Talk:McDonald's Monopoly/Archives/2012

McDonald's Monopoly in Austraila

McDonald's Monopoly in Australia - in (from memory) 2002, there was controversy about Australian McDonald's Monopoly. People were claiming prizes but McDonald's was disputing them, based on the fact that they had last year's tickets.

I don't know the resolution of this one, but I'll watch it and can contribute in the future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirkbroadhurst (talk • contribs) 11:39, February 13, 2005 (UTC)

Duplicate Information

I added a merge to this because there's duplicate information about the scandal in 2001, and I don't know if the scandal deserves its own page. Georgehotelling 19:57, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Georgehotelling, your merger made two unrelated articles merge. The Monopoly Best Chance Game has only run from 2003 through 2005 (this year being the 3rd year, hence "Monopoly Best Chance Game 3.0 at McDonald's" being the official name of the promotion. The McDonalds Monopoly fraud had nothing to do with this promotion. The Best Chance Game, again for clarity, pertains only to the promotion from 2003 until the present, and only then, in the promotions in which Best Buy offered its "Best Buy Bucks" promotion. The actual "Best Buy Bucks" promotions are not the same as the "McFraud" scandal. That is why I am tagging this article. I have written extensively about these promotions on the site bearing the same username as myself. INeedAttention.com 17:22, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I think, possibly as a result of this merge, we have very repetitious information in the "History" section. The opening section (two paragraphs) deals with the fraud, then the following sub-section, "McDonald's Monopoly Game Scandal" repeats this information in one paragraph. Then, "McDonald's promotional contests" is the only section that doesn't deal with the scandal, then the rest of the section (the sub-sub sections "The Fraud", "The Arrests", and "Update") again deal with the scandal. Due to the obvious impact the scandal had on the game (after all it's mentioned frequently in the article!), this should probably be cleaned up to give the scandal it's own section and the "History" section should reflect more of, perhaps, the history of the contest?? (For example, I don't know when the contest was first offered, which should be a fact reflected in this article. The earliest instance to it that I could see was 1999 when the "Update" sub-sub section mentions that Stanley Warwick fraudulently won his prize.) --Canuckguy 13:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, much of the text in the History section needs to be reorganized and merged together. -- HiEv 01:43, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I took care of this recently (note: this was after the above messages were posted^).. see the "History/Fraud section merger" section below. --Josh1billion 06:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Is it even a real contest?

From The official rules: Odds of wining the top collect an win prize:
"Odds of winning approximately 1 in 41,497,391,309"
One in fourty one billion? FOURTY ONE BILLION?! Gront 18:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

There is one piece out of 458,485,000 pieces. BUT you have to collect the other three common pieces as well. Short Line and another common piece will be stuck together, so you have to collect the other ones. 458,000,000 * 17/2 * 17 ~= 66 billion. Divide by two because there are two chances per pull tab, multiply by a bit because there are other prizes like food other than game pieces and you get the 41 billion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calwatch (talk • contribs) 05:50, October 17, 2006 (UTC)

Merge

Let's go ahead and merge McDonalds Monopoly 2006 into this article. There's nothing especially different about the 2006 edition that requires its own article. Cas510 15:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Nix it

Adds no new content for 2006, Merge or just delete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.95.71.55 (talk) 08:06, November 9, 2006 (UTC)

History/Fraud section merger

I have merged the "History" section with the "McDonald's Monopoly Game scandal" section. Both sections were focused on discussion of the fraud/scandal (this was all that the "History" section talked about). So, I have merged both sections, cleaned them up a bit, and named the new section simply "Fraud." I have removed the following statement, which was formerly in the "McDonald's Monopoly Game scandal" section: "It is believed that about $13 million (U.S.) was embezzled in this manner from 1995 to 2001." The reason I removed this was because it contradicts this earlier statement: ". . . had been participants in the scheme, netting more than $24 million". --Josh1billion 01:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Update: I changed the headers from that section around a bit. It's much better now. I didn't mess with the second paragraph of the "Fraud" section at all, though, so someone may want to check and make sure it doesn't repeat/conflict with any information discussed in the first paragraph of that section. --Josh1billion 03:49, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I did a lot to merge the scattered information into a cohesive section and get rid of a lot of redundant information. I also merged a lot of the post-fraud history into a new "Aftermath" section. I think it looks better, but feel free to keep improving it. -- HiEv 19:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Rare Pieces changed?

