Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 4, 2016, 11:27 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Drive to boost Calif. lottery sales under way

California LotteryCalifornia Lottery: Drive to boost Calif. lottery sales under way

Revenue-building campaign needed as governor's bond proposal gains footing

The California state lottery is switching its advertising pitch on nearly two dozen billboards throughout the state, a modest attempt to boost ticket sales.

But the sales campaign will have to get much more aggressive if the lottery is going to pay off Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's $15 billion bond plan to help cover a huge state budget deficit.

Instead of showing life-changing jackpots that can exceed $100 million, the new billboards say there were thousands of recent local winners, a reference to scratchers and other games with better odds but smaller payouts.

"(The players) were waiting for the jackpot to get bigger and bigger, and that had a detrimental effect on sales," said Joan Borucki, the lottery director.

The first reaction to Schwarzenegger's bond plan from many legislators: You cannot be serious. There are doubts about whether sluggish lottery sales can be boosted, fear of losing school funds and qualms about pushing gambling.

But the basic idea gained credibility when nonpartisan Legislative Analyst Liz Hill, seeming to hold her nose, signed off on the governor's strategy and suggested a lottery bond of $5.6 billion to balance the budget.

Then Assembly Democrats approved a budget with $15 billion in lottery bonds that would be used to pay off debt instead of creating a reserve as Schwarzenegger had proposed.

"Given the bad choices before us, the governor's lottery plan deserves consideration and improvement, rather than instant dismissal," former Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, D-Los Angeles, wrote in a newspaper op-ed piece.

The lottery bonds would reduce the need for painful spending cuts or tax increases - easing the conflict between Democratic and Republican legislators that has left the state with a deficit for seven years.

For the Republican governor who promised to "tear up the credit card," the bonds technically would not be borrowing because they are paid off by lottery ticket sales, not the state's taxpayer-supported general fund, a distinction lost on many.

But is encouraging more gambling a proper way to help balance the budget? Some opponents argue that much of the increased revenue would come from low-income persons, who can least afford losses.

"It's a state-run predatory game that often preys on the most vulnerable," said Fred Jones of the California Coalition Against Gambling Expansion, a faith-based group affiliated with opponents of alcohol abuse.

Borucki, the lottery director, said the view that most lottery players are poor is a myth. Monthly tracking surveys show that ticket buyers mirror the population in gender, age, ethnicity, education, income and employment status.

The lottery surveys don't jibe with other reports, Jones said. And even if the lottery surveys are correct, he said, low-income people "are buying a disproportionate number of tickets compared to their income."

Schwarzenegger argues that the use of gambling funds to aid state programs was endorsed by the public in 1984 when voters approved the lottery, which gives 34 percent of its revenue to education.

Schools are getting about $1 billion a year from the lottery, roughly 1.5 percent of the total education budget. The main sponsor of the lottery initiative, Scientific Games, sells lottery equipment.

Racetrack groups fearing competition ran an opposition campaign that outspent Scientific Games. But Proposition 37 was approved by 58 percent of the voters.

The governor's lottery bond proposal, which would need voter approval in November, could face opposition from two of the state's most politically powerful groups: teachers and gaming tribes.

The California Teachers Association did not support the 1984 initiative and always has had a love-hate relationship with the lottery. The union feared that lottery sales pitches would lead people to believe schools are adequately funded.

"We get that all the time," CTA president David Sanchez said in a recent interview.

Sanchez said the teachers would follow their usual decision-making process if a lottery measure is placed on the ballot. The teachers seem likely to oppose the bonds if schools are not protected.

Legislators have warned that a lottery bond measure could be sunk by opposition from wealthy gaming tribes, who might fear greater competition for the gambling dollar.

The tribes are being assured that a push to increase lottery sales would not include video lottery terminals, which are used by some state lotteries and are said to be much like slot machines.

One of the few comments from tribes is that bonds are a better plan than the governor's original proposal to lease the lottery to a private operator for a large lump sum, perhaps as much as $37 billion.

This billboard in National City is part of the state lottery's effort to highlight recent local winners.Presumably, a lottery operated by the state would be more responsive to complaints from tribes. While some states have issued lottery bonds, plans to lease lotteries in other states have stalled.

A big question is whether lottery sales can be doubled to pay off a $15 billion bond. Doubts caused Hill to recommend a $5.6 billion bond.

Schwarzenegger argues that the lottery is underperforming because average per capita sales were $88 in 2006, compared with an average of $189 in the other 40 state lotteries and $225 in the 10 most populous states.

