System for investing in and dispersing funds from a financial institution

Field of the Invention

The invention relates to a system and method for investing in and dispersing funds from financial institution(s). More particularly, the invention relates to a system and method for investment that is attractive to both the investor and the financial institution offering the investment opportunity. Examples of a financial institution to which this invention relates and which are included within the meaning of financial institution as defined below, include a bank, a savings society, a building society, an insurance company, any borrower of equivalent or greater or sufficient standing, such as a Government issuer, a city council or local body issuer, or a sufficiently rated or credit worthy business corporation or business enterprise.

Background of Invention

A problem with existing methods of investments for small or retail depositors/investors arises, particularly due to the low interest rates. Either the depositors' earnings from current interest rates are insufficient to contribute in any meaningful way to their general living or operating expenses, so they continually bleed capital, or the earnings are just insignificant to them. Also, with the low interest rates, there is some reluctance by depositors to commit funds for a long term to a financial institution.

On the other hand, borrowers such as financial institutions (inclusive of those entities described above) would like to be able to offer an attractive investment opportunity to investors, to encourage investors to make their investments on a longer term basis, even when interest rates are low. This invention will also assists financial institutions with their own financial stability, especially when most financial institutions have to make their own investments or lending on a long term basis, in circumstances where they have a depositor base that is predominately making deposits with them that are very much on a shorter term basis. In this current environment, most retail depositors would take a risk of investing longer term for the chance of higher returns, but are extremely wary of risking or losing their capital. Besides the low interest rate environment that generally exists in many of the world's major economies, another reason that the existing investment methods for longer term investments are unattractive is the lack of motivation in investing, particularly for young or fresh investors. As most financial institutions fail to offer investment opportunities that bring fun and excitement to an investment, people tend to be attracted towards other alternatives such as the share market, or much riskier undertakings such as lotteries, casinos etc. Even though these later alternatives may bring fun and excitement, in the case of lotteries and casinos, they can often bring a negative impact in the society.

Prior References:

All references, including any patents or patent applications cited in this specification are hereby incorporated by reference. No admission is made that any reference constitutes prior art. The discussion of the references states what their authors assert, and the applicants reserve the right to challenge the accuracy and pertinency of the cited documents. It will be clearly understood that, although a number of prior art publications may be referred to herein; this reference does not constitute an admission that any of these documents form part of the common general knowledge in the art, in New Zealand or in any other country.

Definitions and Meanings:

It is acknowledged that the term 'comprise' may, under varying jurisdictions, be attributed with either an exclusive or an inclusive meaning. For the purpose of this specification, and unless otherwise noted, the term 'comprise' shall have an inclusive meaning - i.e. that it will be taken to mean an inclusion of not only the listed components it directly references, but also other non-specified components or elements. This rationale will also be used when the term 'comprised' or 'comprising' is used in relation to one or more steps in a method or process. The term "financial institution" in this patent specification is to be given a wide meaning. It means any borrower of sufficient capacity, stature and/or credit worthiness that can raise deposits and investments from the public or other investors. Such borrowers that may have sufficient capacity, stature and credit worthiness will include a bank, a savings society, a building society, an insurance company, or any borrower of equivalent or greater or sufficient standing, such as any Government issuer, any city council or local body issuer, or any sufficiently rated or credit worthy business corporation or business enterprise. The term "range of numbers" means a defined group of numbers whether sequential or not, and are often referred to in this specification as the n numbers.

The terms used when describing a depositor "choosing", "selecting", "picking" and/or "nominating" one or more numbers from a range of numbers, have similar meaning and for the purpose of this specification, are to also include the one or more numbers being selected or generated by any random method.

Unless otherwise stated, the term "deposit" and "depositor" have the same number value in that 1 deposit equals 1 depositor.

The term "Ranking List" or "ranking list" in this specification means the ranking of some or all of the numbers from the range of numbers, from a 1 ^st ranked, a 2 ^nd ranked and so on, based on set criteria, or based on a random draw, to form a Ranking List, which is of sufficient size and length to then be used in the relevant process to determine the required outcomes, including determining the winner or winners from among depositors' in a Bank 'Term Multi".

The term "fixed term interest rate offering" in this specification means an offering by a financial institution for deposits of a fixed term, where the returns to the depositors are of a set amount in respect of depositors receiving a fixed or floating interest rate return over the term of the investment, with the returns for the depositors set at, or about, or with close proximity to the prevailing market interest rates and terms for 'like fixed term interest rate deposits'. The term "number" is an example of a symbol and where the word "number" or "numbers" is used in this specification it is intended to cover any series of symbols able to be

distinguished one from another.

Object of the Invention

It is an object of the invention to provide an attractive method and system for investment by investors on the one hand, and additionally as the case may be, by financial institutional borrowers on the other, whereby the invention ameliorates some of the disadvantages and limitations of the known art, or at least provides the public with a useful choice.

Summary of Invention

In a first aspect the invention resides in a method for depositors investing in and receiving disbursements of funds from a financial institution(s), wherein the depositors are invited to nominate at least one number from a choice from at least one defined range of n numbers

(whether sequential or not) and to register their nomination with a computer system, wherein the method comprises the steps of: recording by a computer system at least an identity or contact details of each depositor, the amount deposited by each depositor, the number or numbers nominated by each depositor, the date and/or time of entry; and

implementing by a computer system a fund dispersal stage mechanism for each depositor in fund dispersal stages, the fund dispersal stage mechanism being such that there are predefined number of fund dispersal stages between 1 and y, where y is a maximum number of fund dispersal stages, and

only a variable but pre-defined number of depositors are selected to a further fund dispersal stage(s) on a basis of their nominated number or numbers meeting a criterion specified for each fund dispersal stage; wherein:

• each depositor(s) who are selected to the further fund dispersal stage(s) will receive either a fixed amount or benefit, or an equally divided share of the fixed amount or benefit, as a pay out, and • the fund dispersal stage mechanism applicable for the relevant depositor(s) in the relevant fund dispersal stage continues until y* fund dispersal stage, where the y* fund dispersal stage is the final fund dispersal stage.

In a further aspect, the invention provides a method for investing in and dispersing funds from financial institution(s) wherein depositors are invited to select two or more numbers from a defined available range of numbers from one to n, and have their selection(s) recorded by the computer system associated with the financial institution, with that computer system being capable of recording at least the numbers selected by each depositor, including how many times each number in the available number range from one to n was selected by each depositor, to provide a ranking list of the number of times each number in the range of one to n was selected, the ranking being determined either by the number of times each number is selected by the relevant depositors, with the order of ranking of each number in the ranking list from first to n being determined by firstly, that number that is least chosen being ranked first, secondly, that number that is second least chosen is ranked second and subsequently continuing the order of ranking in like manner, or alternatively that number that is most chosen is ranked first, that number that is second most chosen is ranked second and subsequently continuing the order of ranking in like manner, and wherein after a defined time has expired a winning sole depositor or depositors is or are selected, the winner or winners being determined by comparing the number or numbers selected by all or at least some of the depositors in a relevant offering made by a financial institution against the ranking of the numbers as set out in the ranking list to make the desired eliminations, by comparing one or more of the numbers chosen by each depositor in a relevant offering against the ranking list of the numbers for that relevant offering.

In a further aspect, the invention provides a method wherein the step of comparing one or more of the numbers chosen by depositors in a relevant offering against the ranking list of the numbers for that relevant offering comprises the step of progressively eliminating those relevant deposits or depositors that have a relevant number or numbers ranked lower, or alternatively higher, on the ranking list than the number or numbers chosen by other depositors in the relevant offering, until a winning depositor or winning depositors is or are found. In a still further aspect, the invention provides a method in which depositors are invited to select one or more numbers from a defined available range of numbers between one and n, and where a ranking value for each of the numbers in the defined available range of numbers from one to n is determined based on their order of draw from a random draw of some or all of the numbers in the available range, the random order of draw then determining a ranking list of the numbers from first to n with the order of the numbers in the ranking list being determined by reference to the order in which the numbers become randomly drawn, and using the resulting ranking list to eliminate deposits from time to time from participating and to determine one or more winning depositors and where the winning depositor or winning depositors of the relevant offering can be determined by comparing the entries of all or at least some of the depositors in the relevant offering against the ranking of the numbers as set out in the ranking list to achieve the desired eliminations, in particular, by comparing one or more of the numbers chosen by each of the depositors against the ranking list of the numbers.

Preferably, the step of comparing one or more of the numbers chosen by each deposit or depositor against the ranking list of the numbers comprises the step of progressively eliminating those relevant deposits or depositors that have a relevant number or numbers ranked lower, or alternatively higher, on the ranking list than the number or numbers chosen by other depositors until a winning depositor or winning depositors is or are found.

Preferably, the steps and/or methods outlined above result in each of the depositors in a relevant offering being assigned a ranking as amongst the depositors in the relevant offering, from a first ranking to a last ranking.

Preferably, the variable but pre-defined number of depositors that qualify to further fund dispersal stage(s) are the ones who nominated the numbers that are least nominated by the other depositors.

Preferably, the fixed amount or benefit, or the equally divided share of the fixed amount or benefit, paid out to the relevant depositor(s), increases with the progression of fund dispersal stage(s). Preferably, in some operations of the method of the invention, the size of the defined range of numbers decreases with the progression of fund dispersal stage(s). Preferably, the nomination of numbers for each fund dispersal stage must be made when making the deposit.

Preferably, the equally divided share is paid out only if multiple depositors are qualified for each fund dispersal stage(s).

Preferably, each of the depositors is allowed to make more than one deposit, up to a fixed number of deposits, within each offering by a financial institution.

Preferably, offerings by a financial institution are made on the same structured basis as other offerings of the same type or class.

Preferably, each depositor making more than one deposit, up to the fixed number of deposits (the maximum) within each offering by a financial institution, comprises a small percentage of the relevant offering, preferably less than 10%.

Preferably, the pay out at each fund dispersal stage is made by a separate entity, which is different from the financial institution offering the investment.

Preferably, the separate entity is an insurer.

In a still further aspect, the invention provides a method where offerings by a financial institution can be structured so that in respect of a relevant offering, the financial institution can pay out or cause to be paid out to its depositors, amounts attributable to a relevant offering that are substantially greater than what would otherwise be payable under alternative and comparable fixed interest rate offerings for like periods, but at the same time, and while being able to perform the foregoing, the financial institution does not bear the burden of the substantially greater payment and instead always pays out an amount that equates to its cost of borrowings that are less than (or alternatively not materially greater than) what would otherwise be paid by the financial institution in respect of an alternative and/or comparable fixed interest rate offering for a like period.

Preferably, the method to achieve the foregoing involves using insurance or other methods of underwriting an amount to be paid out to one or more depositors that correctly select two or more numbers from a range of numbers, that match a selected set of numbers from that range of numbers, with the selected set of numbers being determined by reference to the ranking list described previously, or the selected numbers being selected by random draw. Preferably, the total insurance premium or underwriting fee to be paid or allocated against the amount that may become payable pursuant to the insured or underwritten event, is a premium or fee that is less than 30% of the relevant amount that may be paid out upon the occurrence of the relevant event/s. Preferably, the premium or fee is less than 10% of the relevant amount that may be paid out upon the occurrence of the relevant event/s.

Preferably, the odds that the relevant amount/s that may be paid out in respect of an offering upon the occurrence of the relevant event, is/are odds of between:

• 1 in (3 x the total number of chances that all deposits have in a relevant offering ÷ by the number of deposits in the relevant offering), and

• 1 in (10,000 x the total number of chances that all deposits have in a relevant offering ÷ by the number of deposits in the relevant offering).

Preferably, the odds that the relevant amount/s that may be paid out upon the occurrence of the relevant event, is/are odds of between: In other aspects of the invention herein described the system provides for investment in a financial institution by depositors, wherein the system comprises: accepting, by a deposit accepter, the fund into a deposit forming part of an original deposit fund amount on offer from a financial institution;

associating, by a deposit associator, at least one number with each deposit, wherein at least one number is/are from at least one specified number range(s);

collating, by a deposit number collator, at least one number with a fund dispersal stage; choosing, by a fund dispersal stage chooser, depositor(s) for that fund dispersal stage using a fund dispersal stage choice mechanism;

dispersing, by a fund dispersal system, a specified fund amount to each of the depositor(s) who were chosen by the fund dispersal stage choice mechanism; and

dispersing, by a fund closure system, to all depositors their respective original deposit amount.

