i think they should keep rolling it over until someone gets all seven numbers. i've never heard of any other lottery doing something like that has anyone else?
2006-11-23 20:51:17 · 10 answers · asked by zargonius 3 in Games & Recreation ➔ Gambling
No. I think it was great that 20 people won - its fairer and nobody needs £120m. The Americans have superdraws but they then get hammered with taxes which bring it down dramatically.
2006-11-23 20:54:31 · answer #1 · answered by Charlene 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hmmm, Dadn33.... i dont think you realise the conditions that applied. 12 people won because the winning conditions were lowered, no one would of won under the standard rules, but because the lottery was on its 12th week of rollover the jackpot had to (because of pre-arranged rules of the lottery) be won. if no one matched 5 numbers and 2 stars (they didn't) then the jackpot would be split between everyone who had the next best combination (12 people).
I think it is a reasonable arrangement, it was written into the terms and conditions when the lottery was organised and it works ok, 20 million is not a unreasonable sum to win :)
the lowered conditions probably discourages attempts to buy the pot, by preventing the pot from getting big enough to make it worth the effort and risk.
(buying the pot could be done by a consortium of rich people, buying every combination of tickets and thus being guaranteed to win all the prizes. this has occured with other lotteries, the random number lottery system makes this a riskier approach than a lottery system with a fixed number of printed tickets)
2006-11-23 21:11:11 · answer #2 · answered by only1doug 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it should stop once it reaches 100,000,000. No-one needs that sort of money, so distributing it to the next layer is best. Euromiliones is a very difficult lottery to win, much harder that the UK one, therefore more likely to roll over. I've been doing it a year, and never had even a lowest prize win.
2006-11-23 21:28:14 · answer #3 · answered by mike-from-spain 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah I think the money should be spread out a bit more. But YES a limit of say 15 draws.
2006-11-24 10:07:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Canada
2006-11-30 21:09:42 · answer #5 · answered by Sid B 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
well i just think that its a bit strange that nobody had all the numbers. i mean think of the amount of people that must take part in it. there seems to be a lot of roll over jackpots for it which makes more people buy tickets.....hmmmm!!
2006-11-23 21:05:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think the euro millions. should have a limit on it.and when it gets to that limit.they should work out away that it will be won when it hits that limit.its better to have more winners.of say.5 million each.than one winner of 120 million.
2006-11-23 21:10:37 · answer #7 · answered by peter o 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I find it a bit suss that no-one had any of the numbers for 12 weeks and then when we've spent a fortune on tickets, all of a sudden 12 people win it.................
2006-11-23 20:59:22 · answer #8 · answered by dadn33 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no.i would not mind sharing 120 million with a few other people
2006-11-23 22:23:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes they should share it out to those who were the closest
2006-12-01 06:39:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