Pari-Mutuel Powerball

Reply #32

dallascowboyfan — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:57:24 GMT

Congratulation to the winner/s

Reply #31

Original Bey — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:25:30 GMT

Lucky indeed. 306k on top of what other states were awarded and no state taxes. California Dreamin' .....

Reply #30

Jon D — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 09:40:35 GMT

Did not quite make it this time. Cali sales for Saturday's draw were a few million less than the first draw on Wednesday, $5.37M down from $8.09M. Seems like the inaugural PB draw for Cali got a bump from initial excitement. Still running a JP deficit going into the next $80M draw.

Question is, since the Cali reserve pool is only a couple hundred thousand at this time, if PB is won on next draw, how much more would Cali have to cough up for the JP

Reply #29

ryanm — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 06:17:09 GMT

As far as jackpot funding goes, if Powerball sales for this Wednesday's draw mirror sales of last Wednesday's draw, the current PB jackpot of $80 million ($51.6 million cash) IS fully funded (sales actually support a $53 million cash jackpot, but the MUSL has to shave its jackpot to replenish its set prize/guaranteed jackpot emergency funds).

Reply #28

redhot7 — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:15:00 GMT

$1,306,323

Top winning ticket(s) sold at:

5+0 (1 ticket)

17 FOOD STORE

6522 STANTON AV #A,

BUENA PARK CA 90621

Whoever bought the ticket must be very lucky

However, number of Californians who won have declined from 123,634 from the 1st drawing to 79,644 from the 2nd drawing

Reply #27

Original Bey — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 04:28:02 GMT

What is Cali payout for the 5 +0 in PB for this past drawing

Reply #26

KY Floyd — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:57:55 GMT

PB seems to have committed a bit more to the long term results than the other games, and it seems to be working. If they had doubled the price without raising the starting jackpot they would probably have lost even more players than they did. That would have resulted in small increases, and lower average jackpot offerings. By risking some minor losses if there's a winner in one of the first few rolls they've increased their gross income compared to what it was before the price increase. The occa... [ More ]

Reply #25

Jon D — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:24:08 GMT

Well, they won't go broke, it's just that they may not meet their funding percentage. So they'd have to shuffle the numbers around and maybe pull back on some other prizes on other games or special promotions like raffles, etc.

Pari-mutuel pretty much guarantees that they'll meet their expected funding targets, and not be surprized by an unexpected prize liability that is far outside of the statistical probability.

I'm not used to looking at this whole Powerball thing here in CA, since we... [ More ]

Reply #24

RedStang — Tue, 09 Apr 2013 18:08:20 GMT

Whats the point of having this. Are they afraid of going broke from multiple winners. If we had this i might only buy 1 ticket.

Reply #23

KY Floyd — Tue, 09 Apr 2013 17:01:31 GMT

Fair??????

Not if you think one California winner should get just as much as the total that was paid to 4 winners in other states, which is what you've shown in your chart:

DATE

5/5 WINS

PAYOUT

AMOUNT

DIFF.

15-Jan

4

2000000

-

57611

=

1942389

OTOH, if you want to compare what individual winners in other states got to what individual winners in califormia got you need to look at the average a... [ More ]

Reply #22

KY Floyd — Tue, 09 Apr 2013 16:58:52 GMT

Not even close to right. With multistate games only the jackpot prize is a game involving other states. All of the other prizes are completely independent of what happens in other states.

Each participating state collects the money from the tickets sold by that state, and contributes a percentage of the money towards the jackpot prize. For PB and MM it's about 32%. The rest of the money is kept within the state to pay all of the other prizes, the cost of running the game, and profit to the lo... [ More ]

Reply #21

Stack47 — Mon, 08 Apr 2013 23:54:44 GMT

But the lottery has a budget, and somewhere down the line, they may have to trim some of the prize percentage from another game to cover the losses from a high payout P3 or other overpaid game. That's the reality.

California has almost six times more potential lottery players than the state of Massachusetts, but the annual ticket sales are about $400 million more in MA. The net profit to ticket sales in Cali is 30.2% compared to 17.6% in MA so it's obvious MA has a much higher prize ratio. I... [ More ]

Reply #20

Jon D — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 04:17:50 GMT

You are conflating two different percentages: the overall percent of revenue returned as prizes for the entire state lottery as a whole, versus just a single multistate jackpot game, which is what I was referring to.

Yes, CA lottery was 53% total percentage of revenue returned as prizes in 2010. 2011 was 55%. 2012 was 59%. Each state varies year to year, with a starting point around 50%,(and some less than 50%) and the amount above that depends largely on what percentage of sales were scratch... [ More ]

Reply #19

Jon D — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 04:04:25 GMT

Pari-mutuel applies to all prize tiers, so you would have to add them all up, also including from 4/4+Mega down to 0+Mega for an accurate comparison.

Reply #18

Stack47 — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 03:43:48 GMT

If you compare fixed prize amounts of other states, versus the variable pari-mutuel prize amounts that CA has, over the long run, statistically they will even out.

I don't know how you figure that because California ranks 39 out of 43 states/jurisdictions on the percentage of the total sales paid out in prizes with 53%. The national average is about 62%. Your chart shows only four out of ten 5 + 0 winners benefited. The odds against matching 5 + 0 are bad enough and most of the winners got o... [ More ]

Reply #17

JKING — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 03:39:31 GMT

STD

PRIZE

DATE

5/5 WINS

PAYOUT

AMOUNT

DIFF.

