There is no reason Mega Millions and Powerball can't allow jackpot winners to remain anoymous

Reply #16

Stack47 — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 22:05:23 GMT

There is also the agent that sold the ticket and most stores have posters and signs $5000 pick-4 ticket was sold here , 10,000 tic tac dough or even $500 bingo . The retailers know what time the ticket was sold and after checking the surveillance tape, probably know exactly who the winner is, especially if they are a regular customer. The store owners want free publicity and while the winner is taking their time talking to lawyers, the store owner is talking to news channel 7 maybe suggesting th... [ More ]

Reply #15

TheGameGrl — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 21:56:01 GMT

Bottom Line: Seeing is beleiving. Let the person have two heads and breath fire for all I care. Just allow the public the right to such knowledge and not conceal the winner

KY....You are correct.

Reply #14

rburton — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 16:57:44 GMT

I dont trust computerized drawings, which the hoosier lottery uses. Indiana allows anonymous winners. Also, the Indiana lotto almost never gets above a few million, where before, when they used balls and it was televised, it would get over 10M quite often.

Plus, the lottery is set at 1M for the first 2 drawings after a winner, so it isnt even increased if a winner isnt chosen until a 3rd drawing and then only increases 500K. Also, the cash option is so low, it isnt even worth playing. Last wi... [ More ]

Reply #13

JWBlue — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 01:04:06 GMT

What is the point of this board then?

Most of the topics are pointless unless the jackpot is won.

Reply #12

ohiopick3 — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 00:47:43 GMT

Win it first, then worry about how you are going to complain about it.

Reply #11

joshuacloak — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 00:42:17 GMT

i don;t care if they say they demand a individual name,

they get truste name,, and hell if you can do a trust within a trust

say their 2 diff trusts

Trust A, and trust B

Trust A, claims it for Trust B

yes in the legal world this can be done, ever hear of Parent companys spawning other companys LOL

if we are talking about mm, and pb jackpots, what we are, you have the money to hire a great tax lawyer to do that,

for a lotto to say you can't claim that way,... [ More ]

Reply #10

KY Floyd — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 21:09:05 GMT

i love how KY changed the point to, RNG lottos

I love how you fail to understand that the point is public trust in the honesty of the lottery. If you believe that the public doesn't trust the lottery over RNG's, why is it hard to accept that they may not trust them over unknown winners?

As far as blind trusts providing anonymity, that only works if the lottery will award the prize to a blind trust without knowing who the beneficiary is. Since blind trusts are legal entitites I'd think tha... [ More ]

Reply #9

joshuacloak — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:44:14 GMT

i love how KY changed the point to, RNG lottos

we was talking about mega millions and powerball, going by how sales are, and how some states on both sides of the 2 big games, have anoymous winners,

it does not hurt the lotto sales to allow anoymous winners,

my main post was about my freedom of choice, and you just keep insisting we ether play or don't play, and should be forced to be public

and have no choice on the matter

the point it hurts sales is 0, it does not hurt the... [ More ]

Reply #8

JWBlue — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:39:03 GMT

You are right. The thread is moot.

After my last post in this thread, I did research on living trusts and the name of the owner of a living trust is not public record.

A lawyer isn't even necessary to create a living trust. A simple one (the only aspect of a living trust needed to claim a jackpot is a shield to protect their identity). It can be created online for $80.00.

Reply #7

swampfox — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:30:40 GMT

Anyone can claim a lottery in a blanket trust....No one knows who it is....except their lawyer

Reply #6

KY Floyd — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:54:31 GMT

Maybe you should reread the sentence that follows the one you quoted. Then look at the posts about RNG drawings, and tell me how well convinced the public is as a result of the auditors verifying those drawings. The common argument from those who don't like RNG drawings is that they can't trust what they can't see, and you can't see anonymous winners. The name of the winner has nothing to do with it. It's the public belief that there is a real winner who is a real player, regardless of what thei... [ More ]

Reply #5

JWBlue — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:16:02 GMT

How much marketing benefit is gained by giving the name of a person that wins a jackpot as opposed to allowing a winner to remain anonymous?

Does anyone remember the name of the person that wins the jackpot after one month (besides people that do things that keep their name in the public eye)?

A winner should not have to give up privacy when winning a jackpot in in return for minimal (if any) marketing gain.

They aren't trying to convince an auditor that real people win the lotter... [ More ]

Reply #4

truecritic — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 07:55:21 GMT

you may as will point a gun via govt monopoly at us, saying the only ones allowed to have massive lotto is if the state runs it,

if i was given the option of a other Massive lotto to play, in my area, thats not govt ran, and would repect my wish for being anoymous, i would play for it

What in the world are you saying? I just pulled a couple things out of your post that totally do not make any sense.

Have you ever heard of spell-check? It would help immensely.

Reply #3

joshuacloak — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:30:12 GMT

KY i see your point, however i tend to disagree with don't play then

allow us the freedom to have player ran lotto,

you can have your govt ran lotto, and it being all public and open

however not allowing us to play our own lotto

you may as will point a gun via govt monopoly at us, saying the only ones allowed to have massive lotto is if the state runs it,

if i was given the option of a other Massive lotto to play, in my area, thats not govt ran, and would repect my wish... [ More ]

Reply #2

KY Floyd — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:06:32 GMT

Of course there's a good reason to require people to be identified publicly. They aren't trying to convince an auditor that real people win the lottery, they're trying to convince the public. How many people here don't trust computerized drawings despite all the effort the states put into claiming they're fair and truly random? If people don't believe that, why would they believe it when the state claims that the lottery was won, and the prize was paid, to some unidentified person that nobody wi... [ More ]

Reply #1

Pinkpansies — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:06:16 GMT

What they really want is a good story to help them sell more tickets, i.e. make even more money, the next time around. For the lottery it is all about the money. You should try looking carefully at your lottery's rules though, I think there can be a way around the anonymous thing even if they say there isn't. I've read my states laws and it states that if a company claims a lottery prize, then all of the officer's for the company (ex. President, Vice-President, etc.) have to submit their social... [ More ]

There is no reason Mega Millions and Powerball can't allow jackpot winners to remain anoymous

JWBlue — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 02:56:23 GMT

When I watch these lottery television shows about jackpot winners who are harrassed by people for money, it irks me because it can be prevented.

There are other ways to verify a jackpot has been paid out. California allows jackpot winners to remain anonymous (not sure about Mega Millions, but they do with Super Lotto Plus)

They could hire an autitor to verify a winner has been paid. They already hire an auditor to verify the drawings are fair.

It really is absurd.