Major changes in the game in August should lure players who want bigger jackpots.
Powerball players got lucky during the past 12 months, winning lots of smaller multistate jackpots but dampening overall enthusiasm by reducing the number of huge payoffs in the $200 million to $300 million range.
"The players are just beating the game," Iowa Lottery President Edward Stanek said Monday. "We had 11 Powerball jackpot winners the year before, and we have had more than a 50 percent increase for the fiscal year just ended."
Powerball sales in Iowa declined by 17 percent for the state budget year that ended June 30, contributing to an 8 percent overall drop in Iowa Lottery profits. Sales for all types of Iowa Lottery games rose by 1 percent to a record $211 million for the past 12 months, but the other games had lower profit margins, Stanek told the Iowa Lottery Board.
Iowa Lottery profits are deposited into the state's general fund, where they pay for a variety of programs. Some programs that receive money include education, natural resources, health and family services, and public safety. Overall state revenues have increased, so no state programs are being cut because of the drop in lottery profits.
Sales of instant-scratch tickets, the lottery's longtime sales leader, led again in the recent budget year with sales of $103.3 million. Hot Lotto had the biggest increase among traditional lottery products, up nearly 23 percent to more than $2 million.
Powerball is played in 27 states, plus the District of Columbia and U.S. Virgin Islands. As more states have added Powerball, more people have begun buying tickets, which increases the chances someone will win a jackpot. However, none of the jackpot winners during the past 12 months has been an Iowa resident.
One of the problems with many Powerball winners is that the average size of winning jackpots becomes smaller. That makes the game less attractive to many players. There was one winner in the $200 million to $300 million range in the past 12 months.
Randy Inman of Altoona, a heavy equipment operator who occasionally plays Powerball, said he would buy Powerball tickets more often if there was a more frequent opportunity for super-sized jackpots worth $200 million to $300 million.
"Oh, yeah, I am sure I would be playing for that if I could win that much for a buck," he said.
Major changes are coming for Powerball next month that are intended to lure more players who want bigger jackpots.
"The overall odds will be going from about 1 in 122 million to 1 in 146 million," Stanek said. "The goal is to have the average jackpot somewhere above $90 million when won, and to achieve jackpots in the range of $200 million to $300 million more often."
Reducing the chances of winning the jackpots, however, risks the potential of alienating some other lottery players.
John Tolson, a sanitation worker for the city of Des Moines, said he spends about $2 on Powerball tickets for each of the twice-weekly drawings. He said he doesn't play more often because his chances of winning aren't good.
"I wish the odds were a bit better, and I wish somebody from here in town would win sometimes," Tolson said.
Starting Aug. 28, the guaranteed starting jackpot will increase from $10 million to $15 million. Another change will double the prize to $200,000 for players who match the first five numbers.
Two white balls will be added to the first pool of numbers in Powerball drawings, meaning players will choose five from 55. The Powerball pool will remain at 42.
Another factor that cut into lottery profits was a $2 million expense of equipping 350 Casey's General Stores to sell lottery products for the first time in a decade, Stanek said.
"All of that cost fell into one fiscal year, but the long-term benefits to the state will more than offset that," he said.
Strategic planning continues for newer Iowa Lottery games, Stanek said.
The latest product, an electronic game card known as "Quarter Play," sold strongly in a market test that began in October. Statewide sales began in May.
Some Iowans said the state doesn't need any more lottery games.
"Gambling upsets me a lot," said Bob McConnell, a postal worker from Altoona. "I think the Iowa Lottery is stealing from poor people ... even though they say they are giving it back to the community."
I hope sales in PB increase because I'm happy that there are 55 white balls to choose from instead of 53. However, I'm disappointed that the number of red powerballs are still at 42 when I had demanded 45.
I don't understand how the players supposedly "beat the game" when the state takes half the winnings everytime...
I hope sales in PB increase because I'm happy that there are 55 white balls to choose from instead of 53. However, I'm disappointed that the number of red powerballs are still at 42 when I had demanded 45.
Maybe they didn't realize it was a demand you made. Maybe they mistook it for a request.
Try putting it all in caps next time.
