|
Finances / Finanzen » uk.finance » That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006
| That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383788] |
So, 30 April 2006 17:06 |
|
"Squalid raffle" still a big draw: Against all the odds, Premium Bonds
are more popular than ever in their 50th year
It is 50 years ago this month that Harold Macmillan announced the launch
of what was described as a "squalid raffle" to a Britain labouring under
postwar austerity in an attempt to persuade us all to save more.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8214-2154513,00 .html
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383791 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 18:20 |
|
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:06:36 +0100, Allan Gould
<invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
>"Squalid raffle" still a big draw: Against all the odds, Premium Bonds
>are more popular than ever in their 50th year
>
>It is 50 years ago this month that Harold Macmillan announced the launch
>of what was described as a "squalid raffle" to a Britain labouring under
>postwar austerity in an attempt to persuade us all to save more.
Well, my 1 pound bond held almost from the start is still awaiting
success.
Tiddy Ogg.
http://www.tiddyogg.co.uk
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383793 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 18:36 |
|
"Tiddy Ogg" wrote
> Well, my 1 pound bond held almost
> from the start is still awaiting success.
With odds of 24,000 to 1 each month, you
might expect one prize every 2,000 years or so...
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383795 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 19:10 |
|
"Tiddy Ogg" <tiddyogg [at] madasasheep.com> wrote in message
news:cto952t94efhl980sp0p3te31047vlgu3l [at] 4ax.com...
> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:06:36 +0100, Allan Gould
> <invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>"Squalid raffle" still a big draw: Against all the odds, Premium Bonds
>>are more popular than ever in their 50th year
>>
>>It is 50 years ago this month that Harold Macmillan announced the launch
>>of what was described as a "squalid raffle" to a Britain labouring under
>>postwar austerity in an attempt to persuade us all to save more.
> Well, my 1 pound bond held almost from the start is still awaiting
> success.
It won't even be in the draw, most of the pre-computerised bonds are a waste
of time, they may dig the occasional one out of some dusty basement every
now and then just to make things look good.
Before the new tax discs rules came into force the DVLA managed to lose 2
million cars! And just look at the goings on at the Home Office and all this
guff we keep hearing about tax credits... so what are you chances of your £1
bond being drawn?
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383796 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 19:49 |
|
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 17:10:06 GMT, "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote:
>"Tiddy Ogg" <tiddyogg [at] madasasheep.com> wrote in message
>news:cto952t94efhl980sp0p3te31047vlgu3l [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:06:36 +0100, Allan Gould
>> <invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>"Squalid raffle" still a big draw: Against all the odds, Premium Bonds
>>>are more popular than ever in their 50th year
>>>
>>>It is 50 years ago this month that Harold Macmillan announced the launch
>>>of what was described as a "squalid raffle" to a Britain labouring under
>>>postwar austerity in an attempt to persuade us all to save more.
>> Well, my 1 pound bond held almost from the start is still awaiting
>> success.
>
>It won't even be in the draw, most of the pre-computerised bonds are a waste
>of time, they may dig the occasional one out of some dusty basement every
>now and then just to make things look good.
>
>Before the new tax discs rules came into force the DVLA managed to lose 2
>million cars! And just look at the goings on at the Home Office and all this
>guff we keep hearing about tax credits... so what are you chances of your £1
>bond being drawn?
Except that I thought ERNIE was just that: an electronic random number
generator.
As such it surely doesn't rely on a numbers having to be fed in to
some database - (how could it, back in the 50s datbases were still a
decade or more away).
It just churns out a number that it 'invents' at that moment, and is
totally independent of having a fixed series of numbers.
Rgds
__
Richard Buttrey
Grappenhall, Cheshire, UK
__________________________
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April2006 [message #383800 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 20:33 |
|
Richard Buttrey wrote:
> Except that I thought ERNIE was just that: an electronic random number
> generator.
> As such it surely doesn't rely on a numbers having to be fed in to
> some database - (how could it, back in the 50s datbases were still a
> decade or more away).
> It just churns out a number that it 'invents' at that moment, and is
> totally independent of having a fixed series of numbers.
Surely it only generates a number for a bond that has been issued and
not "cashed in"? In a sense that is a random number from a fixed series
of numbers.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April2006 [message #383801 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 20:35 |
|
Tiddy Ogg wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:06:36 +0100, Allan Gould
> <invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> "Squalid raffle" still a big draw: Against all the odds, Premium Bonds
>> are more popular than ever in their 50th year
>>
>> It is 50 years ago this month that Harold Macmillan announced the launch
>> of what was described as a "squalid raffle" to a Britain labouring under
>> postwar austerity in an attempt to persuade us all to save more.
> Well, my 1 pound bond held almost from the start is still awaiting
> success.