Preferably for each deposit, at least one number associated with that deposit is chosen by the depositor. Preferably, the criterion relates to choosing the number from the specified number range which has the fewer deposits associated with it.

Preferably, the fund dispersal stages are sequential and that each sequential fund dispersal stages have fewer numbers of depositors allowable.

Preferably, the depositor(s) who were allocated funds in the previous fund dispersal stage are eligible to be chosen in a later fund dispersal stage(s).

Also, in other aspects of the invention herein described provides an investment facilitator for use in a financial institution, wherein the investment facilitator comprises: a deposit accepter for accepting funds into a deposit forming part of an original deposit fund amount on offer from a financial institution; a deposit associator for associating one or more numbers nominated by each depositor from one or more specified number ranges, with the deposit;

a deposit fund staging system for acting to move the deposit fund from an initial fund deposition stage through one or more partial fund dispersion stages to a final deposit fund closure stage;

a deposit fund number collator for acting to collate the numbers from each depositor and associate each with a fund dispersal stage;

a fund dispersal stage chooser for using a fund dispersal stage choice mechanism;

a fund dispersal system for dispersing to the depositor(s) who were chosen by the fund dispersal stage choice mechanism a specified fund amount;

a fund closure system for dispersing to the depositors their respective original deposit amount; wherein: the fund dispersal stage chooser chooses from the collated numbers at least one number meeting a criterion specified for each fund dispersal stage. Preferably, the one or more numbers associated with that deposit is chosen by the depositor.

Preferably, the criterion relates to choosing the number which has the fewer deposits associated with it. Preferably, the fund dispersal stages are sequential and that each sequential fund dispersal stages have fewer numbers of depositors allowable.

Preferably, the depositor(s) who were allocated funds in the previous fund dispersal stage are eligible to be chosen in a later fund dispersal stage(s).

In a still further aspect the invention consists in a ranking engine for a computerised investment opportunity in a financial institution, which investment has at least a winning deposit and which allows the financial institution to guarantee a winning or joint winning deposit or a final pool of entries from which a winning or joint winning deposit is found, and wherein in the case of joint winning depositors the number of joint winning deposits is less than ten;

the financial institution receiving a plurality of deposits, each deposit including two or more symbols selected from one or more sets of symbols;

the ranking engine comprising one or more computers;

the computer or computers;

recording the symbols selected in or on each deposit and optionally recording at least the identity or contact details associated with each deposit, and

ranking and recording the ranking of at least two of the symbols chosen in or on each deposit, in order to rank the entries until,

the winning deposit, or

the joint winning deposit, or

the final pool of deposits is selected from which a winning or joint winning deposit, is found;

and wherein the investment opportunity has a predefined close off time and/or date.

In a still further aspect the invention consists in a computer program for conducting a computerised investment opportunity having at least a winning deposit and which allows the financial institution to guarantee a winning deposit or joint winning deposit or a final pool of deposits from which a winning or joint winning deposit is found, and wherein in the case of joint winning deposits the number of joint winning deposits is less than ten;

the financial institution receiving a plurality of deposits, each deposit including two or more symbols selected from one or more sets of symbols;

the financial institution using a ranking engine;

the ranking engine comprising one or more computers;

the computer or computers;

recording the symbols selected in or on each deposit and optionally recording at least the identity or contact details associated with each deposit, and

ranking and recording the ranking of at least two of the symbols chosen in or on each deposit, in order to rank the deposits until,

the winning deposit, or the joint winning deposits, or

the final pool of deposits is selected from which a winning deposit or joint winning deposit,

is found;

and wherein the investment opportunity has a predefined close off time and/or date.

Preferably the program is adapted to record the entry point to the financial institution through or in which a depositor made the deposit and to record other information chosen from the group comprising (a) an identity of a financial institution, (b) a financial sub-type, and (c) a country or area; to enable the program to select a winning deposit for one or more of those entry points to the financial opportunity.

In a still further aspect the invention consists in a method of conducting a financial opportunity having at least a winning deposit and which allows the a financial institution offering the financial opportunity to guarantee a winning or joint winning deposit, or a final pool of deposits from which a winning or joint winning deposit is found, and wherein in the case of joint winning deposits the number of joint winning deposits is less than ten;

the financial institution receiving a plurality of deposits, each deposit including two or more symbols selected from one or more sets of symbols;

the financial institution using a ranking engine;

the ranking engine comprising one or more computers;

the computer or computers;

recording the symbols selected in or on each deposit and optionally recording at least the identity or contact details associated with each deposit, and

ranking and recording the ranking of at least two of the symbols chosen in or on each deposit, in order to rank the deposits until,

the winning deposit, or

the joint winning deposit, or

the final pool of deposits is selected from which a winning deposit or joint winning deposit, is found;

and wherein the lottery has a predefined close off time and/or date. Preferably the results of the financial opportunity are displayed/broadcast in the form of a software or computer driven simulation, the end result of which is based on the ranking of the symbols.

Brief Description

The invention will now be described, by way of example only, by reference to the accompanying drawings: Figure 1 shows a flowchart of various fund dispersal stages in accordance with Example 1 of the invention.

Figure 2 shows a method relating to how ties between n numbers can be resolved, in order to achieve a unique ranking of each n number in a ranking list of the n numbers.

{Note: that if the ranking list of all the n numbers was determined by a random draw of all the n numbers, then there would be no ties, and the method described in Figure 2 would be inoperative).

Figure 3a - 3n shows, by way of a series of computer printouts, a method of processing by computer the results for an offering by a financial institution involving 5,000 depositors where those depositors select 6 different numbers from a range of 10 n numbers. These computer print-outs record at: Figure 3a, the determination of the Ranking List; Figure 3i - 3n, the depositors' 6 chosen numbers (as the number selected and show by selective demonstration, the ranking of the depositors relevant to each other - that is, each depositor is ranked from first to last based on the depositors' 6 number choices, compared against the Ranking List and against each depositor. Figure 3 is relevant to the examples set out in Examples 3-5 below.

Figure 4a - 4f repeats Figure 3i-n. Its only difference is that the computer print-outs record at Figure 4a - 4f the depositors' 6 chosen numbers (by ordinal number, as determined by the Ranking List comprised of the 10 n numbers). Like Figure 3i - 3n, Figure 4a - 4f shows by the same selective demonstration, the ranking of the depositors relevant to each other - that is each depositor is ranked from first to last based on the depositors' 6 number choices and this is shown in ordinal form. Figure 4 is relevant to the examples set out in Examples 3-5 below. Figure 5 shows a flowchart of various fund dispersal stages in accordance with Figure 3a-n. This flow chart is relevant to Examples 3-5 of the invention.

Figure 6a - d contains the calculations of the odds associated with picking a series of numbers (known as the "r" numbers) from a larger number range (known as the "n" numbers) and the associated mathematical formulas.

• Figure 6a - is the odds of picking the r numbers in order.

• Figure 6b - is the mathematical calculation for Figure 6a.

• Figure 6c - is the odds of picking the r numbers in any order.

• Figure 6d - is the mathematical calculation for Figure 6c.

Description of the Preferred Embodiment(s):

The following descriptions will describe the invention in relation to five examples. The invention is in no way limited to the examples as they are purely to exemplify the invention only and that possible variations and modifications would be readily apparent without departing from the scope of the invention.

EXAMPLES OF THE INVENTION

Example Description

Number

EXAMPLE 1

1.0 Depositors' Select 4 numbers - one number from each of a range of four sets of n numbers

1.1 The Bank's Position

1.2 The Bank's Cost of Funds The Insurance Policy

Key Life Insurance Terms

Depositors' Opportunity for Higher Returns

Table 1 - Overview of Numbers Nominated bv Depositors

The $5,000 Depositor's Position

How the Opportunity for Higher Return Works

Table 2 - Summary of Higher Return Opportunity

Payments to Depositors by Insurer

Depositor Interaction

Changing Market Interest Rates - each subsequent offering

Consistency of the Profile of the Bank "Term Multi"

Key Life Insurance Terms

Funds Dispersal Flow Chart

How the Opportunity for Higher Return Works

Determining the Successful Deposits at the Relevant Stages

Market Interest Rates from 3% to 7% p.a.

Table 3 - Overview of Bank and Depositor Positions based on Varving Market Interest Rates

EXAMPLE 2

Payment to Depositors' Determined Randomly

EXAMPLE 3

Depositors' Select 6 numbers out of 10

- Ranking List determined by 'least picked' method

The Bank's Position

The Bank's Cost of Funds

The Insurance Policy Key Life Insurance Terms

Depositors' Opportunity for Higher Returns

Ordinal numbers make ranking of all depositors clearer

Fall-back position - Ties involving two or more winning depositors

Odds for a Depositor of Winning a Monetary Prize

Identification of the 'Top 10' Depositors

Table 4 - Overview of Elimination of Depositors

The $5,000 Depositor's Position

How the Opportunity for Higher Return Works

Table 5 - Summarv of Higher Return Opportunity

Clear Parameters so Eliminations Operate Without Extremes

Payments to Depositors by Insurer

Depositor Interaction

Changing Market Interest Rates - each subsequent offering

Consistency of the Profile of the Bank "Term Multi"

Key Life Insurance Terms

Funds Dispersal Flow Chart

How the Opportunity for Higher Return Works

Alternative Ranking and Elimination Method

Market Interest Rates from 3% to 7% p.a.

Table 6 - Overview of Bank and Depositor Positions based on Varying Market Interest Rates

EXAMPLE 4 Depositors' Select 6 numbers out of 10

- Ranking List determined by 'random' method

Ranking of 10 n numbers by random draw

Clear Parameters so Eliminations Operate Without Extremes

EXAMPLE 5

Depositors' Select 6 numbers out of 10

- Examples 3 & 4, but with Extra Payment Feature

The Extra Payment Feature

Benefits of the Extra Payment Feature

The "New Ranking List"

Matching the Depositor's numbers against the "New Ranking List"

Table 7 - Example of Depositor matching the first 6 numbers on the "New Ranking List"

Size of the Extra Payment/s

Numerous Options for the Extra Payment Feature

The Odds

Extra Payment Feature can be Insured by 3 ^rd Parties

Cost of the Insurance

Table 8 - Cost of Insurance per deposit/entry and per offering

A Further Key Benefit/ Advantage

Numerous Multiple Extra Payment Options

Table 9 - Example A: Two Extra Payment Offerings

Table 10 - Example B: Three Extra Payment Offerings

Proposed Adjustments to Pay the Extra Payment Insurance Premiums

Table 11— Overview of Bank and Depositor Positions based on Varying- Market Interest Rates

5.13

Other Variations for Extra Payment Options

Table 12 - Example C: Three Extra Payment Offerings (cost adjusted for qualifying event - by 1710 ^th )

EXAMPLE 1 Example 1.0 - Depositors' Select 4 numbers - one number from each of a range of four sets of n numbers

The financial institution borrower is referred to as the Bank. In this example, the Bank's offering is called the Bank "Term Multi".

This example sets out the position for each of the Bank, the insurance company and the depositor. Example 1.1 - The Bank's Position - Each offering of the Bank "Term Multi"

In this Example 1 , the amount of each offering to be closed by the Bank is proposed at $25,000,000. The Bank may make multiple offerings of $25,000,000 in order to borrow its desired amount, which is likely to be much larger.

Deposits for each offering, in this example, are to be accepted in lots of $5,000 for a 3 -year term.

Preferably, the Bank will lower its cost of funds. In this example, the Bank will lower its cost of funds by, say, [10%]. The "effective cost of funds" to the Bank is proposed to be set at a discount to the otherwise market rate that would be payable by the Bank operating in an open market for 3- year fixed rate term deposits - i.e. set at, say, [90%] of that market rate.

Preferably, the Bank's cost of funds is to be paid up-front on a discounted cash flow basis. Accordingly, there is no timing disadvantage to the Bank in paying its costs upfront as the upfront payment is discounted.

Preferably, the Bank's cost of funds is to be paid by the Bank to the Insurer (as explained in Example 1.2 below) in one sum as an upfront underwriting or insurance premium. The Insurer will then provide the life cover to each depositor and undertake the other payments required of it under each fund dispersal stage, as set out in Table 2 below.

Example 1.2 - The Bank's cost of funds

For example - the Bank's cost of funds:

Market Rate for a 3-year term is assumed to be [4.00%] p.a. on monthly rests; Cost of funds to the Bank is to be [90%] of that - being [3.60%] p.a.; Present value of $25,000,000 is therefore [$22,444,000];

Upfront underwriting or insurance premium paid by the bank to the insurer would therefore be [$2,556,000].