Jack
I've only been a member for a few days, but I have never seen such inane comments as those being stated about the new Powerball format. I can't actually believe people would get worked up over the fact that Powerball jackpots are seldom reaching the astronomical $200 million to $300 million dollar range, although there was a recent $220 million winner in Idaho.
Would you really be upset if you only won, let's say, $150 million? Give me a break! But even more astonishing is the ranting of the guy who supposedly demanded 45 red balls instead of the current 42. I guess he's not happy that the odds are an astronomical 140 million to one. He must think he'd have a better shot with higher odds. Let's face it, there's only a couple of hundred people in the world who will ever win a jackpot anyway.
Get a life!!
Once again the PB powers that be are sticking it to us by increasing the already near impossible odds all under the guise of increasing jackpots because some people are not happy with winning thirty to seventy million dollars. Come on people-- give me a break! $30,000,000 isn't enough when you make $35,000 - $90,000 a year????
I think I'm gonna "retire" from Powerball and play games with much better odds. You can have the PB and the MM game. I'm not gonna participate in somebody's delusion that it's a winnable game. Oh sure, there ARE winners, but don't confuse the fact of winners with using strategies to beat the odds of this game.
If I were King of the World I'd change the PB and MM games to a twice weekly $25,000,000 Cash Jackpot EXEMPT from ALL taxes and limit the number pool to 5/45 and 1/25. That would be MUCH more fun.
Anybody for 5/39?
:-)
I've only been a member for a few days, but I have never seen such inane comments as those being stated about the new Powerball format. I can't actually believe people would get worked up over the fact that Powerball jackpots are seldom reaching the astronomical $200 million to $300 million dollar range, although there was a recent $220 million winner in Idaho.
Would you really be upset if you only won, let's say, $150 million? Give me a break! But even more astonishing is the ranting of the guy who supposedly demanded 45 red balls instead of the current 42. I guess he's not happy that the odds are an astronomical 140 million to one. He must think he'd have a better shot with higher odds. Let's face it, there's only a couple of hundred people in the world who will ever win a jackpot anyway.
Get a life!!
Lessee. You took the time and trouble to read these posts, to digest them, to feel superior, and then to tell the people who posted to get a life? You have an extra one you'd care to sell, or are you just trying to find one and don't know where to look?
I agree. We all make a lot of inane comments. Including the particularly inane one you posted a little while ago. I even agree that the comment about 'demanding' this and that, and not having the demand satisfied struck me as absurd. But so did yours. So do a lot of my own, occasionally.
I'm not going to suggest you get a life. Sounds as though the one you have is about all you can handle.
Jack
Once again the PB powers that be are sticking it to us by increasing the already near impossible odds all under the guise of increasing jackpots because some people are not happy with winning thirty to seventy million dollars. Come on people-- give me a break! $30,000,000 isn't enough when you make $35,000 - $90,000 a year????
I think I'm gonna "retire" from Powerball and play games with much better odds. You can have the PB and the MM game. I'm not gonna participate in somebody's delusion that it's a winnable game. Oh sure, there ARE winners, but don't confuse the fact of winners with using strategies to beat the odds of this game.
If I were King of the World I'd change the PB and MM games to a twice weekly $25,000,000 Cash Jackpot EXEMPT from ALL taxes and limit the number pool to 5/45 and 1/25. That would be MUCH more fun.
Anybody for 5/39?
:-)
I hope you get to be king of the world. I think the last idea's a middling good one. It's a bit difficult to dovetail it with the first part of the post, but making sense all the way through three paragraphs isn't something anyone's come to expect in most forums.
Jack
Once again the PB powers that be are sticking it to us by increasing the already near impossible odds all under the guise of increasing jackpots because some people are not happy with winning thirty to seventy million dollars. Come on people-- give me a break! $30,000,000 isn't enough when you make $35,000 - $90,000 a year????
I think I'm gonna "retire" from Powerball and play games with much better odds. You can have the PB and the MM game. I'm not gonna participate in somebody's delusion that it's a winnable game. Oh sure, there ARE winners, but don't confuse the fact of winners with using strategies to beat the odds of this game.
