Totally agree with the first 2 posts. David's mistake was to do with the transfers on 2 t shirts, hardly a critical skill to spending sir alans £250k but for some reason it's a firing offence. Charlene's petulance should have seen her go and there's no doubt she won't make the final.
I started out as a bit of a critic of Davids but I thought he was coming along well so it was a surprise to see him go, especially over ironing some tshirts!
Exactly that, I'm pretty sure he's never claimed to be an 'ironing print onto T-shirts expert - he just stepped up and did it. Even the best of the best in business could make a hash up of that one. Nobody had the common sense to suggest maybe ordering a few extras to practice with first, but then again that would have cost more money so it was a double edged sword really when the whole task was about spending as a little as possible and making profit - this is where 'The Apprentice' fails to be realistic some times, as in the 'real world' you'd have to do some practice attempts and allow for some 'duds'.
at this stage, it was Charlenes time to go in my opinion
You couldn't pin her to take much blame in the task, but personally I'd say she's ripe to go. Her arrogance just keeps growing. She's a totally agressive person; and her strange voice raises the hairs on my neck. Probably good in the army; but no good in biz.
You couldn't pin her to take much blame in the task, but personally I'd say she's ripe to go. Her arrogance just keeps growing. She's a totally agressive person; and her strange voice raises the hairs on my neck. Probably good in the army; but no good in biz.
Weeeell, her and Joseph sat there and green lit the 'may contain nuts' spread on the cake - I literally cringed in my seat when they both agreed to use it and said 'lets just go for it' - biggest cock up in the whole entire task in my opinion. When the client has a nut allergy and specifically said 'no nuts' it just beggared belief. If this hadn't of happened I reckon they would have been more forgiving about the T-shirts and ultimately would have paid more money.
Her true colours well and truly came out in the boardroom and it reminded me of her childish behaviour towards Richard a couple of weeks ago, where she refused to speak to him throughout most of the task and demanded all communication to come through David...
Shitbag of a person really and doesn't really deserve to be in the process in my opinion - David is far more level headed and sound minded. I reckon when the shit hits the fan she would totally lose the plot - who would want to partner up with someone like that in a business? Very surprised she was kept and honestly can't see why.
Exactly that, I'm pretty sure he's never claimed to be an 'ironing print onto T-shirts expert - he just stepped up and did it. Even the best of the best in business could make a hash up of that one. Nobody had the common sense to suggest maybe ordering a few extras to practice with first, but then again that would have cost more money so it was a double edged sword really when the whole task was about spending as a little as possible and making profit - this is where 'The Apprentice' fails to be realistic some times, as in the 'real world' you'd have to do some practice attempts and allow for some 'duds'.
Not ordering spares -- even if that meant another pack of ten -- was where the team screwed up.
Where The Apprentice is unrealistic -- although allowing customers to claw back money goes some way to address this, and Lord Sugar mentioned it in the briefing -- is that reputation and repeat business matters.
Not ordering spares -- even if that meant another pack of ten -- was where the team screwed up.
Where The Apprentice is unrealistic -- although allowing customers to claw back money goes some way to address this, and Lord Sugar mentioned it in the briefing -- is that reputation and repeat business matters.
For sure, thinking about it - a few extra prints, and even cheaper low quality t-shirts to experiment on would have cost peanuts. It's a risk all the same (spending money that you can't profit from) but if nobody had experience of ironing prints on to T-shirts (which most don't, quite frankly) it would be classed as a sensible risk. Also, if by chance, or luck, that the practice ones came out fine, they could have gave them away to the client as a gesture, which definitely would have sweetened them up, hence once again a bigger payment being made for the event.
