Countdown to Millions, Maryland's raffle-like lottery, didn't sell as many tickets as lottery officials had hoped, and the drawing was delayed one day to sell more.
At $20 apiece, they were the most expensive tickets ever. The Maryland Lottery held its drawing Monday night for Countdown to Millions new game featuring the Maryland Lottery's best odds ever at winning $1 million.
The lottery sold about 325,000 tickets, short of the lottery's 420,000-ticket goal, said lottery spokeswoman Carole Everett.
Nevertheless, "We're pretty pleased because this game came out at the same time that we lost our advertising agency," Everett said. "This thing has run with almost no advertising. All things considered, we're pretty pleased."
The game's marketing played up the odds: a 1-in-105,000 chance to win $1 million and a 1-in-517 chance to win at least $500. The drawings were originally scheduled for New Year's Eve.
Unlike traditional lotteries in which the number of tickets sold has no effect an individual player's chances to win, Countdown to Millions was more like a raffle. The numbers were assigned sequentially as players bought tickets. The possible combinations in the drawing were limited to the numbers on players' tickets.
So the odds of winning $1 million ended up being about 1 in 81,250 and the odds of winning any prize were about 1 in 400.
Tickets went on sale Nov. 20, about a week after its longtime advertising agency, Eisner Communications, went out of business. The lottery cannot easily purchase ad time directly from television stations, newspapers and other outlets because of restrictions in state procurement laws.
The lottery hired the ad agency Trahan, Burden & Charles on Dec. 8, but the ad campaign was off the air entirely for about a month.
From the beginning, the lottery gave itself wiggle room on the drawing date. The fine print for the game said the lottery could hold the drawing earlier or later, depending on when the tickets sold out. Everett said lottery officials "didn't want to disappoint our players," so they held the drawing last night even though the game hadn't sold out.
On Monday night, lottery officials announced the million dollar winners intermittently during the prime time television hours. The winning numbers are: 076104, 097164, 298695 and 129615.
The odds would change only if the numbers in the draw were limited to those tickets that were sold. If the drawing includes the serial numbers of the unsold tickets this would not be so.
Evidently MD is committed to awarding all prizes. Good for them, even with their advertising setbacks and woes. An honorable resolution.
Quote: Originally posted by johnph77 on Jan 2, 2007
The odds would change only if the numbers in the draw were limited to those tickets that were sold. If the drawing includes the serial numbers of the unsold tickets this would not be so.
Evidently MD is committed to awarding all prizes. Good for them, even with their advertising setbacks and woes. An honorable resolution.
gl
j
Honorable indeed!
They only waited one extra day, and awarded all prizes. WTG Maryland Lottery!
Quote: Originally posted by johnph77 on Jan 2, 2007
The odds would change only if the numbers in the draw were limited to those tickets that were sold. If the drawing includes the serial numbers of the unsold tickets this would not be so.
Evidently MD is committed to awarding all prizes. Good for them, even with their advertising setbacks and woes. An honorable resolution.
gl
j
Including the serial numbers of unsold tickets in the drawing is fraud, and it would be possible that not a single prizes would be awarded. What would reduce the odds is awarding all of the prizes without selling all of the tickets. The only way to keep the same odds would be to award the same percentage of prizes at each level as the percentage of tickets sold. With only 2 $100,000 prizes the only way they could do that would be if they sold exactly 50% of the tickets and awarded half the prizes at each level.
Since they advertise the odds it wouldn't be unreasonable to reduce the number of prizes by no more than the reduction in sales. If they sold more than 50% of the tickets they'd have to award both $100, 000 prizes, but if they sold less than 75% they could eliminate 1 of the 4 $1,000,000 prizes, for example. That would give all players a (slightly) better chance, while limiting the reduction in the lottery's profit. I expect all lotteries that decide to try a raffle will award all of the prizes rather than face the outcry from PO'ed players.
Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on Jan 3, 2007
Including the serial numbers of unsold tickets in the drawing is fraud, and it would be possible that not a single prizes would be awarded. What would reduce the odds is awarding all of the prizes without selling all of the tickets. The only way to keep the same odds would be to award the same percentage of prizes at each level as the percentage of tickets sold. With only 2 $100,000 prizes the only way they could do that would be if they sold exactly 50% of the tickets and awarded half the prizes at each level.
Since they advertise the odds it wouldn't be unreasonable to reduce the number of prizes by no more than the reduction in sales. If they sold more than 50% of the tickets they'd have to award both $100, 000 prizes, but if they sold less than 75% they could eliminate 1 of the 4 $1,000,000 prizes, for example. That would give all players a (slightly) better chance, while limiting the reduction in the lottery's profit. I expect all lotteries that decide to try a raffle will award all of the prizes rather than face the outcry from PO'ed players.
Agreed.
The way out of this situation is the way KY is currently conducting their raffle-type lottery, and I would expect more jurisdictions to adopt this method. They have not announced a drawing date, and the drawing will not be conducted until all tickets are sold. With adequate publicity this shouldn't be a problem and may increase sales as ticket availability becomes scarce. Who knows?
As of this writing, it doesn't appear that South Carolina will sell out either. I hope they do as Maryland did -- go ahead with the draw next week....
It will increase the chances of a win...
The odds would change only if the numbers in the draw were limited to those tickets that were sold. If the drawing includes the serial numbers of the unsold tickets this would not be so.
Evidently MD is committed to awarding all prizes. Good for them, even with their advertising setbacks and woes. An honorable resolution.
gl
j
They only waited one extra day, and awarded all prizes. WTG Maryland Lottery!
Thanks for the explanation , JP77..
I didn't think it sounded right, I must have been too greedy....
DD
Including the serial numbers of unsold tickets in the drawing is fraud, and it would be possible that not a single prizes would be awarded. What would reduce the odds is awarding all of the prizes without selling all of the tickets. The only way to keep the same odds would be to award the same percentage of prizes at each level as the percentage of tickets sold. With only 2 $100,000 prizes the only way they could do that would be if they sold exactly 50% of the tickets and awarded half the prizes at each level.
Since they advertise the odds it wouldn't be unreasonable to reduce the number of prizes by no more than the reduction in sales. If they sold more than 50% of the tickets they'd have to award both $100, 000 prizes, but if they sold less than 75% they could eliminate 1 of the 4 $1,000,000 prizes, for example. That would give all players a (slightly) better chance, while limiting the reduction in the lottery's profit. I expect all lotteries that decide to try a raffle will award all of the prizes rather than face the outcry from PO'ed players.
Agreed.
The way out of this situation is the way KY is currently conducting their raffle-type lottery, and I would expect more jurisdictions to adopt this method. They have not announced a drawing date, and the drawing will not be conducted until all tickets are sold. With adequate publicity this shouldn't be a problem and may increase sales as ticket availability becomes scarce. Who knows?