If Sale of the Century were returning...

[urbanpreppie05]

Here's how I'd do it:

Round 1: Questions worth $50 each
Instant Bargain
Round 2: Question worths $50 each
Instant Bargain
Fame Game-played same as before, except it's back to faces. if the show were on a network, it would use the faces of stars from that network. If it were syndicated, it could be any stars.
Round 3: Questions worth $100 each
Instant Bargain
Fame Game
Speed Round: Questions worth $100 each.

All contestants recive their scores in cash and the prizes they won on stage.

The end Game: The $ale of the Century
Contestantswin it all if they reach a score of $7,500. This makes it so that better players can win in shorter amounts of time. Here's the prize chart. As before, they \"buy\" these prizes at greatly reduced prices.

Day #1- A trip, valued at 7-9K
Day #2- 3 rooms of furniture, valued at 15K
Day #3- A $20,000 shopping Spree at the Mall of America
Day #4- A Trip Around the World, valued at 30K or so
Day #5- A Boat, valued at 40 K
Day #6- A luxury Car, valued at at least 50K

At this part of the game, they MUST buy the prize-but can walk at anytime. (If I'm rusty with the rules, forgive me. I remember the last 2 endgames more.)

Day #7- The contestant has the option of walking away with all the loot (at least 100K) or playing an additional puzzle (like in the last few years) for a cash jackpot starting at 100K and increasing 10K each day it is not won. Sounds easy right? (at least the puzzles were then) Wrong. These are going to be a little harder, making for a big risk. If the contestant loses, they lose all prizes, except any instant bargain/fame game wins and the $7,500 won.

Set: A cross between the latter-day aussie years, with some american flair. The contestant podiums would have glass block behind it, staying blue-tinted during the question round, green during the IB/FG parts, and Red during the Speed Round. Geographically, everything would be set up exactly as it was before in the 80s, but the center \"pit\" would have the logo on it-it would also have a rising podium to display prizes, opening very similar to the James Bond movies (twisting open). The doors would also be used for some prizes, but wouldn't open fully until the end of the game (when they split apart). In the $ale round, the only prize on screen would be-the car, and a gratuitous 100,000+ sign. The rest of the prizes would be on flat screen TV's and slide out on stage (like Name that Video) and would be purplely-blue when not won, and would turn red with a red \"SOLD\" sign on it.

Theme: I like the Aussie themes better-they're slightly faster than ours.

Host: This, I never figured out. Any suggestions?

[Jimmy Owen]

One of the things that was unique about $ale was that you could buy things at incredibly low prices.  If each question is valued at $50 or $100 bucks, where is the temptation about buying say, a home gym for $7?  It was very exciting, in fact, the high point of the show, to see someone hit the Fame Game board for $25.  I have an idea for a non-straddling $ale.  I'll post it if there is any interest.

[Clay Zambo]

Sure, J, post away.    But haven't all versions of Sale been non-straddling?  And frankly, I don't know of anything worth \"fixing\" in Sale, beyond the endgame.

You're right about the $50 and $100 questions, though; $5 questions are all that the game needs.  Maybe $10s for a final round, but I doubt that.  Heck, $1 questions are plenty if the IBs and Instant Cash keep the game tight.

[urbanpreppie05]

Well...I probably should've mentioned that all of the IB prizes would be between 1500-4000, meaning the IB values would be higher too. All i did, essentially was add a \"0\" to the old values.  In fact, I remembered my original notes on \"my revival\" and I'll edit my previous post.

[Jimmy Owen]

Perhaps I should have called it the \"non-returning champ\" format. At the end of the show, the winner would go shopping with the cash won in the main game without knowing the sale prices.  The winner would then have to create a \"Shopping List\" choosing five prizes they want while keeping within their budget.  If they keep within budget, they win every prize on stage.  If not, they get the five prizes they picked as consolation.  A low main game money score most likely would send a player over budget pretty quickly, but at least they would get some nice prizes. anyway.

[Timsterino]

I would keep it just as it was on NBC in the 1980's with Jim Perry. It was a great show.

As a kid, I had fantasies about Summer Bartholomew.

Tim :-)

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'urbanpreppie05\' date=\'Jun 24 2003, 08:03 AM\'] Well...I probably should've mentioned that all of the IB prizes would be between 1500-4000, meaning the IB values would be higher too. All i did, essentially was add a "0" to the old values. [/quote]
 Right. Why? In an effort to give everyone a couple extra dollars in cash, you're ruining the concept of the Instant Bargain. Being offered a cruise for $150 does NOT have the same effect as being offered a cruise for $15.

I applaud your effort to use tangible dollar values to improve the consolation prizes a bit, but this is one case where the dollar values are what they are for a very good reason, and ought not be tampered with. If you have to send your contestants away with more, give 'em an extra box of Turtle Wax.

