|
||||||||
Inept jade got away with it. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#76 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,464
|
Quote:
+1. I won't repeat what I said after Lord Sugar made that nonsense decision because kids might be reading.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#77 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,218
|
Quote:
Just to add, something that seems to be happening more & more with the Apprentice is that candidates are getting fired over nothing to do with the actual task which I find pretty frustrating. May as well skip the tasks as it seems he just waits on certain people getting brought back in so he can fire them. Last night's episode was 100% not based on who caused the failure of the task.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#78 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
|
Not quite in agreement that this was the worst boardroom performance in Apprentice history (have we so soon forgotten Nicholas and his "I can't talk about football" defence?), but it was certainly bad.
Again, not the most unfair firing ever (poor Shazia in the laundry task in series 4 will probably never be beaten for that one; the only candidate ever to get 100% "Hired" cards on YF) but approaching close to it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#79 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,109
|
Quote:
I think AS has made some bad decisions in this series. I think he has already chosen his business partener.The rest is simply going through the motions until the fina.l
Quote:
I think you are absolutely right. LS seems to just be firing the candidates he doesn't like. Not saying he shouldn't - it is his money - but does it make a good progamme?
SA is a complete TV ratings sellout and this show has become a total sham. |
|
|
|
|
|
#80 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 276
|
The "worst decison ever" was firing Mim in series one...she was a potential winner, who couldn't possibly be in front of the camera (where all agreed she was excellent) and in charge of direction at the same time. Even LS and Nick have acknowledged this ever since.
In this instance we are talking about who was worse out of two candidates, neither of whom had distinguished themselves in any way during several episodes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#81 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,109
|
Quote:
The "worst decison ever" was firing Mim in series one...she was a potential winner, who couldn't possibly be in front of the camera (where all agreed she was excellent) and in charge of direction at the same time. Even LS and Nick have acknowledged this ever since.
In this instance we are talking about who was worse out of two candidates, neither of whom had distinguished themselves in any way during several episodes. SA himself verified that he can't take on anyone that doesn't take Azhur's words seriously. I.e. The whole bullying, popular gang. Shame on SA for not picking up on this.........or like his circus remaining contestants, he's the ringleader who is stirring it up for ratings. |
|
|
|
|
|
#82 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,218
|
Quote:
The "worst decison ever" was firing Mim in series one...she was a potential winner, who couldn't possibly be in front of the camera (where all agreed she was excellent) and in charge of direction at the same time. Even LS and Nick have acknowledged this ever since.
In this instance we are talking about who was worse out of two candidates, neither of whom had distinguished themselves in any way during several episodes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#83 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stockport
Posts: 2,072
|
I'm astounded he kept Jade after such a terrible performance on the task, and in the boardroom. I think she's the worst PM I've seen- certainly worse than Nural who was merely ineffectual. She actively ignored good advice, and even felt superior enough to be snotty about it.
Lord Sugar kept her in because she's 'enthusiastic'? A dog trying to hump your leg is enthusiastic; you wouldn't go into business with it though. |
|
|
|
|
|
#84 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
|
Quote:
Yes, they would. But my point is that - as in real life - selling a few items at a high price is often much better than selling a few more at a much lower price. Just saying that "it's still making a profit, so that's OK" as Jade did completely missed the point. There was no imperative to shift stock at the end of the day - if she had sold fewer bottles at a higher price, she could have won the task, which was Sugar's point.
You can't just say she was flat wrong. One of them explained the logic in the programme, so they knew what they were doing. Her problem seemed more to be that they started from too low a price, not that they cut prices later. Quote:
We saw him several times during this episode giving Jade good advice, which she ignored.
Quote:
[LIST][*]She didn't follow the brief. [/list]
The basic idea of getting diverse products is not wrong. The new products could sell better than the old ones. |
|
|
|
|
|
#85 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 11,932
|
Quote:
I'm suprised at how indecisive she was about brining in a second person to the boardroom and that she wasn't aware that it looked bad. It just looked like she wasn't aware of much at all during the task and then to bring in Tom was the icing on the cake that should have given her the cut. The only reason why she stayed was because sugar saw even less point in Azhar than he did in her.
Her little smirk when he left the board room had shown she was pleased that her tactic had paid off. And of course, she wasn't that keen on him. She may be clueless as the PM, but she's a gambler who relies on her instincts, even if it means backstabbing those close to her. However, Tom clearly no longer trusts her. I think she's lost an ally in him. Anyway, I think Tom will be among the last three standing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#86 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 17,852
|
did I hear the numbers right?
