The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: wdm1219inpenna on June 15, 2025, 07:01:07 AM
-
Once upon a midnight dreary, Price is Right had 44 minutes of actual air time and 16 minutes of commercials.
As of 2025 I believe it is now 36 minutes of Price and 24 minutes of commercials which to me is criminal. I realize and recognize that commercials are necessary to help finance the budget for the show, most especially since the show no longer receives payment from companies for fee items such as the ones used in grocery item games and small prize games (e.g. Shell Game, Plinko, Cliff Hangers, etc.).
These are some ideas I would implement if I were in charge of the show...and many of these I realize will be criticized and I'm okay with that.
I know one thing the show has already done is at times at least, they will edit out any overbids in contestants' row. It would be both amusing and frustrating at the same time when that would happen 3 or 4 times in a row. I recall once where after the third overbid Bob asked the players "Do you even remember what the prize is?" and I don't think any of them did! So now with the time crunch the show editing out overbids is understandably necessary.
Often I have felt quite badly for the 9th and final contestant who is called to come on down. They get only 1 chance to bid while others could in theory have had as many as 6 chances to bid. To speed up the show and to make things fairer, I would say after the first one bid round and first pricing game, have just the remaining 3 players bid on the next item, rather than taking the time to call somebody else down. This also would save time as it would require one less bid. After pricing game #2 the remaining 2 players would bid on the next item and play pricing game #3. The last remaining player in contestants row would become one of 2 "Contestants not appearing on stage". After the first showcase showdown, have 4 new contestants called down to start the 4th One Bid round, etc. So instead of 9 contestants per show, you'd still have 8, and all 4 contestants in each half would have 3 chances maximum to win a prize and get up on stage.
Showcase Showdown - I know the big wheel is iconic. I know this suggestion is nothing short of sacrilegious but to save time on wheel spins, especially those that do not go all the way around, replace it with a Press Your Luck style board with the flashing lights (no repeating patterns so it would be Larsen proof). Have all 20 numbers up there from one nickel to $1.00. The players would still get two "spins" maximum to get as close to a dollar as possible. I realize the suspense of the wheel slowing down especially during a bonus spin can be quite exciting, but it has become a rather time-eating process. Furthermore, after 18 years of "Would you like to say hi to anybody?", I could do without that too. It's still the same mechanism to determine who gets to play in the showcase, but just a heck of a lot faster.
Two showcases has always been the norm. I would recommend for both time saving measures and cost saving measures to have just one showcase instead. Perhaps make it one showcase with 4 or 5 prizes instead of 2 showcases with 3 or more prizes each. This would cut back on time needed to announce each showcase. Bids would be written down in secret by each player (think Final Jeopardy! style), and after the final commercial, both bids would be revealed along with the actual retail price of the showcase. If both went over, it would be lost. If both wrote down the same exact bid, it would also be lost. If the player who comes closest to the actual retail price without going over is within $250 of the ARP, they would win the cash equivalent of the showcase amount, or perhaps a smaller cash prize to save on budget (e.g. $20,000, since pretty much most of the showcases today are at minimum $20K).
Certain pricing games could be sped up too. Pocket Change is a prime example of this. Rather than have the contestant walk over and pick an envelope off the board after each number is filled into the car price, just have them select the 4 envelopes off the board at the start of the game!
Ten Chances - Rather than have the player take forever to write down a price, show a list of possible prices for each prize and the player simply must choose which they think is right. Have 4 choices for the 2 digit prize, 6 for the 3 digit prize and 8 for the automobile.
Three Strikes - First, go back to 1 strike in the bag. Second, whenever a player draws a number, give them two chances to place the number instead of just one. The only time the player would not get to do this is if there are only 2 spaces remaining in the car price to be filled in.
One Away - Instead of the "Ladies do I have X numbers right?" spiel, just have the car horn sound right away to indicate how many numbers are right, or have an eggcrate display that lights up much the same way as used in games like Switcheroo and Line 'Em Up.
These are some ideas I have had as far as both time saving and cost saving measures for the show. I'm curious to hear your feedback about it and other ideas you might have.
-
They could do what was done on Doug Davidson's version. Ditch the IUFBs and just have the players come up on stage when their name is called.
-
This was a lot of words to offer no actual improvements whatsoever.
-
I'm not opposed to a single showcase and given the logistical challenges of the new studio, would not be surprised if that hasn't been discussed. As you identified, there would need to be reasonable arrangements for determining a winner when contestants enter the same bid. I don't think making both a loser, as you propose, is the correct path.
I'm strongly opposed to your other proposals. They don't solve any time or gameplay problems and generally create new ones.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
-
I would not change rules of games. I might instruct Drew to cut down on his patter like there’s a second chance, this is like a puzzle and such, but that is likely smatt steps when larger ones are needed so that fully half of the contestants on stage are not playing SBS, Squeeze Play and Pick a Number.
