sloner axiom :)

[raevsky]

If this is your final estimation for OC? Hope I'm not misunderstanding .
than the gab is to large between
1840 to 2270 (430) is huge ! Its like telling us AF 60000 to 120000 !
Give more smaller gab?

Look. The regular estimate (based on DV-13 flow) would be between 1650-1820. Now, we have two possible effects on top of that.
1. Fiji effect. We see an enormous refusal rate for Fiji so far in DV-14 compared to DV-13. However, that could be a fluctuation that could disappear later. If not, that increases regular estimate by 12.5% to 1860-2050.
2. NACARA effect. That could increase the passing number by additional 5%. To 1950-2150.
I would say I am absolutely uncertain wherher any of those 2 effects are going to take place in reality

Totally, that would be between 1650 and 2150, 2150/1650 = 1.30
For Europe I gave an estimate between 33K and 38.85K with NACARA effect (or between 33K and 37K without it), and that is
38.85/33=1.18
That is much more accurate vecause it includes only one of those two effects as unknown - NACARA effect only. There is no Fiji effect for Europe.

 

[raevsky]

Raevsky, can you run your script to generate the CEAC data every 15th days, so we are informed on the # of visa issued so far. Only if you are free to do so.

Probably not. I could rerun more or less frequently a certain small intervals of numbers only

 

[vladek15425]

My head is screaming for me to not make predictions because this year things are very unpredictable - but I know you won't let me get away with that so here goes.

I think your set of numbers is more hope based than fact based. I think there would be dancing in the streets if those numbers came true. but on balance they are too high for me.

Ameer and Franko both have more realistic numbers, I think. I'm really not sure we can predict out the number ranges to the end of the year, but I am pleased to see Franko being so bold as to go to EU44k for September. I think Franko must have been cheered up by Raevsky recently opening the door to a slightly higher number.

So my numbers would be something like this

AF ; 34000 (+/- 1000)
AS ; 5600 (+/- 300)
EU ; 26500 (+/- 1000)
OC ; 1000 (+/- 50)
SA ; 1150 (+/- 75)

thanks simon for sharing with us, indeed not an easy game to predict since its not a simple maths, but for the sake of it and for the sake of the waiting game let us take a chance even if we know that we might be totaly wrong but it doesnt matter its not in our hands pal
like you say i put a bit of my heart in my predictions who knows may be i will kick a**

 

[Sloner]

For Europe I gave an estimate between 33K and 38.85K with NACARA effect (or between 33K and 37K without it), and that is
38.85/33=1.18

So my approach is simple. DV2014 is very similar to DV2013. It is safe to assume that 31-33k will be achieved easily. Now if you add higher number of selectees (I assume that KFC had a good reason to add people, other than using 2012 data) and recent NACARA findings we can add another 5k so we are at about 38-39k.

So you deny the plurality of holes? DV14> DV13 It was originally understood. Maybe we will not deny the obvious facts in favor of their theories. I do not deny 140,000.

 

[raevsky]

So you deny the plurality of holes? DV14> DV13 It was originally understood. Maybe we will not deny the obvious facts in favor of their theories. I do not deny 140,000.

If you are asking me about the density of holes (not plurality), I do not care. My calculations do not take the density of holes into account, and I do not care if it is the same as before or not. I do not need it because I know the max european number from forums and I know the total amount of winners from DOS figures. That is it. I rely on uniform distribution of winners (from non-special countries).

Nevertheless, regarding your question, I believe holes are more dense in EU region in DV-14 than in DV-13.
For instance, for non-special EU countries for up to 27756 number (before additional selection) there we 21563 winners. And in DV-13 for numbers up to 54000 - 35565 winners. That would mean 35565/54000*27756 = 18280 winners, less than 21563. For Uzbekistan the number is about the same, for Ukraine it is also smaller - because about the same amount of winners is spread until larger max number. So, the density of holes in DV-14 is definitely larger for EU than in DV-13

 

[House409]

If you are asking me about the density of holes (not plurality), I do not care. My calculations do not take the density of holes into account, and I do not care if it is the same as before or not. I do not need it because I know the max european number from forums and I know the total amount of winners from DOS figures. That is it. I rely on uniform distribution of winners (from non-special countries).

Nevertheless, regarding your question, I believe holes are more dense in EU region in DV-14 than in DV-13.
For instance, for non-special EU countries for up to 27756 number (before additional selection) there we 21563 winners. And in DV-13 for numbers up to 54000 - 35565 winners. That would mean 35565/54000*27756 = 18280 winners, less than 21563. For Uzbekistan the number is about the same, for Ukraine it is also smaller - because about the same amount of winners is spread until larger max number. So, the density of holes in DV-14 is definitely larger for EU than in DV-13

Raevsky, I guess there are still people returning their forms but they should be not that many. That would increase a little bit the number of registered selectees you will see in the ceac database, don't you think?

 

[House409]

Raevsky, I guess there are still people returning their forms but they should be not that many. That would increase a little bit the number of registered selectees you will see in the ceac database, don't you think?

And then decrease the apparent density of holes?

 

[raevsky]

And then decrease the apparent density of holes?

There are two ways to calculate the number of holes.
1. Absolute way. If you know that EU numbers go up to 54000, and there know amount of winners, you calculate the exact number of holes. That one does not decrease
2. From CEAC data. That is up-to-date number of holes, and that oine could decrease.

 

[raevsky]

Raevsky, I guess there are still people returning their forms but they should be not that many. That would increase a little bit the number of registered selectees you will see in the ceac database, don't you think?

