Maybe they make people wait so long because its usually old people who throw caution to the wind and risk it all and then win big = less money for Endemolians... so maybe they're hoping that 12-18 months down the line these old people will have 'popped their cloggs' so to speak... thus saving them money!

*Note that this post is a joke and no octogenarian gamblers were harmed in the making of it.

No controversial forum topic is complete without a post from MisterAl.

I think you make a good point about the £250,000 being a symbol of the show. There will always be a significant number of people who watch on the possibility that today's player will win the top prize. (That said, because of inflation in the last 5 years, the top prize is now effectively worth £218,000 with CPI (14.6%) and £214,000 with RPI (16.7%). People generally haven't noticed due to their wages not increasing at the same rate.)

I'll respectfully disagree in turn that lowering the amounts would lead to less viewers. The amounts are only one component of an exciting game. They key here is not to focus on what the player wins, but what the banker can offer.

At the moment, the producers' hands are tied, in that they can't afford to take too many risks. One symptom of the recession is more cautious players; another symptom is a more cautious banker, who when offered the chance, will put in standard offers that will likely be taken. The producers are in a catch 22 situation: to make the game more exciting, they have to put more money at risk.

But, Endemol are in financial difficulties:

Endemol snubs restructuring advisors and targets Five
Endemol 'will never repay its £2.2bn debt'
Endemol owners write off €250m

This is the sort of debt that can't be rebalanced quickly, and is going to weigh down on Endemol's finances. Channel 4 are desperate for more revenue, and will struggle to afford the show, if viewing figures dip below a million. You only have to look at the viewing figures, to know there's a problem.

I'm not saying that I would like or prefer a game with a lower prize structure; but, I have to be honest in that there will come a time where the producers aren't faced with a choice. Even a possible move to Channel 5 wouldn't help if the show were financially unsuitable.

France is an example of what could happen to us, with our game sharing many similarities. The show was doing well in 2006, when they increased the top prize from €500,000 with 22 boxes and 6 offers, to €1,000,000 with 24 boxes and 9 offers. The show was cancelled 3 months later, the host of the show saying that was due in part due to players taking too few risks.

It returned 3 years later, with a top prize of €500,000, 24 boxes, and 8 offers. The circumstances are different, with the top prize being raised, but the similarities are there. Even then, the show was cancelled due to the impact of the recession, before being brought back in 2010.

If the producers can reintroduce flexiblity in the offers, then the game will improve. But, to do that, there will need to be some sort of change:

Producers have access to additional funds, e.g. via phone-in competitions
Amounts on the board are reduced
Changes to the show's presentation to boost viewing figures
Wait out the effects of the recession

If you think that the show can survive without changing, that's fine. KP makes a great point that we need to find out what the viewer really wants, and there are many kinds for many reasons.

What we have to consider though, is, why wouldn't a 1p/£200k finish be any more exciting than 1p/£250k? Would a £40k offer on the first, be less exciting than a £50k offer on the second; or more, because of the increased unpredictability? This is what we have to find out, and what the producers need to test.



On the banker role, I should have made clearer: the banker should play the role of the banker, no change in that. A percentage of shows could benefit from varied offers, and bringing in an increased number of people to generate the offers in rotation would help.

My Dad and I enjoyed the day we went to see the show in December 2008 with Patricia and Johnny's games, and that translated into great telly too. I don't know what it's like since they introduced recording 4 shows a day, and don't have your knowledge on how much happens inside. All I know is, that on the box, the show generally has a lacklustre second part, and an occasionally good last part.

The only reason I mention cutting down the running time is, at it is, the humour and jokes just aren't making it into the show anyway, or not to the extent as they should be. Instead, there's "only here once" and a lot of fawning about not going to certain boxes because they have some imagined affliction or unrelated connection with a player's life.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want drastic sweeping changes as it is! But, changing the game might improve the entertainment too. Unless, the answer is improving the entertainment, i.e. more humour and less taking itself too seriously.


That wasn't meant to survive the final edit. I've addressed this earlier to a certain extent, that players need to be less target-driven, and more flexible.

I'll reply to more posts soon, as there are a lot more excellent points to address. Glad you're all liking the topic!

I've just dug out a post I made at some point last year with my idea to improve the game:

I think things might be improved if the board was changed ever so slightly.

Basically, I'd remove the 2 lowest blues (except the 1p), and move the two oranges to the left of the board, whilst adding in 2 new red values: 7500 and 25000.

....
500
750
1000
3000

5000
7500
10000
15000
20000
25000
35000
50000
75000
100000
250000

Not that much money is being added to the board, but boards will generally be a little bit more stable, meaning that offers can be slightly bigger, leading to more interesting decisions.

I think offers should be bigger anyway. Not big as in overly generous, just big enough to be fair. All offers should be dealable. Most offers aren't. This is not good TV when the player does not have a decision.

I'd also like to see a reduction in the number of gimmicks. We seem to have a great number of them recently, and they pretty much ruin the game until 5-box.

Also, 5-box should be 3 boxes to open. I do not think that one box at a time should become permanent.

The general idea was the board should be a bit more stable. At the moment it's a bit top heavy with quite a lot of all or nothing games. My board adds a lot more values around the middle with the result being boards will generally end up being more stable meaning more risks can be taken. I think me and KP did a trial game of this at one point on the games board. It's not massively game changing but subtle enough to achieve what the OP wanted I think. Big wins will still be there, blue wins will still be there, and 1p/£250,000 is preserved (you can't lower the prize to £200,000, pr suicide).

That would be a much better stable board, but will Endemol listen to that idea...I doubt it

ie more deals.

The show was ruined years go with too much dealing and that idea would finish it off.

Not neccesarily. If the board is more stable it also makes it easier to no deal and carry on.

Nearly 6 years since this topic was launched. I think Eddie's lead post and title of this topic was an eerie foreshadowing of what was to come after 2010!

From about mid-2010 onwards was when players started to become more and more cautious, which almost coincided with the show being stretched out to an hour-long slot at the start of 2011, making the show not just predictable, but drawn and at times very boring to watch. Sure enough, in the first year of the hour-long timeslot alone, we had countless entries into terrible deal fame like Grace, Sherilyn, Fran, Wilf, £24k Michael, £1,250 Rosie and £15k Geoff

DoND's peak was in it's first 2 seasons (which appears to be the case for a lot of shows - The full spark is at the beginning and then slowly fades), but i'd say 2011 was really the beginning of the end for the show, with the show becoming boring and more drawn out, the vast increase in cautious players who need money (making the show very predictable at times), and the increase in gimmicks since 2010 - First there was the minature boxes in Tracey's game, then the catapult twist in themed weeks (which people got sick of almost instantly) and later, permanent changes to the format like Box 23 and the offer button

"....Is DoND in trouble?" is an understatement now, sadly. With the confirmation that the DoND's last shows have been filmed, and the final curtain is set to come down on the show for good in a few months time

I think since late 2014, there have been signs that DoND wouldn't be on air for much longer. As of 2014, the show no longer airs on weekends, since this time last year, the show's been taking breaks almost every second or third week to accomodate horse-racing telecasts (Though it's had a solid run so far this year. Don't worry, that'll change next month though! ) and the show even took a 2 MONTH+ break last year - Quietly going off to a break in early July and returning in a graveyard timeslot in late September - i.e. signs that the show is being phased out, and i think the extended summer break was to give us an idea of what life without DoND will be like, when we get to that stage in a few short months