Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

Series 1 and 2 taken off YouTube?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 15-02-2013, 23:47
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163

I was just wondering if anyone knows about this?

Series 1 and 2 of The Apprentice have been taken down from YouTube. They had been uploaded officially by the BBC, so they were good quality and in full videos. They appear to have been taken down. I don't understand why - the BBC obviously haven't made a copyright claim, as they uploaded the videos themselves.

I don't think this is just an Apprentice thing, as there are other BBC uploads I've had trouble finding as well. If anyone could help with this, or explain why this has happened and if they'll be back at any point, I'd be really grateful.

Thanks x
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 12-03-2013, 13:30
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
They're back now, must have been a technical glitch.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17-03-2013, 02:06
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,801
They're back now, must have been a technical glitch.
Interesting to watch back with hindsight of what happens after . Its interesting who gets the first chance to describe herself in episode 1 (Michelle) and who does what from early on in episodes one and two . Ruth is good at organising the team to do something right from the start, but, from what we see, its Michelle who comes up with the idea of buying for nothing in week one and who straight off spots why the calendar is badly designed in episode 2.........
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-03-2013, 10:59
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
Interesting to watch back with hindsight of what happens after . Its interesting who gets the first chance to describe herself in episode 1 (Michelle) and who does what from early on in episodes one and two . Ruth is good at organising the team to do something right from the start, but, from what we see, its Michelle who comes up with the idea of buying for nothing in week one and who straight off spots why the calendar is badly designed in episode 2.........
I know! Everyone said it was Jo who was the one who noticed that there was something wrong with the calendar, but actually all she did was protest about the cats, and I don't think it was the cats that was actually wrong with the calendar. (I know Sir Alan said that they have nothing to do with GOSH, but I think they did their market research, they knew that cat calendars sold and their pictures were so much nicer than the pictures on the other team.) The real fundamental flaw in it was what Michelle pointed out - that you couldn't use it as a calendar because it had minimalist dates, and it was supposed to be a calendar, not a poster. I think far too much fuss was made about the fact that they used cats - what lost them the task was the fact that you couldn't use it as a calendar, and obviously Nargis' dreadful pitches.

I didn't like Michelle though. After the car task on the treat, she just came across as being a stirrer who had been saying lots of horrible things about Sharon (who I did like) behind her back.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17-03-2013, 12:59
_NiallDEE_
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,810
Interesting to watch back with hindsight of what happens after . Its interesting who gets the first chance to describe herself in episode 1 (Michelle) and who does what from early on in episodes one and two . Ruth is good at organising the team to do something right from the start, but, from what we see, its Michelle who comes up with the idea of buying for nothing in week one and who straight off spots why the calendar is badly designed in episode 2.........
I only watched series 2 for the first time, and despite knowing Michelle won I barely even noticed her presence until about week 4/5. Ruth, on the other hand, I thought was a frontrunner right from the start.
_NiallDEE_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-03-2013, 13:09
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
I only watched series 2 for the first time, and despite knowing Michelle won I barely even noticed her presence until about week 4/5. Ruth, on the other hand, I thought was a frontrunner right from the start.
Many of the winners in the early years haven't been clear from the start, but it hasn't been so much like that in later years.

Tim - was PM in Week 1 so was more noticeable than some, but still didn't stand out as much as some others in the early tasks.
Michelle - wasn't hugely noticeable until Week 6.
Simon - wasn't noticeable for quite a while.
Lee - I didn't think was noticeable for quite a while, but some of the people on You're Fired! had him picked out as a winner from an early stage.
Yasmina - very noticeable from the start, partly because she was PM in Week 2.
Arjun - was noticeable from the start, but that was a shorter series so it was easy to see everyone early on.
Stella - did very well in the early tasks so very noticeable early on.
Tom - I can't really remember how he was edited at the start! I do recall that Helen wasn't that noticeable until Week 6 though (although I noticed her and she was my favourite to win from the second week, because she had a very distinctive picture on the website and I made a conscious effort to look out for her on the programme.)
Zara - was edited to stand out from very early on.
Ricky - was noticeable from the start, but not as a winner.
Ashleigh - like Tim, was PM in Week 1.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18-03-2013, 21:48
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,801
I only watched series 2 for the first time, and despite knowing Michelle won I barely even noticed her presence until about week 4/5. Ruth, on the other hand, I thought was a frontrunner right from the start.
Its what they are doing though. Ruth is organising things and selling well, but Lord Sugar is asking her if she's too bossy from early on. Michele is seen making many of the key points on task. Ruth is PM when they get the wrong theme for the advertising campaign - which is inevitable on the briefing she got second hand - but is a loss, through, on her scorecard for not seeing the point. Just got to the car selling episode and its Ruth in her element selling brilliantly - but her entire team miss whats essential - that its the extras you need to sell to make the winning difference. She scores as she clinches most deals , but then she also attracts the blame for not managing to get the extras. There's a mystery too as we are not told how the winning team sells as many cars after starting late, but we are told that Syed is slow and Sharon sells nothing - we don't actually get told what Michelle sells on whats a good selling task for Ruth - and we do know the team Michelle is on is selling more of the extras.

