One billion dollar lottery ?
- Thread starter gman2304
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: cjcride
They should divide that into a hundred top prizes instead of giving it all to one winner.
Why should they do that? Most of the people that bought a ticket only bought a ticket because they were promised a very substantial sum of money. Is that your idea of "fairness" and redistributing wealth?
Oh and they tried that before. Not too much interest. So they changed the odds so that it was harder to win, bigger jackpots. They make more money with bigger jackpots than with the smaller ones. Not that many people play the smaller ones.
With the big ones, you get people who haven't played in 5 years spending $10....
Originally Posted By: cjcride
They should divide that into a hundred top prizes instead of giving it all to one winner.
Why should they do that? Most of the people that bought a ticket only bought a ticket because they were promised a very substantial sum of money. Is that your idea of "fairness" and redistributing wealth?
Oh and they tried that before. Not too much interest. So they changed the odds so that it was harder to win, bigger jackpots. They make more money with bigger jackpots than with the smaller ones. Not that many people play the smaller ones.
With the big ones, you get people who haven't played in 5 years spending $10....
I heard a rumor that tickets cost $2 to play. Too rich for my blood. I'm more apt to play these days if it was a buck, that's pocket change.
What'd be kinda cool is some sort of lotto where each ticket cost one penny. Think of how many would play if, instead of getting change back, they could just got a bunch of penny tickets.
What'd be kinda cool is some sort of lotto where each ticket cost one penny. Think of how many would play if, instead of getting change back, they could just got a bunch of penny tickets.
Originally Posted By: supton
I heard a rumor that tickets cost $2 to play. Too rich for my blood. I'm more apt to play these days if it was a buck, that's pocket change.
What'd be kinda cool is some sort of lotto where each ticket cost one penny. Think of how many would play if, instead of getting change back, they could just got a bunch of penny tickets.
It used to be $1 til they raised it to $2. If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
You might get a lotto that's a penny when you have $1 minimum wage. Right now retailers get 5% as a commission for selling a ticket. You'd have to sell a lot of tickets at 1 cent to cover labor and I doubt the 1 cent would even cover the cost of paper. Plus you have the same problem, the jackpot would be too small and no one would play. There are enough players at $2.
I heard a rumor that tickets cost $2 to play. Too rich for my blood. I'm more apt to play these days if it was a buck, that's pocket change.
What'd be kinda cool is some sort of lotto where each ticket cost one penny. Think of how many would play if, instead of getting change back, they could just got a bunch of penny tickets.
It used to be $1 til they raised it to $2. If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
You might get a lotto that's a penny when you have $1 minimum wage. Right now retailers get 5% as a commission for selling a ticket. You'd have to sell a lot of tickets at 1 cent to cover labor and I doubt the 1 cent would even cover the cost of paper. Plus you have the same problem, the jackpot would be too small and no one would play. There are enough players at $2.
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
Who said I couldn't afford to play it?
To me, it might be worth a buck to play, once in a while; but at $2 since I know it's throwing away money I won't bother at all. It's like buying coffee while traveling. I like Starbucks but I'm not paying $2 every time I want coffee. If the min price for Starbucks was $5 I wouldn't buy it at all. But at $2 I'll buy it. Once in a while.
I won't buy soda at 1cent/can, beer at $1/bottle and lotto at $2/ticket. Above those prices there is no value to me.
If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
Who said I couldn't afford to play it?
To me, it might be worth a buck to play, once in a while; but at $2 since I know it's throwing away money I won't bother at all. It's like buying coffee while traveling. I like Starbucks but I'm not paying $2 every time I want coffee. If the min price for Starbucks was $5 I wouldn't buy it at all. But at $2 I'll buy it. Once in a while.
I won't buy soda at 1cent/can, beer at $1/bottle and lotto at $2/ticket. Above those prices there is no value to me.
Originally Posted By: RISUPERCREWMAN
I would put this money in 100% safe places & would not invest a penny. There is no reason to invest this amount of money unless you are a greedy sob !
Don't worry whoever wins it will probably a poor persons attitude towards money and it will be gone within 5-7 years.
If I won I'd start buying real estate in NY and build it into an empire in 20-30 years worth a billion+. Good start to a nice family RE empire.
Ever since I was a kid I always wanted to own a big nice shiny glass tower. The thought of that excites me a whole heck of a lot more than any car you could buy does.
I would put this money in 100% safe places & would not invest a penny. There is no reason to invest this amount of money unless you are a greedy sob !
Don't worry whoever wins it will probably a poor persons attitude towards money and it will be gone within 5-7 years.
