VGW Win in Florida Civil Suit Highlights Importance Of Terms And Conditions

Written By:   Author Thumbnail Valerie Cross
Author Thumbnail Valerie Cross
Valerie Cross, Ph.D., is a skilled editor, writer, and content strategist with over seven years in the iGaming, poker, and sports betting industry. She has led content teams, managed regional gambling sites, and covered ...
Read Full Profile
The ramifications of this legal victory for sweeps operators are significant — and these operators have VGW's terms and conditions to thank.

A case that had potential to throw a wrench in sweepstakes casino operations can now be chalked up to another win, or at least no contest, for sweeps operator VGW and sweepstakes payment providers. 

Knapp vs. VGW Holdings Limited et al was officially dismissed on Feb. 6 and remaining disputes transferred to the District of Delaware for closing on Feb. 7. 

The involvement of payment processors Worldpay and Fidelity Information Services, Inc. (FIS) posed a potential issue for sweeps operators. If payment providers start pulling out or blocking purchases at sweepstakes gaming sites, it could have a devastating effect on the industry.

But that won’t be happening just yet at least. 

Two clauses that worked in favor of VGW in the Florida case in question were forum selection and choice of law clauses, which dictate that any disputes fall in the jurisdiction of the state of Delaware. As a result, Knapp’s attempt to remand the case back to Florida state court where the case was filed was denied.

Case jurisdiction details

Knapp was seeking to bring the case back to Florida state court, where he may have better chances of a favorable ruling. But Judge Carlos Mendoza of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division, denied that motion, finding federal jurisdiction was proper in this case. 

From the the ruling: “Because the amount in controversy and the numerosity requirements are clearly stated in the notice of removal and supporting declaration … the Court finds that it has subject matter jurisdiction over this action.”

Knapp and attorneys also argued that the case should be remanded based on “local controversy” and “home state” exceptions. 

The court denied the local controversy claim as it stipulates that in the three years preceding the current case filing, no other class action “asserting the same or similar factual allegations against any of the defendants on behalf of the same or other persons” has been filed. But there was another similar suit brought against VGW in that timeframe, Middle District of Florida case Doe v. VGW Malta Ltd., which was dismissed without prejudice. 

The home state exception, which requires that the primary defendant is a citizen of Florida, was also rejected based on the grounds that VGW is an Australian citizen (headquartered in Australia) and has no Florida stakeholders

Ruling favors VGW (and payment providers)

The court ruled in favor of VGW, Worldpay, and FIS, granting all entities’ motions to transfer and otherwise dismiss. The ruling also dismissed the claims against those parties without prejudice, and Judge Mendoza ordered the clerk “to transfer the claims against VGW Holdings Limited, VGW Luckyland Inc, Fidelity Information Services, Inc., and Worldpay, LLC to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware for all further proceedings and to close this file.”

The transfer of claims was based on two clauses in VGW’s terms and conditions, which the plaintiff technically agreed to in order to register an account on the site.

The forum selection and choice of law clauses work to protect VGW (and other sweepstakes operators), and so far they have had a great deal of success in doing so.

A previous ruling declared that “Forum-selection clauses are presumptively valid and enforceable unless the plaintiff makes a ‘strong showing’ that enforcement would be unfair or unreasonable under the circumstances.” In this case, the plaintiff failed to prove the latter. 

VGW’s forum selection clause states:

Subject to clause 23, the parties agree that any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms of Service, or the breach, termination or invalidity of these Terms of Service, will be submitted exclusively to the courts in the State of Delaware in the United States, and you and we consent to the venue and personal jurisdiction of those courts. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties agree that either party may move to compel arbitration or to enforce an arbitral award issued hereunder before any court of competent jurisdiction.

VGW’s choice of law clause states:

These Terms and Conditions, your use of the Platform and our entire relationship will be governed, and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware in the United States, without regard for its choice of conflict of law principles.

The plaintiff made some arguments as to why those clauses shouldn’t be upheld in this case, but none of them were accepted by the court. 

One such argument was that the forum selection and choice of law provisions should not be enforced “because the Defendants fraudulently induced Plaintiff into agreeing to the Terms” which “falsely state that VGW Group does not offer real money gambling and that VGW Group operates legally in Florida and Delaware.”  

