The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
I WON POWERBALL Channel Strip Plugins
Old 26th August 2007
  #1
Lives for gear
 
HIGHENDONLY's Avatar
 

I WON POWERBALL

I GOT 5 NUMBERS and was 1 off on the powerball. This is great news yet sucks cause of how close..
Old 26th August 2007
  #2
Lives for gear
 
drmmrboy's Avatar
 

So did ya win anything?
Can we look forward to this..?
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/good-...z-gear-if.html
Old 26th August 2007
  #3
Gear Guru
 
AllAboutTone's Avatar
 

Damn you could have bought me more gear !!
Old 26th August 2007
  #4
Lives for gear
 
lowfreq33's Avatar
 

Hey, I'm not greedy, I'll just take an empty 10 space 500 series chassis!heh
Old 28th August 2007
  #5
Lives for gear
Matching 5 numbers without matching the powerball is a prize of $200,000. I'd think you'd be celebrating, unless you are FOS.

But I got 3 tickets for the Mega Millions. If I win, I ain't buying anyone a ****ing thing. :D
Old 28th August 2007
  #6
Lives for gear
 
max cooper's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HIGHENDONLY View Post
I GOT 5 NUMBERS and was 1 off on the powerball. This is great news yet sucks cause of how close..
Actually, you weren't close. Matching five numbers is rare enough but when you throw in the extra digit, the odds against you go up astronomically.

Lottery is a tax on the math-challenged.
Old 28th August 2007
  #7
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by max cooper View Post
Lottery is a tax on the math-challenged.
Tell that to the guy in Indiana that won.
Old 28th August 2007
  #8
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HIGHENDONLY View Post
I GOT 5 NUMBERS and was 1 off on the powerball. This is great news yet sucks cause of how close..

Did you buy the multiplier? You have a winning ticket worth somewhere between $200,000 and a million?
Old 28th August 2007
  #9
84K
Lives for gear
 
84K's Avatar
Once I had every number just one number below. so, if the was 21-13-18 I had 20-12-17, FOR EVERY NUMBER! I realized the chances of that are the same as the chances of winning, but I won nothing. So that was the last time I played the lottery.
Old 28th August 2007
  #10
Lives for gear
 
HIGHENDONLY's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
Did you buy the multiplier? You have a winning ticket worth somewhere between $200,000 and a million?
No, just paid a $1. Yea i won $200,000. But i'm already doing pretty well for myself. I'm going to give to my family.
Old 28th August 2007
  #11
Quote:
Originally Posted by max cooper View Post
Lottery is a tax on the math-challenged.
i always thought it was a tax on hope.
Old 28th August 2007
  #12
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by max cooper View Post
Lottery is a tax on the math-challenged.
My favorite on the subject was a Dilbert strip a few years back. Dogbert has a stand with a sign that says "Used lottery tickets, 50% off." He points out that the odds of winning are "only 1 in 40 million less than the full-priced tickets" or something to that effect.
Old 28th August 2007
  #13
Lives for gear
For those who take their gambling seriously (like me):

The odds of winning the jackpot in Powerball are 1 in about 147 million. Pretty freaking slim.

However, since the tickets are $1 each, any time the jackpot goes above 147 million, you have a "positive expectation", and therefore logic dictates that you should play. The reason is that theoretically, if you were to play 147 million times (147 million different tickets/number combinations for the same drawing, or simply 1 ticket for 147 million drawings, if you could live that long) you would win once. Therefore, if you invest $147 million (over time) into it, as long as the jackpot is over that amount each time you play, you would make money. Even if it was only $1.00. But you would still make money. And this is only taking into account the jackpot, and not the other lower prizes (although it does not take into account any taxes you must pay or the penalty for choosing a lump sum payout).

So that's why I play every time the jackpot gets that high. The investment for each drawing is minimal (I only buy 1-3 tickets each time). But the law of positive expectation dictates that it is, in fact, a good bet. Regardless of the fact that I will never have enough money or live long enough to play 147 million times, it's still a good bet. The risk to reward ratio is in your favor.