Preferably, the underwriting or insurance premium is to be paid as each $25,000,000 offering is closed by the Bank. Alternatively it could be paid at some other date, such as part way through the term of the offering, or at the end of the offering, with appropriate adjustments preferably being made to the underwriting or insurance premium to compensate for the delayed payment. This example is on the basis that the premium is paid as each offering is closed by the Bank.

Each closing of a $25,000,000 offering needs to occur within (say) 3 months of the first deposit being accepted. If the Bank does not fully close an offering, then it will retain the right to repay depositors, together with the applicable interest based on the applicable rate for the period that the Bank had the relevant deposits. In this example, it could be based on the 90 day rate, or alternatively, it could be based on the Bank's at call rate.

Example 1.3 - The Insurance Policy

In this Example 1, the insurance policy is to respond to two sets of different payment obligations:

Firstly, to life insurance payments in the event of an insured person's death; and secondly, to payment obligations under each fund dispersal stage to those relevant depositors that become eligible.

Example 1.4 - Key Life Insurance Terms

Each depositor investing $5,000 in the Bank "Term Multi" will receive [$5,000] of life insurance cover for the 3 -year term of the deposit. This insurance cover may cover only against the accidental death of the insured person. The party to be insured must be a natural person. That insured party will be the depositor, or in the event that the depositor is not a natural person, e.g. if the depositor is a company, or if the depositor is a trustee of a trust, the insured person will be an associated person named by the depositor. The life insurance cover is non transferable, and in the event of the death of the insured person occurring during the 3 -year term of the deposit, the insured amount will be payable to the depositor, or to his/her estate.

The key terms of the life insurance, for this example, are set out in Example 1.12 below. Example 1.5 - Depositors' Opportunity for Higher Returns - Insurer's 4 Stage Fund Dispersal Payouts

At the time of making their deposits, the depositors agree and acknowledge that only some of the depositors, through a multi stage fund dispersal process, can become eligible for one or more fund dispersals. In this and other examples herein the number of stages is 4 but any number of stages could be selected. We believe however that a number of about 4 stages are desirable. The [4] stage fund dispersal process described below, will become eligible to participate in the [4] fund dispersals from the Insurer.

The object of the exercise for a depositor is, for each fund dispersal stage, to nominate a number (including for the relevant number being randomly nominated for a depositor) and when doing so, to remain part of a continuing smaller group of depositors that overall achieves the "best results", as that group will receive fixed payouts from the Insurer along the way, and ultimately a substantial payment at the end.

The "best results" are those nominations by depositors of a number (in order: ranging from 1-500; then 1-50; then 1-15; and finally 1-5) that are among the numbers "least" nominated by other depositors in the relevant stage.

All 5,000 depositors are to nominate, the 1 ^st number ranging from 1-500 at the time of making their investment in the Bank "Term Multi".

While we refer herein to the depositors nominating numbers, the numbers could be generated for any or all of the depositors by way of a random method, including being randomly generated if a depositor failed to make a relevant nomination. For ease, we refer to depositors nominating or selecting their numbers.

Within, say [3] months of the maturity date of the Bank "Term Multi", the original nominations from the 5,000 deposits will be analyzed. In this particular example, to become eligible for the funds dispersal for the 1 ^st stage, that group of 500 deposits that nominated the numbers that were "least" nominated by all the deposits, will be notified by the Bank, paid the relevant amount by the Insurer, and will then proceed to the second stage.

In this example, the 2 ^nd , 3 ^rd and then 4 ^th numbers are to be nominated during the last 3 months of the investment term (this being done for depositor input and bank relationship reasons), with the results all determined prior to, or by the date of, the maturity of the Bank "Term Multi".

The numbers that are to be nominated by depositor(s) for the [4] fund dispersal stages are from the following descending number ranges, set out in Table 1 below:

Table 1 - Overview of Numbers Nominated by Depositors

Example 1.6 - The $5,000 Depositor's Position

Instead of receiving a low, almost nominal amount of interest (at [4%] p.a. this would be [$200] annually), each $5,000 deposit receives: a) Life Cover: An amount of life cover of [$5,000] [for each $5,000 deposit made, subject to a maximum of [10] deposits, see note below], payable in the event of death of the insured party occurring during the 3 -year term of the Bank "Term Multi"; b) Capital Protection : Each deposit is deposited with the Bank and will be repaid by the Bank on maturity. c) Opportunity for Higher Returns: Each deposit has the right to nominate numbers and receive up to [4] payments from the Insurer, to be paid within the last 3 months prior to maturity of the Bank "Term Multi".

Life cover note: The maximum number of deposits per insured person may be limited, and for this example it is limited to [10] deposits per insured person. Depositors wishing to make more than [10] deposits per insured person, will need to name an alternative associated person as the person to be insured.

Example 1.7 - How the Opportunity for Higher Return works This is set out in Examples 1.13 and 1.14 below.

Table 2 below summarizes the higher return opportunity. Table 2 - Summary of Higher Return Opportunity

Example 1.8 - Payments to Depositors by Insurer

In all cases, the Insurer will be required to make all payments to the relevant depositors as soon as practical, but within, say, [2 weeks] of any relevant requirement.

Example 1.9 - Depositor Interaction

The depositor must exercise some important thought processes when nominating his/her numbers. The depositor needs to nominate numbers that are different to what he/she believes the other depositors will generally nominate. The success of the depositor's choice of nomination and receipt of the resulting insurance policy payout/s in each fund dispersal stage relies on those choice/s. In the case of the [4 ] and last number nomination, the reasoning and strategy to be adopted will be at its peak, as there will be only [9] deposits left standing at that time, and with each deposit having to chose one number from the number range of 1-5. To be successful, the depositor must pick one number that is least picked by the other depositors.

The short point being that the Bank "Term Multi" deposit provides the depositor with an interesting investment where the depositor has to turn his mind to outplaying the rest of the field. The depositor has some personal influence over whether or not there could potentially be a very significant return, but with the security of having his capital protected through a secure deposit which will be repaid by the Bank in full at the end of the investment term, in this case 3 years.

Following the outcome being known for each $25,000,000 offering, all depositors should be sent or allowed to view a table (preferably on line) showing the outcome of how many deposits picked what numbers (excluding depositor names), so depositors can review the data and compare their reasoning with actual results.

This (past) data should also be available for new depositors considering their participation in any subsequent offering by the Bank of the Bank "Term Multi"

Example 1.10 - Changing Market Interest Rates - each subsequent offering

This Example 1 has been prepared on the basis that the market rate is assumed to be [4.00%] p.a. and with the Bank' s cost of funds at [90%] of that - [3.60%] p.a.

Market Rate Increases: In the event of market interest rate increases, the Bank's cost of funds will remain at [90%], but on that increased market rate. With an increased market rate, the upfront underwriting or insurance premium to be paid by the Bank would also increase. With an increase in the insurance or underwriting premium, the returns and benefits to the depositors will/may also increase. Market Rate Decreases: In the event that the market interest rate decreases, the Bank's cost of funds will remain at [90%], but on that decreased market rate. With a decreased market rate, the upfront underwriting or insurance premium to be paid by the Bank would also decrease. With a decrease in the insurance or underwriting premium, then the overall returns and benefits for depositors set out in this example will/may decrease.

Example 1.16 below contains Table 3, which sets out example scenarios of various "market interest rates" ranging from [3% to 7%] p.a. and the adjusted returns and benefits for depositors, although these are examples and the analysis undertaken may change for a number of reasons other than changes in interest rates, which will be apparent to persons skilled in the art. For example, they may change as a result of the increases or decreases in the amount of each offering by the Bank (i.e. more or less than the $25,000,000 used in this example).

Example 1.11 - Consistency of the Profile of the Bank "Term Multi"

Preferably, there should be no significant adjustments made to the profile of the Bank's offering of the Bank "Term Multi" once set. It should remain relatively standard for each offering: [In this Example 1, the consistent profile is - $25 million in total; 5,000 deposits at $5,000 each; a reduction to 500 - then 50 - then 9 - and then last depositor/s standing].

This is believed to be preferable so the Bank's customers will come to understand the consistent profile of the Bank "Term Multi".

Example 1.12 - Key Life Insurance Terms

In this example, the key life insurance terms are: · 3 -year term life cover, which could be limited to accidental death cover only.

• [$5,000] insurance cover for each [$5000] deposit. Insured must be a natural person, being the depositor, or a person named by the depositor and who is associated with the depositor.

Maximum amount of insurance per named insured person is [$50,000].

Insured person must be able to certify that he/she is unaware of any adverse insurance matters, such as a known pre-existing illness, or the policy may contain exclusion provisions for such an event. (This may not apply if the insurance cover is limited to accidental death cover only.)

• Insurance cover will cease if the depositor assigns the deposit with the bank to a third party prior to its maturity date.

Example 1.13 - Funds Dispersal Flow Chart

Figure 1 shows a flowchart of Stages of a [$5,000] "Term Multi" in respect of this Example

1.

Life insurance of $5,000 is applicable to each deposit of $5,000.

Example 1.14 - How the Opportunity for Higher Return works

1 ^st Stage - 5,000 deposits reduced to 500

At the time of making each [$5,000] deposit, each deposit will nominate a number, to be nominated from the number range of 1-500.

Within [3] months of the maturity date of the Bank "Term Multi", the original nominations from the 5,000 deposits will then be analyzed.

If the number nominated is in a group of 500 deposits that have all nominated numbers that are least picked by all the 5,000 deposits involved in the Bank's offering, then each of those 500 deposits will immediately receive an insurance policy payout/ funds disposal of [$1,500] and the right to proceed to the 2 ^nd stage. The chances of being one of the 500 deposits to proceed to the 2 ^nd stage (from the original group of 5,000) is based on the depositor's own choice of what the depositor thinks will be the least picked numbers. Mathematically it is 1 in 10.

2 ^nd Stage - 500 deposits reduced to 50

If the depositor has one or more of the successful 500 deposits, then the depositor, in addition to having received a funds dispersal from the Insurer of [$1,500] per successful deposit, will receive notification from the Bank to submit 2 ^nd stage nomination/s. For each $5,000 deposit successfully through, the depositor will nominate the 2 ^nd number this time from the number range of 1-50. If a depositor has multiple deposits through to this stage, the depositor will nominate multiple times. If a depositor fails to nominate a number, then it will be randomly nominated. If the number/s nominated is in a group of 50 deposits that have all nominated numbers that are least picked by the 500 deposits, then each of the 50 deposits will immediately receive an insurance policy payout/ funds dispersal of [$5,000] and the right to proceed to the 3 ^rd stage.

The chances of being one of the 50 successful deposits to proceed to the 3 ^rd stage (from the group of 500) is based on the depositor's own choice/s. Mathematically it is 1 in 10.

3 ^rd Stage - 50 deposits reduced to 9

If the depositor has one or more of the successful 50 deposits, then the depositor, in addition to having received a fund dispersal from the Insurer of [$1,500 and $5,000] per successful deposit, will receive notification from the Bank to submit 3 ^rd stage nomination/s. For each $5,000 deposit successfully through, the depositor will nominate a 3 ^r number from the number range of 1 -15. If a depositor has multiple deposits through to this stage, the depositor will nominate multiple times. If a depositor fails to nominate a number, then it will be randomly nominated.

If the number/s nominated is in a group of 9 deposits that have each nominated numbers that are least picked by the 50 deposits, then each of the 9 deposits will immediately receive an insurance policy payout/ fund dispersal of [$10,000] and the right to proceed to the 4 stage. The chances of being one of the 9 successful deposits from the group of 50 is based on the depositor's own choice/s. Mathematically it is 1 in 5 ½.

4 ^th and last stage - 9 deposits reduced to "Last Deposit/s Standing"

If the depositor has one or more of the 9 successful deposits, then the depositor, in addition to having received by this stage fund dispersals from the Insurer of [$1,500, $5,000 and $10,000] per successful deposit, will receive notification from the Bank to submit 4 ^th stage nomination/s.

Each $5,000 deposit successfully through will nominate the 4 and last number from the number range of 1-5. If a depositor fails to nominate a number, then it will be randomly nominated.