Indeed, the court cites a previous ruling that the “court will invalidate a choice clause only if ‘the inclusion of that clause in the contract was the product of fraud or coercion.’” However, the ruling noted there was no indication to substantiate that the forum selection and choice of law clauses were formed by fraud. 

Knapp also argued that “the forum selection and choice of law clauses should not be enforced because the underlying contracts are void against public policy as illegal gambling contracts.”

The ruling said this claim fails thanks to a previous court ruling that rejected the same argument, stating: “A forum selection clause is viewed as a separate contract that is severable from the agreement in which it is contained.”

What did we learn?

What this case and several others have demonstrated is that sweepstakes casinos in general have solid legal protections baked into their terms and conditions, which every customer must agree to before signing up. 

These binding agreements serve to help companies like VGW avoid expensive trials and merits-based judgments when civil cases do arise. 

One such legal fine print deals with arbitration clauses, which require disputes to be settled via arbitration rather than having their day in court. This legal clause has worked in favor of sweeps gaming sites.

Similar technicalities played in favor of the defendant in another case brought against VGW by Fair Gaming Advocates Georgia Inc., which was dismissed in Georgia back in December due to lack of jurisdiction.

After that ruling, US gambling attorney Daniel Wallach noted on LinkedIn: “From arbitration clauses to jurisdictional defenses, there are procedural challenges every step of the way (in sweepstakes lawsuits).” 

VGW is also facing litigation in New York and New Jersey under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). The plaintiffs in those cases allege VGW is running illegal gambling operations under the guise of social casinos.  

According to Wallach, it’s highly unlikely that any of the cases launched against VGW or other sweeps operators will have definitive impact.  

“No class action lawsuit will be transformative or bring industry-wide change because they will either get dismissed on a procedural motion or take years before ever reaching trial, only to ultimately be settled,” he told Next.io.

Perhaps that is why so far in 2025 we’ve seen a flurry of alternative approaches to countering sweeps operators. Those include more cease-and-desist letters and a number of anti-sweepstakes bill proposals, which stand to be more effective in the eyes of the law.

Can The Sweepstakes Industry Benefit From Increased Tax Rates On Real-Money Operators?

Let's dig into — and talk to an expert about — the wild idea that maybe real-money operators could one say step out of the way of sweeps gaming regulation due to increased taxes.

There are three main storylines pulsating through the gambling industry right now.

  1. Pressure is mounting on sweepstakes operators as more and more states start to position themselves against the dual-currency gaming model.
  2. The annual burst of excitement as new iGaming bills are filed is in full swing.
  3. More states are looking at online gambling revenue and thinking, Man, can we get some more of that flowing our way?

Storyline No. 3 is getting the least attention, but it could arguably have the largest impact.

In the past year, we have already seen Ohio double its sports betting tax rate from 10% to 20% and Illinois change its 15% tax rate to a progressive 20-40% scale. New Jersey also considered a tax hike from 15% to 30%. There are two bills in Michigan that would raise the sports betting tax 0.1% and the online casino tax by 1% for each tax bracket. Louisiana for a time considered a bill that would have rocketed its sports betting tax rate to 51%, like New York’s.

Last month, in his 2026 budget proposal, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore suggested the state double its sports betting tax rate from 15% to 30%.

And just this week, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine proposed raising his state’s sports betting tax percentage — again — from 20% to 40%.

Lack of new regulated gaming options hurting existing operators

Lawmakers are increasingly turning to online gambling as a source for tax revenue. Do you think all those legislators in states proposing iGaming bills this legislative cycle just love to play some online slots? No. (Well, maybe.)

They, like all of us, really, have an eye for money.

And they see the mammoth revenue potential of online casinos and, thus, the mammoth tax revenue potential.

The problem is … momentum for online casino legalization is essentially at a standstill. Yes, there are some bills being considered, but you’d be hard-pressed to find an industry stakeholder who would bet their house on any of them passing.

So … what’s a lawmaker to do?

Ah, yes. Increase the taxes on the online gambling that’s already allowed.

Operators are literally asking customers to email lawmakers

Real-money operators are, uh, not thrilled.

The Sports Betting Alliance, which consists of DraftKings, FanDuel, Fanatics, and BetMGM, has pre-written forms that Michigan and Ohio residents can fill out and send to lawmakers, urging them not to raise online gambling taxes. 

