New Rumor: The Twist

[Electra]

I'm a little hesitant to post this, as I'm sure I'll get some hate/disbelief claims, but it's certainly pertinent!

One of my old college buddies has a job with EndemolUSA out in Cali, and while he isn't doing any work on Big Brother 11, he said he was pretty sure of some stuff going on in this season.

Initially I had taken everything he said with a grain of salt, but he had already told me that they decided to "do the house very green and ecofriendly," and now that that has proven to be true, I've taken his other big claim more seriously. I'm still considering this speculation, but it sounds VERY plausible.

The twist? Here is a summary of what I have been told... CBS is making all of their shows cut back on their budget and saving where necessary (the economy blah blah blah), and this year, the twist is that when all the houseguests enter the house, they're being told that the prize money this year is ZERO DOLLARS. And now, instead, they'll have to build the prize money as they go along.

Now I don't know if that means they'll have to raise it in challenges, or by going without certain items in the house or whatever, and "Jim" (we'll call my source that) didn't know much beyond that. I assume the max they could get is the standard 500,000... but who knows.

Source

[dtd2]

Well I am a bit hesitant to believe this to be true. I say that only because as shocking as that is, Australia already did it in 2007. Usually we don't copy other "big" twists like this from other countries. Eventually I think they could have won up to $1 million, but only built it back up to $450,000. I think it was $1 million because that was the prize in 2004. Then in 2005/2006 the prize started at $1million, but every time a rule was broken (not wearing microphones, etc) $5,000 was deducted.

Here are some promos from Australia, announcing the twist.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Liam732#.../9/bxuccetOe1M

http://www.youtube.com/user/Liam732#...10/n-qsG9JleH8

Actually I have noticed a theme. Nearly all of the rumors for twists and such have already been done in Australia

2 houses-Australia 2003
Eco Friendly-Australia 2007
No Prize Money-Australia 2007

If you follow international Big Brother, you would know that Australia since 2005 was notorious for combining twists from the year before from the UK and USA.

[Larry]

I wish this was true, so it would stop people from throwing competitions but every "leak" and "spoiler" that I've seen has been a carbon copy of another version of Big Brother.

Hell, there's a thing going around of "leaked house pictures". Yeah... they're from Season 8.

[Sportsfan]

Yeah, I saw this, and I don't know what to think...part of me thinks this is a good idea (ESPECIALLY if they raise the potential prize to $750,000 or $1 million...if they ended up with under 500k at the finale, it would just seem cut short...) but another part of me thinks that this is a little bit...lame?

I do, however, think that out of all of the theories I have heard so far relating to the economy and "something that everyone can relate to," this is actually the one that has clicked most...the puzzle piece that, so far at least, fits into the "puzzle" the best...I guess we will just have to wait and see!

I can't wait until next Monday, when the pesky NDA is finally lifted and a flood of information starts flowing out! I am going crazy here

[kingston]

I like the idea of the twist but I'm not counting on it

[Kenny]

That's kind of interesting if it's true. We certainly wouldn't have a bunch of people throwing competitions every week if it means losing money, so for that reason alone, I kind of hope this is true! However, what would happen if someone made it to the end without winning any competitions to earn a big prize? Certainly they wouldn't have someone win the show without a substantial payoff, LoL.

Also, I fear that this could backfire and people will just give up too early. If they know there's a HUGE prize waiting for them at the end, they'll fight hard for it no matter what.

[kingston]

Originally Posted by Kenny

That's kind of interesting if it's true. We certainly wouldn't have a bunch of people throwing competitions every week if it means losing money, so for that reason alone, I kind of hope this is true! However, what would happen if someone made it to the end without winning any competitions to earn a big prize? Certainly they wouldn't have someone win the show without a substantial payoff, LoL.

Also, I fear that this could backfire and people will just give up too early. If they know there's a HUGE prize waiting for them at the end, they'll fight hard for it no matter what.

