This thread is about the Lotto. The. LOTT.O.

Flippyfloppy · 07-08-2015 07:11AM #1

In a bid to pi$$ off and annoy people, National Lottery have decided to add another 2 pesky numbers to the drum, rising the odds of winning from 8,000,000:1 to 11,000,000:1.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0807/719698-national-lottery/

AND they're upping the price of line from €3 to €4. What a bag of jerks.

Discuss.

frostyjacks · 07-08-2015 07:16AM

Balls

Mr. Incognito · 07-08-2015 07:20AM

Step 1. Sell national lottery to camelot.

Step 2. Run ads extoling predecesers use of National lottery funds. Insinuate this is continuing. This is not.

Step 3. Gouge Paddys asap before they cop steps 1 and 2

Cee-Jay-Cee · 07-08-2015 07:22AM

I hope it actually encourages people not to do the lotto and backfires on the greedy bastards. I stopped doing it when the current shower of incompetent crooks took over.

Menas · 07-08-2015 07:22AM

On the plus side there should be some bigger roll over jackpots.

jester77 · 07-08-2015 07:22AM

So the fools tax just increased. Stop playing a line a week and you'll have €200 in your pocket at the end of the year. That will go nicely to covering the water charges.

Junkyard Tom · 07-08-2015 07:34AM

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Discuss.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgKyR73biJU

jamesbere · 07-08-2015 07:44AM

I'd do the lotto maybe 2 or 3 times a year. but some people spend a ridiculous amount of money on it. I know a woman who spends 50 a week on lotto.

It's crazy to be spending that amount on it. Mad i tell you, Mad

Barely There · 07-08-2015 08:04AM

I win €3 every week on the lotto by not doing it.

The Corinthian · 07-08-2015 08:48AM

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

In a bid to pi$$ off and annoy people, National Lottery have decided to add another 2 pesky numbers to the drum, rising the odds of winning from 8,000,000:1 to 11,000,000:1.

Because odds of 8,000,000:1 were good?

Lotteries appeared in the 18th century, alongside the development of probability in mathematics, as a means for governments to make obscene amounts of money - Casanova operated one for the French crown, which did very well (one of the few financial successes of his life). Basically, that is the nature of all games of chance where one plays against the house - they are designed for you to lose.

For me lotteries are Dummheitsteuer - basically a tax on stupidity. It's not a coincidence that the vast majority of those who play the Lotto regularly are demographically from lower socioeconomic and educational range, and lotteries helps them stay there.

Just don't play.

Kermit.de.frog · 07-08-2015 09:02AM

About 2 million to one more unlikely. The price of the lotto is going up too.

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/retail-and-services/minimum-cost-of-playing-national-lottery-to-rise-to-4-1.2309395

Flippyfloppy · 07-08-2015 09:04AM

The Corinthian wrote: »

/I] -

Just don't play.

I play very very rarely, like once every 3 months or so. And it would usually be the euro millions.

However some people who do it regularly buy me tickets for special occasions. Which is kind of a horrible present because I'm extremely unlucky. And now when I get said presents my odds will be a whole 3,000,000:1 worse off. It just kinda stinks that they're making it more difficult and upping the price.

The article says they will be able to give 100,000 for 5 numbers and the bonus. If I go to all the trouble of matching 5 numbers and the bonus id be wanting way more than 100,000!!

Really hope this stops people playing. Love a boycott I do!

Big Nasty · 07-08-2015 09:07AM

'Chances' Are there's already a thread on this.

Larbre34 · 07-08-2015 09:08AM

Ah yes, Premier Lotteries, the consortium that includes two massive pension funds.

Anything that is said about improving the jackpots and increasing funds for good causes is all bullsh17, this is about profits for the shareholders, pure and simple. There is nothing to justify a 25/33% increase.

Do yourselves a favour, boycott the irish Lotto draw and stick with Euromillions.

strelok · 07-08-2015 09:16AM

this is the equivalent difference between emma watson cooking you a steak for breakfast the morning after instead of just throwing a quick coffee into you and horsing you out the door.

you still have to complete the ridiculously gargantuan task of actually getting her to bed in the first place, which is something most of us are just going to have to accept is never going to happen.

biko · 07-08-2015 09:20AM

The problem is that poster A doesn't make their title meaningful so poster B doesn't understand a thread already exists when they look at AH front page.
The clickbait generation is here.