One thing I notice is how well informed Lord Sugar is in series two. He knows who did what, has reports from all over the place some episodes. its a big contrast with some later series when he gets it wrong, or goes for the first simple agument he hears. He may actually have an acurate score card in his head for this series. You can see why people have gone, why he's formed opinions of many them. if you note Lord Sugar's comments on Ansell in the car selling task - where he doubts, from his reports from the professional carsalesmen, that Ansell is that good at his main selling speciality, you can see why Ansell eventually won't make the final. It just looks less random than some other series - although Karen and Alexa are the classic cases of what happens when he sees a lawyer or an academic economist.

I note too how good Michelle'is predicting who he will sack. She just can read him when most people seemingly can't.

And the next episode is Michelle's weak one week 7 - the Top Shop one where she is PM? ........
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-03-2013, 06:41
lammtarra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 430

One thing I notice is how well informed Lord Sugar is
One of the strengths of the early series was the boardroom coverage was more focused, and so decisions seemed logical, even if we disagreed with them.

Now the producers have lost that focus, preferring to show rows and insults rather than rational debate.

One of the recent contestants said he enjoyed being in the boardroom as it was a business masterclass from Lord Sugar, which supports the charge against the producers rather than Sugar for losing the plot.

The boardroom as bear-pit is also more like the American series.
lammtarra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-03-2013, 12:41
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
One of the strengths of the early series was the boardroom coverage was more focused, and so decisions seemed logical, even if we disagreed with them.

Now the producers have lost that focus, preferring to show rows and insults rather than rational debate.

One of the recent contestants said he enjoyed being in the boardroom as it was a business masterclass from Lord Sugar, which supports the charge against the producers rather than Sugar for losing the plot.

The boardroom as bear-pit is also more like the American series.
In all fairness, Zara refused to get into personal spats with the others and only focussed on rational debate in the boardroom, and she got a lot of coverage.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-2013, 00:08
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,801
One of the strengths of the early series was the boardroom coverage was more focused, and so decisions seemed logical, even if we disagreed with them.

Now the producers have lost that focus, preferring to show rows and insults rather than rational debate.

One of the recent contestants said he enjoyed being in the boardroom as it was a business masterclass from Lord Sugar, which supports the charge against the producers rather than Sugar for losing the plot.

The boardroom as bear-pit is also more like the American series.
There seems to be a quite a bit less boardroom argument - in terms of noise and length - and some clearer results. Perhaps thats because the tasks and data available lead to easier conclusions and he knows more - and he's not trying to keep people in for otehr reasons like their nail file.

There's a few mysteries in series two though. I can see why he has a problem with Ruth from the odd comments from early on. She also has bad lack in that he discounts when she does do better than Michelle because she's made a mistake herself - as in Top Shop week and using his ideas in the final task. But we never do know why he turns on her over supposedly trying to trap Syed into making mistakes on the cruise ship entertainment task. We see no reason to doubt her explanation - but Lord Sugar seems to go very negative on it and he's still talking about it in the finals. He seems informed that series , so what was it he saw we didn't or is it an early case of getting a bee in his bonnet? I think he's decided by week 10 she isn't going to win. Ansell seems doomed too when the same questions are raised about him in the interviews as Lord Sugar raised in car selling week. And warching it again its even clearer that Syed and Paul are never going to get hired.

Nick also looks weak on a second viewing. He's already negative on the top female contenders by series two, and he's still there pushing for Paul - even after the interviewers have chewed him up and found nothing edible there. He continues to cloud issues in later series.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-2013, 00:19
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,801
In all fairness, Zara refused to get into personal spats with the others and only focussed on rational debate in the boardroom, and she got a lot of coverage.
Zara's interesting because she's one of the few very smart and articulate females he took too. He bins Karen on sight, picks Yasmina over Kate and he missed Miriam in the first series. Zara is very good at it - from twitter she's hoping for English at Oxford and has just been in a debating competion at the Oxford union. But she was also excellent at reading him - without repeating what he says and putting him off or the message flying over his head.

Watching series two it looks like Michelle was good at that too. She's articulate with enough passion - but she doesn't get angry or row in the boardroom. She has a story he likes, but she's also one of the very few people where he's actually laughed at her jokes.