"Last Deposit/s Standing"

Outcome A; If the number nominated is not nominated by any of the other 8 deposits, then that sole deposit "left standing" will receive a fund dispersal of [$500,000] or, in the event that there is more than one deposit whose number was not nominated, then those deposits will receive the [$500,000] divided evenly between them. In all cases for Outcome A, the [$500,000] will be paid to one depositor, or could be shared between a maximum of 4 deposits. Outcome B: (Only operates if Outcome A is not achieved). If the numbers nominated each have 2 or more deposits having nominated them, then the deposits that have nominated the numbers 1-5 that are least picked by all the [9] deposits, will receive a funds dispersal of [$500,000] divided evenly between them. In all cases for Outcome B, the [$500,000] will be paid between a minimum of 2 deposits, or could be shared by up to a maximum of 9 deposits (which occurs if three numbers are each nominated three times, resulting in a 9-way tie).

Note: The determination of [500] deposits as required for stage 1, may not be able to be determined through the one process. The same applies in respect of the [50] deposits for stage 2, and the [9] deposits required for stage 3. To deal with this issue, see Example 1.15 below.

Example 1.15 - Determining the Required/Successful Deposits at the Relevant Stages Determination of the [500] deposits

The term "deposit" is used instead of "depositor" as a depositor may have more than one deposit. Big Picture: 5,000 deposits making nominations spread evenly over the numbers of 1-500, is an average of 10 nominations per number. The numbers chosen that have overall the lowest number of nominations from the deposits are what is relevant - in ascending order - and those numbers should have less than 10 nominations each. For illustrative purposes: Assume that there are 496 deposits that have between them nominated 50 numbers out of the 500. Those 496 deposits all qualify. But going to the number that is ranked 51 ^st in terms of having the next/remaining lowest number of nominations, there are 10 deposits having nominated that 51 ^st number, being 6 more than needed.

As the "extras" would in all material respects be relatively few, all deposits that can't be separated would go through and the 6 "extras" would each participate^ and also receive [$1,500], provided that in the event of there being more than [20] extras, the payments to the deposits can be adjusted, at the discretion of the Insurer [or other such relevant party], in accordance with the following formula: Adjusted Payment to Deposits = [520] x [$1,500] / T

Where "T" is the total number of deposits avoiding elimination.

Determination of the [50] deposits

Big Picture: 500 deposits making nominations spread evenly over the numbers of 1-50, is an average of 10 nominations per number. The numbers chosen that have overall the lowest number of nominations from the deposits are what is relevant - in ascending order - and those numbers should have less than 10 nominations each.

For illustrative purposes: Assume that there are 46 deposits that have between them nominated 10 numbers out of the 50. Those 46 deposits all qualify. But going to the number that is ranked 11 in terms of having the next/remaining lowest number of nominations, there are 10 deposits having nominated that 11 number, being 6 more than needed.

As the "extras" would in all material respects still be relatively few, all deposits that can't be separated would go through and the "extras" would each participate and also receive

[$5,000], provided that in the event of there being more than [10] extras, the payments to the deposits can be adjusted, at the discretion of the Insurer [or other such relevant party], in accordance with the following formula:

Adjusted Payment to Deposits = [60] x [$5,000] / T

Where "T" is the total number of deposits avoiding elimination. Determination of exactly [9] deposits

The determination of exactly [9] deposits as required may also not be able to be determined through the one process.

However in this example, exactly [9] must be determined.

Each deposit, at the time of nominating its 3 ^rd number, will be required to also nominate three back up numbers, also in the range of 1-15. The back up number/s will only be used to separate the deposits, so that the number of deposits can be reduced to exactly [9].

This will be achieved by first considering the first back up number of each of the remaining deposits that are unable to be determined, and eliminating the relevant deposit/s by determining which of the first backup numbers had been chosen by a greater number of the deposits from the pool of [50]. That deposit/s would then be eliminated.

If the deposits have not by this time been reduced to exactly [9], then the exercise is repeated in respect of the remaining deposits still at issue by considering the second back up number nominated by those deposits, and so forth for the third back-up number should that prove necessary. If after the consideration of all these elimination methods, the number of deposits remains greater than [9], then the elimination must still occur, but noting that the chances of getting to this position would be extremely remote.

The elimination process would continue by first seeking from only those few deposits whose elimination can't be determined, one or more further back up numbers. The procedures would again be repeated as relevant to reach only [9] remaining deposits.

Example 1.16 - Market Interest Rates from 3% to 7% p.a.

Table 3 below shows, for varying market interest rates from 3-7% p.a., the position for the Bank, the cash benefit for the Bank that would arise to the Bank on borrowing at 90% of the market interest rate, and the payments to be made to certain depositors. Table 3 is prepared on the following basis:

Figures are in $,000s, and each offering by the Bank is $25 million, for a 3 year term, with 5000 deposits of $5,000.

Table 3 - Overview of Bank and Depositor Positions based on Varying Market Interest Rates

Item Fixed or Market Market Market Market Market maximum Rate Rate Rate Rate Rate

Numbers

3% 4% 5% 6% 7%

90% Rate for the 2.7% 3.6% 4.5% 5.4% 6.3% Bank

P.V. at $23,057 $22,444 $21,848 $21,269 $20,705

90 % of Market

rate

Upfront Premium $1,943 $2,556 $3,152 $3,731 $4,295

Cash Benefit to $207 $267 $324 $378 $428 the Bank of 90%

rate Vs market

rate

Fixed Pavouts

l ^st Stage payouts 500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 per deposit deposits

Variable

Pavouts

^2nd Stage payouts 50 $2,500 $5,000 $7,500 $10,000 $12,500 per deposit deposits

^3rd Stage payouts 9 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 per deposit deposits

4 ^th Stage payouts 1 amount $250,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 Last Deposit/s

standing As, it will be understood by the person skilled in the art that the method exemplified above will need be implemented in a physical device such as a computer system that is

programmed to operate accordingly.

EXAMPLE 2

Example 2.0 - Payment to Depositors' Determined Randomly In this example the same number of fund dispersal stages can be used, the number of fund dispersal stages being dependent upon the number of initial investors except that instead of the investors choosing a number, that is not chosen by the other investors, the selection process could be undertaken by a random number generator which could be linked to the account numbers of each of the investors. This could be their account number or a coupon number associated with the bond or other document associated with the investment, or simply with the account number associated with the investment.

Using the numbers and stages of Example 1, for example at the beginning of stage 1, there could be a selection process which utilises a random number generator to select random numbers between 1 and 5000 (initial discreet deposits) regardless of the number of investors, and then selecting the first 500 of those chosen by their random numbers, to go onto Stage 2. For stage 2, the computer system could randomly select 50 of those numbers associated with the discreet deposits. For stage 3 that could be reduced using the random number generator to 9 discreet deposits, and for stage 4 reducing those 9 to just 1 remaining discreet deposit using the random number generator.

At the end of the investment term, the investors are each returned the amount of their deposits, without any interest, but those who have been lucky enough to be selected, gain a significant return on their investment as well as being paid back their initial investment.

In each case, in this example, preferably the investors are also provided with life insurance cover over the term of their investment. Thus, in the above Examples 1 and 2, where the financial institution is the Bank, the investment can be seen to be either the purchase of life insurance cover by placing a deposit with the Bank which is repaid by the Bank at the end of the insurance term, with the possibility of gaining an additional cash payment from the insurer based on the selection process described in the specification. Alternatively this could be seen to be an investment in the Bank, with the additional benefit of life insurance cover, and the possibility of participating in a prize pool as described above. EXAMPLE 3

Example 3.0 - Depositors' Select 6 numbers out of 10 - the Ranking List determined by 'least picked' method The financial institution borrower is referred to as the Bank. The Bank's offering is for a 3- year term and is called the Bank "Term Multi". This example sets out the position for each of the Bank, the insurance company and the depositor.

Example 3.1 - The Bank's Position - Each offering of the Bank "Term Multi"

In this Example 3, the amount of each offering to be closed by the Bank is proposed at $25,000,000. The Bank may make multiple offerings of $25,000,000 in order to borrow its desired amount, which is likely to be much larger. Deposits for each offering, in this example, are to be accepted in lots of $5,000 for a 3-year term.

Preferably, the Bank will lower its cost of funds. In this example, the Bank will lower its cost of funds by [10%].

The "effective cost of funds" to the Bank is proposed to be set at a discount to the otherwise market rate that would be payable by the Bank operating in an open market for 3 -year fixed rate term deposits - i.e. set at [90%] of that market rate. Preferably, the Bank's cost of funds is to be paid up-front on a discounted cash flow basis. Accordingly, there is no timing disadvantage to the Bank in paying its costs upfront as the upfront payment is discounted to take into account this early payment.

Preferably, the Bank's cost of funds is to be paid by the Bank to the Insurer (as explained in Example 3.2 below) in one sum as an upfront underwriting or insurance premium. The Insurer will then provide the life cover to each depositor and undertake the other payments required of it under each fund dispersal stage, as set out in Example 3.11, Table 5 below.

Example 3.2 - The Bank's cost of funds

For example - the Bank's cost of funds:

• Market Rate for a 3-year term is assumed to be [4.00%] p.a. on monthly rests;

• Cost of funds to the Bank is to be [90%] of that - being [3.60%] p.a.;

• Present value of $25,000,000 is therefore [$22,444,000];

• Upfront underwriting or insurance premium paid by the bank to the insurer would therefore be [$2,556,000].

Preferably, the underwriting or insurance premium is to be paid as each $25,000,000 offering is closed by the Bank. Alternatively it could be paid at some other date, such as part way through the term of the offering, or at the end of the offering, with appropriate adjustments preferably being made to the underwriting or insurance premium to compensate for the/any delayed payment.

This example proceeds on the basis that the premium is paid as each offering is closed by the Bank. Each closing of a $25,000,000 offering needs to occur within (say) 3 months of the first deposit being accepted. If the Bank does not fully close an offering, then it will retain the right to repay depositors, together with the applicable interest based on the applicable rate for the period that the Bank had the relevant deposits. In this example, it could be based on the 90-day (3 month) interest rate, or alternatively, it could be based on the Bank's at call interest rate.

Example 3.3 - The Insurance Policy

In this Example 3, the insurance policy is to respond to two sets of different payment obligations:

• to life insurance payments in the event of an insured person's death; and

· to those relevant depositors that become eligible for payments at each fund dispersal stage.

Example 3.4 - Key Life Insurance Terms

Each depositor investing $5,000 in the Bank "Term Multi" will receive [$5,000] of life insurance cover for the 3 -year term of the deposit. This insurance cover may cover only against the accidental death of the insured person.

The party to be insured must be a natural person. That insured party will be the depositor, or in the event that the depositor is not a natural person, e.g. if the depositor is a company, or if the depositor is a trustee of a trust, the insured person will be an associated person named by the depositor.

The life insurance cover is non transferable, and in the event of the death of the insured person occurring during the 3-year term of the deposit, the insured amount will be payable to the depositor, or to his/her estate.

The key terms of the life insurance, for this example, are set out in Example 3.17 below.

Example 3.5 - Depositors' Opportunity for Higher Returns - Insurer's 4 Stage Fund Dispersal Payouts At the time of making their deposits, the depositors agree and acknowledge that only some of the depositors, through the [4] stage fund dispersal process described below, will become eligible to participate in the [4] fund dispersals from the Insurer (or it may be from the Bank if the Bank takes on the roll of the insurer).

In this Example 3, all 5,000 depositors are to select at the time of making their investment in the Bank "Term Multi" [6] r numbers from a range of [10] n numbers. Each depositor can choose each selected r number, or each r numbers is selected randomly.

The object of the exercise for a depositor is to select 6 numbers, from the range of 10 n numbers, and when doing so, to choose his or her or its numbers on the basis that the depositor's number choice/s will later entitle the depositor to monetary reward (or some other tangible benefit if the reward is something other than money) following one or more elimination and or selection processes based on the depositors number selections.

The elimination and or selection procedures are, in this example, set around a ranking order of all the 10 n numbers (the Ranking List), and the number choices of each depositor. This can be achieved by:

Firstly: ranking the 10 n numbers from 1 ^st to last with the ranking of all the 10 n numbers determined by reference to:

• the number of times each n number was selected by the depositors; or alternatively, · a random method to select each n number, such as a random draw of all the n

numbers; so that each of the 10 n numbers can be ranked from first to last so as to form the Ranking List; and

Secondly: comparing the numbers chosen by each depositor against the above referred Ranking List, and comparing against the choices of the other depositors, in order to rank all 5,000 depositors, from 1 ^st to 5,000 ^th (i.e. first to last), and Thirdly: making a series of eliminations based on set or selected criteria where depositors who avoid one or more elimination steps become eligible to receive rewards, preferably a sum of money (or its realizable equivalent, if not money).

