The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: Michael Brandenburg on November 10, 2003, 11:49:52 AM
-
We'll probably have some more special prime-time Price is Right episodes next spring (in between seasons of Survivor! on CBS), so I thought I'd like to suggest a change on the "Big Wheel" prizes to both promote something new that will be coming out at that time and as a tribute to the zany humor of their late announcer, Rod Roddy.
Here's the change: Each on-stage contestant in each half of the show spins the "Big Wheel" as before, with the contestant getting closest to $1.00 without going over advancing to the final "Showcase" round. However, if a contestant gets exactly $1.00 in either one spin or a combination of two spins, the contestant also gets a "bonus spin," as before, for a chance to win a bonus cash prize.
If the contestant gets the red "$1.00" space on his/her bonus spin, the contestant wins $1 million, as had previously been the case on the TPIR prime-time specials. Further, if the contestant lands on the green "15-cent" space that is just past the "$1.00" space on the wheel, he/she wins a consolation prize in the form of a check for $5,000, again as before.
But if the contestant lands on the green "5-cent" space that is just before the "$1.00" space on the wheel, we have a new consolation prize for that contestant, which is (as Rod Roddy would have no doubt delivered it):
"It’s ONE…
HUNDRED…
THOUSAND…
NICKELS!
And they aren't wooden nickels either, but are the first of two special commemorative nickels being issued this year by the U.S. Mint. These legal-tender coins feature the portrait of America’s third president, Thomas Jefferson, on one side, and on the other, the Jefferson Peace Medal commemorating the purchase of the 800,000 square-mile Louisiana Territory from France in 1803. Total face value of these geniune nickel nickels, FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS!"
Michael Brandenburg
(Well, the recently introduced redesigned $20 bill got quite a few plugs on Wheel of Fortune and Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, so why not these new up-and-coming nickels?)
-
[quote name=\'Michael Brandenburg\' date=\'Nov 10 2003, 11:49 AM\'] (Well, the recently introduced redesigned $20 bill got quite a few plugs on Wheel of Fortune and Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, so why not these new up-and-coming nickels?) [/quote]
At the risk of going off-topic: the redesigned $20 bill is not being received very well. It's being rejected by vending machines, and it took only one week for counterfeits to be discovered. Back to the drawing board.
ObGameShows: The "Sacajawa" and "Socka-wocky" moments on questions involving the then-new golden dollar were LOL funny.
-
[quote name=\'Michael Brandenburg\' date=\'Nov 10 2003, 09:49 AM\'] Total face value of these geniune nickel nickels, FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS!"
[/quote]
All things being equal, I'd rather that the US Treasury spend the tax dollars that I pay to support it on something other than self-promotion on a game show.
-
Agreed, but if they're going to waste money promoting a new coin anyway, this would be cool place to waste it.
-
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' date=\'Nov 10 2003, 01:12 PM\'] Agreed, but if they're going to waste money promoting a new coin anyway, this would be cool place to waste it. [/quote]
Frankly I think it would be perfectly asinine. But that's JMODO.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Nov 10 2003, 10:28 AM\']All things being equal, I'd rather that the US Treasury spend the tax dollars that I pay to support it on something other than self-promotion on a game show.[/quote]
How does TPIR giving away $5,000 worth of nickels cost the government money?
The problem is, the prize would have to be awarded in nickels. What is a contestant going to do with 100,000 nickels? How are they going to be delivered to the contestant and once delivered, how is the contestant going to lug them around? Why does a new coin need to be "promoted" in the first place?
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Nov 10 2003, 03:20 PM\'] How does TPIR giving away $5,000 worth of nickels cost the government money?
[/quote]
Why would TPiR do that promotion without some sort of renumeration from the Treasury?
Why does a new coin need to be "promoted" in the first place?
Even better question.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Nov 10 2003, 06:51 PM\']
Why does a new coin need to be "promoted" in the first place?
Even better question. [/quote]
I can think of two reasons:
One, to inform people that a new coin is being circulated, so they don't think it's counterfeit;
Two, to get people will use it.
