Could We Use Another Big Game Lottery??

Reply #52

THRIFTY — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 19:34:31 GMT

I feel that lotteries represent the redistribution of wealth. Lotteries redistribute taxes through winnings.

Reply #51

Stack47 — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 19:20:17 GMT

Good example!

Many states justified having a lottery because the profits will go to education but failed to say the profits are only a drop in a bucket compared to the states educational budget. That hypocrisy might extend to some players who justify their lottery spendings because of where the profits go too.

Personally, I don't care who gets my losses as long as they can pay me my winnings.

Reply #50

HoLeeKau — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 18:52:25 GMT

Same with lottery. Players voluntarily pay a pretty big tax to fund schools. I'd guess I'm a lesser player, and even I give them several hundred a year. Then should you happen to win they say Oh you didn't voluntarily pay enough extra already, now give us a big chunk of your winnings.

Reply #49

Stack47 — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:54:45 GMT

True government hypocrisy is funding an open air baseball stadium through extra taxes on cigarettes sales and making the stadium non smoking .

Thank you, smokers for paying for OUR stadium, but you're not welcomed here .

Reply #48

mcginnin56 — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:52:45 GMT

Another big joke are the states that sell hard liquor at their huge warehouse like super stores, like it was Kool-Aid.

My state of NH is very, very tough on DWI, takes out big ads on TV and radio to scare the sh*t out of you!!!

We have some of the largest liquor stores, both in size and locations in the nation. Every couple of exits off the highway, gigantic state

liquor store signs inviting you to stop in to restock your bars.

What kind of BS hypocrisy is that. Of course w... [ More ]

Reply #47

Ronnie316 — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:05:10 GMT

The hypocrisy is seen in the fact that the states are offering gambling in the first place.

Since when are the states in the business of running for profit operations

Reply #46

Stack47 — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 16:46:01 GMT

I probably should have said neither PB or MM are TRUE National lottery games.

If your idea of a national lottery games is buying a winning ticket in California and cashing it in New York then there will never be a national game.

You and I can both play PB and MM, using the same numbers, use the same results, and get paid the same amount, but the tickets are bought and the prizes are paid by two different states. The jackpot is created by multi-state participation but the jackpot winnings... [ More ]

Reply #45

Ronnie316 — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 16:18:27 GMT

Perhaps they want as many big games as they can get but unfortunately for them they didnt choose the games, the games chose them

Reply #44

Stack47 — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 15:32:20 GMT

I'll bet some of the same ideas for multi-state lottery games being discussed here were discussed at MUSL meetings.

MUSL currently has six multi-state games including MM and PB. Hot Lotto is played in 14 states and in D.C., Wild Card 2 is played in four less populated states, 2by2 is played in three states, and MegaHits is a slot machine type game played in casinos in three states. Those four games all have smaller jackpots but it still gives the players the chance to win a nice jackpot with... [ More ]

Reply #43

rcbbuckeye — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:20:25 GMT

Hot Lotto which is part of MUSL...Powerball comglomerate.

I wouldn't mind Hot Lotto being available nationwide. Even though Texas sells Powerball, we don't have Hot Lotto. Not sure why. It seems to only be available in states that originally had Powerball.

Reply #42

mcginnin56 — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 10:05:46 GMT

No more room for a third guy ehh?.......Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk.

Reply #41

mediabrat — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 02:18:58 GMT

It's like a Pumpi thread, but with a cast of characters that's only slightly less insane.

If you're looking to start a lottery game to rival the two big ones in terms of jackpot size, I'm not sure the market can support a third big game. You'd probably be better off with a game with smaller jackpots (say, a million dollars) but better odds (say, a 5/35 or 5/39 matrix). If you can show that multiple jackpots can be won with every drawing, you just might get a popular game.

You would have... [ More ]

Reply #40

Lucky Loser — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 01:17:32 GMT

In my opinion, we probably could use another national game of some type. However, seeing as to how players have next to no real chance at winning the active one's, the new game needs to be reasonably easier to win so more people can experience wealth. I don't see where allowing more frequent winners, with a much lower jackpot amount, would hurt because they have two other money-makers already pulling in the dough. In addition, the the states have their own jackpot and daily games which make prof... [ More ]

Reply #39

Ronnie316 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 22:43:03 GMT

WELL IT LOOKED REAL TO ME

Reply #38

mcginnin56 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 20:56:29 GMT

Reply #37

Ronnie316 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 20:32:10 GMT

Regardless, all gov. run lotteries will all be monopolized and all run the same. It is illegal in the private sector but seems perfectly acceptable for the gov. to do it all they want.

Someone had to give them permission. I want to see the permission slip.

Reply #36

RJOh — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 20:26:16 GMT

Neither PB or MM are National lottery games because all winning tickets must be cashed in the state where they were bought.

If your idea of a national lottery games is buying a winning ticket in California and cashing it in New York then there will never be a national game.

Buying a winning ticket in California and getting a check from California that you can cash in New York is as close as it will ever get.