Further to suggestions by other posters on this thread that older bonds
may not be included in the draw, I can confirm that old bonds do get
prizes. I have a 300GBP purchased in 1968 (admittedly not the very
beginning) and it picked up a prize (only 50 quid, mind) in 2004 and
another in 2005. Unfortunately a GBP500 bond purchased in 1980 doesn't
seem to have won any prizes recently (my records of prizes start in 2000).
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383802 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 21:14 |
|
"Richard Buttrey" <chaos.theory.nospam.removethis [at] zen.co.uk> wrote in
message
<
>>Before the new tax discs rules came into force the DVLA managed to lose 2
>>million cars! And just look at the goings on at the Home Office and all
>>this
>>guff we keep hearing about tax credits... so what are you chances of your
>>£1
>>bond being drawn?
>
>
> Except that I thought ERNIE was just that: an electronic random number
> generator.
> As such it surely doesn't rely on a numbers having to be fed in to
> some database - (how could it, back in the 50s datbases were still a
> decade or more away).
That may well have been true for the original beast, but he has been
replaced numerous times over the years. Of course it's still determined by
generating random numbers, within a set range, but the process of linking
winning bonds to names and addresses and issuing prizes is automated, as you
would expect, however anything the wrong side of the 1970's will not be in
that database... what's the point of generating a number that isn't tied to
an issuance?
My old dad commented on this a while back, all his (small) winnings were
from bonds issued this side of the 1990, which would tie in with the upgrade
of ERNIE in the late 80's.
God knows what has become of all the original paperwork over five decades,
don't attribute it to conspiracy when it can be explained by simple
incompetence.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383803 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 21:19 |
|
"Allan Gould" <invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:4bkebkFvvn8gU1 [at] individual.net...
> Tiddy Ogg wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:06:36 +0100, Allan Gould
>> <invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> "Squalid raffle" still a big draw: Against all the odds, Premium Bonds
>>> are more popular than ever in their 50th year
>>>
>>> It is 50 years ago this month that Harold Macmillan announced the launch
>>> of what was described as a "squalid raffle" to a Britain labouring under
>>> postwar austerity in an attempt to persuade us all to save more.
>> Well, my 1 pound bond held almost from the start is still awaiting
>> success.
>
> Further to suggestions by other posters on this thread that older bonds
> may not be included in the draw, I can confirm that old bonds do get
> prizes. I have a 300GBP purchased in 1968 (admittedly not the very
> beginning) and it picked up a prize (only 50 quid, mind) in 2004 and
> another in 2005.
Yet no notable activity in previous three decades? One would expect some
older bonds to benefit from some manual 'pruning' every now and then as not
to frighten the herd, no doubt that boxes of original bonds are now being
used to prop open various doors across the department.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383804 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 22:49 |
|
Virgils Ghost wrote:
> "Tiddy Ogg" <tiddyogg [at] madasasheep.com> wrote in message
> news:cto952t94efhl980sp0p3te31047vlgu3l [at] 4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:06:36 +0100, Allan Gould
> > <invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>"Squalid raffle" still a big draw: Against all the odds, Premium Bonds
> >>are more popular than ever in their 50th year
> >>
> >>It is 50 years ago this month that Harold Macmillan announced the launch
> >>of what was described as a "squalid raffle" to a Britain labouring under
> >>postwar austerity in an attempt to persuade us all to save more.
> > Well, my 1 pound bond held almost from the start is still awaiting
> > success.
>
> It won't even be in the draw, most of the pre-computerised bonds are a wa=
ste
> of time, they may dig the occasional one out of some dusty basement every
> now and then just to make things look good.
>
>From http://www.nsandi.com/products/pb/surprisingfacts.jsp
Myth 3: "Only new Bonds win prizes"
Each =A31 Bond number has an equal chance of winning, regardless of when
it was bought. Bonds purchased more recently may seem to win more
often, but this is because there are more new Bonds than old ones.
Since the =A31 million jackpot prize was introduced in April 1994, more
Bonds have been sold than in the preceding 37 years put together.
Myth 4: "Old Bonds are left out of the draw"
Premium Bond numbers are not programmed into or stored in ERNIE, so no
numbers can be left out of the draw. ERNIE's sole function is to
generate numbers randomly. These are then matched against the existing
eligible Bond numbers.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383805 ] |
So, 30 April 2006 22:52 |
|
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:14:49 GMT, "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote:
>"Richard Buttrey" <chaos.theory.nospam.removethis [at] zen.co.uk> wrote in
>message
><
>>>Before the new tax discs rules came into force the DVLA managed to lose 2
>>>million cars! And just look at the goings on at the Home Office and all
>>>this
>>>guff we keep hearing about tax credits... so what are you chances of your
>>>£1
>>>bond being drawn?