Note that the "commemorative state quarters" did not need any promotions.
I for one was a little surprised the newest dollar coins weren't accepted more than they were (especially when they changed the color so they no longer looked like quarters). It looks like the only way to get people to use dollar coins is to do what other countries did: simply stop making dollar bills, and pull the existing ones out of circulation. True, some will still be floating around, but eventually the dollar coin will be forced into acceptance. (When was the last time you saw a $1000 bill, which haven't been made in over 30 years?)
-- Don (and then do the same thing with pennies, like Australia did in 1992)
-
[quote name=\'That Don Guy\' date=\'Nov 11 2003, 02:31 PM\'] One, to inform people that a new coin is being circulated, so they don't think it's counterfeit;
Two, to get people will use it.
[/quote]
Last I saw, the shows where information was disseminated to the people ran at 5, 5, 6, and 11PM, depending on where you live. The "spaying and neutering" thing is all fine and good 'cuz it's a cause Bob believes in. This is a freakin' nickle.
I for one was a little surprised the newest dollar coins weren't accepted more than they were
Coin: heavy, bulky. Dollar bill: light, stores easily. Give me the paper every time.
And abolishing dollar bills sucks. It's a good way for foreign governments to take your money. When I went to Canada I came back with some bills and a pocketful of change, including some dollar coins. My bank (and most banks, as far as I know) will NOT TAKE coins when exchanging back to your home currency.
If people weren't so lazy and math-stupid, these change isssues wouldn't be issues at all.
-
[quote name=\'That Don Guy\' date=\'Nov 11 2003, 04:31 PM\']
(When was the last time you saw a $1000 bill, which haven't been made in over 30 years?)
[/quote]
On the 1984-86 run of LMAD, as I don't think the 1990 version showed the $1000 bills. MOnty did say the $5000 bill had been discontinued when one was seen in the "pick a bill from 1-9" deal on a couple of occasions on the 70s syndie version.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Nov 10 2003, 05:20 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Nov 10 2003, 10:28 AM\']All things being equal, I'd rather that the US Treasury spend the tax dollars that I pay to support it on something other than self-promotion on a game show.[/quote]
How does TPIR giving away $5,000 worth of nickels cost the government money?
The problem is, the prize would have to be awarded in nickels. What is a contestant going to do with 100,000 nickels? How are they going to be delivered to the contestant and once delivered, how is the contestant going to lug them around? Why does a new coin need to be "promoted" in the first place? [/quote]
Huh? Of course they would give the contestant a check and presumably he or she could convert that check into as many nickels as they want.
Also, the Treasury mention would be paid for by the government...so that's how it would cost them money.
(By the by, the new $20 having problems with vending machines is nothing new. The last redesign of the $20 about 5 years ago had the same problem. The public somehow managed to make it through the crisis)
-
Huh? Of course they would give the contestant a check and presumably he or she could convert that check into as many nickels as they want.
No, if you announce that you're awarding a contestant 100,000 nickels, nickels are what they get. If you award a contestant a car with air conditioning and California emission, air conditioning and California emission are what they get. If you're just going to award $5,000 in the form of a check, what's the point of bringing nickels into the picture?
-
Why would TPiR do that promotion without some sort of renumeration from the Treasury?
Um, well could it be because the government doesn't sell currency the way Libman sells mops? Could it be that the government doesn't advertise currency? Could it be that the idea is to promote the new currency as a public service rather than to accept a fee for advertising a product that is sold for profit?
-
1. To cover part of the cost from our friends at the Treasery
2. So on AFHV when they were doing their whole $20 bill thing they had to give the twenties?
3. Doesn't CBS say that they have the right to substitue prizes of "equal or greater value" in the wavers?
-Joe Kavanagh
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Nov 11 2003, 10:25 PM\']
Huh? Of course they would give the contestant a check and presumably he or she could convert that check into as many nickels as they want.
No, if you announce that you're awarding a contestant 100,000 nickels, nickels are what they get. If you award a contestant a car with air conditioning and California emission, air conditioning and California emission are what they get. If you're just going to award $5,000 in the form of a check, what's the point of bringing nickels into the picture? [/quote]
Yeah, but few game shows say you will win a check, but, of course, you do.
