|
||||||||
Lord Sugar exposing his favouritism this week? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: South Coast
Posts: 16,039
|
Lord Sugar exposing his favouritism this week?
I think its blatantly obvious now that Lord Sugar has his teachers pets.
Purely on performance alone, Tom deserved to go this week. Even he himself admitted it. THe person who was responsible for the failure of the task is, in theory, the one who should go each week. Yet this week and the week before, the fault lay clearly at the fault of a particular person, but NEITHER of them went... Lord Sugar likes to protect his faves?? |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,780
|
I don't think Tom was a pet fave, Sugar made some unnecessary speculation on Tom's motives for being in the competition.
He was right up Adam's arse in the boardroom though. He was the real pet fave this episode. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,843
|
I think Tom has been rigged to win. I think he's like Tom from last year! TWO TOMS! ARGHHH!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,994
|
or maybe it was because Tom has shown he is stronger then Laura in past performances.
Tom had a bad week, but he has shown to be a much better all rounder then Laura has. |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 507
|
I disagree about Tom, it was chance whether his gamble would pay off or not and Lord Sugar likes gamblers.
Really don't like the other woman though, always deflects blame from herself |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,018
|
Tbh, its the age-old question - Do you fire someone who's done 80% of the work, but made a few mistakes along the way or do you fire someone who barely contributed, but consequently made no mistakes?
The right decision this week for me. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 65,903
|
Quote:
I disagree about Tom, it was chance whether his gamble would pay off or not and Lord Sugar likes gamblers.
Really don't like the other woman though, always deflects blame from herself |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Dream
Posts: 2,797
|
he obviously likes Adam and wants him to stay as long as possible
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: South Coast
Posts: 16,039
|
Quote:
he obviously likes Adam and wants him to stay as long as possible
I can see why Lord Sugas likes him though. Adam and Tom for the final?? |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
|
Quote:
Tbh, its the age-old question - Do you fire someone who's done 80% of the work, but made a few mistakes along the way or do you fire someone who barely contributed, but consequently made no mistakes?
The right decision this week for me. I don't think her firing was unfair; she made a mistake in her approach to selling, as Tom did in his approach to selling himself and his team to the artist and in his gamble on the big horror pics (it would have won them the task if they'd sold one, true, but it was never likely to happen). There was a case for firing either of them. Based on the task alone, Tom was probably the one to go. But Laura had been very lucky not to be fired in the junkshop task (where there really was no doubt that she should have gone) and couldn't expect another chance. That said, I think Lord Sugar's comments on her were rather harsh. She did contribute on the tasks, and the suggestion that she was all talk and no action just doesn't reflect what we saw. She was the first to think of an idea in the bathroom product task, she was quick to put herself forward in the exercise task to devise the routine and to demonstrate it and she usually sold well on selling tasks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
|
Quote:
Which shows serious misjudgement of public opinion as Adam is v unpopular.
I can see why Lord Sugas likes him though. Adam and Tom for the final?? |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Pembrokeshire.
Posts: 40,686
|
Quote:
Which shows serious misjudgement of public opinion as Adam is v unpopular.
I can see why Lord Sugas likes him though. Adam and Tom for the final?? |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stockport
Posts: 2,072
|
Quote:
That doesn't really reflect what we saw. Laura didn't "barely contribute". She was forthcoming with her opinions, and was trying to sell. I think her problem was that, like Adam, she was unfamiliar with art and didn't really know how to approach selling it. Adam decided to blag his way through (I agree with Laura totally on that) and it actually worked for him. Laura thought that a softly-softly method was the way to go, and she was wrong.
Adam is the opposite of this for me. He could probably sell me some tat easily, but I wouldn't trust him with anything costing over a tenner. He's clearly a blagger. It was obvious that LS wanted to get rid of Laura- I think she would have gone last week if Jade had brought her into the boardroom instead of Tom. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 34,106
|
I just have to laugh at how much he loves Adam. The man is a total dweeb but Sugars ridiculous bias towards working class muppets who are salesmen means he will get much further than he deserves.
Good news for Adams sake that the show is less about business strategy now and more about selling cheap tat and being lucky. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,019
|
I think he made the right choice in firing Laura, Tom took a risk and it didn't work, sure, but Laura didn't actually appear to do anything useful to help the team, and hasn't really been a strong candidate in any of the past weeks either.