Here’s what the Ohio form says:

Dear [Lawmaker],

I’m concerned about the push for even higher taxes on legal sports betting across the country, that’s why  I’m asking you to protect legal sports betting and keep it fair for Ohio fans like me. 

I love game day and part of the reason is because of online sports betting. But the government imposing higher taxes means fewer bonuses, worse odds, and less competition — hurting the very people and legal operators who play by the rules.

Let’s stop raising taxes on hard-working Ohioans and the games we enjoy. That’s not the way we do it here in the Buckeye State.

During a Gaming Americas webinar in November, Martin Lycka, senior vice president for American regulatory affairs and responsible gaming at Entain, expressed frustration with the growing trend of lawmakers eyeing increased tax rates on established operators.

“Any other state that’s considering raising taxes, hoping that could fix all the other problems, well, I would strongly suggest that’s not necessarily the way you’re better off,” he said. “That’s the key message.”

So … could sweeps regulation actually help?

Now, here’s a thought: Might these lawmakers be less eager to inflate taxes on established operators if they could simply regulate and add taxes to a gray market industry that already exists in their state? Say, oh, perhaps the sweepstakes industry?

At this point, it’s a fair argument to say states may be more likely to regulate sweepstakes casinos than legalize online casinos. (Although it’s a fine line.) However, traditionally, real-money operators have been some of the stoutest opponents of sweepstakes gaming regulation.

Could that change as more and more states consider raising online gambling taxes?

Might real-money operators see sweepstakes regulation as a way to escape jacked-up taxes?

It’s an interesting thought, but one that — at least currently — doesn’t hold much weight, according to US gambling consultant Dustin Gouker.

“I don’t think higher tax rates will play into how regulated operators view the sweeps industry in the short term,” Gouker told Sweepsy. “I believe most of the top operators remain pretty aligned against it. Correct or not, they mostly see it as competitive to their existing business now and in the future.

“I also don’t find it terribly likely we get widespread sweepstakes regulation or taxation in the short term.”

Time will tell if real-money operators reach an inflection point — a point where the trend of increased tax rates becomes so widespread that, perhaps, stepping out of the way of sweeps regulation becomes a viable path to keeping more revenue in their pockets.

But, for now, that doesn’t seem likely. Real-money operators will try other options — such as lobbying and urging customers to contact lawmakers — to stymie the trend of increased tax rates.

Sweeps Casino Inbox: 143 Emails in 13 Days Raise Responsible Gaming Concerns

I signed up for seven sweeps casinos. I got 143 promo emails in 13 days. I don't fault sweeps casinos for this kind of push advertising. But the responsible gaming optics are not ideal — especially at such a critical time for the industry.

My email inbox is not happy with me at the moment.

It likes order, cleanliness, tranquility.

It thrives on a steady flow of read-and-delete and gags at the very thought of unreads piling on top of one another.

Well, email inbox, I profusely apologize for what I’ve done to you these past two weeks.

Or, rather, what sweepstakes casinos have done to you.

Well, that escalated quickly

Here’s the deal: I signed up for seven sweeps casino sites on Jan. 8 for a story that analyzed arbitration clauses in terms and conditions and if those same clauses (or similar clauses) showed up in separate terms and conditions for specific promotions. Those seven sites were:

  • High 5 Casino
  • McLuck
  • Chanced
  • WOW Vegas
  • DingDingDing
  • Crown Coins
  • RealPrize

Then, from Jan. 8-20, I received 143 promotional emails from those seven operators. That’s 11 per day over the 13 days, and it was really more like 12 days, because I signed up pretty late at night on Jan. 8.

I received the most emails from DingDingDing at a whopping 63. That’s nearly five a day.

Chanced was the least abrasive, at just eight total emails.

Only one email focused on responsible gaming

Of the 143 emails, only one had anything to do with responsible gaming. That one came from Chanced — the welcome email, after I’d confirmed my email address. The subject line: Chanced Responsible Social Gaming Introduction. The other 142 revolved around unclaimed bonuses and exclusive offers and 40% sales and big jackpots and a whole lot of FREE in all caps and plenty of emojis to make my once-pristine inbox look like the promo poster for a junk mail convention.

