Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited November 30, 2021, 12:18 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Are Mega Millions sales really that bad now?

Topic closed. 55 replies. Last post 7 years ago by Stack47.

Page 3 of 4
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar
Kentucky
United States
Member #32651
February 14, 2006
9324 Posts
Offline

Well I guess I am wrong. No conspiracy theory from me. It just seems like the Jackpots are growing slower to me. One day I will get lucky and hit one...I hope before I am 80 and can't enjoy it as much

The jackpots do grow very slow, but on average about the same as in the past. There were many MM changes in just the last 3 years like new states added, matrix changes, PB competition, etc. so the only real expectations is the average sales on at certain levels regardless of how many drawing it takes to get there.

    weshar75's avatar - Lottery-042.jpg
    Mcminnville, Oregon
    United States
    Member #3013
    December 13, 2003
    5514 Posts
    Offline

    I would like to see this jackpot run go into the $300 million range at least.  Maybe roll into november past halloween's drawing because big jackpots are fun to play for especially if I win a prize.-weshar75

    US Flag

      Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
      100
      Zeta Reticuli Star System
      United States
      Member #30469
      January 17, 2006
      11603 Posts
      Offline

      Bang Head No, I am not envious...The powerball website FAQ page is garbage,  it is just liberal spin to cover for those states that win too often...I have read that page way back ago, I take it with a grain of salt!

      Now bug off, already!

      pickone4me.

      Well since your opinion overrides facts all that rcbuckeye said a few posts above is oh so true.

      Also, it's still quite entertaining that some hunyak from Wisconsin is so jealous of California winning.

      Maybe you should go to Fond du Lac and bug off.

      Green laugh

      Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any. So many systems, so many theories, so few jackpot winners. 

      Lep

      There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

        Avatar

        United States
        Member #145261
        August 1, 2013
        1740 Posts
        Offline

        I would agree but, if it's only one winning ticket cash 153.5, I hope the jackpot is hit on Tuesday.

          RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
          100
          mid-Ohio
          United States
          Member #9
          March 24, 2001
          20272 Posts
          Offline

          The jackpots do grow very slow, but on average about the same as in the past. There were many MM changes in just the last 3 years like new states added, matrix changes, PB competition, etc. so the only real expectations is the average sales on at certain levels regardless of how many drawing it takes to get there.

          I prefer to look at the growth of the cash values rather than jackpots alone because jackpots can vary with interest rates and their cash values.

           * you don't need to buy every combination, just the winning ones * 

          Thumbs Up       

            Avatar
            California
            United States
            Member #141198
            April 7, 2013
            280 Posts
            Offline

            pickone4me.

            Well since your opinion overrides facts all that rcbuckeye said a few posts above is oh so true.

            Also, it's still quite entertaining that some hunyak from Wisconsin is so jealous of California winning.

            Maybe you should go to Fond du Lac and bug off.

            Green laugh

            hunyak? LOL

              Avatar
              Kentucky
              United States
              Member #32651
              February 14, 2006
              9324 Posts
              Offline

              I prefer to look at the growth of the cash values rather than jackpots alone because jackpots can vary with interest rates and their cash values.

              I understand there is a $1 million secondary prize and some players will play every drawing just for it, but the odds of winning it are over 18 million to win and the probability of multiple prizes in one drawing depends on ticket sales. To get a 50% chance (over half of the possible combos), means a one drawing sales of $130 Million. It's easy to assume a $230 million jackpot might have enough in sales to get a 50% chance, but it's usually not even close and most of us are just contributing to a future jackpot.

                pickone4me's avatar - lightbulb
                Wisconsin
                United States
                Member #104957
                January 23, 2011
                1153 Posts
                Offline

                pickone4me.

                Well since your opinion overrides facts all that rcbuckeye said a few posts above is oh so true.

                Also, it's still quite entertaining that some hunyak from Wisconsin is so jealous of California winning.

                Maybe you should go to Fond du Lac and bug off.

                Green laugh

                Well, cointoss, hunyak is a derogatory term, since you had to resort to that level....So any argument you have just went up in smoke.  You and a few others here need to stop stalking me from topic to topic, it is getting old.

                  Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
                  100
                  Zeta Reticuli Star System
                  United States
                  Member #30469
                  January 17, 2006
                  11603 Posts
                  Offline

                  Oh, aren't you just all pc. Interesting since you called the PB FAQ page a 'liberal spin'.

                  Gee, I thought a hunyak was someone of Eastern European ancestry living in Wisconsin, silly me. That's what the cheese heads in the Army called each other. Guess they weren't as touchy.

                  I'm not stalking you, put your ego in park.

                  Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any. So many systems, so many theories, so few jackpot winners. 