[ChuckNet]

As a kid, I had fantasies about Summer Bartholomew.

You weren't alone! :-)

Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious \"Chuckie Baby\")

[uncamark]

The Brit version (\"From Norwich--the Quiz of the Week!\") did not have continuing champions, so the game was often either who's going to win (and will they get enough to buy *something*) or can the leader get enough to buy the car.  Since Nicholas Parsons spit out at least 100 questions in every episode (with no Fame Game, more Instant Bargains, the Open Sale in the middle and rising question values), there was always the chance that someone could get enough for the car, which was always the \"star prize,\" as they say over there.  But basically, the final sale round was here's what you can buy, what do ya want, congratulations and join us next week--good night.

And all this considering that late in the run, the opening was looooong--after the Anglia knight logo and the \"Quiz of the Week!\" announcement and the animation to the theme song, they'd then bring out *all* of the sale prizes with their \"SOTC\" price, and then the announcer would do a description of each one (leaving out the brand names with the exception of the car, thanks to IBA regulations banning product placement--the IBA did allow \"SOTC\" and other game shows to give the make and model of car).  *Then,* the announcer would intro Parsons (who always seemed to make his entrance from the audience) and then they'd intro the contestants and get into the game.

And that's how *one* no-champions version handled it.

[TheInquisitiveOne]

This is for if I had total say in the revival of $ale:

Cosmetically, I would ask Ray and Marc Ellis (if they are alive, that is) to make the theme song, even if it is an off-shoot of the classic 1983 theme. As for the set, it should be a hybrid of the gold 1980s set and the 2002 Aussie set; I would keep the octagonal doors, but the rest would be a mix (art designers can feel free to chime in on this one). I also prefer the Faces on the Fame Game board with the contestant selecting after correctly answering the question.

As for the main game, I would not change one thing about the show. This is one format that should never be tinkered with, in my opinion. The third Instant Bargain would be the Instant Ca$h bargain, and everything else would remain the same. Returning champions would be allowed. The endgame format would depend on the show itself.

If it were a five-time-a-week show:
I would use the shopping format. Plain and simple. The only thing that I would change is that whatever money that the contestant fails to use in order to buy prizes would be what he or she keeps. For example, if a contestant had $620 and failed to buy something, he or she would keep the $620 as a consolation. Just like the 80s, the cash jackpot would be at the top of the mountain, starting at $50,000 and increasing by $1,000 for each day that it is not hit. Cars that would be offered would range between $30,000 and $50,000 (and slightly higher).

If it were a once-a-week nighttime show:
The shopping format would be way too long to muster, so I would use an enhanced version of the \"Winner's Board\" format to expedite things. Here is how it would work:
Like the 80s version, there are 20 numbers...yada, yada, yada. Here is the enhancement, however. How many questions a contestant wins by is how many picks of the board that he or she has (for example, if a contestant wins by $26, he or she would have five picks of the board, since the 6th question would mean a loss). There would be a $20,000 card, a $5,000 card, a car, and other assorted goodies. Once the board is cleared, the contestant can decide to play one more game. If he or she wins, he or she will also win a cash jackpot starting at $100,000 (and increasing by $5,000 for each week that it is not won), meaning that he or she can walk away with over $250,000 in cash and prizes.

As with all proposed rules, there are flaws. Feel free to point them out and show me how that format can be improved. Thanks for reading!

The Inquisitive One

By the way, even if a contestant wone something after the first two picks, he or she can continue on until he or she runs out of picks, thus the ability to grab more than one prize off the board. Or, the contestant can keep going until she matches five prizes, thus speeding the format.

[Neumms]

clemon79
Posted on Jun 24 2003, 11:02 AM

QUOTE (urbanpreppie05 @ Jun 24 2003, 08:03 AM)

 Well...I probably should've mentioned that all of the IB prizes would be between 1500-4000, meaning the IB values would be higher too. All i did, essentially was add a \"0\" to the old values. 
 
 Right. Why? In an effort to give everyone a couple extra dollars in cash, you're ruining the concept of the Instant Bargain. Being offered a cruise for $150 does NOT have the same effect as being offered a cruise for $15.

I applaud your effort to use tangible dollar values to improve the consolation prizes a bit, but this is one case where the dollar values are what they are for a very good reason, and ought not be tampered with. If you have to send your contestants away with more, give 'em an extra box of Turtle Wax.