If I were King of the World I'd change the PB and MM games to a twice weekly $25,000,000 Cash Jackpot EXEMPT from ALL taxes and limit the number pool to 5/45 and 1/25. That would be MUCH more fun.
Anybody for 5/39?
:-)
Impossible odds to impossible payouts? The lottery would have to have a payout around 80% for that kind of prize, and the jackpot would be the only prize. I take it you have no idea how lottery payouts work, or at least need to find yourself a odds calculator. Otherwise the king of the world might find himself bankrupt from being too generous with prizes.
I know that longer odds seem bad to the players. But put your feet in their shoes. When jackpots range from 10-50 million they sell about an average of $10 million in tickets (this is all lotteries totaled) If the jackpot is won in this range sales become lack luster. Now we know if we raise the odds longer jackpot runs will become more common. When jackpots get to the $150-$200 million dollar range lotteries sell around $40-$50 million in tickets. Now if it was your job to maximize profits to support education, elders, or whatever your lottery supports what would you do? Would you want smaller jackpots when only normal players buy tickets (We all could live off of these jackpots I will agree) or would you want large jackpots as seen before in the $200-$300 million range where the whole nation seems to be buying tickets.
Brad
I trust Chuck Strutt, who is one of the most capable lottery executives in the business. You go, Chuck.
The same people complaining about the matrix change are the same people not buying tickets when the jackpot is low. It's not a wonder that Powerball's sales are in a slump. On a federal level I would like to see state lottery winnings being tax free like in Europe so state games would have an edge over online or indian casinos but I doubt anyone at the federal level has the intellegence to pass something like that.
I'm new to this, but the bigger jackpots got my attention. I prefer no jackpot winners and the impossible odds so I can sleep at night knowing it more than likely rolled over if I didn't win the big one.
Now all we need is a merger with MM taking over PB for a super duper mega power billion $ jackpot at odds at least equal to the national population. Now that would be a lottery.
BArry, still playing California'd SL and now MM!
I know that longer odds seem bad to the players. But put your feet in their shoes. When jackpots range from 10-50 million they sell about an average of $10 million in tickets (this is all lotteries totaled) If the jackpot is won in this range sales become lack luster. Now we know if we raise the odds longer jackpot runs will become more common. When jackpots get to the $150-$200 million dollar range lotteries sell around $40-$50 million in tickets. Now if it was your job to maximize profits to support education, elders, or whatever your lottery supports what would you do? Would you want smaller jackpots when only normal players buy tickets (We all could live off of these jackpots I will agree) or would you want large jackpots as seen before in the $200-$300 million range where the whole nation seems to be buying tickets.
Brad
Nice post, well thought out comment.
Any thoughts on the CT discussions about withdrawal?
Any thoughts about whether the PB participating States ought to be consulted about changes in the game (and approve them) as part of the process before decisions are made to make the changes?
I'd be interested in seeing your views.
Jack
Here's my thoughts:
1. If CT decides to drop Powerball, it would be a blow to the MUSL, because, IMHO, they are already suffering due to the popularity of MM. Implementing a matrix change now for no other reason than higher jackpots (and a higher 1st prize, also like MM) just looks like copying, and CT should drop it. This is the only reason MUSL is citing for a change, and if CT doesn't like it, sever the ties and drop out. Of course, get voter approval first, or they'll likely piss a lot of people off!
2. All participating jurisdictions have already agreed to have the game run by the MUSL, so why not let the MUSL decide on how to run it? Because it creates control issues. PB should be like MM and have every lottery agree on any change to the game and NOT be run by one entity, rather all the work should be shared. This would alleviate some of the recent fiascos about "certifications" that ticket sales have stopped, thereby delaying the drawing - MM has never had this problem in nine years, PB has had it twice to my recollection in less than 5 months.
I just think MM is better than PB, with 2 exceptions:
1- The "Halogen" drawing machines that PB has are beautiful (See them at www.smartplay.com)
2- ALL OF MM NEEDS A MEGAPLIER, NOT JUST TEXAS!!!!
Of course, I've never hit above $150 on MM, but I still like playing it.
I think that MM will surpass the 363+ million first because of too many PB winners. PB should have increased the number of red powerballs from 42 to 45 increasing the odds of winning a prize and jackpot.
