• 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.

Dv 2014 european winers here

britsimon said:
1. The family members are not the reason for the holes. The holes are disqualified entries. The family members are associated with the main case number.
2. Ready means the selectee did not proceed at some point (but their case number was current). It may be (as I said above) that the person filled in the forms and then didn't turn up at the interview OR I suppose it could also be someone who simply didn't return the 122/230 forms at all.
3. The data was gathered from the CEAC website (link below). It is pretty easy to create a script to enter the case number, store the results (from the popup window) and then go on to the next number. That is called screen scraping.

The CEAC data is here https://ceac.state.gov/CEACStatTracker/Status.aspx - enter 2013EU30531 to see how it works.
Click to expand...

Thanks .
I know about the wholes that's created by abanded candidates, but I always thought the derivatives also creates wholes aswell, its like they have they own cn number but its linked to the principal applicant,
My question now is the number of the selectees that's published,ex:
South africa 1100 for 2014, is it including familly numbers ? Or is exluding at that stage ?
 
vladek15425 said:
Thanks .
I know about the wholes that's created by abanded candidates, but I always thought the derivatives also creates wholes aswell, its like they have they own cn number but its linked to the principal applicant,
My question now is the number of the selectees that's published,ex:
South africa 1100 for 2014, is it including familly numbers ? Or is exluding at that stage ?
Click to expand...

No the derivative gets the main CN plus an extension. So - the have EU201430531 01 (Main applicant) 02 for the first derivative and so on.

The September VB had SOUTH AFRICA 1,038. I believe that is already including the family members.
 
britsimon said:
No the derivative gets the main CN plus an extension. So - the have EU201430531 01 (Main applicant) 02 for the first derivative and so on.

The September VB had SOUTH AFRICA 1,038. I believe that is already including the family members.
Click to expand...

Thanks god its including!
I see reavsky is around but he's abstaining on posting !!!
 
If you look at 2013 data EU got 14500 visas from 8750 selectees which covered the CNs up to 30532. So - 14500/30532 means you get .475 visas per case number. The 14500 is part of a data set that only accounts for 45k issued visas - so we know the actual number must be higher. I've explained this before, but my guess is that EU will get around 17 or 18k visas this year. I've explained that in another post that I will find. However, at .475 visas per case number that would mean a max case number of between 36k and 38k. I just can't imagine it being lower than that range, and frankly I find that range to be more pessimistic than it should be.
Click to expand...

throw out the data head. In 2013, the rally was held on the old equipment. I reveal a terrible secret in CEAC no October, November, December 2012. As a result, the total number of visas issued close to 50,000.
Your score is erroneous and contrary to the staff KCC. numbers 60000 and 46000 wins. So a large number of non-holes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sloner said:
throw out the data head. In 2013, the rally was held on the old equipment. I reveal a terrible secret in CEAC no October, November, December 2012. As a result, the total number of visas issued close to 50,000.
Your score is erroneous and contrary to the staff KCC. Until you still do not reach that numbers 60000 and 46000 wins. So a large number of non-holes.
Click to expand...

Translation anyone?
 
britsimon said:
OK - easiest if I go backwards.

The highest numbers known are from internet forums where people have posted their numbers. There have been several reports of numbers in the EU55/56 range and some even higher than that. If it were just one case I wouldn't believe the number, but there are several cases - so I think it is about right. It is also in line with other years.

We know there are 46k selectees (including family members at around 1 extra family member per selectee) from Europe (USCIS published those numbers). So let's say there are around 25k selectees and we know that derivatives do not get their own case number), they should only need 25k case numbers - but we know that the numbers are much higher - so a number in the 50's seems probable. We also can see from the 2013 data that the case numbers went up to 30532 from 8750 selectees on CEAC.

So, to your next point about there being only 5 cases between 20 and 30k. Well true - we don't KNOW that isn't correct, but I think there are probably only about 4000 or 5000 case numbers from 20 to 30k (based on a uniform distribution of the holes).
Click to expand...
Thanks Simon for your profound answer, let's hope that you are not right :))))) Just kidding, obviously we gonna need luck this year.
You have to agree with me that all these forums and discussions are on the level of speculations and neither of us is not KCC employee :) so let's wait September to see what will gonna happen.
 
Thanks Simon for your profound answer, let's hope that you are not right )))) Just kidding, obviously we gonna need luck this year.
You have to agree with me that all these forums and discussions are on the level of speculations and neither of us is not KCC employee so let's wait September to see what will gonna happen.
Click to expand...
it is not right. His words contradict words employee KCC.
 
britsimon said:
Come on OTG - be a glass half full kinda guy would ya!
Click to expand...

