I'm just happy that you have a full understanding of your own opinion then oh sorry it's not an opinion because you saying it makes it fact no wonder the rest of us are confused.

It's amazing I can cope in the world raised my children and have a great job without your insight

It's no good getting all snarky and defensive.

If you want to pretend that my point that the dynamics of a peer group are quite different to that of a formally managed environment is a matter of opinion, go ahead.

It's very hard to believe that anyone with even the vaguest concept of a business environment will agree with you.

I'm really not bothered if people agree with me my opinion is formed from my own experiences not yours and my response was made in that way as I perceived you as being disrespectful to this.

I don't deal with concepts I deal with people .

during the cosmetics task she said it wasnt fair when pulled up for not being able to do what she clearly stated she could

and i think whining 'thats so unfair' is a little bit pathetic, I am suprised she doesnt stamp her foot also

susan may have overestimated how much she could sell but she still sold them


the problem is why did zoe and helen decide to attack her in the middle of the day during the task whilst potential punters were hanging about in their stall.

Zoe wanted to scapegoat susan in front of everyone. it was that simple. Such a person is someone i would never work in a business

well I'm no Susan, but "that's not fair!" as a comment - she said that the quantity was what could be shifted in her experience - she didn't say she could do that single-handed as has been suggested.

I don't like the whining element BUT she has often been right and she needs to make herself heard rather than let others overrule her. remember last series where the young PM was in tears over not being listened to? well it is not a programme for the meek. even Tom gets ignored more often than he should.

Susan needs to get some command-style but her instincts have not been bad so far. I like her apart from her failure to impose herself.

Susan relies too much on Nick and Sugar to stick up for her in the Boardroom, or she resorts to playing the age card.

I actually like her.
She did blag a bit last night because she didn't really put herself forward to do the pitch.
She actually has more business sense in her little finger than the op has in his or her whole body so you shouldn't disrespect her.

Nick only stood up for her when Jim was blasting her unfairly (again) for saying that she HAD tried to tell him to offer discounts - effectively calling Jim a liar (which he was!).

In the task the only thing she really held back on was doing the pitch - and she was in the company of both Zoe and Glenn in that one - they were both just as reluctant as she was to do it - so why single her out? Even then she said she would do it but she thought that Jim would be better at it rather than an outright "I'm not going to do it!"

In the final boardroom she came out fighting - which stunned both of the blokes - and unusually didn't back down or close up when challenged. She was taken in simply because Jim perceived her and Glenn as the two weaker characters on the team - not because she deserved to be in there on her contribution.

And no - I'm not a particular fan of hers just defending "unfair" criticism of her.

I am sure she will be a PM next week and we will see how she gets on in Paris when leading the team

Here we go again. Relying on Nick? Jim was saying one thing, Susan was saying the other. It's quite right that Nick, as the independent observer, adds his voice in especially as what Jim was saying was wrong. He's the objective witness.

And yet for some people here that magically turns into 'relying on Nick'. FFS

She does come across as a spoilt little daddy's girl. Other people might not agree with me but I always get the impression she's on the verge of having a tantrum.

To you, maybe.

I've always thought she held her own rather well when you consider her age and they way she's been treated at times.

I agree, Nick stepped in when it was a clear case of his word against hers, and I this is the exact situation where I would expect Nick or Karen to step in to clarify a situation. It was not a situation where Susan didn't defend herself or stayed silent on the matter, purely relying on others.

I agree.

I was thinking more of the statement she made to camera along the lines of "Glenn is dealing with the pictures it is down to him".

She has many good qualities but you have highlighted one of her worst. The sulky nature of her, the whiny nature of her. Bleating "that is so unfair" every time she is picked up for lying or making a mistake is pretty poor.

However she is an entrepreneur and she does exhibit flashes of brilliance.

The issue for me is would she accept direction from a business partner and would she be mature enough to accept her mistakes.

If I believed the answer to both was yes, and at the moment I do not, then I would believe I had a strong and capable partner to go into business with as she certainly has drive and perception. Although she also has the ability to be wise after the event

It is called Natasha syndrome, at least it is in my house.

Susan was absolutely right on this and for me this shows her business nous and Jim's business arrogance. It was not just his refusal but the garbage he came up with after about why he did not offer the discount.

I work in Purchasing, I am a Manager in Purchasing, and you always but always negotiate on the first price offer. When a Seller walks away he or she is usually inviting you to run after them and in my experience it seldom happens.

The task fell down due to Jim. Whatever Susan did wrong in the task her suggestion could, and probably would, have saved it.

That statement was made out of exasperation that he wasn't using the more creative and imaginative pictures she was producing.

In the show I saw - GLENN chose which photos were being sent through to Jim & Zoe!

Susan made sure sure there were lots of action shots taken (jumping/ boxing/ bike/ piggybacking...) but Glenn chose the ones for consideration - and he chose the stinkers - letting the good ones go!

You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here.

You cannot possibly know what her mental processes were at the time.

Susan has alot of good qualities but your desperation to praise her at all costs does tend to rather invalidate your views.

Course he did dear.

You obviously saw all of the ones he let go and were able to judge them as being superior.

I'm not praising her at all costs. I'm just correcting some of the distorted and biased views that are being promulgated.

We clearly saw her arguing with Glen about which were the best photo's to use and - as per usual - she was ignored.

Immediately afterwards she made the comment about Glen being in charge of the photo's.

It isn't much of a stretch to see what engendered that particular remark,


I don't know which edit you saw but the one I saw showed a lot of much more suitable, action based, photographs that Susan took.

Maybe you were making a cup of tea when they were shown to the rest of us.

You certainly are praising her at all costs.

She is good as I have said elsewhere but she has her weaknesses.



Agreed.

Good old fashioned ass covering.


Maybe you were wrong about the photo's shown being more suitable. They could well have been less suitable.

No.


Yes.


If someone evidently disagrees with a decision and is overruled there is absolutely nothing wrong with them covering their arse.

Otherwise a lot of people would be taking the blame for a lot of things that simply were not their fault. Which would in turn mean that others were not encouraged to learn from their mistakes.


Not according to the sentiments of all the people who slated the 'cardigan' shot chosen.

All Ive heard her say is.... "Thats so unfair..... :yawn: :yawn:

I don't think that's true. I just rewatched the bit where they are discussing the name. We see them run through dozens of names. "Hip Replacement" comes up, and Susan says, "I'm just thinking is that a bit of a sensitive topic?" It's not a strong rejection at all, and she doesn't push the point when Glenn disagrees. I don't think Glenn was being aggressive there at all. She just wasn't very passionate.

Then Jim calls a vote. He doesn't hear Susan's voice, so he specifically checks her opinion. He could have ignored her silence, but didn't. No shouting down there; quite the reverse. She says, "No, but I'm happy to support it." So she's already given up. No passion again, no assertiveness. Clearly Jim has to go with this name. (And later in the boardroom she doesn't support the name.)

I think that's fairly typical. I don't recall her ever being belittled, except in the boardroom when it is fair to comment on other candidate's performances. She belittled Jim then, for example.


I agree about those similarities. However, he does admit to his mistakes and doesn't whine about unfair everything is. He seems to be having more fun.