It was a lot. Plain and simple. Probably too much.

For me, it was too much because of the sheer volume and annoyance. But I’m lucky to say I don’t have a gambling problem. I signed up for these sweeps sites to dig through the terms and conditions, and that’s it. I haven’t played one game so far.

For those with gambling problems, there could be a deeper impact of this bombardment of grab-you-by-your-eyeballs advertising.

I’ll make something clear: I don’t fault sweeps operators for this style of promotion. We don’t bash Bud Light for its incessant ads during every sporting event that has ever happened ever. In fact, in a couple weeks, we’ll all celebrate the comedy of Super Bowl commercials for beer and liquor that very well could have the same effect on alcoholics that sweeps email blasts may have on those with gambling addictions.

The effects in either situation are awful. But the solution is not to prevent Bud Light from making those commercials, just like the solution shouldn’t be to prevent sweeps sites from their full-court-press advertising campaigns.

However …

Now is not the time for sweeps operators to mess around with RG practices

Bud Light isn’t fighting the same war that sweeps operators are right now.

Sweepstakes gaming is glued down to a petri dish under the collective microscope of the gambling industry. Industry stakeholders and lawmakers find themselves analyzing the nature of the dual-currency gaming model and debating whether to ban the sites or regulate them.

Now, more than ever, is a time for sweeps operators to convince us all that they have the players’ well-being in mind, that they advocate responsible gaming and promote responsible gaming tools and messaging on their sites, that they keep responsible gaming in mind with all their current practices. Make no mistake, that’s why the Social and Promotional Games Association, formed by operators to advocate sweepstakes gaming as more and more power-brokers in the US began paying attention to the industry, released a Code of Conduct in December. That code included four main tenets:

  • Age verification to limit purchases to those 18 and older
  • Proper identity verification (Know Your Customer or KYC)
  • Customer location verification
  • Anti-money laundering policies to monitor transactions

That’s great. It’s a good foundation. And the SPGA said it will add more to its Code of Conduct in the future. You can be sure anything it adds will have a responsible gaming flavor.

So that’s where we come back to the 143 emails in my inbox.

Pull advertising vs. push advertising

It’s a lot. Yes, I can choose to unsubscribe from each operator’s emails (and I sure did). But that’s not the point.

It’s in the best interest of sweeps operators to walk on proverbial eggshells when it comes to responsible gaming in 2025, which is going to be a pivotal year for the future of the industry. And the weight of 143 emails cracks those eggshells.

These emails are an example of “push advertising” — where a company sends marketing material directly to a client even if that client hasn’t requested it.

Massachusetts regulators discussed push advertising — and its responsible gambling implications — in March 2023 as the state legalized online sports betting. At first, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission wasn’t going to allow sports betting affiliate sites to sign deals with sportsbooks that would allow operators to pay affiliates for each customer they sent to the sportsbook.

What I just outlined is an example of “pull advertising” — where a company fosters interest and demand organically by creating content customers find on their own. In the case of the sports betting affiliates, interested sports bettors in Massachusetts would Google search terms like “MA sportsbook promo codes” and find the sportsbook deals on the various affiliate sites.

As a way to convince the MGC to finally allow these “Cost-Per-Acquisition” (CPA) affiliate deals, Katherine McCord, an attorney representing affiliate network Better Collective, relayed the potential pitfalls of push advertising vs. pull advertising in the gambling sector.

“By prohibiting CPA … operators will instead focus their marketing budgets away from pull advertising (such as agreements with marketing affiliates) and towards push advertising,” McCord said. “Push advertising is shown across all age demographics and doesn’t include the same responsible gaming resources and educational content that marketing affiliates provide.”

My inbox has a message for the seven sweeps sites I signed up for: Hey, maybe let’s go ahead and try some more pull advertising and ease up on the push advertising, OK?

So says the inbox.

7 Sweepstakes Gaming Industry Storylines To Watch In 2025

Sweepsy takes a look at the top storylines to watch in sweepstakes gaming this year, including potential mergers and judicial decisions that could alter the industry.

If 2024 was the year sweepstakes gaming burst into the gaming industry’s collective conscience, 2025 will be the year it becomes the industry’s new obsession.