>>
>>
>> Except that I thought ERNIE was just that: an electronic random number
>> generator.
>> As such it surely doesn't rely on a numbers having to be fed in to
>> some database - (how could it, back in the 50s datbases were still a
>> decade or more away).
>
>That may well have been true for the original beast, but he has been
>replaced numerous times over the years. Of course it's still determined by
>generating random numbers, within a set range, but the process of linking
>winning bonds to names and addresses and issuing prizes is automated, as you
>would expect, however anything the wrong side of the 1970's will not be in
>that database... what's the point of generating a number that isn't tied to
>an issuance?
But the point is that there is no database.
Just to check this I went to the following site.
http://www.nsandi.com/products/pb/surprisingfacts.jsp
where it makes quite clear that as I originally posted, numbers are
generated randomly, not picked from a database pool. More numbers are
drawn than prizes since some numbers will not have yet been issued,
and some will have been cashed.
So it seems fairly clear that all the system does is pick a number,
then establish whether it's been cashed in or not yet issued. If the
number selected is one of those, it's discarded and the next one is
checked to see if it's in issue, etcetera until all numbers have been
'drawn' for that month.
What is also interesting is that since 1994 when the £1M prize was
introduced, more bonds have been sold than in the preceding 37 years
put together. Which helps explain why older bonds do not appear to win
as often as newer bonds.
>My old dad commented on this a while back, all his (small) winnings were
>from bonds issued this side of the 1990, which would tie in with the upgrade
>of ERNIE in the late 80's.
There have apparently been four ERNIEs, but all operating on the same
principle.
>God knows what has become of all the original paperwork over five decades,
>don't attribute it to conspiracy when it can be explained by simple
>incompetence.
>
Rgds
__
Richard Buttrey
Grappenhall, Cheshire, UK
__________________________
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383810 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 01:31 |
|
"Richard Buttrey" <chaos.theory.nospam.removethis [at] zen.co.uk> wrote in
message
<
> But the point is that there is no database.
> Just to check this I went to the following site.
>
> http://www.nsandi.com/products/pb/surprisingfacts.jsp
>
> where it makes quite clear that as I originally posted, numbers are
> generated randomly, not picked from a database pool. More numbers are
> drawn than prizes since some numbers will not have yet been issued,
> and some will have been cashed.
>
> So it seems fairly clear that all the system does is pick a number,
> then establish whether it's been cashed in or not yet issued.
Precisely, and if your crumpled half-century old bond isn't registered in
the 'database' of active bonds it is simply passed over.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383811 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 01:37 |
|
"Peter King" <peter.a.king [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
<
> Premium Bond numbers are not programmed into or stored in ERNIE, so no
> numbers can be left out of the draw. ERNIE's sole function is to
> generate numbers randomly. These are then matched against the existing
> eligible Bond numbers.
Of course that's a subjective answer, your numbers may well be drawn, they
cannot be "left out", however should the numbers come up it makes little
difference if their system no longer has any knowledge of your dusty old
bond; the winnings aren't tied to any name or address, they inhabit the
twilight zone.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383812 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 08:05 |
|
"Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote in message
news:dTb5g.190987$4P2.74883 [at] fe03.news.easynews.com...
> "Peter King" <peter.a.king [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> <
>> Premium Bond numbers are not programmed into or stored in ERNIE, so no
>> numbers can be left out of the draw. ERNIE's sole function is to
>> generate numbers randomly. These are then matched against the existing
>> eligible Bond numbers.
>
> Of course that's a subjective answer, your numbers may well be drawn, they
> cannot be "left out", however should the numbers come up it makes little
> difference if their system no longer has any knowledge of your dusty old
> bond; the winnings aren't tied to any name or address, they inhabit the
> twilight zone.
Is this an opinion or do you have some evidence for it? Only if you have
evidence I'd like to warn my parents who have a substantial number of bonds
from way back and win (admittedly small figures) almost ever month.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383815 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 10:24 |
|
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 17:36:27 +0100, "Tim" <me [at] home.uk> wrote:
>"Tiddy Ogg" wrote
>> Well, my 1 pound bond held almost
>> from the start is still awaiting success.
>
>With odds of 24,000 to 1 each month, you
>might expect one prize every 2,000 years or so...
I've held a hundred since 1967 and haven't won a bean either.
MM
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383816 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 10:30 |
|
On Mon, 01 May 2006 06:05:07 GMT, "Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
>
>"Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote in message
>news:dTb5g.190987$4P2.74883 [at] fe03.news.easynews.com...
>> "Peter King" <peter.a.king [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>> <
>>> Premium Bond numbers are not programmed into or stored in ERNIE, so no
>>> numbers can be left out of the draw. ERNIE's sole function is to
>>> generate numbers randomly. These are then matched against the existing
>>> eligible Bond numbers.
