Folks, do watch this short (but non-embeddable) video.
Jason Ruspini or Michael Giberson, please provide some pointers, if you have time. Thanks.
UPDATE: See their brainy comments, just below.
–
Previous blog posts by Chris F. Masse:
- BetFair-TradeFair has won its second Queen’s Award for Enterprise in its eight-year history.
- Inkling Markets is one of the “Hot Companies To Watch In 2008”, according to Forrester.
- Plenty of great news coming from Inkling Markets in the coming weeks
- ??? charity-driven prediction markets OR social issue prediction markets ???
- That can’t be Nigel Eccles of HubDub.
- The Marketing Of The Reading Of The Public Prediction Markets = What Robin Hanson has deep trouble with, and what the prediction exchanges (e.g., InTrade-TradeSports, BetFair-TradeFair) haven’t fully computed yet
- In 2013, Enterprise 2.0 will be a $4.6 billion industry. Good. But they forgot to mind the enterprise prediction markets.
Seems like an interesting group of ideas. He suggests that a portion – about 30 percent – of a lottery purchase go directly into an IRA-type account for the purchaser. My first reaction is that I can put a dollar into an IRA-type account right now and have a dollar saved, instead of his proposal that a dollar spent through his lottery idea that only leaves me 30 cents in my saving account (plus a very small probability of receiving a large amount). But, of course, billions of dollars are spent on lotteries in the U.S. and most buyers get zero added to their retirement savings. A 30 cent return would be a big improvement.
.
Of course, if 30 percent of the purchases are taken out of the pool of money available for prizes, that will reduce the size of jackpots and may deter participation even with the automatic savings. Groz also presents an idea for investment-company backing for larger prizes. I don’t know enough about the wholesale finance side of the lottery industry to assess the concept.
I am all for change in “how the gaming industry operates”! As you know, Chris, I recently gave a talk to a class of Marc’s. I was fortunate enough to make his acquaintance at the Housing Futures conference in New York in 2006. He has several other interesting patents, btw.
.
The system to deliver bigger payoffs will be important. From the banks’ perspective, they are getting an uncorrelated asset (SCOREs) with a positive expectancy. I would guess that lottery ticket buyers tend to have relatively low wealth and crave variance above mean, because a return of 7% on 30% of their lotto spending will never make a qualitative difference in their lives.. only the variance can make a qualitative difference. Will they buy proportionately more tickets if a % is held back, and will more tickets sell? Maybe, but raising the jackpot will help, assuming that lottery participation is more than linearly related to jackpot.. What do we think that function is actually?
Seems like an interesting group of ideas. He suggests that a portion – about 30 percent – of a lottery purchase go directly into an IRA-type account for the purchaser. My first reaction is that I can put a dollar into an IRA-type account right now and have a dollar saved, instead of his proposal that a dollar spent through his lottery idea that only leaves me 30 cents in my saving account (plus a very small probability of receiving a large amount). But, of course, billions of dollars are spent on lotteries in the U.S. and most buyers get zero added to their retirement savings. A 30 cent return would be a big improvement.
.
Of course, if 30 percent of the purchases are taken out of the pool of money available for prizes, that will reduce the size of jackpots and may deter participation even with the automatic savings. Groz also presents an idea for investment-company backing for larger prizes. I don’t know enough about the wholesale finance side of the lottery industry to assess the concept.
I am all for change in “how the gaming industry operates”! As you know, Chris, I recently gave a talk to a class of Marc’s. I was fortunate enough to make his acquaintance at the Housing Futures conference in New York in 2006. He has several other interesting patents, btw.
.
The system to deliver bigger payoffs will be important. From the banks’ perspective, they are getting an uncorrelated asset (SCOREs) with a positive expectancy. I would guess that lottery ticket buyers tend to have relatively low wealth and crave variance above mean, because a return of 7% on 30% of their lotto spending will never make a qualitative difference in their lives.. only the variance can make a qualitative difference. Will they buy proportionately more tickets if a % is held back, and will more tickets sell? Maybe, but raising the jackpot will help, assuming that lottery participation is more than linearly related to jackpot.. What do we think that function is actually?