Plus when you fund larger and larger jackpots (by keeping the rollup purely on the single big win) you get more and more people buying more and more tickets.
I think Massachusetts would be likely to earn more money by being able to advertise a much, much larger jackpot and losing these "rollup day" "gamblers" (when your mathematical theoretical return is so far above 100%, I hesitate to call it gambling) but apparently they have some incentive to keep things the way they are (do lottery officials have relatives or buddies who are among those gaming the system?) because they've let this go on so long.
I think Massachusetts would be likely to earn more money by being able to advertise a much, much larger jackpot and losing these "rollup day" "gamblers" (when your mathematical theoretical return is so far above 100%, I hesitate to call it gambling) but apparently they have some incentive to keep things the way they are (do lottery officials have relatives or buddies who are among those gaming the system?) because they've let this go on so long.