                  Lep

                  There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

                    Avatar
                    NY
                    United States
                    Member #23834
                    October 16, 2005
                    4497 Posts
                    Offline

                    Alright, listen up!

                    Here is part of the FAQ

                    Powerball is a random game that knows nothing about who buys a ticket or where a ticket is purchased.

                    If the defined group buys 10% of the tickets, then they will win 10% of the prizes - on average and over a reasonable period of time.

                    Then it is not truely random.

                    Commonsense, and facts, don't apply to lottery games.

                    The more times the same state, or states win, a small minority of people are going to notice, and wonder WTF is going on! 

                    Some need to wake up, and question things.

                    If one actually reads the frigging FAQ, it is very contradictory.

                    If you want to resort to insults, because I notice something that you're too closed minded to notice, or want to think about, that is YOUR problem, not mine.

                    This just tells us that you've got no clue what random means. Random means that nothing is skewing the results that are determined by probability, not that probability doesn't matter

                    Unless you think that flipping a coin 100 times shouldn't result in about 50 heads and 50 tails, how can you think that something with a 10% chance of happening isn't random because it actually happens about 10% of the time?

                      Avatar
                      NY
                      United States
                      Member #23834
                      October 16, 2005
                      4497 Posts
                      Offline

                      The jackpots do grow very slow, but on average about the same as in the past. There were many MM changes in just the last 3 years like new states added, matrix changes, PB competition, etc. so the only real expectations is the average sales on at certain levels regardless of how many drawing it takes to get there.

                      If the advertised jackpots are really growing "about the same as in the past" that's clear proof that average sales are lower than they used to be. Changing the annuity schedule resulted in a significant increase in the advertised jackpot relative to sales, and the actual cash value is now significantly lower for any given amount.

                        Avatar
                        Kentucky
                        United States
                        Member #32651
                        February 14, 2006
                        9324 Posts
                        Offline

                        If the advertised jackpots are really growing "about the same as in the past" that's clear proof that average sales are lower than they used to be. Changing the annuity schedule resulted in a significant increase in the advertised jackpot relative to sales, and the actual cash value is now significantly lower for any given amount.

                        I though I was clear when I said There were many MM changes in just the last 3 years like new states added, matrix changes, PB competition, etc., but apparently you missed it. Why nit pik when it's comparing apples to oranges?

                        The figures I used for comparison were after the last matrix change. Ten years ago ticket sales on a $149 million jackpot were about the same as last Friday's $226 million jackpot. Sales in 2004 were around $10 million for the starting $10 million jackpot compared to $14 million wagered on the current matrix. If you want to compare the start-up jackpot, sales are now 60% higher, but lower when you compare it to different size jackpots.

                        To me the only practical sales comparison is from year to year, but even then there can be many reasons for differences.

                          Avatar
                          NY
                          United States
                          Member #23834
                          October 16, 2005
                          4497 Posts
                          Offline

                          I though I was clear when I said There were many MM changes in just the last 3 years like new states added, matrix changes, PB competition, etc., but apparently you missed it. Why nit pik when it's comparing apples to oranges?

                          The figures I used for comparison were after the last matrix change. Ten years ago ticket sales on a $149 million jackpot were about the same as last Friday's $226 million jackpot. Sales in 2004 were around $10 million for the starting $10 million jackpot compared to $14 million wagered on the current matrix. If you want to compare the start-up jackpot, sales are now 60% higher, but lower when you compare it to different size jackpots.

                          To me the only practical sales comparison is from year to year, but even then there can be many reasons for differences.

                          If the subject isn't clear enough, the discussion is about whether or not MM sales are worse than they used to be. Changes to the game may explain why sales are different, but they're irrelevant to whether or not there is a difference. Offering tickets to 50 or 100% more potential customers should increase sales regardless of the quality of the product, so sales should obviously be higher than they were when far fewer states sold the game. If nothing else resulted in less player interest in buying tickets 50 and 100% increases in the number of potential players should have resulted in 50 and 100% increase in sales.

                          The sensible comparison, and what the OP appears to be asking, is whether or not more recent changes have resulted in slower sales. All of the changes made in an attempt to increase sales. At least some of those changes did increase sales, so the practical sales comparison is from the year in which sales reached a peak until now.

                          "Ten years ago ticket sales on a $149 million jackpot were about the same as last Friday's $226 million jackpot."

                          And there's the proof. The game is offered to far more potential players than it was 10 years ago, but a jackpot  that's 50% higher doesn't generate significantly more sales. Typical sales for the newly inflated $15 million starting jackpot are less than for the smaller advertised starting jackpots of a few years ago.  In 2014 sales for advertised jackpots of about $100 million have been consistently close to $24 million. In 2011 and 2012 they were about $30 million. Even if we assume that  the vast majority of players know that the real jackpot is now smaller, a given amount today produces smaller sales that it did a few years ago.

