We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Premium Bond Winner ?
Comments
- 
            
 I don't really see the point in doing that. The two £1m prizes make up less than 2% of the total prize fund, so splitting them up into the low-value prizes wouldn't make much difference at all. (An extra 80,000 £25 prizes in a total of almost 3.8 million!)Primrose said:In these difficult Financial Times I would rather they temporarily abolished the million pound prizes and spread the winnings over more people in smaller multiples. Spreading a little more happiness around might reach people who could really do with a small financial boost.
 This is the breakdown of September's prizes, from Which?
 £1,000,000 - 2 (1.81% of total prize fund)
 £100,000 - 7 (0.64%)
 £50,000 - 14 (0.64%)
 £25,000 - 28 (0.64%)
 £10,000 - 71 (0.64%)
 £5,000 - 140 (0.64%)
 £1,000 - 2,204 (2.00%)
 £500 - 6,612 (3.00%)
 £100 - 30,244 (2.74%)
 £50 - 30,244 (1.37%)
 £25 - 3,786,474 (85.89%)
 https://www.which.co.uk/news/2020/09/premium-bond-winners-september-are-bonds-a-safe-bet-during-a-recession/
 I suppose you could argue that it would add some excitement to put that money into £100k prizes instead - do that and you could have had 27 £100k winners instead of the 7 there actually were in September. Or maybe just boost the numbers of each of the £5k+ prizes a little - each of those prize tiers currently has 0.64% of the total prize fund, so you could boost each of those by just over half (up to 1% in each tier in fact) if you reallocated the million pound prizes.
 As you spread the money down to the smaller prizes, though, it would make less and less difference. And many people, I suspect, are mainly attracted by the possibility, however remote, of scooping a million!
 6
- 
            
 Agreed, which is why I made the same point in response to the same poster making the same suggestion after last month's draw!onthebench said:As you spread the money down to the smaller prizes, though, it would make less and less difference.
 https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/77468043#Comment_77468043
 Looking further back up the thread, they made exactly the same suggestion yet again a few months ago and another poster considered it worthy of a complaint to NS&I!2
- 
            If I have won £425 over 3 years and have £14,000 invested. What does the interest work out per year please?0
- 
            
 1%...........concorde1966 said:If I have won £425 over 3 years and have £14,000 invested. What does the interest work out per year please?
 1
- 
            concorde1966 said:If I have won £425 over 3 years and have £14,000 invested. What does the interest work out per year please?1.01%£425/3 = £141.67 (per year)£141.67/£14,000 * 100 = 1.01% (per year)/ = divide* = multiply
 If you want to be rich, live like you're poor; if you want to be poor, live like you're rich.1
- 
            
 425 / 3 / 14000 = 1.01%concorde1966 said:If I have won £425 over 3 years and have £14,000 invested. What does the interest work out per year please?1
- 
            
 Having looked at the numbers I can see there could be some argument for boosting the number of upper tier prizes to spread the wealth a little. If you kept one of the £1m prizes, you could, for instance, use half of the other one to increase the number of £100k prizes from 7 to 12 and then use the remaining £500k to boost the number of £50k prizes from 14 to 20 (£300k extra) and the £25k prizes from 28 to 36. That would increase the number of what I would call "very big" wins (£25k+) by more than a third, from 51 to 69.eskbanker said:
 Agreed, which is why I made the same point in response to the same poster making the same suggestion after last month's draw!onthebench said:As you spread the money down to the smaller prizes, though, it would make less and less difference.
 https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/77468043#Comment_77468043
 Looking further back up the thread, they made exactly the same suggestion yet again a few months ago and another poster considered it worthy of a complaint to NS&I!
 Alternatively you could leave the rest of the higher amounts unchanged and add, say 70% to each of the £5k and £10k prize pools, but even if you did that the number of people winning a prize greater than £5k would still only be just over 400, compared to 262 now.
 I think the negative publicity over scrapping a £1m prize would be fairly great, though.0
- 
            People want to win the million not petty amounts1
- 
            
 depends what you define as "petty amounts" - i would be happy with £10K or even £100k and i wouldn't describe them as "petty amounts"London7766551 said:People want to win the million not petty amounts0
- 
            £25 on max, first month though"It is prudent when shopping for something important, not to limit yourself to Pound land/Estate Agents"
 G_M/ Bowlhead99 RIP0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
 
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards

 
         
 
          
          
          
         
