Christmas Eve Jackpot: A Powerball player in Arkansas won a whopping $1.817bn

[CryptSafe]

Congratulations to the Christmas Eve jackpot winner. It is such a remarkable event for him or her at the moment because it is a thing of transformation for the winner to say.  I guess the winner never thought it could happen like this so suddenly, and it was a huge one for him or her.

As for the payment terms, such an amount of money is too huge, though, hence they are giving options to choose from, but choosing any option would come with a guarantee, and that is if I choose to receive the complete payment within the span of 29 years, there should be an assurance that the whole money would be paid in full because that is enough time for them to generate more funds and another thing is this, anything can happen within this time frame so there must be some form of assurance that my wins will be paid in full.

[NotATether]

If I were the winner, I would definitely take the entire prize money as it's quite risky to take an annuity payment over 29 years, despite a written agreement between the two parties.

What?

What do you mean, risky?

Taking a percentage profit over 29 years without doing a dime's worth of work is more than what most people can dream of. And you get twice the money if you just wait.

Besides, most people who choose to take the lump sum end up going bankrupt because they have bad money management, have compulsive spending issues, and eventually falling back to poverty.

[slaman29]

Of course 29 years. Thats still 60 million per year. You'll get the lump sum in 12 years. AND still have 17 years to get 60 million annually.

You know what happens when you have everything, you do dumb things.

Shit now I feel like shit reading about how rich other people are SMH I hate internet

[YOSHIE]

Would you take the lump sum or choose to receive your payments in small amounts for 29 years?

$834.9 million is not a small amount of money, if arranged it might be a full 3x3 room.
Winning the lottery paying two choices, 29 years is not a short time, 6 presidential elections, who guarantees that the lottery gambling house is still standing there and who guarantees that in 29 years we will not be in trouble.

If I win the lottery, I'm not going to pick option two 29 year old, I'm going to pick $834.9 million that's enough for me, rather than me having to deal with 29 year old, that's not in my brain.

In essence, we each have our own choices, for me $834.9 million no longer needs to be negotiated, it's done.

[khiholangkang]

If I were the winner, I would definitely take the entire prize money as it's quite risky to take an annuity payment over 29 years, despite a written agreement between the two parties.

What?

What do you mean, risky?

Taking a percentage profit over 29 years without doing a dime's worth of work is more than what most people can dream of. And you get twice the money if you just wait.

Besides, most people who choose to take the lump sum end up going bankrupt because they have bad money management, have compulsive spending issues, and eventually falling back to poverty.

Maybe the risk is not paid in full or the bookie goes bankrupt before the player's payment is paid off for 29 years, the risk is in the hands of others, while if it is in your own hands, the biggest enemy is yourself, in any way use it, or throw it back to the casino to play it is his fault, but certainly the money is already in your hands you can do anything, even start learning what money management is possible, although I doubt that person will do it when he already holds that much money, unless he is quite realistic about his own situation.

[rdluffy]

If I won that amount in the Powerball, choosing whether to receive the $834.9 million now or over 29 years would be the most “difficult” decision of my life, hahaha
It was something I would like to have to decide 

I've played Powerball a few times and played when it was accumulating such a high amount, but I couldn't even get a single number right in some of the games I played
Just a quick calculation: with those more than 800 million invested, you can get about 7 million monthly 

[Cointxz]

The winner has the option of taking a lump-sum cash payment of $834.9m or getting the full amount that was won in an annuity paid over 29 years.

Would you take the lump sum or choose to receive your payments in small amounts for 29 years?

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyw4x39jdwo

Taking lump sum is the worst decision ever for me since I will lose 1.2B approximately which is higher than the amount that you will get.

Having a 29 years of guaranteed prosperity safe from busting your whole profit on wrong financial decision is always the right call here.

I believe the amount is transferable to beneficiaries in case the winner died earlier.

[Distinctin]

Taking lump sum is the worst decision ever for me since I will lose 1.2B approximately which is higher than the amount that you will get.

That’s a lot to give up, and with that kind of amount they’re offering, it really feels like they’re pushing you away from taking the lump sum.
It’s basically a sign that lump sum isn’t the smart move here.

Also, you’d better be careful with your life too. There could be people on the inside who know who the winner is, and you never know, someone might come after you.

