Win 24 - What a con!!

[Bennyxp]

I see the adverts for it all of the time, and always think that you must be crazy to sign up for it.

Just now the advert has been on again, and I've just looked indepth into it. - Well...just on their website/advert!

It costs £11.95 per month for 24 months. So it costs £286 for your 2 years.

So when you see people winning Wii's or a £250 voucher, they haven't really won anything!

It also says on the advert that they have given away over £3,000,000 worth of prizes, and there have been 170,000 winners!! -You may think that 170,000 is a lot of winners....maybe...but the prizes average out at just over £17 each!!

So, yes there may be a winner who won a holiday + £1,000 cash, but what about the others? There are obviously prizes for less than £17 because of this. - I imagine there are prizes like pens or £5 gift cards, and they make up a large amount of the prizes!


Let me put it into perspective. There have been 170,000 winners with prizes worth £3,000,000. When you add up there 24 monthly installments and x it by the amount of winners, the company has made £48,756,000!! - This doesn't include the thousands of customers who haven't won a thing!!

I should start a company like this....I should only charge £5 per month, and give out the same amount of prizes....I'd still be £20,000,000 more well off!!

I never thought it would be this bad, and it did actually amaze me!!

DO NOT JOIN!!


MORE INFO;

I bet all of the people get entered into the same competitions anyway!

 

[Lottie]

I read that a lot of competitions were boycotting these types of group entry systems that IW were doing too.

 

[Greg]

This is a bit disgraceful this scheme. I thought Ideal World would be above this sort of thing. :devil::devil:

 

[Bexi]

I can't believe anyone would ever think this is good value for money!

 

[Alley Cat]

I would never consider joining Win 24, but without endorsing this scheme in any way, I have to take issue when you say it's a con - it's not a con, it's a very profitable and completely legal business. It would be a con if they were taking people's subscriptions and nobody won anything, but as far as I can see they're not guaranteeing how many people will win, or the sizes of the prizes that will be won, and people are winning - so they're delivering exactly what they say they will deliver, which means it isn't a con. What it is is a form of gambling. The people who join up are playing a game of chance and are gambling that their return will be more than their investment without even a minimum return being guaranteed.

Also, I would point out that it doesn't say that all the winners are different people. Some of the winners may have won more than one prize while paying only one subscription, and there will (possibly/probably) be some members who haven't won anything, so you can't be sure how many people have actually signed up or calculate how much the company has made from subscriptions. Undoubtedly, though, it will have been a great deal of money - they wouldn't run the scheme unless it made a healthy profit. All forms of gambling make a very healthy profit.

Having said that, the people who win the cars and the holidays for a £286 investment will undoubtedly think it's a good return and won't care at all that the company makes a fortune - just as the person who wins a thousand pounds on the roulette table doesn't care that the casino is making a million. Personally I think a person would have to be nuts to join, but then I think all forms of gambling are nuts. Joining Win 24 is a gamble and we all know who wins overall when people gamble.

 

[Lottie]

It is a con, because Win24 are conning the people who are running the competitions in the first place. The people who set up the competitions do it in order to advertise their products and their websites. Win24 circumvent this by flooding their competition with entries from people who haven't even been to the website, let alone seen the products that are being advertised (I don't mean the competition prizes).

Many competition runners are getting wise to this and don't allow automated entries and include a captcha code (numbers and letters) which you have to enter manually.

If you were running a competition, how would you like it if all the entries were from a computer and not from people viisiting your site or buying your products? That's where the con lies.

http://www.loquax.co.uk/webmaster/autoentry.htm

http://benlancaster.wordpress.com/2...bt-00online-telonline-tisca-competition-spam/

 

[Lottie]

This is a bit disgraceful this scheme. I thought Ideal World would be above this sort of thing. :devil::devil:

It is the lowest of the low - but not because people are paying to be in it (that's their choice) but because Win24/IW are using the efforts and websites of 3rd parties in order to make money for themselves without any cost to themselves.

