Yes, lump sum is usually the better choice. In part because you have to live past the break even point to win. And not counting the interest you make on the lump sum in the meanwhile.
Of course the experts making the offer take all that into consideration. Based on typical life expectancy and current interest rates they try to make equivalent offers.
But you can usually do better with the lump sum because the interest rate they use is usually for conservative investment grade bonds. Most investors can do better than that.
Provided you don’t blow it, most of the lump sum can be used to invest instead of just spend. Capital formation.
Interest seldom beats inflation, not the best way to invest when you are starting out. It works OK when you are filthy rich.
Invariably you need to live below your means to grow and stay rich.
This is a good point. I wonder if lump sum works in places where there is essentially a very small segment of mid luxury goods, so you are much less tempted to blow it on something shiny. Maybe in places where there are tons of mid luxury goods staring you in the face each day, you would be much more tempted to blow it (aka YOLO).
I will guarantee if there is a perceived LACK of mid-luxury goods, more of them SHALL be created/provided to try to get your money. As the saying goes: There is no underestimating the gullibility of a well-off customer with money to burn.
That’s also true. It might be one reason why an experiment of a few hundred or a few thousand people will have different results than an experiment with “everyone”.