There are two ways to approach the problem.
1. Assume that final response rate in DV-14 is the same as DV-13. That is logical, there could be some small error.
2. Look at the current response rate according to CEACdata. That one could change overtime.

The first way is better, and the error cannot be large. However, some things are possible - like current economic crysis in a country or a war. Then response rates could change significantly and the second way is needed.

 

[vladek15425]

Look. The regular estimate (based on DV-13 flow) would be between 1650-1820. Now, we have two possible effects on top of that.
1. Fiji effect. We see an enormous refusal rate for Fiji so far in DV-14 compared to DV-13. However, that could be a fluctuation that could disappear later. If not, that increases regular estimate by 12.5% to 1860-2050.
2. NACARA effect. That could increase the passing number by additional 5%. To 1950-2150.
I would say I am absolutely uncertain wherher any of those 2 effects are going to take place in reality

Totally, that would be between 1650 and 2150, 2150/1650 = 1.30
For Europe I gave an estimate between 33K and 38.85K with NACARA effect (or between 33K and 37K without it), and that is
38.85/33=1.18
That is much more accurate vecause it includes only one of those two effects as unknown - NACARA effect only. There is no Fiji effect for Europe.

well yes raevsky just according to 2014 data i can see that the responding rate is 48 % in OC we checked it already when the caec
became operational, so the same rate (fidji effect+ wholes+abandoning...)will lead to 2000 end of the year (excluding the returns from the readys and aps) !
now if we add the nacara effect will probably hit the 2200 - 2300 IMO
and if there is a quota increase in OC which seem to happen ! because of the selectees quota has doubled in OC !
im just analyzing oc because its the easiest case to study and im getting closer and closer to simon prediction when he says that oc "might be" the only region that will be current!
you gave more precision about EU but you are very evasive about OC ?!

 

[raevsky]

As I said, because of uncertainty of Fiji effect (that gives additional 13% difference) I cannot shrink it less than it is now - 30% difference between the upper and low bound. But anyway, I am sure it will be less than upper 21xx with all those effects alltogether

 

[House409]

Probably not. I could rerun more or less frequently a certain small intervals of numbers only

I tried to see if they have uploaded or not the new case numbers (numbers from the March cutoff) in the CEAC system, but it seems they didn't yet. When they do this, will you run your super powerful script to download the new entries in the database? That's so much fun when we get new data from you Raevsky . We can then debate and speculate about this crazy DV thing , counting new holes between new CNs etc....

 

[raevsky]

I could run new numbers only (between new cutoffs and previous cutoffs), except Africa. I could also run between 21750 and 25000 for Africa, but that will not include new numbers for special countries in Africa

 

[Sloner]

Nevertheless, regarding your question, I believe holes are more dense in EU region in DV-14 than in DV-13.
For instance, for non-special EU countries for up to 27756 number (before additional selection) there we 21563 winners. And in DV-13 for numbers up to 54000 - 35565 winners. That would mean 35565/54000*27756 = 18280 winners, less than 21563. For Uzbekistan the number is about the same, for Ukraine it is also smaller - because about the same amount of winners is spread until larger max number. So, the density of holes in DV-14 is definitely larger for EU than in DV-13

In DV2013 numbers to 54000- no. You may not think so.

Question everything. What happened in the DV2000 +23478 winners and DV2004 +24192 winners.
I know I want to hear your opinions.

 

[raevsky]

I did not quite get your question.
EU had 35868 winners in DV-2004, and it had 21719 visas issued in DV-2004. What is 24192 in DV-2004?

 

[Sloner]

I did not quite get your question.
EU had 35868 winners in DV-2004, and it had 21719 visas issued in DV-2004. What is 24192 in DV-2004?

Increasing the winners in the world compared to last year. Why was such a leap?

 

[Britsimon]

In DV2013 numbers to 54000- no. You may not think so.

Question everything. What happened in the DV2000 +23478 winners and DV2004 +24192 winners.
I know I want to hear your opinions.

The early lottery visas went To EU countries besed on countries eligible and knowledge about the lottery itself. The first lottery awarded something like 90% of the visas to EU. So what. That is much different to today.

 

[Sloner]

The early lottery visas went To EU countries besed on countries eligible and knowledge about the lottery itself. The first lottery awarded something like 90% of the visas to EU. So what. That is much different to today.

Added all regions, not just Europe. No. Not because of the EU.
Imagine that you are the winner DV2004 with a high number. Your chances?
In 2003 86169 win, in 2004 110361.

 

[vladek15425]

As I said, because of uncertainty of Fiji effect (that gives additional 13% difference) I cannot shrink it less than it is now - 30% difference between the upper and low bound. But anyway, I am sure it will be less than upper 21xx with all those effects alltogether

Ok i will record +- 2100 for oc , do you think there will be a vosa quota increase for OC perhaps ?
Bieside nacara, like taking from af or eu and put in in oc?

 

[raevsky]

Added all regions, not just Europe. No. Not because of the EU.
Imagine that you are the winner DV2004 with a high number. Your chances?
In 2003 86169 win, in 2004 110361.

You are forgetting about huge additional selection in 2003. 86169 does not include that.
The way how I see that is the following.
1. In 2003 they improved checks for duplicates tremendously. They had to do additional selection because of that, because consulates refused a lot of applications. So, in DV-2004 they did it during regular selection. In both 2003 and 2004 they had real non-current cutoffs in September.
2. I am not sure about 2000, but I suspect it is the same.