Prepare for a whole lot of discussion and perhaps some significant decisions involving the sweepstakes market, where the dual-currency gaming model has invited interest and speculation from players, real-money operators, lawmakers, courts, and more.

Here are seven storylines to follow in the burgeoning sweepstakes industry in 2025.

Market saturation may drive mergers and acquisitions

Let’s play a game: Type “sweepstakes casino sites” in Google right now. Click on any of the lists that pop up. You’ll probably see 20, 30, 40, even 50 different options, depending on what Google result you click.

Alex, what is market saturation?

A bunch of smart people in the gaming industry realized the barriers to revenue are more minimal in sweepstakes gaming, and they’ve flocked to create sweepstakes products.

But there isn’t endless room on the sweepstakes bandwagon. And, despite the relatively low cost of entry compared to that of a regulated market, there’s just not enough money to support 50-plus viable platforms.

So, that’s where mergers and acquisitions may come into play in 2025.

Does VGW Holdings, the owner of brands like Chumba Casino, LuckyLand Slots, and Global Poker, purchase some of the smaller-but-mighty brands? Do operators like High 5 Games and Heuston Gaming (Sweeptastic) merge to compete with VGW?

More states may follow NY and FL’s lead with prize limits

With no federal laws applying to internet sweepstakes gambling, it’s up to each individual state to govern the gray market. Washington and Michigan have banned the sites entirely.

It’s doubtful other states follow that hard-lined stance, as least in the short-term.

Perhaps a more likely near-term adjustment could come in the form of prize limits. Right now, in Florida and New York, players can redeem cash prizes of only up to $5,000.

If states are looking to make a statement to sweepstakes operators but not boot them out entirely, prize limits are a viable option.

Will operators tweak the sweepstakes gaming model?

Even if it doesn’t happen in 2025 — or even by 2030 — it does feel inevitable that the current sweepstakes gaming model will be forced to change at some point.

So might the operators want to get ahead of that change?

At the heart of any lawsuit against sweepstakes operators is their dual-currency gaming model — where one currency (Gold Coins) is purely for in-game use, and the second currency (Sweeps Coins) can be redeemed for cash prizes. The easiest way to get Sweeps Coins is to buy Gold Coin packages that come with Sweeps Coins as a “free” bonus.

Perhaps operators could make it so Sweeps Coins can only be used on certain games, or for certain durations of time. Perhaps operators will give players an option to play a version of the platform with ads, where they can’t purchase any Gold Coins but instead rack up GC and SC via time spent on the platform. Operators will still make revenue via ads, but there will be no overspending worries on the player’s side.

That’s just spitballing. But the change would need to have responsible gaming top of mind.

Impact on the stalled US iGaming momentum

Wyoming is just about the only state with near-term potential for online casinos, and that market size isn’t going to move the needle. And iGaming bills in Virginia and Maryland aren’t obvious contenders yet. Same story with the online casino rumblings in Louisiana.

The retail cannibalization argument has just about frozen the industry and created a gridlock that, frankly, doesn’t appear anywhere near close to being broken.

However, if sweepstakes gaming continues to explode at its current rate (85% compound annual growth rate from 2019-23, per Eilers & Krejcik), that will add fuel to iGaming proponents’ arguments. They’ve worked hard to persuade lawmakers and voters that unregulated offshore sites are collecting boatloads of tax dollars from gamblers in states where online casinos aren’t legal.

These sweepstakes sites are doing the same thing.

So can a larger sweepstakes market with more widespread visibility give online casino proponents another piece of ammo and actually help them convince lawmakers to legalize iGaming sooner?

Will retail casinos join forces with sweepstakes operators?

It’s smart business to take a look at sweepstakes gaming right now.

So, might we start to see brick-and-mortar casinos partner with sweepstakes operators, much like they’ve partnered with the BetMGMs and FanDuels of the regulated world in states with real-money online casinos?

We’ve already seen tribal casinos in California partner with operators like Sparket to provide free-to-play iGaming with prizes built around rewards points or in-person experiences at the casino.

It feels like the relationship would be beneficial. The brick-and-mortar casino(s) would promote the sweepstakes site and likely advertise some sort of sign-up special, giving that site an extra dose of visibility in that market. Meanwhile, the retail casino makes a chunk of money from whatever deal they struck with the sweepstakes operator.

