• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

2014 DV Australian winners

KCC, feel free to prove me wrong by getting to my 22XX case number in September, but assuming you won't, may I take this opportunity to say you're a bunch of, to use the American spelling, a**holes. Thanks -- it feels good to get that off my chest.
 
I hate that we have been put in this situation and even worse I hate that they have picked people in the 2K range again for this year. What is the point of that if all they do is reduce our allocation and give them to other regions.
 
Huh, the old forums are back eh. Probably happened a while ago. Well hey everyone!

I hear we're up to 1450 for June bulletin? When life gives you lemons eh...
 
Ah well, with a number in the 2800 range I think it's acceptable to now say I'm f**ked haha.

Good thing I got my approved LCA the other day, just need to schedule my interview now for the E3. Wanted to hold off until this months bulletin, wasn't expecting it to be so bad.

For those that desperately want it, you'll find a way to get there. Commiserations to those that are in the same situation as I with a shitty number, congratulations to those that made it.
 
DV-2013 — DV-2014 — DV-2015​
Africa — 52080, 49.31% — 61942, 44.04% — 58000, 46.21%
Asia — 16045, 15.19% — 23270, 16.54% — 20002, 15.94%
Europe — 33088, 31.33% — 46589, 33.12% — 40000, 31.87%
North America — 16, 0.02% — 23, 0.02% — 14, 0.01%
Oceania — 2193, 2.08% — 4215, 3.00% — 3499, 2.79%
South America — 2206, 2.09% — 4620, 3.28% — 3999, 3.19%
105628, 100% — 140659, 100% — 125514, 100%​

Okie doke, sorry about the posting mishaps, still don't know how to make it neat. Good luck to everybody who is still waiting, I am too.

These are just stats for anybody who is interested, no predictions here, just wanted to ask people who might be keeping an eye on these things some questions. Could be late to the party here, but are those round numbers (rounded to nearest thousand) for 2015 selectees indicating some sort of 'reset' here? I know about the DV-2012 issue possibly causing the jump in selectees for DV-2014, is this now KCC trying to get back to some sort of working baseline? Could 3500 for OC in DV-2015 be a good indicator for us DV-2014 selectees still waiting for our number to show?

So many helpful people on here, it's amazing. britsimon, you tha man.
 
typo said:
DV-2013 — DV-2014 — DV-2015​
Africa — 52080, 49.31% — 61942, 44.04% — 58000, 46.21%
Asia — 16045, 15.19% — 23270, 16.54% — 20002, 15.94%
Europe — 33088, 31.33% — 46589, 33.12% — 40000, 31.87%
North America — 16, 0.02% — 23, 0.02% — 14, 0.01%
Oceania — 2193, 2.08% — 4215, 3.00% — 3499, 2.79%
South America — 2206, 2.09% — 4620, 3.28% — 3999, 3.19%
105628, 100% — 140659, 100% — 125514, 100%​

Okie doke, sorry about the posting mishaps, still don't know how to make it neat. Good luck to everybody who is still waiting, I am too.

These are just stats for anybody who is interested, no predictions here, just wanted to ask people who might be keeping an eye on these things some questions. Could be late to the party here, but are those round numbers (rounded to nearest thousand) for 2015 selectees indicating some sort of 'reset' here? I know about the DV-2012 issue possibly causing the jump in selectees for DV-2014, is this now KCC trying to get back to some sort of working baseline? Could 3500 for OC in DV-2015 be a good indicator for us DV-2014 selectees still waiting for our number to show?

So many helpful people on here, it's amazing. britsimon, you tha man.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the stats. I noticed that rounded number also, and have seen it before (2012). If you go back about 8 or 9 months you will find a detailed post where I reasoned there was a resetting in the selectees, that selectee splits must therefore be indicative of quota shifts, and based on that I said the 3% number for OC must be an indication that OC would see a large quota increase of up to 50%. That would have been enough to make all OC current or very close. However, the lack of progress on the VB has never taken off in the way that it should. So, not sure how " indicative" the rounding is...
 
neko83 said:
Ah well, with a number in the 2800 range I think it's acceptable to now say I'm f**ked haha.

Good thing I got my approved LCA the other day, just need to schedule my interview now for the E3. Wanted to hold off until this months bulletin, wasn't expecting it to be so bad.

For those that desperately want it, you'll find a way to get there. Commiserations to those that are in the same situation as I with a shitty number, congratulations to those that made it.
Click to expand...

