Has anyone noticed that the history (especially recent history) of the box number on the table have any influence on the Banker's offers?

My observations based on a limited number of games say yes.

Looking back at Laura's game, if her box wasn't #6, which had a brutal past, which brought two 1p winners, there is a chance that her offer would have been near £90,000 on a £3,000/£250,000 final two.

That said, she did have an unstable board which was made more unstable by the loss of the £50,000.

In £25k Peter's game, where he had Box #13 on the table, his final five were the £1, £50, £100, £1,000 and the £250,000, and his offer was £25,000, despite taking out the safety net of £35,000 and another red in that round, and the previous offer being £10,000.

My guess is that the last person who had #13 prior to Peter was £100k Gaz, when he took the box to win the £100,000 when he basically had a virtual one box game for most of his game, and Peter's game became a one box game after the £35,000 went.

Normally, with the loss of that safety net, the Banker's offer would have normally stuck or likely went down, but because of the recent history of #13 on the table at the time, the Banker decided to increase his offer way up. Had it been just about any other number (especially #6 and #14 at the time), the offer would have very likely went down.

Anyone else notice the influence of the box number on the Banker's offers?

Box 22 usually has an effect on the offers simply for it being renowned for big numbers at the table.

Box 16 used to, they said it was the luckiest box in the game, brought out one of the power 5 the most times, but it hasn't been on the table for ages

Box 7 also never had a power 5. The first person to bring one to the table in box 7 swapped it away!

Most cases I agree however in Lauras its because they wanted to try get her to play on and get a winner. 45k was just dealable but low enough to make the contestant think thats not enough and play on.