I certainly think the eggs can provide an interesting dilema for a player and a talking point for the viewer, but only if they are used in a sensible way and not some ridiculous offer or gamble that no-one is going to take, hence making them rather pointless.

What is good about the egg twist is that they can be used in a variety of ways. So unlike previous twists such as "Scrooge or Santa" which were limited to either option, the eggs can be incorparated into each game differently depeding on the player & board.

The bad thing though seems to be that the offers have been pitched rather low since the eggs have been introduced.

So I think potentially the eggs could be a great twist and is just limited to the minds of the Banker/producer on how they want to play them. As of yet though I don't think they are being used too well.

I suspect we may see variations of the egg twist at other times of the year now, such as Christmas, where instead of just limiting Scrooge or Santa to an offer after each box or allowing the Banker to see in a box, they might use it in the same style of easter whereby if you get the good option (Santa) or the bad option (Scrooge) then you may get more/less money or the chance to open a 1 box at a time etc...

I think it's good in as much as there's lots of variation available - so long as the banker doesn't go too mad with them and be really harsh or really generous.

The downside of them is that the offers have been rather stingy this week, and there's only a 1 in 3 chance of increasing your winnings as there's only one good egg.

Definately. One of, if that, the best twist they've come up with.

It's good for the amount of variety that can be implemented into the mini game.

They are a good twist, but I think it would have been better to have had 4 eggs, with 2 good to create a 50/50 situation. 1 in 3 are not good odds so haven't really enticed the contestants very much.

Yes; I would say having 4 eggs would be better to encourage the contestants to use the eggs. On the other hand, having only 3 eggs does give the banker the opportunity to either let the player open 1 egg or 2 eggs.

Also, the contestants would appear to have to deal most of the time before using the eggs, so more eggs could encourage more deals which wouldn't be a good thing right now, as the offers appear to be quite stingy with only a chance of making them better if you find the good egg...

In terms of the variety of ways it can be used, it's an absolutely brilliant twist, and the presence of three eggs allows the odds to be 2:1 in either direction which is great.

The way to use the eggs is for the 'good egg' amount to be an amount that anyone sensible would Deal instantly, and the 'bad egg' amount to be moderately stingy for the board. Unfortunately, the 'good egg' amount has been the right offer for the board and the 'bad egg' offer has been moderately stingy at best... or in one case, the 'good egg' amount was one anyone sensible would Deal instantly, but the 'bad egg' offer was 1p!!!

To take Gemma's five-box board; £26,000, boosted to £62,000 for the good egg, would have worked, and I'd have had a major dilemma in that configuration.

He got it right on her final two though. £16k would have been a no-brainer Deal. £8k would have been a No Deal for probably the majority. £8k with a one-in-three chance of £16k? That's another matter, and it was easily Gemma's hardest decision of the game.

I love the twist though. Instead of picking between a lottery or a guaranteed amount, the player is now choosing between two lotteries. That is fascinating.