>>
>> Of course that's a subjective answer, your numbers may well be drawn, they
>> cannot be "left out", however should the numbers come up it makes little
>> difference if their system no longer has any knowledge of your dusty old
>> bond; the winnings aren't tied to any name or address, they inhabit the
>> twilight zone.
>
>Is this an opinion or do you have some evidence for it? Only if you have
>evidence I'd like to warn my parents who have a substantial number of bonds
>from way back and win (admittedly small figures) almost ever month.
Even though I only have £100 "invested" I am somewhat surprised never
to have won even a fiver in almost forty years. Suppose my hundred had
been a thousand, would my odds have shortened markedly? I wonder...
MM
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383817 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 10:32 |
|
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:35:31 +0100, Allan Gould
<invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
>Tiddy Ogg wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:06:36 +0100, Allan Gould
>> <invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> "Squalid raffle" still a big draw: Against all the odds, Premium Bonds
>>> are more popular than ever in their 50th year
>>>
>>> It is 50 years ago this month that Harold Macmillan announced the launch
>>> of what was described as a "squalid raffle" to a Britain labouring under
>>> postwar austerity in an attempt to persuade us all to save more.
>> Well, my 1 pound bond held almost from the start is still awaiting
>> success.
>
>Further to suggestions by other posters on this thread that older bonds
>may not be included in the draw, I can confirm that old bonds do get
>prizes. I have a 300GBP purchased in 1968 (admittedly not the very
>beginning) and it picked up a prize (only 50 quid, mind) in 2004 and
>another in 2005. Unfortunately a GBP500 bond purchased in 1980 doesn't
>seem to have won any prizes recently (my records of prizes start in 2000).
Do you think it's the case that a large holding virtually guarantees
regular winnings?
MM
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383818 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 10:32 |
|
> >"Tiddy Ogg" wrote
> >> Well, my 1 pound bond held almost
> >> from the start is still awaiting success.
> >
> "Tim" wrote:
> >With odds of 24,000 to 1 each month, you
> >might expect one prize every 2,000 years or so...
>
"MM" wrote
> I've held a hundred since 1967
> and haven't won a bean either.
When was the last time you checked?
You might expect someone with your holding
to have won an average of around a couple
of prizes over that time. But some people
with your holding will have won zero, one,
three, four etc. The proportion having won
none won't be insignificant, unfortunately.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383819 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 10:46 |
|
"MM" wrote
> Do you think it's the case that a large holding
> virtually guarantees regular winnings?
The chances of a single £1 bond *not*
winning a prize in a draw is (currently)
23,999 in 24,000 - or 99.996%.
With the maximum holding of £30,000,
the chances of *not* winning a prize in any
particular draw becomes only 28.65%. The
chances of winning none in a year is 0.00003%.
So if your definition of "virtually guarantee"
is "at least 99.99997% chance" and
your definition of "regular winnings" is
"at least one prize each year", then
a £30,000 holding *would* do that!
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383821 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 11:51 |
|
"Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:nyh5g.4298$AD2.2139 [at] newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>
> "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote in message
> news:dTb5g.190987$4P2.74883 [at] fe03.news.easynews.com...
>> "Peter King" <peter.a.king [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>> <
>>> Premium Bond numbers are not programmed into or stored in ERNIE, so no
>>> numbers can be left out of the draw. ERNIE's sole function is to
>>> generate numbers randomly. These are then matched against the existing
>>> eligible Bond numbers.
>>
>> Of course that's a subjective answer, your numbers may well be drawn,
>> they cannot be "left out", however should the numbers come up it makes
>> little difference if their system no longer has any knowledge of your
>> dusty old bond; the winnings aren't tied to any name or address, they
>> inhabit the twilight zone.
>
> Is this an opinion or do you have some evidence for it? Only if you have
> evidence I'd like to warn my parents who have a substantial number of
> bonds from way back and win (admittedly small figures) almost ever month.
If the government has no clue who murderers and rapists are from 5 years
ago, why have confidence they will know who bought a bond 50 years ago?
I suppose they could try cashing them in and rebuying. If they get a 'no
such number' when they try and cash them in, they'll know.
--
Tumbleweed
email replies not necessary but to contact use;
tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383824 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 11:59 |
|
"Tumbleweed" <thisaccountneverread [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4bm3poF10pcguU1 [at] individual.net...
>
> "Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:nyh5g.4298$AD2.2139 [at] newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>>
>> "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote in message
>> news:dTb5g.190987$4P2.74883 [at] fe03.news.easynews.com...