I know I’ve mentioned this before-
Cut one full cycle of one bid and game. Top winner moves straight through to the showcase. Remaining four spin off for the last segment.
I think the move to this particular studio was Penny bright and pound foolish where the storage is far away and the doors/space behind are not large enough to accommodate everything.
They could also take fifteen mins off LMAD and given them to TPIR.
-
I know I’ve mentioned this before-
Cut one full cycle of one bid and game. Top winner moves straight through to the showcase. Remaining four spin off for the last segment.
Even a five-person showdown with top two advancing would save time.
-
They could also take fifteen mins off LMAD and given them to TPIR.
Great for markets where the two air back to back in the morning.
Not so great for markets like mine, where we run "Live" at 10am and take the 3pm feed of LMAD.
-
Even a five-person showdown with top two advancing would save time.
Better yet, how about a 5-person "Showcase Showdown" with only the winner advancing, and the "Showcase" round done like on the late-1990's UK Bruce's Price is Right, with a randomizer to determine how close the person's bid must be (between $1000 - $5000), without going over, to win?
-
This was a lot of words to offer no actual improvements whatsoever.
In other words, TL;DR.
-
Better yet, how about a 5-person "Showcase Showdown" with only the winner advancing, and the "Showcase" round done like on the late-1990's UK Bruce's Price is Right, with a randomizer to determine how close the person's bid must be (between $1000 - $5000), without going over, to win?
We aren't Britain? We've had the two player showcase for fifty some years? One in five isn't quite as good as one in four plus the top winner getting a pass which might mean some maneuvering in the later games?
-
Once upon a midnight dreary, Price is Right had 44 minutes of actual air time and 16 minutes of commercials.
Certain pricing games could be sped up too. Pocket Change is a prime example of this. Rather than have the contestant walk over and pick an envelope off the board after each number is filled into the car price, just have them select the 4 envelopes off the board at the start of the game!
You've mentioned this and I think it underlines a fundamental misunderstanding of what a game show or indeed a TV show is about. Pocket Change is timed out to have a certain amount of time allotted to that segment and saving the twenty seconds isn't worth the idea of "you got the number right, your reward is getting to go to the board and playing with the prop.
If Pocket Change can be reduced to a single trip to the board, why not build a lectern station near home base and the contestant plays the games from there? Or heck, let the contestant stay standing at contestants row which the shlubs have to sit down and Drew sidles over to the winner and the models carry out directives for the player by proxy?
The increase of commercial time is partially due to the fact that they aren't getting nearly as much money from promoting groceries, small items and the like.
-
The increase of commercial time is partially due to the fact that they aren't getting nearly as much money from promoting groceries, small items and the like.
I don't think it's even that. Wheel and 25WOL look to be under 20 minutes now. Price at 38 (and Price at Night at 43) sounds like it's just the Way Things Are. All carriers want more ad revenue and the way they get that is with more ads. I'm guessing a couple ads are going to be more lucrative than even a 6-grocery game show.
I'm also curious as to what we want to save large chunks of time for. I think after all this time, it's pretty clear that Drew isn't going to full stop the show like Bob did and make someone daytime TV famous. I also don't think Showcase skits are ever going to come back, either.
That being said, two ways to save time are in the Showcase round. They do have two-prize Showcases on occasion and could probably do more of them. Also, despite the lack of skits every Showcase has a theme, even though probably 40% of peak-Barker Era showcases didn't. You can probably save a chunk of time by having more Showcases just be something like "This showcase starts with a trip to fabulous [PLACE]...and you can head to and from the airport in your brand new SUV!..."
-
They could also take fifteen mins off LMAD and given them to TPIR.
Great for markets where the two air back to back in the morning.
Not so great for markets like mine, where we run "Live" at 10am and take the 3pm feed of LMAD.
I will expand on this point and say that the 10am feed is only really used in the Eastern time zone and not much of anywhere else in the country... who tend to use the afternoon feed. It's not practical to attempt such a radical thing as a 45/75 split.
-
I will expand on this point and say that the 10am feed is only really used in the Eastern time zone and not much of anywhere else in the country... who tend to use the afternoon feed. It's not practical to attempt such a radical thing as a 45/75 split.
Not entirely true. Seattle uses the before-Price slot to great effect - the two hour block was consistently one of their most viewed time periods when I was there (honestly, seeing the numbers I'm surprised more affiliates don't try it).
Also, the actual content time number for Price is generally anywhere from 37:15 to 38:00 (minor daily variations). Slightly better than the 36 quoted. There are minor variations between the CBS and streaming versions timing due to the 2x :10 closed captioning ads (and :5 bumps before them) that don't air on streaming/off-net reruns, and due to CBS replacing the real credit roll for a promo and their own network-designed CGI credits, but that's the ballpark. Also worth noting: That's been the standard since 2009 at this point. Price has produced to the same time for sixteen years. (For what it's worth, primetime episodes are timed out to 42:30 and I fully believe that is a major reason why they're some of my favorite episodes with Drew).