Even if it is an incredibly unlikely long shot. Just food for thought.
Old 28th August 2007
  #14
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorGlory View Post
But the law of positive expectation dictates that it is, in fact, a good bet. Regardless of the fact that I will never have enough money or live long enough to play 147 million times, it's still a good bet. The risk to reward ratio is in your favor.
Except that it's not this simple. The fundamental reason that these lotteries exist is to make money for the state(s). *LOTS* of money. The usual take is something like 40% or more, as compared to Vegas slots, which are in the small single digits. The expectation is that you will lose 40% of your money. The operators of the lottery *guarantee* this by manipulating the payout, which is always a fraction of the amount of money bet.

What you're missing is that when the jackpot is more than $147M, the odds are also very high that you have to split the jackpot (since something on the order of 300 million tickets have been sold in that case.) By splitting the pot, you go back to the expectation of losing 40% of your money.

The reality is that you're *never* in the money in a lottery, or any other pure game of chance. At best you break even over the long haul, but only if the "house" is altruistic and doesn't want a cut (rare as hen's teeth, as they say.) Otherwise, you are guaranteed to lose over the long run.

The only time you ever have "positive expectation" is in a game of skill, where (if you're really good) you can analyze the odds of winning, based on your position and observed history, relative to the money odds, and you do it better than your competition. Vegas makes this very hard when you're playing against the house (they blacklist Blackjack card counters.) For a game like poker, you have to overcome the house cut but at least it's possible.

There are a few fun books on the broad subject; the last one I read was "The Eudaemonic Pie" by Thomas Bass, a tale of a bunch of UC Santa Cruz grad students who came up with a computer-aided scheme to beat roulette (which is in theory unbeatable) by discovering and leveraging flaws in the wheels. It's well-nigh impossible to exploit flaws in lottery machines, however, due to their inaccessibility and the low number of runs.
Old 28th August 2007
  #15
Lives for gear
 
HIGHENDONLY's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkatz42 View Post
Except that it's not this simple. The fundamental reason that these lotteries exist is to make money for the state(s). *LOTS* of money. The usual take is something like 40% or more, as compared to Vegas slots, which are in the small single digits. The expectation is that you will lose 40% of your money. The operators of the lottery *guarantee* this by manipulating the payout, which is always a fraction of the amount of money bet.

What you're missing is that when the jackpot is more than $147M, the odds are also very high that you have to split the jackpot (since something on the order of 300 million tickets have been sold in that case.) By splitting the pot, you go back to the expectation of losing 40% of your money.

The reality is that you're *never* in the money in a lottery, or any other pure game of chance. At best you break even over the long haul, but only if the "house" is altruistic and doesn't want a cut (rare as hen's teeth, as they say.) Otherwise, you are guaranteed to lose over the long run.

The only time you ever have "positive expectation" is in a game of skill, where (if you're really good) you can analyze the odds of winning, based on your position and observed history, relative to the money odds, and you do it better than your competition. Vegas makes this very hard when you're playing against the house (they blacklist Blackjack card counters.) For a game like poker, you have to overcome the house cut but at least it's possible.

There are a few fun books on the broad subject; the last one I read was "The Eudaemonic Pie" by Thomas Bass, a tale of a bunch of UC Santa Cruz grad students who came up with a computer-aided scheme to beat roulette (which is in theory unbeatable) by discovering and leveraging flaws in the wheels. It's well-nigh impossible to exploit flaws in lottery machines, however, due to their inaccessibility and the low number of runs.
It's the lotto, no need to go crazy over how it works. I usually just buy 1 tix once a week. If i win, i win. I made $200k off a buck, even tho i have to claim this and pay tax, who cares. Making that kind of money off a buck is pretty damn good.
Old 28th August 2007
  #16
Gear Guru
 
lucey's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by HIGHENDONLY View Post
It's the lotto, no need to go crazy over how it works. I usually just buy 1 tix once a week. If i win, i win. I made $200k off a buck, even tho i have to claim this and pay tax, who cares. Making that kind of money off a buck is pretty damn good.

Happy winnings!