>>> "Peter King" <peter.a.king [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> <
>>>> Premium Bond numbers are not programmed into or stored in ERNIE, so no
>>>> numbers can be left out of the draw. ERNIE's sole function is to
>>>> generate numbers randomly. These are then matched against the existing
>>>> eligible Bond numbers.
>>>
>>> Of course that's a subjective answer, your numbers may well be drawn,
>>> they cannot be "left out", however should the numbers come up it makes
>>> little difference if their system no longer has any knowledge of your
>>> dusty old bond; the winnings aren't tied to any name or address, they
>>> inhabit the twilight zone.
>>
>> Is this an opinion or do you have some evidence for it? Only if you have
>> evidence I'd like to warn my parents who have a substantial number of
>> bonds from way back and win (admittedly small figures) almost ever month.
>
> If the government has no clue who murderers and rapists are from 5 years
> ago, why have confidence they will know who bought a bond 50 years ago?
Because, as I said, they will something almost every month.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383825 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 12:47 |
|
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 23:31:48 GMT, "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote:
>"Richard Buttrey" <chaos.theory.nospam.removethis [at] zen.co.uk> wrote in
>message
><
>> But the point is that there is no database.
>> Just to check this I went to the following site.
>>
>> http://www.nsandi.com/products/pb/surprisingfacts.jsp
>>
>> where it makes quite clear that as I originally posted, numbers are
>> generated randomly, not picked from a database pool. More numbers are
>> drawn than prizes since some numbers will not have yet been issued,
>> and some will have been cashed.
>>
>> So it seems fairly clear that all the system does is pick a number,
>> then establish whether it's been cashed in or not yet issued.
>
>Precisely, and if your crumpled half-century old bond isn't registered in
>the 'database' of active bonds it is simply passed over.
But there isn't a database of active bonds. It seems clear that
there's a register of encashed bonds and bonds not yet issued. All
bonds drawn therefore win a prize unless they've been encashed or not
issued. The example being discussed was an early bond which presumably
had not been cashed in, hence once it's number comes up it will win a
prize.
Rgds
__
Richard Buttrey
Grappenhall, Cheshire, UK
__________________________
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383827 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 12:49 |
|
On Mon, 01 May 2006 09:30:24 +0100, MM <kylix_is [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>On Mon, 01 May 2006 06:05:07 GMT, "Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote in message
>>news:dTb5g.190987$4P2.74883 [at] fe03.news.easynews.com...
>>> "Peter King" <peter.a.king [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> <
>>>> Premium Bond numbers are not programmed into or stored in ERNIE, so no
>>>> numbers can be left out of the draw. ERNIE's sole function is to
>>>> generate numbers randomly. These are then matched against the existing
>>>> eligible Bond numbers.
>>>
>>> Of course that's a subjective answer, your numbers may well be drawn, they
>>> cannot be "left out", however should the numbers come up it makes little
>>> difference if their system no longer has any knowledge of your dusty old
>>> bond; the winnings aren't tied to any name or address, they inhabit the
>>> twilight zone.
>>
>>Is this an opinion or do you have some evidence for it? Only if you have
>>evidence I'd like to warn my parents who have a substantial number of bonds
>>from way back and win (admittedly small figures) almost ever month.
>
>Even though I only have £100 "invested" I am somewhat surprised never
>to have won even a fiver in almost forty years. Suppose my hundred had
>been a thousand, would my odds have shortened markedly? I wonder...
>
>MM
Yes. Why wouldn't they?
Rgds
__
Richard Buttrey
Grappenhall, Cheshire, UK
__________________________
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383828 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 13:00 |
|
"Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:j_k5g.6136$mH3.846 [at] newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Tumbleweed" <thisaccountneverread [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4bm3poF10pcguU1 [at] individual.net...
>>
>> "Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:nyh5g.4298$AD2.2139 [at] newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>>>
>>> "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:dTb5g.190987$4P2.74883 [at] fe03.news.easynews.com...
>>>> "Peter King" <peter.a.king [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> <
>>>>> Premium Bond numbers are not programmed into or stored in ERNIE, so no
>>>>> numbers can be left out of the draw. ERNIE's sole function is to
>>>>> generate numbers randomly. These are then matched against the existing
>>>>> eligible Bond numbers.
>>>>
>>>> Of course that's a subjective answer, your numbers may well be drawn,
>>>> they cannot be "left out", however should the numbers come up it makes
>>>> little difference if their system no longer has any knowledge of your
>>>> dusty old bond; the winnings aren't tied to any name or address, they
>>>> inhabit the twilight zone.
>>>
>>> Is this an opinion or do you have some evidence for it? Only if you
>>> have evidence I'd like to warn my parents who have a substantial number
>>> of bonds from way back and win (admittedly small figures) almost ever
>>> month.
