Re:Shrinkflation, SanDisk Style
by Nullabillity on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @07:40AM
(#34803019)
The correct answer would be to sell it as a $54M jackpot then. Or require the organizers to pay the difference out of pocket.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Is this an attempt at humor?
Re:Shrinkflation, SanDisk Style
by Nullabillity on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @10:06AM
(#34804788)
No?
If you don't know the answer, underestimate and overdeliver. Or consider whether you should be doing it in the first place.
Re:Shrinkflation, SanDisk Style
by oneeyedpigeon on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @10:16AM
(#34804901)
The problem is that underestimating will cause fewer tickets to be sold.
I can imagine a perverse population of customers whose elasticity function prevents the estimate from ever being correct by always buying too many tickets.
Re:Shrinkflation, SanDisk Style
by mrguyorama on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @01:08PM
(#34808003)
A business being less successful if they don't misrepresent reality is perfectly fine to me.
> A business being less successful if they don't misrepresent reality is perfectly fine to me
We are talking about a state government backed lottery, not a business.
> I did not know that shit was estimated.
> If you don't know the answer, underestimate and overdeliver.
Make up your mind, is estimating bad or not? The example I gave isn’t the only possible outcome, some times it’s 1-2% more than quoted when more tickets were sold.
Re:Shrinkflation, SanDisk Style
by Nullabillity on Friday February 17, 2023 @09:57AM
(#34835360)
Err, what? I never posted that first quote?
And even then, it's perfectly consistent to say that estimating is only OK if it doesn't make you look better than reality.