A canary for the (UK property) coal mine - Omaze winners' "£4m" house

[spunko]

Just had a look, another house in Cornwall? Yawn. No disrespect to Cornwall but they already did one recently. Another issue is going to be coming up with new houses that get people talking.

The "London house" they just did was pretty meh. I'd sell it the same day I picked up the keys, couldn't ever see myself living there, it's a pisshole.

[Frank Hovis]

2 hours ago, spunko said:

Just had a look, another house in Cornwall? Yawn. No disrespect to Cornwall but they already did one recently. Another issue is going to be coming up with new houses that get people talking.

The "London house" they just did was pretty meh. I'd sell it the same day I picked up the keys, couldn't ever see myself living there, it's a pisshole.

 

It's good visually, which is the main point given that Omaze primarily advertises on social media.

As someone else noted upthread any winner is unlikely to actually wish to move in.

If I won some amazing place in the Peak District then I would live in it for a month as a holiday, and extend the courtesy to my friends and relations, and then put it up for sale at the given valuation (and not £1m over like the Wadebridge house winners).

Almost all people will read "Win £4.5m house in Cornwall" as "Win £4.5m  house in Cornwall".

Though in this case, unlike the Wadebridge one, if I did win this one then I would actually move into it.

That is however going to be fairly hard given that I'm not buying a ticket.

[spunko]

1 hour ago, Frank Hovis said:

 

It's good visually, which is the main point given that Omaze primarily advertises on social media.

As someone else noted upthread any winner is unlikely to actually wish to move in.

If I won some amazing place in the Peak District then I would live in it for a month as a holiday, and extend the courtesy to my friends and relations, and then put it up for sale at the given valuation (and not £1m over like the Wadebridge house winners).

Almost all people will read "Win £4.5m house in Cornwall" as "Win £4.5m  house in Cornwall".

Though in this case, unlike the Wadebridge one, if I did win this one then I would actually move into it.

That is however going to be fairly hard given that I'm not buying a ticket.

That's interesting - but then it begs the question, why play Omaze and not just stick with the lottery?

[Yadda yadda yadda]

13 minutes ago, spunko said:

That's interesting - but then it begs the question, why play Omaze and not just stick with the lottery?

I've never played Omaze. What are the odds? The big problem with the lottery, from a pure gambling point of view, is the size of the cut taken by tax, the operator and so-called good causes. If Omaze takes a much smaller cut then it might be better value. Albeit all or nothing as there are no smaller prizes.

[Frank Hovis]

45 minutes ago, spunko said:

That's interesting - but then it begs the question, why play Omaze and not just stick with the lottery?

 

I suppose it's more interesting and people generally don't have the dry logical approach of the investors on here who would (usually) just assume that they would sell it.

The ticketing is more complicated than I expected.

 

https://omaze.co.uk/pages/enter-cornwall-ii

[spunko]

1 hour ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

I've never played Omaze. What are the odds? The big problem with the lottery, from a pure gambling point of view, is the size of the cut taken by tax, the operator and so-called good causes. If Omaze takes a much smaller cut then it might be better value. Albeit all or nothing as there are no smaller prizes.

Most people don't give a toss about odds, which I've always found quite strange as I'm really into the odds of gambling etc, I find it fascinating the way that these things are priced up, same with bookies.

Anyway, the odds of winning the Omaze prize IIRC were about 2 million to 1, whereas for the standard Lotto draw on Saturday night they're now something like 12 million to 1.

Omaze give a higher % to charity than Camelot too.

So the odds are vastly better, but then it costs more. Again I doubt most people even consider this, they just think "here's a fiver, I know I probably won't win, don't care about the odds"

[Yadda yadda yadda]

1 hour ago, spunko said:

Most people don't give a toss about odds, which I've always found quite strange as I'm really into the odds of gambling etc, I find it fascinating the way that these things are priced up, same with bookies.

Anyway, the odds of winning the Omaze prize IIRC were about 2 million to 1, whereas for the standard Lotto draw on Saturday night they're now something like 12 million to 1.

Omaze give a higher % to charity than Camelot too.

So the odds are vastly better, but then it costs more. Again I doubt most people even consider this, they just think "here's a fiver, I know I probably won't win, don't care about the odds"

If it is 2 million to 1 at £5 a time they're taking a lot of money out. I don't care if it goes to profits or charity.

I expect Omaze have to show a reasonable case for the valuation. If they're taking in £10m in ticket sales they can afford to spend the valuations. There really isn't a lot of point in inflating the value much.

Odds are fascinating. In this case people are buying a dream rather than gambling, primarily. They buy a ticket to dream about what their life would be like if they had millions. It is escapism. This is why poor people buy lottery tickets much more than rich people. Gambling on cards or horses is about adrenaline as much as anything. The thrill of the chase and the application of skill or knowledge to hopefully get an edge.

