DS Forums

 
 

Team Synergy cheated?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 18-11-2010, 13:31
dave2233
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,190
It's a business program, well supposed to be at least

so cheating ???

No of cause not

the first thing anyone does when starting a new business is to check out the opposition,
how do you think they price competitively and see things they are doing better or worst.
dave2233 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 18-11-2010, 13:33
Unigal07
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Up North.
Posts: 21,867
But isn't looking at rivals ideas all part of business?

It was about making money. If Mothercare brought out a shiny new car for kids - what's stopping Kiddicare online selling the same one?

Nothing wrong with it at all - it was quick thinking on Liz's part as they were getting nowhere fast.
Unigal07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-11-2010, 14:02
vidalia
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London
Posts: 24,469
One of the first rules for a new business is to check out your opposition.
vidalia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-11-2010, 14:16
notary
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 197
But they could have done other things to bring the people back. LIke only giving the medal to the child when they came back, or giving him/her something else. Why didnt they say they could sell it on ebay for a lot more than they paid for it! They could have also offered to post it after taking their card number.
notary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-11-2010, 16:24
Rorschach
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Folkestone
Posts: 10,537
My first time watching the Apprentice and my last.

What a load of knobs no wonder this country is in such a state if these people are the cream of the crop lol.
Of course they are not "the cream of the crop".

Probably not for the first time, I direct you to Mitchell and Webb.
Rorschach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-11-2010, 16:43
Styker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 28,296
The sly/cheeky/sneeky look on Liz's face said it all, though there will be overlaps if we expect them to be to pure on this.

Like on the fashion task, the advert was seen by everyone etc.
Styker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-11-2010, 01:14
DavetheScot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
And the end. Well talk about Judas.

Now I know what PASSING THE BUCK means. The 3 of them at the end the team leader, liz and someone else, instead of standing up together and supporting one another the 2 on the outside totally tried to destroy the team leader just to make themselves look good.

Well sorry Mr Sugar you aint all that because I would have kept the team leader and got rid of one of the others because they were working as A TEAM and therefore had agreed before hand what they were doing, if they were not happy about it then they should have took the team leader to task. Non of them had the balls to work in a board room environment IMHO.

Anyway thats it for me what a load of rubbish lol.
Well, that is the format of the show. I'm sure neither Chris nor Liz are so unsupportive in real business. It's an artificial situation, and they can't possibly stick together as a team in it. All they can do is try to be truthful and fair in what they say, as Sandeesh notably did.
DavetheScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-11-2010, 01:16
DavetheScot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
That both teams failed to take deposits suggests to me it was one of the unmentioned rules of the task.
Interesting that Stuart's team seemed to have so many uncollected DVDs. Sandeesh said on You're Fired her team only had two or three uncollected.
DavetheScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-11-2010, 05:15
notary
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 197
That is because of the high price of them. £15 is a lot of money, and they only did it for the kid to enjoy himself.
notary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-11-2010, 05:39
parthy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,010
Probably not for the first time, I direct you to Mitchell and Webb.
Heh heh, love that clip. When I first watched it, my boyfriend was like "You DO realise you're one of the people they're poking fun at, right?". I was like "I can laugh at myself, it's cool, it's AAALLL cool."
parthy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-11-2010, 07:46
LucyDTrym
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,781
Well, that is the format of the show. I'm sure neither Chris nor Liz are so unsupportive in real business. It's an artificial situation, and they can't possibly stick together as a team in it. All they can do is try to be truthful and fair in what they say, as Sandeesh notably did.
So it is all MAKE BELIEVE then? I thought the idea of the programme was to find a really good ruthless business person.....

Given real tasks.....and working in a team environment.

Cant see the point of it otherwise.

I must say though I chuckled at no deposits.....and I agree with the other ops over that......

IF they had took the money they then could have taken their address and told them they would send it to them in the post it wouldnt have cost much to do that.......

I dont like that Sugar he is so up himself lol.......big bully. blah.
LucyDTrym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-11-2010, 09:42
trollface
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 12,694
My first time watching the Apprentice and my last.

What a load of knobs no wonder this country is in such a state if these people are the cream of the crop lol.

I mean how stupid to pick this ski slope. What I didnt get or understand sorry I am thick, was why were they looking at all these wonderful back drops done professionally, I thought they were able to use them or did I miss something?

Anyway so they have clients who want to buy a DVD, and they tell them to come back later to collect the goods. They had loads left over because most people would have been long gone.

Why didnt they take a deposit or ask for the money up front?

And who would want to buy that rubbish anyway.

And the end. Well talk about Judas.

Now I know what PASSING THE BUCK means. The 3 of them at the end the team leader, liz and someone else, instead of standing up together and supporting one another the 2 on the outside totally tried to destroy the team leader just to make themselves look good.

Well sorry Mr Sugar you aint all that because I would have kept the team leader and got rid of one of the others because they were working as A TEAM and therefore had agreed before hand what they were doing, if they were not happy about it then they should have took the team leader to task. Non of them had the balls to work in a board room environment IMHO.

Anyway thats it for me what a load of rubbish lol.
Somehow I feel that the point of the programme has eluded you.
trollface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-11-2010, 11:52
The Spoon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,325
copying a non-protected idea is common-place. it is just 'marketing' to see what sells and react to that. AMS would probably view it as initiative.
The Spoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-11-2010, 12:57
gemma-the-husky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 17,848
Of course they are not "the cream of the crop".

Probably not for the first time, I direct you to Mitchell and Webb.
perceptive, eh.

people think its a comedy show, too.
gemma-the-husky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2010, 15:53
brangdon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
Interesting that Stuart's team seemed to have so many uncollected DVDs. Sandeesh said on You're Fired her team only had two or three uncollected.
I think she might have understated her returns. Her revenue was £222.97, and they seemed to charge at least £7.99, so that's fewer than 28 DVDs paid for. Much fewer given that some were sold at £12. Yet we're told in the boardroom they made 55, and Jamie claims 57. That suggests they had around 50% unpaid for.

As I think Lord Sugar said, if they had taken a £5 deposit before burning the DVD, they'd likely have won.
brangdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2010, 16:08
Diorelli
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 643
I think she might have understated her returns. Her revenue was £222.97, and they seemed to charge at least £7.99, so that's fewer than 28 DVDs paid for. Much fewer given that some were sold at £12. Yet we're told in the boardroom they made 55, and Jamie claims 57. That suggests they had around 50% unpaid for.

As I think Lord Sugar said, if they had taken a £5 deposit before burning the DVD, they'd likely have won.
You are mixing up revenue from profit. Revenue is the total sales or takings for the day. Profit = Revenue - Expenses. I don't have the exact figures but both teams sales were around the £300+ but Synergy had higher costs than the other team. They ordered 110 DVDs as opposed to just 30 courtesy of Stuart.
Diorelli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2010, 17:30
brangdon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
You are mixing up revenue from profit.
You're right; thanks. Their revenue was £372.97. At £8 a pop that's around 46 units, so they probably had 10-15 DVDs unclaimed (depending on how many they sold at £12). That's somewhat more than two or three, so I still think Sandeesh understated it.
brangdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2010, 19:12
sorcha_healy27
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 68,914
Reason 342 to have brought Jamie back then and not one of the other two.
t was a team decision to go with it- personally IMO sandeesh deserved the boot for making the decision to make too many dvds and for turning up late as well as delegating the burning to people who didn't know how to use the technology
sorcha_healy27 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:02.