Reply #35

mcginnin56 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:54:11 GMT

Poor choice of words on my part, should have referred to as Multi-State Lotteries.

Reply #34

Stack47 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:27:46 GMT

Neither PB or MM are National lottery games because all winning tickets must be cashed in the state where they were bought. There are other smaller jackpot games like Decades of Dollars that is played in more than one state and PB has a couple of multi-state games too. All of those games are pooling the jackpots and the jackpot winnings come from those pools, but the secondary prizes are paid by the state where the ticket was sold.

At least two state lotteries are now offering online play and... [ More ]

Reply #33

Ronnie316 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:25:54 GMT

OH, I thought it may have been BIG SIS but you may be right.......

Reply #32

mcginnin56 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:23:29 GMT

I think it might have been her.

Reply #31

Ronnie316 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:18:58 GMT

LOL. I have a question..............

Who told the government they were the ONLY ones allowed to run a lottery??

Why cant we have private run lotteries that return most of the money instead of keeping it

Reply #30

mcginnin56 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:12:27 GMT

So any dreams of having a third national lottery system, are basically being flushed down the toilet

Reply #29

Ronnie316 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 16:57:28 GMT

Thanks for supporting my point Stack47 that the lotteries are already a huge losing proposition for the public and why would we want more of the same??? The STATE NEVER CAN AND NEVER WILL do anything efficiently or effectively because THERE IS NO COMPETITION which creates efficiency.

It is a monopolized operation to start with and then ADDS the problem of being a inefficiently government run operation. Result = everyone loses.

Reply #28

Stack47 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 16:35:15 GMT

Just looking at two recent threads https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/247928 and https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/249330 some members believe PB is in trouble, some believe MM is in trouble and a few believe both games are in trouble. Because there are many states playing both games there are many reasons why one game should do better than the other at times. Last week the reason was a no brainer when the MM jackpot was $13 million and the PB jackpot was $181 million.

From the state lotteri... [ More ]

Reply #27

mcginnin56 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 12:42:55 GMT

I play Hot Lotto myself twice a week, haven't had to much luck thus far. Not a bad name, but it's already being used legally by several other states.

Good thinking however, your on the right track!

Some other possible names: Winner Take All , Dreams Come True , Instant Millionaire , Rags To Riches

Reply #26

Nikkicute — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 06:33:10 GMT

@Mcginnin56

That's so funny you bring up this subject because I was thinking that one day in the

future the lotto will add another big game so there would be THE BIG THREE.

PowerBall MegaMillions and ????

I wanted to start a thread on what it would be named.

I figure it would be one with the word Lottery in it, then I see some states play

one called HOT LOTTO. I'm like that sounds like a great name! If all the states play it

I think it could get big? maybe...... [ More ]

Reply #25

weshar75 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 03:01:00 GMT

I meant a raffle every month for $5 or $10 or $20 for the nation or another big game that would draw every monday and every thursday so sunday would be the only day of no lottery for another big jackpot game. Hope that clears things up.-weshar75

Reply #24

mcginnin56 — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 00:10:01 GMT

I was aware of that, I've played MA raffles for the last few years. I misled by saying if they sold enough tickets. My implication was that to stay

in the black and be profitable, would be dependent on their volume of raffle ticket sales.

Reply #23

Wooddrive — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:54:55 GMT

in a raffle, you don't get to choose your numbers. it is selected for you witha limited number of tickets sold according to number of prizes.

Reply #22

mcginnin56 — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:49:04 GMT

It's like you were reading my mind weshar. I was just thinking about a previous posters comments about wanting to see a national lottery

doling out twenty or so $1 million prizes every week. The problem with that is how can they guarantee twenty people will pick the correct

numbers. Enter the national raffle game, which can guarantee that, as long as they are selling enough tickets each week.

A lot of states do these raffles annually, usually around Christmas or New Years time, and... [ More ]

Reply #21

Wooddrive — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:48:56 GMT

I don't know. Is that the game they discontinued because someone figured out that if all the numbers were bought they would be ahead. or am i thinking of another game? not familiar with Mass games.

Reply #20

Wooddrive — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:45:13 GMT

i might play a raffle style game but i really would like to see MORE smaller prizes. Pa already has $20 raffles twice a year and oh boy, I've wasted a lot of twentys without even getting a sniff of the jackpot. besides $20 raffle a week is too much to spend. they already have my left arm, i need my right arm to wipe my sorry azz.

Reply #19

RJOh — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:39:20 GMT

Didn't Massachusetts try to do that with their roll down game? Every time the jackpot reached $2,000,000 if there wasn't a jackpot winner, the amount of the jackpot was shared by the lower tier winners. You missed your chance cause they discontinued that game earlier this year.

Reply #18

weshar75 — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:36:51 GMT

I know that the lottery heads are working on a national game. I would like to see a $5 or $10 raffle or even $20 raffle go nation wide to see what kind of prize you could win for your money or a big game that draws twice a week like say monday night and thursday night since powerball and mega have tuesday and wednesday and friday and saturday taken.-weshar75

Reply #17

mcginnin56 — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:30:14 GMT

That is a great idea Wooddrive! So long as there are steady sales each week to replenish the jackpot, I would definitely be interested in such

a game. Wonder if it's ever been tried out before. (without being discontinued).