Preferably, the basis on which each depositor selects his/her/its r numbers is on the basis that the selection/s are made in order and are of those n numbers that the depositor believes will be the n numbers that are to be least selected by all the depositors. This Example 3 proceeds on the basis that the method used to form the Ranking List is based on the number of times each n number was selected by the depositors, with the least selected n number being ranked 1 ^st on the Ranking List, and so on with the most selected n number being ranked 10 (last) on the Ranking List. Within, say [3] months of the maturity date of the Bank "Term Multi", the selections of each of the depositors r numbers associated with the 5,000 deposits will be analyzed, a Ranking List of all the n numbers will be determined, and each of the 5,000 deposits will be ranked using the methods above described. Figure 2 sets out how ties between n numbers are resolved so that each of the n numbers is given a unique ranking in the Ranking List.

Figure 3 sets out an example of 5,000 deposits, and identifies: how the Ranking List of the 10 n numbers is determined using the least picked method - see Figure 3a; how the elimination system works - see Figure 3b; in particular, which depositors and how many correctly chose:

· the 1 ^st least picked number - which was 480 depositors

• the 1 ^st & 2 ^nd least picked numbers - which was 43 depositors

• the 1 ^st , 2 ^nd & 3 ^rd least picked numbers - which was 7 depositors

• the 1 ^st , 2 ^nd , 3 ^rd & 4 ^th least picked numbers - which was 1 depositor • the I ^s , 2 ⁿ , 3 ^Γ , 4 & 5 least picked numbers - which was 1 depositor (the same as above)

• the 1 ^st , 2 ^nd , 3 ^rd , 4 ^th , 5 ^th & 6 ^th least picked numbers - which was 0 depositors; and how the single non eliminated depositor (i.e. the sole major prize winner) is identified - see Figure 3e , 3f, 3h, and 3i - which all show the winning depositor as the Deposit Number 0000939; how each of the 5,000 depositors are ranked from 1 ^st to 5,000 ^th - see Figures 3i - 3n.

Example 3.6 - Ordinal numbers make ranking of all depositors clearer

Figure 4a - 4f is a repeat of Figures 3i - 3n, but with the information that was previously shown in Figures 3i - 3n now shown by reference to ordinal numbers to show the rankings of the depositors chosen numbers as they relate to the Ranking List.

Example 3.7 - Fall-back position - Ties involving two or more winning depositors In this current Example 3, the only way a sole deposit winner cannot be determined is in the event that the relevant winning 6 numbers (i.e. the first 6 ranked n numbers on the Ranking List) are chosen, in order, by two or more depositors.

While this elimination and ranking system set out in this Example 3 guarantees a winning result for a first placed depositor, a joint winner is possible - but unlikely. In this example involving depositors selecting 6 numbers out of 10, once a winner is determined (using all the 6 number choices from the 10 n numbers if required), the chances of one or more other depositors having also chosen in order the exact same 6 numbers as chosen by the winning depositor is/are remote. It is remote because: there are only 5,000 deposits; each deposit represents one chance; and the odds of correctly choosing the 6 numbers in order are odds of 1 in 151,200 chances - see Figure 6a.

Further, the odds of: a double event occurring (two depositors that correctly chose the same 6 winning numbers) is 1 in 253,714 (Calculation: the odds to one x 1.678 - source: Scarne 's New Complete Guide to Gambling, chapter 2);

a triple event occurring is 1 in 404,460 - (Calculation: the odds to one x 2.675);

a quad event occurring is 1 in 555,206 - (Calculation: the odds to one x 3.672); and a quint event occurring is 1 in 706,104 - (Calculation: the odds to one x 4.670).

Accordingly, based on the above odds, and the profile of the Bank "Term Multi", a joint winner with two winners is expected to occur on average only once every 51 offerings, or c. 2% of the time - (calculation: odds of 1 in 253,714 ÷ 5,000 deposits = 50.74).

In the event that it was desirable to 'virtually' ensure that there was always only one sole winner, this could be achieved by increasing the odds or chances. For example, referring to the above, if the depositors were required to pick in order 7 out of 10, then the odds would increase to 1 in 604,800 - see Figure 6a. Therefore the odds of a double event occurring would increase to 1 in 1,014,855.

Accordingly, based on the above change in odds, and with no other changes, a joint winner with two winners is expected to occur on average only once every 203 offerings, or c. 0.5% of the time - (calculation: odds of 1 in 1,014,855 ÷ 5,000 deposits = 202.97).

Ironically, when using the invention as described above, increasing the odds as we have just explained has no effect on the invented systems ability to determine a winner, but makes a sole winning deposit 'virtually' certain.

However, to provide for the situation where the above illustrated elimination processes does not achieve one sole depositor as the winner, then if two or more depositors remain and can't be eliminated or separated using their six chosen numbers, then those tied winning depositors share in proportion as between them the relevant prize/s. Example 3.8 - Odds for a Depositor of Winning a Monetary Prize

In this example, to become eligible for the funds dispersal for the 1 ^st stage, the odds for each depositor are 1 in 10. That group of deposits that selected as their first number, the n number that was "least" selected by all the deposits, avoid elimination. All other depositors are eliminated from receiving any reward relevant to this described process, and the subsequent described processes. As there are [10] n numbers, and as this example uses the least picked n number, the number of deposits that will actually have chosen the least selected n number cannot exceed 500 deposits i.e. cannot exceed 10% of all 5,000 deposits.

The successful [c. 500] deposits will be paid the relevant amount by the Insurer, and will then be subjected to further elimination stages based on the choices of the remaining depositors' second r number, then after that second elimination stage, the then remaining depositors' 3 ^rd r number, and so forth, until one deposit remains that avoids elimination.

As mentioned previously, the only way that there becomes more than one deposit that avoids elimination is if two or more deposits that avoid elimination have chosen the exact [6] r numbers in order - being those that are ranked 1 ^st to 6 ^th on the Ranking List. And this is unlikely.

Example 3.9 - Identification of the 'Top 10' Depositors

Alternatively, the eliminations could be conducted so that a small group of depositors share the major monetary reward, say up to 10 depositors, but it is believed that this will be less attractive to the depositors as they are likely to want to participate in an investment on the basis that there is an opportunity to win a sizable monetary reward that is not shared with any other depositor.

However, recognizing this as a possibility, we have configured our computer simulation to identify the top ten depositors, and to identify those top ten from 1 ^st to 10 ^th . This way we have flexibility. We can readily identify the sole winner (in this case it is deposit number 0000939), or alternatively we can allocate set payments, preferably scaled, to some or all of the top 10. As the system identifies all places, we could allocate payments to the top 20, or top 30, or to that depositor that was placed 8 ^th , or 88 ^th , or 888 ^th , or we can allocate a payment to the single depositor that got it wrong the worst - i.e. a last place payment. The top ten depositors are identified at Figure 3h.

Preferably, the results of these above described elimination processes are all determined prior to, or by the date of, the maturity of the Bank "Term Multi". An overview of this process is set out in Table 4 below. This overview is substantially in agreement with the set of randomly simulated results set out in Figure 3.

Table 4 - Overview of Elimination of Depositors

Fund Deposits Eligible to n Number Range is 1 - 10

Dispersal Nominate from which each relevant

Stages deposit nominates 6 r

numbers.

On making All - 5,000 deposits

the deposit

1 ^st c. 500 l ^st r number

(Figure 3b - 480 deposits)

2 ^nd c. 50 1 ^st & 2 ^nd r numbers

(Figure 3b - 43 deposits)

3 ^rd c. 5 1 ^st , 2 ^nd & 3 ^rd r numbers (Figure 3b - 7 deposits)

₄ th "Last Deposit/s Standing" Determined by reference to the remaining deposits 4 ^th

(Figure 3b - 1 deposit) and if relevant, the 5 ^th and

6 ^th r numbers.

Example 3.10 - The $5,000 Depositor's Position Instead of receiving a low, almost nominal amount of interest (at [4%] p.a. this would be [$200] annually), each $5,000 deposit receives: d) Life Cover. An amount of life cover of [$5,000] [for each $5,000 deposit made, subject to a maximum of [10] deposits, see note below], payable in the event of death of the insured party occurring during the 3 -year term of the Bank "Term Multi"; e) Capital Protection : Each deposit is deposited with the Bank and will be repaid by the Bank on maturity. f) Opportunity for Higher Returns: Each deposit has the right to select one or more

numbers from a range of n numbers and based on those selected numbers, receive up to

[4] payments from the Insurer, to be paid within the last 3 months prior to maturity of the Bank "Term Multi". Life cover note: The maximum number of deposits per insured person may be limited, and for this example it is limited to [10] deposits per insured person. Depositors wishing to make more than [10] deposits per insured person, will need to name an alternative associated person as the person to be insured. Example 3.11 - How the Opportunity for Higher Return works

This is set out in Examples 3.18 and 3.19 below.

Table 5 below summarizes by way of an overview the higher return opportunity.

Table 5 - Summary/Overview of Higher Return Opportunity

In Table 5 above, certain assumptions have been made in respect of the number of deposits to be paid out at each of the [4] stages, following the eliminations relevant to each stage. In practice, there could be more or less deposits to be paid out at each stage, different to those recorded in Table 5 above (see Figure 3 for an actual random simulation of the results for a 5,000 depositor offering). However, in this example, there is an exception in relation to the first stage, for the reason set out in the following paragraphs.

In this example, the first stage eliminations are an exception as the ranking of the 10 n numbers is achieved on the basis that the first ranked n number is the 'least picked' first choice n number by all the 5,000 depositors, the second ranked n number is the 'second least picked' first choice n number, and so forth until the last ranked n number, which is the most picked first choice n number, and in this example it is ranked 10 (i.e. last).

Accordingly, the number of surviving deposits at the first elimination stage of this Example

3 cannot be any more than 1/10 of the total deposits, i.e. it cannot be more than 500 deposits. The simulation as recorded in Figure 3 operates on computing the least picked numbers, ranking those n numbers to create the Ranking List and accordingly, in respect of the first elimination stage, there will never be any more than 10% of the total deposits - see Figure 3b which records that there were 480 deposits from 5,000 following the first elimination stage. This clear position that operates in respect of the first elimination stage is as a consequence of ranking the n numbers using the least picked method, and applies only to the first elimination stage. It does not apply in respect of the second, third or fourth stages of the eliminations, as it is possible that all or a vast majority of those depositors that were not eliminated at any relevant elimination stage also picked as their second and/or third and/or fourth number choice, the n number that was the 2 ^nd , and/or 3 ^rd and/or 4 ^th least picked n number. However, such a position of there being all or a vast majority of surviving depositors that then all or mostly all pick the next relevant 'least picked' number is very unlikely to occur on a probability basis, but it could occur in a way that results in more than 10% of depositors surviving the next relevant elimination stage after the first or prior elimination stage. In fact in our simulation, it shows just this point, as more than 10% of the stage 2 depositors (43 in number) survive to stage 3 (7 in number) - see Figure 3b. Further, there will occasionally be situations where no depositor has picked the next relevant ranked 'least picked' number. For example: taking Table 5 at the 3 ^rd funds dispersal stage, it is possible that none of the remaining depositors from stage 2 also correctly choose the 3 ^rd ranked n number; and taking Table 5 at the 4 ^th funds dispersal stage, it is possible that none of the remaining depositors from stage 3 also correctly choose the 4 ranked n number.

Yet still further, the ranking of the n numbers may occur by means other than the ranking of the n numbers being determined by the number of times each of the n numbers was chosen by all the depositors i.e. by the [5,000] depositors. An example is by way of a random draw of the n numbers to create the Ranking List. This example is further set out in Example 4.

Example 3.12 - Setting Clear Parameters to ensure elimination stages operate without extremes

For a person skilled in the art, there will be a number of ways to set clear parameters to operate so that infrequent outcomes do not adversely affect the methods of eliminations or the objectives of this invention as described herein. By way of example, they include: (a) Setting a maximum pay-out per elimination stage, with a reduction made to the size of the pay-out to a relevant depositor surviving a relevant elimination stage, if the number of surviving depositors exceed a pre-determined number or percentage, with any surplus funds not used to be added to the payments to be paid to other selected depositors, or added to the final payment to be paid to the winning depositor at the 4 ^ti stage; or

(b) Alternatively, as each of the 5,000 depositors can be ranked from 1 ^st to 5,000 ^th using the methods herein described, including as exampled in Figure 3 at 3i-3n:

The top ranked 10% of the 5,000 depositors can be identified and are to become the 500 non eliminated depositors following the stage 1 eliminations ("Stage 1 Winners"); The top 10 % of the 500 Stage 1 Winners can then be identified as the non eliminated parties following the stage 2 eliminations ("Stage 2 Winners");

The top 10 % of the 50 Stage 2 Winners can then be identified as the 5 non eliminated parties following the stage 3 eliminations ("Stage 3 Winners");

The top ranked depositor of the 5 Stage 3 Winners can then be identified as the final non eliminated deposit - and therefor the winner of stage 4 ("Final Winner").