These would by no means be big-money deals — it’s not like the sweepstakes sites would have to rely on these partnerships to gain access to a state’s regulated market.

But they’d be something.

Some sort of decision will move the needle in 2025

These state-level class-action lawsuits currently being waged against sweepstakes operators likely won’t move the needle at all in terms of changing the sweepstakes industry, said Daniel Wallach, a US gaming law and sports betting attorney.

“From arbitration clauses to jurisdictional defenses, there are procedural challenges every step of the way,” Wallach wrote in a LinkedIn post after a Georgia judge sided with VGW in a recent sweepstakes lawsuit. “And those cases that do survive the gauntlet will either take years to litigate or inevitably get settled (see Kentucky). VGW will not want to risk going to trial, where the possibility of an adverse judgment could have national impacts.”

Instead, Wallach said any judicial decision of note would have to stem from lawmaking bodies and organizations, not private citizens.

“The cases that will ultimately decide the legality of the ‘dual-currency’ sweepstakes model — if it ever gets decided — will be those instituted by governmental bodies, such as State AGs and gaming regulatory agencies,” Wallach wrote, “and likely only after a cease-and-desist order that goes unheeded. Coming in 2025.”

Let’s see if the SPGA has any real teeth

Sweepstakes operators formed the Social and Promotional Games Association to advocate the industry as scrutiny intensifies. A big part of that is trying to promote responsible game play.

The SPGA unveiled a Code of Conduct for its members in December. Its four main tenets are:

  • Age verification to limit purchases to those 18 and older
  • Proper identity verification (Know Your Customer or KYC)
  • Customer location verification
  • Anti-money laundering policies to monitor transactions

In its release announcing the Code of Conduct, the SPGA said it would unveil more pillars of the code in the coming months “and engage an external firm to certify member compliance with the Code.”

So it sounds like there will be a certification process.

But will there be penalties if a member doesn’t abide by the Code of Conduct? Will there be fines?

Or … will that operator just lose its certification but continue to do whatever the heck it wants?

In other words: Can the SPGA in any way like a regulatory body could? Doubtful. But we’ll see if it develops some teeth.

5 of the Biggest Sweepstakes to Enter Every Year (And How)

Written By:   Author Thumbnail Geoff Fisk
Author Thumbnail Geoff Fisk
Geoff Fisk is a writer, analyst, and SEO specialist working in the U.S. iGaming industry. Geoff began his career as a sports journalist in Southern California, covering high school and college sports, as well as minor le...
Read Full Profile

Sweepstakes contests offer the opportunity to dream about life-changing amounts of money. The premise is simple – submit an entry and wait for the Publishers Clearing House “Prize Patrol” to show up at your house. 

Or (as in the case of the Starbucks for Life contest or the infamous McDonald’s Monopoly game), purchase items and try to uncover that rare game piece that grants you a big prize.

While the odds of nabbing millions of dollars in a sweepstakes are long, you can’t win if you don’t try. Here are the five biggest sweepstakes contests in the US that you can enter every year, which includes instructions on how to enter:

5. TLC Sweepstakes

TLC is a TV network that exists as a sister brand to HGTV and The Food Network and offers sweepstakes contests throughout the year, 

While the prizes awarded in TLC’s sweepstakes don’t quite stack up to the HGTV Dream Home Giveaway, the consistency of the contests earns a place on our list. The prizes awarded in the contests generally range from $5,000 to $10,000.

Those might not be life-changing sums, but you get many, many chances to win throughout the year. The current TLC sweepstakes, called the Holiday Central $5K Giveaway, runs through January 9, 2025.

You can enter the contest by visiting the TLC website or the Discovery website and navigating to the “Sweepstakes” link at either. The contest rules limit players to one entry per day.

The odds of winning the Holiday Central $5K Giveaway depend on the number of entrants, and TLC doesn’t really provide much more than that in terms of estimated odds. Good news though – you’ll find TLC contests running virtually year-round.

4. Starbucks For Life Sweepstakes

Does a lifetime supply of Starbucks coffee sound good to you? If so, then it’s time to get your entries in for the Starbucks for Life sweepstakes contest.

The grand prize of this contest is “Starbucks for Life,” which translates to one free standard menu beverage or food item per day for 30 years. Starbucks estimates the value of this grand prize at $70,518.

