|
||||||||
Chris's decision on the 20% - a shrewd move |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 52,176
|
He just got lucky, it should have been on ticket sales alone. I suspect Sugar would have sung a different tune if they had lost.
Joanne and Chris didn't seem to be any good at selling tickets themselves the last tour didn't have any takers. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,843
|
I thought that company was a bit shifty. I don't know what they actually did to help Joanne's team. The team went back to the company and they said "3 o'clock is a quiet time." Oh that's great. We're giving you 20 percent of our earnings and you're doing sod all to help us! That's what I would have thought to myself had I been in their shoes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
Good point. It does explain how fearless and confident he can be.
Being an investment banker will also mean he is used to evaluating risks which can be a very good trait to have, but like you say, if it goes wrong the consequences are normally high. |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 406
|
Quote:
Yes but the key word is evaluate. You look at shares through data and forecasts and graphics and stats and you look at hedge funding by balancing potential gains and losses. Chris evaluated nothing - he has no data and there's no evidence he thought at all about what he saw saying and its meaning or had any data about what sales or profits might be under various options.
We don't know if there had any other information but the editing on this was scant and what was shown more was Joanna's reaction to it, but we do know that the industry standard was 35% because of the boardroom and we also know that the deal was praised as shrewd by LS. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,843
|
As mentioned, had they lost the task, he would have got so much grief from Sugar. There's a fine line between success and failure on The Apprentice. One week's shrewdness is next week's folly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 17,852
|
Quote:
He got away with it in the context of a one day task but it was shocking business. In the long term the business wouldn't have made very much money at all. Chris is an idiot who got lucky no matter how Sugar tries to spin it.
that's why the going rate is 35% that's why sports agents get 10% or so of their clents' total package. |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Chris gormlessly offered 20% of the takings and the ticket agent couldn't believe his luck. He didn't have to do a thing and yet stood to get 20% of the gross takings. Hardly a shrewd move, just a mistake which luckily for Chris paid off.
I didn't think it was really fair that only one agency was involved so it was a winner take all deal. This meant that the task depended almost entirely on that initial negotiation as the quality of the tour was completely irrelevant. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
Well, he certainly evaluated the location as he explained the importance of that in the Boardroom when asked about the reasoning of the deal. You can also see in the programme that securing the deal had obvious benefits as Stuart tried to sell his tickets right outside the location Chris secured. It seems to be where they drummed up most of their business.
We don't know if there had any other information but the editing on this was scant and what was shown more was Joanna's reaction to it, but we do know that the industry standard was 35% because of the boardroom and we also know that the deal was praised as shrewd by LS. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,744
|
None of them seemed to be aware that this 35% was a cast in stone industry standard.
So for that reason I think he got lucky. Clutching for straws isn't always a bad thing. Sometimes when you do that you can clutch for a straw and as if by magic one may end up in your hand. |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,744
|
You could speculate that the task was won in spite of Chris, not because of him.
It would be interesting to see if they had done the normal 35% deal how much more profit they would have made. I think that the task success was more down to the efforts of Joanna and Jamie rather than Chris. I don't remember seeing Chris much in that task apart from the 20%/35% deal thing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,744
|
Quote:
Yes but the key word is evaluate. You look at shares through data and forecasts and graphics and stats and you look at hedge funding by balancing potential gains and losses. Chris evaluated nothing - he has no data and there's no evidence he thought at all about what he saw saying and its meaning or had any data about what sales or profits might be under various options.
Had Chris known what he was doing as a calculated move then he would have mentioned it to Joanna and Jamie before he even went to do the pitch. |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 406
|
Quote:
You could speculate that the task was won in spite of Chris, not because of him.
It would be interesting to see if they had done the normal 35% deal how much more profit they would have made. I think that the task success was more down to the efforts of Joanna and Jamie rather than Chris. I don't remember seeing Chris much in that task apart from the 20%/35% deal thing. It's difficult to assess what Joanna and Chris did other than Joanna being PM and Chris securing the pitch because once they secured the agency alot the work the other team had to had been taken away. That's why we saw more of the other team IMO. Most of Joanna's highlights was early on with Jamie and trying to alter the deal with the agency. Can't say I saw her have a defined role in the task either but most of the editing was on the tour guides and the other team. |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,843
|
Quote:
"None of them seemed to be aware that this 35% was a cast in stone industry standard."