Because of certain complications with the ownership and controlling interest (I've heard that CBS has at least some degree of stake in TPIR?), what I'd do in this situation isn't really feasible, but I enjoy the idea of it far more than taking the butcher's knife mindlessly to the show.
When the contract is up for renewal, and in a world where there's no potential ownership tie, I simply let CBS know "Price in daytime is more popular than most of your primetime shows at this point, which get 21/42. 40 minutes is the floor (but I'm going in aiming for the full 42), or we'll walk the show. ABC, NBC, streaming, you name it. If some of your sponsors want to buy placements and prize sponsorships in the show to recoup costs, we can talk about profit-sharing." Affiliates can keep their same local time, and the network can eat 2:30. Price is one of CBS's best rated shows in any daypart in most markets as well as nationally, time to act like it. Since the show's among the most popular things CBS airs, it should honestly be able to get slightly more cash for the reduced # of availabilities too.
And if they call my bluff, I walk.
I'm not changing the show (especially not when the network hasn't cut time since Obama's first year in office), and changing the show to fit just signals that I'm potentially willing to lose more time if they go that route. 22:30 of ads is one of the reason no one under 30 watches non-sports linear TV, and no one having the guts to say "this is idiotic and needs to stop" is one of the reasons we got here. I would literally move the show to Amazon or Hulu if need be (similar to how Wheel and J! are starting down that road), I do not care.
-
I think the easiest way to save time is one showcase with both players locking in secret bids. That would save four or five minutes, at least. Editing out/down the hemming and hawing while listening to 180 different bids from 180 audience members saves time too. Within $250 doesn't win both showcases, obviously, so the bonus could be $25,000, a car, or some combination of cash and transport.
-
The real issue with any attempt to pare the show down is that it would mess with its symmetry. The "rule of threes" is very much in force on TPiR--having three pricing games per half, with the Big Wheel neatly putting a bow on them, just feels right, and is a big reason why it's lasted so long (same reason why the set has three Big Doors even though they could easily do the show with just one). If they cut back to just four pricing games or whatever, I'm not sure that Drew getting to have longer interviews with the contestants would make up for the anemic feel that would result.
Besides that--and this is an admittedly cynical take--TPiR is a quintessential "background show" to a lot of people. In the '70s housewives half-paid attention to it while they did chores; nowadays it's on as a distraction at the doctor's office or on lunch break. These viewers aren't analyzing every single minute detail and probably don't care that three out of the six games are quickies--as long as they get a glimpse of Plinko every week, they're happy.
-
I think the easiest way to save time is one showcase with both players locking in secret bids. That would save four or five minutes, at least. Editing out/down the hemming and hawing while listening to 180 different bids from 180 audience members saves time too. Within $250 doesn't win both showcases, obviously, so the bonus could be $25,000, a car, or some combination of cash and transport.
Cash equivalent bonus was what I was thinking in lieu of DSW. Would still need a solution for a tie - fastest finger? Sub-bidding on one of the prizes?
-
Cash equivalent bonus was what I was thinking in lieu of DSW. Would still need a solution for a tie - fastest finger? Sub-bidding on one of the prizes?
Bidding on one of the smaller prizes is a great throwback to the tiebreaker in home viewer showcases from the original show.
-
I think the easiest way to save time is one showcase with both players locking in secret bids. That would save four or five minutes, at least. Editing out/down the hemming and hawing while listening to 180 different bids from 180 audience members saves time too. Within $250 doesn't win both showcases, obviously, so the bonus could be $25,000, a car, or some combination of cash and transport.
Cash equivalent bonus was what I was thinking in lieu of DSW. Would still need a solution for a tie - fastest finger? Sub-bidding on one of the prizes?
Just give them both the showcase. The current rule provides for awarding both players both showcases under the right condition, so awarding duplicate prizes is not off the table.
EDIT: This is actually a bad idea. See Mike Tennant's post below.
-
I think the easiest way to save time is one showcase with both players locking in secret bids. That would save four or five minutes, at least. Editing out/down the hemming and hawing while listening to 180 different bids from 180 audience members saves time too. Within $250 doesn't win both showcases, obviously, so the bonus could be $25,000, a car, or some combination of cash and transport.
Cash equivalent bonus was what I was thinking in lieu of DSW. Would still need a solution for a tie - fastest finger? Sub-bidding on one of the prizes?
Just give them both the showcase. The current rule provides for awarding both players both showcases under the right condition, so awarding duplicate prizes is not off the table.
