IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/apeclt/v16y2009i3p319-323.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scale economies of lotto once more

Author

Listed:
  • George Papachristou

Abstract

Under the assumption of random number selection, higher moments of a lotto ticket payoff seem to exhibit a peculiar behaviour; variance (and probably skewness) rises up to some number of bets before approaching its limit from above. A close inspection of the 'simplest' expression obtained by means of a hypergeometric summation algorithm suggests that the payoff variance (and probably skewness) is unimodal and attains its highest at a realistic scale.

Suggested Citation

  • George Papachristou, 2009. "Scale economies of lotto once more," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 319-323.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:16:y:2009:i:3:p:319-323
    DOI: 10.1080/13504850601018445
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&doi=10.1080/13504850601018445&magic=repec&7C&7C8674ECAB8BB840C6AD35DC6213A474B5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13504850601018445?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farrell, Lisa & Walker, Ian, 1999. "The welfare effects of lotto: evidence from the UK," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 99-120, April.
    2. Walker, Ian & Young, Juliet, 2001. "An Economist's Guide to Lottery Design," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(475), pages 700-722, November.
    3. Garrett, Thomas A. & Sobel, Russell S., 1999. "Gamblers favor skewness, not risk: Further evidence from United States' lottery games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 85-90, April.
    4. Joseph Golec & Maurry Tamarkin, 1998. "Bettors Love Skewness, Not Risk, at the Horse Track," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 205-225, February.
    5. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kent Grote & Victor Matheson, 2011. "The Economics of Lotteries: An Annotated Bibliography," Working Papers 1110, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Humphreys, Brad & Perez, Levi, 2011. "Lottery Participants and Revenues: An International Survey of Economic Research on Lotteries," Working Papers 2011-17, University of Alberta, Department of Economics.
    2. Akira Maeda, 2008. "Optimal Lottery Design for Public Financing," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1698-1718, October.
    3. Gabrielyan, Gnel & Just, David R., 2017. "Economic Factors Affecting Lottery Sales: An Examination of Maine State Lottery Sales," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258419, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Jen-Hung Wang & Larry Tzeng & Junji Tien, 2006. "Willingness to pay and the demand for lotto," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(10), pages 1207-1216.
    5. Santos-Pinto, Luís & Astebro, Thomas & Mata, José, 2009. "Preference for Skew in Lotteries: Evidence from the Laboratory," MPRA Paper 17165, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Kearney, Melissa Schettini, 2005. "State lotteries and consumer behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(11-12), pages 2269-2299, December.
    7. N. Bhattacharya & T. A. Garrett, 2008. "Why people choose negative expected return assets - an empirical examination of a utility theoretic explanation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 27-34.
    8. R. D. Baker & I. G. McHale, 2009. "Modelling the probability distribution of prize winnings in the UK National Lottery: consequences of conscious selection," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 172(4), pages 813-834, October.
    9. Brennan C. Platt & Joseph Price & Henry Tappen, 2013. "The Role of Risk Preferences in Pay-to-Bid Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 2117-2134, September.
    10. X. H. Wang & Carmen Menezes, 2002. "The Precautionary Premium and the Risk-Downside Risk Tradeoff," Working Papers 0204, Department of Economics, University of Missouri, revised 16 May 2002.
    11. Ian Walker & Rhys Wheeler, 2018. "The Decline and Fall of UK Lotto," Working Papers 247054751, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    12. Potì, Valerio & Wang, DengLi, 2010. "The coskewness puzzle," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1827-1838, August.
    13. Mark Schneider & Robert Day, 2018. "Target-Adjusted Utility Functions and Expected-Utility Paradoxes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 271-287, January.
    14. Philip Grossman & Catherine Eckel, 2015. "Loving the long shot: Risk taking with skewed lotteries," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 195-217, December.
    15. Brennan C. Platt & Joseph Price & Henry Tappen, 2010. "Pay-to-Bid Auctions," NBER Working Papers 15695, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Jaume García & Plácido Rodríguez, 2007. "The Demand for Football Pools in Spain," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 8(4), pages 335-354, August.
    17. Hartog, Joop & Vijverberg, Wim P.M., 2007. "On compensation for risk aversion and skewness affection in wages," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 938-956, December.
    18. Baker, Rose & Forrest, David & Pérez, Levi, 2020. "Modelling demand for lotto using a novel method of correcting for endogeneity," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 302-308.
    19. Carmen F. Menezes & X. Henry Wang, 2004. "On the Risk–Downside Risk Tradeoff," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 72(2), pages 179-187, March.
    20. W. Henry Chiu, 2005. "Skewness Preference, Risk Aversion, and the Precedence Relations on Stochastic Changes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(12), pages 1816-1828, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:16:y:2009:i:3:p:319-323. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEL20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.