>>
>> If the government has no clue who murderers and rapists are from 5 years
>> ago, why have confidence they will know who bought a bond 50 years ago?
>
> Because, as I said, they will something almost every month.
But this is someone who has never won.
--
Tumbleweed
email replies not necessary but to contact use;
tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383829 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 13:02 |
|
"Tumbleweed" wrote
> I suppose they could try cashing them in
> and rebuying. If they get a 'no such number'
> when they try and cash them in, they'll know.
.... and even if they don't get a 'no such number',
they'll lose their entry into one of the draws!
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383836 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 14:47 |
|
"Tim" <me [at] home.uk> wrote in message news:GpKdnR08VKEjd8jZRVnysQ [at] bt.com...
> "Tumbleweed" wrote
>> I suppose they could try cashing them in
>> and rebuying. If they get a 'no such number'
>> when they try and cash them in, they'll know.
>
> ... and even if they don't get a 'no such number',
> they'll lose their entry into one of the draws!
>
a risk which has to be balanced against them _never_ getting a win dueto a
government cockup. Nota bad trade off after 30 odd years of no wins I'd have
thought
--
Tumbleweed
email replies not necessary but to contact use;
tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383842 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 15:32 |
|
"Richard Buttrey" <chaos.theory.nospam.removethis [at] zen.co.uk> wrote in
message news:lhpb52p587dlll93qlnb15vkgi4mr4ml1j [at] 4ax.com...
> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 23:31:48 GMT, "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote:
>
>>"Richard Buttrey" <chaos.theory.nospam.removethis [at] zen.co.uk> wrote in
>>message
>><
>>> But the point is that there is no database.
>>> Just to check this I went to the following site.
>>>
>>> http://www.nsandi.com/products/pb/surprisingfacts.jsp
>>>
>>> where it makes quite clear that as I originally posted, numbers are
>>> generated randomly, not picked from a database pool. More numbers are
>>> drawn than prizes since some numbers will not have yet been issued,
>>> and some will have been cashed.
>>>
>>> So it seems fairly clear that all the system does is pick a number,
>>> then establish whether it's been cashed in or not yet issued.
>>
>>Precisely, and if your crumpled half-century old bond isn't registered in
>>the 'database' of active bonds it is simply passed over.
>
>
> But there isn't a database of active bonds.
So once the draw has been made how do they tie the winning numbers to
*people*, 50000 civil servants each with a ledger?
Christ.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383843 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 15:35 |
|
"Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote in message
news:I9o5g.47878$2g2.28751 [at] fe07.news.easynews.com...
> "Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:j_k5g.6136
> <
>>> If the government has no clue who murderers and rapists are from 5 years
>>> ago, why have confidence they will know who bought a bond 50 years ago?
>>
>> Because, as I said, they will something almost every month.
>
> This isn't either or, some of the old dusty boxes were no doubt entered
> into the new system in the heady days of the 70's, they were somewhat
> preoccupied later on.
>
> I'm heartened that so many hold so much false and misplaced hope in our
> valiant civil service ;)
Well obviously they neglected to enter some of the old dusty boxes when they
were busy mocking up the moon landings, covering up Roswell and getting rid
of Di.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383844 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 15:36 |
|
"Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:j_k5g.6136
<
>> If the government has no clue who murderers and rapists are from 5 years
>> ago, why have confidence they will know who bought a bond 50 years ago?
>
> Because, as I said, they will something almost every month.
This isn't either or, some of the old dusty boxes were no doubt entered into
the new system in the heady days of the 70's, they were somewhat preoccupied
later on.
I'm heartened that so many hold so much false and misplaced hope in our
valiant civil service ;)
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383846 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 15:53 |
|
"Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:D8o5g.329$A54.285 [at] newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote in message
> news:I9o5g.47878$2g2.28751 [at] fe07.news.easynews.com...
>> "Blackthorn" <nenagh_uk [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:j_k5g.6136
>> <
>>>> If the government has no clue who murderers and rapists are from 5
>>>> years ago, why have confidence they will know who bought a bond 50
>>>> years ago?
>>>
>>> Because, as I said, they will something almost every month.
>>
>> This isn't either or, some of the old dusty boxes were no doubt entered
>> into the new system in the heady days of the 70's, they were somewhat
>> preoccupied later on.
>>
>> I'm heartened that so many hold so much false and misplaced hope in our
>> valiant civil service ;)
>
> Well obviously they neglected to enter some of the old dusty boxes when
> they were busy mocking up the moon landings, covering up Roswell and
> getting rid of Di.
Lol, indeed, but thankfully the British government is not known for their
cockups :)
I've spoken to my old dad today, he has about £400 in old premium bonds and
he has kept a solid record of winnings, the old school bonds haven't won
*once* in over four decades, and nearly every post 1990 bond has won at
least once, the odds are completely skewed. He's planning to cash them in
and replace them with new issues, I shall keep you informed of any results.
