I agree with everything you say. I just would have like to see her fired. Or Fran would have done too.

Yeah. You just don't tell you potential boss that though

That's why my job in the Ctiy lasted half an hour.

" I hate you and everything you stand for. You are dull and you are boring ... Can I have £250,000, please?" (flutters eyelashes)

Yeah. Me too. But, in all honesty, I'd rather see Natalie fired first. Luisa isn't a pleasant person, but she seems to have some ability. The only ability Nat has shown so far is her viciousness in the boardroom.

I thought it had to be between her or the project manager.

Was surprised it was Rebecca, had they not had the motivational speaker they may have lost a higher % of the fee as that was a highlight of the day and the only truly business related part of it.

And about her not really doing much throughout was also a bit of a shock, I still couldn't tell you that project managers name...

I guess it probably comes down to the fact that Sir Sugaryness didn't like her business plan. She wasn't given a chance to be PM which seems unfair. The professional motivational speaker was the only good thing they had and Rebecca should have enforced that point. She was overpowered by toxic Luisa.

I expect Rebecca did make that exact point - it's more that we weren't shown it in the broadcast episode. To have done so would only have made Sugar's decision to fire her more baffling.

The whole thing was baffling and I'm glad that the YBF audience agreed

Lusia, you hate me and all I stand for. Francesca, you were useless in the task and delivered nothing worthwhile. Rebecca, you provided the only saving grace of the task ... You're fired.

Utterly mental.

Well she may have done, but it was pointed out on You're Fired! that she could have defended herself better and she didn't say, 'Actually I did...'
Last edited by george.millman : 06-06-2013 at 14:22

I agree about Jordan. If it turned out that Alan Sugar was focused on overspending, then how come he didn't have more of a go at Jordan if Jordan was in charge of finances?
In fact if that was Jordan's role, what else did he bring to the task?

Interesting, maybe Jordan has a business plan that Sugar likes?

Ah, I haven't watched YF yet. Is there any chance that she might have said that and it was just edited out, though?

I suppose... I don't see that they focus so much on telling a story on the You're Fired! programme though.

True. I was just wondering how it came across. I don't normally watch YF until the day after - I go straight into blogging mode after the episode finishes so that I can at least get some sleep!

Here's something....we are made aware that Rebecca suggested hiring a motivational speaker, which costed £600. And bear in mind here that Jordan was in charge of finances.

However, the team spent £2,654.19.
So after the £600 spent on the motivational speaker that leaves £2054.19 which was spent on other things.
The £600 amounts to about 23% of the total expenditure.

So why was the motivational speaker alone presented as the cause of the failure of the task?
What about the remaining expenditure of £2054.19 which was spent by the team?
Why was it just the money spent on the motivational speaker alone which is to blame for the failure of the task?

not read the whole thread so don't know if this has already been said but this issue over wanting to hire a motivational speaker rather take the responsibility within the group I think was a big deal , especially when the other team got good feedback from their customer on that aspect

in that sort of environment not trusting yourself or one of your team-mates to do something like that, which you would think at least one of them should be capable of doing given their ambitions, showed a real weakness imo

£300 on the bloody flamingo and whatever those fake flames cost

Don't diss the flamingo, we all had them at our schools didn't we???

I remb the good times I had going to see the flamingo in between French and double PE.

WHAT? Why did Rebecca get fired? She's showed some really good business skills - the ability to take feedback (she became less harsh and horrible in Week 2 after the grilling), the ability to communicate (clearly as she's done some of the best sales throughout the whole process) and the ability to strategize (she's really organized). I didn't understand the logic! If LS wanted to see more of Rebecca, he should have put her as a PM! That's where people shine. Sophie, Rebecca and Uzma should have been PMs...it's not good firing them for reasons like this. Francesa was a mess as PM and should have gone!

To be fair though, I thought she would stick up for herself better. If you don't stick up for yourself in the boardroom then you're going. It's as simple as that!

I don't get why people rave about her selling skills , on the beer task she had me cringing watching the way she dealt with the pub landlords

she came across like she did not have a clue about their business and totally failed to make the pitch at the level required , selling is all about being able to communicate according to your target audience and she definitely struggled to do that

But over six weeks, it's also been up to Rebecca to make her own opportunities to shine. On a couple of occasions I got the occasion that she was happy to let more vocal team members do things and stay below the radar.

Going into this week's task, four candidates had yet to be a PM: Leah and Francesca, who Sugar nominated, and Rebecca and Alex. No doubt if she had survived she and Alex would have been PMs next week.

As for why she was fired, on the face of it I'm baffled, but ultimately Sugar decided he would rather keep the other two in the competition. How much of that is down to the individual business plans? Probably quite a bit. Presumably Rebecca's wasn't all that strong.

I know, at least the motivational speaker served a very useful purpose and was possibly the best thing that the team could come up with.
But a £300 flamingo? It's not even as though it would be missed if they didn't have it.

Aside from the motivational speaker there's another £2000 to account for. What about all that?
And Jordan being in charge of finances, how on earth did he get off so lightly by Sugar?

The whole point of the task was about quality of service and for the event to have a coherent link to business. For which it's obvious to see why the other team won. But this was more a case of ideas, structure, and overall approach.
In this context the motivational speaker Team Evolve hired was the one singular saving grace which addressed this remit.

If I were to point any blame at Rebecca for anything it would perhaps be for the wine thing. But what about the culpability of everyone else in the team who all played a part in contributing to a shambles?
Aside from the £600 spent on the motivational speaker which was the only useful element the team brought to the table, what about the other £2000 which needs to be accounted for?
Does Sugar genuinely believe that the other £2000 was money well spent or something?

but they spent £600 on something they could have done themselves and that the other team did do themselves with some success

yes they maybe spent poorly on other things but that was an element they didn't need to even spend a penny on

The £300 wasn't just the flamingo, it was spent on 'props'. However much it was, it was still a waste of money.

We saw the team spend £280-odd on food in Morrisons, plus there was the cost of their various activities (the planks, that sort of thing), plus the wine for the wine tasting was probably not part of the Morrisons spend. They might also have been charged for the venue, although that's never made clear in the episode (often they're not charged for things like that, I think).

I'm confused as to why so many people blame Jordan for the overspend. It was his PM, Francesca, whose strategy was to go for quality. Jordan was trying to keep track of the budget and we saw him advising the girls not to go crazy in Morrisons, but ultimately budgetary decisions are up to the PM not the finance person. As it was, excluding the motivational speaker, Evolve actually spent less than Endeavour on their basic activities, food etc, so arguably Jordan actually did a good job.

I think it was also said in the boardroom that he was one of a couple of people who offered to do the speech himself, but he was overruled by Francesca who (not unreasonably) wanted a professional to do it. So I don't see how anyone can pin the £600 on Jordan either.

But my point is that there was another £2000 to account for and that the speaker was the only thing which fulfilled the remit of the task.
Going by my maths £600 is less than £2000, so why was the £600 pointed out as 'bad' money, but the other £2000 deemed to be money well spent.