I think the 'twist' of this game that board members aren't taking into account is that unlike other game shows, even *IF* the contestant loses, it's not like the money goes down -- however much money is made by the contestant is coming out of the budget in one way or another.
Compared to say DOND, where the produ..I mean BANKER wants them to leave with less than the ideal amount of money, the smartest move for this show would be to make questions harder and the payouts smaller. This way the contestant gets confident, keeps going, and hits the wall on a tricky question. They also have not introduced the "take a percentage and run" rule, which makes the show not seem like a cakewalk. Yet, unlike the traditional game show where you could lose it all or go back to a 'safe haven', all that money is still technically WON by someone on that stage.
I'm a little surprized that the dutch format wasn't adapted for the US market, where you opt-out of a question by taking a cut in the money. In their version, you deplete your winnings by 25%, 50%, and 75% respecively, but the mob still gets cut down for a wrong answer. Each question was worth $50,000 divided by the number of mob members left in play [which would have been a "change the channel" moment for anyone saying "Aww dang, dere's MATH in dis show?"].
Something tells me we'll never see this more than once a week unless big changes are made.