• 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.

April 2015 Visa Bulletin Released

DV4ROGER said:
I've been observing lower European case numbers for a while now, specifically case numbers EU20### which do not interfere with U2 cases neither in 2014 nor in 2015 – these are representing the non-limited countries (other than U2).
Setting 2014 density at 100 points we had from December to March the following densities for 2015:

68.1 – 77.8 – 87.0 – 97.8

The filling of lower ranks is fast and parity almost reached. I did not follow the submission date discussion so can't say whether there is already a noticeable slowdown or not but I doubt there will be a low response rate for these countries (at the end). Responsible for the observed low response rate are the (indistinguishable) limited countries Ukraine and Uzbekistan.
Click to expand...

Very interesting point. I'll take a look at that by country. Thanks DV4Roger!
 
DV4ROGER said:
I've been observing lower European case numbers for a while now, specifically case numbers EU20### which do not interfere with U2 cases neither in 2014 nor in 2015 – these are representing the non-limited countries (other than U2).
Setting 2014 density at 100 points we had from December to March the following densities for 2015:

68.1 – 77.8 – 87.0 – 97.8

The filling of lower ranks is fast and parity almost reached. I did not follow the submission date discussion so can't say whether there is already a noticeable slowdown or not but I doubt there will be a low response rate for these countries (at the end). Responsible for the observed low response rate are the (indistinguishable) limited countries Ukraine and Uzbekistan.
Click to expand...
which means?
 
The higher the density is the lower the final cut-off will be. In order that your number goes current the filling of this case number range has to stop soon.
 
Edouard said:
which means?
Click to expand...
He is saying, Edouard, that, based on his analysis of lower rank numbers for the EU region, the newly introduced digital information submission initially has either slowed down some folks from submitting their information to KCC and/or KCC from completing the registration of submitted data in their system, yet as time went on the process has been continuously catching up (which in itself is not overly surprising), resulting in a 97.8 index for March (compared with 100 point index average for all of 2014, which Europe ended with 40.150). This does not mean, though, that Europe will not be able to go well above and beyond the final number for last year, given all ongoing changes, i.e. the ineligibility of some large countries in Africa, low Internet penetration in developing countries required for DS-260 submissions, better capability of KCC to detect fraud and deception, continuing problems with Iran and Nepal etc., etc., which all should positively impact the EU region. Hence, your "life jacket" might well be on it's way, after all. In the meantime, enjoy the champagne. Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Agreed.
Two changes helping higher case numbers are:

Increased number of visas for Europe (20k+); and

Less selectees in Ukraine and Uzbekistan.

For the rest of Europe there are about 2000 visas more available than in 2014.

Edouard's number can cope with an index of 110 points. If Ukraine and/or Uzbekistan remains low that could be 113 points.
 
Britsimon said:
I said if the response rate stays low then the chances for the higher numbers is better. You want a demonstration - ok, let me tell you a story.


Let's say there are the last 10 people on the Titanic and there are only 5 lifejackets. Not everyone will want a lifejacket though as some people would be very happy to stay on the Titanic because the Champagne is free tonight. The 10 people draw lots to see who the order in which they will each be asked whether they want the lifejacket or not. So now they have a case number. IN previous sinking disasters we know that about 7 out of 10 people will want a lifejacket – but one of them on average is too fat to fit in the lifejacket. So – in the average sinking, passenger number 6 has a pretty good chance to get a lifejacket because passengers 1 through 5 won’t all want a lifejacket and one of them might be fat anyway. In the same way, passenger 7 and 8 aren’t feeling too bad. Passenger number 10 is writing a goodbye note to his mother.


Now – for some reason the allure of the champagne means that only 6 out of 10 people want a lifejacket on this ship and passenger number 10 realizes that passenger number 4 is really chubby. Now he has a chance. Do you see what I mean now?


Oh and in case you hadn’t realized, your case number means you are passenger number 10. Normally you would be drowning tonight, but if enough people want the champagne, you might get a chance.
Click to expand...
I love this :D
 
DV4ROGER said:
I've been observing lower European case numbers for a while now, specifically case numbers EU20### which do not interfere with U2 cases neither in 2014 nor in 2015 – these are representing the non-limited countries (other than U2).
Setting 2014 density at 100 points we had from December to March the following densities for 2015:

68.1 – 77.8 – 87.0 – 97.8

The filling of lower ranks is fast and parity almost reached. I did not follow the submission date discussion so can't say whether there is already a noticeable slowdown or not but I doubt there will be a low response rate for these countries (at the end). Responsible for the observed low response rate are the (indistinguishable) limited countries Ukraine and Uzbekistan.
Click to expand...

As always your input is valuable Roger. Your comments made me think about the submission date/response rate throughout the ranges. Whilst I have pointed out the overall response rate (as affected by submission backlog) is 40% in EU, that is not uniform across the number range. The chart below groups cases by 1000 and shows responses versus non responses. In the lower numbers (where Ukraine and Uzbekistan cause the higher density) there is an average response rate of 36.14%, whilst once the U2 countries are out the density drops and the response rate goes up to 47.24%. I checked that against the position one month earlier and those numbers were 32% and 42%. So, there is still some backlog affecting things - but the response rate for ranges is clearly heading over 50% and probably will end up at 60%+ which is in line with what we saw last year.

Marchresponsethroughrange.jpg

I'll look at other regions tomorrow.
 