2-Apr

1

250000

-

201115

=

48885

29-Mar

2

500000

-

264531

=

235469

26-Mar

0

22-Mar

0

19-Mar

1

250000

-

151276

=

98724

15-Mar

1

250000

Reply #16

Jon D — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 02:31:35 GMT

Actually, you were correct in your initial assessment of CA pari-mutuel games.

If you compare fixed prize amounts of other states, versus the variable pari-mutuel prize amounts that CA has, over the long run, statistically they will even out. But it is kind of ironic that compared to other states, California, which has pari-mutuel for all draw games from MM down to P3, could be considered more honest!? They don't spend (pay in prizes) more than they take in (in ticket sales revenue) compared... [ More ]

Reply #15

HoLeeKau — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 00:30:03 GMT

Oh wait, maybe I spoke too soon. I didn't know there could be only one winner and they'd get less than the full prize amount. Hmmm that doesn't seem right.

Reply #14

HoLeeKau — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 00:20:10 GMT

I was just gonna ask if there were no winners, if the pool rolls to the next drawing. That's actually not a bad system

Most states have a limit to how much they'll pay out at each level for each drawing, but I don't know what that is. So it could be pari-mutual in just about any state if there are enough winners, and each ticket could be worth less than a mil. However, if there's only one winner they don't get the entire pot - they can never win more than a million (or two if they purcha... [ More ]

Reply #13

Stack47 — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 23:19:20 GMT

There was only one 5 + 0 last night and they only got $201,115. Race tracks take their percentage cut off the top of each pool and payoffs are determined by the number of winning tickets in each pool. A percentage of MM sales is applied to the jackpot and probably before their cut is deducted. I believe the 1 + 1 and 0 + 1 payoff are fixed, but including them, they still paid out 67% of their total MM sales to prizes.

Reply #12

Jon D — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 22:15:01 GMT

Just to clarify my earlier post: there is nothing *wrong* with the way CA structures it's jackpot games per se, that's just the way pari-mutuel works.

A comparable percentage of revenue is paid out in prizes as compared to other states. And the 5/5 is not hit on every draw in MM, it often times rolls and is above $250,000. Same will be true for PB, 5/5 will probably only be hit every 2 or 3 draws, so it will be higher than $1,000,000 many times, and higher still when the jackpot is huge.

W... [ More ]

Reply #11

JKING — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 21:46:15 GMT

If you find this upsetting like I do. I can only suggest that you E-mail the link of this thread to you local California newspaprer and TV station.

Transparency in California government for all to see.

Reply #10

maringoman — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 21:35:13 GMT

I know! I often add the powerplay and megaplier just so that I could feel I cheated and got away with it should I ever win.

Reply #9

dallascowboyfan — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 21:06:22 GMT

No Powerplay or Megaply dang that suxs.

Reply #8

dallascowboyfan — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 21:04:31 GMT

Good info Jon

Reply #7

Jon D — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 20:13:24 GMT

In CA pari-mutuel jackpots games, there is a fixed percentage for those top prize tiers, and if nothing is won, the amount rolls over to the next draw.

For Mega Millions, its about 5.5% of revenue for the 5/5 prize tier. So with an average of $3,000,000 revenue for MM, that's about $165,000.

We don't know what the revenue will be for Powerball, or the 5/5 prize tier share. But if we assume it will have the same number of picks/plays of 3,000,000 for PB, then you have $6,000,000 revenue. Co... [ More ]

Reply #6

RJOh — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 20:11:24 GMT

Will California simply split the $1,000,000 by how many 5 of 5 winners there are?

How does California treat the $250K prize won by MM players who match 5of5? Most of the times a single or couple of winners come out ahead. It's only when there are a bunch of them, they come up short.

Reply #5

Original Bey — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 19:11:43 GMT

On the advice of my attorney....lol

Reply #4

JKING — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 19:09:42 GMT

So basically, California is screwing its constituants out of 100's of millions of dollars from the non-pari-mutuel states.

Would that be correct

Reply #3

Original Bey — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 18:04:57 GMT

Correct. Keep in mind however, the individual state funds all of its non jackpot prizes.

Reply #2

JKING — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 17:58:43 GMT

So, let's say there are four 5 of 5 winners in a given state...

California...recieves $1,000,000 to split four ways.

Non-parimutual State B recieves $4,000,000 to be split 4 ways.

Does that sound about right? It would make California legislative sense. *L

Reply #1

Original Bey — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 17:33:50 GMT

The following was taken directly from the CA lottery website's Q A regarding the Powerball. Hope this helps.

12. PowerPlay: Some states offer PowerPlay and California will not. Why?

California will NOT offer the PowerPlay feature because all California prizes are pari-mutual by law and PowerPlay cannot be applied to pari-mutual prizes.

Pari-Mutuel Powerball

JKING — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 17:29:57 GMT

Hi,

Wow, I finally get to play Powerball next week.

My understanding is that all lottery prizes in California are pari-mutual. So how does that work if you get 5 of 5?

Isn't the 5 of 5 payout in non-pari-mutual states $1,000,000 regardless of how many 5 of 5 winners there are?

Will California simply split the $1,000,000 by how many 5 of 5 winners there are?

Does anyone know how it will work