May I suggest charity ... charity ... charity. It's good Karma, and they need it.
Old 28th August 2007
  #17
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkatz42 View Post
Except that it's not this simple. The fundamental reason that these lotteries exist is to make money for the state(s). *LOTS* of money. The usual take is something like 40% or more, as compared to Vegas slots, which are in the small single digits. The expectation is that you will lose 40% of your money. The operators of the lottery *guarantee* this by manipulating the payout, which is always a fraction of the amount of money bet.

What you're missing is that when the jackpot is more than $147M, the odds are also very high that you have to split the jackpot (since something on the order of 300 million tickets have been sold in that case.) By splitting the pot, you go back to the expectation of losing 40% of your money.

The reality is that you're *never* in the money in a lottery, or any other pure game of chance. At best you break even over the long haul, but only if the "house" is altruistic and doesn't want a cut (rare as hen's teeth, as they say.) Otherwise, you are guaranteed to lose over the long run.

The only time you ever have "positive expectation" is in a game of skill, where (if you're really good) you can analyze the odds of winning, based on your position and observed history, relative to the money odds, and you do it better than your competition. Vegas makes this very hard when you're playing against the house (they blacklist Blackjack card counters.) For a game like poker, you have to overcome the house cut but at least it's possible.

There are a few fun books on the broad subject; the last one I read was "The Eudaemonic Pie" by Thomas Bass, a tale of a bunch of UC Santa Cruz grad students who came up with a computer-aided scheme to beat roulette (which is in theory unbeatable) by discovering and leveraging flaws in the wheels. It's well-nigh impossible to exploit flaws in lottery machines, however, due to their inaccessibility and the low number of runs.
You are correct in that I neglected to factor in the split pots... but don't forget that the chance that a winning number combination comes up multiple times in a drawing is the same that the loosing numbers will come up multiple times. As there are 147 million more loosing combinations than winning combinations, this accounts for a lot of money that the states are keeping.

I wish I knew the breakdown of the lottery commission's budgets. This would of course aid in setting an exact threshold of how much the jackpot would have to be. And if I really wanted to figure in taxes, deductions, and all that, I could come up with an even better number.

And yes, you are guaranteed to lose over the long run. But that is only if you continue to bet even after making a significant win. Games like blackjack, craps, roulette, and slots are all negative expectations, all the time. But I for one have made money over time at these games because I practice stop-loss, capitalize on rushes, and pull back during periods of "bad luck". None of that is mathematically sound... but stopping after losing a set amount during a gambling session and increasing bets during periods of "good luck" tend to help. Now, I don't believe in luck, and I certainly recognize the odds of each game are not in the player's favor. You pretty much have to live by that when you visit casinos as much as I do. However, controlling your betting in games of chance, recognizing when to increase your betting, and learning when to tap out makes long term winning a possibility. The only thing that guarantees you to lose over time in gambling is making bad decisions (i.e. drinking when playing) and not being able to control your bankroll. The odds do not take into consideration human decisions regarding how much to bet and when to do so.

What I'm trying to say is, if I have a great night at the tables and make $10K, or I win Powerball, and then never gamble again for the rest of my life, I have definitely not lost over time.

But I shall certainly check into that reading you mentioned... If you are a card player, I highly recommend David Sklansky's The Theory of Poker, which includes a lot about betting theory and expectation.
Old 28th August 2007
  #18
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HIGHENDONLY View Post
No, just paid a $1. Yea i won $200,000. But i'm already doing pretty well for myself. I'm going to give to my family.