And as far as I remember half of the cases in the U2 ranges are RoE cases. So the U2 response is more like 25 percent?
Great chart by the way.
 
DV4ROGER said:
And as far as I remember half of the cases in the U2 ranges are RoE cases. So the U2 response is more like 25 percent?
Great chart by the way.
Click to expand...

Yes, U2 would be very low - I think we can assume the RoE have a uniform 47% response all the way through the range, so the reason for the reduction in the early range is entirely due to U2.
 
Britsimon said:
I said if the response rate stays low then the chances for the higher numbers is better. You want a demonstration - ok, let me tell you a story.


Let's say there are the last 10 people on the Titanic and there are only 5 lifejackets. Not everyone will want a lifejacket though as some people would be very happy to stay on the Titanic because the Champagne is free tonight. The 10 people draw lots to see who the order in which they will each be asked whether they want the lifejacket or not. So now they have a case number. IN previous sinking disasters we know that about 7 out of 10 people will want a lifejacket – but one of them on average is too fat to fit in the lifejacket. So – in the average sinking, passenger number 6 has a pretty good chance to get a lifejacket because passengers 1 through 5 won’t all want a lifejacket and one of them might be fat anyway. In the same way, passenger 7 and 8 aren’t feeling too bad. Passenger number 10 is writing a goodbye note to his mother.


Now – for some reason the allure of the champagne means that only 6 out of 10 people want a lifejacket on this ship and passenger number 10 realizes that passenger number 4 is really chubby. Now he has a chance. Do you see what I mean now?


Oh and in case you hadn’t realized, your case number means you are passenger number 10. Normally you would be drowning tonight, but if enough people want the champagne, you might get a chance.
Click to expand...
Enthralling!
 
EURO2014 said:
He is saying, Edouard, that, based on his analysis of lower rank numbers for the EU region, the newly introduced digital information submission initially has either slowed down some folks from submitting their information to KCC and/or KCC from completing the registration of submitted data in their system, yet as time went on the process has been continuously catching up (which in itself is not overly surprising), resulting in a 97.8 index for March (compared with 100 point index average for all of 2014, which Europe ended with 40.150). This does not mean, though, that Europe will not be able to go well above and beyond the final number for last year, given all ongoing changes, i.e. the ineligibility of some large countries in Africa, low Internet penetration in developing countries required for DS-260 submissions, better capability of KCC to detect fraud and deception, continuing problems with Iran and Nepal etc., etc., which all should positively impact the EU region. Hence, your "life jacket" might well be on it's way, after all. In the meantime, enjoy the champagne. Cheers!
Click to expand...
Thanks, I understand better now... So, I guess I may win a life jacket AND a glass of champagne in the end? Gorgeous...
 
DV4ROGER said:
Agreed.
Two changes helping higher case numbers are:

Increased number of visas for Europe (20k+); and

Less selectees in Ukraine and Uzbekistan.

For the rest of Europe there are about 2000 visas more available than in 2014.

Edouard's number can cope with an index of 110 points. If Ukraine and/or Uzbekistan remains low that could be 113 points.
Click to expand...
If I understand well, our chance is linked with the bad or good fate or Ukraine and /or Uzbekistan?
 
Britsimon said:
As always your input is valuable Roger. Your comments made me think about the submission date/response rate throughout the ranges. Whilst I have pointed out the overall response rate (as affected by submission backlog) is 40% in EU, that is not uniform across the number range. The chart below groups cases by 1000 and shows responses versus non responses. In the lower numbers (where Ukraine and Uzbekistan cause the higher density) there is an average response rate of 36.14%, whilst once the U2 countries are out the density drops and the response rate goes up to 47.24%. I checked that against the position one month earlier and those numbers were 32% and 42%. So, there is still some backlog affecting things - but the response rate for ranges is clearly heading over 50% and probably will end up at 60%+ which is in line with what we saw last year.

View attachment 430

I'll look at other regions tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Hi, I'm new here. Do you have a similar graph or chart for the OC region. Much appreciated.
 
DV4ROGER said:
Just realized that that is not possible. :-(
Click to expand...

Yup, I was about to say that...

Although there might be a way if I can spare the time.

We have the entry data for 2014 and 2o15 now. So from that we should be able to reconstruct the draw to figure out how many cases each country had and apply the cut offs to see how many cases went current per country. We could then get a rough response rate per country or a pretty precise case to issued rate, since we have the official issued numbers too.

We can also confirm that with accurate derivative rates and apply that to selectees, because we cannot be sure of the fraud holes, versus non responses, so we might have to apply 2015 regional fraud rates.

I created a useable spreadsheet for the entries across all countries for 2013 to 2015 if you want that...
 
Britsimon said:
Yup, I was about to say that...

Although there might be a way if I can spare the time.

We have the entry data for 2014 and 2o15 now. So from that we should be able to reconstruct the draw to figure out how many cases each country had and apply the cut offs to see how many cases went current per country. We could then get a rough response rate per country or a pretty precise case to issued rate, since we have the official issued numbers too.

We can also confirm that with accurate derivative rates and apply that to selectees, because we cannot be sure of the fraud holes, versus non responses, so we might have to apply 2015 regional fraud rates.

I created a useable spreadsheet for the entries across all countries for 2013 to 2015 if you want that...
Click to expand...
Ys, I do want, Britsimon. Especially for France... -)
 
Of all the big regions, seems like asia is the worst

-Nepal has massive density
-response rate very high

For this of us with cn above 10,000. Just forget about it..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top