If I won I'd start buying real estate in NY and build it into an empire in 20-30 years worth a billion+. Good start to a nice family RE empire.
Ever since I was a kid I always wanted to own a big nice shiny glass tower. The thought of that excites me a whole heck of a lot more than any car you could buy does.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
Who said I couldn't afford to play it?
To me, it might be worth a buck to play, once in a while; but at $2 since I know it's throwing away money I won't bother at all.
Did you just read what you wrote? I believe it was you who said it wasn't worth it for you. Therefore you can't afford it. To some people $2 is pocket change they can afford to toss away. For you, pocket change is $1 but not $2. Therefore you can't afford $2 on a lottery ticket even if you're a millionaire. $2 is the price to pay for a one in 292 million shot.
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
Who said I couldn't afford to play it?
To me, it might be worth a buck to play, once in a while; but at $2 since I know it's throwing away money I won't bother at all.
Did you just read what you wrote? I believe it was you who said it wasn't worth it for you. Therefore you can't afford it. To some people $2 is pocket change they can afford to toss away. For you, pocket change is $1 but not $2. Therefore you can't afford $2 on a lottery ticket even if you're a millionaire. $2 is the price to pay for a one in 292 million shot.
What is your net worth now?
You will be similar to Trump with a glass tower.
You will be similar to Trump with a glass tower.
For people who won't or don't play, you should at least check out the local lotto store. IME the people there aren't thinking there's a 1 in 292.2 million chance I'll win. They look like they are thinking there's about a 10% chance everyone they see will win, and a 20% chance they themselves will win.
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
What is your net worth now?
You will be similar to Trump with a glass tower.
I like Trump, I have read all his books.
At the moment I'm in the mid seven figure area.
What is your net worth now?
You will be similar to Trump with a glass tower.
I like Trump, I have read all his books.
At the moment I'm in the mid seven figure area.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
Who said I couldn't afford to play it?
To me, it might be worth a buck to play, once in a while; but at $2 since I know it's throwing away money I won't bother at all.
Did you just read what you wrote? I believe it was you who said it wasn't worth it for you. Therefore you can't afford it. To some people $2 is pocket change they can afford to toss away. For you, pocket change is $1 but not $2. Therefore you can't afford $2 on a lottery ticket even if you're a millionaire. $2 is the price to pay for a one in 292 million shot.
I don't understand the terms here, sorry--I think we're using terms differently. I normally carry a few hundred in cash. I can easily afford a ticket. I just think buying tickets is a bit like setting my money on fire.
afford =/= perceived value
At $2 a ticket I'd rather eat out four or five times with my family (2 tickets per week). As it is we eat out more than that--so if I forgo eating out as a family we could easily afford to play the lotto.
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
Who said I couldn't afford to play it?
To me, it might be worth a buck to play, once in a while; but at $2 since I know it's throwing away money I won't bother at all.
Did you just read what you wrote? I believe it was you who said it wasn't worth it for you. Therefore you can't afford it. To some people $2 is pocket change they can afford to toss away. For you, pocket change is $1 but not $2. Therefore you can't afford $2 on a lottery ticket even if you're a millionaire. $2 is the price to pay for a one in 292 million shot.
I don't understand the terms here, sorry--I think we're using terms differently. I normally carry a few hundred in cash. I can easily afford a ticket. I just think buying tickets is a bit like setting my money on fire.
afford =/= perceived value
At $2 a ticket I'd rather eat out four or five times with my family (2 tickets per week). As it is we eat out more than that--so if I forgo eating out as a family we could easily afford to play the lotto.
Originally Posted By: gman2304
My wife called me Wednesday evening, all wigged out that the store she had stopped at wouldn't take a credit card for lottery tickets. She wanted to know if I had any cash. I told her I did and she asked if I would meet her at the garage door so she could go back to the store and buy some tickets. I took her a 10 dollar bill and she was back in a few minutes with a lottery ticket with 5 chances of winning the Wednesday drawing. She didn't get even one number right from the five tickets. Her logic is, 'if you don't play, you have NO chance of winning'.....which is right, but I don't like the odds.
You don't like 1 in 292 mil chances to win? LOL.
My wife called me Wednesday evening, all wigged out that the store she had stopped at wouldn't take a credit card for lottery tickets. She wanted to know if I had any cash. I told her I did and she asked if I would meet her at the garage door so she could go back to the store and buy some tickets. I took her a 10 dollar bill and she was back in a few minutes with a lottery ticket with 5 chances of winning the Wednesday drawing. She didn't get even one number right from the five tickets. Her logic is, 'if you don't play, you have NO chance of winning'.....which is right, but I don't like the odds.