I have no source on this aside from my own personal experience, but I do believe the rare piece in the different color groups has occasionally changed over the years. For example, I believe that for some years Park Place was the rare piece. I worked at a McDonald's and customers would constantly get Boardwalk and go nuts, thinking they'd won. Can anyone else find any research on this? --Ktwombley 17:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm.. I don't have any sources either but out of faint memory I do think you're right. --Josh1billion 17:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I've tracked it since 1999 and the rare pieces haven't changed since that time. This year (2008) added two new groups of pieces (Electric Company & Waterworks-RARE and Arches & Golden-RARE), but all the old rare ones are the same as in each of the previous years (back to 1999 anyway). -- Michael Coley, Amazing-Bargains.com, 7 October 2008

I know for a fact that I have personally gotten multiple Boardwalks in one year after 1999, and in one instance, I received two Boardwalks on the same item. (This was my first immediate clue that Boardwalk was the rare piece for the year). Since there's only 1 such rare piece (Boardwalk/Park Place), your information would have to be wrong. Even if there were 2 or 3 such pieces, the odds of one person getting all three of them in one year would be astronomical. And I trust the person who actually worked at McDonalds and witnessed confused customers. -- Jwinters | Talk 01:50, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

20th Century History?

They've had this game since 1987. Where's the history? MMetro (talk) 21:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

All the in

Page should be moved to McDonald's Page

This aricle doesn't deserve it's own page. I will be nominating it for delete.--Ghostfacebandit (talk) 01:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

One piece?

Didn't the game originally have only one game piece per food item? ISTR that there were some years between the first year of the game and the second appearance.

Color change for 2008

The color for Mediterranean Avenue and Baltic Avenue has been changed to brown from the original purple for the 2008 game. No explanation is given except for in the online game, when clicked on, those spaces say "Look, it's brown now." on the prize description pop-up.

After looking at the Monopoly (game) article, it appears they've copied the brown from the later UK and the new Hasbro World editions. Why would they change that for the American McDonald's games??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 20:36, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Coke points

Coke points from the online game are transferrable, if you don't use the code. Just give the redemption codes to someone else and delete the e-mails you were sent. I hit Community Chest twice in one session and sent the codes to my sister because I don't collect Coke points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 20:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

hey what if you get the arches avenue ticket thing ( it says 100,000 $can ) what do you do do you get 100,000 are what get back to me soon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoenixsniper69 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

isn't it funny?

how everyone across the us always seems to be missing the same pieces that would complete a property set? 70.57.26.244 (talk) 18:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

its also funny because McDonalds is nearl a monopoly... its a sign! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.125.54 (talk) 00:28, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

um...it's called a "rare piece", It's not like there's an equal number of each property out there. There's one property in each set that's designated as a "rare piece" and there's a limited number of those in existence, depending on the number of each prize that is to be awarded. In 2009, there's 1 Boardwalk, and a crap load of Park Place. That's the beauty of the marketing campaign -- that it gets people buying McDonalds morning, noon, and night, just to have a 1 in 40 billion chance of winning $1,000,000 (which is really $50,000 a year for 20 years). -- Jwinters | Talk 01:55, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Online Version

Its states in the Online Version that in 2009 only 10 pieces were aloud to be entered daily. This is also true of 2008. I am adding it. I am also adding in the reason for edit to see TALK page.

Thank You --Bkopicz3 (talk) 21:41, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

• • Correction its listed under restrictions NOT online version.