It's a bit like winning the "millionth customer to set foot through the store entrance" without ever setting foot in the store.

 

[Bennyxp]

I would never consider joining Win 24, but without endorsing this scheme in any way, I have to take issue when you say it's a con - it's not a con, it's a very profitable and completely legal business. It would be a con if they were taking people's subscriptions and nobody won anything, but as far as I can see they're not guaranteeing how many people will win, or the sizes of the prizes that will be won, and people are winning - so they're delivering exactly what they say they will deliver, which means it isn't a con. What it is is a form of gambling. The people who join up are playing a game of chance and are gambling that their return will be more than their investment without even a minimum return being guaranteed.

Also, I would point out that it doesn't say that all the winners are different people. Some of the winners may have won more than one prize while paying only one subscription, and there will (possibly/probably) be some members who haven't won anything, so you can't be sure how many people have actually signed up or calculate how much the company has made from subscriptions. Undoubtedly, though, it will have been a great deal of money - they wouldn't run the scheme unless it made a healthy profit. All forms of gambling make a very healthy profit.

Having said that, the people who win the cars and the holidays for a £286 investment will undoubtedly think it's a good return and won't care at all that the company makes a fortune - just as the person who wins a thousand pounds on the roulette table doesn't care that the casino is making a million. Personally I think a person would have to be nuts to join, but then I think all forms of gambling are nuts. Joining Win 24 is a gamble and we all know who wins overall when people gamble.

Erm.....I'm not sure why you are having a go at me for everything I said. :/

I NEVER used the word 'con' in my whole thread post apart from the title. It may not be a con due to some customers getting prizes, but in another way, it is, as they don't state how few people win, and how much. - I had to make the title catchy for people to view it. What would you have called it?

In my eyes, I still think it is a con due to people signing up being told about all the big winners and 170,000 winners...not mentioning the £5 vouchers (i persume they have), which is covering the fact, and making more people sign up.

Actually, were you say ''I would point out that it doesn't say that all the winners are different people'' Yes it does...it says ''170,000 winners'', if you won 2 things, you wouldn't be called 2 winners would you? You would just be called a winner!!

Then you go on to say ''and there will (possibly/probably) be some members who haven't won anything, so you can't be sure how many people have actually signed up or calculate how much the company has made from subscriptions''
- I'm sure I said the amount I came to was just from the WINNERS who have won something, and did not include the people who hadn't won....please read the posts and get it right before moaning at people....(I'm sure you work for Win24!!)

''All forms of gambling make a very healthy profit'' Correct....but they don't go on Ideal World do they?! I wouldn't care less if it wasn't on IW, but the fact they air it in the way they do isn't fair. (This is why it is in the IW section!)

''Having said that, the people who win the cars and the holidays for a £286 investment will undoubtedly think it's a good return'' Yes...but they would make up less than 1% of their customers, so it doesn't really balance it out.

''just as the person who wins a thousand pounds on the roulette table doesn't care that the casino is making a million'' You are going off track here....but atleast roulette is 50/50....I'm trying to make a point that the ''top 10 winners'' for last month includes a Wii (worth less than £200) so less than 10 people have got their money back!! So You can put 250 on roulette and have a 50/50 chance of winning, or do the same with Win24, and have less than 1% chance.... These are 2 completely different things!

People like you do annoy me, and I appologise to everybody else viewing the thread, but I just had to get my point seen

 

[Greg]

Ben, I totally agree with you. This is the sort of 'scheme' that would not be out of place of a junk mail scam. Notice there is a 'guarantee' on the website. One might think without clicking it might mean you are guaranteed to win a prize or your money back. When you actually click on it, all it says at that there is some sort of 'notary' by an 'independent auditor'. It doesn't say who it is. It gives the impression of something legitimate but offers very little.

 

[pdsalford]

This is a bit disgraceful this scheme. I thought Ideal World would be above this sort of thing. :devil::devil:

I don't think you can assume Ideal World is above anything that will make them money.