There's a lesson there somewhere for how to do well - if it matters with the business plans deciding who wins - and if, as Lamm tarra says, the more rational conversations on the adult show ever count or get shown.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-2013, 01:57
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
There's a few mysteries in series two though. I can see why he has a problem with Ruth from the odd comments from early on. She also has bad lack in that he discounts when she does do better than Michelle because she's made a mistake herself - as in Top Shop week and using his ideas in the final task. But we never do know why he turns on her over supposedly trying to trap Syed into making mistakes on the cruise ship entertainment task. We see no reason to doubt her explanation - but Lord Sugar seems to go very negative on it and he's still talking about it in the finals. He seems informed that series , so what was it he saw we didn't or is it an early case of getting a bee in his bonnet? I think he's decided by week 10 she isn't going to win. Ansell seems doomed too when the same questions are raised about him in the interviews as Lord Sugar raised in car selling week. And warching it again its even clearer that Syed and Paul are never going to get hired.

Nick also looks weak on a second viewing. He's already negative on the top female contenders by series two, and he's still there pushing for Paul - even after the interviewers have chewed him up and found nothing edible there. He continues to cloud issues in later series.
I didn't understand what his problem was with Ruth. I didn't see that she tried to set Syed up - in all fairness, that man didn't need setting up - but maybe we didn't see the whole picture. I also thought it was unfair when he didn't let her explain properly about reading the rules on the ship task. To me, it was clear that she was sure that anything they spent would be deducted, but she asked Syed to confirm that and he said it wasn't there, so she took his word for it. Sugar's 'Did you read the rules? Yes or no?' was very uncalled for, I think.

Zara's interesting because she's one of the few very smart and articulate females he took too. He bins Karen on sight, picks Yasmina over Kate and he missed Miriam in the first series. Zara is very good at it - from twitter she's hoping for English at Oxford and has just been in a debating competion at the Oxford union. But she was also excellent at reading him - without repeating what he says and putting him off or the message flying over his head.

Watching series two it looks like Michelle was good at that too. She's articulate with enough passion - but she doesn't get angry or row in the boardroom. She has a story he likes, but she's also one of the very few people where he's actually laughed at her jokes.
Yes, Michelle and Zara are in the minority of very articulate women he has liked (I think Susan falls into that category as well). Kate was articulate, but I think she tried too hard to come across as being perfect. I didn't actually like her that much, I thought there was something ever so slightly nasty about her when things didn't seem to be going her way. Yasmina was a good talker as well though.

The mistake that both Miriam and Karen made was that they were so convinced they were staying that they didn't focus enough on standing up for their own cause in the boardroom. Sir Alan regretted firing Miriam and apologised to her later. With Karen on the other hand, I think she was seriously overrated, and if she'd lasted longer than Week 3, I think she'd have gone downhill very quickly. I didn't see anything that great from her. Her strategy in Week 1 was clever, but almost backfired on her. In Week 2 she wrote the pitch that Nargis messed up, and maybe should have pushed to pitch herself. In Week 3 she spent a very long time negotiating the dinner jacket, before finding out the person didn't have it in the first place. Nargis was heavily criticised for bringing her into the boardroom, but I thought that was the right decision. Nargis definitely deserved to be fired, but I had no issue with her boardroom decisions. From the edit, I didn't see why she could justifiably bring in Michelle, Ruth, Sharon or Alexa. Karen was very good at personal skills and getting the team onside, but I didn't see anything really exciting about her. I think the only reason she is so liked by Apprentice fans is because she was probably one of the biggest shock firings ever.

Zara is interesting not just because she was an articulate person that he liked, but also because she is considerably more upper-class than most winners. She didn't fit the mould of Apprentice winners and was probably very unlike anything he would usually go for, so it must have been something about her. Whatever she had that charmed him worked on me as well, I have to say. I think it's to do with the way that she speaks. She has this wonderful voice that I could listen to forever, and in all honesty I was backing her from the moment she first appeared at the start of Episode 1.* I think there was something very honest about her as well - she wasn't like Kate because she didn't try to come across as being perfect; when she made a mistake, she held her hands up to it. And she did make quite a few mistakes, but on the whole she was a good enough all-rounder. Also, she remained totally professional throughout and never allowed personality clashes to interfere with her performance on the tasks. Another interesting thing about Zara is that I believe she is the only winner who wasn't well-liked by the other candidates - the others clearly had a problem with her; maybe she was difficult to live with, I don't know. But if I had to choose anyone from any series of The Apprentice to work with, it would be her, as there was just something about her that I thought was marvellous.

*Has anyone else noticed that at the start of the first episode of Young Apprentice Series 2, Zara's introduction has been edited in a way that makes it sound like a response to Mahamed's?

