Disturbing trend

Reply #12

DoctorEw220 — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:08:42 GMT

i like the instant version, but i think the online version is doomed.

Reply #11

four4me — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:54:50 GMT

ew they got 2 different version of the game one scratch off and one instant winscratch off 1000 a week for life # 505The top prize of $1,000 a week for life is paid in annual installments of $52,000 less appropriate federal withholding, which currently is 25 percent. Since the initial version of this game, Win $1,000 A Week For Life, went on sale in July 1995, the Pennsylvania Lottery has had 63 top prize winners.

Reply #10

DoctorEw220 — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 04:49:33 GMT

it pays $3000 a MONTH to the winner, not $3000 a week.

Reply #9

leather — Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:31:28 GMT

52 wks ayear=52000is this not correct not too bad,,what are the rules as they apply to the winner

Reply #8

DoctorEw220 — Wed, 29 Sep 2004 04:56:03 GMT

lucky for life is gonna be doomed from the start.

Reply #7

CASH Only — Tue, 28 Sep 2004 22:57:52 GMT

I'm not crazy about Match 6, but I would play it over Unlucky for Life.

Reply #6

DoctorEw220 — Tue, 28 Sep 2004 22:56:01 GMT

the sad thing about this game is that it makes match 6 lotto look like a game worth playing.

Reply #5

CASH Only — Tue, 28 Sep 2004 22:53:38 GMT

Keep Super 6 retired; bring back Super 7 with CASH OPTION.

Reply #4

DoctorEw220 — Tue, 28 Sep 2004 22:49:41 GMT

i plan on playing it at least once, but i think PA is nuts to do that. the odds aren't great. the top prize is one in which you will still need to work even after winning it. i could see it lasting one drawing, and then once PA sees the fact that sales are poor, it will be retired. as much as i don't want to say it, i think PA needs super 6, wild card lotto, or super 7 back. WHAT THE HELL WAS PA THINKING WHEN THEY DECIDED THAT THIS GAME WOULD WIN PLAYERS OVER

Reply #3

CASH Only — Tue, 28 Sep 2004 22:42:44 GMT

I don't mind the $2 per play for Massachusetts Ca$h Winfall's 1-in-6 overall odds.

Reply #2

hypersoniq — Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:03:13 GMT

I agree, leave the for life prizes in the domain of the instant tickets... where people won't mind paying $2 for a shot.THe only way PA is going to get the message is if nobody plays it... I plan to skip it entirely... Not even planning on tracking the numbers. PA, Stop the $2 online games

Reply #1

CASH Only — Sat, 25 Sep 2004 14:06:09 GMT

No comments

Disturbing trend

CASH Only — Tue, 31 Aug 2004 20:53:47 GMT

While annuity-only prizes are not the problem they used to be for US lottery players, there is a trend towards online games (where players can choose their numbers) offering games with lifetime prizes. OR and WA each have a Lotzee (discontinued New Jersey game)-style game with top prizes of $1000-a-week-for-life, and PA has announced plans for a 6/38 game with a similar prize. IMO lifetime prizes should be restricted to games where players... [ More ]