Raffle odds, part deux

[Oak]

I didn't want to hijack the best raffle odds thread, so here's another question.

Assuming a hypothetical raffle for a fully guided desert bighorn or Stone's sheep hunt with the goal of grossing $75,000, what cost to odds ratio makes you most likely to participate? I know many don't participate in raffles.

I'd be interested in your opinions on lesser raffles as well. Do you prefer lower cost tickets in general, or better odds?

 

[Irrelevant]

I prefer 100 ticket raffles, it makes my figgerin' easier.

 

[rwc101]

$25 is cheap enough for me to join in on the fun with sufficiently long odds to never get my hopes up.

 

[Bullshot]

At high dollar tickets, I check the ratio, at low dollar tickets it more spray and pray.

 

[Sytes]

$25 is cheap enough for me to join in on the fun with sufficiently long odds to never get my hopes up.

This would be my opinion as well.
Raffles are a crap shoot. Worth placing some money though my intent is to support the organization, be it RMEF, DU, or RMBS.

I've never hunted rams nor have an intent to do such though I value the conservation efforts. That is where my $ goes. If it was $100+... Likely instant No. that would exceed my out of pocket spending. I may buy 2 tickets... though if it starts at $50... I'd love to say I would though my income defines how much I can place outside my main supported organizations.

Wish I had more $...

 

[d-edward]

$25 is cheap enough for me to join in on the fun with sufficiently long odds to never get my hopes up.

This. While there is an obvious difference in odds between your $25 and $250 examples, I would be more likely to throw $25 at a raffle chance and less sad if I was out that amount.

 

[ccc23454]

I like the 100, odds are effectively the same but thats a tank of fuel and nice round #.

I have NEVER hit any of the lottery tickets for guns or tags.....so i am due

 

[Jape]

I like higher price point raffles because the odds increase. The odds are already low so why not raise them?

 

[SaskHunter]

You can get some 50-100$ raffles that range between 200-350 tickets depending on species/locations. It's still a good chunk of change but I normally apply to raffles for hunting/conservation orgs so that money doesn't go wasted.

 

[Bluffgruff]

Is this going to segue into another thread about RMBS raffles?

 

[winmag]

Given that all these options are for the same prize, all of the options have the same ratio of expected reward to cost, so none have “better” odds. If you buy more cheap tickets you end up with the same overall odds than if you bought one expensive ticket.

Unless the maximum number of tickets per buyer is limited, then it’s possible that fewer raffle tickets = better odds.

And unless a higher price would lead to the tickets not selling out, then that would lead to better odds too.

So this is purely a behavioral question, not a finance/valuation/statistical odds question.

What is your target market for raffle ticket buyers (their financial and socioeconomic status)? I know I won’t fret too much about throwing $25 at something but it would have to be something I’ve already been wanting to throw $250 into the hat. Would $250 tickets cause it to not sell out? If you sell them at $25 and Billy the Redneck wins, will it cause problems for future raffle hunts with this hypothetical outfitter?

 

[mdunc8]

I’d never buy anything over $25

 

[mdhunter]

I am comfortable at $100...I like the slightly better odds.

 

[Wildabeest]

Most of my charitable contributions start at $100, so that’s what selected. But if $25 got more people into the game, I’d just buy 4.

 

[justdada]

Dude.... you know all you have to say is "sheep tag" and I'm in.
But I do like the <1:1000 odds for extra donations

 

[Trial153]

I just got a email today for sheep raffle, 500 a ticket/400 tickets to be sold....wtf

 

[Dsnow9]

I like $100 tickets but will likely spend the same regardless! If cheaper tickets increases the chances of tickets selling out and raising the most money I would say do what you need to do.

 

[Sytes]

Do you prefer lower cost tickets in gpeneral, or better odds?g

Say someone buys 10 raffle tickets of 3000 total @ $25, wouldn't that person have the exact same statistical chance to win a hunt as someone who buys 1 raffle ticket of 300 total @ $250?

Or maybe easier to visualize:

Raffle 1:
1 ticket available @ $37,500 of 2 tickets total.
Raffle 2:
1,500 tickets @ $25 of 3,000 total.

Statistically, wouldn't they both have the same 50% chance to draw the winning tag? Is there really an actual, "better odds" in this equation?

 

[Buffs35]

Say someone buys 10 raffle tickets of 3000 total @ $25, wouldn't that person have the exact same statistical chance to win a hunt as someone who buys 1 raffle ticket of 300 total @ $250?

Or maybe easier to visualize:

Raffle 1:
1 ticket available @ $37,500 of 2 tickets total.
Raffle 2:
1,500 tickets @ $25 of 3,000 total.

Statistically, wouldn't they both have the same 50% chance to draw the winning tag? Is there really an actual, "better odds" in this equation?

I was told there would be no math.

 

[Dsnow9]

Say someone buys 10 raffle tickets of 3000 total @ $25, wouldn't that person have the exact same statistical chance to win a hunt as someone who buys 1 raffle ticket of 300 total @ $250?

Or maybe easier to visualize:

Raffle 1:
1 ticket available @ $37,500 of 2 tickets total.
Raffle 2:
1,500 tickets @ $25 of 3,000 total.

Statistically, wouldn't they both have the same 50% chance to draw the winning tag? Is there really an actual, "better odds" in this equation?

Odds are the same if you spend the same dollar amount. I think what @Oak is asking is just trying to test the waters and see what odds/$ would people be most likely to buy one ticket. Someone planning on spending $500 will likely spend that money either way and have the same odds. But if you have 5k people get in at the $25 level that wouldn’t have otherwise. Likely that would be a net positive for the organization. If to big of odds scare people away from buying tags and the organization doesn’t make enough, it wasn’t worth getting more people in the mix. Hence the poll...