Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
thehustle.co
Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
1–10 of 40 posts
Re: Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
#2This seems like a submarine article to sell tickets to conferences or gather people's information.
Re: Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
#3If one compares the amount of money that most sweepers have made to the time invested in the activity, then probably any minimum-wage job would have been more worthwhile financially.
For the small amount of exceptionally successful sweepers, I still suspect that the time lost, along with the additional burden of tax accounting, makes this a pretty inefficient strategy financially. The exceptional ones are showing effort and strategies that they could have instead applied to traditional business and investment paths with a greater return.
Re: Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
#4If one compares the amount of money that most sweepers have made to the time invested in the activity, then probably any minimum-wage job would have been more worthwhile financially. For the small amount of exceptionally successful sweepers, I still suspect that the time lost, along with the additional burden of tax accounting, makes this a pretty inefficient strategy financially. The exceptional ones are showing eff…
old boss told me once - 'some people will work harder at not having a job than they would at a job'
Re: Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
#5If one compares the amount of money that most sweepers have made to the time invested in the activity, then probably any minimum-wage job would have been more worthwhile financially. For the small amount of exceptionally successful sweepers, I still suspect that the time lost, along with the additional burden of tax accounting, makes this a pretty inefficient strategy financially. The exceptional ones are showing eff…
> If one compares the amount of money that most sweepers have made to the time invested in the activity, then probably any minimum-wage job would have been more worthwhile financially.
But why even make the comparison? You can’t work at McDonald’s from your kitchen table at 11 AM if you feel like it or while you’re watching TV at 2PM on a Saturday.
Re: Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
#6If one compares the amount of money that most sweepers have made to the time invested in the activity, then probably any minimum-wage job would have been more worthwhile financially. For the small amount of exceptionally successful sweepers, I still suspect that the time lost, along with the additional burden of tax accounting, makes this a pretty inefficient strategy financially. The exceptional ones are showing eff…
> If one compares the amount of money that most sweepers have made to the time invested in the activity, then probably any minimum-wage job would have been more worthwhile financially. But why even make the comparison? You can’t work at McDonald’s from your kitchen table at 11 AM if you feel like it or while you’re watching TV at 2PM on a Saturday.
No little endorphin hit from mopping up spew either. Financially it seems like a lame duck, but I can see why it would be attractive to some personality types.
Re: Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
#7If one compares the amount of money that most sweepers have made to the time invested in the activity, then probably any minimum-wage job would have been more worthwhile financially. For the small amount of exceptionally successful sweepers, I still suspect that the time lost, along with the additional burden of tax accounting, makes this a pretty inefficient strategy financially. The exceptional ones are showing eff…
old boss told me once - 'some people will work harder at not having a job than they would at a job'
On average, Coke enters around 300 online contests per month (about 10 hours’ worth of work) and wins £1k in prizes.
That's £100 per hour which is much better than most jobs. That's most likely a statistical aberration, but if you assume the people they go back are also the people that won in the first place it probably seems to be a winning strategy.
That's assuming people that go long streaks without winning then stop.
Re: Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
#8> Kohl’s gave out 1,000 $20 gift cards ($20k total), but the ad got 10,812 retweets. According to an estimate from the data analytics company SumAll, the value of a branded retweet is $20.37. So for a cost of $20k, Kohl’s got roughly $220k in value — about 10x its investment.
There's no way a retweet is worth $20-- or is this some weird power-law effect?
Re: Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
#9> Kohl’s gave out 1,000 $20 gift cards ($20k total), but the ad got 10,812 retweets. According to an estimate from the data analytics company SumAll, the value of a branded retweet is $20.37. So for a cost of $20k, Kohl’s got roughly $220k in value — about 10x its investment. There's no way a retweet is worth $20-- or is this some weird power-law effect?
That mis-valuation is striking at the problem's heart: a branded retweet is worth real value while a dummy account which only retweets brands is worthless.
Re: Women who win hundreds of sweepstakes per year
#10I was wondering why there would be publicizing of opportunities and tricks by fierce competitors in a zero-sum game. I think it's not just community and/or showing off, but part of the explanation is this:
> They gather in forums like Sweepstakes Advantage, subscribe to newsletters like I Win Contests, SweepSheet, and Sweeping America, and gather at conventions all over the world.
I've seen this many times in other niches: you find or create a community, actively pump it up, and sell them things (and/or sell them to others).