Author Topic: Break The Bank (ABC Game Shows) Questions (Read 9039 times)

Don Howard · « **Reply #15 on:** October 13, 2006, 09:55:18 AM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'134370\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 09:04 AM\']
Does anyone know when CBS allowed you to keep anything you won over $25K, without having to give any back?[/quote]
I suspect it was in the early autumn of 1978, which was what allowed Match Game '78 to bring on the Star Wheel at that time.

mmb5 · « **Reply #16 on:** October 13, 2006, 12:14:48 PM »

[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'134371\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 09:25 AM\']
Wow, imagine if the Pyramid had premiered in the '60s..."The $1,000 Pyramid", with your Winner's Circle category values being $10 on the bottom row, $20 for the middle, $30 for the top....
[/quote]

If you're just lopping off the '0', the first row would be $5. Something tells me that the 60s mentality would have set in where the difference between winning and not winning wouldn't have been so severe or even to the point where the six boxes added up to $1,000 (like $100x3-$200x2-$300). This would be like Password, Match Game, et. al. where you got nothing extra for winning the entire bonus round. Thread hijack alert: I wonder which one was the first?

--Mike

aaron sica · « **Reply #17 on:** October 13, 2006, 12:27:28 PM »

[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'134387\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 12:14 PM\']
If you're just lopping off the '0', the first row would be $5. Something tells me that the 60s mentality would have set in where the difference between winning and not winning wouldn't have been so severe or even to the point where the six boxes added up to $1,000 (like $100x3-$200x2-$300). This would be like Password, Match Game, et. al. where you got nothing extra for winning the entire bonus round. Thread hijack alert: I wonder which one was the first?

--Mike
[/quote]

My mistake - The first syndie $25K had the $100, $200 and $300 - the daytime was $50, $100 and $200, and yes, I was lopping off the '0', so it would be $5 for each bottom box.

I wonder what they would have used then, because you do bring up a good point about nothing extra for winning the entire thing - would have been $55 for all 6 boxes if they were set up in the $5/$10/$20 mold.

For all those who hate the "'mo money syndrome" (of which I am one as well), to me this is quite an interesting reversal of that subject.....

clemon79 · « **Reply #18 on:** October 13, 2006, 01:04:32 PM »

[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'134388\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 09:27 AM\']
For all those who hate the "'mo money syndrome" (of which I am one as well), to me this is quite an interesting reversal of that subject.....
[/quote]
Thing is, Pyramid (when done right) is such a good game that I'd watch it anyhow.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #19 on:** October 13, 2006, 01:51:31 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'134390\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 01:04 PM\']
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'134388\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 09:27 AM\']
For all those who hate the "'mo money syndrome" (of which I am one as well), to me this is quite an interesting reversal of that subject.....
[/quote]
Thing is, Pyramid (when done right) is such a good game that I'd watch it anyhow.
[/quote]
But just like Millionaire, a significant part of the draw -- at least originally -- was the large payout. When the original version debuted, there was nothing else like it because so much money could be won in such a short amount of time. Not ONLY was the game terrific, but the payout was revolutionary.

To me, the bigger question would be whether "The Pyramid" would have even sold in the early seventies without the big-money element tacked onto it.

aaron sica · « **Reply #20 on:** October 13, 2006, 02:06:37 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'134390\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 01:04 PM\']
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'134388\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 09:27 AM\']
For all those who hate the "'mo money syndrome" (of which I am one as well), to me this is quite an interesting reversal of that subject.....
[/quote]
Thing is, Pyramid (when done right) is such a good game that I'd watch it anyhow.
[/quote]

Oh without a doubt, me too, regardless of the money given out. Been a favorite ever since I was old enough to know what it was.

The fun I'm having with this thread, though, is "cheapening" the shows - it's fun (at least to me) to come up with cheaper cash amounts for shows if they'd debuted earlier. For example, had WoF materalized in the '60s...$5, $10 spaces on the wheel, with a top dollar value of $50 or $75 in the first round? Much better than trying to come up with insane amounts of money to give away. All hypothetical, but still fun.

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #21 on:** October 13, 2006, 04:08:34 PM »

Quote

The fun I'm having with this thread, though, is "cheapening" the shows - it's fun (at least to me) to come up with cheaper cash amounts for shows if they'd debuted earlier. For example, had WoF materalized in the '60s...$5, $10 spaces on the wheel, with a top dollar value of $50 or $75 in the first round? Much better than trying to come up with insane amounts of money to give away. All hypothetical, but still fun.

You can start with Deal or No Deal...but I guess we've been down that road before. I wouldn't mind the "mo' money" syndrome so much if it at least kept in lines with inflation. $25,000 might have been the top prize on a game show in the '70s. I know there's a site out there (which I haven't got the inclination to check) but that's probably worth between $75-100,000 today(?)

I think going on a prime time game show and walking out with a $100,000 top prize would be a major accomplishment. I think even that's life-changing money to some degree...but I guess since WWTBAM - which is still a big favorite of mine - changed the rules 7 years ago, nothing short of $1 million top prize would cut it these days.

I wonder where we're headed next...

mmb5 · « **Reply #22 on:** October 13, 2006, 04:17:48 PM »

[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'134396\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 02:06 PM\']
The fun I'm having with this thread, though, is "cheapening" the shows - it's fun (at least to me) to come up with cheaper cash amounts for shows if they'd debuted earlier.
[/quote]
The $25 Bee.

--Mike

aaron sica · « **Reply #23 on:** October 13, 2006, 04:45:06 PM »

[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'134406\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 04:17 PM\']
The $25 Bee.

--Mike
[/quote]

That one probably wouldn't work. Sounds funny when sung. "$20 Bee", however, works much better.

aaron sica · « **Reply #24 on:** October 13, 2006, 04:47:34 PM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'134405\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 04:08 PM\']
I think going on a prime time game show and walking out with a $100,000 top prize would be a major accomplishment. I think even that's life-changing money to some degree...but I guess since WWTBAM - which is still a big favorite of mine - changed the rules 7 years ago, nothing short of $1 million top prize would cut it these days.

I wonder where we're headed next...
[/quote]

Oh, I know exactly what you mean. I've said this before but I remember being absolutely amazed when Pyramid hit syndication in '85 as "The $100,000 Pyramid". I was simply amazed at that much money being given out (I was also disappointed because I thought it would be like a $50K/$100K WC structure every night..but cut me some slack, I was only 10/11 years old

). Then, like you said, Ian, you get to Millionaire, and $100K won on a question's no biggie.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #25 on:** October 14, 2006, 05:13:49 AM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'134405\' date=\'Oct 13 2006, 04:08 PM\']
I know there's a site out there (which I haven't got the inclination to check) but that's probably worth between $75-100,000 today(?)
[/quote]
http://www.westegg.com/inflation

And it annoys the hell out of me that shows like D/ND treat anything under $50,000 like it's nothing at all. It's not life-changing, but I could take care of a lot of bills with the money, and would be happy to have it.