Mahamed: I don't go to no posh school. I don't have that financial backing from my family. I want to show people that you can achieve if you have a dream. I have a dream to become a successful entrepreneur, and I'm here to do so.
Zara: Everyone has dreams, but there's a difference between the people who lie in their bed at night dreaming of all that they could do and the people who wake up, get up and start doing the work so that they can actually live that dream.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-2013, 11:50
TXF0429
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,631
I didn't understand what his problem was with Ruth. I didn't see that she tried to set Syed up - in all fairness, that man didn't need setting up - but maybe we didn't see the whole picture. I also thought it was unfair when he didn't let her explain properly about reading the rules on the ship task. To me, it was clear that she was sure that anything they spent would be deducted, but she asked Syed to confirm that and he said it wasn't there, so she took his word for it. Sugar's 'Did you read the rules? Yes or no?' was very uncalled for, I think.
I too also got this impression. It was a very strange scenario but didn't Ruth ask Syed whether it was measured in profit or turnover and Syed said turnover? So, Ruth went out to buy loads of bottles of Champagne, believing that it was measured in turnover - or have I missed something. I think Syed very nearly stayed in that boardroom - look at SAS when he's talking to Nick and Margaret, he's trying to justify keeping Syed in. I think that had it been any other candidate, Syed would have ultimately stayed as he really fought for his life and his boardroom performance was, in all honesty, better than Ruth's.

Another interesting thing about Zara is that I believe she is the only winner who wasn't well-liked by the other candidates - the others clearly had a problem with her; maybe she was difficult to live with, I don't know. But if I had to choose anyone from any series of The Apprentice to work with, it would be her, as there was just something about her that I thought was marvellous..
Oh I'd contest that (assuming we are talking about all winners and not just Young Apprentice). You may not know as you haven't seen the end of Series 6, but by Laura's firing, I'd say everyone bar Jamie and arguably Joanna had clashed with Stella in some way. Chris resented her superior record, she and Stuart had clashed multiple times in Weeks 7 and 8, she and Laura clashed in Week 8 and she and Liz clashed during Week 9.
Coincidentally, did you know that there are a remarkable amount of similarities between Series 6, Week 9 and YA Series 2, Week 6:

The task was the 3 v 4 task and it was a Scavenger Hunt. The losing PM (in both cases named Elizabeth) was the front runner up until that task. They both sent the person on their sub-team back to the house (Harry M and Joanna), both tried to gang up on the eventual winner (Stella and Zara) and ultimately the other girl in the baordroom was fired (Laura and Hayley).
On the winning team (featuring the ultimate 3rd and 2nd placers) the winning PM finished 3rd (Jamie and Haya), whilst the person who worked alone only got 2 items (Jamie and Harry H), whilst the sub-team of 2 did very well on the task, finding 5 items and getting a number of successful discounts (Stuart/Chris and Haya/James).
The next three to ultimately get fired were the losing PM of that task (Liz and Lizzie), a candidate from the winning team (Stuart and Harry H) and the person who escaped the boardroom in the losing team (Joanna and Harry M)

Now you tell me that isn't weird.

Anyway, my point is that Series 6 had a lot of hate for the winner as well and I really think you should watch the rest of it.
TXF0429 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-2013, 12:10
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
Oh I'd contest that (assuming we are talking about all winners and not just Young Apprentice). You may not know as you haven't seen the end of Series 6, but by Laura's firing, I'd say everyone bar Jamie and arguably Joanna had clashed with Stella in some way. Chris resented her superior record, she and Stuart had clashed multiple times in Weeks 7 and 8, she and Laura clashed in Week 8 and she and Liz clashed during Week 9.
Coincidentally, did you know that there are a remarkable amount of similarities between Series 6, Week 9 and YA Series 2, Week 6:

The task was the 3 v 4 task and it was a Scavenger Hunt. The losing PM (in both cases named Elizabeth) was the front runner up until that task. They both sent the person on their sub-team back to the house (Harry M and Joanna), both tried to gang up on the eventual winner (Stella and Zara) and ultimately the other girl in the baordroom was fired (Laura and Hayley).
On the winning team (featuring the ultimate 3rd and 2nd placers) the winning PM finished 3rd (Jamie and Haya), whilst the person who worked alone only got 2 items (Jamie and Harry H), whilst the sub-team of 2 did very well on the task, finding 5 items and getting a number of successful discounts (Stuart/Chris and Haya/James).
The next three to ultimately get fired were the losing PM of that task (Liz and Lizzie), a candidate from the winning team (Stuart and Harry H) and the person who escaped the boardroom in the losing team (Joanna and Harry M)

Now you tell me that isn't weird.

Anyway, my point is that Series 6 had a lot of hate for the winner as well and I really think you should watch the rest of it.
Fair play, I did forget about Stella actually. You're right, Zara was one of two winners who wasn't liked by the group.