This contest is not a winner-take-all sweepstakes, as up to five grand prizes will be awarded. Lots of other prizes are up for grabs as well, including a $1,000 Delta gift card, a $500 Marriott Bonvoy gift card, and Starbucks Rewards stars.

The Starbucks for Life contest tasks players with collecting game pieces, which you get by purchasing items at Starbucks. You can also enter the sweepstakes without making a purchase by visiting the Starbucks for Life website.

This contest runs yearly through January 5, 2025. This sweepstakes will award more than 10 million prizes total, and while Starbucks doesn’t provide the exact chances of winning the grand prize, you can rest assured that the five big winners will be on the good end of some very unlikely odds.

3. Microsoft Rewards Presents: A Million Dollar Sweepstakes

We have good news and bad news regarding the Microsoft Rewards Presents: A Million Dollar Sweepstakes.

The good news – this is a real, legitimate sweepstakes contest with a $1 million grand prize on the line. The bad news – the deadline for entry is 11:59 pm Pacific Time on December 31, 2024, and that deadline is rapidly approaching.

This contest provides a couple of different ways to enter. The easiest way to get into the contest is by visiting the sweepstakes website’s home page, clicking the “claim your free entry” button and providing the requested details from there.

You can also submit five entries by redeeming 2,000 Microsoft Rewards points. Additionally, you can enter by mail by following the instructions located within the Official Rules of the contest (you can find a link to these rules near the bottom of the sweepstakes site homepage).

In addition to the million-dollar grand prize, this contest will also award 10 secondary prizes of $10,000 each. Two $10,000 prizes will go out in each of five jurisdictions (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Germany).

Microsoft states that the odds of winning the grand prize depend on the total number of entries for the contest. Keeping in mind that this sweepstakes isn’t just limited to the U.S., you can safely guess that those odds are astronomical.

2. Publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes

The legendary Publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes is perhaps the most famous sweepstakes contest in the U.S. 

This contest began in 1967, and you’ve very likely seen the commercials where the PCH “Prize Patrol” shows up at a winner’s house, giant seven-figure check in hand. The biggest prizes in the PCH Sweepstakes have included a $10 million prize and a “$5,000 a week for life” prize.

The Publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes is still going strong, and you still have a few weeks to get your entry in for the current edition of the contest. The current contest (aka “Giveaway No. 19990”) will award a grand prize of $1,250,000.

Unlike some of the other contests on our list, PCH provides the exact odds of winning the $1.25 million prize. If you want to claim this grand prize, you have a 1 in 6,750,000,000 chance of winning.

You can enter this long-running contest by visiting the PCH Sweepstakes website and filling out the entry form. You can submit one entry per day, and the deadline to enter is midnight on Feb. 26, 2025.

1. HGTV Dream Home Giveaway

The aptly named HGTV Dream Home Giveaway functions as an annual sweepstakes contest that awards a “dream home” as the grand prize. The location of the dream home changes from year to year, and the house itself is usually worth seven figures.

The winner of the 2025 HGTV Dream Home Giveaway gets a grand prize package that’s worth more than $2.2 million

This year’s dream home is located in the countryside of Bluffton, South Carolina. The three-bedroom, three-and-a-half-bathroom home spans more than 3,000 square feet and is described by interior designer Brian Patrick Flynn as “the perfect blend of Lowcountry elegance and modern comfort.”

HGTV began running this sweepstakes in 1997, and it’s become one of the most popular contests in the U.S. The 2025 edition of the Dream Home Giveaway began on Dec. 17, 2024, and runs through February 14, 2025.

You can submit up to two entries daily for the contest; one per day on the HGTV website and one per day on the Food Network website. The chances of winning the grand prize depend on how many total entries are submitted, but we estimate that the eventual winner will have to beat odds of around 150,000,000-to-1.

The grand prize package also includes $100,000 cash, a 2025 Mercedes Benz GLC, and a five-year supply of Vida paper towels.

The contest winner can also opt to take a $750,000 cash prize instead of the house.

What VGW’s Legal Win In Georgia Means For Sweepstakes Lawsuits Moving Forward

A federal judge in Georgia dismissed a class action lawsuit against VGW Holdings, a prominent sweepstakes casino operator, due to lack of jurisdiction.

