WOF disclaimer question

[Clay Zambo]

Since Chuck Woolery’s passing, several of his WOF episodes have popped up in my YouTube feed, and I’ve enjoyed them a lot. He really was a fine host.

But what I’m wondering about is a disclaimer read during the closing credits: “The prices of the prizes were furnished to the contestants prior to the show, and have been rounded off to the nearest dollar.” (And, sometimes, “Gift Certificates do not include
sales tax,” which, okay, but who said they did?)

I get the “rounded off” part, but why would it matter enough that they’d feel a need to tell us that contestants had seen the prices before the show?

[Casey]

It's only a guess on my part, but if I knew that I could buy a car for $5000, or what some of the more expensive trips or other prizes cost ahead of time, I might play the game differently than if I didn't have that information until I solved the puzzle.

[Joe Mello]

I get the “rounded off” part, but why would it matter enough that they’d feel a need to tell us that contestants had seen the prices before the show?

I assume that either the staff or S&P thought that this info was beyond the standard contestant briefing and had to be given its own thing. As Casey mentioned, the prizes can influence gameplay, not just in the case of the One More Timers, but also the fact that you can put money on account.

[Dbacksfan12]

I get the “rounded off” part, but why would it matter enough that they’d feel a need to tell us that contestants had seen the prices before the show?

Weren't there several prizes that were "off the board"?  If the turntable spins around to show rejects from the Dollar Tree Garden Center and I'm saying "I'll take the speedboat for $7,200", perhaps there was concern that a contestant could rattle that off without any boat in sight.

[Bob Zager]

Knowing the prices in advance could have helped contestants decide if the would like to place the money earned each round "on account" and spent later, combined with what was earned later.  I rarely saw anyone choose that option.

[Strikerz04]

Knowing the prices in advance could have helped contestants decide if the would like to place the money earned each round "on account" and spent later, combined with what was earned later.  I rarely saw anyone choose that option.

Let alone choose the account option and win around round to carry that over.


I agree - I think of it as a larger amusement park where if there were big ticket items, I'm going to aim just a little higher to get it (whereas at said park, I wouldn't dare come close).

[Clay Zambo]

I completely understand *why* it would be useful and strategic for the players to have seen the prices before the game; I just found it curious that it would be something they felt had to be disclosed.

Whatevs. I miss shopping, but it couldn’t exist today when the show runs about 19 minutes and change.

[Jeremy Nelson]

I miss shopping, but it couldn’t exist today when the show runs about 19 minutes and change.

The best we could reasonably expect is the Shopping wedge from Retro Week in '99- space is worth a flat $5-10k, and earning it gives you the opportunity to pick from three prize packages.

[Casey]

I completely understand *why* it would be useful and strategic for the players to have seen the prices before the game; I just found it curious that it would be something they felt had to be disclosed.

Again, only a guess, but I imagine it may be so that people watching at home, who don't see the big prizes (at least on the Woolery episodes I've seen) unless a person buys one, don't write in wondering why a contestant saved up a bunch of money for an expensive prize.  It probably could have been worded in a clearer way. 

This discussion makes me wonder - in the early years of WOF, did Chuck (or Pat) explain to the home audience that a person could put any or all of their winnings on account to buy a bigger prize?  My recollection is that the on account option was only mentioned if a person spent all their money down and couldn't buy any more prizes, or the contestant just opted to do it, which was a very rare thing.

[Matt Ottinger]

This discussion makes me wonder - in the early years of WOF, did Chuck (or Pat) explain to the home audience that a person could put any or all of their winnings on account to buy a bigger prize?  My recollection is that the on account option was only mentioned if a person spent all their money down and couldn't buy any more prizes, or the contestant just opted to do it, which was a very rare thing.

I grew up with the show, and my memory was that On Account was explained a lot in the early going, but once the show had hit its stride, they assumed it was a part of the game that you knew, and only mentioned it when it was relevant.  Every show has unusual rules that don't get explained every single episode.

[Kevin Prather]

I grew up with the show, and my memory was that On Account was explained a lot in the early going, but once the show had hit its stride, they assumed it was a part of the game that you knew, and only mentioned it when it was relevant.  Every show has unusual rules that don't get explained every single episode.

Kinda like giving the clues in the Winner's Circle. We'll talk about it when someone does it.

[Ian Wallis]

The "On Account" option could be used at any time.  I remember at least one episode where a contestant bought one smallish prize then told Chuck "I'd like to put the rest On Account".  They didn't have to wait until they go down to not being able to afford additional prizes.

[clemon79]

I completely understand *why* it would be useful and strategic for the players to have seen the prices before the game; I just found it curious that it would be something they felt had to be disclosed.

It was an age when Standards and Practices was still up your ass about every little tiny thing. Thinking about it, it was also the first Merv show that came remotely CLOSE to any situation where something happened "off camera" like that and maybe Merv just preferred to err on the side of caution.

[Bobby B.]

The "On Account" option could be used at any time.  I remember at least one episode where a contestant bought one smallish prize then told Chuck "I'd like to put the rest On Account".  They didn't have to wait until they go down to not being able to afford additional prizes.

They couldn’t do the same with the gift certificate option, could they?  ISTR they could only do that when they couldn’t buy anything else.

[Clay Zambo]

It was an age when Standards and Practices was still up your ass about every little tiny thing. ...maybe Merv just preferred to err on the side of caution.

Makes sense! I got to the point on MSQ where I didn't think I could order a sandwich at Subway without someone randomizing the toppings.