I think that MM will surpass the 363+ million first because of too many PB winners. PB should have increased the number of red powerballs from 42 to 45 increasing the odds of winning a prize and jackpot.
The Powerball should use the system that the Hoosier Lottery uses. They would make tons of money if they did--no kidding!
lol,sad but true losingjeff....
The PB/MM are like all businesses. The goal is to make money for the leadership, then the states. The player is at the bottom of the concern. When the so-called Directors see their bonuses dropping because of reduced sales, that results in maximum attention. Huge jackpots equate to huge budgets and a huge bonus. Trust me, as long as the state can make tons of money, and the employees can make a ton of money, they are happy. Right now they aren't happy. When their bonuses go up again, then they will be quiet little lambs.
The PB/MM are like all businesses. The goal is to make money for the leadership, then the states. The player is at the bottom of the concern. When the so-called Directors see their bonuses dropping because of reduced sales, that results in maximum attention. Huge jackpots equate to huge budgets and a huge bonus. Trust me, as long as the state can make tons of money, and the employees can make a ton of money, they are happy. Right now they aren't happy. When their bonuses go up again, then they will be quiet little lambs.
There's probably a lot of truth to what you're saying. Someone's making multi-state decisions biased in favor of lousy odds and unimaginable jackpots. Those decisions have to be based on some sort of reasoning, which can certainly be influenced by self-interest.
Someone's pushing the envelope, choosing to believe that there's a huge pool of potential ticket buyers out there who won't buy tickets for a $25 million jackpot, but will do so for a $200 million one. It's obvious from some percentage of the posts here that some people actually think that way. People who probably haven't seen a lot of wealth, but who evidently believe moderate wealth just wouldn't suffice to fill their fantasies. Presumably, they'd rush out to buy tickets if the prize was $100 billion, but there was zero chance of winning. PB and MM are missing a good opportunity by not cashing in on that group's assets (what they have left after they finish their dealings with some Nigerian spammers).
On the other hand, there are millions of people who continue to buy scratchers and pick 5s. A lot more will probably swing that way as the odds against winning become (more) astronomical.
I'd be the last person on earth to deny that human beings, Americans included, aren't using their gray matter when it comes to buying lottery tickets. But I'd suggest their level of self-imposed stupidity is being over-estimated, both by PB and MM, if they think the reason Americans aren't buying tickets for those two big multis involves prizes being too small.
Even though self-interest on the part of lottery officials might well give them a reason for believing it, or hoping it's so.
Jack
The same people complaining about the matrix change are the same people not buying tickets when the jackpot is low. It's not a wonder that Powerball's sales are in a slump. On a federal level I would like to see state lottery winnings being tax free like in Europe so state games would have an edge over online or indian casinos but I doubt anyone at the federal level has the intellegence to pass something like that.
The same people complaining about the matrix change are the same people not buying tickets when the jackpot is low. It's not a wonder that Powerball's sales are in a slump. On a federal level I would like to see state lottery winnings being tax free like in Europe so state games would have an edge over online or indian casinos but I doubt anyone at the federal level has the intellegence to pass something like that.
I agree with what you said dvdiva. Players don't like to play PB when the jackpot is very low and only play when the jackpot is very high. I'm not complaining about the number of white balls going up from 53 to 55, but I'm complaining about the number of red power balls staying at 42 when I had demanded 45 to 47. PB needs to increase the odds of winning the jackpot as close to 176 million from MM.
Jimmy Sand, you write,
"Impossible odds to impossible payouts? The lottery would have to have a payout around 80% for that kind of prize, and the jackpot would be the only prize. I take it you have no idea how lottery payouts work, or at least need to find yourself a odds calculator. Otherwise the king of the world might find himself bankrupt from being too generous with prizes."
First, I DO know how lottery payouts work and have no need for an odds calculator. Second, you'd be surprised at how much profit PB and MM make. They have never lost money. Third, you also need to know that there would be no need for lotteries if your tax dollars were used wisely and efficiently by the spenders in your government of your taxes. Fourth, the issue is greed: no prize amount is ever good enough for most people which makes the powers that be change the odds against us even more. It isn't a question of "being too generous with prizes" but of being duped into what is shoved down our throats and being made to feel unhappy with smaller amounts-- like I said, $25,000,000 is more than enough for me. It's not for you?
