The Creatively Different Blind competition - result and stats

Thank you to everyone who entered the competition I ran to win a £300 roller blind  - it closed at midnight (-ish...... I'm never quite certain about finishing times where rafflecopter is involved!) and the winner was drawn this morning. So a huge round of applause to

Yvonne Brownsea

who is going to be able to add a touch of really novel and individual style to one room in her home.

However, Yvonne wasn't actually the first person picked. The first name out of the hat was checked against the list of people signed up to the Creatively Different newsletter - and hadn't signed up. Signing up was one of the rules of the competition, and the first entry option, without which the other options would not unlock. The original winner had ticked the box to say they had signed up - yet they hadn't done it.

So another winner was drawn. This time, we didn't even get as far as checking  whether they had signed up to the newsletter. The entry was supposedly a Twitter one - but they had NOT pasted the URL of the tweet into the space, so it was impossible to check they had entered.

The third name out of the hat was Yvonne. Yvonne had done everything exactly as she had said she had, so her entry was completely valid and we are delighted to be able to award her the prize.

Now here are some facts and figures - they surprised me and made me realise why some people say "I never win anything".

Because of the points awarded to different entry methods, there were a total of 5107 entries, representing 1436 separate entries from just over 400 unique people.

HOWEVER of those 400, all of whom were required by both the Rafflecopter widget and the rules to sign up to the newsletter or already be signed up. only 120 actually did sign up. THAT MEANS 280 PEOPLE SAID THEY HAD SIGNED UP WHEN THEY DIDN'T. Do you really think that promoters don't check? Of course they do!

160 people said they had left a blog post comment - but only 141 comments were actually left. 19 PEOPLE SAID THEY HAD COMMENTED WHEN THEY HADN'T.

Just over 400 entries claimed to have tweeted - but only 360 had pasted the URL of the tweet into the box (not counting the few who had had problems copying and pasting on a mobile and told me - I excused them). Of those who didn't paste in the URL of the tweet, some just pasted the text of the tweet or the URL of the competition and some gave their Twitter names. None of those counts - it MUST be the URL of the tweet, otherwise your entry can't be verified. If you don't know how to give the URL of  a tweet, check my guide. But what really mystified us were the "alternative" uses of the space for the URL..... some were left blank, or said things like "nice prize" or "hope I'm lucky" and the one that puzzled us most of all said "225".

I don't have access to the Creatively Different Twitter or Facebook profiles, but I imagine similar non-entries were made using those entry routes too. So overall, around a quarter of the entries were disqualified. The same sort of figure that crops up over and over again in all kinds of competitions run by all kinds of people.

I've said this time and time again, and I'm sorry to bang on about it but if you ever want to win anything, it is vital that you read the instructions and the rules and follow them to the letter.  Promoters DO check, and they DO disqualify, and if you are not entering correctly you could spend 24 hours a day, 7 days a week entering competitions and never win a thing.

On the other hand, if,  like Yvonne, you ARE entering correctly, it might cheer you up to know that in almost every competition, a quarter of the people you think you are up against will be disqualified!

And if you are wondering whether I practice (or should it be practise? I hate that pesky word!) what i preach, I've had five wins so far today so I must be doing something right!