It is easier to do these in the evening when you’ve had the day to kick around some thoughts. But this one is especially unprofound…I was wondering if Deal or No Deal would be more interesting if the banker was actually contestant whose winnings would be based on how much he/she pays for the other contestant’s briefcase.
Right now, the banker is just some silhouette — the numbers are chosen by average of what is left on the board and the dramatic needs of the moment.
What if the banker/contestant has a pool of money from which to make offers. If the other contestant takes the deal, the banker gets twice the amount in the briefcase. If the other contestant doesn’t take the deal, then the banker would then get half of any money in the pool that remains after the final offer of the show. That way the baker has to judge between the potential rewards in the briefcase or the consequences of being left with only half the balance.
To make things interesting, you bring in enemies or competitors as the contestant and banker…bosses/employees, athletes, professional wrestlers and the like.
My wife says this is too complicated for television and she’s likely correct. I didn’t say these ideas would all be winners…of course it would be nice to have one winner…but the new year’s just begun and I haven’t had time to think of much yet.