Wow, that is weird actually and I hadn't noticed that! It's not quite such a profound discovery, but have you noticed that since they changed the format of the adult series to business partner, the first two people to be fired at the interview stage have always been the remaining people from last week's losing team? Although obviously that's only happened twice so probably just a coincidence. Another thing that I've noticed is that the majority of the time, the eventual winner is on the winning team in the first week - the only ones who haven't been are Lee, Yasmina, Arjun and Tom.

I certainly intend to watch the whole of Series 6 at some point, I just haven't got around to it yet. I believe it's just the last three episodes I haven't seen, I did watch up to Laura's firing.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 01:41
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,801
Fair play, I did forget about Stella actually. You're right, Zara was one of two winners who wasn't liked by the group.

Wow, that is weird actually and I hadn't noticed that! It's not quite such a profound discovery, but have you noticed that since they changed the format of the adult series to business partner, the first two people to be fired at the interview stage have always been the remaining people from last week's losing team? Although obviously that's only happened twice so probably just a coincidence. Another thing that I've noticed is that the majority of the time, the eventual winner is on the winning team in the first week - the only ones who haven't been are Lee, Yasmina, Arjun and Tom.

I certainly intend to watch the whole of Series 6 at some point, I just haven't got around to it yet. I believe it's just the last three episodes I haven't seen, I did watch up to Laura's firing.
Which was the week I would have fired Stella for ignoring Laura and going to the most expensive supplier possible. That in a task where its obvious that low cost is the priority and she's has more local background than most .....

Meanwhile, I am back in series one with 3 episodes to go. And I still have not seen any reason for Tim to win... He's basically OK and not as clearly bad when he's bad as some of the competition. Even when he puts people off in the charity auction exercise, Miriam is there to save the day and make sure he's not in the firing line. Saira seems very active, but gets an awful lot wrong, and I think she's doomed after Lord Sugar decides she is too abrasive in the football texting task. Paul and James are both impressive - in very different ways, but Paul looks a risk and umpteen hyperbole too far. James looks OK, if a bit placid for his Lordship, and seems to have more good ideas than Tim, and Miriam seems very competent at most things from thinking through ideas, to presentations, to negotiating and selling. She's got the point more often than not, when others have missed it, and when she's got it wrong everyone else has too .........You can see why Lord Sugar now thinks he made a mistake ........
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 05:17
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,801
Which was the week I would have fired Stella for ignoring Laura and going to the most expensive supplier possible. That in a task where its obvious that low cost is the priority and she's has more local background than most .....

Meanwhile, I am back in series one with 3 episodes to go. And I still have not seen any reason for Tim to win... He's basically OK and not as clearly bad when he's bad as some of the competition. Even when he puts people off in the charity auction exercise, Miriam is there to save the day and make sure he's not in the firing line. Saira seems very active, but gets an awful lot wrong, and I think she's doomed after Lord Sugar decides she is too abrasive in the football texting task. Paul and James are both impressive - in very different ways, but Paul looks a risk and umpteen hyperbole too far. James looks OK, if a bit placid for his Lordship, and seems to have more good ideas than Tim, and Miriam seems very competent at most things from thinking through ideas, to presentations, to negotiating and selling. She's got the point more often than not, when others have missed it, and when she's got it wrong everyone else has too .........You can see why Lord Sugar now thinks he made a mistake ........
Just watched series 11 episode 10, and its well up there with the most ridiculous contrived firing reasons ever. Miriam went for the other two's product choice, and because she didn't direct the two people supposedly directing her - when the only issue was they were not telling her the right things anyway. Tim should have been fatally damaged after Sugar's comments on his performance in the last task - but he went through on a weaker record than Miriam. And Paul looks like a first run through of Baggs over Liz - Lord Sugar sees himself in him, until the next week when he turns on him, and coems up with a daft excuse to fire someone else.......You would think he would have learnt and not keep on doing it in other series.......
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 08:55
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
Just watched series 11 episode 10, and its well up there with the most ridiculous contrived firing reasons ever. Miriam went for the other two's product choice, and because she didn't direct the two people supposedly directing her - when the only issue was they were not telling her the right things anyway. Tim should have been fatally damaged after Sugar's comments on his performance in the last task - but he went through on a weaker record than Miriam. And Paul looks like a first run through of Baggs over Liz - Lord Sugar sees himself in him, until the next week when he turns on him, and coems up with a daft excuse to fire someone else.......You would think he would have learnt and not keep on doing it in other series.......
You mean Series 1 Episode 10, but I'm sure that's just a typo...

