Onto the topic, I think yes it would be good to see the house edge a bit lower and people would be more interested, if you can get everything with just a 3% edge then that's even better than the 5%.
That's 40% reduction in income. That would mean a 40% reduction in spending. That would mean we were just like all the other sites.
But when your chef quits you have to change the way you run things to keep up your reputation 
.
I apologise for touching some sort of soft spot here but clearly, reducing the house edge to 3% would make it a greater site to play on and also mean you'd giveaway more lottery tickets, meaning, if people buy them, you go in profit if they try and get the same percentage each round or something.
. I apologise for touching some sort of soft spot here but clearly, reducing the house edge to 3% would make it a greater site to play on and also mean you'd giveaway more lottery tickets, meaning, if people buy them, you go in profit if they try and get the same percentage each round or something.
He hasn't quit, he's taken on extra help as his business model works so well it is now too much work for him alone.
Nope, you will not be like all the other sites, you will be in a better position to be competitive with them. A 1% reduction will already place you in a better position to compete with other gambling sites. When you changed the business model from a faucet site to a gambling site, you effectively changed the original concept and the original goal for this site.
When you were mostly a faucet, you had to subsidize the faucet payouts with the gambling income, but now you are re-defining yourself as a gambling site and that changes your target market. Gamblers wants a low house edge and a fun experience.
. 
This will mean the Lottery Jackpot will be much higher, if everyone just use that refund to buy tickets again. 
this is the second time this month 
