• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • TV Shows: Reality
  • The Apprentice
Paloma - what a fibber
<<
<
1 of 4
>>
>
Paulie Walnuts
20-10-2010
She impressed me in some ways during tonights show, especially the way in which she remained calm under pressure and was always articulate.

That was one hell of a porky pie in the boardroom though, when she denied criticising Sandeesh
-Sid-
20-10-2010
Can't bear contestants who lie in order to advance. She's got no integrity that one. I have no respect for her.

And I don't think she was as good as she made out. If Paloma had got her way, the team would have had 400 more items to bake on top of what they already couldn't manage!
Tissy
20-10-2010
Originally Posted by -Sid-:
“Can't bear contestants who lie in order to advance. She's got no integrity that one. I have no respect for her.

And I don't think she was as good as she made out. If Paloma had got her way, the team would have had 400 more items to bake on top of what they already couldn't manage!”

Exactly she wanted to make promises the couldn`t possibly deliver on.
barbar
20-10-2010
And what is wrong with making promises you cant keep? As LS said they wont see you again. What they should have done is like the supermarkets do, make a loss leader. Ask them what they want and at what price and only make and deliver what offers the highest profit. I dont think it was all or nothing.
Mrstimmy
20-10-2010
She was awful. I hated the patronizing cow. The way she spoke to the PM (forgot his name) in the boardroom was just so rude. Her superior than thou attitude and the way she looked up then did her patronising voice, grrrrrrr I HATED her
Monkseal
20-10-2010
She and Shibby had a rather childish gossipy bitching session about Sandeesh that he brought up in front of his boss. I'm not sure why she was supposed to continue it to back up someone who was attacking her, or why he seemed to think it reflected well on him. He showed a lack of integrity bringing it up. Maybe he thought he could coast on charm, given that it was pretty much all he brought to the table.
Trollheart
21-10-2010
Originally Posted by barbar:
“And what is wrong with making promises you cant keep? As LS said they wont see you again. .”

Well, because you're representing the Sugar Corporation or whatever, and as their representatives you have to be seen to be reliable and truthful. You shouldn't be able to say "Oh I wont see him again! 20,000 croissants? Yeah no problem. Who cares if we can't deliver?"
Totally the wrong attitude, and a terrible example to just say "who cares?"
i4u
21-10-2010
Paloma couldn't stop, what she told others about the boardroom was also err interesting.

She seems to have forgotten the person she denied bitching about was in the boardroom with her and is still in the game.

Will Sandeesh keep quiet or start asking questions and dropping hints to others?

She don't seem the type to let things drop.
DavetheScot
21-10-2010
To be fair to her, with all the many things said and done during the day I wouldn't be surprised if she had genuinely forgotten her words about Sandeesh.

But in any case, how many people have bitched about a colleague with someone else? And if you have, and that person then repeated what you'd said to them, would you admit it? I don't think many people would.

I did love Sandeesh's quizzical look when that was going on, the one that said clearly "Hmm, this is interesting. Did she really say that about me?"
i4u
21-10-2010
Originally Posted by barbar:
“And what is wrong with making promises you cant keep? As LS said they wont see you again. What they should have done is like the supermarkets do, make a loss leader. Ask them what they want and at what price and only make and deliver what offers the highest profit. I dont think it was all or nothing.”

But she's shown to millions of people how she would do buisness....she saw nothing wrong with falsely 'guaranteeing' delivery.

In the programme she step up to the plate and apologise to the chef, infact didn't she offer £150 compensation?

She'd be quite happy to put a company out of buisness and walk away boasting she'd obtained a fantastic order.

She's from the Nick Leeson school of trading.
Paulie Walnuts
21-10-2010
Originally Posted by DavetheScot:
“To be fair to her, with all the many things said and done during the day I wouldn't be surprised if she had genuinely forgotten her words about Sandeesh.”

I doubt it very much. If nothing else she seemed to be pretty sharp, and her memory didn't let her down with other things.
Yobaba**
21-10-2010
Thought she appeared fairly nice and placid before now, shocked me by how much of a bitch she turned out to be.
i4u
21-10-2010
Originally Posted by DavetheScot:
“To be fair to her, with all the many things said and done during the day I wouldn't be surprised if she had genuinely forgotten her words about Sandeesh.