Yes, I totally agree about Miriam's firing being ridiculous. She was fired essentially because she didn't tell the group to only choose one person at a time to give her direction. I think the biggest mistake that she made (which was a mistake that Saira and James made as well) was stepping up to be PM before they'd decided who was going to present. I think it wasn't a good idea for the PM to be the presenter because they were lumping too much responsibility on themselves - but it didn't seem to matter in either case, as they both performed really well. In later series Sugar fixed this problem by ensuring that everyone had a chance to present and to work backstage at some point.

In all fairness to Lord Sugar, he may have done his fair share of shock firings (Karen over Jo, Shazia over Jenny etc) but the only two that he has openly regretted later are Miriam and Liz. Considering how many series there have been now, the fact that there have only been two occasions where he feels he made the wrong decision (not counting the decision as to who will win), I think that's quite impressive.

I think Miriam should have won hands-down, but out of the final four Tim was definitely right for it, as he was apprentice material. Saria, Paul and James were all too experienced for it - if you look at Paul's attitude in Episode 11, he didn't even understand what the job was for. Tim on the other hand was adaptable, honest and a quick learner. Sugar seemed to forget about this by Series 6; this was why I think Laura should have won.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 18:39
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,801
You mean Series 1 Episode 10, but I'm sure that's just a typo...

Yes, I totally agree about Miriam's firing being ridiculous. She was fired essentially because she didn't tell the group to only choose one person at a time to give her direction. I think the biggest mistake that she made (which was a mistake that Saira and James made as well) was stepping up to be PM before they'd decided who was going to present. I think it wasn't a good idea for the PM to be the presenter because they were lumping too much responsibility on themselves - but it didn't seem to matter in either case, as they both performed really well. In later series Sugar fixed this problem by ensuring that everyone had a chance to present and to work backstage at some point.

In all fairness to Lord Sugar, he may have done his fair share of shock firings (Karen over Jo, Shazia over Jenny etc) but the only two that he has openly regretted later are Miriam and Liz. Considering how many series there have been now, the fact that there have only been two occasions where he feels he made the wrong decision (not counting the decision as to who will win), I think that's quite impressive.

I think Miriam should have won hands-down, but out of the final four Tim was definitely right for it, as he was apprentice material. Saria, Paul and James were all too experienced for it - if you look at Paul's attitude in Episode 11, he didn't even understand what the job was for. Tim on the other hand was adaptable, honest and a quick learner. Sugar seemed to forget about this by Series 6; this was why I think Laura should have won.
I haven't got there yet, but he does seem to be heading for a not Saira as she's too brash and makes mistakes, not James because he's just not Sugarlike, and not Paul because he has all of Saira's issues and some more. I haven't yet seen Tim doing anything worth winning - except by default - though - and even in the last pre final task he's still seeing more in Paul than Tim on what he says. Looking at it with hindsight, I think the winner by default and " most like me but reliable enough" criteria are there in series one.

The issue about the prize seems to be there from the start. if you listen to Lord Sugar describing what he wants in terms of range of skills and reliability he is implying a significant role and implying he needs a James or a Miriam. As you say, if its an apprentice manager he should have someone less experienced and malleable - but as he described it its more a role where people will have real power and closely watch him work at a high level. If you add on fitting the job to the person, and the job then becoming less and less high level over alter series - till there is none at all - you just see those contradictions work out.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 18:53
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
I haven't got there yet, but he does seem to be heading for a not Saira as she's too brash and makes mistakes, not James because he's just not Sugarlike, and not Paul because he has all of Saira's issues and some more. I haven't yet seen Tim doing anything worth winning - except by default - though - and even in the last pre final task he's still seeing more in Paul than Tim on what he says. Looking at it with hindsight, I think the winner by default and " most like me but reliable enough" criteria are there in series one.

The issue about the prize seems to be there from the start. if you listen to Lord Sugar describing what he wants in terms of range of skills and reliability he is implying a significant role and implying he needs a James or a Miriam. As you say, if its an apprentice manager he should have someone less experienced and malleable - but as he described it its more a role where people will have real power and closely watch him work at a high level. If you add on fitting the job to the person, and the job then becoming less and less high level over alter series - till there is none at all - you just see those contradictions work out.
I think Tim was a pretty good winner. You don't really see what is so special about him until Episodes 11 and 12, but I think a lot of that is the editing as he's not that entertaining. The thing about Tim is that he's relentless - he may not have stood out that much, but he's never seen to be slacking, he gives every task his all and he's able to learn. Another good thing about him is that he hasn't clashed with anyone in the series - I think he and James are the only people in the first series you can say that about. Everyone seems to get on pretty well with Tim; even Adele appeared to respect him more than she respected anyone else. Obviously it's not all about who everyone gets on with, but I think if you can earn everyone's respect, that is a good skill.

