Running winner-based promotions is a great way to drive engagement, grow your audience, and reward loyal users. However, one challenge might be repeated winners. This can occasionally occur. We notice this on our RandomPicker platform from time to time, even in large drawings with lower chances of winning – this is how randomness work.
Should past winners be excluded from future promotions? Or is it better to keep the playing field open?
The core concern is trust and engagement. Promotions lose value if people believe the same person always wins, or if others feel they never have a chance. At the same time, excluding loyal or high-value participants can backfire by alienating your most engaged audience. So, how do you navigate to find the right approach; or perhaps a balance?
Why you might want to exclude past winners
🎯 Higher perceived fairness
When the same people keep winning, others might think the contest isn’t truly random or that it’s rigged. This can make them lose trust in your brand.
🎉 More winners, more happiness
Excluding past winners means more different people get to experience the joy of winning. This can lead to more positive buzz about your brand.
🧲 Encourages new people to join
Knowing that past winners can’t win again might encourage new participants who feel they have a better chance with a level playing field.
🚀 Focus on new customers
If you want to attract new leads, giving prizes to new people makes more sense.
Why you might NOT want to exclude past winners
🏆 May discourage loyal fans
People who enter every contest are often your biggest fans. Excluding them might feel like you’re punishing their loyalty.
📉 Could lower participation
If your past winners are very active, excluding them could mean fewer people enter overall.
🎲 That’s how randomness works
Sometimes, the same person wins by chance, especially in smaller contests. Excluding them goes against the idea of a truly random draw.
💰 Good for fundraising
If you’re raising money, you want to encourage everyone to donate, even past winners who might donate again for another chance to win.
How excluding winners affects participation
Excluding might lower participation in the very next contest from loyal past winners, but it can increase participation in the long run as more people feel they have a fair shot.
Including keeps your loyal fans happy, but it might discourage others who feel their chances are slim if the same names keep popping up.
When is excluding past winners a good idea?
- Big prizes: for expensive or highly desired prizes, fairness is super important. Excluding past winners helps keep trust high.
- Getting new leads: if your main goal is to get new email addresses or followers, focus the prizes on new people.
- Reaching inactive customers: if you want to get people who haven’t engaged in a while interested again, exclude past winners to give them a reason to participate.
- Lots of repeat winners: if you notice the same people winning several times, even if it’s random, excluding them can prevent people from getting suspicious.
- Publicly important contests: for contests where fairness is key to your reputation (like big brand giveaways), it’s often best to exclude past winners.
When is including past winners better?
- Fundraising: you want to encourage everyone to donate, so don’t exclude past winners who might donate again.
- Rewarding loyal customers: if the contest is specifically for loyal customers, it’s okay to let past winners participate.
- Small, frequent giveaways: for small, regular prizes, it’s less of a big deal if someone wins again. The focus is just on keeping people engaged.
- Very few participants: if not many people enter, excluding past winners might leave you with very few eligible people.
- Just for fun engagement: if the main goal is to get people talking and interacting (like a quick social media contest), and the prize isn’t a huge deal, it’s less important to exclude past winners.
Hybrid approach: cooldown periods
If you hesitate between excluding and including, there’s a balanced third approach – a temporary exclusion period is also known as a winner cooldown. Instead of blocking past winners forever, exclude them for a certain time or for a set number of future contests. You can apply different rules for different prizes. This can balance fairness with keeping your loyal fans engaged in the long run.
You have to decide how long the cooldown period should be. Not too short and not too long. It also depends on the frequency of your promotions. For example, if you run contests every month, a winner might be excluded from the next 3 or 6 months.
If you feel that the complete cooldown period is too strict and can negatively influence the engagement or loyalty, you can limit only winners of big prizes and still keep the possibility to win smaller prizes.
There are other possibilities for how to soften the winner exclusion, for example to win only twice or three times a year.
Tips for implementation
- Keep track of winners: have a system to easily see who has won in the past and when.
- Clear terms: make sure the rules about past winners are easy to find and understand in your contest terms and conditions. Have a section in your FAQs where people can find answers to common questions, including the rules for past winners.
- Communicate positively: “We’re giving others a chance to win this round!”
- Use the copy feature of RandomPicker.com – it helps you automatically exclude the winner(s) of the previous drawing.
- Use automated systems (e.g. tagging in CRM) to track winners.
- Watch and learn: track participation and see how your exclusion rules affect how many people enter your contests and what people are saying about the fairness of your contests.
- Be flexible and don’t be afraid to change your rules if they aren’t working well.
In short, deciding whether to exclude past winners is a balancing act. Think about what you want to achieve with your contest, who your audience is, and how your decision might affect trust and participation. Using time limits or waves to exclude winners can be a smart way to keep things fair while still rewarding your loyal fans over time.
Let us know about your experience with repeated winners and what is your preferred approach.
