Company proposes new pooling lottery ticket to fight 'jackpot fatigue'

Comment #13

CASH Only — Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:42:33 GMT

Petition Tennesee/North Carolina to join MUSL Hot Lotto. If it comes to either state, the jackpot probably would have longer odds by then.

Comment #12

tony95 — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:43:46 GMT

I wrote to all of the powerball state lottery representatives and warned them about this problem when they raised the powerball odds from an astronomical 120million to 1 to the statistically impossible 145million to 1. When the odds are raised people expect higher jackpots and when it takes forever for the pot to build up to the expected level, then sales are going to drop. The pool solution is something I would never participate in simply because it's another hand in the player's money. My s... [ More ]

Comment #11

savagegoose — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:06:54 GMT

this is a good plan , but here in sth oz we've been able to do this sort of thingsince the new terminals where installed.

u know how some stores run syndicates, well the terminall produces a syndicate of any size u like it to.

and as ea player joins they print a shared ticket.

ea player gets their own sydicated ticket, and its worth their share of the syndicate.

ie if it was a $100 entry and 10 people where in hed pay $10 and have a 1/10th prize

he dont even me... [ More ]

Comment #10

Greg — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 02:29:09 GMT

Jackpot Fatigue is caused by one problem only: Jackpot games that have impossible odds such as PowerRip and MegaRip.

Change the number field, even if it means playing for $5,000,000 per drawing and you will draw players.

If you lower the number field, the players will purchase tickets. - from Number Field of Dreams

Comment #9

rdc137 — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 15:19:03 GMT

The more monopolistic the lotteries get (no online gambling despite the fact I don't) and the harder the games get to win, the less interested I have become. Not long ago I posted I wouldn't be buying PA tickets anymore and I don't miss it at all. I get my Powerball tickets and that's about it. In fact, I'm considering axing lottery outright because of the way it's being handled lately.

Comment #8

pumpi76 — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 02:32:59 GMT

LUcky lary, dude you made me laugh, it was funny LOL...

More important than winning the state's lottery is the movie Red Planet.. ...

Comment #7

LckyLary — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 23:17:50 GMT

The only FATIGUE I got was in my legs from standing on line for 3 hours in Connecticut back in 1998. The best way to drum up more sales is to make online play fully legalized and STOP ADDING MORE BALLS

Comment #6

RJOh — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 18:16:31 GMT

According to their news release at: http://www.poolingplus.com/news1

RMS came up with the marketing idea and name and trade marked it. They wrote a program to do a web survey that lotteries can download but they are expecting lotteries or their vendors to write the software to make the idea work and I assume pay them a royalty fee for using it.

In another LP thread a member asked how he could protect his intellectual property, share it and profit from it at the same time, reading this artic... [ More ]

Comment #5

BaristaExpress — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:02:56 GMT

You know who's 50% would be shared The players 50%

You can bet the states won't give up any part of their 50%. And to come to think of it Powerball is less than 50% going to the players as it is now because of the power play option!

I SAY NO TO ANY NATIONAL LOTTERY POOL OR STATE LOTTERY POOLS

Comment #4

RJOh — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:43:15 GMT

There's no such thing as something for nothing. The states now take 50% of sales for themselves leaving 50% to be split among the players who match 3 or more numbers. Now that Relationship Marketing Systems wants a piece of the pie, which 50% are they going to share?

Ohio tried that marketing strategy with Lot'O Play and it didn't work. They got rid of SuperLottoPlus that offered one chance to lose for $1 and replaced it with Lot'O Play with twelve chances to lose for $2. Since the amount... [ More ]

Comment #3

JAP69 — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:35:44 GMT

RMS has branded their pooling ticket PoolingPLUS(TM) because it is a combination ticket that includes both traditional 100% owned tickets plus one or more pools of 10 tickets each. Thus, a player who spends $6 could get three 100% owned tickets plus 3 pools of 10 tickets each giving them a total of 33 chances to win for only $6. Amada states, With PoolingPLUS, the Lottery sells more tickets at full price and the players get the best of both worlds the opportunity to 'win it all' through their... [ More ]

Comment #2

justxploring — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:28:28 GMT

Actually, I wouldn't mind sharing $150 million with 10 or 12 people, although winning it all

would be nice too.

Most players don't have to win hundreds of millions of dollars to see the value in playing; they just need to believe they have a shot at winning something significant. Believe me, even $1 million is significant to most people; and knowing they have a lot more chances to win gives them that shot.

Yes, Many people here have expressed this same sentiment... [ More ]

Comment #1

LOTTOMIKE — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:12:14 GMT

as long as its still a dollar a ticket i don't mind sharing 150 million with 5 or 6 people.

Company proposes new pooling lottery ticket to fight 'jackpot fatigue'

Lottery Post — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:00:16 GMT

An Arizona company has designed a new lottery ticket concept that would enter the purchaser in a pool with other lottery players, at the same time entering chances that are not part of the pool.

The company claims that the increased number of chances to win will combat jackpot fatigue, a sense of dimished player excitement over large jackpots leading to lower ticket sales.

The company hopes to attract state lotteries with its promise of higher sales. According to the company's press reles... [ More ]