LAST EDITED ON May-26-16 AT 11:21PM (MST)[p]Maybe I'm too cautious, because this looks a lot like a game of chance to me.
Your betting you'll draw before you invest the current outfitter/guide fees, the "house' is betting you won't. The "house" is betting you'll get invested for a couple or three years, then feel the need to keep investing, to protect you previous investment, and eventually pay in more than they generally charge to outfit and guide you. On the front end, the "house" carries most of the risk, but once you've tied up a few years membership his risk starts to decline and yours goes up. The "house" really does well if you come on hard times, die, get injured, or get discouraged.
I'd just start poking $350 a year in an Roth IRA and keep applying, every where, then borrow from my IRA when it gets large enough and I get my draw of a lifetime, and I'm not limited to one outfitter and what he has to offer. But, the "house" knows a lot of us are gamblers, so it might work for them, as point creep continues to improve their odds that members won't draw anytime soon.
I'd guess they'll eventually build in a "graduated reduced" pay out for people who start out with high point totals. Like a three day hunt or a reduced priced fee hunt. Because, in the end the "house" goes broke if it goes takes in less that it pays out. Will the State eventually tax the "game" like they do casinos and if you draw a tag, and win the outfitted/guided services, do you get a 1099 (so the outfitter can claim it as business expense) from the outfitter and have to pay income taxes on the market value of your winnings?
I have no problem with it, as long as it's legal and folks are not deceived about how the "bet/win/loose" works. And......it doesn't look like anyone is being deceived. I'm not much of a gambler but then I do apply for State tags every year and that's getting to be a pretty high odds raffle.
Think I'll stick to Blackjack but to each his own.
DC