Spoiler concerning Paul below:

Spoiler
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 01:23
TXF0429
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,631
I haven't got there yet, but he does seem to be heading for a not Saira as she's too brash and makes mistakes, not James because he's just not Sugarlike, and not Paul because he has all of Saira's issues and some more. I haven't yet seen Tim doing anything worth winning - except by default - though - and even in the last pre final task he's still seeing more in Paul than Tim on what he says. Looking at it with hindsight, I think the winner by default and " most like me but reliable enough" criteria are there in series one.

The issue about the prize seems to be there from the start. if you listen to Lord Sugar describing what he wants in terms of range of skills and reliability he is implying a significant role and implying he needs a James or a Miriam. As you say, if its an apprentice manager he should have someone less experienced and malleable - but as he described it its more a role where people will have real power and closely watch him work at a high level. If you add on fitting the job to the person, and the job then becoming less and less high level over alter series - till there is none at all - you just see those contradictions work out.
You wait until Episode 11 regarding Tim. I really think he wins it in the last two tasks. Saira was my favourite candidate, though. She had some awesome highs and terrible lows, but at the top of her game, she was better than anyone else in my opinion. In Week 8, she single-handedly saved the task for Raj whilst in Week 3, she was the key reason for the task victory.
Paul started well, but slowly tailed off after his PM defeat in Week 6. It would have been fair for him to be fired in Week 10. Although I do believe he was scapegoated in a few tasks (Week 5 and Week 8 especially come to mind).
TXF0429 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 11:53
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
You wait until Episode 11 regarding Tim. I really think he wins it in the last two tasks. Saira was my favourite candidate, though. She had some awesome highs and terrible lows, but at the top of her game, she was better than anyone else in my opinion. In Week 8, she single-handedly saved the task for Raj whilst in Week 3, she was the key reason for the task victory.
I think Saira was marvellous, but her issue was that her skills were too specific - she was incredibly strong on sales and negotiation, but other than on that I don't think she really stood out. But she was unlucky to lose both times she was Project Manager, she should have had a better record than that. (Curiously, I realised recently that Saira is only one of two women who has lost twice as PM on any series, the other being Zoe Beresford? I was very surprised when I realised that. With male candidates it is a lot more common.)

Paul started well, but slowly tailed off after his PM defeat in Week 6. It would have been fair for him to be fired in Week 10. Although I do believe he was scapegoated in a few tasks (Week 5 and Week 8 especially come to mind).
He may have been scapegoated in Week 8, but I don't think he was in Week 5. If I remember correctly (been a while since I watched that episode) he didn't understand the art and wasn't very good at selling it. I have mixed feelings about Matthew being fired on that episode actually - out of the whole team he was definitely the weakest and deserved to be fired, however I don't think he should have been in the boardroom as he wasn't really responsible for the loss. I think Rachel should have chosen Paul and Saira - although I can understand why she didn't, as they were both a lot stronger than her, so had she done that she would have been in a dangerous position herself, as was proven when they were all in the boardroom together on the following task. Matthew was the easy fall-guy.

My issue with Paul is that I didn't think he was a very nice person. A lot of people liked it that he refused to say who should be fired in the boardroom, and I suppose that is admirable in a sense - however I think in a boardroom situation it is important to tell the truth, and sometimes that means landing someone in it if you think they messed up. He was sexist - both Saira and Miriam had issues with his attitude towards women. Every time he had to work under a female project manager he made some kind of reference to Hitler, which he may have thought was funny but I don't think anyone else did.

Also he was terrible at keeping his cool under pressure; he didn't get on with Saira but he really let her get to him, and I think that's really unprofessional. If you compare him to people like Helen, Zara and Lucy from later series, they didn't get on with people but they never let it affect them. I think possibly women are better at that than men, but what about people like Harry H and Nick? Even Adam from Series 3 was shown to have that skill; he was bullied an awful lot by Katie which was very unfair (even though I didn't think he would have gone that much further than Week 7 anyway as I don't think he was that great on the tasks), but he managed to stay calm and articulate the facts.

I think Sir Alan might have done better to keep Rachel and let Paul go in Week 6 as looking at the whole series, I think Rachel could have done better (her pitch in Week 6 was truly cringeworthy, but I think she proved a strong candidate in the other tasks.) Still, I can see why Sir Alan might not have thought that way, as up until that point, Paul had stood out more than Rachel.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 14:10
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
Oh by the way, TXF0429, I think you should go for the next series of Virtual Apprentice! It's a lot of fun, and I think you'd go quite a long way.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 18:36
TXF0429
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,631
Oh by the way, TXF0429, I think you should go for the next series of Virtual Apprentice! It's a lot of fun, and I think you'd go quite a long way.
Oh, I've considered it many times, but I don't want to commit unless I absolutely know that I'd give it my full commitment. I don't want to be like some of the candidates this series who turned up for one task and then never again.

