PGRI Introduction:
Powerball and Mega Millions have both been massively
successful brands. Still, lotteries are applying all their energies to make them
even more successful, and now are adding to the mix with Monopoly Million-
aires’ Club. Right now, the mission of implementing the most exciting new game
launch in the history of U.S. lotteries is somewhat all-consuming. Thinking that
this is a good time to begin the dialogue on building a plan for long-term sustain-
able growth for all of the multi-state games, I asked May Scheve Reardon if she
could share her thoughts on cross-jurisdictional marketing and distribution.
Creating consistency for nation-wide branding and marketing is a challenge
when there are forty-five different lotteries whose mission is to serve their own
in-state stakeholders. Developing and executing cross-jurisdictional initiatives will
always be challenged by the fact of different state statutes, different business
and public policy agendas, and different business processes. State lotteries and
their commercial partners have done an amazing job at identifying the elements
that should remain the province of each state, focusing on those areas where
cross-jurisdictional standardization is do-able, and capitalizing on the tremen-
dous benefits to building on those areas of commonality.
Public Gaming International • September/October 2014
8
Public Gaming
May Scheve Reardon
Executive Director, Missouri Lottery
Paul Jason, Public Gaming:
When
cross-selling began in 2010, Powerball and
Mega Millions were managed by two dif-
ferent groups of lotteries. And not all lot-
teries signed on to both games right away.
Going forward, now that all U.S. lotteries
sell both Powerball and Mega Millions,
what is the purpose of having two separate
management groups to manage the two
games? Wouldn’t the ability of lotteries to
work collaboratively and create consensus
be significantly enhanced if there was one
management group to manage both games?
May Scheve Reardon:
Powerball,
Mega Millions, and the new Monopoly Mil-
lionaires’ Club game are national brands
that can benefit greatly from having one cen-
tral body that oversees all aspects of these
games. One governing body could provide
more cohesive guidance and address the is-
sues relating to operational efficiencies, risk
management, brand awareness, and all the
elements that go into the business of build-
ing these brands. The end result would be
much better coordination of nation-wide
initiatives that would generate increases in
sales for each individual lottery.
It should be noted that there are forty-five
different state lotteries with forty-five differ-
ent sets of statutes, rules, constraints, politi-
cal cultures, and business agendas. Having
one governing body does not change the fact
that it is very difficult for anything we do on
a multi-state level to align with the objec-
tives of all forty-five lotteries. That problem
will never go away. I still think that having
one governing body would serve as a better
foundation for working together to find the
solutions that will free up the tremendous ca-
