Found a McDonalds Monopoly piece for a free Quarter Pounder with Cheese on the sidewalk a few days ago and decided to redeem it. That brought to mind this question:
This contest, like many others, have a “no purchase necessary” clause, meaning you can mail in for free game pieces. I also know (or have heard, at least) that companies like McD’s who run contests like these like to put the rare “winning” game pieces in certain areas to advance sales.
Does McD’s have any obligation whatsoever to put any winning game pieces in the “free” pool? Or is it random? I can see how they might want to (make it less likely to get by the general public) and not want to (fewer winners = less interest next time). The fact that in this particular promotion, you need 2-3 pieces total for the major prizes (and the common ones will undoubtedly be in that pool, and they’re equally important to win), is an added complication you can feel free to or not to address.
The illusion that collecting them is accomplishing something.
I remember some time back a thread where I asked if contests based on a unique winning game piece truly count as “random” or not, since if you aren’t in the right area to acquire it your chance of winning is zero.
The only real payout you have any chance of getting is free food, which isn’t a bad prize if you eat at that chain often. I’m not going to increase my trips to McD’s because of the contest, but the free fries and free Big Macs every now and then won’t push me away either.
But I’ve done consulting work for companies that were having contests similar. My job was to go to the printing company that printed the commons (game pieces that laymen call “losers”, or the game pieces that are part of a multi-part puzzle). An example was when Hi-C drinks were awarding expensive sneakers in a contest. Consumers had to collect game pieces in threes (front, middle, back of a sneaker). Collect all 3 and win the sneakers. 2 pieces were “commons” (easily available). The 3rd piece and “instant win” pieces were printed up special and kept under lock and key.
Every now and then I would go into the printing company and introduce a winning piece into the batch of thousands of commons. There was no way of anyone knowing when I would do this, and no way of knowing what area of the country this winner would end up.
Over the past 20 years I’ve done this for numerous contest like the sneaker example, for grocery stores, and even for Colt 45 when they were giving away Cadillacs (no, I’m not kidding. And my client told me that out of 5 cars as prizes, only 3 got claimed!)
After the contest I had to make out an affidavit stating that I put so many winning pieces into the commons batches over the specified period of time. The affidavit also stated certain things as to the integrity of the pieces and that all were put into circulation, etc…
The free “no purchase necessary” game pieces had an equal chance of being a winner as any other as there was no way of knowing where any game pieces were going.
I supplement my income in law enforcement doing this. Believe it or not I had to have a private detective license in the states I did this in. That explanation is complicated.
Companies only have the “no purchase necessary” game pieces because otherwise, they’d fall afoul of anti-gambling laws-- They’d rather you get game pieces by buying their product, since getting you to buy their product is the whole point of the game. And if the game pieces didn’t offer a chance of getting the big prizes, then they’d still be afoul of the same laws.
I’m interested in why the detective license is required. That would never have occurred to me. Would you care to elaborate? (I know you said it’s complicated.)
Compare with the Canadian “Skill Testing Question”, which is another route to get around the same thing. Paying for an entry in a drawing is gambling, but paying for an entry in a drawing, and then doing some second-grade arithmetic to get the prize is a “test of skill”.
Without getting into the legal gobbledygook that most state licensing bureaus have, the answer is because technically what I was doing was providing security by protecting an asset of my client. In many states in order to provide security as a licensed professional one must be in a uniform with either a numbered badge or a name plate.
One can provide security in plain clothes as a private detective. My clients wanted a professional in a suit/tie, not some schmuck in a rent-a-cop outfit.
Yes, IIRC the guy in the McD scam was also in charge of slipping the winning prizes into the gamepieces randomly. IIRC in fact the scam was discovered when analysis showed the prizes were statistically won in highly unlikely distribution patterns - i.e. mainly where this guy had accomplices across the USA. Then they leaned on a few of the winners to get confessions…
(Something along the lines of “there’s no way that not a single grand prize was won in CA or NY” followed by strict stats analysis.)
Hopefully this will get some views. I don’t think it warrants its’ own thread.
The McD game is proudly advertising “1in 4 wins???” (mostly food prizes)
I admit I have a craving for their fries, not much else there. I do like to win things, no matter how inconsequential so I’ve been picking up the large fries to go with whatever lunch I have been having. Each L fries comes with 4 tickets. So far I have collected 26 tickets, none a winner. What are the odds that a game with supposedly a 25% chance of winning would have a streak of 26 non winning tickets?
PS I bought a med coke which came with two tickets to stave off the inevitable ass who tries to invalidate the argument by wondering why I have a non multiple of 4 number of tickets…Sad that I have to think like that about my posts now.
re: the OP, it used to be you could request a game piece at the store. Now you have to hand print and mail in a request in some ludicrously short time frame to get a free game piece. I guess it meets the letter of the “no purchase required” rules but it is off putting.
If each one has a .25 chance of winning, I think the chances of getting 26 in a row of non-winners would be .75^26 or .00056, or 0.06%, or 6 out of 10,000.
My rate is about 1 in 6 wins, for some anecdotal evidence.
It would mean that the distribution of prizes would have to be such that it didn’t discriminate against those “free” pices, although in theory a non-discriminitory process could still result in an outcome where no good prizes ended up in that batch. That’s my take anyway.
I was gonna post commiserting about how the random number generator hates us… but then I realized that this was a real-life event, not World of Warcraft, and there is no RNG, there’s just real randomness.
This makes me wonder about the food-based game pieces that were common for a period in the late nineties. Oreo and other companies often had contests where the winning game piece was a specially printed Oreo cookie or something. If you wrote in for that, would they send you an Oreo, or a free bag of Oreos that might contain a winning gamepiece?
I always assumed they went that route in the hopes that less prizes would be claimed due to consumers unknowingly eating the winning game pieces. I mean, how many people inspect each Oreo before shoving it in their mouth?
So wait, the subcontractor’s employees essentially rigged the game and stole prizes, and McDonald’s was forced to pay $16 million to the subcontractor for breach of contract?
Once when I was a kid, M&M/Mars had a contest where every candy wrapper had a letter inside it, and if you spelled some word, you’d win. And I did actually manage to spell that word. But I ate my Halloween candy so slowly that by the time I’d won, nobody had the big packages with the rules or prizes on them anymore, so I had (and still have) no clue what it was I would have won.
That would never have occurred to me. Would you care to elaborate? (I know you said it’s complicated.)