 

[Swankypants]

Why get so tetchy Ben when someone wants to have a debate/conversation/alternate view? You clearly used 'con' in the title - to draw people into reading your post. Ironic given your subject matter.

Everyone on here seams to agree that is clearly a poor offer and amounts to gambling. It panders to the dense and gullible in society like a lot of things nowadays. Be glad you are bright enough to avoid and move on.

I was going to say - Watch the "winner(s)" scroll across the screen too - there aren't that many of them and one won a BP Rucksack - altogether now! oooooooooooooo!

 

[Bennyxp]

Why get so tetchy Ben when someone wants to have a debate/conversation/alternate view? You clearly used 'con' in the title - to draw people into reading your post. Ironic given your subject matter.

Everyone on here seams to agree that is clearly a poor offer and amounts to gambling. It panders to the dense and gullible in society like a lot of things nowadays. Be glad you are bright enough to avoid and move on.

I was going to say - Watch the "winner(s)" scroll across the screen too - there aren't that many of them and one won a BP Rucksack - altogether now! oooooooooooooo!

I was not getting tetchy at all, but when I write something and somebody disagrees or have to pick up on little things, and even say things which are meant to be against me (eventhough they end up having the same opinion) that does annoy me.

If you look at any of my past tread starters I don't think I have ever had to say that somebody has annoyed me or anything, as I've never had somebody who picks up on the tiniest of things!

''Everyone on here seams to agree that is clearly a poor offer and amounts to gambling'' If they agreed to it, I don't understand why they had to write 2 paragraphs about me writing 'con' in the title....if they hated 'win 24', I wouldn't have thought they would have even brought it up. - 'Con' was used to get people to click on the button, and I NEVER used the word on my thread post, so I think it is irrelivant. BUT I still think it is a 'con' due to people being targeted thinking that there is a high chance of being a winner, when in fact it is near impossible.

''Be glad you are bright enough to avoid and move on.'' I really don't understand this post....I wanted to point this rediculous scheme out to the lovely people on this site (isn't this what this site is designed for?!) And I think you will find, I didn't really reply until the person commented with their essay. It had points against me, and I wasn't not going to reply if thats what you think!

 

[StumpyBloke (old account)]

Fight!! Fight!! Fight!!

 

[Bennyxp]

Fight!! Fight!! Fight!!

Yeah!!

 

[Greg]

lol Ben :muscle:

 

[Alley Cat]

Erm.....I'm not sure why you are having a go at me

Disagreeing with what you said on a discussion forum, where you've started the discussion, is "Having a go" at you? The purpose of a forum is to voice one's opinions, whether or not we all share those opinions. If you don't like the heat etc.

for everything I said. :/

I'm picky, it's a fault. I also come to forums like this one because I enjoy a good discussion/debate.

I NEVER used the word 'con' in my whole thread post apart from the title.

Where you used it is irrelevant - you used it, and I have the right to say that I think your use of it is incorrect.

I had to make the title catchy for people to view it.

You should just have put "Naked Women!" - it would have been more catchy and equally accurate.

What would you have called it?

Libellous. A con (confidence trick) is a deliberate attempt to defraud, which is illegal. Win 24 is not, legally, defrauding anybody - what they're doing may be unethical, it may be immoral, but it isn't illegal. I'd recommend you're more careful with your choice of words in future before you find yourself being sued.

In my eyes, I still think it is a con due to people signing up being told about all the big winners and 170,000 winners...not mentioning the £5 vouchers (i persume they have), which is covering the fact, and making more people sign up.

Do you seriously think that all these people are signing up for this without knowing what it is? You think they're all so stupid that they buy a product without looking at it first? That would be like buying a TV because the presenter told you it was great without actually seeing the TV or learning its features first. Who does that?

And, by the way, nobody is making anybody sign up. These are adults with free will who are choosing to sign up - if they don't bother to find out what it is that they're signing up for then they've only themselves to blame.

