Timeline for How does gambling (like buying a lottery ticket) differ from investing?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
49 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9 at 9:47 | answer | added | gnasher729 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Oct 4 at 10:46 | answer | added | keshlam | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 23 at 12:33 | history | protected | Chris W. Rea | ||
| May 10, 2019 at 22:38 | history | reopened |
NL - SE listen to your users JTP - Apologise to Monica♦ |
||
| May 10, 2019 at 22:35 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| May 10, 2019 at 22:40 | |||||
| May 10, 2019 at 22:19 | history | edited | NL - SE listen to your users | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Rewrite to fit the site better
|
| Apr 8, 2019 at 14:10 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Apr 9, 2019 at 11:26 | |||||
| Apr 8, 2019 at 13:54 | comment | added | Ben Miller | @JoeTaxpayer In my mind, the spirit of the "no gambling" rule is that we don't want to cover questions on the details of playing blackjack, poker, etc, which might arguably be "money" or "personal finance" questions if we didn't have this stipulation. This question is specifically how gambling relates to investing, and investing is on-topic. (Note: because you didn't ping me with an @, I didn't see your comment until now.) | |
| Mar 24, 2019 at 1:00 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Mar 24, 2019 at 1:16 | |||||
| Mar 14, 2019 at 1:56 | comment | added | JTP - Apologise to Monica♦ | @BenMiller , are you suggesting we remove the “no gambling questions” from FAQ or that this question doesn’t fall under that? | |
| Mar 14, 2019 at 1:20 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Mar 14, 2019 at 12:06 | |||||
| Feb 1, 2018 at 14:18 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Feb 1, 2018 at 16:25 | |||||
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:25 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://money.stackexchange.com/ with https://money.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Dec 16, 2016 at 6:17 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Dec 21, 2016 at 3:04 | |||||
| Nov 8, 2016 at 4:45 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Nov 9, 2016 at 10:45 | |||||
| Oct 12, 2016 at 17:16 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Oct 15, 2016 at 5:32 | |||||
| Jul 3, 2016 at 2:01 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Jul 4, 2016 at 8:12 | |||||
| S May 13, 2016 at 23:50 | history | closed |
NL - SE listen to your users Victor mhoran_psprep JTP - Apologise to Monica♦ |
Not suitable for this site | |
| S May 13, 2016 at 23:50 | comment | added | JTP - Apologise to Monica♦ | I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because questions on wagering and gambling are specifically off topic, see money.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic | |
| May 13, 2016 at 3:13 | comment | added | user965748 | One point of view might be that an investment is something you buy based on quantification of EV. Of course a sane person buys only those with positive future value (in the world of negative interest rates it can be something preserving value better than holding currency :)). Standard lotteries are highly EV- games, therefor they don't qualify as investments. | |
| May 12, 2016 at 11:47 | answer | added | iqkrdo | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 11, 2016 at 20:34 | answer | added | sp7 | timeline score: -1 | |
| May 11, 2016 at 18:13 | answer | added | jkuz | timeline score: 18 | |
| May 11, 2016 at 16:30 | answer | added | David Mulder | timeline score: 10 | |
| May 11, 2016 at 2:41 | comment | added | HopelessN00b | @quid No, it's not. It's a standard way of running a lotto with a rolling jackpot. In fact, it's kind of the whole point of rolling jackpot lottos like the PowerBall. The bigger the jackpot gets, the more tickets are sold, generating more profit, because they take 50% of the ticket sales as profit, with the other half going into the prize pool. The more tickets they sell, the more profit they make, period. You can't say it's a flaw just because you don't like that it destroys your argument. | |
| May 11, 2016 at 2:33 | comment | added | quid | @HopelessN00b, "the jackpot greatly exceeded the cost of buying a ticket" is a fundamental flaw. | |
| May 11, 2016 at 2:21 | comment | added | HopelessN00b | @quid No, the Virginia one cited was a standard lotto, where the jackpot greatly exceeded the cost of buying a ticket for every possible numerical combination. | |
| May 10, 2016 at 21:37 | comment | added | Victor | I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about gambling and not personal finance and investing. | |
| May 10, 2016 at 20:47 | comment | added | JohnFx♦ | An interesting twist is the concept of "No Lose Lotteries" which are much closer to investments than the regular lottery freakonomics.com/podcast/… | |
| May 10, 2016 at 20:46 | comment | added | quid | @HopelessN00b, the exception is not the rule. Those were fundamentally flawed lotteries. | |
| May 10, 2016 at 20:46 | comment | added | WBT | See also: How does modern Wall St. work in NYS gambling laws? | |
| May 10, 2016 at 20:15 | comment | added | Peter K. | @HopelessN00b : Right, for which the loopholes have been closed. I agree that new lottery systems can be exploited, it's just a losing proposition on established ones. | |
| May 10, 2016 at 20:10 | comment | added | HopelessN00b | @PeterK. Which fails to consider the non-jackpot prizes, which account for a significant portion of the value in cases where all possible lotto numbers are purchased. For that matter, the dupe you linked at me contains an answer which provides three examples of lottos which were exploited for a mathematical advantage and a positive EV. | |
| May 10, 2016 at 19:57 | history | edited | ACV | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added a definition and why it is not a duplicate question.
|
| May 10, 2016 at 19:50 | answer | added | teldon james turner | timeline score: 7 | |
| May 10, 2016 at 19:48 | comment | added | Peter K. | @HopelessN00b: Very, very wrong. See the linked dupe especially: even though the jackpot itself can theoretically grow without bound, there is a point at which the consequent ticket-buying grows to such a fever pitch that the expected value of the jackpot actually starts going down again. | |
| May 10, 2016 at 19:42 | comment | added | HopelessN00b | @PeterK. While that's true in the general case, when major lotteries end up with very large jackpots, the odds can shift in the player's favor. Take the most recent record-setting PowerBall jackpot. At $1.586 billion, and a $2 ticket offering 1 in 292 million odds, the player had a huge mathematical edge, even before accounting for the possibility of winning prizes other than the jackpot. In the past, investment groups have taken advantage of this as well.. | |
| May 10, 2016 at 19:25 | answer | added | Joe | timeline score: 27 | |
| May 10, 2016 at 19:04 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 12, 2016 at 17:25 | |||||
| May 10, 2016 at 18:53 | answer | added | JTP - Apologise to Monica♦ | timeline score: 7 | |
| May 10, 2016 at 18:06 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackFinance/status/730096585300914177 | ||
| May 10, 2016 at 17:57 | comment | added | Eric Lippert | Duplicate of money.stackexchange.com/questions/57931/… | |
| May 10, 2016 at 16:38 | answer | added | Vadim Ponomarenko | timeline score: 24 | |
| May 10, 2016 at 13:13 | vote | accept | ACV | ||
| May 10, 2016 at 12:43 | answer | added | Ben Miller | timeline score: 65 | |
| May 10, 2016 at 12:26 | comment | added | Peter K. | There's an exhaustive analysis of the odds and return rates of various US lotteries here. Compare that with the "risk vs return" charts usually associated with investments and I reckon buying a lottery really doesn't qualify... though gambling on roulette comes closer. :-) | |
| May 10, 2016 at 12:16 | history | edited | mhoran_psprep |
edited tags
|
|
| May 10, 2016 at 11:54 | review | First posts | |||
| May 10, 2016 at 12:05 | |||||
| May 10, 2016 at 11:52 | history | asked | ACV | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
