• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • TV Shows: Reality
  • The Apprentice
geography and history not their strong points
<<
<
2 of 2
>>
>
studeruk
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by sepmix:
“Regarding the 60 x 7 = 4800 thing, was anyone here also realising the fact that a fast food restaurant making £420 in 2 hours would be a failure?”

Yep - they obviously hadn't given *any* consideration to costings with that gem! Couple of chefs, someone on the till, greeters / waitress - the wage bill alone would be a significant percentage when you consider tax, employers NI etc as well.

The other team weren't great either though - although they had costed it well, their margin of just 23% was way too low. What about waste, complaints, exchanges, rises in raw costs or VAT?
At least they had somewhere to go if they needed by cutting quality but they were a good way off the mark to start with.

Methinks Lord Sugar will be doing most of the brainwork on the business side of the partnership!
Big Dipper
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by Glorfindel:
“He was!”

I have undertaken my own modest study into Byron's dietary arrangments and have discovered several alarming inconsistencies contained therein. While I can find no evidence of him eating meatstuffs it is certain that Byron was curious to attempt their consumption and digestion. According to Edward Blunden's Shelley (1946):

Quote:
“For Michaelmas Day Byron regularly resolved to have a roast goose, and bought one; but by the time he had fattened it for a month the goose and he were such friends that the bird did not come to the table, and another was bought. At last he possesed four pet geese which travelled in cages under his carriage.”

I venture to suggest it is fortunate that Byron died so young, otherwise he might well have cornered the world market in geese.

Moving swiftly on, and concerning the matter of fish, Byron was at some times an abstainer yet at others an avid consumer. From Life of Lord Byron : with his letters and journals (Vol.2 - 1811-13):

Quote:
“1811: "As we had none of us been apprised of his peculiarities with respect to food, the embarrassment of our host was not a little, on discovering that there was nothing upon the table which his noble guest could eat or drink. Neither meat, fish, nor wine, would Lord Byron touch ; and of biscuits and sodawater, which he asked for, there had been, unluckily, no provision. He professed, however, to be equally well pleased with potatoes and vinegar (*possibly because he discovered the potato and wished to promulgate the success of this most versatile vegetable) and of these meagre materials contrived to make rather a hearty dinner”

And yet only two years later:

Quote:
“"Stuffed myself with sturgeon, and exceeded in champagne and wine in general, but not to confusion of head. When I do dine, I gorge like an Arab or a Boa snake, on fish and vegetables, but no meat. I am always better, however, on my tea and biscuit than any other regimen, and even that sparingly.”

However by 1823 the poet opines in Don Juan, Canto XIII:

Quote:
“And angling , too, that solitary vice,
Whatever Izaak Walton sings or says:
The quaint, old, cruel coxcomb, in his gullet
Should have a hook, and a small trout to pull it.”

Perhaps Byron is being somewhat harsh on Izaak there. Anyway, I hope my labours in unearthing these details are of some small interest to the reader.
.
.
.
* I must confess that my remark about the potato is an invention.
Beth5681
14-07-2011
I think everyone's overlooking the close-up of Helen using an iPhone calculator to do the most simple of sums. I think it was 0.6x100.
GeorgeI
14-07-2011
Despite the lack of History and Geography I still think the worst was not really understanding what the concept of "Fast Food" involved.
60 customers in 2 hours at peak time!!!
JordanT91
14-07-2011
Regarding history and geography at school:

Both are optional after the age of 11 (year 6?)
Also, geography doesn't deal with countries, continents etc. If it did I would have took it because I'm interested in different countries. It only deals with things like rivers, mountains, valleys etc. It's more of a scientific subject.

Just thought I'd let you know.
muppetchair
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by JordanT91:
“Regarding history and geography at school:

Both are optional after the age of 11 (year 6?)
Also, geography doesn't deal with countries, continents etc. If it did I would have took it because I'm interested in different countries. It only deals with things like rivers, mountains, valleys etc. It's more of a scientific subject.