Average per capita lottery sales were $110 in the states west of the Mississippi, where lottery-playing is not a long tradition. An administration official argued that the key comparison is with the 10 big states.

Schwarzenegger's plan is based on boosting lottery sales to the national average, doubling the current revenue and creating a new stream of revenue, $1.2 billion a year, that could be used to pay off the bond.

A report issued last fall by the Milken Institute in Santa Monica said current rules prevent the lottery from increasing payouts, building reserves to invest in new games and more marketing, and using new technology.

Massachusetts has the highest per capita sales, $707, of any state lottery that does not use video lottery terminals, said the report. Its payout rate in prizes is about 70 percent of revenue, compared with 54 percent in California.

"Increasing payouts is a big deal and is probably the one thing that can affect sales the most," said Borucki, the lottery director.

Some of the suggestions for boosting sales: ticket-vending machines that give change and could be placed in stores, pushing tickets by Internet and cell phone, and selling ad space on lottery tickets.

"It's very valuable real estate," Borucki said of the rates that could be charged for placing ads on tickets.

Another hurdle for the governor's bond proposal: major differences with the Assembly Democratic plan.

Schwarzenegger needs $5 billion from the lottery bonds to balance his proposed budget for the new fiscal year that begins July 1. Assembly Democrats need $3.6 billion from the bonds to balance their budget plan. That's not such a big deal.

But the governor wants to use the remainder of the $15 billion to build a reserve. Money would be put into the reserve automatically in good times, which could soften cuts needed when a slowing economy produces less tax revenue. That also would serve as a spending cap - something Democrats oppose.

Instead of a reserve, Assembly Democrats want to use the bulk of the $15 billion to pay off debt run up in recent years, including money owed to schools.

What would happen if voters reject the lottery bonds in November? The governor's backstop is a temporary one-cent increase in the sales tax, opposed by Republican legislators.

The backstop in the Assembly Democratic proposal, still a sketchy outline like the governor's plan, could be a combination of tax increases, spending cuts and short-term loans.

But even if approved by voters in November, some legislators do not think the lottery bonds could be sold in time to provide money before the new fiscal year ends next June.

"We don't think it's workable," the Senate budget committee chairwoman, Denise Ducheny, D-San Diego, said of the plans by the governor and Assembly Democrats to base the new budget on revenue from lottery bonds.

The Schwarzenegger administration cited a bill introduced in February, SB 1679 by Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, as an example of legislative interest in boosting lottery sales to finance bonds.

But Florez had his own view of how lottery bonds should be used. He said it was a kind of "education plus" proposal for a large fund to offer needy students a free college education.

"We wanted to put $15 billion into an endowment fund," Florez said.

Thanks to Hosni for the tip.

Union-Tribune

We'd love to see your comments here!  Register for a FREE membership — it takes just a few moments — and you'll be able to post comments here and on any of our forums. If you're already a member, you can Log In to post a comment.

10 comments. Last comment 8 years ago by DC81.
Page 1 of 1
Avatar
Northern California
United States
Member #19948
August 9, 2005
151 Posts
Offline
Posted: June 24, 2008, 8:42 pm - IP Logged

The billboard campaign is a farce - it will have no measurable impact.

 

This article is typical  - it scrapes the surface but doesn't give a lot of the real fundamentals about this issue.

 

The teachers will not support anything that doesn't guarantee their union more money - period. If they even "abstain" (go neutral) the measure will not pass.

 

Ahhhhnuld doesn't have a clue either. He surrounds himself with people who tell him what he wants to hear. In the end, this thing will fail and they will "regretfully" inform us that the state sales tax has to go up by about 15% and that they are raising a buttload of fees ('cuz taxes take a 2/3 vote and they won't get that) just so the "waste express" can keep on chugging along.

 

I know "net" etiquette says never talk about religion or politics but this whole thing makes me boiling mad. I love my state and I remember when we led the nation in many quantifiable ways (schools, infrastructure, delivery of public services). Now, CA is a joke. I will not retire here.

    konane's avatar - wallace
    Atlanta, GA
    United States
    Member #1265
    March 13, 2003
    3333 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: June 24, 2008, 11:00 pm - IP Logged

    When states allow lotteries a higher percentage of ticket sales for prizes then players will buy more tickets.

