Options
Are the candidates getting blasted because of their business plans.
jules1000
Posts: 10,709 Forum Member
✭✭
It seems to me that SAS has been pretty unconventional when it comes to the firing of candidates this year...More so than any other Apprentice. Usually I agree with his choices and so do the audience on AYBF, not so this year. Do you think this may have something to do with their business plan and whether it is preferable for SAS.??
0
Comments
I think he was pretty appalled at what some of the finalists offered last year... Jim and Helen's plans just weren't the sort of thing he would have been interested in. Tom won the eseries, and Susan and LS have gone into partnership this year - so I assume he is ensuring that the finalists this time will all have something worthwhile to offer him.
yes. I don't know why they don't tell us a bit about the business plans as they go along. e.g. candidates could say I want to be project leader because my business plan is related to the task. Or you could use the talking head VTs to have the candidates tell us about their plans or bitch about others ideas. Or they could tell LAS a bit about their plan when he asks them "why shouldn't I fire you" It seems we are going to be kept in the dark until the final 3. Why don't they even tell you on You're Fired?
Apprentice is in danger of heading down the route of Series 3 of Raymond Blancs "The Restaurant" (which was subsequently cancelled) where a laughbly incompetent contestant who failed at even the most basic weekly task is ultimately hired as their business concept is the most profitable.
I have now disagreed with every single firing this series, and I think the digital spy + you're fired audience are with me (except maybe for Michael)
250k is peanuts to LAS, he probably get paid more by the BBC to do the show. He can also pick up any good investment opportunities after the event as we have seen. The entertainment factor is all important now, IMO.
If the You're Fired audience had had their way, Katie would have been fired in Week 1, and she's subsequently turned into Girl Jesus. And Jane would have been fired in Week 2 instead of Week 4, after which point everyone's suddenly decided she's a strong candidate. The audience doesn't know what it wants half the time.
I think Series 4 was far worse for firings contra to the audience's opinions. Most of the audience polls this series have been fairly split - anybody who lost to Michael Sophocles in any of his 50 Boardroom appearances probably would have been elected president after their firing, as would Shazia, or Lucinda.
I don't think it's peanuts to Alan, he is not as rich or successful as people generally believe (or the show tries to pretend - with a 'boardroom' in a part of London - heavily hinted at - that he would never be able to run etc etc). Even if he is paid more by the BBC it's a huge drain on his time when he does have businesses to run etc. Opportunity cost and whatnot. Plus, I have a strong sneaking suspicion that the opportunity to make money from the businesses at the end is a large part of his recompense, as is the publicity and the ego-stroking. It's basically become one large vanity project, with him also being able to choose a potentially very-lucrative business at the end of it to stake a huge claim in.
I do wonder if this wasn't the main reason for the shift in prizes - his fee is far less, but he's really putting less of his time and money on the line in the long-run. Instead of employing someone who always moves on after a decent salary for a few years, and also being mentored by him, he gets to choose someone very energetic and motivated from a fresh selection of new business plans that, attached to his celebrity, cannot fail to at least repay his investment.
Bib - well they're utterly failing at that, because this has been the least entertaining series yet imo (after the last one), and I think it's no coincidence that with the dumbing down of the tasks, the extended boardrooms versus task time on broadcast, and the change is prize it's all going to pot.
He's fired a couple for being too quiet, and also saved some for not being too quiet. That's normal, especially for the early stages.
He usually fires team leaders about half the time. This year he hasn't fired any. It's the first time we've passed the 5th task without losing at least 1 leader; usually 2 or 3 have gone.
I usually agree, and when I don't, I at least understand his reasoning. My impression is that other people disagree more often than you imply. There hasn't anything as controversial as firing Karen in the second series, or Shazia in the fourth (both of which I've defended here, against people who passionately believed Lord Sugar was wrong).
I doubt it. I think it's pretty pointless to talk about it, since we have no way of knowing. Whether you believe it or not depends on whether you think it is cool to be cynical.
oh lol that was ridiculous, do you remember the guys completely messed up the desert (souffle or something... they kept messing up the mixture :rolleyes:) and then served cocktails instead (their expertise). The cocktails were great, naturally. Hardly a level playing field when the poor other guy was following a menu. Yes very similar to what TA is now.
Tom was hired last year as LS liked his Business plans, if it was under the old format i think Tom would have got nowhere near the Final, & maybe it's the same case this year as i think LS has already decided by the time the 6th episode was filmed, who he wants to invest in.
Of all the years I've watched The Apprentice I've never witnessed this before.
Thankyou thats how I feel. Hence this thread;)
The change in prize has totally destroyed the whole point in the show. The tasks are now meaningless and just buffer to create a series. I've said it before on here, it's now like a long, drawn out and not so interesting Dragon's Den.
I think it's time Sugar was replaced by someone who will go back to the original format of an job offer. It worked. This investment stuff does nothing for the show.
Even Michael :eek:
It's a bit like watching a catering programme and seeing the candidates lambasted for not being able to climb trees for ripe mangoes, search out their own truffles in a European forest, hunt and kill a wild boar and then cook the lot beautifully and creatively on a barbecue they've fashioned themselves from some hollowed out stone and some animal bones. And then watching them miraculously escape being given the boot because the prize is about being able to cater for the vagaries of the eccentric upper upper classes and their menu selection is phenomenal.
All very entertaining watching them all attempt the former but somewhat frustrating watching the farce that has become the latter now that there seems to be connection in pretence only.