There are weasel ways of doing it, anyway. You say "You can win 100,000 nickels...that's right....5 THOUSAND DOLLARS!" go on and do your hypothetical nickel promo and still be able to cut a check for 5K.
(Did WinTuition actually give the quarters as change or was it converted into a check?)
-
Yeah, but few game shows say you will win a check, but, of course, you do.
The check is the form of payment, not the prize. Once you've cashed the check, what have you got? Money!
There are weasel ways of doing it, anyway. You say "You can win 100,000 nickels...that's right....5 THOUSAND DOLLARS!" go on and do your hypothetical nickel promo and still be able to cut a check for 5K.
Weasel ways don't go over very big with network merchandising departments.
-
1. To cover part of the cost from our friends at the Treasery
What cost? I just said the government doesn't advertise currency.
2. So on AFHV when they were doing their whole $20 bill thing they had to give the twenties?
Huh?
3. Doesn't CBS say that they have the right to substitue prizes of "equal or greater value" in the wavers?
We just had this discussion with regard to Let's Make a Deal. If the zonk prize were a baby elephant, the show might offer the contestant who won it a color TV and $100 cash and they would usually accept the offer. But if the contestant said they wanted the baby elephant, the show was obligated to deliver a baby elephant. In this case TPIR could offer a check for $5,000 but would have to be prepared to deliver 100,000 nickels.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Nov 11 2003, 09:56 PM\']
1. To cover part of the cost from our friends at the Treasery
What cost? I just said the government doesn't advertise currency.[/quote]
For some reason, there were a few commercials with Kermit the Frog promoting the state quarters, as well as print ads:
U.S. Mint Announces Appointment of Kermit the Frog as 'Spokesfrog' for the 50 State Quarters(tm) Program
Kermit the Frog Speaks Out on the Nation's 'Changing Change'
NEW YORK, June 3 /PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. Mint today announced a three-year agreement with The Jim Henson Company in which Kermit the Frog, the legendary television and film celebrity, will serve as the official ``spokesfrog'' for America's 50 State Quarters Program. Kermit the Frog will soon be starring in broadcast and print commercials for the 50 State Quarters Program.
[...]Each quarter is produced for only 10 weeks, so consumers are encouraged to keep checking their pocket change regularly to collect each of the state quarters. For more information on the 50 State Quarters and how to collect them, visit the Mint's web site at http://www.USMINT.gov (http://\"http://www.USMINT.gov\").
SOURCE: http://www.coinmall.com/ccw/ccw19.htm (http://\"http://www.coinmall.com/ccw/ccw19.htm\")
That suggests to me that the U.S. Mint does indeed advertise currency.
-
At the risk of going off-topic: the redesigned $20 bill is not being received very well. It's being rejected by vending machines, and it took only one week for counterfeits to be discovered. Back to the drawing board.
All redesigned money is rejected by vending machines until the vending machines are updated to recognize it. And any bill can be counterfeited. The point is to make currency so that most counterfeits are obviously fake. As far as that goes, they're certainly no *worse* than the previous design.
As for not publicizing the state quarters, they didn't do enough of it *before* the first ones were released. The first I heard of it was when one turned up in a till at work when they'd been out a month, and none of us or the customer who got it had heard anything about it. We figured it must be real because who would make fake quarters, and who would do it so badly as to put a horse instead of an eagle on the back?
There was that stupid commercial for the dollar coin that had the George Washington picture off the dollar bill talking about it.
-
That suggests to me that the U.S. Mint does indeed advertise currency.
You need to learn the difference between paid advertising and public service announcements. The latter have been around for decades and one of the most prominent clients is Smokey the Bear. The U.S. Forestry Service has never paid one nickel for air time or ad space for Smokey the Bear because the time/space is donated by radio and TV stations, networks, magazines, etc. It is conceivable that Henson is donating the cost of producing the PSAs and deducting the cost as a contribution to a non-profit entity.
