Options
Stuart's firing was a DISGRACE!
The Rhydler
Posts: 4,494 Forum Member
✭✭✭
Oh, so Alan Sugar doesn't like a liar? Is that it?
So your employee Lee McQueen didn't lie in his CV? At age 28???
Stuart was a little bit economical with the truth, but the lad is 21 years old, I dare say he really did imagine he had a fully licensed telecoms company, as far as he was concerned he did.
Sugar had no right to lambast him the way he did. Just so all the viewing public who hate him can bounce for joy on their couches that he's finally got his just desserts.
'Ive been weak, you've brought out this weakness in me' - No mate, it's called senilty, you made the decision to fire Liz and you alone, it wasn't Stuart's fault. Stuart is making money in his business, he didn't lie about that, just a quibble about the term fully licensed. No reason at all to scream at him in a ratings-boosting effort. You put him through to the interviews purely to fire him a week later. I can see through you Sugar - and your leader - The BBC!
Baggs had to go of course, don't get me wrong, he has been nowhere near the strongest candidate, but it was the manner of the firing! Bang out of order and I know I'm gonna get loads of you saying 'wah wah the fat wa**ker deserved it'...but he did NOT deserve it! I feel sorry for the kid.
So your employee Lee McQueen didn't lie in his CV? At age 28???
Stuart was a little bit economical with the truth, but the lad is 21 years old, I dare say he really did imagine he had a fully licensed telecoms company, as far as he was concerned he did.
Sugar had no right to lambast him the way he did. Just so all the viewing public who hate him can bounce for joy on their couches that he's finally got his just desserts.
'Ive been weak, you've brought out this weakness in me' - No mate, it's called senilty, you made the decision to fire Liz and you alone, it wasn't Stuart's fault. Stuart is making money in his business, he didn't lie about that, just a quibble about the term fully licensed. No reason at all to scream at him in a ratings-boosting effort. You put him through to the interviews purely to fire him a week later. I can see through you Sugar - and your leader - The BBC!
Baggs had to go of course, don't get me wrong, he has been nowhere near the strongest candidate, but it was the manner of the firing! Bang out of order and I know I'm gonna get loads of you saying 'wah wah the fat wa**ker deserved it'...but he did NOT deserve it! I feel sorry for the kid.
0
Comments
I am very disappointed that Ed Byrne was clearly on a gagging order during You're Fired...
Yeah, thats true...but it didn't. Cos old man Sugar didnt notice, cos he's losing it.
The whole licence thing had been blown out of all proportion as an excuse for ridding themselves of Stuart who by and large worked hard during the time he was there.
Just because he is 21 dos'nt give them the right to fire him that way.
Other candidates have probably lied about far worse things.
If the world was great then he should of got fired last week and Liz would be in the final/
Oh they have!
Lying on your CV is not good, but McQueen did it and it never affected his chances of getting the job did it?
Smacks of double standards.
Think Stu needed a bit of a reality check but there was zero reason to smack him down like that.
Most fans of the Apprentice will have predicted this, especially how vicious Sugar's mates are when interviewing candidates.
Or the production team were 'shrewd' enough to realise he made for great TV.
If anybody out of this bunch is remembered in a couple of years it will be Stuart Baggs "The Brand".
He's the only one with what The Lord Sugar said he was looking for. Exceptional, Innovative etc...
Yes - it's completely AS's problem if he fired Liz on a whim.
Also Stuart repeatedly offered an explanation and all that was screened was Viglen Man and LAS saying 'I don't want to hear it.'
If you screen an accusation of someone of lying on their CV I think you should show their explanation, even if only to shoot it down in flames.
I did wonder if The Brand's position in You're Fired - third when he was the first off, and with 15 minutes to himself - was some kind of deal because they stitched him up in the main episode.
Reckon they told him to really have a go at Stuart then?
I would'nt use the word vicious, just rude obnoxious and totally unprofessional (except Margaret)
Fraid not, its cos he's the one they've been waiting for and they didnt want the other two to impinge on his time too much.
Oh, are you on the production team?
Yes, actually.
(No, I'm not, but it was fairly obvious, it would normally go in the order they were fired)
]
stuart at least has/had passion, and at the grand old age of 21 a certain amount of ......well wot the fuc(*
Yeah, no mention of his PROFIT MAKING business at the age of 21. Stella hasn't done that, Chris hasn't done that and Jamie's business was on the verge of going bust.
:rolleyes:
So as I thought, you are expressing an opinion, which is no better nor worse than my opinion.