Hey, Uncle Highendonly, it's you're nephew Jonny. I really need a new guitar amp, so can you go ahead and send the Orange Rockerverb 50 you were going to buy me to my home address. I'll come visit you and the Auntie for Christmas this year.
Old 28th August 2007
  #19
Lives for gear
 
nukmusic's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HIGHENDONLY View Post
It's the lotto, no need to go crazy over how it works. I usually just buy 1 tix once a week. If i win, i win. I made $200k off a buck, even tho i have to claim this and pay tax, who cares. Making that kind of money off a buck is pretty damn good.
same here. you can't win if you don't play heh

sometimes I see folks buying $100(or more) of tickets...all for one drawing. I would assume the odds would be better if you had one ticket for 100 different drawings.
Old 28th August 2007
  #20
Lives for gear
 
HIGHENDONLY's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonboy79 View Post
Hey, Uncle Highendonly, it's you're nephew Jonny. I really need a new guitar amp, so can you go ahead and send the Orange Rockerverb 50 you were going to buy me to my home address. I'll come visit you and the Auntie for Christmas this year.
Yea i remember you when we were kids playing in the sandbox. Long time no see, why havent you called?? I guess powerball had a way of bringing us together
Old 28th August 2007
  #21
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HIGHENDONLY View Post
Yea i remember you when we were kids playing in the sandbox. Long time no see, why havent you called?? I guess powerball had a way of bringing us together

It's fate, remember that sand vagina we'd always make LOL, aahhhh good times. So, just let me know on that amp, remember, it's never too late to tell me you love me.
Old 28th August 2007
  #22
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nukmusic View Post
sometimes I see folks buying $100(or more) of tickets...all for one drawing. I would assume the odds would be better if you had one ticket for 100 different drawings.
Only if you bet the same numbers on all of the tickets. If you bet 100 different sets of numbers on the same draw, the odds are the same as betting 100 different sets on 100 different draws (or the same set of numbers on 100 different draws.) It's a memoryless system.

If you bet the same set of number a bunch of numbers on the same draw, you improve your potential payout (because you'll get 99% instead of 50% if one other person picks the same numbers) but it is mostly throwing away money (moreso than the lottery is otherwise.)

An interesting measure of lottery psychology is to point out that 1-2-3-4-5-6 has exactly the same odds of winning as any other set of numbers, but many people find this troubling and wouldn't bet on this or any other seemingly ordered sequence.
Old 28th August 2007
  #23
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

There is a small lottery here called Gopher 5 where the odds are much better and it starts at 100 grand. It has only 5 numbers. A couple of years ago I got 4 out of 5 right when the jackpot was just under 2 million. And the fifth number I was off by 2 (I think it was 27 and I had 25). I was that close to 2 million bucks. I won $500.
Old 28th August 2007
  #24
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorGlory View Post
You are correct in that I neglected to factor in the split pots... but don't forget that the chance that a winning number combination comes up multiple times in a drawing is the same that the loosing numbers will come up multiple times. As there are 147 million more loosing combinations than winning combinations, this accounts for a lot of money that the states are keeping.
None of this matters a bit. Lotteries are even worse bets relative to other kinds of gambling because the state's take is *guaranteed.* The "house funds" are *never* at risk. They simply add up the amount bet, subtract their (sizable) percentage, and the rest becomes the payout. At least in Vegas the odds are generally set beforehand, independent of the amount wagered, so house funds are at risk in the short term. The states don't even have that level of exposure, and their take is much much larger. It doesn't matter how many people play or how much anybody bets--as a percentage of the wager, the state's take is always the same. It's just printing money for them--the more people they can get to wager, the more money they make, with no risk whatsoever. The bean counters *love* when nobody wins and the pot gets rolled over, because the total eventually bet (and their resulting take) will be even higher due to the hype and irrational behavior.
Quote:
I wish I knew the breakdown of the lottery commission's budgets. This would of course aid in setting an exact threshold of how much the jackpot would have to be. And if I really wanted to figure in taxes, deductions, and all that, I could come up with an even better number.
It's all public information. For example, in California the payout is a bit less than 53%. 35% goes to education, 7% to paying the retailers, 3% to "operating expense", and a bit less than 2% to "game costs."

Week in and week out.

So over the long haul, you have to spend $100 to win $53. Them's crummy odds.
Quote:
And yes, you are guaranteed to lose over the long run. But that is only if you continue to bet even after making a significant win. Games like blackjack, craps, roulette, and slots are all negative expectations, all the time. But I for one have made money over time at these games because I practice stop-loss, capitalize on rushes, and pull back during periods of "bad luck". None of that is mathematically sound...
Herein is the key.