Jade's team had about £450 odd in cash, and £450 in stock so if they could only buy £150 stock at a time, they must have been topping up regularly, and not selling much at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
#87 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,654
|
£150 was the starter cash they had : there was no limit on how much they could restock at any given time. I don't believe that either team restocked more than twice, it clearly took far too much time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#88 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,043
|
OP your wrong, she made a profit, even if it was slightly lower than the winning team, all sir alan is concerned with is to make a profit. we don't know if she has a better buisness proposal compared to the fired asian candidate , its not all about winning tasks
|
|
|
|
|
|
#89 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,441
|
Quote:
OP your wrong, she made a profit, even if it was slightly lower than the winning team, all sir alan is concerned with is to make a profit. we don't know if she has a better buisness proposal compared to the fired asian candidate , its not all about winning tasks
I do not believe I am wrong. I do agree it is not all about winning the task, it is about what you can show however Jade was a pathetic PM, the worst PM performance for many a year. |
|
|
|
|
#90 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
She did, just not to the extend the other team did. Part of her problem is that she let a sub-team restock, told them the priority items, and then allowed them to get what else they thought was best, and they didn't follow the brief.
Quote:
The basic idea of getting diverse products is not wrong. The new products could sell better than the old ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#91 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
|
Quote:
The sub-team were doing what she asked, it wasn't a case of them deciding for themselves to buy a mixture of stuff. Jade told Tom on the mobile to spend all the cash.
Quote:
He said "Concentrate on the bugs of course?" She said "Yes but get some hot waterbottles because the colour looks good on the stall. Oh and get fake tan cause that sells well."Then she told them to get a mixture of the other stuff too.
Despite putting her words in quotes, bold and italic, you've misquoted her. She says the waterbottles "look good" but doesn't mention colour or the stand. (It's about 29 minutes into iPlayer.)She then says, "And whatever you think; a mixture of the other stuff". And then "It's up to you how much you buy now." So she's identified the items she thinks are important, the best sellers, and then given her team discretion over the rest. That's exactly what I said she did. They used the discretion she gave them to buy the wrong things. Quote:
They might turn into good sellers, but the idea is to learn from what you've seen already sells well.
Which she did. She told them to get a mixture of known good sellers, plus a few other things that were more speculative. It's a better strategy for the first restocking than the final restock, but it's not out-and-out wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#92 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,110
|
Quote:
Spending all the cash is correct, because if goods are not sold they are valued at what they paid. There's no point holding onto cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#93 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 76
|
Quote:
Spending all the cash is correct, because if goods are not sold they are valued at what they paid. There's no point holding onto cash.
Despite putting her words in quotes, bold and italic, you've misquoted her. She says the waterbottles "look good" but doesn't mention colour or the stand. (It's about 29 minutes into iPlayer.) She then says, "And whatever you think; a mixture of the other stuff". And then "It's up to you how much you buy now." So she's identified the items she thinks are important, the best sellers, and then given her team discretion over the rest. That's exactly what I said she did. They used the discretion she gave them to buy the wrong things. Which she did. She told them to get a mixture of known good sellers, plus a few other things that were more speculative. It's a better strategy for the first restocking than the final restock, but it's not out-and-out wrong. I agree that spending all the cash is right (because it's about investing in items that will then multiply money if they sell, and what does not sell will be counted as asset anyway - so they may just as well invest everything) But when Tom proposed to reinvest the majority of their cash into the iBugs, she clearly replies "no"and then added, as was quoted - and you justly corrected - to get more waterbottles because they look good, which isn't exactly a good reason to buy something: they clearly didn't shift well, or at least nowhere near as fast as others like the iBugs She also asks them to buy a "mixture of the other stuff, it's up to you how much you buy now" - so she doesn't ask them to get a mixture of known good sellers, but just of "the other stuff". Essentially she's a) confusing, not giving them clear instructions and b) failing to recognize what this task was about: since this was the second restock, she should have, at this stage, told them to reinvest exclusively in one, or maybe a couple of items, i.e. those that had the best margin and sold the fastest (and based on what we saw, their one best-seller were the iBugs, although they did mention in the boardroom that eyelashes sold well too, if I remember correctly) certainly not in "a mixture", discretion or not. That's going completely against the idea behind this task - to identify what sells and focus just on that to maximise profit Finally you say that they "used the discretion she gave them to buy the wrong things": unless I missed something (and I may have), we don't know what they actually bought so that's not a call we can make either way |
|
|
|
|
#94 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
Spending all the cash is correct, because if goods are not sold they are valued at what they paid. There's no point holding onto cash.
Quote:
Despite putting her words in quotes, bold and italic, you've misquoted her. She says the waterbottles "look good" but doesn't mention colour or the stand. (It's about 29 minutes into iPlayer.)
Quote:
She then says, "And whatever you think; a mixture of the other stuff". And then "It's up to you how much you buy now." So she's identified the items she thinks are important, the best sellers, and then given her team discretion over the rest. That's exactly what I said she did. They used the discretion she gave them to buy the wrong things.
Quote:
Which she did. She told them to get a mixture of known good sellers, plus a few other things that were more speculative. It's a better strategy for the first restocking than the final restock, but it's not out-and-out wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#95 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
Not so - tying up cash in stock that's difficult to shift is an invitation to cash flow problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#96 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,110
|
Quote:
In real life, not on a one off Apprentice task.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#97 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: sportyland
Posts: 30,070
|
Jade is a manipulative bit*ch
And Karren really did not do her job properley in not reporting on how rubbish Jade is. Margaret would have. I would put money on that I hope the bi**h is fired soon and that she has to answer for her actions on You're Fired |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:37.