Just thought I'd let you know.”

Surely you mean 13 / 14?, Options are chosen at the end of year 8, and start in year 9 dont they?
calathea
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by capekdeh:
“That's what you get if you let someone like Murdoch keeps you in the dark by feeding you with endless gossips, tits & football.”

Now THATS a takeaway
justmise
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by Big Dipper:
“I have undertaken my own modest study into Byron's dietary arrangments and have discovered several alarming inconsistencies contained therein. While I can find no evidence of him eating meatstuffs it is certain that Byron was curious to attempt their consumption and digestion. According to Edward Blunden's Shelley (1946):

I venture to suggest it is fortunate that Byron died so young, otherwise he might well have cornered the world market in geese.

Moving swiftly on, and concerning the matter of fish, Byron was at some times an abstainer yet at others an avid consumer. From Life of Lord Byron : with his letters and journals (Vol.2 - 1811-13):

And yet only two years later:

However by 1823 the poet opines in Don Juan, Canto XIII:

Perhaps Byron is being somewhat harsh on Izaak there. Anyway, I hope my labours in unearthing these details are of some small interest to the reader.
.
.
.
* I must confess that my remark about the potato is an invention.”

I just had to drop everything and log on to congratulate the Big Dipper for the most elucidatory post I have ever read on these fora.
spannerandpony
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by JordanT91:
“Regarding history and geography at school:

Both are optional after the age of 11 (year 6?)
Also, geography doesn't deal with countries, continents etc. If it did I would have took it because I'm interested in different countries. It only deals with things like rivers, mountains, valleys etc. It's more of a scientific subject.

Just thought I'd let you know.”

History and Geography are not optional after the age of 11; they are part of the National Curriculum for years 7, 8, and 9 (11-14).

They only become optional in Year 10 and above.
Shute
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by spannerandpony:
“History and Geography are not optional after the age of 11; they are part of the National Curriculum for years 7, 8, and 9 (11-14).

They only become optional in Year 10 and above.”

**nods**

Son (yr 11) takes history NOT geography
Daughter (yr 10) takes geography NOT history

it's all very confusing.

But both were compulsory until the end of year 9 when they made their GCSE choices. Frankly I'd rather both were compulsory rather than the waste of time subjects that are like RE and Welsh.
Big Dipper
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by justmise:
“I just had to drop everything and log on to congratulate the Big Dipper for the most elucidatory post I have ever read on these fora.”

Alas I must confess to being a charlatan of the most disgraceful kind, and I deserve your utter condemnation for my opprobrious behaviour.

I nicked all the quotes from here.
justmise
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by Big Dipper:
“Alas I must confess to being a charlatan of the most disgraceful kind, and I deserve your utter condemnation for my opprobrious behaviour.

I nicked all the quotes from here.”

The ability to contextually reference that which pre-exists, is meritorious in itself - imho
allafix
14-07-2011
Originally Posted by studeruk:
“Yep - they obviously hadn't given *any* consideration to costings with that gem! Couple of chefs, someone on the till, greeters / waitress - the wage bill alone would be a significant percentage when you consider tax, employers NI etc as well.”

Indeed. Why on earth did they think a fast food place needed waitresses, greeters and menus. Deploy those staff in getting the food out quickly. Did you see how many people were preparing food in the Mexican fast food outlet Jim visited?

Originally Posted by studeruk:
“The other team weren't great either though - although they had costed it well, their margin of just 23% was way too low. What about waste, complaints, exchanges, rises in raw costs or VAT?
At least they had somewhere to go if they needed by cutting quality but they were a good way off the mark to start with.

Methinks Lord Sugar will be doing most of the brainwork on the business side of the partnership!”

The margin was low, but could be increased by reducing the meat quality to fast food norms. Rises in VAT wouldn't affect them. Any VAT they pay to suppliers they can reclaim. An increase in VAT would put their retail price up, but not affect the margin.
<<
<
2 of 2
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map