New Jersey United States
Member #21,205
September 4, 2005
963 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on Jun 25, 2012
Sales are down. Income is up. It's easy to see that $2 PB is a complete success if you remember that its purpose is to earn income for the states.
Actually, the income is affected by the fact that the prize allocation is not being covered by 32% of sales. The effect of the guaranteed starting jackpot carries too far into the rollover series.
They did not sell enough tickets to cover $39.9 million cash using only the 32%. The actual cash value covered was around $25.6 million. They need to come up with the $14.3 million out of sales.
What they are counting on is a super huge (record or near record) jackpot. If they continue to have bad luck they may either abandon this scheme, or alternatively, make MM as bad as powerball.
Back in the early 90's California changed it's Lotto matrix from 6/49 to 6/54; sales fell; rollovers were infrequent (because of luck) and they rolled back the longer odds, although not to the original 6/49 game.
If lots of jackpots are won early in the series, look for something similar to happen.
ohio United States
Member #125,192
March 26, 2012
2,023 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Jun 17, 2012
Now that MM and PB have similar payouts and cash prizes, ticket sales should tell the true story of prices difference effect on total sales. While PB will be forced to increase its jackpots by $10M regardless of tickets sales, it will be interesting to watch MM jackpot increase which is only dependent on tickets sales.
Morrison, IL United States
Member #4,657
May 13, 2004
1,885 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Jun 24, 2012
PowerBall will change its matrix or its price before it ever disappeared and MM would have to consider if some states might ban together to create another $1 multi-state game if they ever abandon that market.
PowerBall wouldn't be the first $2 ticket game to fail and be replaced with a game closer to its older version. It happened in Ohio in 2007 when Lot'O Play was replaced by Classic Lotto a version of the 6/49 game it replaced a year earlier.
Ugh, I sure hope Powerball doesn't change its matrix to make it even harder to win, like it did in the past every time it had a lucky string of winners. Also, if PB goes back to the $1 ticket price, what's there to differentiate it from Mega Millions? PB will more than likely just disappear, since MM will just take its place (assuming Florida jumps on board).
New Jersey United States
Member #1
May 31, 2000
27,937 Posts Online
If you want to compare PB and MM jackpot amounts and increases, you can only compare the cash values. As everyone SHOULD know, the annuity jackpot estimate is calculated based on the cash that is estimated to be on-hand. Since PB and MM have different annuity lengths (29 vs. 25 years) and different payout increments (annually-increasing vs. fixed year-to-year), it is not valid to compare the annuity jackpot amounts as a raw number. Only the cash values can be compared as raw numbers.
I'm not offering an opinion as to which one is better -- I am merely saying that when comparing the jackpots, use a valid comparison.
NY United States
Member #23,834
October 16, 2005
4,772 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Prob988 on Jun 25, 2012
Actually, the income is affected by the fact that the prize allocation is not being covered by 32% of sales. The effect of the guaranteed starting jackpot carries too far into the rollover series.
They did not sell enough tickets to cover $39.9 million cash using only the 32%. The actual cash value covered was around $25.6 million. They need to come up with the $14.3 million out of sales.
What they are counting on is a super huge (record or near record) jackpot. If they continue to have bad luck they may either abandon this scheme, or alternatively, make MM as bad as powerball.
Back in the early 90's California changed it's Lotto matrix from 6/49 to 6/54; sales fell; rollovers were infrequent (because of luck) and they rolled back the longer odds, although not to the original 6/49 game.
If lots of jackpots are won early in the series, look for something similar to happen.
"What they are counting on is a super huge (record or near record) jackpot."
They're certainly hoping for that, but my guess is that they're simply counting on things evening out in the long run, and probability is on their side. The 7 jackpots since the price increase have averaged $142.7 million, so the ones that came up short are being offset by the big ones that had high sales.
I don't know how this compares to what they hoped for, but they're doing better than they were at $1 per ticket. Probability promises that every now and then they'll have an unusually big jackpot, and the price/odds says jackpots should average out to about twice what they used to. Let's see how it looks at the end of the year.
United States
Member #124,610
March 16, 2012
3,733 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Todd on Jun 25, 2012
If you want to compare PB and MM jackpot amounts and increases, you can only compare the cash values. As everyone SHOULD know, the annuity jackpot estimate is calculated based on the cash that is estimated to be on-hand. Since PB and MM have different annuity lengths (29 vs. 25 years) and different payout increments (annually-increasing vs. fixed year-to-year), it is not valid to compare the annuity jackpot amounts as a raw number. Only the cash values can be compared as raw numbers.
I'm not offering an opinion as to which one is better -- I am merely saying that when comparing the jackpots, use a valid comparison.
you are right... of course... it will be fun watching to see whose cash value rises quicker once they are both at the same cash value level... MM was winning this last time - hands down on the 'cv increase'... but that might just have been because of the level that the jackpots were at.
the jackpot advertised amounts are deceptive, since it is so easy to equate the two - is there some translation tool somewhere that can translate the jackpot amounts into similar language (other than comparing the cashvalues?)
mid-Ohio United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20,272 Posts
Offline
Now we'll just has to pretend PB didn't get won and just look at the performance of MM on its own in this range. It seems so far that MM's jackpots are increasing at the same rate that PB's jackpot would have increased with its $2 tickets.
This brings up the question why are PB jackpots seeming to get won more often inspite of its higher price and less players? Could it be players paying $2 per play are giving a little more thought to the combinations they are playing?
* you don't need to buy every combination, just the winning ones *
United States
Member #124,610
March 16, 2012
3,733 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Jun 28, 2012
Now we'll just has to pretend PB didn't get won and just look at the performance of MM on its own in this range. It seems so far that MM's jackpots are increasing at the same rate that PB's jackpot would have increased with its $2 tickets.
This brings up the question why are PB jackpots seeming to get won more often inspite of its higher price and less players? Could it be players paying $2 per play are giving a little more thought to the combinations they are playing?
I agree: sounds like the 'casual' players have dropped out of PB and now only those with '2$ and a plan' remain. :)
New Jersey United States
Member #21,205
September 4, 2005
963 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on Jun 27, 2012
"What they are counting on is a super huge (record or near record) jackpot."
They're certainly hoping for that, but my guess is that they're simply counting on things evening out in the long run, and probability is on their side. The 7 jackpots since the price increase have averaged $142.7 million, so the ones that came up short are being offset by the big ones that had high sales.
I don't know how this compares to what they hoped for, but they're doing better than they were at $1 per ticket. Probability promises that every now and then they'll have an unusually big jackpot, and the price/odds says jackpots should average out to about twice what they used to. Let's see how it looks at the end of the year.
I think you're refering to "the average final jackpot" and not average jackpot, the latter being more like $100M annuity.
Since the changover, it's reached or exceeded the "average" only twice independent of the previous matrix.
At current annuity rates, $100M Jackpot represents something like $66M bucks. The first time it passed $100 (jumping from $94 to $113, it achieved the cash value of the prize as being approximately 32% of sales. The second time, it was barely below. For all prizes won below $100M, the lottery has had to kick in cash from profits to pay the prize.
They of course, play by probability, but the probable does not always occur. This is why people buy lottery tickets in the first place. The probability of winning is extremely low, even if one plays regularly. However people are observed who do win nonetheless.
I have no idea what Powerball will do as a result of their new situation. Nevertheless the value of a Powerball ticket is generally much less than a Megamillion ticket, and I think that many people are getting that.
