• 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.

September VB - DV14 Last Chapter

Britsimon

Super Moderator
For a year, I realized that I love my country more than someone else. Many people leave the U.S. and then returned. So why waste your energy, time and money. This is my home and I'm glad I was born here.
More positive friends.:)My feelings are similar to fly the Russian team of the World Cup. Life goes on.;)

Sloner - you may be right, it is a personal decision for everyone and in the end we all need to make the best of what we have, not what we dream of - so that is a sensible comment.

I notice you have revealed a case number - you have never mentioned being a selectee before - is it for real????
 

MattWatt

Active Member
Congrats to all those (past and present) who did go current. I hope your US dreams are realised, and wish you all the best for your future.

I would also like to thank all the regular on here for their advice, support and guidance in the past - BritSimon, Vladek, Sm1smom, Sloner, SusieQQQ, rafik, Mijoro, and all the rest.

Here's hoping for a correction / amendment for September, or failing that lower CNs for everyone for DV-2016.
 

Sloner

Active Member
Sloner - you may be right, it is a personal decision for everyone and in the end we all need to make the best of what we have, not what we dream of - so that is a sensible comment.

I notice you have revealed a case number - you have never mentioned being a selectee before - is it for real????
Yes:) This number can be thrown in the trash. But I will leave it to history.:)
 

MattWatt

Active Member
I am still in wonder why they fixed eu,oc and sa.Nothing make sense :(

Someone called KCC to ask that question (for OC anyway), and was told that OC numbers hadn't been finalised, and that the final September number may change in the next few weeks.

My question is ... why publish the VB now if numbers aren't yet finalised - considering that KCC have always maintained that the 15th of each month is the "official" release date.
 

Kurt14

Registered Users (C)
I do think there might be a small adjustment - but small if anything at all. Very sad.

Have they been known to adjust the final VB numbers in previous years?.... I'm clutching at anything right now... OC's 1450 is roughly 200 short of my CN!
 

Britsimon

Super Moderator
Someone called KCC to ask that question (for OC anyway), and was told that OC numbers hadn't been finalised, and that the final September number may change in the next few weeks.

My question is ... why publish the VB now if numbers aren't yet finalised - considering that KCC have always maintained that the 15th of each month is the "official" release date.

That is encouraging - and it would not surprise me at all to see it change. The thing is the VB covers way more than just DV. In fact, DV is around 5% of the immigration annually so for every 1 person expecting the VB for DV reasons there are 19 more for other visa types. So - it is possible they decided not to hold up the VB publishing, but still intend to update the DV numbers. I could see changes for OC and SA for sure - and possibly EU. From a country POV I could imagine Egypt and Nepal being adjust slightly also. THe reason for that is that these numbers have not changed at all and that means they are based on 8 months of processing - maybe they just want a better picture of what is happening.

AF and AS have already been changed, so an update for them seems less likely.

This DV continues to show it is like no other DV year...
 
  • Like
Reactions: CWH

Britsimon

Super Moderator
Have they been known to adjust the final VB numbers in previous years?.... I'm clutching at anything right now... OC's 1450 is roughly 200 short of my CN!

They have adjusted recent months - but there is MORE reason to adjust this last VB....
 

Slikk

Member
Well they have educated developers, who knows what happend to algorythm everything is still a mistery..

Remains the main question. Why are they specifically increased the number of winners? I think sitting there not educated chicken .....:mad:
 

Britsimon

Super Moderator
Remains the main question. Why are they specifically increased the number of winners? I think sitting there not educated chicken .....:mad:

I go back back to the 2012 fiasco. They calculated (as you did) that they would get very poor response. That wasn't correct as we now know - but it was too late - they had already pulled the trigger. And guess what. They have screwed up 2015 the same way also (since the 5k country selection cutoff and no Nigeria accounts for all the difference between 125 and 140. Bloody nightmare.
 

connectedspace

Active Member
I go back back to the 2012 fiasco. They calculated (as you did) that they would get very poor response. That wasn't correct as we now know - but it was too late - they had already pulled the trigger. And guess what. They have screwed up 2015 the same way also (since the 5k country selection cutoff and no Nigeria accounts for all the difference between 125 and 140. Bloody nightmare.

Not sure I follow - if there's no Nigeria, surely there are more to spread around over the rest of the world?
 
Top