Mass. Lottery games to merge, jackpots to increase

Comment #23

DoctorEw220 — Sat, 20 Mar 2004 03:13:58 GMT

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 cas... [ More ]

Comment #22

CASH Only — Tue, 02 Mar 2004 15:33:23 GMT

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.

Comment #21

LottoBuddy — Tue, 02 Mar 2004 00:10:01 GMT

Who cares? A U$50 million annuity is worth a lot more than C$2 million cash

Comment #20

CASH Only — Mon, 01 Mar 2004 15:36:46 GMT

LottoBuddy:Again, the Mass 6/49 (and 6/42) DO NOT have a cash option.

Comment #19

LottoBuddy — Mon, 01 Mar 2004 00:38:38 GMT

Unlike small US lotteries l

Comment #18

CASH Only — Fri, 27 Feb 2004 13:14:31 GMT

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.

Comment #17

LottoBuddy — Tue, 24 Feb 2004 05:49:40 GMT

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

Comment #16

CASH Only — Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:34:09 GMT

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.

Comment #15

Jake649 — Mon, 23 Feb 2004 02:30:22 GMT

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 diseas... [ More ]

Comment #14

LottoBuddy — Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:04:01 GMT

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

Comment #13

CASH Only — Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:14:01 GMT

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?).

Comment #12

golotto — Sat, 17 Jan 2004 02:58:53 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by BabyJC on January 16, 2004 When will this merge of Megabucks Mass Millions begin and what they will re-name it as?they could call the combined game Mass Lotto

Comment #11

BabyJC — Sat, 17 Jan 2004 02:50:38 GMT

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

Comment #10

smd173 — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 22:44:32 GMT

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.

Comment #9

tg636 — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 16:22:00 GMT

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 th... [ More ]

Comment #8

CASH Only — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:55:53 GMT

Can you imagine what jackpot odds MM would have if changed to include CA

Comment #7

Todd — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:54:14 GMT

Can you imagine the rollovers

Comment #6

CASH Only — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:52:06 GMT

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.

Comment #5

Todd — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:49:40 GMT

So, what state do you think Mega Millions will add? Are they talking about Tennessee or some other state

Comment #4

CASH Only — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:16:06 GMT

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... [ More ]

Comment #3

tg636 — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:06:34 GMT

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 jackpot... [ More ]

Comment #2

CASH Only — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 14:42:57 GMT

The new game MUST offer a cash option

Comment #1

vbmx — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:05:51 GMT

Mass. Lottery games to merge, jackpots to increase

Lottery Post — Fri, 16 Jan 2004 10:57:52 GMT

Lottery Director also announces expansion of Mega Millions into new stateThe 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 als... [ More ]