^^ But I've already said, I think they have "set recipes to follow", they don't just pick it out of the air. And your assuming they know how to make "butter cream", it's the Apprentice not Bake Off
I'm not being funny but you don't have to know much about food or baking to know how to make buttercream, I've never baked a cake in my life and I could do it! And even if they had to follow a set recipe, with the mother having a nut allergy they could have asked to substitute the chocolate spread for buttercream or jam to make certain the cake contained no nuts. I hardly think the production team would've said no and risked a lawsuit from the parents.
i agree. i was fuming.
he at least deserved a chance to have his say before he was fired , to defend himself but thanks to that cow sticking her oar in , he was robbed of a chance.
and that leaves a very sour taste , he didnt get a word in edgeways
i agree. i was fuming.
he at least deserved a chance to have his say before he was fired , to defend himself but thanks to that cow sticking her oar in , he was robbed of a chance.
and that leaves a very sour taste , he didnt get a word in edgeways
I honestly thought when AS interrupted him he was doing so in order to fire Charleine on the spot for not shutting up and letting David have his say. My whole take on Charleine has completely changed now, I said in another thread that when she was being ignored in the first few weeks I felt sorry for her as I honestly thought the other candidates looked at her and thought 'Pfft she's a hairdresser! What does she know?'.
Having seen her becoming a more dominant force in the last couple of weeks I can totally understand why they were ignoring her. When she was PM in the book task she spoke to everyone like they were children and basically shut Richard out completely, in my eyes to blame him for the failure of the task were they to lose so she could say 'Richard didn't do anything!'. Then last week she spent time trying to wind Richard up by taking a sale away from him now this week she practically screamed over David when he tried to have his say.
She's gone from being the one I was rooting for in the beginning to someone I cannot wait to leave!
At the end of the day, David's business plan - whatever it was - was obviously not viable in the eyes of Lord Sugar.
The remaining contestants might've come across as complete idiots at some point so far this series (I'd personally say they all have!!!) BUT one of them clearly has this absolutely incredible business plan and when we get to the final two it will probably make sense why they lasted until the end.
Unless this year sees another "Tom" or "Lee" winner then yes, David was robbed.
Actually i think the thing that most ruined the day was David sucking the joy out of the climbing etc. Most parents will forgive anything as long as their child is having a ball .Davis=d showed in the story task he has a fun side so why did he act like he was running a health and safety scheme video shoot at a childrens party
I think it was an entirely deserved firing and the party bags shows why. Rather than just putting the extra stuff (water pistol, sweets) in the party bag to bulk up the cost and save the team from Joseph/Charleine/Gary's mistake, he took the glowsticks out with the stated tactic of using this as a trap to force the parents to pay for the party bags, on the grounds that "we already gave your kids the glowsticks so you're stuck". That's horribly sharp practice, and whilst that might normally work on The Apprentice, it's a very stupid thing to do on a task where the whole thing hinges on pleasing the client so they'll pay the maximum discretionary fee at the end. The t-shirts thing, again, would have been more forgiveable if we hadn't already seen on the DIY task that he's perfectly happy just to bang product out without caring about the quality or taking much care to get things right.
Honestly I've found David to be an unpleasant, bitchy, glib narcissist from the off. I think he showed some talent but more than any single person there I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.
Actually i think the thing that most ruined the day was David sucking the joy out of the climbing etc. Most parents will forgive anything as long as their child is having a ball .Davis=d showed in the story task he has a fun side so why did he act like he was running a health and safety scheme video shoot at a childrens party
I agree that this was David's main failure on the task, not the transfers which I doubt any of Gary (who just stood there watching) or Joseph or Charleine could have done much better on either.
Joseph and Charleine messed up with the chocolate spread when they should have made their own icing (or even not used any), however it was Gary's dull, boring attitude with the kids and failure to reassure the parents over the spread (why did he say it was Nutella when it wasn't?) that was the major screw up. He should have been fired.
Personally, I do think David deserved to go. His biggest failing for me, more than the T-Shirts (which anyone of them would have messed up) was his lack of enthusiasm with the kids themselves. And Gary is equally to blame here. I think *that* is what cost them, as I think the parents may have been willing to overlook some of the other mistakes if they felt the party had had more atmosphere from the get go. Charleine and Joseph did make more of an effort during the beach part of the party to be fair.
