I examine a rent-seeking contest in which the winner gets a minimum rent but also gets an additional rent which is an increasing function of his lobbying expenditure. I give real-world examples of such rent-seeking competitions. Contrary to the standard result in the rent-seeking literature, I obtain the perverse result that aggregate rent-seeking expenditures may be inversely related to the number of rent-seekers. However, I note that even if this result holds, the cost of administering rent-seeking competitions may imply that society is better off with fewer contenders than with an infinitely large number of contenders, although the optimal number may not be the smallest number.