Once Sugar points his finger at a candidate and growls " I'm watching you ...." they have a target on their back and the other candidates are rubbing their hands in glee at a possible scapegoat.
Uzma was not a great candidate,but that applies to lots of them,and unfortunately as soon as her team lost the challenge then she was doomed to be binned.
Had I been in her position I'd be making sure to shine on the task and getting stuck in.Sadly ,street selling just wasn't Uzma's forté.

and that chance to shine becomes impossible when you are not the PM and the PM knows you have that target on your back so they can marginalise your contribution during the task knowing you are a good scapegoat if the team loses

Yes, but Sugar didn't like Tom's business plan either. He decided to invest in a previous idea of Tom's - the nail file. Which was what I said. You took issue with that, but don't seem able to refute it.

Some candidates have survived that very well. Debra Barr was given such a warning in the very first boardroom in Series 5. She then went all the way to interviews.

True, but he liked Debra. Rightly, given how good she was when she was good, and what she's done since. The problem is for the people he identifies as dull do nothings. A lot of them were actually OK, and in the new format, may well have had strong proposals. He tends to clear them out of the way to make room for the street trader types he regularly keeps in with less merit, and the people where he actually has identified something more outstanding..

Added to which Uzma has a particular style and one thats not designed for TV , or 5-30 AM starts, or selling things in all sorts of places, and in all sorts of weather. If you look at her site she's clearly good at making herself and others look good - which is a large part of her business, and its actually an excellent looking site generally - with lots of sideline busineses seemingly going on. If the figures support that, I think he may have missed something.

This is, as I may have mentioned in one of the other threads, something I expect to see more of, because running even a highly successful online business need not involve direct selling of any kind, let alone street sales to passers-by.

And running a moderately successful one might not involve working with other people or teams.

The latter flaw -- no experience of managing or even working in teams -- is by no means confined to online entrepreneurs but is something we have often seen with stellar sales people in past series, who flop as PMs.

If Uzma is from the online-only mould, it will be interesting to see if, say, Rebecca, who has been the best saleswoman so far this series, is more than a one-trick sales pony.

I agree. There's possibly the online trader element, the own boss element, the unemployable by anyone else element, and the nerd element. Tom basically only needs to be someone who you can lock up alone,in a windowless room, until he comes up with an idea - he doesn't need any of the skills he patently didn't have to do that. There's a few people this series who have elements of Gordon Brittas, and one who even works in the same field, plus some Del Boy cousins. .There's also almost some Jeeves like characters - the gentleman of leisure. What there are fewer of are the good corporate high flyers who do have a range of skills, and tended to do well though they rarely won at the final stage. That may explain some of why they can't work well as groups, and why most can't present, or act appropriately in a corporate, or even larger scale business, environment?

I think you are exactly right but ironically what won it for Tom was, I think, his boardroom anecdote about doorstepping the American (Walmart?) buyer which, if nothing else, shows a degree of resourcefulness and persistence.

Indeed. in a sense. he had done the one thing successfully that was necessary - regardless of what he showed he couldn't do on task. That also showed too, though, that he had a saleable, presumably profitable, low cost item, with a patent, and worked up costs? With that in hand, you could always let more able people sell it and make it.

Here you also wonder if Lord Sugar at all interested in smoothies, make up, or cakes, or having a stake in anything miles from London,.and if the effort/investment versus return calculation rules most proposals out anyway.

[quote=totalwise;66029226]Never had a corporate job, I always assumed people would be backstabbing ar********, [\QUOTE ]
Wow! This is scary!

Maybe you should get a "corporate job" one day, preferably before you have kids...

(Funnily enough, the people I've known personally to go through the absolute worst trouble with colleagues, have all been in the 'caring' professions & organisations.)

Peace

I disagree that Tom's talent wasn't apparent. He had many viewer supporters despite us not knowing his business plan at that point. However, I don't see much point in arguing with you about that; you're welcome to your assessment of him.

In the comment I was replying to, you didn't say anything about the nail file. In effect you said that when it came down to Helen versus Tom, he preferred Tom, and that was because he didn't like Helen's business plan. I'm not disagreeing that that's what happened; I'm saying it's OK for it to happen at that stage in the process. There's nothing to refute.

The awkward bit there was that Tom's proposal was rejected and he won with something he didn't propose - but had in his kit bag/CV.T hat would have looked, and been, totally unfair. It looked more acceptable though after Lord Sugar allowed Helen to pull out a second idea she hadn't originally proposed too. Itturned out to be very fortunate that she did that.........

Wooster was the 'man of leisure', and a bit of a twit, as contrasted with the much smoother and infinitely more competent Jeeves, his valet.

Interesting points, though.
Last edited by Lucien_Di : 29-05-2013 at 21:05

I did mention the nail file in the comment you originally replied to (it's at post #32, check and see).

Tom's popularity with viewers needn't imply he was a good candidate. It just means they liked him, which isn't surprising as he was a nice guy. This series, Jason is a big public favourite, but not a strong performer.

Ok. It wasn't mentioned in the comment I was replying to, #45.

There's no evidence the nail file influenced Lord Sugar's decisions before the final episode, so nothing to refute. It's just supposition on your part.


During that series, I saw many people pointing out his ability on this forum. And during the show, he was only taken into the boardroom once, and that when there was only 4 people on his team. So despite being on the losing team 5 times, his team leader didn't think he was to blame for the loss. It wasn't just because he was a nice guy. He had a lot of good ideas and identified important issues, and stood out for that in a way few other candidates did in that series.

You replied to my comment at #32 - check your comment at #40. You'll also note that my comment at #32 says "arguably" the nail file won it for Tom ie I didn't claim that I had evidence. Nor did I claim that it influenced Sugar's decisions before the final episode - I said I thought that was why he won. You're arguing against something I never said!


Yes, some pointed out his strengths, and I don't deny he had some flashes of inspiration. Overall, though, I think he was a poor candidate. If others think differently, well, they're entitled to their opinion, but I don't share it.

I know. I already conceded I made that mistake, and explained how it happened, so you don't need to keep repeating it. (By "In the comment I was replying to", I meant a more recent part of the conversation. I didn't realise you were going back further. When you explained, I did realise, and said "Ok". Can we drop this now?)


You seemed to think (#53) I had to refute something. It seems to me now that we've nothing of substance to argue about.

My original point was that there's no reason to think Tom didn't get to the final on merit. Even if you don't think he had merit, enough other people do to make it plausible that Lord Sugar did too.


And as I said in #62, I'm not interested in trying to change your opinion of Tom.

Your post didn't seem quite clear, but I think we've sorted it now.


Well, you'd seemed to be arguing that Tom couldn't have won on the basis of his nail file, as I'd said - that was what I thought you'd been refuting. I think you misunderstood my post.


Well, indeed, but this forum is for airing differing points of view, is it not?

She was on a downward spiral as soon as that task began and she was just wondering around the streets