Reply
Bronze Conversationalist

Change Timing on Sweeptakes

Why must sweepstakes start and end at 9 a.m. and 8:59 a.m., et, respectively?

 

For the first day of a sweepstakes, the 9 a.m. start time includes just about everyone across the United States, while on the last day, it rules out many folks who live farther West than the East Coast. This gives a strong advantage to those in the East to get in that last 5 entries, but it leaves the rest of us short that many, unless we want to get up early and rush to get those entries recorded.

 

Instead of 9 to 8:59, how about changing the Timing rule to run from midnight to 11:59 p.m., respectively? Put it on the calendar days instead of an arbitrary and unfair time of 9 a.m., eastern time. That would provide everybody in the United States time zones a more level playing field.

 

Or, is there anything that specifically requires a sweepstakes to run in 24-hour increments, only? Since these end at 8:59, which is 1 minute short of a 24-hour increment, and would seemingly violate such a requirement, at least by the letter if not the intent, then I guess not. If there is no such 24-hour rule, either legally or internally, the sweepstakes could still run from 9 a.m., et, if the committee decides it just has to start at 9 a.m. for some reason. Then the end time could be adjusted by itself to 11:59 p.m., et, on that last day to let more people have the opportunity to enter the sweepstakes at leisure, just as we are able to do during the other days of the sweepstakes.

 

I like dreaming of winning one of those sweepstakes, someday, but I feel slighted about that last day when I can't drag myself out of bed in time to go to my den, fire up the computer, log in to AARP, right-click my way into AARP Rewards, and open the sweepstakes of choice to enter by 6:59 a.m., mt.

 

Mountain timers and Pacific timers aren't in the worst position, either. My guess is that AARP members in Alaska and Hawaii just don't stand a chance on that last day.

 

Stay well and enjoy!

Lynn

418 Views
0
Report
Reply