Multi-state games

Reply #5

CASH Only — Wed, 07 Jun 2006 15:24:55 GMT

I don't mind California using a pari-mutuel formula since their payout is the same (50%) as the other MM states. It evens out in the long run.

Reply #4

Just6ntlc — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 13:27:04 GMT

My vote is no only because CA joined MM and have all of their prizes is pari-mutuel. Texas should have the Megaplier apply to all states with fixed amounts.

Reply #3

ryanm — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 15:46:26 GMT

If all 12 Mega Millions states went pari-mutuel, then all the prize funds would have to be common (like the jackpot prize is), and that would create too many headaches (as opposed to the states paying the prizes under the jackpot from their own funds), so I don't see that happening.

Reply #2

CASH Only — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:38:30 GMT

California requires all online games to pay prizes using a pari-mutuel formula. Therefore the only way all 12 members would play by the same rule would be for the other 11 to go pari-mutuel.

Reply #1

ryanm — Sun, 04 Jun 2006 21:20:02 GMT

Yes, I think California's MM should fall in line with the rest of the states. However, I see no harm in what Texas is doing, since it costs players an extra $1 to multiply their prizes, so I really see the Texas Megaplier as a separate game from Mega Millions (with exception of no extra prize for match 5+1 obviously).

Multi-state games

CASH Only — Sun, 04 Jun 2006 17:19:11 GMT

Mega Millions winners in California get pari-mutuel prizes. MM players in Texas have the Megaplier, which multiplies all prizes except the jackpot. At least two MM states require the cash/annuity choice when you play.

Even worse is the new Lose for Life online game. VA winners have a cash option (which is equal to only 10 years of quarterly payments.) GA doesn't even have a cash option, and the same probably can be said of KY.