Again, the DVLA managed to 'lose' 2m cars, in that context a few premium
bonds matter little.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383857 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 19:00 |
|
On Mon, 01 May 2006 13:32:56 GMT, "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote:
>"Richard Buttrey" <chaos.theory.nospam.removethis [at] zen.co.uk> wrote in
>message news:lhpb52p587dlll93qlnb15vkgi4mr4ml1j [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 23:31:48 GMT, "Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"Richard Buttrey" <chaos.theory.nospam.removethis [at] zen.co.uk> wrote in
>>>message
>>><
>>>> But the point is that there is no database.
>>>> Just to check this I went to the following site.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nsandi.com/products/pb/surprisingfacts.jsp
>>>>
>>>> where it makes quite clear that as I originally posted, numbers are
>>>> generated randomly, not picked from a database pool. More numbers are
>>>> drawn than prizes since some numbers will not have yet been issued,
>>>> and some will have been cashed.
>>>>
>>>> So it seems fairly clear that all the system does is pick a number,
>>>> then establish whether it's been cashed in or not yet issued.
>>>
>>>Precisely, and if your crumpled half-century old bond isn't registered in
>>>the 'database' of active bonds it is simply passed over.
>>
>>
>> But there isn't a database of active bonds.
>
>So once the draw has been made how do they tie the winning numbers to
>*people*, 50000 civil servants each with a ledger?
Sorry, I should have been more precise. Since the advent of databases
in I guess the 1980's, no doubt the bond numbers have been stored in a
database. But the point I'm making is that the database isn't trawled
for a random bond **within it**. A series of random bond numbers are
generated, and then checked to see if they are either cashed bonds, or
bonds not yet issued. If the answer is no, then ipso facto the bond is
a winner.
Presumably if having identified a winning bond number, no name and
address could be traced for it, the auditors who certify each draw
would have noted this and done something about it when it first
occurred, to ensure there was no systematic breakdown in record
keeping.
Rgds
>
>Christ.
>
__
Richard Buttrey
Grappenhall, Cheshire, UK
__________________________
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383859 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 19:18 |
|
"Richard Buttrey" <chaos.theory.nospam.removethis [at] zen.co.uk> wrote in
message news:t5fc52h1binfu9f14gi2ija2ho7us7glrn [at] 4ax.com...
<
>>> But there isn't a database of active bonds.
>>
>>So once the draw has been made how do they tie the winning numbers to
>>*people*, 50000 civil servants each with a ledger?
>
> Sorry, I should have been more precise. Since the advent of databases
> in I guess the 1980's, no doubt the bond numbers have been stored in a
> database. But the point I'm making is that the database isn't trawled
> for a random bond **within it**.
Oh, absolutely, nobody was disputing the randomness of the numbers (entropy
notwithstanding). However, the patchiness of the database would emulate an
unclaimed lottery ticket if they've, hrm, lost track of things over the
years.
In today's world the main element is dealing with the partial transference
of millions of old bonds on various legacy databases and half a century of
assorted detritus, just think of all those who have passed away, changed
address, moved abroad and just think of the turnover in equipment, staff and
procedures over the years. The random number generator is rather
insignificant by comparison.
<
> Presumably if having identified a winning bond number, no name and
> address could be traced for it, the auditors who certify each draw
> would have noted this and done something about it when it first
> occurred, to ensure there was no systematic breakdown in record
> keeping.
This is what the NAO tentatively refer to as "legacy issues" :-
http://www.nao.org.uk/pn/02-03/0203626.htm
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383860 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 19:24 |
|
"Virgils Ghost" <no [at] spam.com> wrote in message news:4qr5g.259783
<
> This is what the NAO tentatively refer to as "legacy issues" :-
>
> http://www.nao.org.uk/pn/02-03/0203626.htm
Their internal systems ran out of numbers! lol.
One can read between the lines.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383866 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 20:03 |
|
In message <H085g.319298$iS4.11165 [at] fe05.news.easynews.com>, Virgils
Ghost <no [at] spam.com> writes
>. what's the point of generating a number that isn't tied to
>an issuance?
ERNIE isnt a computer. It holds no data. It just generates numbers. Most
are wasted.
--
John Boyle
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383869 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 20:00 |
|
"MM" <kylix_is [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6rhb52lgvcuq96l1evm9nqu35f6hfq2t2b [at] 4ax.com...
> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:35:31 +0100, Allan Gould
> <invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Tiddy Ogg wrote:
>>> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:06:36 +0100, Allan Gould
>>> <invalid [at] invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Squalid raffle" still a big draw: Against all the odds, Premium Bonds
>>>> are more popular than ever in their 50th year
>>>>
>>>> It is 50 years ago this month that Harold Macmillan announced the
>>>> launch
>>>> of what was described as a "squalid raffle" to a Britain labouring
>>>> under
>>>> postwar austerity in an attempt to persuade us all to save more.