The Ad Council handles most public service advertising. Here is a mission statement from them:
The Ad Council is a private, non-profit organization that marshals volunteer talent from the advertising and communications industries, the facilities of the media, and the resources of the business and non-profit communities to deliver critical messages to the American public. The Ad Council produces, distributes and promotes thousands of public service campaigns on behalf of non-profit organizations and government agencies in issue areas such as improving the quality of life for children, preventive health, education, community well being, environmental preservation and strengthening families.
It is very unlikely that Treasury has a budget for paid advertising on TPIR or anywhere else, but TPIR could give the nickels exposure as a prize, free of charge, as a public service. This is precisely what Barker does when you see puppy dogs on the show and Barker talks about the animal shelter they came from.
-
If anyone has an episode on tape from this season's premiere week (I believe it was) of Wheel of Fortune, watching the credits would probably settle this whole mess the fastest: the gift tag that week represented $1000 in new 20-dollar bills.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Nov 12 2003, 03:10 AM\'] It is very unlikely that Treasury has a budget for paid advertising on TPIR or anywhere else, but TPIR could give the nickels exposure as a prize, free of charge, as a public service. This is precisely what Barker does when you see puppy dogs on the show and Barker talks about the animal shelter they came from. [/quote]
No, they do have a budget. To introduce the new $20 bill, the Treasury Department spent $33 million dollars.
From the NY Times News Service via the Taipei Times: (http://\"http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/bizfocus/archives/2003/09/28/2003069614\")
"The US Bureau of Engraving and Printing will spend US$33 million on advertising, marketing and education programs to promote the new bill, and it has hired a public relations firm and, in a first, a product placement firm and one of Hollywood's top talent agencies to put the US$20 bill on the publicity circuit. By the time the new bill joins the currency flow next month, it will have appeared virtually everywhere but on the ballot for California's recall election"
I doubt they'll spend anywhere near that for the new nickels, but they certainly are spending money to get their "product" placed. I don't know if they spent money to have it appear on WWTBAM or WoF because the Treasury is likely to have lobbied for free exposure, but they sure did spend to have it pop up on TV elsewhere.
-
[quote name=\'inturnaround\' date=\'Nov 12 2003, 07:52 AM\']No, they do have a budget. To introduce the new $20 bill, the Treasury Department spent $33 million dollars.[/quote]
Proving again that if there's any way to waste money, the government will find it.
-
To introduce the new $20 bill, the Treasury Department spent $33 million dollars.
Well you learn something new every day. I hope they make their $33 million back.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Nov 12 2003, 02:10 AM\']
That suggests to me that the U.S. Mint does indeed advertise currency.
You need to learn the difference between paid advertising and public service announcements. [/quote]
Public service announcements are, by definition, advertisements. Whether it's "This is your brain, this is your brain on drugs" or "Look at the new $20," they're still advertising a product, service, or opinion.
The U.S. Forestry Service has never paid one nickel for air time or ad space for Smokey the Bear because the time/space is donated by radio and TV stations, networks, magazines, etc.
But they're still advertising, irregardless if it costs money to air the ad. And it definitely cost money to create the commercials -- subsidized by donations or not.
When's the last time you saw a Smokey the Bear commercial? The only PSAs I see are those increasingly annoying anti-smoking ones.
It is conceivable that Henson is donating the cost of producing the PSAs and deducting the cost as a contribution to a non-profit entity.
And it's just as conceivable that Henson got paid for Kermit's familiar image and name.
It is very unlikely that Treasury has a budget for paid advertising on TPIR or anywhere else, but TPIR could give the nickels exposure as a prize, free of charge, as a public service. This is precisely what Barker does when you see puppy dogs on the show and Barker talks about the animal shelter they came from.
Which is entirely different. That is Bob Barker's charity of choice, which he promotes because he feels so strongly about the cause. Frankly, if I was in the same position as Barker, I'd talk about puppies, too.
Proving again that if there's any way to waste money, the government will find it.
If they didn't advertise the new $20 bill, many people would not accept the new ones because they would be obvious counterfeits. Had I not known about the new $20, I wouldn't be dumb enough to accept it.