                            Avatar
                            Kentucky
                            United States
                            Member #32651
                            February 14, 2006
                            9324 Posts
                            Offline

                            If the subject isn't clear enough, the discussion is about whether or not MM sales are worse than they used to be. Changes to the game may explain why sales are different, but they're irrelevant to whether or not there is a difference. Offering tickets to 50 or 100% more potential customers should increase sales regardless of the quality of the product, so sales should obviously be higher than they were when far fewer states sold the game. If nothing else resulted in less player interest in buying tickets 50 and 100% increases in the number of potential players should have resulted in 50 and 100% increase in sales.

                            The sensible comparison, and what the OP appears to be asking, is whether or not more recent changes have resulted in slower sales. All of the changes made in an attempt to increase sales. At least some of those changes did increase sales, so the practical sales comparison is from the year in which sales reached a peak until now.

                            "Ten years ago ticket sales on a $149 million jackpot were about the same as last Friday's $226 million jackpot."

                            And there's the proof. The game is offered to far more potential players than it was 10 years ago, but a jackpot  that's 50% higher doesn't generate significantly more sales. Typical sales for the newly inflated $15 million starting jackpot are less than for the smaller advertised starting jackpots of a few years ago.  In 2014 sales for advertised jackpots of about $100 million have been consistently close to $24 million. In 2011 and 2012 they were about $30 million. Even if we assume that  the vast majority of players know that the real jackpot is now smaller, a given amount today produces smaller sales that it did a few years ago.

                            "The sensible comparison, and what the OP appears to be asking, is whether or not more recent changes have resulted in slower sales."

                            It says "really that bad now" which to me means terrible overall sale compared to another period of time. Current sales, October 2014 are $281.59 million compared to $167.1 million in October 2013 and $142.6 million in 2012. When someone asked "how bad", we should ask "compared to what" because the matrix change is just one-year-old. And now MM Friday sales are competing with the Monopoly game.

                            "Ten years ago ticket sales on a $149 million jackpot were about the same as last Friday's $226 million jackpot."

                            "And there's the proof. The game is offered to far more potential players than it was 10 years ago, but a jackpot  that's 50% higher doesn't generate significantly more sales."

                            Where did you find those "far more potential players" because today PB and MM are both played in over 40 jurisdictions and most of your "more potential players" are those who played the other game 10 years ago. And based on what you're saying, I doubt you looked at the actual sales figures because in some areas sale appear to be up, but down in others.

                            The state lotteries probably combine MM and PB sales and see if overall sales are up or down. We can't say "all things being equal, sales are either up or down" because things are not equal. Overall sales give the lotteries a better picture and it's not like either game is losing money.

                              Avatar

                              United States
                              Member #135798
                              November 29, 2012
                              417 Posts
                              Offline

                              If the subject isn't clear enough, the discussion is about whether or not MM sales are worse than they used to be. Changes to the game may explain why sales are different, but they're irrelevant to whether or not there is a difference. Offering tickets to 50 or 100% more potential customers should increase sales regardless of the quality of the product, so sales should obviously be higher than they were when far fewer states sold the game. If nothing else resulted in less player interest in buying tickets 50 and 100% increases in the number of potential players should have resulted in 50 and 100% increase in sales.

                              The sensible comparison, and what the OP appears to be asking, is whether or not more recent changes have resulted in slower sales. All of the changes made in an attempt to increase sales. At least some of those changes did increase sales, so the practical sales comparison is from the year in which sales reached a peak until now.

                              "Ten years ago ticket sales on a $149 million jackpot were about the same as last Friday's $226 million jackpot."

                              And there's the proof. The game is offered to far more potential players than it was 10 years ago, but a jackpot  that's 50% higher doesn't generate significantly more sales. Typical sales for the newly inflated $15 million starting jackpot are less than for the smaller advertised starting jackpots of a few years ago.  In 2014 sales for advertised jackpots of about $100 million have been consistently close to $24 million. In 2011 and 2012 they were about $30 million. Even if we assume that  the vast majority of players know that the real jackpot is now smaller, a given amount today produces smaller sales that it did a few years ago.

                              Thank you. That's all folks.

                              A headline jackpot is what people see, sales should be comparable (or less, given people know of worse odds). I've played in 11 states; billboards, sides of busses, window LEDs, and the terminals only ever gave headline number. It doesn't matter that there was a matrix change (aside from what I mentioned about worse odds leading to spend less). If increased playing population and increased headline due to annuity schedule show lower sales for comparable levels, the conclusion is pretty easy to get to.