|
||||||||
Young Apprentice...Week 6 TV Advert Task, BBC 1...Discussion, 8pm |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#301 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
Maria's advert reminds me of the make-an-advert task in the last series of Adult Apprentice which was criticised for being... tacky.
(The advert was for English wine. A woman, with a strong cockney accent, in tears while sitting in a garish chair). |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#302 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 398
|
Navdeep made a sarcastic comment against Andrew at the start of the episode, in the car, backed up by Lucy. So neither have a great concept of teamwork then?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#303 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 398
|
Quote:
English wine is a classy product and wanted a classy advert. Hair spray needn't be and Maria went consistently for her market. The other advert made no sense at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#304 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Andrew made all the wrong calls. He accused Steven of doing what Navdeep had done. Andrew has one of the worst records. So Lord Sugar fires Navdeep??
Actually he could have fired all three, or just Andrew, and it would have made more sense. |
|
|
|
|
|
#305 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 398
|
Quote:
Is Andrew about to cry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#306 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North London
Posts: 1,772
|
So anyone explain how Andrew remains?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#307 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 359
|
Absolutely ridiculous decision. Sugar has lost his marbles and didn't even explain his barmy decision. Seriously, I'm not watching the rest of this series, that made so little sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#308 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
I don't think it was a "positive edit" stitch-up? Lord Al has always banged on about having a definite brand concept in these kind of tasks, so the result was hardly surprising.
The others had a green product for males, with a chamelon that didn't look like one and a blurb on the bottle that was contradictory. They had a joke in the advert that took away the focus and the advert didn't show any gain from using the product. Maria also presented hers better. I don't think tacky is a problem for Lord Sugar if it may sell and doesn't contradict its own message. he's not adverse to making millions selling something tacky. |
|
|
|
|
|
#309 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: cardiff
Posts: 12,557
|
Corny boxer ad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#310 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 359
|
Quote:
Maria had the basic ideas right - strong focus consistency and a standout can.
The others had a green product for males, with a chamelon that didn't look like one and a blurb on the bottle that was contradictory. They had a joke in the advert that took away the focus and the advert didn't show any gain from using the product. Maria also presented hers better. I don't think tacky is a problem for Lord Sugar if it may sell and doesn't contradict its own message. he's not adverse to making millions selling something tacky. |
|
|
|
|
|
#311 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
So anyone explain how Andrew remains?
He's seen Navdeep's offer and doesn't want to invest in it? He didn't seem to think much of Andrew last week so why keep him though? Next week he's going to lose two - which means its pretty crucial who is on what team. Does he want to dump the obvious weaker cases in one team to preserve his options? He seems to see something in Stephen. Lucy has a good record and he noted it early on. Maria is on his wave length and her record is now looking quite good. We know, on the other hand, he didn't rate Patrick's design and Patricks record is poor, so he's not really looking like a possible winner, and Andrew was nearly fired for the last two weeks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#312 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 398
|
Quote:
Maria had the basic ideas right - strong focus consistency and a standout can.
The others had a green product for males, with a chamelon that didn't look like one and a blurb on the bottle that was contradictory. They had a joke in the advert that took away the focus and the advert didn't show any gain from using the product. Maria also presented hers better. I don't think tacky is a problem for Lord Sugar if it may sell and doesn't contradict its own message. he's not adverse to making millions selling something tacky. In my opinion, there is a big difference between selling something tacky and almost being proud of its tackiness to the extent of thinking there is such a thing as "good tacky". |
|
|
|
|
|
#313 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Symmetry? 3 boys, 3 girls left??
He's seen Navdeep's offer and doesn't want to invest in it? He didn't seem to think much of Andrew last week so why keep him though? Next week he's going to lose two - which means its pretty crucial who is on what team. Does he want to dump the obvious weaker cases in one team to preserve his options? He seems to see something in Stephen. Lucy has a good record and he noted it early on. Maria is on his wave length and her record is now looking quite good. We know, on the other hand, he didn't rate Patrick's design and Patricks record is poor, so he's not really llooking like a possible winner, Andrew was nearly fired for the last two weeks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#314 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Symmetry? 3 boys, 3 girls left??
He's seen Navdeep's offer and doesn't want to invest in it? He didn't seem to think much of Andrew last week so why keep him though? Next week he's going to lose two - which means its pretty crucial who is on what team. Does he want to dump the obvious weaker cases in one team to preserve his options? He seems to see something in Stephen. Lucy has a good record and he noted it early on. Maria is on his wave length and her record is now looking quite good. We know, on the other hand, he didn't rate Patrick's design and Patricks record is poor, so he's not really looking like a possible winner, and Andrew was nearly fired for the last two weeks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#315 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 398
|
Just watched the bit where Andrew's team discusses ditching "Chameleon". Stephen suggests "Brian" as the product name! When the other three unanimously express surprise, he adds "Brian - the only friend you can count on"!
At that point Lucy threw "Chameleon" back into the mix on the basis that the focus group really liked it. Andrew immediately said "I definitely don't like Chameleon". Stephen said they can change the sense of "adapting"; Lucy backed him up strongly, saying "I think you can pitch it as in that you can adapt it to your own style" - which is what they went with and were heavily criticised for. Navdeep to her credit was 100% against using "Chameleon". Andrew quite reasonably said that Navdeep was criticising the idea without coming up with a workable alternative. I don't share other people's opinion that Lucy's great. She could justifiably be held accountable for the failure of this task. And it was Lucy who thought that the rear of the chameleon's head was a quiff! |
|
|
|
|
|
#316 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Just watched the bit where Andrew's team discusses ditching "Chameleon". Stephen suggests "Brian" as the product name! When the other three unanimously express surprise, he adds "Brian - the only friend you can count on"!