If you would accept it without knowing about the new $20s, I've got an offer for you: Send me $200 in traditional currency and I'll send you $15,140 in colorful, new money.
-
Public service announcements are, by definition, advertisements.
Good heavens, no. You've never worked for a commercial broadcast station, have you? PSAs and promotional announcements are logged differently, treated by the FCC differently, accounted for differently, the time is not sold, make-goods are never given and they bring in zero revenue to the station. As any Broadcasting 101 student can tell you, there is a world of difference between a paid advertisement, a public service announcement and a promo.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Nov 12 2003, 03:58 PM\']
Public service announcements are, by definition, advertisements.
Good heavens, no. You've never worked for a commercial broadcast station, have you? PSAs and promotional announcements are logged differently, treated by the FCC differently, accounted for differently, the time is not sold, make-goods are never given and they bring in zero revenue to the station. As any Broadcasting 101 student can tell you, there is a world of difference between a paid advertisement, a public service announcement and a promo. [/quote]
And make no mistake, the Treasury Department is not just making PSAs for stations to run. They're actually spending millions of dollars as part of a commercial campaign to convince people that the funny-colored money spewing out of their ATMs is legit.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Nov 12 2003, 01:58 PM\']
Public service announcements are, by definition, advertisements.
As any Broadcasting 101 student can tell you, there is a world of difference between a paid advertisement, a public service announcement and a promo. [/quote]
Either I'm being confusing or you are misunderstanding my argument.
Public service announcements are a type of advertisement, because it is a promotion of a service, product, or opinion. The fact that the stations account for it differently does not change the fact that it is an advertisement. If I stood at the street corner yelling "Only YOU can prevent forest fires," I'm still advertising.
PSAs are not free, either. If you don't pay the station for PSAs, that means less ad revenue, less net income, and less taxes received. It's still a cost of the PSA, albeit deferred. Donations such as the ones to the U.S. Forestry Department for Smokey the Bear resulted in less tax revenue because donations also can lower taxable income.
-
[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Nov 10 2003, 01:58 PM\'] At the risk of going off-topic: the redesigned $20 bill is not being received very well. It's being rejected by vending machines, and it took only one week for counterfeits to be discovered. Back to the drawing board. [/quote]
No need. There's nothing wrong with the bills. As you said, counterfeits WERE discovered. If counterfeits could NOT be detected, THEN it would be back to the drawing board.
-
It'll help to quote your larger point, which was:
Public service announcements are, by definition, advertisements. Whether it's "This is your brain, this is your brain on drugs" or "Look at the new $20," they're still advertising a product, service, or opinion.
In an extremely broad sense, I see your point. I just don't believe it's relevant.
In the real world of TV economics, there is an enormous difference between PSAs and paid advertising. The fact that as communication tools, they are designed to elicit similar results is an interesting thing to discuss in a conversation about the power and influence of the media. However, the method by which the "This is your brain" campaign reached the viewer was completely different from the method the government is currently using to commercially market the new twenty-dollar bill.
PSAs are not free, either. If you don't pay the station for PSAs, that means less ad revenue, less net income, and less taxes received.
Again, that's economic philosophy vs real world practicality. A station manager who runs PSAs instead of paid commercials won't have a station to manage for very long. He's not going to be too concerned about the "big picture" view that the costs got absorbed somewhere else while he's filing for unemployment.
-
PSAs are not free, either. If you don't pay the station for PSAs, that means less ad revenue, less net income, and less taxes received. It's still a cost of the PSA, albeit deferred. Donations such as the ones to the U.S. Forestry Department for Smokey the Bear resulted in less tax revenue because donations also can lower taxable income.
Actually, PSAs are provided to the stations for free, to be carried whenever space is available. As for who pays for the creation of the ads -- it all depends. For non-profit organisations, ad agencies usually donate their time and money for the creation of the ads. And as for government agencies, tax dollars might come into play. We shouldn't forget the Ad Council, which is a charitable organisation in itself that handles some PSA campains for non-profit organisations and governmental entities.