A federal judge in Georgia issued a ruling this week that could have lasting ramifications in the quickly growing — and debate-stirring — US sweepstakes casino industry.

That judge sided with VGW Holdings, the world’s most prominent sweepstakes operator that owns sites like Chumba Casino and LuckyLand Slots, in a Georgia class action lawsuit where the plaintiffs wanted to recover gambling losses from VGW sites over the past four years.

The verdict? The US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia dismissed the lawsuit due to a lack of jurisdiction. In other words: There isn’t enough about VGW that concretely and directly ties it to Georgia (other than two remote employees living there) for VGW to be reasonably seen as “transacting business” in Georgia. Thus, a Georgia court does not have the proper jurisdiction to decide whether VGW sites’ sweepstakes models of gaming duped Georgia residents into gambling away their earnings.

“While the Defendants casino gaming websites were certainly accessible by Georgia users and the Defendants accepted payments from Georgia users in order to play the games,” the ruling read, “the Court finds this limited interaction, without more, insufficient to satisfy the transacting business prong in O.C.G.A § 9-10-91(1).

So, what does this win for VGW mean for sweepstakes operators moving forward?

‘Procedural challenges every step of the way’

First of all, we all know how much US courts love their precedents. Heck, this country’s whole judicial system is built with a backbone of following precedents. Did this court from back in the day hear a similar case?? OK what the heck did they do?

And this VGW victory sets a major precedent for the many lawsuits facing sweepstakes operators right now.

That precedent: If the operator is not physically based in a state, or you can’t make a reasonable argument it has a legitimate retail presence in that state, it’s going to be hard for residents of that state to sue for a gaming structure that they believe cheated them of their money — especially if the plaintiffs can’t prove the sweepstakes site performed any targeted advertising in their state, which the Georgia court ruled VGW did not do in Georgia

In a LinkedIn post discussing this verdict, Daniel Wallach, a US gaming law and sports betting attorney, said VGW’s win in Georgia is indicative of the long road any of these sweepstakes lawsuits have toward reaching any meaningful or needle-moving resolution.

“From arbitration clauses to jurisdictional defenses, there are procedural challenges every step of the way,” Wallach wrote. “And those cases that do survive the gauntlet will either take years to litigate or inevitably get settled (see Kentucky). VGW will not want to risk going to trial, where the possibility of an adverse judgment could have national impacts.”

Wallach wrote that he believes the only sweepstakes lawsuits that will actually lead to decisions regarding the legality of these sites’ Sweeps Coins/Gold Coins two-currency gaming structure — in which Sweeps Coins can be redeemed for real money — will have to stem from lawmaking bodies and organizations, not from private citizens banding together for a class action bid.

“The cases that will ultimately decide the legality of the ‘dual-currency’ sweepstakes model — if it ever gets decided — will be those instituted by governmental bodies, such as State AGs and gaming regulatory agencies,” Wallach wrote, “and likely only after a cease-and-desist order that goes unheeded. Coming in 2025.”

Could VGW win in Georgia have immediate impact in other states?

VGW is currently facing lawsuits in Tennessee, New York, California, Mississippi, and Connecticut.

All the cases are quite similar — in almost every way — to the Georgia case.

And as Wallach alluded to, VGW recently settled a class action lawsuit in Kentucky for around $11 million at the end of 2022.

These types of lawsuits center around the legality of the sweepstakes gaming model. Sweepstakes sites let players play with two forms of digital currency. One kind, often called Gold Coins, has no real-world value. The other kind, often called Sweeps Coins, can be redeemed for real money. Players can purchase Gold Coin packages that come with Sweeps Coins, but the sites try to clearly communicate the actual purchase is only for the in-game-currency Gold Coins.

There are all types of sweepstakes sites, from online casinos to online poker to even online sports betting, where Fliff leads the market.

VGW’s victory in Georgia now sets a precedent that will make lawsuits against these sweeps operators even more unlikely to reach any meaningful resolution other than a settlement or a dismissal. In other words: Don’t expect these class action lawsuits to actually change the laws of the sweepstakes gaming industry.

Or, as Wallach wrote:

“This case exemplifies how difficult it is for private civil litigation to serve as the vehicle for testing the legality of the sweepstakes casino business model.”