Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 6, 2016, 12:39 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Would You Play This MUSL?

Topic closed. 13 replies. Last post 2 years ago by Stack47.

Page 1 of 1
11
PrintE-mailLink
Teddi's avatar - Lottery-008.jpg

United States
Member #142499
May 13, 2013
1182 Posts
Offline
Posted: June 14, 2014, 1:38 am - IP Logged

Hypothetical game...Just for fun

I know many on here don't care for large jackpots going to single individuals, but for those who love to see huge jackpots, would you play a MUSL game with the following criteria:

No secondary or tertiary win levels. You either win the jackpot or you don't. If all the numbers don't match, you get nothing. 80% of ticket sales would go towards the jackpot so that there would be large rollover amounts.

Odds would be 1:120 million

This lottery would have no annuities. Whatever is advertised is what you receive (minus taxes).

Winners would have the option of anonymity but a consultation with a financial advisor would be a mandatory stipulation.

Any unclaimed wins are added to the jackpot upon expiration of a winning ticket (180 days).

 

Would you play?

    Tialuvslotto's avatar - Jailin
    Texas
    United States
    Member #150797
    December 31, 2013
    815 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: June 14, 2014, 6:51 am - IP Logged

    What's the ticket price?

    If a reasonable cost, it sounds great.  But how many would keep playing week after week, month after month, year after year of losses and no wins?  The lotteries learned from the slot machine operators that a trickle of small prizes is the way to keep 'em hooked.

      whiteballz's avatar - Lottery-015.jpg
      Nutley, New Jersey
      United States
      Member #131058
      August 1, 2012
      875 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: June 14, 2014, 7:20 am - IP Logged

      This lottery would have no annuities. Whatever is advertised is what you receive (minus taxes).

       

      would having no tax on lottery winnings be too much to ask? All the other countries in the world don't tax lottery winnings, why should we?

      .

        Saylorgirl's avatar - Lottery-065.jpg
        Indiana
        United States
        Member #129225
        June 13, 2012
        546 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: June 14, 2014, 7:23 am - IP Logged

        Hypothetical game...Just for fun

        I know many on here don't care for large jackpots going to single individuals, but for those who love to see huge jackpots, would you play a MUSL game with the following criteria:

        No secondary or tertiary win levels. You either win the jackpot or you don't. If all the numbers don't match, you get nothing. 80% of ticket sales would go towards the jackpot so that there would be large rollover amounts.

        Odds would be 1:120 million

        This lottery would have no annuities. Whatever is advertised is what you receive (minus taxes).

        Winners would have the option of anonymity but a consultation with a financial advisor would be a mandatory stipulation.

        Any unclaimed wins are added to the jackpot upon expiration of a winning ticket (180 days).

         

        Would you play?

        I think it is a great idea!  I would play I am only interested in the jackpot amount anyway not the little prizes.  The only item I don't like is the "mandatory stipulation" for a financial advisor.  Other than that I'm in.

          Avatar

          United States
          Member #145267
          August 1, 2013
          1502 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: June 14, 2014, 8:31 am - IP Logged

          No, I would not play. You have to win something to keep people interested.


            United States
            Member #106134
            February 13, 2011
            806 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: June 14, 2014, 9:57 am - IP Logged

            No, the odds are too small, it would get fleeced and go bankrupt in no time.  You'd never see large jackpots.

            Bump the odds to at least 1 : 999,999,999,999 and it might be worthwhile.

              yomibid1's avatar - binary

              United States
              Member #49322
              January 27, 2007
              74 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: June 14, 2014, 10:14 am - IP Logged

              I agree, bigbear29, and jjtheprince, looking for larger odds. Small odds, no play for me.

                Teddi's avatar - Lottery-008.jpg

                United States
                Member #142499
                May 13, 2013
                1182 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: June 16, 2014, 1:50 pm - IP Logged

                What's the ticket price?

                If a reasonable cost, it sounds great.  But how many would keep playing week after week, month after month, year after year of losses and no wins?  The lotteries learned from the slot machine operators that a trickle of small prizes is the way to keep 'em hooked.

                $1 per ticket. Anything more than that and people would expect secondary prizes.

                I might wake up early and go running.  I might also wake up and win the lottery.

                The odds are about the same.

                  Teddi's avatar - Lottery-008.jpg

                  United States
                  Member #142499
                  May 13, 2013
                  1182 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: June 16, 2014, 1:52 pm - IP Logged

                  No, the odds are too small, it would get fleeced and go bankrupt in no time.  You'd never see large jackpots.

