|
||||||||
Who would have got fired if the other team lost? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 16
|
Who would have got fired if the other team lost?
(it's Friday and i'm bored)
I think it would have been Chris, 20% deal, plus failing on the other tasks LS would have let him go I believe Jamie - did a good job as the guide despite his crazy facts Joanna - annoying as she is didnt actually make any mistakes thoughts please |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ronnie's bed
Posts: 20,566
|
Jamie would have been irrelevant in this task as its about the money that was taken. I think Jo would of blamed Chris for his 20% of everything deal whilst Jamie and Chris would have said that Jo was a rubbish PM.
I think he would have fired Jo. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
I think if the other team had lost we would have got the truth about who was to blame in the Joanna/Jamie thing rather than the edit which we saw which was purely done to make Joanna look bad.
I actually wonder if they did that to throw us off the scent as up to that point she was so much stronger than all the other candidates except for Stella. That edit seems to have 'frightened a few people off'. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 11,473
|
I don't think Droning Chris could have credibly survived yet another boardroom encounter.
The 20% deal would definitely have been identified as the task loser - even though when the team won Lord Sid praised it as innovative. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 1,651
|
If they had lost the blame would have had to go on Chris for the risk he took with the 20% deal, and I think he would have gone. Jamie is the weakest of the three, I feel, but he did a good job as the tour guide and would have been rewarded for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
|
I think it would have had to have been Chris. His 20% deal was held up as good strategy because they won, but that was hindsight. Had they lost, it would have been held up as bad strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 277
|
I think Jo would of been fired because Sugar wouldn't have been able to make up his mind who he fancied more, Chris or Jamie?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Sugar could have taken his pick.
Chris for the agency deal. Joanne for not being able to manage Jamie. (Although that would have been a little unfair as it's very hard for any manager to do anything about someone who is being willfully uncooperative - as Jamie was - in the short term). Jamie for not properly cooperating with his PM. (I suspect this will set alarm bells ringing in Sugar's head. Anyone who refuses to cooperate with their manager and insists on doing it their own way could cause all sorts of problems for him in the future.) |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
|
As with the actual result, it would have been based on past performance as much as what happened on the task. So Joanna would have been safe.
It's hard to say who out of Chris and Jamie would have gone. Chris had a poor record: only 3 wins. Jamie has 5 wins, but did pretty poorly on the previous task getting only 2 of 5 items. If I had to say, I'd say Chris. Giving up 20% of their profits might have been worth while to get the deal, but it was more generous than he needed to be. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: In my Opinion
Posts: 10,057
|
Chris or Jamie...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 442
|
Quote:
I think Jo would of been fired because Sugar wouldn't have been able to make up his mind who he fancied more, Chris or Jamie?
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: By the window
Posts: 14,154
|
Perhaps he is hypnotised by the drone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 7,491
|
Jamie because he's shit at defending/selling himself in the boardroom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,550
|
I think that Jo would have had a hard time. I think he would blame Jo for the faiure as Jo should have handled the negotiation as it was make or break on the task. However I think Chri would have been fired.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:09.