But then what's to prevent all contestants from bidding the same amount every time, thereby guaranteeing everyone who makes it to the Showcase a win? It might not happen right away, but it wouldn't take long for people to figure it out once they learned the rule.
-
Two secret bids might lead to more ties too. Right now, two separate people bidding on separate showcases, it's pretty unlikely that a tie will occur (especially if one costs say $21,500 and the other $18,437). It's more feasible for two people to secretly bid $22,000 on a single showcase.
If they do go a secret bid route, they could always just have the contestants rebid if they do end up the same and do that (and edit the tape as necessary) until different bids happen.
-
Contestant #1 bids on the showcase. Contestant #2 guesses whether the ARP is higher or lower than that bid. If #2 is right, he wins the showcase. Otherwise #1 wins it (see Card Sharks).
-
Another option for the secret bid showcase, if both players tie, award it to the top winner.
I admit I do like the idea of both players doing a separate bid on one of the other prizes as a tie-breaker of sorts.
Another option would be to show a list of 10 possible showcase prices, the top winner would have the option of selecting one first or passing to the other player to select first, and giving the top winner potentially a 1 in 9 chance.
The drawback with a secret bid I realize is it would take away all of the screaming excitement of the audience participation in the live audience in screaming out different bids, but I suppose they could still do so anyway, just without the audience seeing the list of possible prices.
In all cases, the list of 10 possible prices for the showcase, at least one of the prices shown would always be guaranteed to not be over the ARP of the showcase. Conversely, it could be where all 10 are below the ARP as well.
-
I think the easiest way to save time is one showcase with both players locking in secret bids. That would save four or five minutes, at least. Editing out/down the hemming and hawing while listening to 180 different bids from 180 audience members saves time too. Within $250 doesn't win both showcases, obviously, so the bonus could be $25,000, a car, or some combination of cash and transport.
Cash equivalent bonus was what I was thinking in lieu of DSW. Would still need a solution for a tie - fastest finger? Sub-bidding on one of the prizes?
Just give them both the showcase. The current rule provides for awarding both players both showcases under the right condition, so awarding duplicate prizes is not off the table.
But then what's to prevent all contestants from bidding the same amount every time, thereby guaranteeing everyone who makes it to the Showcase a win? It might not happen right away, but it wouldn't take long for people to figure it out once they learned the rule.
Yeah I realized that a little while after I posted it. Bidding on the same showcase, it does sort of remove the jeopardy if both players bid the same amount.
-
Contestant #1 bids on the showcase. Contestant #2 guesses whether the ARP is higher or lower than that bid. If #2 is right, he wins the showcase. Otherwise #1 wins it (see Card Sharks).
Only thing is, it's a big difference between guessing Higher/Lower for control of the row of cards, and guessing H/L for a chance at $20K+ in prizes. Way too little work for such a grand prize, esp. when someone obviously over/underbids by a lot.
I actually liked Kevin's idea of letting both contestants get their Showcase if there's a tie, but Mike makes a good point. How about a "DIY" Showcase where you're shown no more than four items. Each contestant can pick two or three and bid on that, under the condition that they can't pick the same three items. Whoever's closer wins.
You still only have four items described, and through editing magic the contestants make their "choices" by the time George finishes describing everything. "Jennifer, you're bidding on the Kia Soul, a trip to Rome, and a new camera. Robert, you chose the Kia, the camera, and the Macbook Pro. Lock in your bids and we'll be right back..."
-
I think the easiest way to save time is one showcase with both players locking in secret bids. That would save four or five minutes, at least. Editing out/down the hemming and hawing while listening to 180 different bids from 180 audience members saves time too. Within $250 doesn't win both showcases, obviously, so the bonus could be $25,000, a car, or some combination of cash and transport.
Easy fixes all around for a two player showcase. If by some chance they both bid and they're under, stop tape and have them rebid while telling them they're under. I like cash equivalent to make up for no DSW.
-
Contestant #1 bids on the showcase. Contestant #2 guesses whether the ARP is higher or lower than that bid. If #2 is right, he wins the showcase. Otherwise #1 wins it (see Card Sharks).
However, that guarantees that the showcase will be won each episode. I'm sure CBS/Fremantle likes to see the occasional Double Overbid to keep the budget in check -- much like how their budget loves when a contestant selects the least expensive Big Deal door on LMAD.
-
I would want as close to zero double overs as possible because you don’t want the last memory of the show being the Spoilers Victory sounder and nobody celebrating their new boat or trips
-
I don't think this would actually save any time, but I just watched one of the specials from 1986 and was fascinated by the choice of transitioning from the 3rd game of the half straight into the Showcase Showdown without a break.
-
I don't think this would actually save any time, but I just watched one of the specials from 1986 and was fascinated by the choice of transitioning from the 3rd game of the half straight into the Showcase Showdown without a break.
Complete with the walking to the Big Wheel that most of the time spatially could not happen.