the reasoning for this weeks eviction. They could have easily overlooked Vanessa's indiscretion. I think they might not have been too happy with the actual result and fell back on this excuse in attempt to get someone else out. Plus we all know what a good money earner this weeks voting will make. People will be voting more as the vote will be split so many ways. Pretty cynical I know but that's my opinion.......

well yes it is convenient, but as they have all (or most at least) discussed noms in one way or another, it is poetic justice for them really, isnt it?

yeah, I suppose it's a good way to stop it happening again....

I think they want Derek to dig a bigger hole for himself so it becomes a big story like Nasty Nick. If he left this week it would all fall a bit flat.

Come on guys, they just want more money. Bet they didn't make much on last week's vote.

I guess they showed Vanessa as the scapegoat as she was the one who wasnt even trying to be sly about nominating.

They should have just had the people who transgressed up for nominations

BUT NO ENDEMOL WANT MORE MONEY!!!! - IE THEYRE ALL UP FOR EVICTION

What really pisses me off is that Makosi says shit like Dont worry Vanessa no one blames you
Then Derek, Lesley, Craig and Kemal all say much the same
with Craig saying No one from Team Britany will be evicted.(Dic*head)
IE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO WERE GUILTY OF BEING SLY

Derek being the worst

i think that in previous series, HM's have always discussed noms - it's nothing new, they usually just get a warning for it. it is all a bit convenient isn't it!

which is the point I made. People will vote more as they panic that their favourite might go as the vote is split. It's a lot harder to predict the result....

Wonder if they own all the sex shops in Amsterdam as well.

I wrote about this on another similar thread a minute ago..but darned if I can find it now...what I was wondering is...will this actually effect the amount of people who vote, or will the same amount of people vote who normally do but it will just be spread over 12 people, so there will be no extra cash in it for Endemol?

Really if they were after making more money they should have said vote for who you want to stay in, then evict the one with the most votes, that way all the family, friends, fanbases etc.. would have phoned in to keep their person in. This way all thats gunna happen is they are gunna get the odd extra vote, my opinion only of course!

Yapp it's also a matter of vote control to get the person out they want to. Maybe HEAT told them they don't want Jade to loose her contracts to Lesley..

I guess slagging off Endermol is just one more traditional part of BB.

Perhaps next year we could all text them (at a massive cost to ourselves obviously) to keep it off the screen.

It's all about the cash cow

Do they think she'll get round to bonking everyone?

I mean she should have been up last week and they changed the rules.

She would also be up this week, but they changed the rules.

It's a con folks.

Again.

she is up for eviction this week

I failed to see why they have changed the rules to save Sam? week 1 rules were clear to all the viewers and she was saved due to that, week 2 Vanessa (and Derek) cheated and again BB made the right decision. Maybe your just upset cause you don't like her but don't make silly comments that aren't true.

Good point!

I don't care about any of them. It's a serious, imho, objective question.

u've said Sam's escaped being up 4 eviction when she hasn't though

Simple, a large number of HM's were blatantly breaking the rules about nominations. So perhaps they thought it needed to be done to teach them a lesson. We'd have all been up in arms if they hadn't done anything about it.

Sam is still up for eviction anyway, so it isn't as if she's been made immune.

Actually if there was any collusion, it was probably so as to save Derek.
Oh and probably to generate more income as this is going to cause a lot of people to vote.

I've just spent my 35p on her!

Sam has escaped an "ordinary" eviction.

She'd have gone this week and last if she'd have been up v Roberto and now Derek.

You people know exactly what I mean. Why the semantics?

well to be honest they did explain the rules first last week so they can't really be accused of any foul play there

but i did predict there would be a twist here

i understand the income bit. It was my first thought.