Congrats on the LCA. Glad you have a good plan b!
 
Britsimon said:
Thanks for the stats. I noticed that rounded number also, and have seen it before (2012). If you go back about 8 or 9 months you will find a detailed post where I reasoned there was a resetting in the selectees, that selectee splits must therefore be indicative of quota shifts, and based on that I said the 3% number for OC must be an indication that OC would see a large quota increase of up to 50%. That would have been enough to make all OC current or very close. However, the lack of progress on the VB has never taken off in the way that it should. So, not sure how " indicative" the rounding is...
Click to expand...
I've always agreed with you about the quota shifts, you can see the exact legislation that describes how it's done:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE...012-title8-chap12-subchapII-partI-sec1153.htm

I don't want to do numbers, I just want to wait for the next bulletin, but for those into it read the legislation section on diversity immigrants. It talks about splitting regions into "high" and "low" admission regions based upon if they make up over 1/6 (16.67%) of the total number. The split of "high" and "low" regions then affects the allocations. Asia could be flitting that line? Or KCC is rounding numbers when there are draw anomalies, I don't know.

I'm also just guessing this, but for KCC to do the allocations exactly they need to leave it so in the last month there is a minimum number of selectees that are NOT current. Quick maths: 140659 selectees, 12 months, they need to leave 11722 selectees NOT current until at least the last month. Splitting that amongst 6 regions and lo and behold they need to leave a minimum of 1956 selectees NOT current until at least the last month for each region. Someone said we're at 1450 now? A jump of that size brings us to 3406 in the last bulletin. Funny that next year with the rounded (and so perhaps rebaselined) numbers that OC is 3499? So still hope for people up to 3400 in OC? Someone smart? Bueller? Any one?
 
Typo I explained how I thought the rounding worked. Let's say they want to hit 3000. They get to 2999 and the next selectee in sequence happens to have a derivative. So the number is 3001. On the other and the next selectee has 7 derivatives and they say that is too many so they leave it. That is how we see 3499.

Regarding the idea in your last paragraph. I don't think they chunk the selectees into 12, but if they did, they would not divide the last batch into the 6 regions. That would be bat entry unfair. So I am not smart, and not Bueller, but I'm sur your last paragraph is not what is happening...
 
Britsimon said:
Typo I explained how I thought the rounding worked. Let's say they want to hit 3000. They get to 2999 and the next selectee in sequence happens to have a derivative. So the number is 3001. On the other and the next selectee has 7 derivatives and they say that is too many so they leave it. That is how we see 3499.

Regarding the idea in your last paragraph. I don't think they chunk the selectees into 12, but if they did, they would not divide the last batch into the 6 regions. That would be bat entry unfair. So I am not smart, and not Bueller, but I'm sur your last paragraph is not what is happening...
Click to expand...
Okay I’m pretty sure why the visa bulletin numbers for OC are throwing everybody off. The optimal approach to KCC’s problem would be to not grant any visas for OC, South America or North America until September. The numbers for those regions should (optimally for KCC) stay at zero until September, but by the fact they're not actually zero leads people to try and read into their progression.

Here’s the explanation, it all has to do with endgame:

KCC have a restaurant with 50,000 seats in it. By the end of the year their goal is to fill it as close as they can to capacity and to do this fairly. The END of the year is the only point in time where they will be assessed on both these points.

If they were to approach this problem logically, and in a monthly fashion, they would want to fill 1/12 of all the seats each and every month, until it is full. The point to note now is that the combined selectees from OC, North America and South America actually make up less than 1/12 of all selectees (and so, by the consensus on these forums, less than 1/12 of the 50,000 visas to be allocated too). To get distribution fairness exactly right, the best approach for KCC would be to start by filling the restaurant only from the other regions (and at a pace slightly slower than 1/12 their visa numbers a month) and to then only give seats to OC, North America and South America in the very final stage (month) of filling.

So really the visa bulletin should theoretically have OC, South America and North America reading zero by all rights until September. I’ll leave it to others to postulate why they're not zero, but it’s the fact that these three regions are so small in proportion to the other regions that their visa numbers up until September actually mean nothing. This doesn’t mean they will go CURRENT, not at all, it just means we should never have bothered reading into the numbers for these regions… until in a few weeks time haha.

