I suggested on Janet's game thread that although she may well have taken her box regardless, part of the reason for the large number of blue wins recently is the poor final offers that contestants have been getting.

After posting that I looked at the episode history, and saw nobody had dealt at this stage since Alexandra on 19th September! And while there have been 8 final offer deals this series, three of them were joke deals and most of the others were on absolute all or nothing finishes.

I expect some of the Wakeyists may defend these low offers as they want people to play to the end, but I think the final offer should be the toughest decision of the game, when the contestant is still in play and has two very different amounts remaining. Offering 25% or less of the higher amount on a red/blue finish isn't going to test many people, unless the red is £250,000.

At the moment it seems to usually be a case of either deal at 5-box or go to the end. And perhaps the expectation of a crap final offer is a factor in persuading a lot of people to deal at 5-box as well!

Yes, it used to only be really low if the 1p remains until the final pair, but now it's really any blue! I think players are going to have to make their 5-box decision based on the fact they'll probably get offered 20% - 25% of the red on a red-blue finish, probably even if the blue is £750!

A few better get-out offers at the final pair will lead to more no-deals at 5-box, which will please many of us round here!

any final two with the 250K should be 65K minimum to really test them.

I agree with you. However, it is the banker's "job" to get the box for as low an amount as possible. In a low blue/red finish, I think a lot of people would deal in the fear of winning that low blue, to cut their losses after turning down a large sum of money.

Not necessarily as Theresa's 52K was dealt but they shouldn't really go lower than 50K as they might get an 'easy' 250K win.
They can do that occasionally - theresa's game created a talking point.
But most of the time if the banker has any sense he should offer a good offer as they've gambled to get they're anyway and he should offer them high offers like Claudine.

I'd agree with that point too. I've always said that £50k would be my dealing point if I had a blue/£250k finish.

That's fair enough, if people are accepting the offers (which they usually do if it's £250k or £100k involved). With lower reds though, they have become easy no-deals. In that case the Banker's not doing his job, he's gambling on the box containing the blue!

Well given that it was only 5K, I reckon a lot of people would no deal that. i would! I think he should have offered 6/7K for that scenario to make it a bit more interesting.

I was happy enough with Alexandra's final offer as it rewarded courage slightly and I thought it was about right although wkaeyists think that wasn't testing because it was dealt.

Basically the banker can offer lowish amounts but not ridiculous ones.
Lee for example should have been offered 1-1.5K so he would have had a decision to make.

I think another problem is all or peanuts situations at 5 box where the banker is popping in joke offers all the time.

well unless your names Laura or they want another winner your offer should MINIMUM with 1p be 50K anything else below is a easy no deal only the real custards would deal anything below 50K offer no matter what the fall back.

1p in final two I think the anything goes is good pj style swap sometimes or retract the deal to take a risk if its 1p vs a power 5 hmmm. Controversial but controvery = ratings.

Well, take today's game for example, I would have offered £10,000 on a £100 vs £20,000 board because it's in the middle and it gives the contestant a dilemma as they can either take that £10,000, double it, or lose the lot. Whereas with £5,000, it's alot less of a dilemma in my opinion, you can either take the £5,000, lose £5,000 or earn an extra £15,000 and I know which decision I'd make. That's said, some people might find £5,000 more of a dilemma and may cut their losses and run. £5,000 is alot of money to some people and is a nice consulation prize if their game has crashed and burned. It all depends on the player and their circumstances.

I think the final offer should be testing for the player but it should vary otherwise it would get boring and predicatable.

I think my problem with low offers is that when someone takes one, it feels flat. If someone says No Deal then it's a "Yay, you show that Banker, now win big!" moment, but then if they crash it feels really depressing (1p Trevor being a key example there!).

With high offers, if they deal it's a "Yay, good move!" moment, if they No Deal then it's a "Wow, what bravery, hope it was right!". So that's two interesting emotions for both options, but when it's a low offer Deal, it just feels...kinda "Oh, ok then". Subsequently destroying the board in the proveout can provide good fun but if they don't and get a huge proveout offer, then it just makes the situation worse. That's why I really *hated* the situation in late April, when you'd have games with low offers until the contestant dealt, and then suddenly in the proveout they get insanely high - that's not entertainment, that's just televisual cruelty!

I rarely complained about the high offers because eventually I decided that I preferred them to the lower ones. Maybe in early Season 2 I did a bit because they were new and surprising then, but I would really prefer a week of Paul H-like games to 1p Trevor-like ones. Well, I tell a lie, it's good to mix it up sometimes and throw in low and high offers randomly, but generally, high-offer games I prefer to low ones!

The only time I think they got the offers right was may 2007. after the stupidly high offers in april and before the low offers in June. Despite what some wakeyists may think i think they put a lot of offers right then.

I agree with alot of what Billy said. The banker shouldn't force people to no deal. He should merely give tricky lowish offers.
Take Irene for example if she'd won a blue which she did that was rubbish as she was forced to no deal at the 5 box stage. At the same time if she'd left the 75K and got a really decent sum of money that would have been flat and she wouldn't have had much of a 'gamble' to get it.

Ultimately I think it is possible to get the balance right giving gamblers high offers as well as pitching them at a low/average level a lot of the time to create tough decisions + entertainment.

They should also give tricky decsions on poor boards. e.g 1/2K instead of a few hundred quid.

that said Lisa, James and Maria all went all the way.

The banker seems particularly mean by kicking people when they are down. He never seems to offer a get-out for a player who has suffered bad luck and apparently relishes making them squirm even more.

In Janets game yesterday she went from a strong position at 5 box to a weak one at 2 box though bad luck and I just knew a low offer was coming. No compassion. She was either going to be humiliated by having to accept an insulting offer or go on. And he's done this on numerous occassions lately.

As I've said before I'm relatively happy if someone takes a risk and then deals. If Janet had accepted a reasonable offer at 2 box, say 8 or 9K then I would have been happy because she took risks in earlier rounds. I like to see bravery rewarded and in Janet's case yesterday she had been very brave and could have been given a fair offer as a get out.

However, ultimately its a game that relies on emotions good or bad to maintain its viewing figures. The banker is cast as a classic 'baddie' and meanness seems to keep viewers hooked. Look at The Weakest Link. Still pulling good audiences after all these years.

I think that's true Basicasic, I often question why certain players are getting exceptionally generous/mean offers for no reason but I guess at the end of the day, it's entertainment. The average viewer couldn't really care about 'offer generosity' whereas myself and others on the forum probably take it more seriously.

It's just frustrating that people haven't even been given teasers at 5 box/2 box with collapsed boards and just forced to take the box and the banker's been getting 'lucky' so often.

Now the shows going on until at least June, they should have brought it out later Methinks, or people will be thinking that £51,000 is a decent offer on a £50k/£250k finale...

that said, what Lisa, James or Maria?

Personally i dont think he should go lower than 25% of the mean with £250k in the final two

100K Maria, 15K James and 3K lisa. The point I'm making is that there have been a lot of offers that have been undealable at the final 2 but they are sort of exceptions because they turned down dealable offers there.