Actually, were you say ''I would point out that it doesn't say that all the winners are different people'' Yes it does...it says ''170,000 winners'', if you won 2 things, you wouldn't be called 2 winners would you? You would just be called a winner!!

You've never worked in advertising or PR have you? Win 24's website is a copywriter's dream - 50 people win competition 1..... 50 people win competition 2...... and hey presto we have 100 winners. The fact that some of them have won both competitions is immaterial.

please read the posts and get it right before moaning at people....

You really need to learn the difference between discussing and moaning.

(I'm sure you work for Win24!!)

I almost wish I did - I'd probably be earning a lot more than I do now.

''All forms of gambling make a very healthy profit'' Correct....but they don't go on Ideal World do they?! I wouldn't care less if it wasn't on IW, but the fact they air it in the way they do isn't fair.

Isn't fair? Life's not fair, the world's not fair - this isn't a kiddie's playground, this is commercial television. Ideal World is a business in it for profit. And I have to tell you that virtually no business in the entire world is "fair" - business is cut-throat, very often immoral, almost always in some way unethical, and never, ever, fair. Shopping TV is very closely monitored by the regulators, and if IW and Win 24 were doing anything that in any way stepped outside what's considered to be acceptable, they'd very quickly be stopped. If you think that fairness should be monitored you'd better suggest that to the regulators.

''just as the person who wins a thousand pounds on the roulette table doesn't care that the casino is making a million'' You are going off track here....but atleast roulette is 50/50....

It is? You'd better warn all the casino owners of that, because they think that the odds are much more in their favour.

I'm trying to make a point that the ''top 10 winners'' for last month includes a Wii (worth less than £200) so less than 10 people have got their money back!! So You can put 250 on roulette and have a 50/50 chance of winning, or do the same with Win24, and have less than 1% chance.... These are 2 completely different things!

People sign up to Win 24 voluntarily, of their own free will. They choose Win 24 when they could have played at the casino if they'd wanted to. Rightly or wrongly they prefer the odds at Win 24, which they're perfectly entitled to do. Nobody with a brain could join Win 24 thinking they'd got more than an outside chance of winning anything worthwhile, but if they want to that's up to them. More money than sense in my opinion.

The fact that we keep coming back to, however, is that what IW/Win 24 are doing is completely legal, and consenting adults are choosing to be part of it. If you don't like Win 24 then don't sign up. If you don't like IW for being part of it then don't watch IW. Maybe send them an email expressing your outrage.

And you need to stop putting things in the titles of your threads if you don't want other people to take issue with them.

People like you do annoy me

I can live with that.

 

[merryone]

Well Ben, for all it's worth, you can use the word "con" to describe this shoddy outfit as much as you like as far as I'm concerned....even if it is legal, above board, whatever! Like other posters I just don't think it's something one would expect a channel like IW to be promoting, especially since they pride themselves on their "family and friends" image so much.....It's like encouraging your Nan to phone the number on the back of that scratchcard that fell out of her Take a Break, you know the one that promised her she'd won a prize worth at least £500!

Of course the VT's only going to show people (well actors) who have won major prizes, but sadly ,despite a lot of us realising that quite a few people have come away with a £5 voucher to use on your next visit to a Harvester restuarant, or nothing even, they'll be enough who don't, or mistake IW's endorsement as a mark of quality and trust.......and remember that the more people who join up, the less your chance is of winning anything! Legal? =Yes, but a rip off? even more so.....I agree, people sign of their own free will, but the ad is clearly pitched at shopping channel viewers as many will be lonely, vulnerable people who like to spend their money! If IW want to convince us they're "family" then they need to stop "selling their Grandmother down the river!"

 

[Swankypants]

The fact that you answer every reply with a five page essay Ben shows it winds you up far more than it should! Chill.

