I know im probably gonna cause a stir here but what the hell is it with loads of these contestants never seeing something like 7k in all their lives doesn't anyone who comes on this show have a decent paying job?.

The part-time Wakeys are out in force after this one! Just imagine what it would be like if the real one was still here... (and I think basicasic will do well not to get himself banned tonight!)

She's at uni I think...I'll be starting this year and have never had anything like £7.5k...

I know alot of students tend to not have since they are still in education but im sure plenty of older contestants have also said this too.

Oh, another one of those who forgets the first two words of the game's title when defining how to play it.



I'll give you that.



She showed up that it's about weighing up risk and reward - and she clearly couldn't face the risk of losing £7,500 on a dangerous board, albeit one that could have produced enormous reward given good fortune.

Hey, you guys are all going to enjoy the summer replacement for DoND - every contestant has a full-time job!

I bet Sarah had big regrets after the game.

Well, not only does Sarah work in the ice-cream business like Gaz but also had the £100,000 in her box like Gaz! Shame she didn't win it like Gaz did though...oh well I'm sure she's happy with £7,500! Welldone Sarah!



Haha I love Rita!

I thought Sarah was lovely. She didn't take the game too seriously, and she was really nice and bubbly.

I was surprised at her deal, but £7,500's a lot of money, and she would clearly never have gambled for the £100k.

It would be a joke if the offers were consistent. The offers have to show judgement or the game would have no depth. Nothing but luck would matter. Like playing poker without betting.

Those with a weak disposition please look away now.

I thought Steven's bravery and pluck on Friday was sure to be an inspiration to today's player.

I'd had enough even before the introduction had finished what with that irritating nervous giggle and fringe down to her chin. The omens weren't good when she started consulting the family, having eventually giggled her way to the 2nd offer. And after the extensive sweep of family, pilgrims and players at the 3rd offer stage it was odds-on for a deal. Even so I nearly choked on my coffee when she uttered the dreaded word. If I'd been eating my cake the paramedics would have had to perform a tracheotomy

When I think back to the previous lame deals of Steven and Kelsie (and even Jeff this week) at least they had decent offers to tempt them despite golden boards. This comprehensively trumped those as the most pathetic, pitiful, timid, lamentable deal I've EVER seen bar none. When I think of the players that have struggled recently with poor boards to get anything decent out of the game and they've had to watch this!

And for what? £7500! Mummy and Daddy have probably got that lost down the backs of the seats on the sofa. I would have had more sympathy had she carried on and then bailed out after the £250k had gone. It would have been a 1 box game and a deal at that stage would have been reasonable for the cautious player.

That deal would be off the bottom of the Dealometer and I think the Banker's low subsequent offers showed the contempt he held for it. I don't think anybody on this forum can defend that deal. I just don't.

A lost opportunity to kick-start her young life with £100,000. What a waste.

I won't bother arguing with the rest because it's been done sixty-three times before, but I think this bit is totally wrong...if he'd had that much contempt he'd have made really high offers to rub it in and show up what a crap deal it was! As it was she only missed out on £10k in terms of the offers, making it look like not such a bad deal if you ignore the contents of the box.

I'll give you almost everything except this:



But they almost certainly don't! You're treating £7,500 like it's £75.

Once again it comes down to people's perception of money and this is why Deal or No Deal is such an interesting 'game' show. We have VARIETY, meaning there are players like Graeme who obviously don't think £41,000 will make a lot of difference to them and then players like Sarah who consider £7,500 to be life-changing. I personally consider no dealing £41,000 to be more of a stupid decision than dealing at £7,500 but that's because how I value money is different to how Graeme (and basicasic) view it!

I agree, I disagreed with the 3rd round deal at the time but the show needs variety. it makes it more interesting. We need just a few cautious dealers and extreme risk takers to make the game interesting and unpredicatable.

Had she gone all the way, that would have been the case!

Not literally of course. The point I'm trying to make is that they own an ice cream factory. They will have pots of money and £7500 will be small beer to them. Sarah could have gone for the big stuff knowing she'll never have to struggle like the average person has to at that age.

Well even if her parents do earn a lot, it doesn't necessarily mean they're prepared to spend it all on her. (Which is what pisses me off about the student finance system...not that I'm at all bitter about getting a grant of ninety quid a year.) The fact that she said she'd "never had any money", and indeed the fact that she dealt at all, suggested that she was definitely in need of it.

Well done Sarah, but I think it was silly to deal when you did. And why is the Banker being so under-inflated with the offers?! In March/April her proveouts would have been £15,000, £20,000 and £50,000!

And the Rita bit was hilarious! She jumped up so fast! Bless her!

They may own a factory and have quite a lot of money from that, but I don't really see why that would automatically mean they would give money to Sarah.

I think he was just demonstrating that he 'got her cheap' and that subsequent insulting offers were all that would have been needed to get her out of the chair had she actually gone on.