Example 3.13 - Payments to Depositors by Insurer

In all cases, the Insurer will be required to make all relevant payments to the relevant depositors as soon as practical, but within, say, [2 weeks] of any relevant requirement.

Example 3.14 - Depositor Interaction

The depositor may exercise some important thought processes when selecting his/her/its [6] numbers from the 10 n number range. The depositor needs to nominate numbers that are different to what he/she believes the other depositors will generally nominate. The short point being that in this example involving choosing the least picked numbers, the Bank "Term Multi" deposit provides the depositor with an interesting investment where the depositor may turn his mind to 'attempting' to outplay the rest of the field.

Following the outcome being known for each $25,000,000 offering, all depositors should be sent or allowed to view a table (preferably on line) showing the outcome of how many deposits picked what n numbers (excluding depositor names), so depositors can review the data and compare their reasoning and their n number choices with actual results.

Preferably, this (past) data should also be available for new depositors considering their participation in any subsequent offering by the Bank of the Bank "Term Multi".

Example 3.15 - Changing Market Rates - each subsequent offering

As is the case with Example 1 , this Example 3 has been prepared on the basis that the market rate is assumed to be [4.00%] p.a. and with the Bank's cost of funds at [90%] of that - [3.60%] p.a.

Market Rate Increases: In the event of market interest rate increases, the Bank's cost of funds will remain at [90%], but on that increased market rate. With an increased market rate, the upfront underwriting or insurance premium to be paid by the Bank would also increase. With an increase in the insurance or underwriting premium, the returns and benefits to the depositors will/may also increase.

Market Rate Decreases: In the event that the market interest rate decreases, the Bank's cost of funds will remain at [90%], but on that decreased market rate. With a decreased market rate, the upfront underwriting or insurance premium to be paid by the Bank would also decrease. With a decrease in the insurance or underwriting premium, then the overall returns and benefits for depositors set out in this example will/may decrease. Example 3.21, Table 6 below sets out example scenarios of various "market interest rates" ranging from [3% to 7%] p.a. and the adjusted returns and benefits for depositors, although these are examples and the analysis undertaken may change for a number of reasons other than changes in interest rates, which will be apparent to persons skilled in the art. For example, they may change as a result of the increases or decreases in the amount of each offering by the Bank (i.e. more or less than the $25,000,000 used in this example).

Example 3.16 - Consistency of the Profile of the Bank "Term Multi" Preferably, there should be no significant adjustments made to the profile of the Bank's offering of the Bank "Term Multi" once set. It should remain relatively standard for each offering.

In this Example 3, the consistent profile of each offering is - 3 -year term; $25 million in total; 5,000 deposits at $5,000 each; a reduction of depositors by c. 90% in stage 1 eliminations; a reduction of the non eliminated depositors from stage 1 by a further c. 90 % in stage 2 eliminations; a reduction of the non eliminated depositors from stage 2 by a further c. 90 % in stage 3 eliminations; a reduction of the remaining non eliminated depositors from stage 3 to one remaining depositor - the winner of the substantial payment.

This is believed to be preferable so the Bank's customers will come to understand the consistent profile of the Bank "Term Multi".

Example 3.17 - Key Life Insurance Terms

In this example, the key life insurance terms are:

3 -year term life cover, which could be limited to accidental death cover only.

[$5,000] insurance cover for each [$5000] deposit.

Insured must be a natural person, being the depositor, or a person named by the depositor and who is associated with the depositor.

Maximum amount of insurance per named insured person is [$50,000].

Insured person must be able to certify that he/she is unaware of any adverse insurance matters, such as a known pre-existing illness, or the policy may contain exclusion provisions for such an event. (This may not apply if the insurance cover is limited to accidental death cover only.) • Insurance cover will cease if the depositor assigns the deposit with the bank to a third party prior to its maturity date.

Example 3.18 - Funds Dispersal Flow Chart

Figure 5 shows a flowchart of the Stages of a [$5,000] "Term Multi" in respect of this Example 3.

Life insurance of $5,000 is applicable to each deposit of $5,000.

Example 3.19 - How the Opportunity for Higher Return works 1 ^st Stage - 5,000 deposits reduced to c. 500

At the time of making each [$5,000] deposit, each deposit will select [6] numbers, to be selected from the number range of n numbers ranging from 1 to 10.

Within [3] months of the maturity date of the Bank "Term Multi", the original selections from the 5,000 deposits will then be analyzed.

If the first number selected by a depositor is the n number that is least selected by all the 5,000 depositors, then that depositor and the other depositors that selected that n number as their first number each receive an insurance policy payout/ funds disposal of [$1,500] and the right to proceed to the 2 ^nd stage.

The chances of being one of the c. 500 deposits to proceed to the 2 ^nd stage (approximately 10% from the original group of 5,000) is based on the depositor's own choice of what the depositor thinks will be the least picked numbers. Mathematically, it is 'approximately' 1 in 10.

2 ^nd Stage - c. 500 deposits reduced to c. 50 If the depositor has one or more of the successful c. 500 deposits not eliminated in the first stage of eliminations, then the depositor, in addition to having received a funds dispersal from the Insurer of [$1,500] per successful deposit, will be entitled to proceed further in 2 ^nd stage eliminations.

If the second number selected by a relevant depositor is the n number that is second least selected based on the rankings of the n numbers as determined by all the 5,000 depositors' selections, then that depositor and the other depositors that selected that n number as their second number each receive an insurance policy payout/ funds disposal of [$5,000] and the right to proceed to the 3 ^rd stage.

The chances of being one of the c. 50 deposits to proceed to the 3 ^rd stage (approximately 10% from the group of c. 500) is based on the depositor's own choice of what the depositor thinks will be the least picked numbers. Mathematically, and based on probabilities, it is 'approximately' 1 in 10.

3 ^rd Stage - c. 50 deposits reduced to c. 5 If the depositor has one or more of the successful c. 50 deposits not eliminated in the second stage of eliminations, then the depositor, in addition to having received a funds dispersal from the Insurer of [$1,500 & $5,000] per successful deposit, will be entitled to proceed further in 3 ^rd stage eliminations. If the third number selected by a relevant depositor is the n number that is third least selected based on the rankings of the n numbers as determined by all the 5,000 depositors' selections, then that depositor and the other depositors that selected that n number as their third number each receive an insurance policy payout/ funds disposal of [$10,000] and the right to proceed to the 4 ^th stage.

The chances of being one of the c. 5 deposits to proceed to the 4 ^th stage (approximately 10% from the group of c. 50) is based on the depositor's own choice of what the depositor thinks will be the least picked numbers, Mathematically, and based on probabilities, it is 'approximately' 1 in 10.

4 and last stage - c. 5 deposits reduced to "Last Deposit/s Standing"

If the depositor has one or more of the c. 5 successful deposits, then the depositor, in addition to having received by this stage fund dispersals from the Insurer of [$1,500, $5,000 and $10,000] per successful deposit will be entitled to proceed further in 4 stage eliminations to determine the winner.

If the fourth number selected by a relevant depositor is the n number that is fourth least selected based on the rankings of the n numbers as determined by all the 5,000 depositors' selections, then that depositor, if the depositor is the only such depositor, is the winner of the major payment.

In the event that any of the above described elimination stages cannot be continued, or a single winner cannot be determined by the 4 ^th elimination stage described above, then preferably the winning depositor is determined by considering the remaining depositors choices of their other relevant r numbers. The depositor that emerges with the best choice/result as the progressive consideration of the r numbers is made, as chosen in their order, will become the sole winner.

These procedures to determine the sole winner are set out in Figure 3 - see 3h. Also see Figure 4a - which shows (using the ordinal numbers) the top 64 placements. We believe this use of the ordinal numbers is the best way to visually display the invention's ability to rank all the depositors, from 1 ^st to 5,000 ^th (i.e. last) - for last, see Figure 4f.

Example 3.20 - Alternative Ranking and Elimination Method Alternatively, as each of the 5,000 depositors can be ranked from 1 ^st to 5,000 ^th using the methods herein described, including as set out in Figure 3i -3n and Figure 4a - 4f: The top ranked 10% of the 5,000 depositors can be identified and are to become the 500 non eliminated depositors following the stage 1 eliminations ("Stage 1 Winners");

The top 10 % of the 500 Stage 1 Winners can then be identified as the 50 non eliminated parties following the stage 2 eliminations ("Stage 2 Winners");

The top 10 % of the 50 Stage 2 Winners can then be identified as the 5 non eliminated parties following the stage 3 eliminations ("Stage 3 Winners");

The top ranked depositor of the 5 Stage 3 Winners can then be identified as the final non eliminated deposit - and therefor the winner of stage 4 ("Final Winner").

Example 3.21 - Market Interest Rates from 3% to 7% p.a.

Table 6 below shows, for varying market interest rates from 3-7% p.a., the position for the Bank, the cash benefit for the Bank that would arise to the Bank on borrowing at 90% of the market interest rate, and the payments to be made to certain depositors.

Table 6 is prepared on the following basis:

Figures are in $,000s, and each offering by the Bank is $25 million, for a 3 year term, with 5000 deposits of $5,000. Table 6 - Overview of Bank and Depositor Positions based on Varying Market Interest Rates

Item Projected Market Market Market Market Market or Rate Rate Rate Rate Rate

Maximum

Numbers

3% 4% 5% 6% 7%

90% Rate for the 2.7% 3.6% 4.5% 5.4% 6.3% Bank

P.V. at $23,057 $22,444 $21,848 $21,269 $20,705

90 % of Market

rate

Upfront Premium $1,943 $2,556 $3,152 $3,731 $4,295

Cash Benefit to $207 $267 $324 $378 $428 the Bank of 90%

rate Vs market

rate

Fixed Pavouts

l ^st Stage payouts 500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 per deposit deposits

Variable

Pavouts

^2nd Stage payouts 50 $2,500 $5,000 $7,500 $10,000 $12,500 per deposit deposits

^3rd Stage payouts 5 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 per deposit deposits

4 ^th Stage payouts 1 amount $270,000 $540,000 $560,000 $580,000 $600,000 Last Deposit/s

standing EXAMPLE 4

Example 4.0 - Depositors' Select 6 Numbers out of 10 - Ranking List determined by 'random' method

This Example 4 is a repeat of Example 3, but with one significant difference. The difference relates to using a different method to the method used to achieve a ranking of the n numbers in the Ranking List as set out in Example 3.5. Example 4.1 - Ranking of n numbers by Random Draw

The different method is that instead of the ranking of the n numbers by reference to the ranking of the n numbers being determined by the number of times each of the n numbers was chosen by all the depositors i.e. by the [5,000] depositors as is set out in Example 3.5, in this Example 4 the ranking of the n numbers occurs by a random method, such as a random draw of the n numbers so that the 10 n numbers may be given a ranking from 1 ^st to 10 ^th (last) based on the order of their random draw.

For example, the ranking of the 10 n numbers may be determined by a random draw of the 10 n numbers, with the first drawn n number being ranked 1 ^st , and so forth until the last n number is drawn - in this example the 10 drawn n number will be ranked last in the Ranking List.

Alternatively, the ranking of the 10 n numbers may be determined by a random draw of the 10 n numbers, with the first drawn n number being ranked 10 ^th (last), and so forth until the last n number is drawn - in this alternative example the 10 ^th drawn n number will be ranked first in the Ranking List.

Alternatively, other random methods could be used to establish the Ranking List. Example 4.2 - Clear Parameters so Eliminations Operate Without Extremes

In this example of a random draw of the 10 n numbers being used to determine the ranking order of the 10 n numbers in the Ranking List, it is possible that the first ranked n number will be chosen by more than 10% of all depositors, and significantly so.

The same applies in respect of the 2 ^nd ranked n number, and so on for one or a few other n numbers.