But by no means is money exchanged between the organisation or agency and the broadcaster or publisher. If it did, then it wopuld be paid advertising, not PSAs.
A station manager who runs PSAs instead of paid commercials won't have a station to manage for very long.
True, if the station manager chose to run PSAs instead of paid ads from sign-on to sign-off. But of course, there have been many TV & radio stations and publications over the years that folded due to lack of advertising dollars.
But, once upon a time, the use of PSAs was mandatory for TV and radio stations until several years ago -- during that time, stations were required to set aside some time per week for PSAs and public service programming, as part of their condition of their license. Though of course, the stronger stations placed such material during the least-viewed periods -- generally late nights, mornings and weekends.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Nov 12 2003, 07:19 PM\'] It'll help to quote your larger point, which was:
Public service announcements are, by definition, advertisements. Whether it's "This is your brain, this is your brain on drugs" or "Look at the new $20," they're still advertising a product, service, or opinion.
In an extremely broad sense, I see your point. I just don't believe it's relevant.
[...]Again, that's economic philosophy vs real world practicality. A station manager who runs PSAs instead of paid commercials won't have a station to manage for very long. He's not going to be too concerned about the "big picture" view that the costs got absorbed somewhere else while he's filing for unemployment. [/quote]
Relevant? This entire thread has been irrelevant! The original post was about offering $5000 in nickels instead of a $5000 check in the less-than-3% chance that a contestant spins a dollar and lands on the nickel on the bonus spin during an episode of TPiR. And much of game show discussion is irrelevant (What is the spelling of the surname of the first champion on the original Sale of the Century? Who will replace Bob Barker when he's gone? Who would win a deathmatch between Bob Eubanks and Jim Perry?)
Irregardless of it's relevance, my point is that the following two assertions are incorrect: that PSAs have no cost and that they aren't advertisements. To a station manager, that might be "true"... to people outside of the biz, it's not.
The non-philisophical economics of the situation is that it's better to get money from advertisers than a third of the same amount from the government. The station manager doesn't need to understand the "big picture" because that's not part of his job.
Each job has its own "truths" which collide with what the average person thinks. To someone who works in the broadcast industry, a PSA is not an advertisement, but to Joe Sixpack, it looks like an ad, acts like an ad, so it must be an ad. Most people would say that the main goal in business is to maximize profits, but if you said it to an accountant, he/she would probably explode.
-
To someone who works in the broadcast industry, a PSA is not an advertisement, but to Joe Sixpack, it looks like an ad, acts like an ad, so it must be an ad.
Actually, my bet would be that most members of the Sixpack household can tell the difference between paid commercial advertisements and PSAs. And even if they can't, it's not their job to know the difference. It is the job of broadcast professionals to know the difference. My point is that it's only in the rarified world of economic philosophy and media theory that the two are the same, and there's just not much real world use for that perception.
This is EXACTLY the same argument I have with economists who try to convince me that over-the-air broadcast television isn't "free". I see their points, I get their points, but there has to be a word in the English language that refers to a form of entertainment that you watch without handing someone money, and in our language that word is "free".
Irregardless of it's relevance, my point is that the following two assertions are incorrect: that PSAs have no cost and that they aren't advertisements.
But neither of those assertions were made. The specific point you originally disputed was, "You need to learn the difference between paid advertising and public service announcements." Economic philosophies or no, there simply is a clear, distinct and significant difference between PSAs and paid advertising, and it is helpful to recognize what that difference is. Also, even the dimmest of us realize that there is a cost associated with the production and distribution of PSAs. I'm not aware of anyone making the "assertion" that there is not.
Bottom line is that I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just objecting to the flat accusation that WE'RE wrong because we're looking at it as TV professionals rather than macroeconomists.
-
In addition to what Matt says, there seems to be a problem with the connotation of the word "advertise". In the ivory-tower world of media theorists you could stretch the definition of the word "advertise" to include promos and PSAs. In real-world media economics the semantically more accurate words would be promote or publicize, as the word advertise is universally taken to mean directly paying money for time or ad space.