Options
Susan might as well of got second place/first because of her 'deal'
![[Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e8e791856d12efee8876dcaf78e334e4.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 2,937 Forum Member
✭✭✭
Lord Sugar on "You're Hired" said he is going to be in close contact with her yet didn't say anything about Helen WHO WAS second place, just goes to show Susan is the real runner up doesn't it?
I think Helen was second place because you can't fault her progress during the process, like one loss I believe.
P.S: Now I see why Alan Sugar was gunning for Tom to win.
I think Helen was second place because you can't fault her progress during the process, like one loss I believe.
P.S: Now I see why Alan Sugar was gunning for Tom to win.
0
Comments
I think once it came to the final, past history obviously meant nothing and it was based on business plans. Had Susan got her numbers right and showed more maturity (in a business sense) she very well could have won.
I think once she works her figures out and comes to Lord sugar at a later date, she'll get into business with him. She must have been ecstatic once Lord Sugar said what he did. I cant imagine him saying that without meaning it.
I agree with this, once all hope is lost you suddenly hear that my first thought would be "AM I HALLUCINATING" lool.
Yeah, Karen did big up Helen A LOT to be fair but that's probably because she knew she deserved better than third place.
Tom got VERY lucky, his chair idea was not good AT ALL but he had other innovations which LS wanted to pursue.
Sigh.
Yes, I think that Susan will do very well out of it and I am glad that she got such recogonition from Sir Alan in your fired, when he said that she could join them at synergy! Good for her and I think that had her figures been a little more realistic then she would have won!
Susan hired students who were under the tax threshold, unlike herself.
Not at all, she explained it away in her interview when she said that she had employed students and they were below the wage of tax paying!
Susan proved what a good business person she has been when she said that she had earned enough money to pay for herself through University! That is fantastic from somebody so young and it proves that she has worked very hard!
Even if this is true their earnings still need be recorded and they need to be paid properly, including a wageslip, they would still pay a small amount of National Insurance contributions also
The thing is though that it is up to HMRC to work that out. If these students had lots of different jobs they could be liable.
But as far as I know things are different for employers, if it was as easy as giving students a few hours work here and there and avoiding tax, then no unskilled worker would have a full time job.
And that's before insurance. If she is not declaring them as employees then they probably weren't insured. Does anybody know where these workers were (because if they were involved in producing the cosmetic products then accidents were more likely to happen and depending on what chemicals were used could be quite serious)?
I'm sure there are other requirements too.
Sorry, I didn't mean to step on your point. I'm just a slow typist (I had honestly finished before I read your post).
Not true, generally workers at events are self employed, transient workers who offer their services to a company for a set number of days. They negotiate a price and they are then responsible for sorting out their own tax matters. To expect a small business to set up a full payroll account for one or two days of work would be ludicrous.
I'm happy Tom won , but would've equally been happy if it was Susan.
Think Susan was speaking about the students she hired to help her at the Ideal Home Show which had nothing at all to do with production.
Was rather annoyed when I found out she'd been at the Ideal Home Show this year so didn't see her in action because I visited the show last year.
Exactly. Your the only one that makes sense.
Its silly to quibble about paying cash to a group of students at an event that lasted a couple of days.
I bet these 'outraged' posters have paid a cleaner or a plumber in cash too. It's up to THEM to report their earnings. Get over it.
I thought one of them was her boyfriend.
I may obviously be wrong and got mixed up but, if one of them was then she'll def know what he earnt.
Not necessarily, if they were self employed it would be up to them to declare or not. There are ways around this sort of thing. Obviously cash deals are better for students, they usually end up in great debt which take a while to pay off and will pay plenty of tax in the future.
Did Susan say how much she paid them, because I never heard it if she did?.
The only "quibble" was that she paid them in cash, which frankly is a total crock tbh.
Helen, who's basically a secretary, pitched a service business, which supplied secretarial services.
She is a market trader and does ok out of it. You could take any market trader and give them £250,000 and you might make a bit more money.
This is the same woman that pushed a product in the beuty task saying she could seel soo many an hour and sold no where near what she suggested.
She was lucky; a lot.