How about while the dealers are switching decks out of the ShuffleMaster they announce in a clear and understandable tone..."($?)antes please!"

DUCWIDT by incorporating one simple task with another so as to save time?

IIRC, a large part of a dealers job description is to control the table. I would have to imagine that this particular announcement is one of the responsiblities included in said job description.

easy game

And that would be an incorrect assumption...and it is not a time saver based upon my limited experience in tournaments using that insipid change.

I could see it being a bit of a time saver if it was full tables, but is it really that much of a time saver 4 handed or less? Who isn't paying attention when you're that short-handed?

Your assumption would be very incorrect.

The maximum 10 seconds it saves per hand is in no way a compelling enough reason to fundamentally change the structure of the game.

I just have to assume people who feel BB Ante will save "loads of time" are the ones fake-tanking preflop for 2 minutes on every single hand, yet are suddenly concerned about saving 10 seconds by eliminating the Table Ante.

This seems incorrect to me. If the BB does not have enough chips to post a blind that covers the small blind amount, he is not eligible to win the small blind (or at least, he can only win the portion of it that he can cover). If he cannot post a blind at all, he would be all-in for a side pot that would include only his ante. Presumably any other player that wanted to contest the pot would still have to at least call the amount of the normal big blind.

Its probably worth it early in tournaments that are deep and have antes from the start. The time saved there is more valuable than the issues.

Late in tournaments not so much.

What does that player end up with if they win the pot on each scenario.

I'm an NVGer who has never heard of this before, so it may surprise you that I have an opinion.

A) is best. One (admittedly minor) problem with doing antes normally is the total amount of the dead money per hand varies quite a bit, particularly when you move from two tables to one. If you play ante-only tournaments then 10-18 handed the dead money per hand basically remains constant as levels rise but its balanced by people busting - then it suddenly doubles when you move to FT (in a normal tournament this happens too but less noticeably because people are focusing on the blinds).

A) gives a smoother structure whereas B) seems to be trying to replicate something that's actually a "bug" with the normal way of doing it.

As for C) ok, but then why not do it all tournament? If the question is specifically about these BB-ante tournaments (about changing the structure of the game - lots of things do, but a variety of tournaments are available. Playing PLO also fundamentally changes the nature of the game from NLHE, it doesn't mean there isn't space for both kinds of tournaments).

On the question of whether a very short BB should be deemed to have posted antes first or his BB first.
1) obviously go by the rules if this hase been specified - (presumably the BB stays in front of his whereas the ante is drawn into the middle)
2) otherwise the judgement consistent with other forms of poker is he posts the antes first and anything he has left over is his BB that can be matched against other players' bets and the SB to the extent he can cover them
3) however when writing rules, consider writing them that he posts his BB first, anything left over (up to a BB) gets thrown in the middle to juice the pot but the really short player isn't obliged to juice the pot for the others before he has his own BB there.

About game play. There is already the idea that one should play slightly looser if one is UTG as one has to post the blind next hand (but not if he busts, so this acts as a discount on the risk). It makes significant difference to that calculation if one also has to post a dead ante.