DS Forums

 
 

Sugar talked so much rubbish about the boys' 'App blurb'


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-05-2011, 11:37
comedyfish
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia ♂
Posts: 19,829

"The survival of the angry birds is at stake. Dish out revenge on the green pigs who stole the Bird's eggs"

First two lines of the most succesful App of all time. tells you nothing about it at all. I download apps all the time the blurb has rarely anything to do with it... its referalls and ratings/comments

He def had an agenda and basically said look who ever wrote this should be in the boardroom (IMO)

(mind you apparently Sugar said the iphone wouldn't last 6 months )
comedyfish is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 12-05-2011, 11:43
ACU
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 7,916
"The survival of the angry birds is at stake. Dish out revenge on the green pigs who stole the Bird's eggs"

First two lines of the most succesful App of all time. tells you nothing about it at all. I download apps all the time the blurb has rarely anything to do with it... its referalls and ratings/comments

He def had an agenda and basically said look who ever wrote this should be in the boardroom (IMO)

(mind you apparently Sugar said the iphone wouldn't last 6 months )
agree with the bit in bold 100%...for me its referals that have the biggest influence, followed by ratings and comments.

I only really read the blurb once an app has been recommended.
ACU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 11:43
rufnek2k6
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tardis, Kormacetocyplos
Posts: 3,521
I thought the same. TBH I've can't ever recall the taglines of an app ever influencing my decision over downloading an app. Also, did he ask the girls what their money making strategy was on their app? I cant see the upgrade packs working for their app.
rufnek2k6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 11:58
comedyfish
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia ♂
Posts: 19,829
I thought the same. TBH I've can't ever recall the taglines of an app ever influencing my decision over downloading an app. Also, did he ask the girls what their money making strategy was on their app? I cant see the upgrade packs working for their app.
yes that is another good point
comedyfish is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 12:00
ACU
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 7,916
I thought the same. TBH I've can't ever recall the taglines of an app ever influencing my decision over downloading an app. Also, did he ask the girls what their money making strategy was on their app? I cant see the upgrade packs working for their app.
Wouldnt the upgrade packs, be more annoying noises? Same with the boys, more accents, more phrases etc.

To be honest I cant see anyone paying for upgrades to either app.
ACU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 12:48
Miles_T
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bracknell
Posts: 2,269
I'm wondering if the boys app actually got on the market properly. I know from my experience of android apps that they do not always appear for everyone straight away.

Both apps were toilet though. What was it 13,000 downloads? I expect 13,000 deletions two minutes after download

You cant judge an app on 24 hours, it needs feedback and that takes weeks if not months.

If it was based on 24 hour downloads the boys missed a trick have something to do with sex in the title and scantily clad woman in pic, would of won easy, job done!
Miles_T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 12:58
CaptMcMallister
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 222
He def had an agenda and basically said look who ever wrote this should be in the boardroom (IMO)
He also spouted a load of nonsense at the beginning of the board room pushing his "how easy it is to start a business agenda". He went on about how they didn't need any start up funding, when he conveniently forgot the need to pay for the software house's services the teams got to use for free, and the fact that neither of them had actually made any money!

Maybe I'm just getting old, but I felt the boardroom was more of a pantomime than ever last night...
CaptMcMallister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 12:59
ACU
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 7,916
He also spouted a load of nonsense at the beginning of the board room pushing his "how easy it is to start a business agenda". He went on about how they didn't need any start up funding, when he conveniently forgot the need to pay for the software house's services the teams got to use for free, and the fact that neither of them had actually made any money!

Maybe I'm just getting old, but I felt the boardroom was more of a pantomime than ever last night...
...and setting up three tech websites for them to pitch at.
ACU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 13:19
tornado
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 191
Yes- Sugar's entire babble infuriated me. He said how it just goes to show how anyone can still set a business up overnight. Sorry - what a load of nonsense. I'm not sure Joe Bloggs wanting to get an application going would have a top computer design team working for him for free overnight to get the application going nor on the second day of trading would your average business be able to get interviews with two internet websites and Wired magazine, or be at all likely to be promoted as their app of the day. Also on the second day of trading, both teams were able to present at and have a stall at a major London technology fair. It's such a load of nonsense.

Also, neither team actually made any money. That would be the true test of the application and the only way of knowing if it was actually a business. I could hand out any number of freebies in my town centre. That doesn't mean I've got a business. I doubt if anyone would pay for the girls' app extensions - if it was in anyway successful, another company could easily replicate their idea and do it better. The boys' app is similarly unlikely to have anyone actually pay for it but it at least has something of a concept which could be developed.

As for Sugar, saying that the Girls' application had global appeal whilst the Boys didn't and that the Wired magazine's promo was irrelevant, that was both illogical and untrue. In the first 6 hours, the boys beat the girls 3-1, suggesting that there was no real issue with the copy that had been written by Jim. Then following, the Wired magazine piece, the girls got 9000 extra downloads. This is frankly what you might expect from a promo as app of the day on such a website . Sugar actually berated Edna for failing to go to this pitch as it was so key. Later, however, he told the boys, the Wired promo was irrelevant. Where was his evidence/logic for this claim? Or that the girls' app had global appeal? He goes from one minute saying to the girls, the way to win the task was to get Wired onside, to telling the boys, it was always just based on the quality of the app. So contradictory. It just infuriated me because there was no business logic in what he was saying.
tornado is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 13:38
rufnek2k6
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tardis, Kormacetocyplos
Posts: 3,521
He also spouted a load of nonsense at the beginning of the board room pushing his "how easy it is to start a business agenda". He went on about how they didn't need any start up funding, when he conveniently forgot the need to pay for the software house's services the teams got to use for free, and the fact that neither of them had actually made any money!

