40% is not enough!

Reply #55

CASH Only — Mon, 25 Jul 2005 13:38:13 GMT

NY Lotto is NEVER a bargain! I'm still only playing $1.

Reply #54

Todd — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 22:18:43 GMT

I agree, NY Lotto is AWE$OME at $1 for 2 tickets. Buy extra tickets this drawing

Reply #53

JimmySand9 — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 22:05:39 GMT

The biggest jackpot in the nation, unfortunately also subject to some of the most punitive taxes in the nation. Still, get your tickets. And wheelers and big dealers, remember, 2 plays for a buck

Reply #52

CASH Only — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 17:44:33 GMT

tn:NY Lotto is a bad game because the lower prizes $uck

Reply #51

Tnplayer805 — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:33:35 GMT

Not bad for an instate lotto game. (The Jackpot amount

Reply #50

Todd — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:27:46 GMT

NY Lotto Jackpot for Tonight:$52 MillionNew Yorkers, Don't forget to buy your Lotto tickets

Reply #49

CASH Only — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:43:39 GMT

Unfortunately somebody (from OH) hit Mega.

Reply #48

CASH Only — Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:11:03 GMT

Don't play more than $1

Reply #47

JAG331 — Sun, 17 Jul 2005 19:45:40 GMT

I'm workin on it

Reply #46

Maverick — Sun, 17 Jul 2005 19:44:10 GMT

Well if you insist, then allow me

Reply #45

CASH Only — Sun, 17 Jul 2005 16:56:11 GMT

I wish somebody would hit this stupid game.

Reply #44

JimmySand9 — Sat, 16 Jul 2005 15:41:21 GMT

That's a good question. It's always been 40%. It's probably to maximize proceeds to education.

Reply #43

Just6ntlc — Sat, 16 Jul 2005 15:33:15 GMT

Why NY's Lotto payout is 40% or less? I think cash option is best.

Reply #42

CASH Only — Sat, 16 Jul 2005 14:54:17 GMT

just6:The 40% is the payout percentage, NOT the cash value of the annuity.

Reply #41

Just6ntlc — Sat, 16 Jul 2005 02:22:11 GMT

If my family lived in NY to play NY Lotto, I would go for payments, not cash value at 40% before federal taxes.

Reply #40

CASH Only — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:32:09 GMT

I played only $1 at $46m and will play only $1 for Saturday.

Reply #39

CASH Only — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 19:36:37 GMT

just6:The 40% in this thread is referring to my NY Lotto's terrible payback %, rather than the % of the annuity that is the cash option.

Reply #38

Just6ntlc — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 04:13:51 GMT

I definately do especially how the jackpots are starting to fall in CA SLP. Since in it's 6th rollover, it's only at 24 million. I like the cash option when it's above 50% before federal taxes. 40% is too little.

Reply #37

CASH Only — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:46:52 GMT

Let it go to someone else (who prefers cash).

Reply #36

Maverick — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:43:10 GMT

I meant the BIG hit could be yours.

Reply #35

CASH Only — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:39:33 GMT

Night neighbor? What do you mean

Reply #34

Maverick — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:35:43 GMT

But it could be your night neighbor.

Reply #33

CASH Only — Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:40:48 GMT

Not even at $46m.

Reply #32

Maverick — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 06:13:00 GMT

Reply #31

Todd — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 01:04:50 GMT

Reply #30

Maverick — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 00:09:23 GMT

Reply #29

CASH Only — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 15:18:16 GMT

I told you I'm not playing.

Reply #28

dvdiva — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 05:53:52 GMT

Only if they offer a cash prize for it.

Reply #27

Rip Snorter — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 21:05:39 GMT

That's good to remember when we get lost in all this lottery mix. That's a fact....I don't know what the penalty is in NY for forgetting to appear for jury duty, but most places the law gets its feelings badly bruised when it happens.... tend to come down hard on that brand of forgetfulness.Jack

Reply #26

Maverick — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 21:03:08 GMT

Oh c'mon CO. At $42 million+, I know you're gonna play

Reply #25

Maverick — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 21:01:35 GMT

I agree.

Reply #24

Maverick — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 21:00:12 GMT

That's good to remember when we get lost in all this lottery mix.

Reply #23

Maverick — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 20:57:42 GMT

Unfortunately, that's very true. It all goes back to why. Because no where else can a person bet only $1 and have a chance at multi-millions.

Reply #22

CASH Only — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:53:10 GMT

Another reason not to play NY Lotto: I have jury duty next week.

Reply #21

CASH Only — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:36:19 GMT

Reply #20

JimmySand9 — Sun, 05 Jun 2005 05:46:56 GMT

And keep in mind that the lottery brass would probably want to increase the payouts. But the problem lies in NY State legistature. They won't let them increase the payouts. So if you want to complain, complain to your local state congressperson. And complain often.

Reply #19

RJOh — Sun, 05 Jun 2005 04:14:46 GMT

I think CASH Only was referring to the percent of tickets sales that goes toward prize money, not the amount of taxes that has to be paid on the prizes. To me a jackpot of $20M is the same regardless of the number of tickets sold to create the jackpot. $50M or $75M in tickets sales makes no difference to me if I'm willing to buy a ticket.RJOh

Reply #18

Rip Snorter — Sun, 05 Jun 2005 03:18:37 GMT

Rick:Yep, it is a fact. And reducing the odds by half when those odds are a million to one wouldn't help an awfully lot in any case. Still, I like the 5 plus ones. Matter of personal tastes, thinks I.Jack

Reply #17

dvdiva — Sun, 05 Jun 2005 01:19:44 GMT

If you really care than it would be cash at once and tax free. That's the only way you're getting your money's worth. Otherwise you only get 1/3 of the prize irrigardless of the payout percent.

