PA, i would see maybe one or two customers ask for the annuity value for the old super 6. the rest would ask for the cash option. a lot of lotteries are either making the cash option the default on the machine, doing all cash jackpot lotto games, or chose not to have their own lotto game, and rely on a multi-state game for a huge jackpot and big sales. nowadays with lotteries such as tennessee, north dakota, south carolina, nebraska, idaho, montana, kansas, south dakota, and various other lotteries, aren't even offering a million-dollar jackpot game.
no !
The new game MUST offer a cash option!
I'm all for getting rid of 6/49 Mass Millions and keeping 6/42 Megabucks with increased payoffs for lower prizes, a bonus number and a cash option. If they make it 6/45 or something like that without other big changes, what's the point? I'd rather lose going for a huge MegaMillions jackpot than face almost as bad odds going for much less money in the boring "new" game. Now is the time to make real improvements if they are going to. How can they lure people against enormous MegaMillions jackpots - by making it fun even if you don't hit the jackpot.
Personally, I would go back to 6/36 like Megabucks was when it started and have winners every week or so, even if the jackpot won't set them for life. I'd advertise it as the game where there are actually jackpot winners every week. Seeing "no winner" week after week after week is pretty demoralizing. If I'm going to lose, why not lose going for MegaMillions? If the jackpot is always going to be low compared to MegaMillions, they need to have a game where there are winners for all to see.
tg:
The new game IMO should have a different matrix than the games it replaces so that everyone filling out betslips for the current games is aware of the new game.
Mass doesn't need a "super" jackpot game; if they want a "bigger" in-state game, create a 6/50 with no bonus ball, lengthen the annuity to 30 payments WITH A LONG-OVERDUE CASH OPTION, keep the $3,000 and $100 prizes in the current 6/49, but make 3-of-6 pay $5.
Otherwise, make the new game 6/43, with the same prizes as the 6/42 except pay $5 for matching 3-of-6, and lengthen the annuity WITH A CASH OPTION.
So, what state do you think Mega Millions will add? Are they talking about Tennessee or some other state?
I e-mailed MUSL and they believe it'll be CA joining Mega Millions.
That presumably would mean CA joining NY and TX in requiring Mega Millions players to choose cash/annuity when they BUY the ticket, with the other states using the "proper" rules.
Can you imagine the rollovers?
Can you imagine what jackpot odds MM would have if changed to include CA?
Yes, I agree - it is now impossible for any other lottery game to compete with Mega Millions or Powerball in jackpots anyway, so they have to make other jackpot games more inviting in other ways. Hot Lotto shows how to do it. Long odds of winning the jackpot, but reasonable odds of winning something - 1:16. Where in Megabucks, the "easier" of the 2 games, the odds of winning the lowest cash prize (the free ticket being a worthless prize, in my opinion) are 1:555. Pretty lousy, and I'm glad they've been losing money.
Let's hope they don't blow it. But if they do, so what - there's always MegaMillions.
>Mass doesn't need a "super" jackpot game; if they want a "bigger" in-state game, create a 6/50 with no bonus ball, lengthen the annuity to 30 payments WITH A LONG-OVERDUE CASH OPTION, keep the $3,000 and $100 prizes in the current 6/49, but make 3-of-6 pay $5.
I don't think TN will join MM because of the way they ripped Rebecca Paul when leaving Georgia.
Of course if there is another $300,000 bonus in it for her to get a multi-state game running by such and such a date and MM can let her join the fastest, then you better believe it will happen.
Did you know that no one has hit the Mass Millions jackpot in 19 months now!
When will this merge of Megabucks & Mass Millions begin and what they will re-name it as? "Mega Millions" would have been perfect, but they can't use that now since they re-named the Big Game. Will there only be two drawings instead of four?
I also wonder what they will do about all their customers who have season tickets for each game as they are right now?
IMO the lack of a cash option has a LOT to do with the fact there has been no jackpot winner since June 2002.
I would imagine those DUMB enough to purchase season tickets for the two lame-duck games (whenever the changes are made) would be given a refund for the leftover drawing(s).
At that time, Mass should also expand the MASS CASH (currently 5/35) to four drawings a week, probably with a new format (fewer numbers?).
Why would players want to get rid of Mass Millions? It is the only lottery I know of that is currently a fair bet. Your expected winnings is greater than the cost of a ticket ($1?).
Over how many years will the $49.2 million jackpot be annuitized? Why are sales so low for a lottery with such a high expected payout?
They are thinking of getting rid of Mass Millions because the sales are so low. It is suffering the common lottery disease "jackpot fatigue". Only very large jackpots stimulate sales.
To answer your second question - why low sales with a high expected value? Because most players do not understand expected value and if they do, they do not base their buying decision on it.
Good luck,
Jake
LottoBuddy:
Why would people want to play a game where the winner CANNOT receive their prize in lump sum?
Would Canadians continue to play Lotto 6/49 and Super-7 if the jackpot could be paid ONLY through an annuity?
PS-The Mass 6/49 and 6/42 each are paid in 20 annual installments, with NO cash option.
I agree that it seems stupid not to offer a cash option. Is the 20-year annuity at least guaranteed (like Powerball) even if you die or the state claims bankruptcy?
Does anybody know of a lottery pool that I can join for Mass Millions that doesn't charge extra fees?
LottoBuddy:
Stick to the Canadian lotteries. In addition to no cash option for the Mass 6/49 or 6/42, all US prizes are taxable.
Unlike small US lotteries l
LottoBuddy:
Again, the Mass 6/49 (and 6/42) DO NOT have a cash option.
Who cares? A U$50 million annuity is worth a lot more than C$2 million cash!
LottoBuddy:
I do! My rights are violated because the money belongs to the PLAYER, yet a "winner" is restricted on how he/she/they can receive their winnings.
massachusetts should extend their annuity period to 30 years, and offer a cash option of at least $1 million. that way, the annuity value would be greater, and there would be bigger rollovers in terms of the annuity value. either that or make all their games offer a lump sum jackpot instead of just mass cash. a lot of customers choose the cash option. on an average day in PA, i would see maybe one or two customers ask for the annuity value for the old super 6. the rest would ask for the cash option. a lot of lotteries are either making the cash option the default on the machine, doing all cash jackpot lotto games, or chose not to have their own lotto game, and rely on a multi-state game for a huge jackpot and big sales. nowadays with lotteries such as tennessee, north dakota, south carolina, nebraska, idaho, montana, kansas, south dakota, and various other lotteries, aren't even offering a million-dollar jackpot game.