United States
Member #2,338
September 17, 2003
2,063 Posts
Offline
Under 150 for sure. You will die of old age before MM gets big again or the lotteries fix it. Seems like they are busy trying to pawn off the lottery to third parties rather than give players what they want or what generates sales.
NY United States
Member #23,834
October 16, 2005
4,771 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by dvdiva on Jan 25, 2007
Under 150 for sure. You will die of old age before MM gets big again or the lotteries fix it. Seems like they are busy trying to pawn off the lottery to third parties rather than give players what they want or what generates sales.
Cash Only, dvdiva. dvdiva, Cash Only.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with the way MM works, and probability says that it could be hit for 53 on Tuesday or it could roll to a billion or more. Both are long shots, but there is no "for sure".
PA United States
Member #22,982
October 6, 2005
2,229 Posts
Offline
I didn't see this post, but I actually predicted to a friend that it would be won again the following draw, and sure enough it was. I have seen that happen multiple times before after record jackpots. I think some people just keep playing and don't know it was won already.
United States
Member #12,416
March 13, 2005
564 Posts
Offline
No idea how large it's going to get, but I think the next Winner is going to be in Virginia, Illinois or Mass......just because I don't think they've had a Winner yet in those States
New Jersey United States
Member #2,376
September 25, 2003
582 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by sirbrad on Jan 28, 2007
I didn't see this post, but I actually predicted to a friend that it would be won again the following draw, and sure enough it was. I have seen that happen multiple times before after record jackpots. I think some people just keep playing and don't know it was won already.
I think you are talking about Powerball. This poll is for Mega Millions.
United States
Member #91
January 19, 2002
16,125 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by sirbrad on Jan 28, 2007
I didn't see this post, but I actually predicted to a friend that it would be won again the following draw, and sure enough it was. I have seen that happen multiple times before after record jackpots. I think some people just keep playing and don't know it was won already.
Twisted is right this poll is for MM....
But I think an answer to your theory is that there are probably alot of multi draw tickets purchased during big jackpots, as well as a lot of pools started...If you look at the number of small prize winners that Raven62 puts up on Md's challenges you see that there were about 1.8 million winners winning anywhere from $3 to $21 on the PB 254 million jackpot draw.....Its only natural that most would roll over there wins to the next draw instead of cashing in....thus producing quite a few extra million combinations.......
It would be interesting to see what the winners have selected on a back to back win....
"Everybody has to believe insomething...I believe I'll have another beer!" = W.C.Fields
United States
Member #2,338
September 17, 2003
2,063 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on Jan 27, 2007
Cash Only, dvdiva. dvdiva, Cash Only.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with the way MM works, and probability says that it could be hit for 53 on Tuesday or it could roll to a billion or more. Both are long shots, but there is no "for sure".
If there's nothing wrong why are lotteries like the MA lottery finally starting to realize that low jackpots equal low sales?
It's only a matter of time before a change happens to this lame game. When I'm finally right about this run, the next run and several other runs are you going to say I was right? Good luck waiting for that billion dollar run. Maybe if they switch to pesos it will be possible.
As for cash prizes who wouldn't prefer a cash prize except those unable to manage money for themselves. I think Euromillions is the best example of a lottery right now. Tax-free cash and two jackpots over $200 million in cash. I don't see Mega ever coming close to that in the current game form with a $1 ticket price.
NY United States
Member #23,834
October 16, 2005
4,771 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by dvdiva on Jan 30, 2007
If there's nothing wrong why are lotteries like the MA lottery finally starting to realize that low jackpots equal low sales?
It's only a matter of time before a change happens to this lame game. When I'm finally right about this run, the next run and several other runs are you going to say I was right? Good luck waiting for that billion dollar run. Maybe if they switch to pesos it will be possible.
As for cash prizes who wouldn't prefer a cash prize except those unable to manage money for themselves. I think Euromillions is the best example of a lottery right now. Tax-free cash and two jackpots over $200 million in cash. I don't see Mega ever coming close to that in the current game form with a $1 ticket price.
If low jackpots mean low sales how can the lotteries afford to give away $7 million as a starting prize? Most states noticed a long time ago that they can make billions of dollars on typical sales. Smaller jackpots mean big sales that are just smaller than the sales for big jackpots. If Massachusetts is only figuring that out now they're a decade behind the times.
The size of the jackpots always has been and always will be a function of how much money goes to the jackpot from each ticket and the odds of the game. There's no question that doubling the cost of a ticket would double the average jackpot, but players would have to spend twice as much money for the same chance at it. The only difference between doubling the cost of tickets and doubling the odds against winning are that with a $2 ticket nobody will have the option of only playing $1. What may not be any different is how many tickets would be sold is either change was made. There's no doubt that a lot of people who regularly play $1 per draw would still buy one $2 ticket for every draw, but a lot of the people who spend more money would spend the same amount and buy fewer tickets. Increasing the jackpots by increasing the cost of tickets or increasing the odds against winning won't guarantee that the amount won will change at all. That still depends on how many tickets are sold. The smart states know that raising the odds or the ticket cost will reduce the number of tickets they sell. That's exactly what the recent rafffles have been about. Offer good odds for a modest jackpot and settle for selling a modest number of tickets.
In the last 12 months MM has paid out jackpots of 122, 163, 94, 267 and 265 million, plus several more modest jackpots. Basically, somebody won about 100 million or more every 10 weeks. There's no rational basis for thinking there's something wrong with a game that offers results like that.
It would certainly be nice if prizes in the US were tax-free, but don't hold your breath. Eliminating federal taxes would probably be a windfall for the states because the effective jackpots would be bigger which might bst sales. Any state that eliminates state taxes on lottery prizes might come out ahead by selling more tickets and collecting 50% instead of just 3 to 8% of the prizes. Unfortunately, the federal government wouldn't see that sort of benefit from eliminating taxes, so I don't think it's very likely to happen.
be vewyvewy quiet, WewHuntingNumbers