I normally am, but atm I just hate to NOT be in control of our short, medium and long term plans!
It would be so much better to know *for sure* that having a CN is just requires time (to be patient) not the added factor of luck, especially when there is a perceived chance of one's number to only come up at the end, if at all.

britsimon said:
a max case number of between 36k and 38k.
Click to expand...
That's what I think, too ... yet I still don't see historic evidence of that being the case, so while you are safe, I still am not convinced that we are, let alone anyone above EU35k.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sloner, could you try and explain what is not correct in this answer I gave? I would hate to give anyone bad information - so please enlighten us.
Click to expand...
However, at .475 visas per case number that would mean a max case number of between 36k and 38k. I just can't imagine it being lower than that range, and frankly I find that range to be more pessimistic than it should be.
And I guess he says short data for those 3 months october november december !
Click to expand...
In CEAC no data for these 3 months.
 
Sloner said:
However, at .475 visas per case number that would mean a max case number of between 36k and 38k. I just can't imagine it being lower than that range, and frankly I find that range to be more pessimistic than it should be.

In CEAC no data for these 3 months.
Click to expand...

Simon admits by him self that the data is missing and it is not complete . But its good enough
To be used for speculation on dv 2014.
 
Sloner said:
However, at .475 visas per case number that would mean a max case number of between 36k and 38k. I just can't imagine it being lower than that range, and frankly I find that range to be more pessimistic than it should be.

In CEAC no data for these 3 months.
Click to expand...

Sloner, I dispair sometimes. You see conspiracy and mistakes where anyone with any common sense would think about what they are saying.

Your point is that there are almost no dates in October, November and December. However you are looking at status date which is when there was the last update in CEAC - not the interview date. Think about it. When do you think the interview for 2013EU1 took place? Do you still think this data is missing the first 3 months???
 
vladek15425 said:
Simon admits by him self that the data is missing and it is not complete . But its good enough
To be used for speculation on dv 2014.
Click to expand...

That has always been my point exactly. However, this Oct - December "secret" is nothing more than Sloner losing a grip on reality.
 
britsimon said:
That has always been my point exactly. However, this Oct - December "secret" is nothing more than Sloner losing a grip on reality.
Click to expand...

Lol he always did !
And u know what I like him and he's conspiracy theory,he keeps me verry incuisitive, at least he's cruel like some forum member(p*****l)!
 
Sloner, I dispair sometimes. You see conspiracy and mistakes where anyone with any common sense would think about what they are saying.

Your point is that there are almost no dates in October, November and December. However you are looking at status date which is when there was the last update in CEAC - not the interview date. Think about it. When do you think the interview for 2013EU1 took place? Do you still think this data is missing the first 3 months???
Click to expand...

Britisimon, you will still argue with me? Please check all the CN in CEAC. http://greencard.by/upload/iblock/27f/DV Appt Oct 2012.pdf I will not say just like that. British all stubborn?
Lol he always did !
And u know what I like him and he's conspiracy theory,he keeps me verry incuisitive, at least he's cruel like some forum member(p*****l)!
Click to expand...

another. Check the link I gave. Sitting here doing nothing. had better engaged helpful anything.
 
Sloner said:
Britisimon, you will still argue with me? Please check all the CN in CEAC. http://greencard.by/upload/iblock/27f/DV Appt Oct 2012.pdf I will not say just like that. British all stubborn?
Click to expand...

Sloner it isn't about me being stubborn, it is about the cryptic postings you produce which take detective work to figure out what the hell you are talking about.

OK so I checked the list you provided. Of those 35 case numbers 29 are missing entirely from CEAC (and therefore from the CEAC data spreadsheet). 6 are present in CEAC and the speadsheet.

The 6 all have status dates later than the interview dates. Since that is a small percentage my guess is that it is updates after mid December that gets those cases to appear on the CEAC list. So I would agree that there is missing data - which is exactly what I have said many times before. How significant it is (in terms of impact), I don't know. There are 786 cases in Warsaw on the spreadsheet for the whole year which is an average of around 65 per month when your listing suggests October only had 35. So - based on that, I think this.

The CEAC data is missing a number of cases (because those cases are not in CEAC).
There are some cases missing from October to around mid/late December, 2012.
There may continue to be cases missing after that timeframe.
The EU highest number of 30532 looks too low (as the highest cutoff was 33,000 before EU went current).
The global issued count from this data is only 45k. I would expect higher, although AOS is missing from this data.
It looks likely therefore that there are gaps in the data and the data ends too early. Both those things balance and allow us to still use this data in a representative way, whilst being cautious about this missing data.
 
britsimon said:
The CEAC data is missing a number of cases (because those cases are not in CEAC).
There are some cases missing from October to around mid/late December, 2012.
There may continue to be cases missing after that timeframe.
The EU highest number of 30532 looks too low (as the highest cutoff was 33,000 before EU went current).
The global issued count from this data is only 45k. I would expect higher, although AOS is missing from this data.
It looks likely therefore that there are gaps in the data and the data ends too early. Both those things balance and allow us to still use this data in a representative way, whilst being cautious about this missing data.
Click to expand...


You are so "schlau"! ;)


PS: true that.. "cryptic postings which take detective work to figure out what the hell [this person is] talking about." - lol (no offence to Sloner!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top