Having said that, Charleine's attitude throughout the episode was pretty bad. She caused unnecessary tension by telling Joseph what David had said about him only being a good salesman, and her behaviour in the boardroom was just bizarre - she was borderline hysterical and didn't let David get a word in edgeways. There's no way Sugar is going to want to work with someone like that.
^^ But I've already said, I think they have "set recipes to follow", they don't just pick it out of the air. And your assuming they know how to make "butter cream", it's the Apprentice not Bake Off
Then the simplest thing to do would be to go to Tesco and buy some ready made stuff,
What I don't understand is why, when the issue had already kicked off, someone didn't produce the jar of chocolate spread as soon as the party arrived for food rather than wait for the father to demand to see it.
^^ I've said in other posts, "why not just buy a cake" I assume they couldn't as they seemed to follow "guide lines" written in the book, as to things they could do and couldn't do and themes which they could offer.
They obviously had a set number of venues and themes to choose from and could tell the customer straight away at the initial meeting. Very scripted.
I agree that I felt David shouldn't have been fired. He was a good candidate and being fired over his ability to add a transfer onto a T-shirt makes the whole programme and process a nonsense. It would be easy to overlook the need for a few test runs when ordering up items, so I don't even think that I'd blame the people who selected or ordered the product.
That said, I agree with the poster who pointed out that the activity was not fun for the children. Given that David's business idea is events related, I'd have agreed if he'd been fired for that. I couldn't believe my ears when he said they weren't allowed to climb to the top! In my opinion, the choice of activity wasn't fun enough for a birthday party for kids of that age.
I didn't agree that parents would feel obliged to purchase party bags if the children had already been given things out of them, and thought it a very poor idea, but there's nothing wrong with giving them to the kids tp play with on the bus, then collecting them at the end, and putting them back into the bags - there was no need to give the parents a depleted bag.
I'd have fired Charlene for her board room behaviour.
Comments
Exactly that, I'm pretty sure he's never claimed to be an 'ironing print onto T-shirts expert - he just stepped up and did it. Even the best of the best in business could make a hash up of that one. Nobody had the common sense to suggest maybe ordering a few extras to practice with first, but then again that would have cost more money so it was a double edged sword really when the whole task was about spending as a little as possible and making profit - this is where 'The Apprentice' fails to be realistic some times, as in the 'real world' you'd have to do some practice attempts and allow for some 'duds'.
You couldn't pin her to take much blame in the task, but personally I'd say she's ripe to go. Her arrogance just keeps growing. She's a totally agressive person; and her strange voice raises the hairs on my neck. Probably good in the army; but no good in biz.
Weeeell, her and Joseph sat there and green lit the 'may contain nuts' spread on the cake - I literally cringed in my seat when they both agreed to use it and said 'lets just go for it' - biggest cock up in the whole entire task in my opinion. When the client has a nut allergy and specifically said 'no nuts' it just beggared belief. If this hadn't of happened I reckon they would have been more forgiving about the T-shirts and ultimately would have paid more money.
Her true colours well and truly came out in the boardroom and it reminded me of her childish behaviour towards Richard a couple of weeks ago, where she refused to speak to him throughout most of the task and demanded all communication to come through David...
Shitbag of a person really and doesn't really deserve to be in the process in my opinion - David is far more level headed and sound minded. I reckon when the shit hits the fan she would totally lose the plot - who would want to partner up with someone like that in a business? Very surprised she was kept and honestly can't see why.
Not ordering spares -- even if that meant another pack of ten -- was where the team screwed up.
Where The Apprentice is unrealistic -- although allowing customers to claw back money goes some way to address this, and Lord Sugar mentioned it in the briefing -- is that reputation and repeat business matters.