I totally agree this would add a whole new level of gameplay into the mix... of things and would target people for a lack of effort in prize money challenges... while I'm waiting to see if it's true... I think it just might be... Allison did say that the twist was one that everyone can relate to and having to earn prize money and luxuries during these tough economic times falls into that same realm.

[Sportsfan]

Originally Posted by Kenny

That's kind of interesting if it's true. We certainly wouldn't have a bunch of people throwing competitions every week if it means losing money, so for that reason alone, I kind of hope this is true! However, what would happen if someone made it to the end without winning any competitions to earn a big prize? Certainly they wouldn't have someone win the show without a substantial payoff, LoL.

Also, I fear that this could backfire and people will just give up too early. If they know there's a HUGE prize waiting for them at the end, they'll fight hard for it no matter what.

WOW...The more that I think about it, they could use this money thing to REALLY change the game...they could do a lot with it.

I personally would like the idea that they START with a given amount of money, and lose it for certain things. But since the rumor is earn money, lets take a second to look at that.

The first thing that comes to mind is the Veto. Say someone wins the veto. If they chose not to use it, $10,000 dollars goes into the pot. Early in the game, this might not effect much, but later down the line, if someone is up on the block, for example, and you think you have the votes to save them, the strategy might be to NOT use the veto to bank more money. It could also work for things like food comps...a certain amount of money is given to those who eat slop for the week, etc.

What would really be cool, is the ability to gain money, and then spend it. Stuff like food would have to be bought...luxuries...they could even charge for stuff like water!

For something like this to work though, the potential prize would have to be more than 500k...

[kingston]

Originally Posted by Sportsfan

WOW...The more that I think about it, they could use this money thing to REALLY change the game...they could do a lot with it.

I personally would like the idea that they START with a given amount of money, and lose it for certain things. But since the rumor is earn money, lets take a second to look at that.

The first thing that comes to mind is the Veto. Say someone wins the veto. If they chose not to use it, $10,000 dollars goes into the pot. Early in the game, this might not effect much, but later down the line, if someone is up on the block, for example, and you think you have the votes to save them, the strategy might be to NOT use the veto to bank more money. It could also work for things like food comps...a certain amount of money is given to those who eat slop for the week, etc.

What would really be cool, is the ability to gain money, and then spend it. Stuff like food would have to be bought...luxuries...they could even charge for stuff like water!

For something like this to work though, the potential prize would have to be more than 500k...

I don't like the idea of using the veto as a bargaining tool. While I feel that in recent seasons the Veto holder has way too much power. Right now pretty much once the veto is used it's almost certain who is going home I don't think scaring people into not using this power would almost certainly lead to even more predictability and dominance. Using the veto already creates a target for players in the game and adding money into the pot would almost certainly create an even bigger target. Sometimes the Veto is pivotal to saving our favorites and advancing those who provide us with entertainment or lack there of I think if money were involved we'd see would simply see it not used at all it's just too easy to bank that extra cash. BBUS players are greedy enough as is.

I do like the idea of charging them for food and luxuriates though and having them try and earn that money back somehow.

Now I do respect your creative ideas but when we look at the rumor and the information we have been given by the producers so far I'm not sure your speculation really relates well even though I think some of it is really good. The information Allison Grodner gave us a few days ago says that the twist is something "everyone can relate to..." while the charging them for luxuries does the veto idea does not.

[Larry]

It would be interesting if they 'paid' to use the veto (and other things). It would be like America's Player but on a grand scale.

One week it could be that you'll add 10K to the pot if you use veto and another week it could be that you'll add 10K to the pot if you don't. If you go against that week, you will lose 10K.

I respect your creative ideas but again if we look at the rumor and the information from Allison Grodner gave us a few days ago that the twist was "something everyone can relate to..." giving them money on top of money doesn't quite fall into that category.

Maybe you're reading too far into what she's saying. Currently at this time I do think a lot of people can relate to the idea presented above in many ways. 1) Do you do what's best for you or do you do what's best [money wise] for everyone else. It would really put you in a spot. Would you risk pissing off everyone else by using/not using the veto or would you just go along with it to add more money. 2) With what money you have, do you spend it on luxuries, or things you need.