Reply #16

Rick G — Sun, 05 Jun 2005 00:33:15 GMT

Ha, I have to laugh at those who think that lower tier prizes on the jackpot games or scratch-off games are fairer payoff-to-odds than the pick 3 or pick 4.Good luck!!! It might be a good idea to look at the odds on the back of the bet slip or scatch off ticket.Buying two tickets does not lower your odds by half. It lowers your odds by one. Do the math. The state would love you to think that the second ticket lowered your odds by half, but it hasn't. It's only lowered your odds by total numb... [ More ]

Reply #15

emilyg — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 23:22:03 GMT

if you're looking for the lottery to set you up for life - you're dreaming. i would continue playing - it's fun and any extra money is just that.

Reply #14

Rip Snorter — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 23:16:07 GMT

Rich:That's a worthy observation. But if a person is inclined to the other side of the equation, if a person just doesn't give too much of a damn, he can bet'em high and not let himself be too disaffected if he has to stake out a soft spot of concrete under a bridge until his fortunes improve.It all counts off three-score and ten and it might be he'd learn something worth knowing about this reality, sleeping under a bridge. I'm not so sure a lot of folks couldn't learn more by sleeping in the g... [ More ]

Reply #13

four4me — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 22:35:25 GMT

I agree kinda with Rjoh people are playing to win and could care less about percentages and taxes. And if i win i'll be happy for that. It's the tax that hurts. However i will figure out a way to make the money work for me and get that which they took back some how. The point in playing is to win. I live in maryland buy the time they take local and state tax they get nearly half. So if they reduced the amount i think there would be an uprising our pay outs are allready pitifull. people have alre... [ More ]

Reply #12

Rick G — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 22:07:56 GMT

Keep it cheap and you won't weep.

Reply #11

Rip Snorter — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 21:59:48 GMT

so if i win a 10 million dollar jackpot i only get 4mil after all taxes get taken....danm, i thought it would be about 7 mil or 6 at least.......that glass is half full alright, half full of nothing xsmega:you could always tell them to keep their piddling 4 mill, go back to whatever you were doing before you won a jackpot, minus spending money on tickets. That's the available alternative. They own the racetrack, they own the horses and they own the dollars you spend, not to put too heavy a bu... [ More ]

Reply #10

Rick G — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 21:56:55 GMT

Anything more than a 50% vig or take would be unacceptable to me.Scratch-off tickets and lower-tier jackpot games payoffs take should be illegal.I'll stick with the pick 3 and when that goes to more than 50% take I'll go back to the ponies with an 18% take. Casinos are only taking 8% of your money but the volume of bets in a two-hour visit to the casino far exceeds a visit to the lottery terminal or mutuel clerk at the track.

Reply #9

Xsmega — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 21:18:30 GMT

so if i win a 10 million dollar jackpot i only get 4mil after all taxes get taken....danm, i thought it would be about 7 mil or 6 at least.......that glass is half full alright, half full of nothing

Reply #8

JimmySand9 — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 20:14:10 GMT

I don't really care about games with low payouts (although I care about games with higher payouts, woo-hoo!). I like NY Lotto because you get two plays for a dollar, and jackpots do get big. And even though you can't say the same for the lower payouts, it's better than nothing. Look at it half full.

Reply #7

Rip Snorter — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 19:27:11 GMT

After thinking about it a while I'll add that the bean-counter MBAs are probably working three shifts toiling over the question, trying to figure out how low they can go in payouts before people quit buying tickets. Trying to find the exact balance between the illusion-amount they post on the billboards and what they think will inspire enough hopes in the non-winners when they read about it in the papers to keep them in the game. Whatever that percentage turns out to be is probably where they'l... [ More ]

Reply #6

Rip Snorter — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 18:43:20 GMT

Lottomike:I'm not sure how low the payouts would have to be before I'd cease to feel grateful for them and begin feeling resentment that they weren't larger. Thus far it hasn't happened to me, but my wins haven't been so large as to place me into that piece of the population who had so much as to not be grateful for whatever it happened to be.It's difficult to imagine myself feeling differently if the win was a jackpot, but I suppose I might.But in answer to the other part of your question, I t... [ More ]

Reply #5

Whirlwind — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 18:32:58 GMT

Iplay because I enjoy the challenge of trying to win. The money is a bonus. SO I would play either way. Don't get me wrong I would love a big pay out just as much as anyone, oh yeah. But I think I would keep playing.

Reply #4

dboz7 — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 18:06:15 GMT

NO WAY would I play..... the states vig is already ridiculus at 50% (PK3 PK4 games) I go back to my example of, suppose you had a game with only 4 numbers that cost $100 each, if you bought 2 of em you would only have a 50% chance of breaking even....

Reply #3

konane — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 18:03:55 GMT

Lotteries need to follow FL's example by making payout % higher. Greed whether expressed in higher taxes or lower lottery payouts irks people who carefully look at their return for $ spent. Besides lotteries are a voluntary form of taxation.

Reply #2

RJOh — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 17:41:50 GMT

People who play lotteries because of their jackpot size don't care about the payout percentages.RJOh

Reply #1

bks2 — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 17:05:26 GMT

I'd still play I would just not play as often till the jackpots were at playable amounts. The lottery has the upper hand, if you want a chance at big bucks you have to play, people would play if the payout was 20%.

40% is not enough!

CASH Only — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 14:11:01 GMT

This question asks if you would stop playing your favorite lottery game if the payout was reduced from 50% (or more) to 40%. Remember NY Lotto has a payout of only 38%-40%.