Sorry --Bkopicz3 (talk) 21:44, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

The article states that when the three cards are created, one is randomly chosen to be a winning card, meaning that each time you enter a code you have a 1/3 chance of winning something. over the course of this year's monopoly game I have entered about 30 pieces into the online game and not won anything. This makes me question the validity of this portion, coupled with the fact that no source is given, and I could not find this claim made in the official online rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.113.67.12 (talk) 12:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Its called Mayfair, not boardwalk! Mayfair is the rare piece this time. I've had Park place quite a few times now. I just need 1 more for each set which clearly is not going to happen grr :L —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.87.181 (talk) 18:51, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

2010 online game

There's no gameboard in the online game for 2010. I entered my free code, it's the same code on all the gameboard/collection things, and it said I was entered in the Community Chest drawing. After registering and entering codes, the player is presented with three Chance cards. Select one and it asks if you want that one or to go back and choose another. You can keep changing your mind as long as you want, until you accept a choice. I played eight game pieces and won one prize, 30 Coke Rewards points. When I entered that code and chose a card, it instantly said it was a winner without any "Are you sure?" step. I suspect it makes zero difference which card the player chooses. If the game piece is a pre-selected winner, you'll win. If not, you don't win a prize. If only one of the three cards is a winner, giving the player the possibility of winning OR losing with every code, some States or countries could consider the game gambling since it involves skill. McDonalds gets around that in most places by offering free game pieces by mail so players aren't technically *required* to spend money to play, it's merely tedious and inconvenient to play for free. In previous years, if the player had a winning code, the game would give one or two double rolls then the exact number to land the token on the winning property. Of course the player had to have previously played enough losing codes to collect the other properties in the group, unless the winning code was to land on a Chance or Community Chest space. There was no skill or randomness involved. Bizzybody (talk) 06:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

After reading this, I started paying more attention. It does indeed still ask you to confirm even if the card you are picking is actually a winner. However, the win rates indicate that each code is still seeded to make any card win if the code is going to win at all. I've consistently chosen the same card and it's certainly not 1 in 3 chances.24.12.15.6 (talk) 16:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Popular Culture section

I'm seeing that the Popular Culture section has been deleted multiple times by different users...likely because the content looks like blog spam. So far there aren't any real references out there to show that the blog is relevant in the "big picture" (i.e., outside of Ann Arbor, MI). Does anyone else want to chime in on this? Madcap21 seems very intent in keeping it up there. -- Tim D (talk) 22:55, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

2010 how to tell if you've entered a winning code.

If the first code you enter isn't a winner, then the flash game reloads slower for a subsequent code, it will be a winner. Conversely, if your fist code is a winner then it reloads slower, that code is going to be a loser. If your connection is really fast it will be harder to tell when it reloads. This only works once per session since it then has both the loser game and the winner game downloaded and the loading bar will go very fast for a win or loss the rest of the session. Either way, the 2010 online game is awful compared to previous years. Bizzybody (talk) 07:00, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

This has been made more difficult for the 2011 game. There's at least four different animations for each of the three choices, three losing and one winning. If you haven't won yet on one of the three choices and the loading animation goes really fast, you didn't enter a winning code. If you've lost three in a row choosing the same throwing style then the fourth time loads slower, it's likely going to be a winner. Last night I entered 10 codes using the middle choice and won nothing, though one of the 10 was also an instant Medium Fries winner. Bizzybody (talk) 05:43, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

2010 online game stole a code.

I was entering codes tonight and after one of them it went back to the login without displaying the three cards. I logged in again, re-entered the code and it said it had already been played. It stole the code, didn't give me a "choice" which we know is a bogus thing since all the win/lose is pre-selected per code like it has always been. Twice more tonight it kicked back to the login screen but it didn't prevent me from playing more codes. The win ratio looks like it's dropping. In the past 48 hours I've entered 17 codes and got ONE win for 30 Coke points and two of the pieces were instant wins for medium fries. That's only 1 in 5.666666~ Previous days playing 10 codes it's been 1 in 3 to 4 codes, sometimes better. So far I've only got a single free Redbox rental in the online game, the rest of my online wins have been coke points. I've gotten a few instant wins of free medium fries, one free smoothie or iced coffee and one free flurry or parfait. I've won nothing else. McNopoly 2010 is the lamest this game has ever been. Bizzybody (talk) 07:09, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

