NS&I Transparency

Linton

71peyman71 said:

coyrls said:

71peyman71 said:

Thanks all.
Of course I knew about Ernie but the whole process seems to lack transparency. I don't know what I expect to see and certainly showing the draw on TV is not feasible.

I have done pretty well out of it overall but the bit about the top prize winner is still a mystery.

Is this enough detail for you: https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/01/ernie_quantum_el_reg/

Yes, thanks

I have had my fair share of wins, specially recently. Certainly a better return than if I had my money in an ISA or the best return savings account.

What seems a little unfair to me is that all bonds have equal chance of winning regardless of how long they are held. For example, someone who bought £50 bonds last month has as much chance to win a million as someone who's had the same amount for 10 years. 

Surely they can insert an algorithm where longer held bonds are more likely to win than newer bonds. They can do this by  weighing each bond based on length of time held, just for the million £ prizes.  

They could weight the choice by any way they wanted but I dont think disadvantaging new buyers would be a great way of selling more PB's.  Though I dont think say doubling your chance of winning £1M would have any real difference - it certainly wont result in any noticable change to your chance of not winning.

jon81uk

71peyman71 said:

jon81uk said:

71peyman71 said:

coyrls said:

71peyman71 said:

Thanks all.
Of course I knew about Ernie but the whole process seems to lack transparency. I don't know what I expect to see and certainly showing the draw on TV is not feasible.

I have done pretty well out of it overall but the bit about the top prize winner is still a mystery.

Is this enough detail for you: https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/01/ernie_quantum_el_reg/

Yes, thanks

I have had my fair share of wins, specially recently. Certainly a better return than if I had my money in an ISA or the best return savings account.

What seems a little unfair to me is that all bonds have equal chance of winning regardless of how long they are held. For example, someone who bought £50 bonds last month has as much chance to win a million as someone who's had the same amount for 10 years. 

Surely they can insert an algorithm where longer held bonds are more likely to win than newer bonds. They can do this by  weighing each bond based on length of time held, just for the million £ prizes.  

Why should someone holding them for longer get better odds? The draws are monthly, if you remove the money you don't get entered into the draw.

I am not talking about removing the money at all. 

I said it seems fairer for someone who's had their money in longer to have a better chance of winning than someone who invested just last month. It's an incentive to keep your money in longer. 

But anyone can invest or remove the money at any time, why should those who don't withdraw get any benefit?

msallen

71peyman71 said:

I said it seems fairer for someone who's had their money in longer to have a better chance of winning than someone who invested just last month. It's an incentive to keep your money in longer. 

Someone who has held a bond for 1 month has 1 chance of winning this month. Someone who has held a bond for 100 months has had 100 chances of winning previously plus 1 chance this month. It couldn't be fairer.

Olinda99

Plus the fact (to simplify things) the prize money in any particular month is 1.4% (per annum so 1/12th of this per month) of the total number of £1 units invested and thus has nothing to do with how long those units have been invested for.