Kermit.de.frog · 07-08-2015 09:21AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk6hZZ2d7kI

The Corinthian · 07-08-2015 09:21AM

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

And now when I get said presents my odds will be a whole 3,000,000:1 worse off. It just kinda stinks that they're making it more difficult and upping the price.

You say that like it realistically makes a difference.

Seriously, count to a million. You'll give up long before you get to 1,000 is my guess and a million is a thousand times that. And 8 million is eight times that again. And those were the 'better' odds.

Now ask yourself why you're playing - even every 3 months or so?

Really hope this stops people playing. Love a boycott I do!

No it won't. If you and others can't see how pointless playing odds of 8,000,000:1 are, what makes you think that odds of 11,000,000:1 will mean to people?

recyclebin · 07-08-2015 09:23AM

This thread title makes more sense. I approve.

longshanks · 07-08-2015 09:23AM

strelok wrote: »

this is the equivalent difference between emma watson cooking you a steak for breakfast the morning after instead of just throwing a quick coffee into you and horsing you out the door.

you still have to complete the ridiculously gargantuan task of actually getting her to bed in the first place, which is something most of us are just going to have to accept is never going to happen.

Speak for yourself chief.

Peregrine · 07-08-2015 09:26AM

Merged both threads. Please don't clickbait.

machiavellianme · 07-08-2015 09:27AM

The Corinthian wrote: »

You say that like it realistically makes a difference.

Seriously, count to a million. You'll give up long before you get to 1,000 is my guess and a million is a thousand times that. And 8 million is eight times that again. And those were the 'better' odds.

Now ask yourself why you're playing - even every 3 months or so?

No it won't. If you and others can't see how pointless playing odds of 8,000,000:1 are, what makes you think that odds of 11,000,000:1 will mean to people?

The extra cost per line might put them off though?

Eugene Norman · 07-08-2015 09:29AM

Higher odds work psychologically because you get more rollovers. With more rollovers you get higher prizes and if the odds are 11m-1 anyway the punt of a euro or four on a 20M jackpot sounds better than on a 2M jackpot.

seanaway · 07-08-2015 09:31AM

I stopped playing the NAtional Lottery years ago. The spread of winnings is grossly unfair. Play Euromillions. At least you can still win decent amouns without hitting all the numbers.

kneemos · 07-08-2015 09:32AM

Might be wrong ,but I think I heard something about the UK lottery dropping off dramatically in favour of Euromillions.

100,000 for six numbers when it used to be the jackpot will definitely alienate punters.

07-08-2015 09:32AM

The UK have 49 numbers for a population of over 60 million (this has never changed since it launched in 1994). We'll have 47 numbers for a population of under 5 million? Doesn't make sense.

KungPao · 07-08-2015 09:34AM

More wasted money for addictive types who are already struggling financially.

There are folk out there who spend half their income on alcohol, fags, and bloody lottery tickets - they will just carry on throwing money down the jacks.

For me, as a once or twice a year player for the big draws, that's me done. I am not burning 4 euros for one miserable line.

To hell with that.

The Corinthian · 07-08-2015 09:35AM

machiavellianme wrote: »

The extra cost per line might put them off though?

True, though it's beyond me why this would make sense to them - burning a fiver is ok, but setting a tenner on fire is too far...

machiavellianme · 07-08-2015 09:36AM

Just go to the casino and put 3 euro on black every week. Double your money or go home with nothing.
Almost a one in two chance. The odds of a similar return from the lotto are a lot higher.

AndyBoBandy · 07-08-2015 09:39AM

Menas wrote: »

On the plus side there should be some bigger roll over jackpots.

So fewer people will win bigger sums of cash.

I'd rather a €10 million jackpot make 10 millionaires, as opposed to 1 €10 millionaire.

whiskeyman · 07-08-2015 09:47AM

Jesus, I'm sick of the whole gang professing 'tax on stupidity' lark.
If people want to spend 3 or 4 quid a week on a flutter, that gives them excitement of playing and a bit of escapism from their hum drum life and checking their numbers, let them!
It's not even the price of a pint FFS! So many people of us have odd or stupid spending habits that probably cost us a lot more than what some people flutter away on the lotto anyway!
Sure, there is an element of gambling that could be abused, but if it's within a sensible range it's fine.

This thread is about the Lotto. The. LOTT.O.

Comments