It is desirable that such infrequent but potentially extreme outcomes be eliminated by setting clear parameters that deal with such situations, albeit that those extreme situations are unlikely. For a person skilled in the art, there will be a number of ways to set clear parameters to operate so that 'infrequent' outcomes do not adversely affect the methods of eliminations previously described in Example 3, and which are relevant to this Example 4.

By way of example, and as previously set out in Example 3.12, preferably they include:

(a) Setting a maximum pay-out per elimination stage, with a reduction made to the size of the pay-out to a relevant depositor surviving a relevant elimination stage, if the number of surviving depositors exceed a pre-determined number or percentage, with any surplus funds not used to be added to the payments to be paid to other selected depositors, or added to the final payment to be paid to the winning depositor at the 4 ^th stage; or

(b) Alternatively, as each of the 5,000 depositors can be ranked from 1 ^st to 5,000 ^th using the methods herein described, including as set out in Figure 3i - 3n and Figure 4a - 4f: • The top ranked 10% of the 5,000 depositors can be identified and are to become the 500 non eliminated depositors following the stage 1 eliminations ("Stage 1 Winners");

• The top 10 % of the 500 Stage 1 Winners can then be identified as the 50 non eliminated parties following the stage 2 eliminations ("Stage 2 Winners");

• The top 10 % of the 50 Stage 2 Winners can then be identified as the 5 non eliminated parties following the stage 3 eliminations ("Stage 3 Winners");

• The top ranked depositor of the 5 Stage 3 Winners can then be identified as the final non eliminated deposit - and therefor the winner of stage 4 ("Final Winner").

In all other respects, the matters and examples set out in Example 3 are relevant and therefore repeated for this Example 4.

EXAMPLE 5

Example 5.0 - Depositors' Select 6 Numbers out of 10 - A Repeat of Examples 3 & 4, but with Extra Payment Feature

This Example 5 repeats Examples 3 and 4, but creates an extra payment feature.

Consistent with all prior examples, each offering by the Bank of a Bank "Term Multi" referred to in this Example 5 is: a 3-year term, with 5,000 deposits, of $5,000 each, with a total for each offering of $25,000,000. Example 5.1 - The Extra Payment Feature

This extra payment feature arises through the use of probability and/or odds in relation to a depositor correctly choosing, in order, some or all of the depositor's 6 r numbers that then correctly match the ranking order of a selected number of the n numbers in:

• the Ranking List, or

• in one or more new ranking list/s created for this purpose ("New Ranking List")

Example 5.2 - Benefits of the Extra Payment Feature

The benefit of this extra payment feature is that for a relatively small cost levied against the returns that are to be paid to some of the depositors in each relevant offering by the Bank of a Bank "Term Multi", the Bank can offer an 'extra' return or cash benefit to a depositor/s in each relevant offering that may become payable to a depositor in the event that a depositor is able to match, in order, his or her selected numbers to the required numbers on the Ranking List or, as may be required, on a New Ranking List. And this extra payment that may be paid to a depositor can be very sizable.

Example 5.3 - "New Ranking List"

If the (first) Ranking List was used, then it is likely that this extra prize feature would only ever be won by depositors that had already become winners - as those depositors, representing approximately 1/10* of all 5,000 depositors, would have at the very least all correctly chosen the first ranked number on the (first) Ranking List.

We believe it is preferable that for the purposes of this additional extra prize, all 5,000 depositors should be given an equal chance. Preferably this is done by the creation of a New Ranking List of the 10 n numbers, determined by random draw on or about the maturity date of the Bank "Term Multi". Further, the determination of the New Ranking List by random draw reduces the chances of fraud in respect of the 'large' extra prizes.

By using a New Ranking List, each of the 5,000 deposits has an equal chance to win the extra payment, and each depositor will retain a significant interest in his/her deposit until then. Further benefits are set out in Example 5.10 below.

This Example 5 proceeds on the basis that there is a New Ranking List of the 10 n numbers determined by random draw on or about the maturity date of the Bank "Term Multi".

Example 5.4 - Matching the Depositor's numbers against the "New Ranking List"

To illustrate how a depositor's 6 r numbers can be later matched, in order, to the first 6 ranked n numbers in the New Ranking List, see Table 7 below:

Table 7 - Example of a Depositor's 6 chosen numbers matching the ranking order of the first 6 n numbers in the "New Ranking List"

Example 5.5 - The Size of the Extra Payment Feature Preferably, this extra return or cash benefit to be paid to a depositor/s that correctly matches the required number of his/her/its original r number choices with the required number of numbers on the New Ranking List relevant to a 'standard' offering of a Bank "Term Multi" is of an amount that is at least equal to, but preferably of an amount that is greater than, the amount identified in Example 3 as the fourth stage payment amount for an offering of the Bank "Term Multi" - see Example 3.21, Table 6, where the 4 stage payment is in most cases set at $500,000 for each offering.

Preferably, in this Example 5, for each offering of a Bank "Term Multi", the extra payment feature/s total an amount of between $500,000 and $2,000,000, although it could be greater - see Example 5.13.

Example 5.6 - Numerous Options for the Extra Payment Feature

There are many options available to the Bank or the Insurer when making this extra payment feature available for depositors in each offering of a Bank "Term Multi". For example, an extra return or cash benefit may be offered to the depositors in each offering of the Bank "Term Multi" in respect of one or more of the following occurrences of a depositor having, by reference to the New Ranking List:

• the first 6 numbers (e.g. see Table 7 above); and/or

• the first 5 n numbers; and/or

• the last 6 n numbers, in order as ranked; and/or

• the last 5 n numbers, in order as ranked.

These numerous options are further considered in Example 5.13 below. Example 5.7 - The Odds

Figure 6a sets out the odds of picking a range of r numbers in order from a larger range of n numbers. Relevantly, Examples 3, 4 and 5 are all based on a depositor picking 6 numbers in order from a range of 10 n numbers.

The odds for each of the above scenarios set out in Example 5.6 are set out below:

• the first 6 n numbers in order is odds of 1 in 151 ,200

• the first 5 n numbers in order is odds of 1 in 30,240

• the last 6 n numbers, in order is odds of 1 in 151 ,200

• the last 5 ii numbers, in order is odds of 1 in 30,240

These above odds mean that for Bank "Term Multi" offerings, with each offering comprising 5,000 deposits (representing one entry, or one chance), on average an extra payment to a relevant depositor/s for: first 6 n numbers in order occurs every 30.24 offerings (151,200 ÷ 5,000) first 5 n numbers in order occurs every 6.05 offerings (30,240 ÷ 5,000) last 6 n numbers in order occurs every 30.24 offerings (151,200 ÷ 5,000) last 5 n numbers in order occurs every 6.05 offerings (30,240 ÷ 5,000)

Preferably, we believe that for this extra payment feature to be attractive to depositors, depositors must see that winners do occur, and that they can occur reasonably often.

Accordingly, we believe that it is preferable to structure this example of an extra payment feature on the basis that there are two or more payment offerings on offer, with at least one of the extra payment offerings having odds that are set to ensure it is won reasonably often, for example one of the extra payment offerings is expected on the odds to be won on average at least once every 5 to 10 offerings of a Bank "Term Multi".

We have adopted this principle - see Example 5.11 below. Example 5.8 - Extra Payment Features can be Insured by 3 ^r Parties

It is an option for the Bank, or the Insurer referred to in Examples 3 to 4 above, including this Example 5, to obtain separate insurance from a third party underwriter or insurer to underwrite the offer to depositors of the extra payment feature/s, which will only become payable upon the occurrence of one or more selected events, such as the events set out in Examples 5.6 and 5.7 above. Similar third party insurance is used to cover for special risks - such as by lottery or gaming operators who wish to insure their obligation to pay significant prizes against set odds, or hole-in-one insurance for golfing events. Such insurance is all about the odds and this type of insurance can also be used in respect of the extra payment feature/s as contemplated in this Example 5, involving the Bank "Term Multi" where depositors select a set of 6 numbers, from a larger set of 10 n numbers.

Alternatively, the risk that is to be undertaken by a third party underwriter or insurer could instead be a risk undertaken by the Bank and/or the Insurer, with part or all of a 'notional' insurance premium (that would otherwise have been paid to a third party insurer) being set aside by the Bank and/or the Insurer to accumulate to meet the insured event/s as they occur.

However, we believe that it is more preferable that such a risk be independently insured, especially recognising that the insured event could occur earlier than expected, and more often 'initially' than expected. For example and as illustrative of this risk only, Figures 3b and 3h evidence that from a random draw of 6 different numbers from a range of 10 n numbers being allocated to each of the 5,000 depositors, the winning depositor had, in order, the first 5 ranked n numbers and was just 1 out of 5 away from having 6 in a row.

Example 5.9 - Cost of the Insurance

Typically the third party insurer will want an insurance premium equating to 1.75 x to 2.25 x the insured risk. To illustrate what this means in terms of the cost of obtaining this insurance from a third party, and taking the required insurance premium cost as the mid-point, being 2 x the risk:

Assume that what is being insured against is a payment of $1,000,000, to be paid to a depositor that correctly chooses the first 6 ranked n numbers (in order) in the New Ranking List;

The odds of this event occurring are odds of 1 in 151,200 - see Figure 6a;

Each depositor has one set of 6 n numbers, therefore each depositor represents and has one entry;

At 2 x the risk: The Insurer operates on the basis that against the probability of the insurer being required to pay out the insured amount of $1,000,000, and based on the odds that this event should on average occur once every 151,200 entries, the insurer will have been paid insurance premiums totalling 2 x the insured risk, i.e. to be paid a total of $2,000,000 in insurance premiums from 151,200 entries (deposits);

The insurance premium per entry/deposit is therefore:

$2,000,000 ÷ 151,200 = $13.23 per entry/deposit;

And importantly, for each offering of a Bank "Term Multi" (consisting of 5,000 deposits @ $5,000 each, totalling $25,000,000), the insurance cost to be absorbed within each offering in order to cover an 'insured' extra payment of $1,000,000, is just $66,138.

Table 8 below sets out by way of examples, the costs of obtaining third party insurance in respect of a depositor having in order 5 or 6 numbers in the New Ranking List for insured amounts ranging from $500,000 to $2,000,000 as an insured 'extra payment' - at a premium rate of 2 x the insured risk. Table 8 - Costs of Insurance per depositor/entry and per offering (involving 5,000 depositors)

Example 5.10 - A Further Key Benefit/Advantage

By using the methods to create this extra payment feature in respect of each offering of the Bank "Term Multi", the Bank has created a situation where, in respect of each offering, it can:

• pay-out amounts that are greater than what would otherwise be payable under normal fixed interest rate offerings; • but, at the same time, the Bank always pays less (or not substantially any more) than what it would otherwise pay under normal fixed interest rate offerings - in this Example 5 it remains at 90% - see Table 11 below.

We believe this aspect of the invention of being able to offer a significant extra payment, even though this significant extra payment is contingent on a certain event/s, to be of real benefit to the Bank as among other things, and in addition to the financial benefits to the Bank, it makes for an attractive investment proposition for the Bank's existing depositors, and it is an attractive investment proposition with which the Bank can use to attract new depositors, all of which it can do on a term deposit basis.

Example 5.11 - Numerous Multiple Extra Payment Options It will be appreciated that a standard offering of a Bank "Term Multi" could be structured to offer more than one extra payment feature.

For instance, and by way of example only, a standard offering of a Bank "Term Multi" could include the following two or three extra payment features, as set out in Tables 9 and 10 below:

Table 9 - Example A: Two Extra Payment Offerings

Event - With reference to Extra Payment Amount Total Cost to be absorbed the "New Ranking List" a within the standard

Depositor has the following offering of a Bank "Term numbers: Multi"

First 6 $1,000,000 $66,138

Last 6 $500,000 $33,069 Total Insurance Cost $99,207

Example A

Frequency of Extra Payments: By offering two extra payment amounts as set out in Table 9 - Example A above, and with reference to Example 5.7 - The Odds, on average:

either of the $1,000,000 for the first 6 numbers, or the $500,000 for the last 6 numbers, should become payable once every 15.12 offerings (calculation: 30.24 ÷ 2).

Table 10 - Example B: Three Extra Payment Offerings

Frequency of Extra Payments: By offering three extra payment amounts as set out in Table 10 - Example B above, and with reference to Example 5.7 - The Odds, on average: the $500,000 for the first 5 numbers on the New Ranking List should become payable once every 6.05 offerings of a Bank "Term Multi"; and

either of the $1,000,000 for the first 6 numbers, or the $500,000 for the last 6 numbers, should become payable once every 15.12 offerings (calculation: 30.24 ÷ 2).

