• 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.

CEAC data update

n.n. said:
The density has increased, it's correct, but I think that there is some small mistake in your calculations. You are comparing different data.
You are comparing total cases of dv2014 wih only invited to co ones in 2015. It would be more correct to take final ceac for 2014 and compare invited family members to CN count in both cases.

Then it makes 24,570 (family members) / 11,064 = 2.22 (data taken from final dv 2014 ceac)

So yes, there is a density increase, but it is from 2.22 to 2.25 but not from 2.09 to 2.25 as you mention imho.
Click to expand...

Sorry I UNDERSTATED it.

There are 40,000 selectees and from the CEAC data we can see the original derivative rate is 1.82 per case number (40000/21958). That is 2015 data.

Now for the 7904 cases that have been scheduled (which is a representative number) we can see the current derivative rate is 2.25. OK - so the difference between the two (the derivative growth is a 20+% increase). That means for the 7904 cases there should be 14385 family and there are actually 17776. BIG difference.
 
bici said:
I understand what you are saying Simon.
I have some questions though.
So, between 42000 and 45006, there are 1113 cases. That roughly makes a little less than 400/1K . So how this density is any different than any range after the CN35700. I am thinking that they are all the same.
You said 46000 selectees for EU. Did you mean 45006 as we all know that the last EU number is 45006- so far.
Derivate growth. I see your points, which are actually the facts. But, are not those leveled off by no responses, no shows, refusals, APs etc. So, it exists but is it that much an issue to worry about?
Click to expand...

Don't confuse case numbers with selectees. Two different things. I misled you about the 46000, there were 40,000 spread over 21958 cases. Those 21958 cases have holes between them and that is why the highest CN is 45006.

See my correction above about the derivative growth rate. I suspect that is more than normal. In the pre DS260 days it was a chore to add a spouse. With DS260 it is easy. Get married, unlock, resubmit. Done. AF is well over 20% derivative growth rate.
 
Britsimon said:
Sorry I UNDERSTATED it.

There are 40,000 selectees and from the CEAC data we can see the original derivative rate is 1.82 per case number (40000/21958). That is 2015 data.

Now for the 7904 cases that have been scheduled (which is a representative number) we can see the current derivative rate is 2.25. OK - so the difference between the two (the derivative growth is a 20+% increase). That means for the 7904 cases there should be 14385 family and there are actually 17776. BIG difference.
Click to expand...

Thanks, now I understand how you calculated it and everything seems reasonable.
But how then it happens that in CEAC data in dv2014 the derivative rate was 2.22? Actually, comparing to previous year the derivative rate did not increase, but comparing to 40,000 winners / 21958 case numbers - yes, it is much higher.

In dv2014 there were 46589 winners in EU but I do not know the number of all cases to compare to this year.
I understand that comparing to previous year is not so much important, but I think it is quite interesting.

Probably the derivative growth is quite natural process as potentially is already included in cn estimations by KCC. It is interesting what was the growth in dv2014 if we compare initial density when data was published to the final density at the end of financial year. Probably this is a natural growth for all years as people get married constantly.
 
n.n. said:
Thanks, now I understand how you calculated it and everything seems reasonable.
But how then it happens that in CEAC data in dv2014 the derivative rate was 2.22? Actually, comparing to previous year the derivative rate did not increase, but comparing to 40,000 winners / 21958 case numbers - yes, it is much higher.

In dv2014 there were 46589 winners in EU but I do not know the number of all cases to compare to this year.
I understand that comparing to previous year is not so much important, but I think it is quite interesting.

Probably the derivative growth is quite natural process as potentially is already included in cn estimations by KCC. It is interesting what was the growth in dv2014 if we compare initial density when data was published to the final density at the end of financial year. Probably this is a natural growth for all years as people get married constantly.
Click to expand...

Yep the 2.22 rate in 2014 is interesting - but since we don't have the same data we can't compare too well. I expect the 2015 2.25 to increase - it is maturing. So - whilst derivative growth was always there we can now see it and it is possible it has increased (I speculate due to the DS260)
 
We can estimate the nominal derivative rate for 2014 from the entries data.
Unfortunately, I only keep AS data in my excell file.
 
Britsimon said:
Yep the 2.22 rate in 2014 is interesting - but since we don't have the same data we can't compare too well. I expect the 2015 2.25 to increase - it is maturing. So - whilst derivative growth was always there we can now see it and it is possible it has increased (I speculate due to the DS260)
Click to expand...

This I understand. But then I think it is more correct to compare the growth from the beginning of the FY year by year. Otherwise it seems that we see 20% this year and suppose that this is because of ds260. But people get constantly married and children are born. So this should not be an extraordinary picture.

I suppose that it is more correct to compare 2.22 to 2.25 (and 2.25 can still increase). But then it will make 1%-4% growth comparing to previous years but not 20%, as it is obvious that having selected 40,000 in May 2014 will not end up with same number in September 2015. But this is relevant to all years, not specifically to 2015.
 
n.n. said:
This I understand. But then I think it is more correct to compare the growth from the beginning of the FY year by year. Otherwise it seems that we see 20% this year and suppose that this is because of ds260. But people get constantly married and children are born. So this should not be an extraordinary picture.

I suppose that it is more correct to compare 2.22 to 2.25 (and 2.25 can still increase). But then it will make 1%-4% growth comparing to previous years but not 20%, as it is obvious that having selected 40,000 in May 2014 will not end up with same number in September 2015. But this is relevant to all years, not specifically to 2015.
Click to expand...

I know all that - I do. Really. I am not trying to make a point about derivative growth comparison from this incomplete year to another year.

What I am trying to explain is the difference for THIS year. Many people will have calculated their position based on 1.82 (which would have been logical). But they have slipped back in the queue.
 
adela15 said:
if EU only goes up to 37000, I m missing the card by few numbers..sad
Click to expand...
No it won't be that low. Where did you get that impression from? I'd more more optimistic if I were. Pessimism does not add anything at this stage but unhappiness.
 
They had updated 30 AS cases about 10 days ago, so it seems they have switched to updating in small batches, or perhaps they have another technical problem. I'll extract the data this morning...
 
Britsimon said:
The in transit updates are in. I have the data - just trying to decide whether to process it now, or sleep...
Click to expand...
Sleep at 9:45PM? In summer? Come on Simon. Please consider doing it today before you go to sleep if you trust something is different. Otherwise, we'll extract things from your last comment: Where are the predictions?
 
bici said:
Sleep at 9:45PM? In summer? Come on Simon. Please consider doing it today before you go to sleep if you trust something is different. Otherwise, we'll extract things from your last comment: Where are the predictions?
Click to expand...

My friend, sometimes people get tired. Simon does us all a favour -- surely we can wait a few more hours before he helps us yet again.
 
Well. I am aware of that fact. That's why I mentioned him of the two probabilities that he and we have. It totally depends upon him. And sometimes people may get into the feeling that the things that they consider doing for others may not be within their interest area anymore and so I just wanted to catch up with him in that the things that he is doing for all of us are all precious, appreciated, needed and anxiously waited for. Mine was just a little push. In the meanwhile, I knew that some people would be concerned for him but we all know that this forum is for people with hopes and hopes do not give a break.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top