Jamie had the brilliant idea of the water bottle/towel thingie, something I would buy. He's good at selling too, and he gets along with people. I never thought he could win but I did like him.
He's very charismatic I think, rather than likeable (he could be smarmy and smug quite a bit of the time) which makes him a good sales person and pitching. He also seemed to be the ideas man at the beginning (with the Cuuli) but he lost a lot of shine with his naff Skiing idea in the DVD's task.
He was the male version of Liz but less articulate and slightly less intelligent (and less good), but when it comes down to it they were both only really great at sales and not much else.
I was really surprised he was fired over the bore that is Chris to be honest. I dread the presentation next week, as lovely as Chris is, I tend to develop a serious case of attention deficit disorder when he talks . Jamie seemed to have more passion when he spoke in my opinion. Then again if it was up to me I would of had a Stella/Stuart final, so what do I know .
I actually quite liked him and was hopeful that he would do well in the interviews. I think he got quite a tough time of it in the interviews to be honest, and certainly tougher than Stella and Chris.
From what I can remember he didn't do anything (good or bad) which made him stand out. He was just... there .
Jamie was fairly good at the beginning but he just got worst and worst towards the end. Another person that is so full of his own self importance. I didn't like him at all!
Jamie had the brilliant idea of the water bottle/towel thingie, something I would buy. He's good at selling too, and he gets along with people. I never thought he could win but I did like him.
I thought he had more than good salesman to him. He was actually a very charismatic character, more so than Stella, I would say. I actually thought that he was a contender for the final until those gruelling interviews.
But with most of these shows, I'm cynical about how they are set up, edited etc. But the interview process in itself was very telling in how tough or weak the questions were and whom they were being directed to.
Which left me feeling that that his interviews were pretty tough in comparison to Chris and Stella's, but especially Stella's.
I suppose you could argue the fact that both Chris and Stella are squeeky clean type candidates and nothing much to grill them about.
If so, why even bother having candidates like Stuart and Jamie on the show?
I guess its the same reason Lord Sugar fired Joanne before him. LS delivered a heart warming speech to Joanne, complete with a "regret". Then came Jamie and it was a simple 15 second segment of youre fired. He is just there. Middle of the road kind of guy that you easily forget about!
He was absolute rubbish imo though. I didnt mind him at the beginning. But i think that has more to do with the editing, rather than ability. The show hadnt really shown how boring, repetitive or how be blamed everyone else at that point...he could hide!
I guess its the same reason Lord Sugar fired Joanne before him. LS delivered a heart warming speech to Joanne, complete with a "regret". Then came Jamie and it was a simple 15 second segment of youre fired. He is just there. Middle of the road kind of guy that you easily forget about!
He was absolute rubbish imo though. I didnt mind him at the beginning. But i think that has more to do with the editing, rather than ability. The show hadnt really shown how boring, repetitive or how be blamed everyone else at that point...he could hide!
From what I can recall, he was pretty good at the beginning. I actually wanted to him to win. I'd swap him with Chris or Stella any day.
Yeah, but he was totally shit by the end of the series. I thought he started out okay, but watching his display in the interviews and boardroom yesterday I couldn't belive he'd made it that far.
I was really surprised he was fired over the bore that is Chris to be honest. I dread the presentation next week, as lovely as Chris is, I tend to develop a serious case of attention deficit disorder when he talks . Jamie seemed to have more passion when he spoke in my opinion. Then again if it was up to me I would of had a Stella/Stuart final, so what do I know .
Although presentational style is important, it is surely far more important to pay attention to what is actually said. From Chris you always get a well-reasoned case. From Jamie you get absolute waffle. To suggest Jamie should have got to the final over Chris is the most absurd statement I've read on this forum. Jamie, like Joanna, was so far out of his depth last night that I seriously have to question the process leading up to the semi-final. I think Liz and Paloma would have made far more credible interviewees.
Although presentational style is important, it is surely far more important to pay attention to what is actually said. From Chris you always get a well-reasoned case. From Jamie you get absolute waffle. To suggest Jamie should have got to the final over Chris is the most absurd statement I've read on this forum. Jamie, like Joanna, was so far out of his depth last night that I seriously have to question the process leading up to the semi-final. I think Liz and Paloma would have made far more credible interviewees.
I do not appreciate you calling my views "absurd", it's only a television programme and I'm entitled to my opinion. Chris has never wowed me, even when I could concentrate on what he was saying. Jamie could be a bit hit and miss with the way he did business, but when he had a good thing going he was one of the best there. This is all my own opinion of course and you are most likely to disagree but please don't degrade my opinion. I wouldn't tell you that you're absurd for thinking that Liz or Paloma should be in the final, even though I thought they went out at the right time and should not of reached the interview stage.
It was Joanna that was the gobshite. Most undeserving 'with regret' in series history.