But in any case, how many people have bitched about a colleague with someone else? And if you have, and that person then repeated what you'd said to them, would you admit it? I don't think many people would.

I did love Sandeesh's quizzical look when that was going on, the one that said clearly "Hmm, this is interesting. Did she really say that about me?" ”

She could remember every other 'fact' but not that one...mmm.

Shibby made an observation, it was Paloma and the other girl in the car who let rip.

Her problem is the eyes and ears of Lord Sugar were present. Paloma may have dug a big hole for herself and may drag the other girl into her lies.
-Sid-
21-10-2010
None of the three that found themselves in the boardroom covered themselves in glory.

But whilst Shibby can put his foot in it, and Sandeesh can be a grumpy/lazy moo, it's Paloma I'd trust least of all.
Elan Morin
21-10-2010
Originally Posted by -Sid-:
“None of the three that found themselves in the boardroom covered themselves in glory.

But whilst Shibby can put his foot in it, and Sandeesh can be a grumpy/lazy moo, it's Paloma I'd trust least of all.”

yep. What a liar she turned out to be.
DavetheScot
21-10-2010
Originally Posted by i4u:
“She could remember every other 'fact' but not that one...mmm.

Shibby made an observation, it was Paloma and the other girl in the car who let rip.

Her problem is the eyes and ears of Lord Sugar were present. Paloma may have dug a big hole for herself and may drag the other girl into her lies.”

Could she remember every other fact? How many little incidents of the day was she never required to recall in the boardroom?

But assuming she did remember, I don't blame her at all for not admitting it. As I've said, I don't think many people would have told the truth about that.
Stardog
21-10-2010
She showed her true colours throughout the entire episode. Her trying to go for 400 was stupidity and her lying in the boardroom was a joke.
ronnie24
21-10-2010
Originally Posted by -Sid-:
“Can't bear contestants who lie in order to advance. She's got no integrity that one. I have no respect for her.

And I don't think she was as good as she made out. If Paloma had got her way, the team would have had 400 more items to bake on top of what they already couldn't manage!”

Completely agree
barbar
21-10-2010
This task is about how much money you can make. As LS himself pointed out why pay compensation. Its not about correct business attitudes. Making promises and not keeping them, if it will make you more money is square and fair in them.
MrsSpoon
21-10-2010
Paloma reminds me of some bosses I have had in the past. They regret nothing and never hold their hands up if they are worng.
The sort who will trample on everyone else to get where they want to be.
I think that Alan Sugar likes her type.
i4u
21-10-2010
Originally Posted by barbar:
“This task is about how much money you can make. As LS himself pointed out why pay compensation. Its not about correct business attitudes. Making promises and not keeping them, if it will make you more money is square and fair in them.”

But she DID NOT make ANY money from HER guarantee of 1000 bread rolls, she would have lost even more money over the additional order of 400.

Didn't Paloma offer compensation before Dr. Crippen proposed a lower sum?

Your interpretation of Sugarlump's words are wrong.

The Sugar babe pointed out the reason the team would not see the chef again is because they FAILED to deliver 1000 rolls, not because it was a one off Apprentice exercise and take the money and run.

Sugardaddy was pointing out there was room for negotiation regarding any compensation.....I didn't notice Paloma disagreeing with the quack's prescription.
i4u
21-10-2010
Originally Posted by DavetheScot:
“Could she remember every other fact? How many little incidents of the day was she never required to recall in the boardroom?

But assuming she did remember, I don't blame her at all for not admitting it. As I've said, I don't think many people would have told the truth about that.”

She claimed she never said anything negative about Sheebash.

But from what we saw she clearly has an opinion of Sheebash's worth based on last night's and previous tasks....or did she forget.

What she said in the vehicle was filmed, what happens in the house somehow gets back to Sugarloaf or one of his sidekicks...will Palomo get the other girl too also lie or will Sheebash get to the other girl first.
gilesb
21-10-2010
in defence she did say that the man (Whatever he was called) started the conversation. We only saw an edited part so perhaps he did start it and she just stated her views as well.

Her comment in the boardroom was that he had asked the question and she had responded.
CaptBlueBalls
21-10-2010
Not only does she tell fibs,,,but she's got that irritating Australian twang.
DUNDEEBOY
21-10-2010
Think she is being primed as the one to be taken apart at the interview stage if she goes that long.
<<
<
1 of 4
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map