You don't like 1 in 292 mil chances to win? LOL.
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
Who said I couldn't afford to play it?
To me, it might be worth a buck to play, once in a while; but at $2 since I know it's throwing away money I won't bother at all.
Did you just read what you wrote? I believe it was you who said it wasn't worth it for you. Therefore you can't afford it. To some people $2 is pocket change they can afford to toss away. For you, pocket change is $1 but not $2. Therefore you can't afford $2 on a lottery ticket even if you're a millionaire. $2 is the price to pay for a one in 292 million shot.
I don't understand the terms here, sorry--I think we're using terms differently. I normally carry a few hundred in cash. I can easily afford a ticket. I just think buying tickets is a bit like setting my money on fire.
afford =/= perceived value
At $2 a ticket I'd rather eat out four or five times with my family (2 tickets per week). As it is we eat out more than that--so if I forgo eating out as a family we could easily afford to play the lotto.
Let's check the dictionary to see how we're using the term.
Afford
1. To have the financial means for; bear the cost of: able to afford a new car.
2. To manage to spare or give up: can't afford an hour for lunch.
So if you can't spare $2 for the lottery even if you have it, then you can't afford it. Others who make less than you but are willing to gamble can afford it it as they have the money to spare for the chance.
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
If you can't afford $2, then you shouldn't be playing.
Who said I couldn't afford to play it?
To me, it might be worth a buck to play, once in a while; but at $2 since I know it's throwing away money I won't bother at all.
Did you just read what you wrote? I believe it was you who said it wasn't worth it for you. Therefore you can't afford it. To some people $2 is pocket change they can afford to toss away. For you, pocket change is $1 but not $2. Therefore you can't afford $2 on a lottery ticket even if you're a millionaire. $2 is the price to pay for a one in 292 million shot.
I don't understand the terms here, sorry--I think we're using terms differently. I normally carry a few hundred in cash. I can easily afford a ticket. I just think buying tickets is a bit like setting my money on fire.
afford =/= perceived value
At $2 a ticket I'd rather eat out four or five times with my family (2 tickets per week). As it is we eat out more than that--so if I forgo eating out as a family we could easily afford to play the lotto.
Let's check the dictionary to see how we're using the term.
Afford
1. To have the financial means for; bear the cost of: able to afford a new car.
2. To manage to spare or give up: can't afford an hour for lunch.
So if you can't spare $2 for the lottery even if you have it, then you can't afford it. Others who make less than you but are willing to gamble can afford it it as they have the money to spare for the chance.
So let me see if I can clear this up. Fiscally, supton can afford the lottery. Mentally, emotionally, or by some other non-traditional currency or calculus, he cannot justify spending $2 on a lottery ticket.
Does that sum it up?
Does that sum it up?
Originally Posted By: supton
Ah, I see. Can you understand my dilemma then? I "have the financial means for" but I won't "spare or give up". I'm between those two definitions.
Yes, my original point, you can't afford to spend $2 on a lottery ticket, but you could afford $1. I suggest paying mega millions instead. Only $165 million so it's not getting much press.
Ah, I see. Can you understand my dilemma then? I "have the financial means for" but I won't "spare or give up". I'm between those two definitions.
Yes, my original point, you can't afford to spend $2 on a lottery ticket, but you could afford $1. I suggest paying mega millions instead. Only $165 million so it's not getting much press.
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: cjcride
They should divide that into a hundred top prizes instead of giving it all to one winner.
Why should they do that? Most of the people that bought a ticket only bought a ticket because they were promised a very substantial sum of money. Is that your idea of "fairness" and redistributing wealth?
Not at all. Not saying change the rules mid game. In subsequent draws 100 very wealthy lottery winners would help the sales. Why? for there would be thousands more people that would say 'I knew that lucky winner! he lived/worked in the neighborhood!'
It's all about more winners and more sales.
I think some European lotteries already have a cap of sorts.
Off topic, if a few million is not enough, How much is?
Originally Posted By: cjcride
They should divide that into a hundred top prizes instead of giving it all to one winner.
Why should they do that? Most of the people that bought a ticket only bought a ticket because they were promised a very substantial sum of money. Is that your idea of "fairness" and redistributing wealth?
Not at all. Not saying change the rules mid game. In subsequent draws 100 very wealthy lottery winners would help the sales. Why? for there would be thousands more people that would say 'I knew that lucky winner! he lived/worked in the neighborhood!'
It's all about more winners and more sales.
I think some European lotteries already have a cap of sorts.