(britsimon, my point about the rounding was to ask why the targets themselves are rounded to nearest 500’s, e.g. why in one year they are close to a multiple of 500 but in other years they are seemingly random. That’s the rebaselining I’m talking about.)
 
typo said:
Okay I’m pretty sure why the visa bulletin numbers for OC are throwing everybody off. The optimal approach to KCC’s problem would be to not grant any visas for OC, South America or North America until September. The numbers for those regions should (optimally for KCC) stay at zero until September, but by the fact they're not actually zero leads people to try and read into their progression.

Here’s the explanation, it all has to do with endgame:

KCC have a restaurant with 50,000 seats in it. By the end of the year their goal is to fill it as close as they can to capacity and to do this fairly. The END of the year is the only point in time where they will be assessed on both these points.

If they were to approach this problem logically, and in a monthly fashion, they would want to fill 1/12 of all the seats each and every month, until it is full. The point to note now is that the combined selectees from OC, North America and South America actually make up less than 1/12 of all selectees (and so, by the consensus on these forums, less than 1/12 of the 50,000 visas to be allocated too). To get distribution fairness exactly right, the best approach for KCC would be to start by filling the restaurant only from the other regions (and at a pace slightly slower than 1/12 their visa numbers a month) and to then only give seats to OC, North America and South America in the very final stage (month) of filling.

So really the visa bulletin should theoretically have OC, South America and North America reading zero by all rights until September. I’ll leave it to others to postulate why they're not zero, but it’s the fact that these three regions are so small in proportion to the other regions that their visa numbers up until September actually mean nothing. This doesn’t mean they will go CURRENT, not at all, it just means we should never have bothered reading into the numbers for these regions… until in a few weeks time haha.

(britsimon, my point about the rounding was to ask why the targets themselves are rounded to nearest 500’s, e.g. why in one year they are close to a multiple of 500 but in other years they are seemingly random. That’s the rebaselining I’m talking about.)
Click to expand...

So are you saying that OC/SA will have big jumps in September, getting close to the quota signaled by the selectee split?

I think that is a VERY wishful thinking theory - and not at all how they have behaved in previous years.

Sorry.
 
Britsimon said:
So are you saying that OC/SA will have big jumps in September, getting close to the quota signaled by the selectee split?

I think that is a VERY wishful thinking theory - and not at all how they have behaved in previous years.

Sorry.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is the next logical step. Bulletin increases for all regions, big increases for OC and South America – not so likely to go CURRENT though due to the large increase in selectees globally.

Everybody has felt this intuitively anyway, they feel the “slow” progression for those two regions needs to be made up for – this is that feeling explained logically.

What behaviour in previous years are you comparing it to? It’s not really possible to compare as OC, South America and North America have gone CURRENT for the last eight years.

There are also several totally logical reasons for these three regions to not be held at zero until September in practice:
  • KCC can gather more precise demand data to use for setting the other regions’ numbers.
  • The risks inherent in concentrating all interviews for a region into September are mitigated.
  • It staggers the actual immigration from those regions that consequently takes place.
  • It keeps the diversity visa mechanisms in those countries oiled throughout the year.
  • People wouldn't like seeing zero progression until September.
What KCC does is mathematically sub-optimal, but much more practical. They have their heads screwed on, so we just need to keep ours screwed on until the next bulletin.

Your contributions are what make this forum, britsimon. There are many people myself included who can’t thank you enough. Also, not sure if it’s different now, but in some of your sigs in the old forum the link leads to page not found:

http://community.immigration.com/forums/dv-lottery.16
 
Isn't there something that they can't schedule more than 10% of the available visas in a particular month? How does that fit with a massive jump?
 
SusieQQQ said:
Isn't there something that they can't schedule more than 10% of the available visas in a particular month? How does that fit with a massive jump?
Click to expand...
I don't know, is there?

In any case, OC, South America and North America combined only make up 6.3% of global selectees. So, if visas and selectees are roughly proportional (like we are all assuming) the limit you mentioned still wouldn't be encountered.

These three regions are so tiny in number when compared to the whole, that KCC can safely leave them until last. That is in fact the optimal strategy for it to achieve perfect distribution fairness at year end.
 
typo said:
I don't know, is there?

In any case, OC, South America and North America combined only make up 6.3% of global selectees. So, if visas and selectees are roughly proportional (like we are all assuming) the limit you mentioned still wouldn't be encountered.

These three regions are so tiny in number when compared to the whole, that KCC can safely leave them until last. That is in fact the optimal strategy for it to achieve perfect distribution fairness at year end.
Click to expand...

10% per country per month. I've seen this mentioned a few times but don't believe I've seen an official reference to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top