|
||||||||
Lucy and Ashleigh have to win! |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Northants
Posts: 1,491
|
Quote:
Agreed, although I am assuming that because he had *such* a bad edit in the first two weeks that there is no way he can possibly win. Even more so than in the grown-up version - no doubt partly because it is a shorter series so you can't allow a longer narrative to unfold - the winner has always had a favourable edit all the way through, with nothing more than minor wobbles. Arjun and Zara were never made to look weak at any point.
On that basis, Lucy looks to be the strongest in terms of the way the candidates have been presented thus far - I've been backing her since week three - although I will also say that, while she has had some consistently good showings, she hasn't really had a *wow* moment yet. None of them have, really - I think that's why I've been relatively disappointed with this year's candidates. The focus has been much more on their academic and general knowledge deficiencies, which seems very odd to me given that one of the aims of the show is to showcase and promote the role young people can play in business.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
I know the shows are edited to produce a story line from hours of footage, however I don't buy this 'bad edit' business, at least definitely not regarding Patrick's first two weeks. There was no editing to make him look bad, he did it all himself.
![]() I always say that if you see lots of bad things a person does, that's not a bad edit, that's just them. But if it's just that we don't see good things, that could be a bad edit because they're being edited out. Patrick had an appalling week in Week 2, and to some extent in Week 1 (although his wetsuit/kimono was admired by one shop, and they said they'd buy it if they had more of them), but since then, we haven't seen him get anything wrong. Most of the winners had a bad week at some point, but we only get to see half an hour of several days of task... I'm not sure what it is about Patrick, but I think he has something to him. I'd pick him for my team. |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
I don't think Patrick has done anything overtly bad since the second week actually.
Having said that, I had picked him out as a potential winner before the series started, as he had a clear investable idea. To be honest I wouldn't be that surprised if he won - and I actually rate his chances of winning now as higher than Ashleigh's as the final (insofar that it contributes anything to the final decision) is a creative task which is NOT one of her strengths. But I don't think he deserves to win either. All part of the fun. We'll see how wrong I am tonight ...
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
I know the shows are edited to produce a story line from hours of footage, however I don't buy this 'bad edit' business, at least definitely not regarding Patrick's first two weeks. There was no editing to make him look bad, he did it all himself.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 900
|
Quote:
(although his pricing approach was absolutely barmy).
This ignores the cost of lost sales to shoppers who are deterred by the higher prices, and also that haggling can result in completely arbitrary and often excessive discounts. |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
It seems to have become part of Apprentice lore that prices should be set high in order to allow room for negotiation or to be dropped around tea-time.
This ignores the cost of lost sales to shoppers who are deterred by the higher prices, and also that haggling can result in completely arbitrary and often excessive discounts. |
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 900
|
Quote:
Yes, in the first two weeks. But we've had five weeks since then, can you recall any occasion since Week 2 that he was a bad team player?
Quote:
wetsuit/kimono was admired by one shop, and they said they'd buy it if they had more of them),
If there have been "wow" moments this series, wetsuit/kimono was one, alongside Lucy's multi-coloured cakes (as good as a bought one, as the Australians have it).Ashleigh's proponents might wish to add her grasp of the figures which, if unsurprising in a trainee accountant, would put to shame many of the adult contestants who have struggled with concepts like margins over the past several years. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Quite. I have no problem with setting high initial prices per se, although obviously there is a point beyond which it just gets silly. My issue with Patrick was more that he set himself up to haggle from the outset. In a street market, yes - but at an event where you are effectively making an impulse purchase I would think it would put most people off. It's almost as if he wanted to make a statement to demonstrate how well he can negotiate, rather than focus on selling as much stuff as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
Have you watched The Apprentice Australia? I watched a few episodes on YouTube... they had a task to make and sell pies, and there was a girl called Amy (the PM for that task) who had a really weird pricing strategy. She decided not to set a price for the pies so that they could negotiate on prices for each customer. Sort of like what Patrick did, but to a greater extend. She got fired for it.
That's a completely bonkers strategy. In Patrick's case there is an argument (not a very strong one) that, because the umbrellas were high-ticket items, you could get away with a negotiating tactic (although I'm convinced in the long run you would just end up handing over profit). Who wants to haggle over the cost of a pie that presumably was intended to sell for less than a fiver?!? I'd have fired her for that without even watching the episode! |
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Aside from the first few seasons of the US show, I've only ever seen the UK versions.
That's a completely bonkers strategy. In Patrick's case there is an argument (not a very strong one) that, because the umbrellas were high-ticket items, you could get away with a negotiating tactic (although I'm convinced in the long run you would just end up handing over profit). Who wants to haggle over the cost of a pie that presumably was intended to sell for less than a fiver?!? I'd have fired her for that without even watching the episode! You can watch that episode here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91gSWZGQ2Lc |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
Most of the time I don't like the international versions, apart from the UK. I started watching the first series of the US, but I was put off when someone thought it was a good idea to charge $1,000 for a glass of lemonade. The Australian version is quite entertaining though, it's the only one apart from the UK version I've really enjoyed. I think they only made one proper series of it, then they started doing celebrity editions.
You can watch that episode here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91gSWZGQ2Lc |
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,806
|
I hope Maria and Patrick win.
I'm surprised Lucy is still in. We all know Shugs does not like lawyers or aspiring lawyers, so how she is still in is beyond me! Sure it was her first time in the final 3, but so what. He could have chucked her out last week but kept her in. Hmmm indeed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 13,451
|
I was so worried that Patrick and Maria would win throughout the whole episode, when Lucy and Ashleigh won I didn't care who won after that, just so happy that it wouldn't be Patrick or Maria ![]() Quote:
I don't think that's fair. Why make two people believe that they're in with a chance if they are actually not? If they don't want them to win fair enough, but why let them leave their families and put everything into the tasks if it's already decided that they're not going to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
I was so worried that Patrick and Maria would win throughout the whole episode, when Lucy and Ashleigh won I didn't care who won after that, just so happy that it wouldn't be Patrick or Maria
![]() Well tbh I don't think Patrick or Maria should have been anywhere near the final, and the fact that they actually got to the final and got more screentime then other contestant is frankly quite undeserved, so I wouldn't exactly say Patrick and Maria were unfairly treated. I'd say that Lord Sugar did the fairest think possible actually, putting the two worse candidates in the same group so that we would have a deserving final 2, and Lucy and Ashleigh's pitch and product was clearly far superior to Patrick and Maria's so I don't think it can be argues that there was anything unfair about the situation tbh. |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,021
|
Interesting that unlike last week Lord Sugar didn't give his business card to the losers. Or maybe an oversight?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,806
|
Quote:
Interesting that unlike last week Lord Sugar didn't give his business card to the losers. Or maybe an oversight?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 13,987
|
The right two got through and I think either girl would have been a worthy winner.
![]() Don't get me started on the other two though.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:14.