Reply #16

Wooddrive — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:25:35 GMT

Whenever a game is discontinued, whatever the jackpot amount, all money is distributed, even if all the numbers don't match. Jackpot first, if no jackpot winner, then 2nd tier, 3rd tier and so on...evenly. They should have a game where all money are distributed. I don't know what the guaranteed jackpot would be but I would definitely play knowing evrything will be paid out.

Reply #15

mcginnin56 — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:12:33 GMT

That may well be rcbbuckeye. I suggested a less expensive ticket as a means of drawing attention to a new game, that hopefully would instantly

attract new players. There is a pick 5 game in MA (which I play once a week), called Mass Cash which used to be played only twice a week, now it's

every day of the week. So I can see the writing on the wall. Texas is certainly getting very aggressive in their game promotions! And like you said,

once other states see the success and prosperity... [ More ]

Reply #14

rcbbuckeye — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 22:43:52 GMT

Fifty cents for a ticket ain't gonna happen. Lotteries are looking for ways to increase the price of a ticket and increase revenue. Texas is starting a new game in a month or so called All or Nothing. Ticket cost will be $2. Top prize will be $250,000. There will be 4 draws a day, 6 days a week. You can see where that is going. Look for other states to follow suit, especially if this game is successful. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Pick 3 and Daily 4 games changed to 4 draws a day... [ More ]

Reply #13

dallascowboyfan — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 21:38:10 GMT

I wish Oklahoma had a state lotto game maybe one day

Reply #12

mcginnin56 — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 21:32:31 GMT

Agreed RJ. But most of the million dollar state games don't hit very often. My state features the Megabucks+ game which can take several months

before the winning numbers ever come up. Same with my neighboring state of MA, with it's Megabucks Doubler. The pick 5 games are a different

story, but most of those only hit between 25k-100k, depending on what state your in.

The casinos, scratchers, and pick 3-4 will always enjoy a good market share from their loyal fans.

The niche... [ More ]

Reply #11

RJOh — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 21:20:03 GMT

PowerBall and MegaMillions aren't the only games states have, most have a local game with jackpots of a million dollars or more, a pick5 game with jackpots of $100K plus and pick3 and pick4 games with numerous scratch-offs and raffles. If that's not enough ways to lose your money, some are also adding casinos.

People aren't frustrated because there aren't enough games, they are frustrated about losing the ones they play and more games aren't going to change that.

Reply #10

mcginnin56 — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 21:14:38 GMT

One lottery is not able to please all people. Were all diverse, and have different expectations of what is more important to us.

I suggested a third national lottery game to fill that void. There are millions who would be willing to invest a couple of bucks a week, for the chance

at winning significantly larger lower tier prizes. Ex. perhaps as many as twenty $1 million prizes up for grabs every week.

Maybe this type of lottery would not be for those that are just chasing the huge

Reply #9

Ronnie316 — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 20:34:07 GMT

If ANYONE doubts what it is that Im saying, consider THIS:

OUR PRESIDENT HAS BEEN AN AVOWED ANTI-CAPITOLIST FROM HIS YOUTH

AND

WE THE PEOPLE VOTED FOR HIM TO BE OUR PRESIDENT

AND

WE THE PEOPLE WILL VOTE FOR HIM TO AGAIN BE OUR PRESIDENT

Reply #8

Ronnie316 — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 20:10:50 GMT

You are forgetting that competition is part of the old capitalist system that we USED TO BE before the SSA chose the path of Socialism.

A corpoorate run lottery would keep only 15% (or less) of gross sales for operating expense and profit. That would make prizes almost endless and put state run lotteries out of business.

The federal government has around 600 departments and agencies to make sure that never happens. I'm all for it though. Count me IN.

http://www.usa.gov/directory/federal... [ More ]

Reply #7

Keke242 — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:49:16 GMT

Agreed

Reply #6

haymaker — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:44:46 GMT

I like the idea of bigger 2nd,3rd 4th prizes, but don't think it'll ever happen cause the $ would have to come from the JP,

and lottery wants the big JP cause that attracts more players,

which is their real objective.

Reply #5

HoLeeKau — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 14:29:04 GMT

Most states do a raffle or two every year, so I guess that does work, but here it takes 3 months selling $10 tickets to get just one million dollar prize. I wonder how it would work nationwide? If they could give away 20 one million prizes every month selling 50 cent, or even $1 tickets, I'd be in for a few dollars a month.

Reply #4

onlymoney — Sun, 05 Aug 2012 14:23:17 GMT

I'd like to see a lottery that takes let's say 20 million dollar JP and splts it into 20 draws the same evening, each person winning a million.

The draws wouldn't occur until it reached 20 million obviously. The only problem I can see is how long it would take for it to reach 20 million. Maybe only 10 million.