Couple wins millions using lottery loophole

Post by adrianmonk » Tue, Jun 11, 2019, 2:35 AM UTC

bcbrown wrote: post #105

bhl wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on the numbers alone, that's about a 20% return for the MIT group, for an annualized return (not considering compound interest) of less than 3% per year. Does this suggest that those trying to game the lottery should just turn to investing in the market? It's amusing to see that the market, which is less structured in probability and more volatile, outperforms the lottery in this aspect.

That doesn't mean they had that amount of capital under investment. If you bet $10 every week, and every week you win $11, at the end of the year you've bet $520 and made a profit of $52. But you never had more than $10 "invested". If that $18 million was evenly spread out over 7 years, it would be close to $50k/week, or $215k/month. Those are probably more accurate amounts of working capital for calculating ROI.

Post by MegaButts » Tue, Jun 11, 2019, 2:45 AM UTC

rwc wrote: post #131

qtplatypus wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in the gambling industry and live in au. From my perspective this is super strange. By law vendors have to publish the odd (and on some games the EV).

Publishing the odds is common. Doing the math on those odds apparently is not.

Post by gowld » Tue, Jun 11, 2019, 2:58 AM UTC

ALittleLight wrote: post #143

larrydag wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally like the saying "the lottery is a tax on the innumerate"

Although it's a bit cruel because the "innumerate" are disproportionately poor. Lottery tickets may be driven more by despair and hope for an improbable escape than by innumeracy.

Post by sigstoat » Tue, Jun 11, 2019, 3:52 AM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #140

flukus wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and it provides a little excitement and lets them fantasize about the winnings I've heard this before, but why do you need a ticket to fantasize about what you'd do with that much money? It can be a conversation starter and I can see the excitement aspect in watching your numbers come up (if you don't have a hundred combos to watch at once), but fantasizing is free.

As someone who's bought a few lottery tickets in his life, I can confirm that the fantasizing is in fact better when it's about something that could happen to you.

Post by Consultant32452 » Tue, Jun 11, 2019, 3:58 AM UTC

indigodaddy wrote: post #85

wvenable wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason they don't do that is marketing; more people play for big jackpot. I think even saying there might 250 $1 million winners this week isn't as big of an enticement.

Exactly, they would never sell anywhere close to the amount of tickets as they do for the single-winner lump sums that swell to ridiculous amounts. So they wouldn't have the necessary incoming ticket sales to be able to do the 250 $1 million winners.