Misconceptions you have had about game shows

[rigsby]

[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' post=\'185898\' date=\'May 12 2008, 10:49 PM\']not to mention it being apparent how much makeup Barker actually wore.[/quote]On a related note, back when I was much, much younger, I thought that was his actual hair color...

[ITSBRY]

We didn't get cable until around 85. After discovering game show reruns, I can recall being convinced that there was a law that said daytime shows (game shows and soap operas) could never be canceled, just replaced...and that cable was created  to "make room" for all the shows that were no longer on the networks. I specifically remember seeing Tic Tac Dough and Hot Potato reruns and thinking "oh wow, I thought this show wasn't on anymore...they've been making more episodes all this time?"

I think the logic behind this had something to do with knowing that there were federal laws that had something to do with game shows and the fact that TPIR and most daytime soap operas that were airing at the time had been on TV my entire life.

Just think about a world with endless episodes of Three's A Crowd!

[SteveR]

[quote name=\'pownster\' post=\'185893\' date=\'May 12 2008, 11:08 PM\']And I could never understand why contestants were forced by the host to spend as much as their money on prizes as possible - I mean, wouldn't you just want to keep ALL THE CASH fof yourself to buy your own things?[/quote]
They didn't HAVE to buy the ceramic dog.

While they couldn't turn it into cash, they did have the option of putting any or all of that round's winnings On Account and try to build up for one of the "big" prizes that were available on each show.

Only problem was, you had to win another puzzle in order to have access to your On Account money.

[Ian Wallis]

Only problem was, you had to win another puzzle in order to have access to your On Account money.

...and avoid Bankrupt.

[Neumms]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'186142\' date=\'May 16 2008, 10:07 AM\']

Only problem was, you had to win another puzzle in order to have access to your On Account money.

...and avoid Bankrupt.
[/quote]

Wasn't the rule if you started buying, you had to keep buying until you had too little money left to buy any more?

[Ian Wallis]

Wasn't the rule if you started buying, you had to keep buying until you had too little money left to buy any more?

Yes, but you could put the remaining money On Account at any time.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'186145\' date=\'May 16 2008, 08:24 AM\']
Yes, but you could put the remaining money On Account at any time.
[/quote]
Was it? That wasn't an all-or-nothing deal? I thought once you committed to spending, you had to spend down as far as you could, and then you could put the remainder On Account (or on a gift certificate.)

[Ian Wallis]

That wasn't an all-or-nothing deal? I thought once you committed to spending, you had to spend down as far as you could, and then you could put the remainder On Account (or on a gift certificate.)

I remember watching a couple of Woolery episodes where a contestant bought one prize, had a few hundred left and said "I'd like to put the rest On Account".  Chuck just reminded him that he had to win another round to claim it.

I also have an episode on tape from 1985 where a lady puts $107 on account.  I can go back and check, but I'm sure there was a $48 ceramic dalmation or something still available that the contestant didn't want to buy.  I think the lowest-value prize was always under $100.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'186151\' date=\'May 16 2008, 09:13 AM\']
I think the lowest-value prize was always under $100.[/quote]
No. The dalmatian used to be the cheapie at $120 or so.