Having a 29 years of guaranteed prosperity safe from busting your whole profit on wrong financial decision is always the right call here.

I believe the amount is transferable to beneficiaries in case the winner died earlier.

A law like that should exist.
Even if the money hasn’t been withdrawn yet, the winner already owns it. Ownership should automatically transfer in case of death, that just makes sense.

[KTChampions]

If I were the winner, I would definitely take the entire prize money as it's quite risky to take an annuity payment over 29 years, despite a written agreement between the two parties.

What?

What do you mean, risky?

Taking a percentage profit over 29 years without doing a dime's worth of work is more than what most people can dream of. And you get twice the money if you just wait.

Besides, most people who choose to take the lump sum end up going bankrupt because they have bad money management, have compulsive spending issues, and eventually falling back to poverty.

A lottery operator could go bankrupt, for example. Are you willing to bet money that this definitely won't happen in 29 years? With almost 2 billion dollars at stake, there's no incentive to make such a bet. Plus, of course, there's inflation. Look at how metal prices have risen this year (gold, silver, platinum). It's a bad sign. We could be in for years of severe inflation, and this annual payment will become a pittance (but 100% will lose its current value).

[stompix]

If I were the winner, I would definitely take the entire prize money as it's quite risky to take an annuity payment over 29 years, despite a written agreement between the two parties.

What?

What do you mean, risky?
Taking a percentage profit over 29 years without doing a dime's worth of work is more than what most people can dream of. And you get twice the money if you just wait.
Besides, most people who choose to take the lump sum end up going bankrupt because they have bad money management, have compulsive spending issues, and eventually falling back to poverty.

Inflation!
Let's take the mild one at 3%, the last sums which are the biggest will have a loss of close to 60%.

Since the payments are not equal, he will get around ~140 million in the last year, at 3% inflation, this is like getting $60 million now!
But getting $100 million now, on average stock return will be in 30 years $1.75 billion!

So he could effectively spend 75% of his money from the upfront payment and invest just a quarter in stocks and he will get more money from that than the entire rate payment! You don't want to hear the numbers for 6% inflation 

[KTChampions]

Inflation!
Let's take the mild one at 3%, the last sums which are the biggest will have a loss of close to 60%.

Since the payments are not equal, he will get around ~140 million in the last year, at 3% inflation, this is like getting $60 million now!
But getting $100 million now, on average stock return will be in 30 years $1.75 billion!

So he could effectively spend 75% of his money from the upfront payment and invest just a quarter in stocks and he will get more money from that than the entire rate payment! You don't want to hear the numbers for 6% inflation 

For real?  I didn't know this detail. It makes this deferred payment scheme look even more disgusting.
6% inflation will leave only 16% of the final payment, i.e. instead of 140 million he will receive 23, haha. But honestly, I don't believe that inflation will be lower than or equal to 6%, when the price of metals doubles in a year, when real estate starts being sold with 50-year mortgages, and in general everything is becoming more expensive in an illogical manner, then I don't believe it at all. So the only sensible option is to take your money immediately.

[bitLeap]

I will go with the option of receiving the payment in small amount for 29 years if there is a guarantee that I will be paid irrespective of what happen to the company. I will not lose over $932m which is collecting less than the total I won. If I chose smaller annual payments for 29 years, that will be over $62.65m per year which is enough for me. People are truly lucky to win this type of money that will change their life forever.

We agreed to this option because it was too risky to take all the winnings at once, threats from thieves and murderers could arise at any time once the winnings were exposed to the media. Furthermore, having a guaranteed annual payout allows us to enjoy it without worry, and if something happens the money is already set aside for inheritance.

[freedomgo]

A lottery operator could go bankrupt, for example. Are you willing to bet money that this definitely won't happen in 29 years? With almost 2 billion dollars at stake, there's no incentive to make such a bet. Plus, of course, there's inflation. Look at how metal prices have risen this year (gold, silver, platinum). It's a bad sign. We could be in for years of severe inflation, and this annual payment will become a pittance (but 100% will lose its current value).

Isn’t it a state-sponsored lottery? If it is, then there’s really no way it goes bankrupt since it’s backed by public funds.

On top of that, lotteries earn money daily, it’s a very lucrative business.