Maybe I'm just getting old, but I felt the boardroom was more of a pantomime than ever last night...
Agreed completely. How far-fetched it is from reality makes me laugh, even though AS makes it appear realistic. I appreciate the show can encourage people to go into business but it is all very misleading.
rufnek2k6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 14:06
diary_room
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London
Posts: 5,415
I agree I think he overplayed the description. The main problem was A) not getting the magazine support and B) the parochialism of the app.

However, technically you can create an app from virtually nothing *If you know how to program*. You need a computer and an internet connection but that's about it. Some kid did it recently, I read. And in reality a 'pitch' to a website or blog can just as easily be an email or a tweet.

Real app makers don't go along to website offices and 'pitch' their idea in person with a full presentation et al.
diary_room is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2011, 16:53
Frillynix
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Belfast, NI
Posts: 5,846
I think he deliberatly used that wording so that Jim would be chosen to go into the boardroom . He was never going to fire someone like Jim at such an early stage and knew that the person in with him or Leon would go.

I actually think in a way it was his way of KEEPING JIm for another week and making the choice easy for himself at this early stage (just my little theory and Im usually wrong)
Frillynix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2011, 22:21
brangdon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
I'm wondering if the boys app actually got on the market properly. I know from my experience of android apps that they do not always appear for everyone straight away.
As they had nearly 3000 downloads in the first 6 hours, they must have been on the market.

In the first 6 hours, the boys beat the girls 3-1, suggesting that there was no real issue with the copy that had been written by Jim.
It's hard to say. The first 3,000 was based partly on the promotion they did at that show. It's possible that people realised they were on The Apprentice and told their mates that, and so a lot of downloads were from people curious about the show. Basically, I agreed with him. The copy may not have done much harm, but it wouldn't pull in many punters either. It was lame.

Then following, the Wired magazine piece, the girls got 9000 extra downloads. This is frankly what you might expect from a promo as app of the day on such a website . Sugar actually berated Edna for failing to go to this pitch as it was so key.
His point was that Edna failed to realise the Wired pitch was more important than the show. It's a valid criticism. Only about 100 people were at the show. Edna won, but she also made some mistakes, and Lord Sugar likes to give everyone a hard time at some point. (It doesn't always make the edit, of course.)

Later, however, he told the boys, the Wired promo was irrelevant.
As I recall, he said that the boys wouldn't have done much better even if they had got the Wired promo. That's not quite the same as saying it's irrelevant. Maybe they'd have got 5,000 instead of 4,000.

Although if the girls had lost all three websites, they'd surely have been crippled. Maybe they'd have got 5,000 too, instead of 10,500. I think they'd have got some, because there are people who seek out everything that's new.

Where was his evidence/logic for this claim? Or that the girls' app had global appeal?
That the girls' app had more global appeal than the boys' was surely obvious. No-one outside the UK cares much about UK accents or stereotypes. Even Leon realised it, early on, but he ignored his own misgivings.

He goes from one minute saying to the girls, the way to win the task was to get Wired onside, to telling the boys, it was always just based on the quality of the app. So contradictory.
It's fair to criticise the girls for not realising the importance of Wired, and fair to criticise the boys for not having global appeal. Both teams made mistakes. I don't see it as a contradiction, unless you believe one team must be 100% perfect and the other team 100% wrong.

It just infuriated me because there was no business logic in what he was saying.
To me the logic was obvious. The format of the programme makes it harder to drill down much further than "it's obvious".
brangdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-05-2011, 20:24
Orbitalzone
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 12,173
As always, whichever team loses gets told they did it all wrong, if they won by a tiny amount then they'd be congratulated on how well they'd done.

Lord Sug is hardly the technical wizard he seems hell bent on reminding us about, I mean he did well 25 years ago being one of the first to sell low cost crappy electronics and in all fairness some relatively useful cheap computers but in this day and age he would struggle and almost certainly fail to compete at all.
Orbitalzone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2011, 08:44
roddydogs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,347
Sugar talks rubbish surprise? Did you watch Sugar on football?
roddydogs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 15-05-2011, 21:21
moox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
He also spouted a load of nonsense at the beginning of the board room pushing his "how easy it is to start a business agenda". He went on about how they didn't need any start up funding, when he conveniently forgot the need to pay for the software house's services the teams got to use for free, and the fact that neither of them had actually made any money!

Maybe I'm just getting old, but I felt the boardroom was more of a pantomime than ever last night...
Perhaps he was referring to how someone (or a group) who is technically minded could write their own app. Of course those who aren't would need to hire some sort of assistance but if you can program then there is a lower barrier to entry.

Although not for the iPhone, as it costs ~£99 and signing lots of NDAs to even potentially be allowed to publish your app, and you need to buy a nice expensive Mac to write the app on.
moox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2011, 17:46
brangdon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
As for Sugar, saying that the Girls' application had global appeal whilst the Boys didn't and that the Wired magazine's promo was irrelevant, that was both illogical and untrue.
It seems to match what is said in this Pocket-Lint podcast. They pooh-pooh the notion that Wired is especially influential, and instead seem to think it the marketing blurb and meta-data mattered most. One of them suggests having an app that started with "a" helped, although the others disagree.
brangdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2011, 02:23
totalwise
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,366
the tagline did have something to do with it, if they had made it simple like "funny english accents" it would be descriptive and make some sense.

They way they wrote it, if an average american from OHIO, US was reading it, they wouldn't have a clue what the app was about.

I don't think the concept of funny British accents was a bad move, having travelled a bit, almost all English speaking countries have a fascination with English accents, and there are many Brits who are successful in the US for their poncy English accents like Ann Widicom, Russell Brand the the Daily Mirror guy.
totalwise is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:10.