Whilst it's understandable your sticking up for someone for whom you clearly have an enormous amount of affection, making absurd statements like this is rather silly and does nothing for your credibility.
Joanna has been one of the most well liked candidates in the history of the programme with only a tiny (but often very vociferous) minority bucking the trend.
I'm not really a Jamie fan, he was a nice enough fellah
Can't the same about Joanne, who was a rude, obnoxious little madam. She put on this 'Jo the cleaner' crap act to get an easy ride from the interviewers and that did for her. The crocodile tears did nothing for me when I think of how she put Laura, Jamie and indeed whatshername who got fired in week 2 through hell.
I'm not really a Jamie fan, he was a nice enough fellah
Can't the same about Joanne, who was a rude, obnoxious little madam. She put on this 'Jo the cleaner' crap act to get an easy ride from the interviewers and that did for her. The crocodile tears did nothing for me when I think of how she put Laura, Jamie and indeed whatshername who got fired in week 2 through hell.
Well, you can think that if you like. :rolleyes:
But you're way out of kilter with:
Nick and Karen
Most of the members here
Lord Sugar
The interview panel
The panel on YF
And her fellow competitors.
Comments
He was the male version of Liz but less articulate and slightly less intelligent (and less good), but when it comes down to it they were both only really great at sales and not much else.
Look at Joanna, small business that basically hasn;t grown in years, thick as two short planks, yet she nearly got to the final.
Jamie was fairly good at the beginning but he just got worst and worst towards the end. Another person that is so full of his own self importance. I didn't like him at all!
Stella for the win!
A good salesman, but thats about it!
I thought he had more than good salesman to him. He was actually a very charismatic character, more so than Stella, I would say. I actually thought that he was a contender for the final until those gruelling interviews.
But with most of these shows, I'm cynical about how they are set up, edited etc. But the interview process in itself was very telling in how tough or weak the questions were and whom they were being directed to.
Which left me feeling that that his interviews were pretty tough in comparison to Chris and Stella's, but especially Stella's.
I suppose you could argue the fact that both Chris and Stella are squeeky clean type candidates and nothing much to grill them about.
If so, why even bother having candidates like Stuart and Jamie on the show?
:D
Jamie should give up on property and set up his own London tour bus company. He made a very entertaining tour guide!
I guess its the same reason Lord Sugar fired Joanne before him. LS delivered a heart warming speech to Joanne, complete with a "regret". Then came Jamie and it was a simple 15 second segment of youre fired. He is just there. Middle of the road kind of guy that you easily forget about!
He was absolute rubbish imo though. I didnt mind him at the beginning. But i think that has more to do with the editing, rather than ability. The show hadnt really shown how boring, repetitive or how be blamed everyone else at that point...he could hide!
He was exactly what he is full of...cr!p!!
Nice to look at though, and quite charming.
Yeah, but he was totally shit by the end of the series. I thought he started out okay, but watching his display in the interviews and boardroom yesterday I couldn't belive he'd made it that far.
Although presentational style is important, it is surely far more important to pay attention to what is actually said. From Chris you always get a well-reasoned case. From Jamie you get absolute waffle. To suggest Jamie should have got to the final over Chris is the most absurd statement I've read on this forum. Jamie, like Joanna, was so far out of his depth last night that I seriously have to question the process leading up to the semi-final. I think Liz and Paloma would have made far more credible interviewees.
I do not appreciate you calling my views "absurd", it's only a television programme and I'm entitled to my opinion. Chris has never wowed me, even when I could concentrate on what he was saying. Jamie could be a bit hit and miss with the way he did business, but when he had a good thing going he was one of the best there. This is all my own opinion of course and you are most likely to disagree but please don't degrade my opinion. I wouldn't tell you that you're absurd for thinking that Liz or Paloma should be in the final, even though I thought they went out at the right time and should not of reached the interview stage.
He was (and is!) a toadying gobsh!te AFAIC - right from the word go!
Whilst it's understandable your sticking up for someone for whom you clearly have an enormous amount of affection, making absurd statements like this is rather silly and does nothing for your credibility.
Joanna has been one of the most well liked candidates in the history of the programme with only a tiny (but often very vociferous) minority bucking the trend.
I'm not really a Jamie fan, he was a nice enough fellah
Can't the same about Joanne, who was a rude, obnoxious little madam. She put on this 'Jo the cleaner' crap act to get an easy ride from the interviewers and that did for her. The crocodile tears did nothing for me when I think of how she put Laura, Jamie and indeed whatshername who got fired in week 2 through hell.
Well, you can think that if you like. :rolleyes:
But you're way out of kilter with:
Nick and Karen
Most of the members here
Lord Sugar
The interview panel
The panel on YF
And her fellow competitors.
Have fun.