If it were private, then yeah maybe issues could happen, but even then it doesn’t make sense that they would withhold winnings instead of paying them instantly.
That’s just my guess though.

[Shinpako09]

Now that is tempting, both have pros and cons. Even I would have a hard time deciding what to choose. If he chooses the cash, he will lose almost $1B. If I were in his situation, maybe I’d just take the first option to save the trouble and carefully diversify into different investments, with most of it in crypto. If invested in top coins, 29 years from now it could make a good amount of profit

[KTChampions]

A lottery operator could go bankrupt, for example. Are you willing to bet money that this definitely won't happen in 29 years? With almost 2 billion dollars at stake, there's no incentive to make such a bet. Plus, of course, there's inflation. Look at how metal prices have risen this year (gold, silver, platinum). It's a bad sign. We could be in for years of severe inflation, and this annual payment will become a pittance (but 100% will lose its current value).

Isn’t it a state-sponsored lottery? If it is, then there’s really no way it goes bankrupt since it’s backed by public funds.

On top of that, lotteries earn money daily, it’s a very lucrative business.

If it were private, then yeah maybe issues could happen, but even then it doesn’t make sense that they would withhold winnings instead of paying them instantly.
That’s just my guess though.

Maybe you're lucky to live in a country where stability has existed for a long time. I'm not that old, but I remember the country's currency (where i'm living) being devalued to zero twice, and several more times simply losing value dramatically in a short period of time. So the prefix "state-guaranteed" doesn't change anything at all.
The US can't even save the dollar from inflation (even though it's the strongest economy in the world), which means that in the long run, their guarantees are just garbage.

[mirakal]

If invested in top coins, 29 years from now it could make a good amount of profit

Don’t invest everything in one place. Learn how to spread the risk, that’s something we all learn in crypto. It’s fine to trust and choose the top coins in the market, but there’s still no certainty they’ll grow the way you expect, it’s still a high-risk investment. If I may suggest, assuming you’re the winner, maybe go 50% into crypto and 50% into a real business. Something you can manage yourself or at least something where your money is actually working for you.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

As far as there will be a guarantee that the company will not fold before the time at which they will pay me all the money, I will prefer to take it little by little till the agreed time, because winning that kind of money when you don't expect it and getting the money all at once will be tempting. It's better I receive it small and know what to do with it.

This is my fear too, I would not want a situation where probably at the end of that 29 years or even before then, then the company will go bankrupt or might have fold due to some circumstances. It's better I take the lump sum, use 60% to buy Bitcoin and it for 60 years, while I use 20% for some needs and 20% for another investment.

[Die_empty]

This is my fear too, I would not want a situation where probably at the end of that 29 years or even before then, then the company will go bankrupt or might have fold due to some circumstances. It's better I take the lump sum, use 60% to buy Bitcoin and it for 60 years, while I use 20% for some needs and 20% for another investment.

My guess is that the money will be transferred to an asset or financial manager or even a bank. So that the funds will be safe even when the company goes under. Powerball started in the US in April 1992. I know age is not a guarantee that they will not go bankrupt, but they have built a good reputation over these years. With the rate of inflation, I might consider taking a lump sum, but my problem would be how to manage it. I might go for the other option.

[FirmWars]

If they are to give him only $834.9m, it means they will take $982.1m out of the man's winning, why's that? I win a lottery and they are helping me to split my money, if they can pay $$834.9m as the first lump sum and then split the $982.1m for 29 years, I will accept but if they are going to cut me short off $982.1m, I can't accept such an offer  because it's cheating. Considering the risk in waiting for 29 years, I would have love to take the lump sum but the cheating is really too much.

[Maslate]

I know age is not a guarantee that they will not go bankrupt, but they have built a good reputation over these years. With the rate of inflation, I might consider taking a lump sum, but my problem would be how to manage it. I might go for the other option.

They’ve been around since 1992 and they’re backed by the government. Bankruptcy is technically possible, sure, but it’s very unlikely.
I can’t really think of a government-backed business that just goes bankrupt easily, especially a lottery.

Looking at the history of massive winnings they’ve already paid out and the fact that they’re still operating today, that alone says about how stable the system is.
https://theworlddata.com/powerball-jackpot-statistics-in-us/