For sure, thinking about it - a few extra prints, and even cheaper low quality t-shirts to experiment on would have cost peanuts. It's a risk all the same (spending money that you can't profit from) but if nobody had experience of ironing prints on to T-shirts (which most don't, quite frankly) it would be classed as a sensible risk. Also, if by chance, or luck, that the practice ones came out fine, they could have gave them away to the client as a gesture, which definitely would have sweetened them up, hence once again a bigger payment being made for the event.
Gary was incompetent and was dead cert to go, I wonder why they chose David??
Joseph is a joke and Charlene Ive said from the beginning is a conniving whinger
I'm not being funny but you don't have to know much about food or baking to know how to make buttercream, I've never baked a cake in my life and I could do it! And even if they had to follow a set recipe, with the mother having a nut allergy they could have asked to substitute the chocolate spread for buttercream or jam to make certain the cake contained no nuts. I hardly think the production team would've said no and risked a lawsuit from the parents.
he at least deserved a chance to have his say before he was fired , to defend himself but thanks to that cow sticking her oar in , he was robbed of a chance.
and that leaves a very sour taste , he didnt get a word in edgeways
I honestly thought when AS interrupted him he was doing so in order to fire Charleine on the spot for not shutting up and letting David have his say. My whole take on Charleine has completely changed now, I said in another thread that when she was being ignored in the first few weeks I felt sorry for her as I honestly thought the other candidates looked at her and thought 'Pfft she's a hairdresser! What does she know?'.
Having seen her becoming a more dominant force in the last couple of weeks I can totally understand why they were ignoring her. When she was PM in the book task she spoke to everyone like they were children and basically shut Richard out completely, in my eyes to blame him for the failure of the task were they to lose so she could say 'Richard didn't do anything!'. Then last week she spent time trying to wind Richard up by taking a sale away from him now this week she practically screamed over David when he tried to have his say.
She's gone from being the one I was rooting for in the beginning to someone I cannot wait to leave!
The remaining contestants might've come across as complete idiots at some point so far this series (I'd personally say they all have!!!) BUT one of them clearly has this absolutely incredible business plan and when we get to the final two it will probably make sense why they lasted until the end.
Unless this year sees another "Tom" or "Lee" winner then yes, David was robbed.
Honestly I've found David to be an unpleasant, bitchy, glib narcissist from the off. I think he showed some talent but more than any single person there I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.
Joseph and Charleine messed up with the chocolate spread when they should have made their own icing (or even not used any), however it was Gary's dull, boring attitude with the kids and failure to reassure the parents over the spread (why did he say it was Nutella when it wasn't?) that was the major screw up. He should have been fired.
Having said that, Charleine's attitude throughout the episode was pretty bad. She caused unnecessary tension by telling Joseph what David had said about him only being a good salesman, and her behaviour in the boardroom was just bizarre - she was borderline hysterical and didn't let David get a word in edgeways. There's no way Sugar is going to want to work with someone like that.
Then the simplest thing to do would be to go to Tesco and buy some ready made stuff,
What I don't understand is why, when the issue had already kicked off, someone didn't produce the jar of chocolate spread as soon as the party arrived for food rather than wait for the father to demand to see it.
They obviously had a set number of venues and themes to choose from and could tell the customer straight away at the initial meeting. Very scripted.
That said, I agree with the poster who pointed out that the activity was not fun for the children. Given that David's business idea is events related, I'd have agreed if he'd been fired for that. I couldn't believe my ears when he said they weren't allowed to climb to the top! In my opinion, the choice of activity wasn't fun enough for a birthday party for kids of that age.
I didn't agree that parents would feel obliged to purchase party bags if the children had already been given things out of them, and thought it a very poor idea, but there's nothing wrong with giving them to the kids tp play with on the bus, then collecting them at the end, and putting them back into the bags - there was no need to give the parents a depleted bag.
I'd have fired Charlene for her board room behaviour.