Do you know when the next series will be? I'd certainly give it some serious consideration.
TXF0429 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 04:09
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,801
You wait until Episode 11 regarding Tim. I really think he wins it in the last two tasks. Saira was my favourite candidate, though. She had some awesome highs and terrible lows, but at the top of her game, she was better than anyone else in my opinion. In Week 8, she single-handedly saved the task for Raj whilst in Week 3, she was the key reason for the task victory.
Paul started well, but slowly tailed off after his PM defeat in Week 6. It would have been fair for him to be fired in Week 10. Although I do believe he was scapegoated in a few tasks (Week 5 and Week 8 especially come to mind).
Still not seeing it with Tim. You are right he wins in episode 11, but he wins because Paul falls out of the race by trying a takeover, and there's a meeting of minds of London working class boys between Tim, Lord Sugar and Paul Kemsley that ends with James going inspite of his better record. We have talk of doubts about his motivation, but zero evidence to support that and Claude and Nick not agreeing. Tim then only has to beat Saira - who has been too abrasive throughout, and compunds that in the final with Paul - after she's silly enough to pick him. Tim's success in the final is to pick the right team, and have Ben and Miriam doing the key work for him. He picks the right sort of imaginative idea, but his particular idea of fashion, and idea of charging high prices for the tickets, falls apart . He ends up inviting students for very little money, and producing no return - which undermines completely the idea he throws together for Sir Alan of making the fashion show into a paying continuing concern. Saira at least makes some money .James,and Miriam and even Ben all look better to me than either finalist - in the final.

With hindsight, its all got a lot of deja vue (or deja vue from later?) about it. James and Paul fall on their basic CVs, and why they would want to work now for anyone else. Sir Alan could have saved a lot of time just not including them if that was his criteria.That argument turns up again in later series - though its reversed for Yasmina. Paul survives long enough to have a trial run of Stuart Baggs versus Liz, with Miriam, and sets the stage for all the similar characters who fail at the interview stage - or the week before. Saira, on re-view, looks even more of an early model for Ruth, Claire, Debra and those that follow them.

Tim in episode 11 also gets almost exactly the same words from Sir Alan, about his past and life journey, that Michelle gets in her final. Their wins, seen together, look very similar. One difference is that in series two, Michelle was getting more praise towards the end about her task performances - although the viewer never gets to see what she is up to in some tasks where her team beats Ruth's - all we know is that someone on her team in some tasks must have been doing comparably well to Ruth. In series one, I don't see any similar argument that Tim is doing better than he is shown. In series 2 I think that whats wrong with Paul or Ansell or Tuan is pretty obvious, and both Mickelle and Ruth stand out more as the finalists - in series 1, I think there are two or three stronger candidates than the finalists - and still around late enough to have made the final themselves.

Off to find series 3........
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 11:18
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,163
Oh, I've considered it many times, but I don't want to commit unless I absolutely know that I'd give it my full commitment. I don't want to be like some of the candidates this series who turned up for one task and then never again.

Do you know when the next series will be? I'd certainly give it some serious consideration.
I believe it will be quite soon. And for this year at least, Stuart did release the dates and times that people would need to be online before the series started. Towards the end of the series there was a little bit of deviation from that (which I actually got quite frustrated with and I told him so, as I obviously have other commitments as does everyone else) and he said he'd bear that in mind for the next series.

Tim in episode 11 also gets almost exactly the same words from Sir Alan, about his past and life journey, that Michelle gets in her final. Their wins, seen together, look very similar. One difference is that in series two, Michelle was getting more praise towards the end about her task performances - although the viewer never gets to see what she is up to in some tasks where her team beats Ruth's - all we know is that someone on her team in some tasks must have been doing comparably well to Ruth. In series one, I don't see any similar argument that Tim is doing better than he is shown. In series 2 I think that whats wrong with Paul or Ansell or Tuan is pretty obvious, and both Mickelle and Ruth stand out more as the finalists - in series 1, I think there are two or three stronger candidates than the finalists - and still around late enough to have made the final themselves.
Weirdly in Series 2, Sir Alan seemed to have a big problem with nice people - he fired Sharon and Ansell (and arguably a few other people) because they were 'too nice' to get on in business. I didn't understand why this was, as he's never had a problem with nice people on any other series - Tim, Simon, Yasmina, Arjun, Tom and Ashleigh all had lovely personalities! Maybe it was something to do with the specific role he was planning for that year's winner?

I didn't understand what was special about Michelle - she wasn't bad on the tasks, but arguably the weakest out of the final four. I can see why Paul went because of his CV, but I think a Ruth/Ansell final would have been so much better. Maybe it was just the editors, but I couldn't see anything great about Michelle at all.
george.millman is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:04.