Example 5.12 - Proposed Adjustments to Pay the Extra Payment Insurance Premium

In respect of a 'standard' offering of the Bank "Term Multi" being offered with the two extra payment features as set out in Table 9, Example A above, the insurance cost of $99,207 is preferably paid by way of it being deducted from the payments that would have otherwise been made to the winning depositor at the 4 ^th stage level.

To illustrate this, we have set out in Table 11 below, a copy of Table 6 from Example 3.21, and made an adjustment to this table in respect of the amount to be paid to the winning depositor at the 4 ^th stage level - see additional two columns at the bottom of the table.

Table 11 - Overview of Bank and Depositor Positions based on Varying Market Interest Rates - ADJUSTED FOR INSURANCE COST of EXTRA RETURN/S

Item Projected Market Market Market Market Market or Rate Rate Rate Rate Rate

Maximum

Numbers

3% 4% 5% 6% 7%

90% Rate for the 2.7% 3.6% 4.5% 5.4% 6.3% Bank

P.V. at $23,057 $22,444 $21,848 $21,269 $20,705

90 % of Market rate

Upfront Premium $1,943 $2,556 $3,152 $3,731 $4,295

Cash Benefit to the $207 $267 $324 $378 $428 Bank of 90% rate

Vs market rate

Fixed Pavouts ^ls Stage payouts per 500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 deposit deposits

Variable

Pavouts

^2nd Stage payouts 50 $2,500 $5,000 $7,500 $10,000 $12,500 per deposit deposits

^3rd Stage payouts 5 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 per deposit deposits

PRIOR to 1 amount $270,000 $540,000 $560,000 $580,000 $600,000 ADJUSTMENT

4 ^th Stage payouts

Last Deposit/s

standing as per

Table 6 Example

3.16

LESS -$33,069 -$99,207 -$99,207 -$99,207 -$99,207

Insurance Cost (1)

Extra Payment/s - Table 9 Example A

ADJUSTED 1 amount $236,931 $440,793 $460,793 $480,793 $500,793 4 ^th Stage payouts

Last Deposit/s

standing

(1) In Table 11 above, under the 3% Interest Rate Column, the insurance cost is set at $33,069 and is limited to providing for one extra return of $500,000 in the event a depositor correctly chooses the first 6 n numbers.

Example 5.13 - Other Variations for Extra Payment Options

As will be obvious to a person skilled in the art, and as is evident from Tables 9 and 10 above, each offering of the Bank "Term Multi" could be offered using a number of different combinations of extra payments (preferably insured by a third party), set against what the Bank believes is an attractive offer for its existing customers, and an attractive investment to attract, and to retain, new customers. As a further example, the three extra payments set out in Table 10 - Example B, could be offered to only some of the 5,000 depositors, being only those depositors who are selected on or about the maturity date of the Bank "Term Multi" by having chosen as their first number choice, a number that is randomly chosen from the number range of 1-10 ("Qualifying Step"). Once those depositors are selected/determined, and they would represent

approximately 10% of all depositors {calculation: one number out of 10), then the New Ranking List can be thereafter determined, following which only those depositors who are selected by the Qualifying Step are then eligible to 'win' the extra payment amounts as set out in Table 10 - Example B by matching in order their 5 or 6 number choices against the New Ranking List.

This Qualifying Step has the effect of reducing the number of deposits eligible for the extra payments set out in Table 10 - Example B by approximately 90%. Further, it has a corresponding reduction to the cost of the insurance premium to be absorbed within the overall costs of offering a Bank "Term Multi". This c. 90% reduction is evidenced below in Table 12 - Example C, column 5.

Table 12 - Example C: Three Extra Payment Offerings (cost adjusted for qualifying event - by l/10 ^th )

Event - With Extra Payment Total Total Adjusted

Qualifying

reference to the Amount Insurance Cost Cost to be event

"New Ranking absorbed

Pre adjustment adjustment for

List" a within the

1 number in 10

Depositor has (as in Table 10) standard the following offering of a numbers Bank "Term

Multi"

First 6 $1,000,000 $66,138 $6,614

(÷ 10)

First 5 $500,000 $165,350 $16,535

(÷ 10) Last 6 $500,000 $33,069 $3,307

(÷ 10)

TOTAL Extra $2,000,000

Payments

Total

$264,557

Insurance Cost

Example B

(as in Table 10)

Total $26,456

Insurance Cost

Example C

As will be obvious to a person skilled in the art, a large number of extra payment options can be configured for offerings of a Bank "Term Multi". For example, both the offerings set out in Table 10, Example B and Table 12, Example C could be offered, at a total cost of c.

$291,013.

Alternatively, the three extra payment offerings in Table 12, Example C could be increased by a factor of 10 (to $10,000,000; $5,000,000 and $5,000,000 respectively), at a cost equating to the total cost of $264,560.

Requirement for Computer System

As will be understood by a person skilled in the art, the methods exemplified in the examples and citations above, will need be implemented in a physical device such as a computer system that is programmed to operate accordingly. Variations

It will of course be realised that while the foregoing has been given by way of illustrative example of this invention, all such and other modifications and variations thereto as would be apparent to persons skilled in the art are deemed to fall within the broad scope and ambit of this invention as is hereinbefore described.

For example,

(a) the number of depositors may be selected in a particular fund dispersal stage as the result of random selection of their nominated numbers, such as the ones used in various conventional lottery systems that are known in the art. Hence, the criterion for the selection based on the nominated number may vary and is not necessarily limited to the ones explained in the examples;

(b) the depositors that fail to reach a fund dispersal stage, including failing to reach the first fund dispersal stage, could receive other set benefits or payout opportunities, not necessarily open to those depositors who are successful in reaching fund dispersal stage(s);

(c) the fund dispersal stages could be different, including that there could be more or less than the 4 stages described in the above examples, or they could all occur before, at, or after the maturity date of the term deposit;

(d) a modification may be made so that an interest rate (a regular interest payment through the term of the deposit) could be payable to the depositor on each deposit. This modification is more likely to be made when interest rates increase, or when a borrower has a lower credit rating profile than other borrowers, e.g. the extra margin for the credit differential of the relevant borrower could be used in a modification to the five examples described above as a regular amount of interest to be paid to the depositors. It is noted that if such a modification was made, then any interest payable to the depositor would, in most commercial situations, be at a rate less than the otherwise "market interest rate" applicable to the relevant borrower, if that borrower were to attract depositors offering only a fixed rate of interest for the relevant term, with none of the features described in or contemplated by this invention;

(e) a modification may be made to the mix of benefits from the insurance policy as described in the current examples;

(f) the borrower could also be the insurer;

(g) the 3 -year term of the Bank "Term Multi" as set out in the examples could be altered to a lesser or greater term;

(h) the extra payment feature/s as set out in Example 5, could be structured so that the extra payments: could be winnable on multiple dates throughout (including after) the term of the Bank "Term Multi"; could be winnable by some depositors and not all as a consequence of some set or prior qualifying step, such as only being winnable by those depositors that survive the first elimination stage as set out in Examples 3-5; could be split into two or more different tiers of winnable extra payment features, with for example, one tier operating for those depositors eliminated at the first stage, and another tier operating for depositors not eliminated at the first elimination stage;

(i) the extra payment feature/s as set out in Example 5, could be structured so that the odds against winning the extra payments were significantly increased from those odds and ratios set out in the Example 5, with a corresponding balancing adjustment, such as by including monthly draws where each month a set of depositors receive one extra entry of 'selected r numbers', so that over the length of the term of the Bank Term Multi, the odds and ratios of winning the extra payment/s return to being close to or at the levels contemplated in Example 5;

(j) alternatively, the extra payment feature/s as set out in Example 5, could be structured so that a smaller amount was winnable each month, or each quarter, over the term of the Term Multi offerings, instead of at the maturity date as contemplated in Example 5, or a combination of both could be offered;

(k) there could be a number of borrowers offering depositors an investment in different but standard Term Multi offerings, with the extra payment features as set out in Example 5 being structured so that the extra payments are available to all depositors, irrespective of the actual Term Multi that a depositor is invested in;

(1) the parameters of invention as described in the examples can be varied in many different ways. For example, the parameters as set out in Examples 3-5 could be varied depending on the potential number of depositors that may make up a ' standard offering', and the related amount of deposit funds. These variations may include a change to: the potential pool of n numbers; the number of n numbers which a depositor is required to select; whether or not the order in which depositors choose their n numbers was or was not important; or changes could be made to allow for different deposit sizes by the depositors;

(m)the package of benefits arising from the insurance policy could be replaced with benefits from another arrangement designed to provide the same sort of fund dispersal outcome as the insurance policy provides as described herein, with or without the life insurance feature;

(n) some of the examples show sequential numbers in each range - but this need not be the case so long as the computer system is programmed with the identity of all of the numbers that can be chosen by depositors;

(o) some or all of the numbers that can be chosen by depositors could be allocated to depositors by random methods;

(p) the Ranking List of the n numbers as set out in Example 3 could be used by the financial institution as a broadcasting event, where the order of the numbers on the Ranking List is revealed to the depositors by some broadcast event, including by some virtual racing event (e.g. if the n numbers totalled 10 as they do for Example 3, then the ranking order of the 10 n numbers could be revealed by 10 'characters '(such as 10 comical characters numbered 1-10 that are applicable to the relevant financial institution) undertaking a virtual race where the finishing placements are determined by and match the order set out in Ranking List which the computers analysis of the depositors' selection of their numbers has determined (e.g. see Figure 3a). Alternatively, such a virtual race could be run in accordance with the 'prior', but undisclosed, results of a random draw of the 10 n numbers. These methods would allow the financial institution the ability to create some excitement and publicity around its offerings for depositors, and the delivery of the outcomes.

Finally various other alterations or modifications may be made to the foregoing without departing from the scope of this invention.

Advantages This invention is in relation to a system for investing in and dispersing funds from a financial institution as described herein, and has at least the following advantages. a) Opportunity for investors to receive significantly higher returns. b) Opportunity for financial institutions to attract depositors away from other

competitors, and to provide an attractive investment for their own clients, so as to mitigate against potentially losing them as customers. c) Simple to understand. Life insurance opportunity. e) Investment security - as the capital is well protected. f) Advantageous to financial institutions - as it creates a lower cost of funds for them. g) A lower cost of funding by financial institutions can allow those institutions to lower their lending rates, thereby benefiting the public. h) This system provides a mechanism for financial institutions to lengthen the maturities of their depositor base. i) Using this system to lengthen the maturities of a financial institutions depositor base creates greater financial stability for those financial institutions, which is of advantage to them and others in the financial market place, including members of the public. j) This invention can bring excitement/fun to investors/depositors as the selection

criteria to qualify for fund dispersal stages can be based on their own nominated numbers. Further, a financial institution could use the invention as a means to deliver results and communications to its depositors, such as by using exciting means designed to be unique to it, such as by the use of unique characters in a virtual race that is broadcast to deliver the order of the Ranking List, and then using the same event to broadcast the results, including the winning deposit/s. Hence, the invention is attractive and a motivating investment opportunity for all parties. k) This invention allows a financial institution to reward a last placement prize to a depositor, and to create an exciting event around that - see 5,000 placement (last place) in Figure 3n and Figure 4f.

1) This invention system is a good one as it encourages savings by encouraging

depositors to tie up their funds in a secure manner while still having the opportunity for substantial returns in excess of returns normally on offer by/through a financial institution fixed term deposit. m) This invention system may be viewed as an alternative to such lottery or gambling activities where there is a very high risk of losing all an investor's money, whereas this system provides for the capital to be protected by way of a term deposit, but still providing depositors with substantial upside opportunities. n) By using the methods as set out in Example 5 to create the extra payment feature relating to this invention, the invention in this method of operation creates for a financial institution an advantageous situation in respect of each offering, where the financial institution can:

• pay out to its depositors in a relevant offering, amounts that are substantially greater than what would otherwise be payable under comparable fixed interest rate offerings for like periods; but at the same time, the financial institution pays less than what would otherwise be payable under such comparable fixed interest rate offerings set out in Example 5, the total cost remains at 90%.

While the background to the invention discussed small or retail depositors, this invention is also applicable to larger investors participating in large investment offerings by sizable financial institutions, such as by a Government issuer.

Further, while this invention is applicable to a low interest rate environment, it is also applicable to a higher interest rate environment with or without some adaptions without departing from the scope of this invention.