Promoting more lottery play

Reply #20

ayenowitall — Thu, 27 Jul 2006 02:12:08 GMT

There are some folks who don't and won't play the lottery games because they see them as a waste of money. I don't think there's much of anything that can be done to draw them into playing.

I voted for bigger prizes because that's what usually draws out more players and more money. When a jackpot gets big enough to get major news coverage, it gets people's attention and they come out to play for the big money. Also, a lot of pools start to form when the pots get large.

I think the best sho... [ More ]

Reply #19

DoubleDown — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 01:13:40 GMT

Hey JXP, I hear ya !!

when my ship comes in, I will probably be somewhere in the mountains...

up the proverbial creek...as they say.

cryin me a river.....

oh well...whatever floats yer boat !!

guess I'd better ship on out....

....DD

Reply #18

justxploring — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:35:05 GMT

I agree with the agreement! LOL I realize the states want to make money, but after a while I think many people give up. Only the crazy people (like yours truly) keep hoping their ships will come in. I don't mind if when mine does, it's only a dinghy. I just don't want to get to the point where someone has to float me a loan.

(sorry for the pun-ishment, folks

Reply #17

ayenowitall — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 02:07:14 GMT

Much thanks to Todd for being so responsive in getting the poll choices to load so we can vote.

aye

Reply #16

MillionsWanted — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:56:11 GMT

Higher prizes for 4th and 5th divisions is necessary. The first division prizes are so high already that it doesn't matter if the pot is reduced a little. Simply speaking, the 1st division pot should be reduced and 4th and 5th division pot should be increased.

It's the smaller divisions that people win all the time and if the prizes on these levels was higher it would be more fun for the average player.

Reply #15

dvdiva — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 20:59:26 GMT

Lotteries have different audiences. Scratch tickets. Pick 3/4. Smaller local games and lastly the big jackpots. Pick 3/4 is pretty stable and adding internet sales would be the best way to maximize profits.

For scratch tickets you have to be more creative on the prizes. Local games would be the hardest since most states can't really offer great prizes. The game shouldn't approach the big games in terms of odds though.

For big games it's all about the jackpot. Perpetually low jackpots equa... [ More ]

Reply #14

CASH Only — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 20:41:10 GMT

Two things:

1. All lottery games should pay out AT LEAST 50%. This especially means NY Lotto.

2. All prizes based on annuity value should have a cash option-INCLUDING lifetime prizes.

Reply #13

konane — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 20:39:06 GMT

Well stated. If folks are winning, they are playing more frequently and spending more $$$$. It's a win/win for everyone ... keeps the $$$$ flowing.

Reply #12

bellyache — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 20:34:42 GMT

I believe that making it easier to win a prize would make more people play.

Reply #11

Raven62 — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:36:00 GMT

My guess is your figures are from a $300,000,000+ Jackpot, a $28,000,000 payout for Match 3 may be justified and supported by Ticket Sales.

07/18/2006 Drawing

Match 5+1 000,001 $49,000,000

Match 5+0 000,004 $250,000

Match 4+1 000,016 $10,000

Match 4+0 000,924 $150

Match 3+1 000,991 $150

Match 2+1 018,946 $10

Match 3+0 049,591 $7

Match 1+1 117,471 $3

Match 0+1 221,268 $2

Match 3 Payout=$2,479,550

PS: Jackpots would be reduced by an amout equal to the increased lower tier prizes.... [ More ]

Reply #10

RJOh — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 13:50:53 GMT

MegaMillions

MATCH NUMBER OF WINNING COMBINATIONS

5 / 5 +B 1

5 / 5 45

4 / 5 +B 255

4 / 5 11475

3 / 5 +B 12750

3 / 5 573750

2 / 5 +B 208250

1 / 5 +B 1249500

0 / 5 +B 2349060

Do the math, paying $50 for match 3 could cost $28M each drawing, about twice the amount of average sales. I like the PowerBall idea of adding to the lower tier prizes after the jackpot h... [ More ]

Reply #9

Raven62 — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:56:42 GMT

Higher Lower Tier Prizes!

(Example: Match 3 Numbers on MegaMillions - Prize $7,

Match 3 Numbers on Pick-3 (Box) - Prize $50)

If MM Match 3 Prize was $50 it would entice more players.

Reply #8

Todd — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:26:50 GMT

Polls are working now.

Reply #7

ayenowitall — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 08:19:31 GMT

Just a couple of points of clarification....

My wording was a little careless with #2. I actually meant to say More total prizes ; i.e., more ways to win.

Also, I didn't mean to suggest that these were all measures that the state lotteries could implement. These are simply conditions that might induce more play by more people.

aye

Reply #6

JimmySand9 — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 05:52:09 GMT

Bigger prizes:

Everybody likes bigger prizes.

More total payouts:

The higher the prize payout percentage, the better deal it is.

Lower ticket prices:

That's always nice, but remember, lower prices mean lower prizes.

Games that are easier to win:

Absolutely.

Lower vigs and taxes on payouts:

I have no idea what a vig is. But taxes are really out of lottery's control.

New and innovative games:

We've been seeing a lot of them lately, but we could always use more.... [ More ]

Reply #5

Rip Snorter — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 05:08:41 GMT

Nice poll though, aye.

My thought is that more lower tier prizes would help, offset any way they can, or need to in other avenues. More people taking home prizes and talking about it probably would do more than anything else.

Jack

Reply #4

ayenowitall — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 02:22:23 GMT

I apologize for not having the poll choices available for voting as it's usually done in poll threads. I couldn't get the poll choices to load properly when I posted, so I just included them in the message text. In retrospect, I think my firewall settings were just a little too tight. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thanks for your thoughts.

aye

Reply #3

ryanm — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 01:56:27 GMT

lol Yeah, I remember in winter 2005 when Powerball kept getting hit before making it to even $50 million, the states cried uncle and thus jumped the gun on upping the matrix to 5/55 + 1/42 (although that matrix seems appropriate now with North Carolina in the game).

Reply #2

RJOh — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 01:26:01 GMT

Lotteries are not only designed to be self supporting, but to make money and be profitable for the states which is why they don't have:

1. bigger prizes = both prizes and profits come from sales, bigger prizes mean less profit.

2. more total payouts - if everything went to payouts why have lotteries to raise money?

3 lower ticket prices - where else should the money come from if not from the ticket prices?

4. games that are easier to win - more winners mean less money for the top winners.... [ More ]

Reply #1

Coin Toss — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 00:13:04 GMT

4. Games that are easier to win.

Bingo. That would be my #1 from your list. There was a thread before about making a lottery game wider , i.e., more winners, and not just at the chump change prize levels, either.

As for advertising, I don't think lotteries need to advertise anymore. In fact, going back to the above, more winners would be the best advertising they could do.

But instead, most of them go the other way - a la PB and MM, and expand matrixes and make it harder to hit.... [ More ]

Promoting more lottery play

ayenowitall — Sun, 23 Jul 2006 19:48:16 GMT

With all of the wagering opportunities we have, I wonder if the potential for lotteries has been pretty much maxed out. Is there any way that state lotteries can significantly increase their handle?

As a jackpot player, I'd like to see more players in order to help the pots grow to higher levels at a faster pace. I'd also like to see other lottery games have more participation in order to help diminish the need to increase other state taxes.

What measures would help to increase lottery sa... [ More ]