>>> Well, my 1 pound bond held almost from the start is still awaiting
>>> success.
>>
>>Further to suggestions by other posters on this thread that older bonds
>>may not be included in the draw, I can confirm that old bonds do get
>>prizes. I have a 300GBP purchased in 1968 (admittedly not the very
>>beginning) and it picked up a prize (only 50 quid, mind) in 2004 and
>>another in 2005. Unfortunately a GBP500 bond purchased in 1980 doesn't
>>seem to have won any prizes recently (my records of prizes start in 2000).
>
> Do you think it's the case that a large holding virtually guarantees
> regular winnings?
Did they do statistics when you were at school?
tim
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383870 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 20:11 |
|
In message <4po5g.238113$7i1.192057 [at] fe06.news.easynews.com>, Virgils
Ghost <no [at] spam.com> writes
>I've spoken to my old dad today, he has about £400 in old premium bonds and
>he has kept a solid record of winnings, the old school bonds haven't won
>*once* in over four decades, and nearly every post 1990 bond has won at
>least once, the odds are completely skewed. He's planning to cash them in
>and replace them with new issues, I shall keep you informed of any results.
How many bonds has bought post 1990?
--
John Boyle
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383875 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 21:59 |
|
"john boyle" <john [at] johnboyle1.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:GLzL48LO2kVEFwDo [at] johnboyle1.demon.co.uk...
> In message <H085g.319298$iS4.11165 [at] fe05.news.easynews.com>, Virgils Ghost
> <no [at] spam.com> writes
>
>>. what's the point of generating a number that isn't tied to
>>an issuance?
>
> ERNIE isnt a computer.
Yeah, of course not.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/04/business_a_ history_of_ernie/html/5.stm
*cough* muppet.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383877 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 22:06 |
|
"john boyle" <john [at] johnboyle1.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:oKYQIqNi9kVEFwnF [at] johnboyle1.demon.co.uk...
> In message <4po5g.238113$7i1.192057 [at] fe06.news.easynews.com>, Virgils Ghost
> <no [at] spam.com> writes
>
>>I've spoken to my old dad today, he has about £400 in old premium bonds
>>and
>>he has kept a solid record of winnings, the old school bonds haven't won
>>*once* in over four decades, and nearly every post 1990 bond has won at
>>least once, the odds are completely skewed. He's planning to cash them in
>>and replace them with new issues, I shall keep you informed of any
>>results.
>
> How many bonds has bought post 1990?
About the same, though it's made worse by the fact the post '90 bonds keep
winning and are reinvested, which in time win again, not a sausage from the
old school bonds however. Probability dictates that by now they should have
compounded up in excess of the newer bonds.
He has also worked out the yields and they're quite stark, around ~5% for
the new bonds and 0% for the old ones. Very odd.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383878 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 22:08 |
|
"john boyle" <john [at] johnboyle1.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:oKYQIqNi9kVEFwnF [at] johnboyle1.demon.co.uk...
> In message <4po5g.238113$7i1.192057 [at] fe06.news.easynews.com>, Virgils Ghost
> <no [at] spam.com> writes
>
>>I've spoken to my old dad today, he has about £400 in old premium bonds
>>and
>>he has kept a solid record of winnings, the old school bonds haven't won
>>*once* in over four decades, and nearly every post 1990 bond has won at
>>least once, the odds are completely skewed. He's planning to cash them in
>>and replace them with new issues, I shall keep you informed of any
>>results.
>
> How many bonds has bought post 1990?
Also, I should add that the old bonds cannot be checked on the NS&I website,
which speaks volumes.
|
|
|
| Re: That "squalid raffle" (aka Premium bonds) Times Sat 29 April 2006 [message #383879 ] |
Mo, 01 Mai 2006 22:24 |
|
In message <EMt5g.255532$117.161422 [at] fe02.news.easynews.com>, Virgils
Ghost <no [at] spam.com> writes
>> ERNIE isnt a computer.
>
>Yeah, of course not.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/04/business_a_ history_of_e
>rnie/html/5.stm
>
>*cough* muppet.
Suggest you take some cough medicine before you do some more research.
Can you can find any of the attributes of a computer that can be found
in ERNIE ?
The main attribute that ERNIE lacks is that it is not programmable and
it does not work using software. It just generates numbers, that is all,
not from an algorithm but from thermal noise. Previous models used a gas
mechanism.
--
John Boyle
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Do Feb 9 01:52:32 CET 2012
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,09717 Sekunden |