Everyone would be happy with $5 or 10 million. But the incredible difficulty of winning combined with the routine "low" jackpot amounts have a hard time getting people out their stupor. If I'm going to daydream, isn't it more fun to daydream about what you'd do with $400 million instead of $12 million? The power of the daydream is a big factor. The odds are the same whether the jackpot is $12 million or $400 million, so it does make sense to wait for the pot to hit a certain amount before you play, especially if you aren't bound to a particular number. Let other people fill the pot. There's not much small jackpot incentive for average quick-pick person on the fence about the lottery.
I think the lure of increasing jackpots has its limits though. If jackpots started at $300 million people would soon get blase and wait for it to hit a billion. Or say, enough of this, I worked hard for my dollar and don't want to throw it away on this nonsense anymore. The real solution would be for the states and PB to accept the profits they make and not constantly go for increased odds and annuity shenanigans to boost sales until they make it so lousy people stop playing.
One solution PB could try is to have season tickets like MA has for MM. Then you'd get people in for every drawing, no matter what the amount. I'm surprised more states don't have them.
The same people complaining about the matrix change are the same people not buying tickets when the jackpot is low. It's not a wonder that Powerball's sales are in a slump. On a federal level I would like to see state lottery winnings being tax free like in Europe so state games would have an edge over online or indian casinos but I doubt anyone at the federal level has the intellegence to pass something like that.
I agree with what you said dvdiva. Players don't like to play PB when the jackpot is very low and only play when the jackpot is very high. I'm not complaining about the number of white balls going up from 53 to 55, but I'm complaining about the number of red power balls staying at 42 when I had demanded 45 to 47. PB needs to increase the odds of winning the jackpot as close to 176 million from MM.
Interesting information. How'd you come by it?
My impression has always been the 'most players' buy tickets whenever they happen to think about it while they're in a convenience store, but that those same 'most players' remember more frequently and buy more tickets when the jackpot is higher.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I will say that I think you're wrong, that you don't know anymore than anyone else about what 'most players' like or don't like. You and I have to guess about such things unless we have an inside line on the information, which I don't, and I doubt seriously you do.
Most players, I'll say as flatly as you've done, like to win. They like to win small amounts, and they like to win large amounts. That's why casino managements set the slots to pay out plenty of small prizes, as well as the occasional large one. They know their operation would have to shut down if all they offer on those slots is a buzzillion dollar prize maybe sometime.
Lottery operations could learn a lot by hauling a few Roccos in for an interrogation about what gamblers like and don't like. So could people making bland statements about what lotteries ought to do.
Jack
The same people complaining about the matrix change are the same people not buying tickets when the jackpot is low. It's not a wonder that Powerball's sales are in a slump. On a federal level I would like to see state lottery winnings being tax free like in Europe so state games would have an edge over online or indian casinos but I doubt anyone at the federal level has the intellegence to pass something like that.
The Federal Gov't would never stop taxing the lottery, because that's the only way the federal government makes money off of it. The states, on the other hand, can stop imposing their taxes on it if they wished, because they would continue reaping the benefits of the lottery, and perhaps more so. But I don't think they'd ever stop taxing it either, because by taxing, they are hedging their bets, so to speak.
i did a poll on this,call it superball,mega and powerball combined.all 40 states.
Well you never know about not getting tax. First the amount is very small compared to other sources and they don't do it in Europe which is hardly known for being a low tax contenent.
I sure would like to see higher jackpots when the change happens and the sales should correct themselves.
me too......
In for a penny....in for a pound I always say! Eliminate Income taxes and substitute them with Powerball in all 50 states! Of course, that would mean that they would have to add about 50 more balls and jack the odds up to around 300 billion to 1 but the payouts would also be a couple hundred trillion to 1. Just think! The Government could use their cut to fund the wars on terror, poverty, drugs and build a whole new shuttle fleet for NASA!
You've named a lot of reasons for hoping such a thing doesn't happen.
Jack
This is a Powerball thread.