[spunko]

28 minutes ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

If it is 2 million to 1 at £5 a time they're taking a lot of money out. I don't care if it goes to profits or charity.

This is why poor people buy lottery tickets much more than rich people. Gambling on cards or horses is about adrenaline as much as anything.
 

I was just about to akshooooly you on this, because I seem to remember reading the opposite was true, but I can't find it now so maybe I imagined it

 

[Yadda yadda yadda]

48 minutes ago, spunko said:

I was just about to akshooooly you on this, because I seem to remember reading the opposite was true, but I can't find it now so maybe I imagined it

 

Maybe I'm wrong and simply a prejudiced dosbodder. No-one I know who has money plays whilst the povos do.

[Frank Hovis]

1 hour ago, spunko said:

I was just about to akshooooly you on this, because I seem to remember reading the opposite was true, but I can't find it now so maybe I imagined it

 

 

34 minutes ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

Maybe I'm wrong and simply a prejudiced dosbodder. No-one I know who has money plays whilst the povos do.

 

I don't know of any studies of lottery ticket buying correlated with wealth but I did hear a Camelot spokesman on the radio discussing buying patterns.

He said that in "normal", as in non-must go non-special, draw sales the highest number of tickets tend to be sold in northern towns, from memory Burnley was a high seller.

When it is however a must go or special draw then the highest number of sales are in wealthier areas with the example given of Canary Wharf.

I'm not sure if you can prove your, and my, instinct from this about poorer people buying more proportionate to their wealth but you can say that richer people have, on average, a better understanding of the odds when gambling.

[spunko]

31 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

 

 

I don't know of any studies of lottery ticket buying correlated with wealth but I did hear a Camelot spokesman on the radio discussing buying patterns.

He said that in "normal", as in non-must go non-special, draw sales the highest number of tickets tend to be sold in northern towns, from memory Burnley was a high seller.

When it is however a must go or special draw then the highest number of sales are in wealthier areas with the example given of Canary Wharf.

I'm not sure if you can prove your, and my, instinct from this about poorer people buying more proportionate to their wealth but you can say that richer people have, on average, a better understanding of the odds when gambling.

Yeah that sounds like the one I heard. Whenever there's a bumper Euromillions rollover, the highest number of tickets are usually sold in Kensington & Chelsea IIRC.

[apples]

17 hours ago, spunko said:

I was just about to akshooooly you on this, because I seem to remember reading the opposite was true, but I can't find it now so maybe I imagined it

Poor people spend less in absolute terms, but proportionately more, says the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/jul/27/national-lottery-regressive-poverty

("this article is more than 13 years old", mind, but I can't find anything more recent)

Quote

According to new Theos/ComRes research, published today, the National Lottery is regressive. We need to be careful what we mean by this. The data show that people from lower-income households (earning under £20,000 pa) play draw-based games less often than their wealthier peers (from households earning over £35,000 pa) but buy scratchcards more frequently. Overall, frequency of play balances out between income groups.

In terms of spending, however, richer and poorer households spend almost identical amounts on draw-based games (both £141) but markedly different sums on scratchcards (£41 and £55 respectively). This absolute difference translates into a significant proportional difference. Whereas the average individual from a £40,000 household spends less than 0.5% of their pre-tax income on the lottery, the average individual from a £20,000 household spends proportionally more than twice as much.

This is the Theos research referenced:

https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2009/07/27/national-lottery-is-a-bad-deal-for-poor

The report has 404ed, but here's an archive:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120616135701/http://campaigndirector.moodia.com/Client/Theos/Files/NationalLotteryreport.pdf

Quote

A typical Lottery player lives in semi-routine or a lower-supervisory/technical household. He or she is not, in the main, professional or well educated. Indeed, he or she is as likely to be unemployed as living in an affluent home. Although the typical player will be spending only the same as, or perhaps even slightly less than his affluent counterparts, proportionate to household income he or she will be spending perhaps two or three times more than high income players.

The Guardian article links to a National Lottery Commision paper that's also 404ed, so another archive:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090323011904/http://www.natlotcomm.gov.uk//UploadDocs/Contents/Documents/social_research_2003_pdf(3).pdf

Edited March 20, 2023 by apples

[spunko]

1 hour ago, apples said:

Poor people spend less in absolute terms, but proportionately more, says the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/jul/27/national-lottery-regressive-poverty

("this article is more than 13 years old", mind, but I can't find anything more recent)

This is the Theos research referenced:

https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2009/07/27/national-lottery-is-a-bad-deal-for-poor

The report has 404ed, but here's an archive:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120616135701/http://campaigndirector.moodia.com/Client/Theos/Files/NationalLotteryreport.pdf

The Guardian article links to a National Lottery Commision paper that's also 404ed, so another archive:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090323011904/http://www.natlotcomm.gov.uk//UploadDocs/Contents/Documents/social_research_2003_pdf(3).pdf

Blimey, 1% of their income on the lottery. Most of that on scratchcards presumably. Mental. Never mind tax on the stupid, a tax on the poor.