The online game just stole another code! I have a States Avenue piece with this code: g8vlbqdvkwm It first claimed it was an invalid code, then when I re-entered it exactly the same it claimed it had already been used. Bizzybody (talk) 07:42, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Yet another stolen code! I entered it, got the "momentary surge in traffic" page and when I was able to get back to it, it claimed the code had alreay been used! Bizzybody (talk) 23:37, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Just found out that the online game keeps a history of all codes you've played, win or lose, and it keeps the wins in a separate history with links to claim the prizes. That's good but the way the online game is designed with the phony choice of three cards and appearing to cheat the player when the site has a problem is not a good thing. That never happened with previous year's online games! Bizzybody (talk) 23:59, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Claiming Redbox wins.

The online game is not too informative when you win a free Redbox rental. The information that the code has to be used on the Redbox website is on the SECOND claim page after you click Claim Prize. If you just write down the code presented on the first page and try to use it at a Redbox kiosk, you're told the code is invalid instead of being informed at the kiosk that the code has to be used on redbox.com/mcd Issues like this make me think a different company or at least a different group of people did the implementation of the 2010 Monopoly game. There should also be a *highly visible* notice on the game site that the player can check their play history in case of any problems to see if they've won or lost. I never encountered any such issues with previous years' games. Bizzybody (talk) 00:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

2011 game, enter codes faster.

Sign in then skip the enter code screen by appending your code to the end of this URL http://www.playatmcd.com/en-us/Main/Entry?entryCode=xxxxxxxxxxx Replace the x's with your code. Use lowercase letters. Paste into the address bar of your browser and it goes directly to the Hit the Hat Game. 2nd year of this lame BS instead of the actual Monopoly game where players can collect and win online. Whatever, the winning codes are all pre-determined anyway. Bizzybody (talk) 05:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Probability of getting rare pieces

Does anyone know the probabilities of getting the rare game pieces? The article doesn't say. I found a site showing the number printed of each game piece, but this says nothing about the chance of getting the pieces since I don't know how many there are in total. 67.1.85.60 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:47, 15 October 2011 (UTC).

Incorrect Information

The article says: "There are also "instant win" tokens the recipient can redeem for McDonald's food (typically small menu items, such as a free small McFlurry or medium fries) but never for any food item that has game pieces, money, or other prizes."

Though I haven't searched for sources, I know from first-hand experience that through 2009, it was possible to get food prizes that rendered more game pieces. Particularly, in 2007, you could win a 3-piece chicken selects, which rendered more game pieces. You also can win a lunch extra value meal on a game piece which could also render more pieces. This blanket statement is misleading. If someone has a source to back me up, I'd suggest a modification to make this section correct. --67.165.178.74 (talk) 06:37, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Promotion ended early because of Olympics?

Wasn't there one year when the promotion had to end early because it ran up against the Olympics, and McDonald's had to get out its new plastic drink cups with NBA players who were on Team USA on them? (My guess would be 2000, as those Olympics would have been held around the time the McDonald's game is usually played every year.) -- That Don Guy (talk) 22:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Date of earliest version

The article says the contest started in 1987 but I definitely remember at least one Monopoly-themed McDonald's contest earlier than that, 1984 at the latest and maybe as early as 1980. It might not have been an annual thing back then but I'm sure it happened at least once. This would have been in Canada (more specifically around the Edmonton area, if that matters) and I recall the game pieces being like miniature tear-open envelopes such as certain bills come in, much bigger than the pieces in the recent versions of the game. I think the tray liners in their restaurants might have served as the boards, but I could be mistaken about that. Pieces were supposed to be given out two per purchase, as the article says, but I remember one time near the end of the contest a guy gave my mother a big handful because they needed to get rid of them (they weren't physically attached to the food containers like they are now).

Where would one even start to look for sources on this, though? My memory of the thing isn't a citable source, obviously. 50.72.196.97 (talk) 06:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)