    Good luck to everyone!

      jackpotismine's avatar - kanji for_peace.jpg
      Kunming
      China
      Member #57910
      January 23, 2008
      3626 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: June 24, 2008, 11:25 pm - IP Logged

      When states allow lotteries a higher percentage of ticket sales for prizes then players will buy more tickets.

      The government just don't get it. The more the "average" person wins the more they will play. It's just common sense. If you play and play and play and NEVER win why should you keep spending money especially giving the economy situation. They don't really care anyway because they are filthy rich. What a Joke!

      Play to win!

        barbos's avatar - gold bar-and-cash1.jpg
        California
        United States
        Member #23908
        October 17, 2005
        122 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: June 25, 2008, 4:57 am - IP Logged

          It is just waste of money.  I already saw those billboards and don't believe telling how many players won one or a couple bucks can boost a lottery sales.  The California Lottery already did it's best by allowing the anonymous prize claiming - that one in my opinion was a far better step, even though I don't remember it widely advertised. Now all they can do is wait for the gas price to get lower - if ever.

          Avatar
          Entertaiment Capital
          United States
          Member #37800
          April 19, 2006
          302 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: June 27, 2008, 2:39 am - IP Logged

           You know what guys... Now it's time to point out the most frustrating problem with California Lottery.

           The jackpot increase rate of Super Lotto Plus is the biggest problem. It's painfully slow. Although there is Mega Millions, there is absolutely no guarantee that there will be jackpot winners from California every time. Well, I have no problem with Mega Millions being played in Cali itself, but it's eating away the jackpot increase rate of Super Lotto Plus.

            fja's avatar - gnome1

            United States
            Member #91
            January 19, 2002
            11927 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: June 27, 2008, 9:44 am - IP Logged

            It sure doesn't help lottery sales when you have multiple second prize winners in Mega millions and the winners only get $33,000 each in parimutual prize money while all other states pay out $250,000 per ticket. 

            "Everybody has to believe in something...I believe I'll have another beer!"   = W.C.Fields                      

              barbos's avatar - gold bar-and-cash1.jpg
              California
              United States
              Member #23908
              October 17, 2005
              122 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: June 29, 2008, 12:19 am - IP Logged

              It sure doesn't help lottery sales when you have multiple second prize winners in Mega millions and the winners only get $33,000 each in parimutual prize money while all other states pay out $250,000 per ticket. 

              Well for that the next MM second prize will be about 700 000.  Good luck!

                Avatar
                Northern California
                United States
                Member #19948
                August 9, 2005
                151 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: June 30, 2008, 12:05 pm - IP Logged

                That and the fact that annuity factors are so low.

                 

                Annuity factors are the multiplier that Lotterys apply to the $$$ in the top prize pool to arrive at the advertised jackpot.

                 

                If the annuity factor is 2.0, then $20 million in the top prize pool = an advertised jackpot of $40 million. AF's can and have been 2.0 or better.

                 

                I think recently the annuity factors are more like 1.6 - so it takes a lot for $$$ for the jackpot to rise.

                 

                MM is certainly part of the issue. I think and equally big impact comes from no one ever knowing what a prize will be. Our wonderful Supreme Court thinks its their job to redefine everything (no, I'm not talking about marriage, I'm talking about what makes a lottery game).

                 

                No other lottery I know of, domestically or internationally, defines a lottery game they way our Supreme's did.

                  lottocalgal's avatar - Lottery-043.jpg
                  CA
                  United States
                  Member #57222
                  December 23, 2007
                  587 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: July 3, 2008, 10:00 am - IP Logged

                  I have a sure fire way to increase my lottery playing, STOP BEING STINGY ON THE PAYOUTS, CALIFORNIA!

                  And for the scratchers, which I have stopped buying alltogether,  MAKE IT SO THE PAYOUT ODDS ARE BETTER!  Not much, just enough.  The California scratchers are pathetic.  Ive seen a few tickets where the odds of winning ANY money amount are  14 to 1. and we know that means  spending $14 to win $1.

                  California always finds ways to get us to purchase more except the one that means the most.

                  Let's try this....
                  Stop spending money on  advertising and office parties and put that money into more winning tickets (And I don't mean "free tickets play").

                  THERE, PROBLEM SOLVED.

                    DC81's avatar - batman39
                    MI
                    United States
                    Member #54830
                    August 31, 2007
                    985 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: July 3, 2008, 1:38 pm - IP Logged

                    CA could really stand to get rid of the Paramutual winnings but the work required to be able to do that would probably be significant and a big pain in the arse seeing that it's in the state's constitution IIRC..

                    You can't predict random.