Thinking about it, there aren't really any HMs that I would say I like, and in the last week, people vote for who they want to win, rather than evict.

With most of the public disliking the HMs, it would probably make more sense to keep having evictions under the last 2/3, otherwise people are just not going to bother voting in the last week.

Anybody any thoughts on this?

I dont understand what you're trying to say - they have evictions every week.

I think the OP is trying to say that given we dislike the HMs this year they need to keep the "vote to evict" going as long as possible before they turn it to "vote to win" - to keep the pennies roling in for them.

they usually do vote to evict until the final week anyway.

I think they mean that they should have more evictions, so rather than 5 people in the final week there would only be 3.

I agree, from endemols point of view they will probably make more money that way....the 'final' i see being a fight between 2 housemates (maybe Makosi v Anthony) with the people who dont care Makosi is a horrible person because she has been entertaining and the people who'd rather someone 'nice but dull' won batteling it out...with the other 3 finalists just being unimportant and not getting many votes at all.

I agree .. (and to clarify) With 2 weeks left, and standard evictions, there will be 5 left for us to vote *for* in the last week, and since probably 4/5 of them will be almost universally hated, not many people will bother to vote, whereas if they keep up the evictions until three are left, they'll get lots more people voting.