Whether it's $otC or Password or whatever, every time someone mentions the possibility of increasing the stakes on a show, someone else contends it's \"mo' money syndrome.\" Well, I don't watch game shows for a lesson in economics. To me, it's about excitement. How can you deny that a $150 cruise is much more exciting than a $15 cruise? That's a $135 difference! My palms are sweating already! \"But won't that bankrupt the production company?\"you cry. Well, of course if the cruise costs $150, it should be more challenging to win. In my career as grocery store checker, I'm quite accustomed to changing prices, so watch and learn: Instead of giving away a $15 cruise, say, twice a week, they could sell one $150 cruise every five weeks. Either way, this costs $300 every two weeks, EXACTLY the same prize budget! Frankly, I have to wonder the safety and comfort level of any cruise that could be had for just $15, particularly with what we hear about cruise ships these days. Years ago when \"WoF\" had shopping they offered cruises and they must have cost at least a couple of thousand dollars. Somehow, that show stayed on the air, and, need I remind you, it became the most popular syndicated show in history. If a show is to be current and appeal to the \"Shipmates\" crowd, they have to do better than the $15 cruises that some \"traditionalists\" so fondly remember. My proposal, then, is an escalating cruise, that starts at $150 and goes up $75 each day until it's won. I call it \"$uper $ale of the Century.\" Imagine the tension mount as we head into the Fame Game, hoping against hope for the money card that put you over the top for what could be a $525 or $675 cruise. That is what game shows are all about.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Neumms\' date=\'Jun 24 2003, 10:04 PM\'] How can you deny that a $150 cruise is much more exciting than a $15 cruise? That's a $135 difference! My palms are sweating already!

In my career as grocery store checker, I'm quite accustomed to changing prices, so watch and learn: Instead of giving away a $15 cruise, say, twice a week, they could sell one $150 cruise every five weeks. Either way, this costs $300 every two weeks, EXACTLY the same prize budget!

My proposal, then, is an escalating cruise, that starts at $150 and goes up $75 each day until it's won. I call it "$uper $ale of the Century." Imagine the tension mount as we head into the Fame Game, hoping against hope for the money card that put you over the top for what could be a $525 or $675 cruise. That is what game shows are all about. [/quote]
 I like you. Damn, this is funny, funny stuff. Comic GOLD, I say. GOLD. Now just cook it down into forty-five seconds, and we'll get you booked on Funny Money...

[Robert Hutchinson]

[quote name=\'Neumms\' date=\'Jun 25 2003, 12:04 AM\']My proposal, then, is an escalating cruise, that starts at $150 and goes up $75 each day until it's won. I call it \"$uper $ale of the Century.\" Imagine the tension mount as we head into the Fame Game, hoping against hope for the money card that put you over the top for what could be a $525 or $675 cruise. That is what game shows are all about. [/quote]
While I don't think this is fair as a parody of the poster I think it's parodying, it is damn funny. I lost it at \"escalating cruise\".

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'TheInquisitiveOne\' date=\'Jun 24 2003, 09:24 PM\'] I also prefer the Faces on the Fame Game board with the contestant selecting after correctly answering the question.
 [/quote]
 Off to a good start so far.

As for the main game, I would not change one thing about the show. This is one format that should never be tinkered with, in my opinion. The third Instant Bargain would be the Instant Ca$h bargain, and everything else would remain the same.

Even better. I think I'm getting excited.

If it were a five-time-a-week show:
I would use the shopping format. Plain and simple. The only thing that I would change is that whatever money that the contestant fails to use in order to buy prizes would be what he or she keeps. For example, if a contestant had $620 and failed to buy something, he or she would keep the $620 as a consolation.

I thought this happened anyhow. I know that losers always received \"the cash in front of them\" so it seems reasonable that a champion would as well, if it wasn't spent on prizes.

Like the 80s version, there are 20 numbers...yada, yada, yada. Here is the enhancement, however. How many questions a contestant wins by is how many picks of the board that he or she has (for example, if a contestant wins by $26, he or she would have five picks of the board, since the 6th question would mean a loss).

I like the idea, but I don't like how you determine how many picks they get, I think that's too complicated. Also, you're penalizing the viewer for an exciting front game...a game that comes down to the last question would make for a crap Winner's Board. I don't mind the idea of players knocking more than one prize off of the board in a single trip, but you need to make sure they go home with SOMETHING, particularly if it's a weekly show. So I think you need to work on this method somewhat. It's not a bad initial notion, tho.

Maybe they can be allowed to knock one prize off of the board for each $50 they win in the front game, with a minimum of one? Then, engineer the front game a little (and you could do this without changing the essence of the game), so that a low win would be under $100, the average win would be between 100-150, a big win would be $150, and a total asskicking could exceed $200. Just something to start with...I have no idea how you would do this, save for jacking up the values of the Money Cards on the Fame Game board and making Speed Round questions +/- $10 a pop.

[ChuckNet]

Why not just use more-or-less the same format as they did during the shopping era? There's really no need for changes to that format, IMO, and it really entices viewers to tune in again tomorrow.

Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious \"Chuckie Baby\")