£70,000 - always been an odd amount really. So how much do you think the winner deserves. Is being declared the winner (without the prize) enough, or maybe you think they should go the whole hog and win £1million.

Alternatively, the format of other countries get the housemates to compete in weekly tasks for a jackpot fund, or maybe like Teen Big Brother, a round the world trip would be best.

What do you lot think?

I think the prize money needs to be higher than 70k now. Perhaps rounding it off to 100k would be the best idea.

£1MILLION that would stop the "we all get on so well" crap.

I agree with this.

I think the £70k prize limit is an extremely disappointing amount seeing as though the contestants give up so much of there time while making some c4 executives extremely rich.

P.S Just thought I better point out that I can’t stand watching "reality tv"

I say £500, 000 is a gppd amount. It'll stop the "we all love eachother" attitude but still wont break the endemol bank.

Nothing will break their bank! A million is too much, I'd say £250k or £500k.

I say that we make them play for £1 MILLION. Each week the live Saturday task could be for a prize of £100 000, which goes to the winner at the end of the series. That would make the task vital, and will cause large reprucisions for the group if they fail it. Especially if one person (eg. Fed Mark II) keeps on failing the task, the pressure would be immense.

I agree 70k has always seemed an odd amount to me too, they can afford to raise it, so they should!
I think maybe a millions a bit steep.... maybe 100 or 250k.

Have a set prize fund of £10,000 and they have to gamble the rest on tasks. It brings so much more excitement into the game, as they will all be going out to win the money and increase it in anyway possible. And that means give them a set food budget based on the performance in the task.

I don't want it to be too high as this would tempt some to try alliances or voting strategies to share the prize money.

Keeping it at a relatively low amount does mean the contestants will think it is not worthwhile sharing the winnings.

Also it means C4 etc can still have the excuse its not a gameshow, it's a 'social experiment' and the HMs can still claim they are doing it for the experience. as opposed to the prize money or the chance for a cushy media career.

I think they should be made to earn the money not food. Like someone said make them bet on the tasks. Make the tasks harder ,worth watching not like the stupid ones last time.

Well, to add to your comments, setting at £1m may be too high and doesn't really leave them room to go - I think somewhere between £100,000 and £250,000 would be best.

Talking of the Million, I do think C4 could afford it considering that last year the flop that was Boys and Girls gave away £100,000 every week for 12 weeks.

I agree with making them play for prize money rather then food in tasks. It would put huge pressure on them to pass. Then regards to the food money, they should be given a set amount each week, which would guarantee alcohol every week.

And imagine the backlash if three contestants fail the big task for £20,000. Add that to the alcohol which they will buy each week and there will be half an hour's of televised highlights we have there.

£70,000 is not a lifechanging amount but a million is.

I don't mind if they get paid a million, but if that happens it changes viewer's perceptions of what the show is about and maybe votes too.

Such as voting for winner the person from the most deprived background who needs the money most.