But it wasn't! That's the thing! Chris was so shrewd (or incredibly lucky) to negotiate a new deal. He's a genius. I expect he'll invent time travel by the end of the series.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 643
|
The deal with the agency clinched the deal. Why would Stuart have to resort to poaching if the selling of the tickets weren't difficult? With the deal, they apparently had access to Trafalgar Square as well. It's not clear whether the pricing is down only to Chris but just implied that while Jaime and Joanna were off to plan the tour bus route, he'd been left to do the pricing.
Stella and Jaime had the easiest jobs to be honest. Whether they have a full load of tourists or not depends on the selling team. If they had a cancelled tour like what happened with Synergy, they do nothing and can pin the blame on the sales team. Whether they were bad at it was irrelevant, the tourists didn't seem to care about refunds and the like. |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,843
|
Quote:
"None of them seemed to be aware that this 35% was a cast in stone industry standard."
But it wasn't! That's the thing! Chris was so shrewd (or incredibly lucky) to negotiate a new deal. He's a genius. A one man ideas factory. I expect he'll invent time travel by the end of the series.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,205
|
The trouble is, they give no facts.
How many tickets did the agency sell? Did they sell 50 tickets to every 10 tickets of the other team? Did they sell nothing? You know if that team won Sugar calls it a shrewd deal. If they lost, it's utter craziness and he's fired. It was a stupid deal at the end of the day as he had no guaranteed level of service from the ticket place. |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,284
|
I think that 20% was the reason that they did so well, they knew whatever they did they were giving away 20% so they had to really get a move on if they thought they were going to be able to give it away and still win the task. I bet because of that they went out there and did well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
None of them seemed to be aware that this 35% was a cast in stone industry standard.
So for that reason I think he got lucky. Clutching for straws isn't always a bad thing. Sometimes when you do that you can clutch for a straw and as if by magic one may end up in your hand. Mind you, the looks between the agent and his assistant were revealing, you could see the pound signs ringing up in their eyes, 20% of total takings probably wasn't much different to 35% of the agents sales, but it tempted them to agree. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,190
|
No one can say if it was a good or a bad decision because we don't have the figures.
It was a gamble and it seems it paid of from what Sugar said, but who knows
|
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dagenham Essex UK
Posts: 9,714
|
Quote:
No one can say if it was a good or a bad decision because we don't have the figures.
It was a gamble and it seems it paid of from what Sugar said, but who knows ![]() But I do have to agree with others, who say that if Joanna's team had lost, Chris would have been ripped apart by AS. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,259
|
Quote:
Very true....
But I do have to agree with others, who say that if Joanna's team had lost, Chris would have been ripped apart by AS. We all know that it's a TV programme before anything else, but I don't like the fact that tonight's show was so full of manipulation. |
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 25
|
I think the chap in the store had the measure of Chris so asked again----To get this right, you're offering us 20% of all your days takings? Chris seems to be floundering a bit and replies, yes. But, with the number of people in the shop later taking their Tour Of The Day, then by chance, it happened to be a winning deal by Chris.
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
I think the chap in the store had the measure of Chris so asked again----To get this right, you're offering us 20% of all your days takings? Chris seems to be floundering a bit and replies, yes. But, with the number of people in the shop later taking their Tour Of The Day, then by chance, it happened to be a winning deal by Chris.
He offered them something which sounded very generous, but actually probably didn't earn the agent much different to the normal 35% on their own sales. |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,744
|
Quote:
The trouble is, they give no facts.
How many tickets did the agency sell? Did they sell 50 tickets to every 10 tickets of the other team? Did they sell nothing? You know if that team won Sugar calls it a shrewd deal. If they lost, it's utter craziness and he's fired. It was a stupid deal at the end of the day as he had no guaranteed level of service from the ticket place. Now it feels as if they were all given some costumes and told to go and have a bit of fun. Because as you say it seems more down to blind luck as nobody really knows how all these tickets got sold. For all we know most of the selling could have been taken out of their hands and everything was dependent on how many tickets the agency sold.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,744
|
Quote:
The point is Chris knew he was offering a very good deal. He wanted to be certain of getting the agency on side. He said as much when telling Joanna what he'd agreed. It was a gamble but he understood that having the ticket agent would make a win nearly certain.
He offered them something which sounded very generous, but actually probably didn't earn the agent much different to the normal 35% on their own sales. I can understand why Joanna was justifiably cautious. Because for all they (and we) knew that 20% could have cut their profits considerably given that nobody really seemed to know what prices they should be selling at and the other team could have actually done a lot better. I think everybody on both teams were pretty much working blind and nobody really knew how things would fall in the end. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:28.