At that point Lucy threw "Chameleon" back into the mix on the basis that the focus group really liked it. Andrew immediately said "I definitely don't like Chameleon". Stephen said they can change the sense of "adapting"; Lucy backed him up strongly, saying "I think you can pitch it as in that you can adapt it to your own style" - which is what they went with and were heavily criticised for. Navdeep to her credit was 100% against using "Chameleon". Andrew quite reasonably said that Navdeep was criticising the idea without coming up with a workable alternative. I don't share other people's opinion that Lucy's great. She could justifiably be held accountable for the failure of this task. And it was Lucy who thought that the rear of the chameleon's head was a quiff! Who do you think is the best then? |
|
|
|
|
|
#317 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 398
|
Andrew admits his faults - and decisions. He made lots of admissions in the boardroom as to which (bad) decisions were his.
That's pretty rare in The Apprentice. Would you rather invest in a person who tries to wheedle his way out of responsibility, or in someone who will admit his mistakes? |
|
|
|
|
|
#318 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: the back of beyond
Posts: 6,900
|
Did NOT see that coming! Although Andrew boasting he has lost 5 tasks is like saying "come on, shoot me" you could see the cogs whirring in their heads " well girls, looks like we got ourselves another scapegoat".
![]() Impression of Andrew: "Regrettably" "Navdeep, you r'e Fired"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#319 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
Sorry, Thenetworkbabe, I probably shouldn't have quoted you in that last comment, as it wasn't really a response to what you said. Just a mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#320 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Its not so much firing Navdeep - he's fired lots of queter smarter people before - even this series because he doesn't think they fit his bill. He's sent some of his best potential winners home on the argument they belong somewhere else. There's more of a question why he didn't fiire Andrew as he seemed not to think that much of him last week? if Andrew had been somone good on a bad week, or Lord Sugar was sold on keeping a Tom or a Stuart or a Tre for the particular reasons he kept them, it would make more sense for someone innocent but unwanted to go?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#321 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
Okay, fair point. Maybe that was a bad suggestion, but Andrew still went with it. I think Andrew was more to blame than Lucy. And I can't think of anywhere else where Lucy has gone wrong (unless you count when she argued with the sub-team in Week 2, but I think that was more their fault than hers.)
Who do you think is the best then? |
|
|
|
|
|
#322 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 398
|
Quote:
Okay, fair point. Maybe that was a bad suggestion, but Andrew still went with it. I think Andrew was more to blame than Lucy. And I can't think of anywhere else where Lucy has gone wrong (unless you count when she argued with the sub-team in Week 2, but I think that was more their fault than hers.)
Who do you think is the best then? Andrew can be held accountable as PM and I can't say that that is wrong. I'm just saying that Lucy is slipping under the radar. Of course, some people might say that's a good thing - a skill. I like Andrew. I paid closer attention to Lucy this week as some people think she's great and I'm not so sure. Of course she could pull a blinder next week - we'll have to see. I must say I think that people must bring a professional attitude to work, including towards people you don't like, and I didn't like Lucy & Navdeep's comment about Andrew in the back of the car. I wouldn't judge them on that alone - I'm just saying that it's a warning sign in my book, requiring watching them closely. I do feel that with Andrew, what you see is what you get. I'm not so sure about that with Lucy. George, you like Lucy and that's fine. You may prove me wrong should she shine in the next 2 episodes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#323 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
I think he does like Andrew though... I think last week he just said that (as he does sometimes) to see how Andrew would react. While Andrew hasn't generally been strong on the tasks, he is boyish, fun and likeable - and I think LS likes him, as do many of the people on these forums. Patrick is another one who is weak on the tasks, but comes across as being a nice person, but he doesn't have an infectious personality like Andrew does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#324 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
George, I don't know what the "bad suggestion" is that you refer to as my comment was a stand-alone one, not in response to any others (save a general comment by some people a little while ago on Lucy). I haven't read all the comments on this thread yet - I guess you think I'm responding to one of yours but I'm not.
Andrew can be held accountable as PM and I can't say that that is wrong. I'm just saying that Lucy is slipping under the radar. Of course, some people might say that's a good thing - a skill. I like Andrew. I paid closer attention to Lucy this week as some people think she's great and I'm not so sure. Of course she could pull a blinder next week - we'll have to see. I must say I think that people must bring a professional attitude to work, including towards people you don't like, and I didn't like Lucy & Navdeep's comment about Andrew in the back of the car. I wouldn't judge them on that alone - I'm just saying that it's a warning sign in my book, requiring watching them closely. I do feel that with Andrew, what you see is what you get. I'm not so sure about that with Lucy. George, you like Lucy and that's fine. You may prove me wrong should she shine in the next 2 episodes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#325 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 359
|
Quote:
Andrew admits his faults - and decisions. He made lots of admissions in the boardroom as to which (bad) decisions were his.
That's pretty rare in The Apprentice. Would you rather invest in a person who tries to wheedle his way out of responsibility, or in someone who will admit his mistakes? I suppose we saw Navdeep correctly criticize the product, but she didn't come up with a good solution did she? I still think Sugars firings have a lot to do with the business plans of the contestants. maybe Andrew has a good one and Navdeep doesn't. Still she was robbed, completely, she should've been final two (with Lucy) - based on what they have let us see. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:39.





"Navdeep, you r'e Fired"!