[sleepwello'nights]

1 hour ago, apples said:

Poor people spend less in absolute terms, but proportionately more, says the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/jul/27/national-lottery-regressive-poverty

 

Haven't read the article, so my opinion may be covered, they're buying hope. That could be a personality trait opposite to self reliance.

[spunko]

You only get 4 days to claim with Omaze. The more I learn, the less I like about all this.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/property/article-11936915/Tens-thousands-Brits-enter-Omaze-win-dream-home-theres-catch.html

The Omaze Million Pound House Draw costs £10 per ticket, but entrants have been shocked to learn that the winner only has 96 hours to claim their prize and agree to all the terms and conditions. 

If you don't respond in time you forfeit the property - as once happened to one winner who had bagged a cash prize in a previous draw.

You can't opt for no publicity either. Fuck that!

According to one of the comments, if you have a criminal record they have the right to cancel your win. WTF all round.

Just had a look, seems to be true.

Quote

Background Checks: Except where legally prohibited, Omaze reserves the right to conduct background screenings or security checks, at its discretion, on a Potential Winner and any Potential Winner guests, where applicable, and the Potential Winner agrees to sign any necessary documentation required for such checks. This will always be done in accordance with Omaze’s Privacy Notice. Promoter reserves the right to disqualify any Potential Winner and any Potential Winner’s guest(s) based on the results of such background check (or the background check of Potential Winner’s guest(s), if applicable), if Promoter reasonably determines that awarding the Prize(s) to such Potential Winner and/or Potential Winner’s guest(s) might reflect negatively on Promoter or any of the Prize Draw Partners, or be likely to put Promoter, any of the other Prize Draw Partners, or any other third-party in danger.

 

[HousePriceMania]

3 hours ago, spunko said:

You only get 4 days to claim with Omaze. The more I learn, the less I like about all this.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/property/article-11936915/Tens-thousands-Brits-enter-Omaze-win-dream-home-theres-catch.html

The Omaze Million Pound House Draw costs £10 per ticket, but entrants have been shocked to learn that the winner only has 96 hours to claim their prize and agree to all the terms and conditions. 

If you don't respond in time you forfeit the property - as once happened to one winner who had bagged a cash prize in a previous draw.

You can't opt for no publicity either. Fuck that!

According to one of the comments, if you have a criminal record they have the right to cancel your win. WTF all round.

Just had a look, seems to be true.

 

Like all things property...a total fecking scam

[spunko]

5 minutes ago, HousePriceMania said:

Like all things property...a total fecking scam

It doesnt even specify a criminal record, just a general "background check".

You said some hurty words on Twitter in 2013, sorry, you're disqualified.

[HousePriceMania]

4 minutes ago, spunko said:

You said some hurty words on Twitter in 2013, sorry, you're disqualified.

Yes, I am.

[HousePriceMania]

WTF..."or the background check of Potential Winner’s guest(s),"

 

 

Wouldn't you just not invite Boris ?

[Frank Hovis]

And....

It's back.

New EA this time, Offers Over £3.5m which is the price at which it was delisted.

 

 

As they would say in Spinal Tap.

It's so bleak, it's like, how much more bleak could this be?

The answer is none. None more bleak.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/134117282#/?channel=RES_BUY

[ashestoashes]

2 hours ago, Frank Hovis said:

And....

It's back.

New EA this time, Offers Over £3.5m which is the price at which it was delisted.

 

As they would say in Spinal Tap.

It's so bleak, it's like, how much more bleak could this be?

The answer is none. None more bleak.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/134117282#/?channel=RES_BUY

£2.5 m over valued assuming the land can be converted to a caravan/campsite

Edited April 29, 2023 by ashestoashes

[Frank Hovis]

8 minutes ago, ashestoashes said:

£2.5 m over valued assuming the land can be converted to a caravan/campsite

 

I was maybe being more generous and suggesting £1.5m valuation as the house itself is pretty decent even if the location isn't.

[Frank Hovis]

There are no changes in the listing but it is the subject of this week's advertorial in Cornwall Live which suggests that potential purchasers are not exactly queueing around the block.

Such advertorials presumably cost money.

Still OEIO £3.5m, bear in mind that Omaxe valued it at £3m and the market has markedly cooled since the end of Lockdowns and WFH.

 

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/property/award-winning-house-rock-cornwall-8469173

 

[Frank Hovis]

Someone has failed to obtain an independent valuation!

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/134117282#/?channel=RES_BUY

[Delboy]

On 24/06/2023 at 10:15, Frank Hovis said:

Someone has failed to obtain an independent valuation!

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/134117282#/?channel=RES_BUY

 

I guess if you've got that kind of money in the bank, with no mortgage, a valuation is unnecessary.

It's always a mystery to me, when I dream of owning a multi-million pound home, how the estate agents think up a price.