The Anonymous Claimant POLL

Reply #12

CA LotteryGuy — Sun, 04 Mar 2007 22:03:39 GMT

Hypersonig....the ability to refuse the press conference varies by state. CA is like PA where you can refuse the press conference. In fact in July a Super Lotto Plus $100 million refused the conference and the lottery couldn't understand why. Also in California the lottery will only release your name and not the city in which you live. So if you buy out of town, you might be able to stay a little bit more under the radar. As far as a trust in California, you must identify a person as the pr... [ More ]

Reply #11

hypersoniq — Sun, 04 Mar 2007 21:13:41 GMT

I would use a trust, but not the lawyer. I will claim it myself as a trustee acting on behalf of the winners and they would do well to keep me from the cameras ;-) (you CAN refuse the press conference, I checked with the PA lottery awhile back)

IF reporters come around anyway, I simply LIE to them, tell them I started a company to keep people anonymous and advertise a website (which would be built up after winning) where I offer to do it for any winner in any state for a gift of $12,000

Reply #10

guesser — Sun, 04 Mar 2007 02:59:14 GMT

CA, I'm with you, if you don't make the names publicly available, no matter who it is that won. how can you be sure no funny business went on ? I realize funny business can happen no matter what, but as you said, play by the rules or don't play, it really is as simple as that.

If you can't handle winning, then don't play.

Does anyone care that 90% of the people that win have no problems

Reply #9

CA LotteryGuy — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 20:10:54 GMT

dvdiva....sue all you want once you won. You are playing a game based upon the rules of the lottery which are approved by the state. As long as the lottery enforces these rules equally, you have no chance of winning your case unless you can persuade someone to change the rules.

Reply #8

dvdiva — Tue, 27 Feb 2007 03:26:13 GMT

The only reason why someone should have a blind trust is if they are a politician and don't want the appearance of impropriety. Otherwise you don't need a blind trust.

Personally I think if I won enough it would be in an offshore trust. Only state I play in that doesn't offer the ability to have a trust is Oregon and I'd probably sue for the right to claim the prize as I wish since it's (after I win of course) my money.

Reply #7

guesser — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 19:17:42 GMT

You have like a 260-times greater risk of getting killed in an auto accident on the way to and from another state than you actually do winning the lottery.

NO.

Reply #6

TheGameGrl — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 00:47:26 GMT

My priority in playing is not whether anonymity is offered but whether the prize is offered at a level that allows me to do well in this lifetime.

Reply #5

Coin Toss — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 00:47:09 GMT

As for the poll question about going to an anonymous state as oppossed to playing in your own state, I discarded vote. Here's why - I call it Slim Fast syndrome - here's what I mean....someone goes and buys cans of Slim Fast with the intent of substituting the Slim Fast for a meal. A few days later they're eating like they always have, with the addittion of a can or two of Slim Fast every day. hat was intended to cut down on calories now is itself more calories!

Just substitute lotto.... [ More ]

Reply #4

justxploring — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 00:31:50 GMT

Take a trip to a 24-hour Kinko's around 2am when nobody's around

If you don't already own an all-in-one printer, they're pretty inexpensive. You don't even have to leave home, just order a throw-away Lexmark online for around $29 or $39. Walmart has a nice HP for $44.88. You can always give it away later. After all, you just won the lottery! Why leave the house with your ticket, which can get lost, and drive down to a place in the middle of the night to make copies? To me, that's just pla... [ More ]

Reply #3

Guru101 — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:41:17 GMT

Anonymous in the lottery isn't really anonymous. Just because the lottery doesn't give out the information doesn't mean that a lot of people won't find out, especially the people you know. Whatever it may be, a new house, a new car, etc, the people you know will find out that your financial situation has changed big time. So really, it's not anonymous.

Reply #2

rundown99 — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:12:11 GMT

You made a good point about the blind trust. The lawyer, who is the claimant in such a situation, would be in control and not you. Money does create problems, whether the money is from lottery winnings, inheritance, or even in the entertainment biz. Each person has his/her flaw. That is what makes us human. But it is up to the person to solve the problems.

Reply #1

OldSchoolPa — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:31:17 GMT

I would say that many of these people's problems came about as a result of previously developed character flaws...the fact that they got lucky and came into large amounts of cash via the lottery only served to make them fodder for news reports. People of all backgrounds make both good and bad decisions. It doesn't matter if your working class, middle class, upper class, rich, successful business person, or a celebrity/athlete. Sure, claiming a prize in anonymity will relieve a person of some... [ More ]

The Anonymous Claimant POLL

rundown99 — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:04:20 GMT

Would you save your money and buy a large number of tickets to play in a state that allows lottery winners to remain anonymous? Read the following article before making your decision.

http://www.rotten.com/library/culture/lottery-winners