Quote:
but stopping after losing a set amount during a gambling session and increasing bets during periods of "good luck" tend to help. Now, I don't believe in luck, and I certainly recognize the odds of each game are not in the player's favor. You pretty much have to live by that when you visit casinos as much as I do. However, controlling your betting in games of chance, recognizing when to increase your betting, and learning when to tap out makes long term winning a possibility. The only thing that guarantees you to lose over time in gambling is making bad decisions (i.e. drinking when playing) and not being able to control your bankroll. The odds do not take into consideration human decisions regarding how much to bet and when to do so.
It's a bit like collars in the stock market; you essentially limit your downside by limiting your upside as well.

Quote:
What I'm trying to say is, if I have a great night at the tables and make $10K, or I win Powerball, and then never gamble again for the rest of my life, I have definitely not lost over time.
But by your own admission you gamble regularly, so by odds you *will* lose over time.

Do you have records of the long-term results of your playing? Have you added up all of the times you lost until your stop point and subtracted that from the times you won and then walked away?

The reality is stark. Stop-loss strategies only put an upper bound on the rate that you bleed money, and walk-away strategies only work if you *never* gamble again (and put an upper bound on the upside.) Otherwise, probability will do what probability does, and you won't know the answer until the day you die (or give it up.)

I don't have any objection to gambling per se (though it has been decidedly a mixed bag for the residents of the pueblos of New Mexico.) For most folks, the intangible value of the entertainment is part of the winnings, and so as a whole they feel positive about the experience. But take a look at the games professional gamblers play. They're the ones that are actually winnable by skill, even if most of the winning can be attributed to the lack of skill of the other players. House games cannot lose in the long run (the casinos are *very* skilled and the odds are tipped in their favor in all games) and lotteries cannot lose *ever.*
Quote:
But I shall certainly check into that reading you mentioned... If you are a card player, I highly recommend David Sklansky's The Theory of Poker, which includes a lot about betting theory and expectation.
There are also a couple of good books out there about a couple of groups of MIT geeks going out to break the bank that are both educational and vastly entertaining. Can't think of the titles offhand but an Amazon search will probably turn them up.

I'm not trying to harp on this, but you strongly implied in your original post that there was a threshold point at which your odds of winning a lottery improved and it was "logical" to bet. But that point does not exist--it is *never* logical, in a probabilistic way, to buy a lottery ticket.

It might be fun, or entertaining, or an adrenaline rush, but it makes no monetary sense.
Old 28th August 2007
  #25
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

There is nothing logical about playing the lottery. Don't try to apply logic. If you think you might win the Powerball jackpot, you have to remember that your odds of getting killed today are thousands of times greater.

But it isn't about logic. It is more about some sort of divine intervention. Maybe it is my turn? heh
Old 28th August 2007
  #26
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
There is a small lottery here called Gopher 5 where the odds are much better and it starts at 100 grand.
Well, the odds are slightly better than California in that Minnesota appears to have a 59% payout rate rather than California's 53%.

However, the money odds are not significantly better than any other lottery, because there will be more split pots to make up for the smaller number of possible plays. The money odds are pretty much the same for any lottery.

However, the psychological value of a bunch of smaller payouts cannot be underestimated. All those $10 payouts at the cash register for instant winners keep people coming back for more, just like the ringing bells in Vegas and the $3 payout on the $.25 slot make you want to keep going. In the lottery, if there was only one prize, it would be even larger (and thus more tempting), but only one person per week would be rewarded for their behavior and they'd take in a lot less money as a result.

It's a fascinating study in convincing people to go against their better interests (not unlike politics, but more mathematical.)

For those who play the lottery (obviously, I don't), is there any fine print on the ticket or slip (or referenced contract that you don't read) about agreeing to have your name and story publicized if you win big? I have a funny feeling there is.
Old 28th August 2007
  #27
Lives for gear
 
jeremy.c.'s Avatar
that's wicked news, congrats!
I have lotto winners in the family too, but it wasn't enough to make everyone rich, which is fine by me as I have seen it ruin lives already... anyway yours isn't big enough to do anything but make things easier or to help out your family, which is pretty cool of you.