 

[StumpyBloke (old account)]

As far as I am concerned anyone who does sign up to this rip-off is quite stupid plain and simple! It certainly isnt a con Ben, as others have said, so chill dude, BUT it is a rip-off and more fool anyone stupid enough to buy in to it, unless of course they are fully aware that the chances of them winning anything of value is virtually non-existant - and then more power to them!

 

[Bennyxp]

Disagreeing with what you said on a discussion forum, where you've started the discussion, is "Having a go" at you? The purpose of a forum is to voice one's opinions, whether or not we all share those opinions. If you don't like the heat etc.



I'm picky, it's a fault. I also come to forums like this one because I enjoy a good discussion/debate.



Where you used it is irrelevant - you used it, and I have the right to say that I think your use of it is incorrect.



You should just have put "Naked Women!" - it would have been more catchy and equally accurate.



Libellous. A con (confidence trick) is a deliberate attempt to defraud, which is illegal. Win 24 is not, legally, defrauding anybody - what they're doing may be unethical, it may be immoral, but it isn't illegal. I'd recommend you're more careful with your choice of words in future before you find yourself being sued.



Do you seriously think that all these people are signing up for this without knowing what it is? You think they're all so stupid that they buy a product without looking at it first? That would be like buying a TV because the presenter told you it was great without actually seeing the TV or learning its features first. Who does that?

And, by the way, nobody is making anybody sign up. These are adults with free will who are choosing to sign up - if they don't bother to find out what it is that they're signing up for then they've only themselves to blame.



You've never worked in advertising or PR have you? Win 24's website is a copywriter's dream - 50 people win competition 1..... 50 people win competition 2...... and hey presto we have 100 winners. The fact that some of them have won both competitions is immaterial.



You really need to learn the difference between discussing and moaning.



I almost wish I did - I'd probably be earning a lot more than I do now.



Isn't fair? Life's not fair, the world's not fair - this isn't a kiddie's playground, this is commercial television. Ideal World is a business in it for profit. And I have to tell you that virtually no business in the entire world is "fair" - business is cut-throat, very often immoral, almost always in some way unethical, and never, ever, fair. Shopping TV is very closely monitored by the regulators, and if IW and Win 24 were doing anything that in any way stepped outside what's considered to be acceptable, they'd very quickly be stopped. If you think that fairness should be monitored you'd better suggest that to the regulators.



It is? You'd better warn all the casino owners of that, because they think that the odds are much more in their favour.



People sign up to Win 24 voluntarily, of their own free will. They choose Win 24 when they could have played at the casino if they'd wanted to. Rightly or wrongly they prefer the odds at Win 24, which they're perfectly entitled to do. Nobody with a brain could join Win 24 thinking they'd got more than an outside chance of winning anything worthwhile, but if they want to that's up to them. More money than sense in my opinion.

The fact that we keep coming back to, however, is that what IW/Win 24 are doing is completely legal, and consenting adults are choosing to be part of it. If you don't like Win 24 then don't sign up. If you don't like IW for being part of it then don't watch IW. Maybe send them an email expressing your outrage.

And you need to stop putting things in the titles of your threads if you don't want other people to take issue with them.



I can live with that.

I'm not going to carry on with this due to me keeping with my opinion.

If I called it "Naked Women!" , I don't see how it would be more accurate!

Also, On roulette, if you place £250 on red or black, it is near enough 50% chance of doubleing your money!

''People sign up to Win 24 voluntarily, of their own free will. They choose Win 24 when they could have played at the casino if they'd wanted to.'' I agree with this, but I'm not sure if you know, but not all people who watch IW are 'normal', lets put it this way. And if a presenter is saying about winning cash, cars Etc. they wont think and look indepth, they will just sign up! On the other hand, if they got told the chances of winning, I doubt they would.

I have nothing wrong with the company, (eventhough they are taking advantage of promotional competitions), the thing I have a problem with is that IW know there are vunerable people out there who will just sign up, so they allow it to be on their channel. Now that is not on! - If they could get out of it FINE...but if they sign up, they are in a 24 month contract, which they might not beable to keep up!!