One big winner of $340M in Oregon

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

sixone

Lifer
May 3, 2004
25,030
5
61
Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
Every news report I saw was estimating the Lump Sum payout to $160 mil. Haven't heard any official numbers though since they never really know how many people buy tickets those last couple days to pump up the jackpot.

$164 million. Pretax.

And taking the annuity is no way to 'enforce discipline.' There are a lot of companies out there that will loan you money against your future income. If you're the kind of person that will blow thru the payment, then this option will look tempting, at least.
 

MaxDepth

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2001
8,757
43
91
Originally posted by: RossMAN
:(

Rats. I thought you would have had it. I mean if the chances are 1 in 148 million, you would have collected half that ticket plus all those near misses. But...looking at that you would have only come out ahead by like 10 million. I guess that's only a lukewarm deal.
:D

EIDT:
My short list of things that I would have done with the money:
1) Buy three house: one at the beach (NC or SC); one in Park City, Utah; and my parents house
2) Buy a minor league baseball franchise (like the Durham Bulls)
3) Build a trust/investment fund that would allow all my nieces, nephews, extended family that can claim me as a relative to have college paid for (even through doctoral), 20% down payment on a house (within reason), mediacl/dental insurance
4) Create a cooking school in NC that would rival the CIA
 

AdamSnow

Diamond Member
Nov 21, 2002
5,736
0
76
Originally posted by: conehead433
Originally posted by: AdamSnow
Originally posted by: geno
Originally posted by: ATLien247
Originally posted by: Vinfinite
7.8M per year is fucken plenty, choosing lump sum is just asking to lose it all

I'm guessing you haven't done the math needed to realize that you get more value from the lump sum versus the annuity...

inflation?

I would like to know as well... to me - getting 7.8m of 30 years sounds like a better deal... at least then if you cant control yourself you know that you have 30 years to party... :)

The problem with the annuity is that most of the lotteries don't allow for anyone in your family to inherit or continue to receive the yearly payment if you die. You can do far better than the 7.8 million per year investing properly if you opt to take the lump sum payment.

Understand completely now... Yes, investing 100m for a few years would give you much better return than 7.8m /year :)
 

conehead433

Diamond Member
Dec 4, 2002
5,569
901
126
Winning the lottery could ruin your life. Friends, relatives, everyone and their brother wanting your money. Time to move to Austrailia.
 

Mermaidman

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2003
7,987
93
91
Originally posted by: conehead433
Winning the lottery could ruin your life. Friends, relatives, everyone and their brother wanting your money. Time to move to Austrailia.

But, I thought money solves all problems!
 

Mayfriday0529

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2003
7,187
0
71
110 Million Lump sum attracts too much attention. If I win that amount of money, I probably only keep around 10 million enough to secure a comfortable lifestyle and the rest I would donate it.
 

DainBramaged

Lifer
Jun 19, 2003
23,454
41
91
While I'm sure things would have the potential to change as soon as I got my hands on the money, I'd take the lump sum and invest it. You would get a lot better returns than 7.8 mill per year.
 

ATLien247

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2000
4,597
0
0
Originally posted by: Jnetty99
110 Million Lump sum attracts too much attention. If I win that amount of money, I probably only keep around 10 million enough to secure a comfortable lifestyle and the rest I would donate it.

I'll glady accept your donation in its entirety...
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,940
4,529
126
Originally posted by: sixone
$164 million. Pretax.
And taking the annuity is no way to 'enforce discipline.' There are a lot of companies out there that will loan you money against your future income. If you're the kind of person that will blow thru the payment, then this option will look tempting, at least.
Yep, $164.4 million pretax. With 35% federal tax and 9% Oregon tax, that is $92 million post tax.

With the annuity isn't it ~$340 million/30 = ~$11.3 million a year for 29 years (~$22.6 million the first year)? Pretax ($6.3 million and $12.7 million post tax if tax rates remain the same).

You are correct that it is theoretically probable to do better with the lump sum, and you are correct that it is possible to borrow against the future income. However, years of history have shown us that taking the lump sum OFTEN leads to bankruptcy or worse. Past winners were killed for their money, bankrupt, are driving taxis for a living, have family members kidnapped/killed, bombarded with beggers of all forms, arrested, etc. When you don't have the money yet (annuity), history has shown that those side issues are drastically reduced. For purely financial reasons, take the lump sum. For practical reasons you are often an idiot to take the lump sum.
 

randomlinh

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,846
2
0
linh.wordpress.com
which is why i wish identity would be left out of it... heh. I don't need people knowing how much money i have. but if i did win, i'd probably divide it up so all my close friends and family get say 5 mil.. and the rest i'd have to find a worthy charity that would actually make good use of the money.
 

GuitarDaddy

Lifer
Nov 9, 2004
11,465
1
0
It's pretty simple really, take the $92mm lump sum after taxes, invest it in tax free munnies at 5%. Then party your a$$ off on 4.6mm a year in non-taxable income for life and never touch the $92mm
 

Malfeas

Senior member
Apr 27, 2005
829
0
76
Originally posted by: Vinfinite
7.8M per year is fucken plenty, choosing lump sum is just asking to lose it all

It's wiser to take the lump sum. Imagine if you will, that you take the yearly payout, and die the first year. Luckily you filled out a will and you brothers, sisters, mom and dad whatever, are now inheritors of your potentially vast estate. But wait. They have to pay the estate tax. And guess what, they owe the WHOLE amount on the 340 million. Thats right, the whole amount. Guess what, your inheritors are now bankrupt, and the government will take the lottery winnings every year until the taxes are paid off.

Good job, you just ****** over everyone you care about.

Also, by taking the lump sum and investing the majority of it, even in fairly conservative ways, will over 30 years grow faster than the yearly payout would be.


Edit: I admit I can be wrong on the estate tax, that's just what someone in the office here said. I could google the answer, but I prefer to give someone else the opportunity to call me a dumbass.
 

Mayfriday0529

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2003
7,187
0
71
Originally posted by: ATLien247
Originally posted by: Jnetty99
110 Million Lump sum attracts too much attention. If I win that amount of money, I probably only keep around 10 million enough to secure a comfortable lifestyle and the rest I would donate it.

I'll glady accept your donation in its entirety...

I donate it to charities
 

Opossum

Member
Oct 10, 1999
177
0
0
I live in Medford Oregon, right next to Jacksonville were the winning ticket was sold. Not to start any rumors but word is the winner may be the same guy that won the state lotto in 2001 for $8.75 mil. Not confirmed. But that is the word going around town.
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,909
3,889
136
Originally posted by: conehead433
Winning the lottery could ruin your life. Friends, relatives, everyone and their brother wanting your money. Time to move to Austrailia.

That's the number one rule when winning the lottery. Set up some kind of anonymous LLP, and have your lawyer go down and claim it. Those morons with the big cardboard checks on TV are just begging to have their lives ruined by all the mooching lowlifes that will crawl out of the woodwork.