Or more accurately "Is there a point to them"

We know that it's very unlikely someone will ever deal at either offer. It's the way Endemol, (and the wakeyists ) want it . Seeing as this is as the case, do you think there is actually a point to the first and second offer under the current format?

I was thinking about two possible changes to the set-up bearing this in mind:

Either:

Get rid of the first two offers and make the first offer at 11-box, it sort of makes sense in it's own way to have the first offer at the halfway point in the game


Or:

Change the rounds to 5-5-5-5, it would still make a first offer deal unlikely but make a second offer deal all the more possible as if people want to deal after 11 boxes have been opened, why not after 10 have been opened?


Oh, and if anyone is wondering, the only first and second offers I would have seriously contemplated would have been Howard's £18,000, Matt's £35,000 and Aaron's £30,000.

Any thoughts?

They should keep the first and second offers and the way it is now...the first and second offers i think set up the game and what the bankers attitude is going to be towards the player.

The first and second offers are also a good time for there to be jokes and banter between the player and the banker

The first and second offers are also a good time for there to be jokes and banter between the player and the banker

They're far from jokes - look at KP's signature

They aren't made to make people go on for definite, some second offers have been amazingly high, some even over £20,000 (excluding Matt's and Aaron's wonderful boards for fairness), and they were turned down and the game crashed!

KP is the only person in the world who would take the second offer though .... I hope

I think they should definitely stay, as it forms the basis of the game. When Craig got offered three swaps at the start of his game, it was just pointless, and we didn't properly know how the banker was reading him at all.

Whilst the first and second offers may never get dealt, it would seem silly to get rid of them - if only for the purposes of the timing of the episode. The first and second offers do take up a few minutes each - especially when you get banter with the banker.

If you removed the first and second offers, then the show would barely last 35 minutes including adverts, and a lot of banter would be lost.

i really do agree and this is what makes the show so interesting for us who have a sense of humour but there are people who watch the show just for the gambling side of things(are,nt they sad)

They should get rid of them and any old trouts that think they're a good idea as well.

I'm convinced someone's going to deal at the 1st or 2nd offer one of these days. A targetist will come along, be offered £20k or thereabouts, and deal. The first two offers are always quite fun, as there's a lot of wing banter and you find out about the contestant.

They should be there so that if they are dealt, they have the biggest loss of a proveout ever and we can all point and laugh at them for being so silly.

I doubt anyone will ever take the 1st offer but theres been one or two lately when the 2nd offer comes I half expect to hear the "Thoughtful" Music followed by the dreaded 4 letter word.
I don't think anyone would dare deal though at offer 2 Noel would crucify em and so would I.

Which, as I said ages ago, is why I think taking the second offer takes courage. A very different sort of courage, sure, and it's perhaps fair to say it's fiscal cowardice. But the courage to stand up to your convictions against what would feel at the time like immense social disapproval... that's not to be dismissed. Dot lacked that courage, sucked on by the audience and ultimately bailing out for just a quarter of what she'd turned down under no little duress; Beryl, to my mind, did not, and I suspect if she'd played in January 2007 she would have gone before 11-box.

If they let her, of course...

I agree to previous comments the first couple of offers are necessary for the banker to weigh up the intentions of the contestant....gambler or not?!

I really do not think anyone would deal on the first offer, I mean contestants go to win big money! why else would anyone go on a game show, so unless either of the first 2 offers exceeded £40k which is highly unlikely, I really dont think first/second offer deals would ever happen.

Nope, they won't exceed £40k except in £500k games, because the maximum second-offer mean is about £40k. But if £25k or so - and we've seen more than a few second offers in that region - isn't 'big money' to you, I'm mildly worried. Of course it's not a patch on ten times that, but...

They definately shouldn't go. They set a pattern of the banker's thinking, and maybe a theme with the offers.

I would be interested to see as a 20-25K 2nd offer deal as a one/two/three off as that is substantial money and a talking point but not much more than that really.

Whilst it's highly unlikely the first & second offers will ever be taken (though part of me would like to see at least one person deal the first offer just to be different), it does indicate how the game will go and the mood of the Banker. It also allows for the Banker to play some joke offers and have a bit of fun with the contestant before the game gets to the more important offers.

I think opening 11 boxes in succesion would be too many at once as the chances of getting to first offer with the power 5 intact would become slim, plus if you had someone with a system then they might end up opening the 11 boxes too quickly, which means that Endemol might edit in more long pauses between the openings to drag out the tension. Also I think if the rounds changed to 5-5-5-5 we would see more early deals as there would be much more of a risk in no dealing if you had to open 5 instead of the usual 3.

Yeah, it is important to keep the first and second offers. I mean, yeah its unlikely they'll be taken, but it forms a relationship between the player and the Banker and sets up the game.