what is 1 + 2 + 3?

August 24, 2005 12:00 AM

Why do so many contests ask a stupid "skill-testing" question?
posted by randomstriker to Grab Bag (11 answers total)

To evoke the idiotic instinct that since you can answer the question, you stand a pretty good chance of winning.
posted by Mephistopheles at 12:19 AM on August 24, 2005

Best answer: It's actually required by law in Canada. In short, a game is pure chance is considered a lottery, and not legal to run without a license. But if you ask a skill question, then it's not a lottery.
posted by Nothing at 12:22 AM on August 24, 2005

game OF pure chance.
posted by Nothing at 12:22 AM on August 24, 2005

Best answer: A court decision ruled that the equations must contain at least three operations to actually be skill testing.

Presumably they made this decision after they had solved all other problems in Canadian society.
posted by Mephistopheles at 12:25 AM on August 24, 2005

It's noteworthy that there must be three operations, since getting the wrong answer is often not an obstacle to receiving the reward, eh?
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 12:55 AM on August 24, 2005

Here in the UK I assume it's a money generating operation. For example:

Ring [a premium rate number] and tell us the answer to this question:
Did Prince Charles recently marry:
a. Camilla Parker Bowles
b. Madonna
c. Sandra Bernhardt

At £1-£3 a call, I imagine they'd quite quickly recoup the cost of the prize offered.
posted by ceri richard at 1:02 AM on August 24, 2005

I was always under the impression that the competitions are simply there to gather contact information for people, and the question is simple to allow many people to answer. This therefore increases the amount of data captured.

Also, if it's £1 per play, the revenue is increased. 10000 entries, you've paid for a very nice prize for whoever won.
posted by gaby at 2:19 AM on August 24, 2005

Here in the UK I assume it's a money generating operation.

No, pretty sure it's the same as in Canada - prize-winning contests must ask a soul-destroyingly easy question to avoid being classified as pure chance/gambling.
Of course, money-gathering is still the main aim behind running them in the first place.
posted by anagrama at 3:28 AM on August 24, 2005

Mephistopheles' answer may not be a joke. My Google-fu is failing me, but I remember seeing a study that showed that response rates actually rise when people have to do something first (paste the right sticker onto the entry form, answer a stupid question) rather than just sending in their form.
posted by fuzz at 4:30 AM on August 24, 2005

It's definitely an anti-gambling/anti-lottery situation, legally. This is also why, in the UK at least, if a certain brand of food product has a "This product might let you win £100000 instantly" kind of deal, it will ALWAYS have a mechanism for "no purchase necessary" where you can write in to the food company and get a free entrance to the draw. This is what makes it a "free" draw, versus a lottery.
posted by wackybrit at 4:35 AM on August 24, 2005

Also, if it's £1 per play, the revenue is increased. 10000 entries, you've paid for a very nice prize for whoever won.

Often the actual prize has been sponsored by the company that markets it.

In other words, when 10000 people text in an answer to win a SonyEricsson phone, what they don't realise is that the television show running the content got the phone for free.
posted by ralawrence at 5:34 AM on August 24, 2005