On the topic of multiple winners, I remember hearing about a jackpot won by something ridiculous like 17 people. They were going to investigate for fraud but then found out everyone of them played the same numbers off of a fortune cookie...
Old 29th August 2007
  #28
Lives for gear
 
emkay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkatz42 View Post
Except that it's not this simple. The fundamental reason that these lotteries exist is to make money for the state(s). *LOTS* of money. The usual take is something like 40% or more, as compared to Vegas slots, which are in the small single digits. The expectation is that you will lose 40% of your money. The operators of the lottery *guarantee* this by manipulating the payout, which is always a fraction of the amount of money bet.

What you're missing is that when the jackpot is more than $147M, the odds are also very high that you have to split the jackpot (since something on the order of 300 million tickets have been sold in that case.) By splitting the pot, you go back to the expectation of losing 40% of your money.

The reality is that you're *never* in the money in a lottery, or any other pure game of chance. At best you break even over the long haul, but only if the "house" is altruistic and doesn't want a cut (rare as hen's teeth, as they say.) Otherwise, you are guaranteed to lose over the long run.

The only time you ever have "positive expectation" is in a game of skill, where (if you're really good) you can analyze the odds of winning, based on your position and observed history, relative to the money odds, and you do it better than your competition. Vegas makes this very hard when you're playing against the house (they blacklist Blackjack card counters.) For a game like poker, you have to overcome the house cut but at least it's possible.

There are a few fun books on the broad subject; the last one I read was "The Eudaemonic Pie" by Thomas Bass, a tale of a bunch of UC Santa Cruz grad students who came up with a computer-aided scheme to beat roulette (which is in theory unbeatable) by discovering and leveraging flaws in the wheels. It's well-nigh impossible to exploit flaws in lottery machines, however, due to their inaccessibility and the low number of runs.

What you're both missing is that the amount of the jackpot does not factor into the permutations and combinations involved in chance. The jackpot could be a buck or a billion bucks. The only thing that counts are the number of tickets sold and the number of people who purchased the tickets. I always look sadly at the poor folks who might buy ten, twenty or a hundred bucks worth of tickets for the same draw. I try to explain to them how little, if any this increases their chance of winning. The only way to lessen the odds would be a fairly hefty purchase of a hell of alot of tickets and even then that can only increase the chance that you'll win something, but not necessarily the jackpot. The only affordable way to up your odds of winning that is guaranteed, is if you buy a ticket rather than not buying one.
Old 29th August 2007
  #29
Lives for gear
 
emkay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by olivia_nb View Post
that's wicked news, congrats!
I have lotto winners in the family too, but it wasn't enough to make everyone rich, which is fine by me as I have seen it ruin lives already... anyway yours isn't big enough to do anything but make things easier or to help out your family, which is pretty cool of you.

On the topic of multiple winners, I remember hearing about a jackpot won by something ridiculous like 17 people. They were going to investigate for fraud but then found out everyone of them played the same numbers off of a fortune cookie...

That would make a great short story! The Cookie Chronicles...
Old 29th August 2007
  #30
Lives for gear
 
Sugarnutz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
There is a small lottery here called Gopher 5 where the odds are much better and it starts at 100 grand. It has only 5 numbers. A couple of years ago I got 4 out of 5 right when the jackpot was just under 2 million. And the fifth number I was off by 2 (I think it was 27 and I had 25). I was that close to 2 million bucks. I won $500.
My mother in-law did this at the end of July on the Tennessee "Lotto 5", she had 4 of the 5 numbers and the one she didn't have was 10, she had 9. There were 60 winners of that 4 of 5 combo and she won a measly $131, thought for sure that would have been at least a couple of grand.dfegad
Top Mentioned Products
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
deathman / So much gear, so little time
5
Frost / So much gear, so little time
18
AdamJay / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
2
MASSIVE Master / The Good News Channel
7
MCal27 / Music Computers
19

Forum Jump
Forum Jump