                  Bump the odds to at least 1 : 999,999,999,999 and it might be worthwhile.

                  The odds are close to the Euromillions odds and they do pretty well, plus everything here goes to the jackpot so rollover amounts will be more than Mega Millions.

                    Teddi's avatar - Lottery-008.jpg

                    United States
                    Member #142499
                    May 13, 2013
                    1182 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: June 16, 2014, 1:56 pm - IP Logged

                    I think it is a great idea!  I would play I am only interested in the jackpot amount anyway not the little prizes.  The only item I don't like is the "mandatory stipulation" for a financial advisor.  Other than that I'm in.

                    Just a consultation, they don't have to hire anyone or listen to any advice presented. Something like what Camelot does for UK winners. Help them to avoid the common initial pitfalls.

                    I might wake up early and go running.  I might also wake up and win the lottery.

                    The odds are about the same.

                      HoLeeKau's avatar - YheaShea
                      Idaho
                      United States
                      Member #94283
                      July 17, 2010
                      2284 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: June 16, 2014, 6:11 pm - IP Logged

                      I would probably play it.  I don't win the smaller prizes often anyway, so if there weren't any there's no skin off my nose.  If the jackpot would grow quickly enough that the jackpot was often over a couple hundred million, I'd play.  If there was a second prize, that would make it even sweeter, but honestly I would not miss the smaller prizes $1000 and under.


                        United States
                        Member #124493
                        March 14, 2012
                        7023 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: June 16, 2014, 6:58 pm - IP Logged

                        Hypothetical game...Just for fun

                        I know many on here don't care for large jackpots going to single individuals, but for those who love to see huge jackpots, would you play a MUSL game with the following criteria:

                        No secondary or tertiary win levels. You either win the jackpot or you don't. If all the numbers don't match, you get nothing. 80% of ticket sales would go towards the jackpot so that there would be large rollover amounts.

                        Odds would be 1:120 million

                        This lottery would have no annuities. Whatever is advertised is what you receive (minus taxes).

                        Winners would have the option of anonymity but a consultation with a financial advisor would be a mandatory stipulation.

                        Any unclaimed wins are added to the jackpot upon expiration of a winning ticket (180 days).

                         

                        Would you play?

                        I would only play if it was RNG.

                        I think that technology is the way to go.

                        Just like FB, Twitface, and Bitcoin, I think that as long as there is a computer involved and my name is not Dave, that there can be no harm done.

                          Saylorgirl's avatar - Lottery-065.jpg
                          Indiana
                          United States
                          Member #129225
                          June 13, 2012
                          546 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: June 16, 2014, 7:20 pm - IP Logged

                          Just a consultation, they don't have to hire anyone or listen to any advice presented. Something like what Camelot does for UK winners. Help them to avoid the common initial pitfalls.

                          In that case then yes I love this new game!

                            Avatar
                            Kentucky
                            United States
                            Member #32652
                            February 14, 2006
                            7308 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: June 16, 2014, 10:31 pm - IP Logged

                            Hypothetical game...Just for fun

                            I know many on here don't care for large jackpots going to single individuals, but for those who love to see huge jackpots, would you play a MUSL game with the following criteria:

                            No secondary or tertiary win levels. You either win the jackpot or you don't. If all the numbers don't match, you get nothing. 80% of ticket sales would go towards the jackpot so that there would be large rollover amounts.

                            Odds would be 1:120 million

                            This lottery would have no annuities. Whatever is advertised is what you receive (minus taxes).

                            Winners would have the option of anonymity but a consultation with a financial advisor would be a mandatory stipulation.

                            Any unclaimed wins are added to the jackpot upon expiration of a winning ticket (180 days).

                             

                            Would you play?

                            "a consultation with a financial advisor would be a mandatory stipulation." and "Just a consultation, they don't have to hire anyone or listen to any advice presented."

                            If the jackpot winner doesn't have to listen or do anything, what is point of making it mandatory?

                            Sounds like somebody believes the lotteries have some responsibility for financial mistakes by future winners and this mandatory stipulation gets them off the hook. FYI, each state lottery member of the MUSL decides their own rules and regulations. Through the years state legislators have created lots of silly laws, but I've never read one like this; a mandatory waste of time.

                            "Would you play?"

                            Odds of 120 million to 1 with probably only one winner won't get much follow up play.