I thought he might have made it a double firing though, he hasn't done one of those yet this year has he. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
We're at the stage where Sugar based his decisions on the process as a whole, not individual tasks. Of course he has his favourites - he has read their business plans and seen them all in action, so he has a good sense by now of who might be investable - just as he did with Tom Pellereau last year despite his poor task record.
When will people understand that the outcome of the process has little to do with task performance? You can have a very attractive business to invest in but be a moderate performer in tasks, and they will always win out over a strong weekly performer with no business plan (e.g. Helen Milligan). Tom has proven himself to be a strong all-rounder and fully deserved to stay. Yes, he made a couple of mistakes and his high-risk strategy back-fired - but equally if he had closed one sale he would have won the task by miles and Sugar would have praised him for his vision and courage. I suspect that extending his existing wine investment business makes for a very attractive investment. He's bullet-proof all the way to interviews, I'd say. More thoughts over on my blog, if anyone's interested: http://slouchingtowardsthatcham.com/...-8-street-art/ |
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,007
|
Quote:
I don't think Tom was a pet fave, Sugar made some unnecessary speculation on Tom's motives for being in the competition.
He was right up Adam's arse in the boardroom though. He was the real pet fave this episode. I agree with you. I think Sugar likes a risk taker and Tom took a risk, which admittedly didn't come off, but if it had....... Sugar obviously loves Adam! Personally I can't stand him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 23,261
|
I think a few things went in Tom's favour:
1) He took a risk 2) they did not lose the tast by a massive amount 3) he didn't bring Adam back into the boardroom Right decision IMO. A top salesperson should be able to sell anything to anyone! |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,320
|
I think Tom and Adam are both quite liked by Lord Sug, but for different reasons. I would think Tom is seen to be the more business savvy candidate on a broader scale than Adam just because he seems to be more than just sales and likes to be very detailed in thought as well as practise. I tend to feel (and this is just personal opinion) that Adam has to wing things more whereas with Tom I tend to think he knows what he's doing before he does it whereas Adam does it and just hopes it works out (and if it doesn't he's still tried it nevertheless). Sugar prob likes that Tom has the ability that he has at his age, and likes Adam because he will see him as that grafter that works hard, straight talker and can achieve in a situ that he wouldn't be expected to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
I think a few things went in Tom's favour:
1) He took a risk 2) they did not lose the tast by a massive amount 3) he didn't bring Adam back into the boardroom |
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
I think Tom and Adam are both quite liked by Lord Sug, but for different reasons.
Adam certainly does wing it, and for sure Sugar can see some of himself in it, but unless he has a fantastic business idea it's hard to see Sugar taking a punt on it. Sugar's an experienced and sensible businessman - he's not going to invest £250k on a wing and a prayer. He wants a safe bet, ideally in a business he understands and can add value to. That's why Tom Pellereau was such a good fit last year. |
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London
Posts: 15,936
|
Tom didn't deserve to go OP. He's a very strong candidate. Laura was riff-raff and deserved to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
Tom didn't deserve to go OP. He's a very strong candidate. Laura was riffraff and deserved to go.
Tom, on the other hand, has a very investable business already with a good turnover, and has proven several times he is strategic (in a good way!), makes his own decisions and has a good business brain on him. Be interesting to see what his business plan is - I'm betting it will be much better thought through than any of the others. He's been my tip to win since week 2, and I see no reason to change that voew despite last night's defeat. |
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
|
Quote:
THe person who was responsible for the failure of the task is, in theory, the one who should go each week.
Quote:
I don't think her firing was unfair; she made a mistake in her approach to selling, as Tom did in his approach to selling himself and his team to the artist and in his gamble on the big horror pics (it would have won them the task if they'd sold one, true, but it was never likely to happen).
The real problem is that the wrong team won. Gabrielle's mistakes seemed more serious than Tom's. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,052
|
I think whilst Tom made a couple of mistakes, and took a big risk, he didn't actually make the glaringly obvious mistakes that Gabrielle's team did.
He was unlucky not to get pure evil and I think he took a reasonable risk which I think LS admired. Gabrielle's team performed far worse over the whole task. Neglecting to flatter an artist enough and taking a calculated risk are hardly on a par with neglecting to find out your clients basic requirements for a commission and then neglecting to pay your client any attention. I don't think LS could fire Tom when he was effectively the only person in two teams who secured a corporate commission. Laura looked out of her depth all the way through which was probably reported by Nick, and she performed extremely poorly in a task where you'd expect Adam to be far more out of his comfort zone. It was the right decision. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:42.