Off topic, if a few million is not enough, How much is?
Last edited:
Personally, I could retire forever on 1.5M (after tax).
Having 10M or so, would allow me to take care of family and bring friends on vacations too.
800M? That's crazy money and most likely will destroy the life of anyone who is not ready for it, as in nearly all lotto winners.
I'd be fine with 100x 8M winners. Increases your odds, too! Not really, but statistically
Having 10M or so, would allow me to take care of family and bring friends on vacations too.
800M? That's crazy money and most likely will destroy the life of anyone who is not ready for it, as in nearly all lotto winners.
I'd be fine with 100x 8M winners. Increases your odds, too! Not really, but statistically
Originally Posted By: cjcride
Not at all. Not saying change the rules mid game. In subsequent draws 100 very wealthy lottery winners would help the sales. Why? for there would be thousands more people that would say 'I knew that lucky winner! he lived/worked in the neighborhood!'
It's all about more winners and more sales.
False. It's been mentioned before. There are many smaller lotteries with smaller jackpots. People don't play them. When it's 800 million, you get people spending $10 on tickets when they haven't spent any in 5 years. Bigger jackpots leads to more sales. Smaller jackpots lead to smaller sales. Just look at the sales as the jackpot has climbed.
619 01/06/2016 02-11-47-62-63 17 $528.5 Million 3
618 01/02/2016 05-06-15-29-42 10 $355.8 Million 2
617 12/30/2015 12-36-38-54-61 22 $301.8 Million 3
616 12/26/2015 27-40-44-59-65 20 $261.7 Million 2
615 12/23/2015 16-38-55-63-67 25 $232.6 Million 4
614 12/19/2015 28-30-41-59-68 10 $204.6 Million 2
613 12/16/2015 09-10-32-42-55 06 $180 Million 2
612 12/12/2015 02-14-19-30-62 22 $161 Million 2
611 12/09/2015 07-10-16-46-56 01 $145.9 Million 2
610 12/05/2015 13-27-33-47-68 13 $128.7 Million 2
609 12/02/2015 14-18-19-32-64 09 $110 Million 2
608 11/28/2015 02-06-47-66-67 02 $100 Million 3
607 11/25/2015 16-29-53-58-69 21 $90 Million 2
606 11/21/2015 37-47-50-52-57 21 $80 Million 3
605 11/18/2015 17-40-41-46-69 06 $70 Million 2
604 11/14/2015 14-22-37-45-66 05 $60 Million 3
603 11/11/2015 04-26-32-55-64 18 $50 Million 3
602 11/07/2015 07-16-25-50-53 15 $40 Million 2
Not at all. Not saying change the rules mid game. In subsequent draws 100 very wealthy lottery winners would help the sales. Why? for there would be thousands more people that would say 'I knew that lucky winner! he lived/worked in the neighborhood!'
It's all about more winners and more sales.
False. It's been mentioned before. There are many smaller lotteries with smaller jackpots. People don't play them. When it's 800 million, you get people spending $10 on tickets when they haven't spent any in 5 years. Bigger jackpots leads to more sales. Smaller jackpots lead to smaller sales. Just look at the sales as the jackpot has climbed.
619 01/06/2016 02-11-47-62-63 17 $528.5 Million 3
618 01/02/2016 05-06-15-29-42 10 $355.8 Million 2
617 12/30/2015 12-36-38-54-61 22 $301.8 Million 3
616 12/26/2015 27-40-44-59-65 20 $261.7 Million 2
615 12/23/2015 16-38-55-63-67 25 $232.6 Million 4
614 12/19/2015 28-30-41-59-68 10 $204.6 Million 2
613 12/16/2015 09-10-32-42-55 06 $180 Million 2
612 12/12/2015 02-14-19-30-62 22 $161 Million 2
611 12/09/2015 07-10-16-46-56 01 $145.9 Million 2
610 12/05/2015 13-27-33-47-68 13 $128.7 Million 2
609 12/02/2015 14-18-19-32-64 09 $110 Million 2
608 11/28/2015 02-06-47-66-67 02 $100 Million 3
607 11/25/2015 16-29-53-58-69 21 $90 Million 2
606 11/21/2015 37-47-50-52-57 21 $80 Million 3
605 11/18/2015 17-40-41-46-69 06 $70 Million 2
604 11/14/2015 14-22-37-45-66 05 $60 Million 3
603 11/11/2015 04-26-32-55-64 18 $50 Million 3
602 11/07/2015 07-16-25-50-53 15 $40 Million 2
Can't debate that. Good research there. The siren call of Billion$ certainly works.
- Status
