I said similar in another thread: Anthony specifically pointed out that he chose them because of Katie, how great she was, how intelligent. He said this to Daniel. It was a smackdown if ever I've heard one.

Of course Daniel is delusional and takes credit for everything so he didn't register it. Nor have some posters on here. Katie secured the hot tubs. Daniel just happened to be there and for once wasn't a total liability. If Lord Sugar knew this, I reckon he wouldn't have been quite so sympathetic. But maybe he would...I think he sees vulnerability in Daniel cos honestly the lad's a bit puddled.

Daniel was a crybaby. Should of manned up and sold what he was given to sell instead arguing!!!

I think some of you are missing the point actually, value of sales was unimportant to the winning team, they won so who cares. What was important was actual sales made, now no one would expect Mark to sell 100+ hot tubs but even if he had only sold his 2, should the team of lost he would more than likely be safe, as Katie only sold 1.

What Daniel did was fail to realise that, had they lost, he or Felipe would of been for the chop. They failed to sell as many stupid handbags, as the hot team sold hot tubs!! They should of been able to sell at least 30 - 50 handbags between them. They were a relatively cheap item, woman like handbags they also like different types of handbags, and the sort of women attending an agricultural show would doubly like them (stereotype I know). They were a great impulse buy and the sort of thing you could buy without "breaking the bank", yet they spent all day arguing, Daniel did himself no credit that day.

I highly doubt they could have sold such an inflated figure with a niche item that is more suited to the west end than a country show no matter who did the selling.

And as for "women like handbags" while that may be true the style was awful and the area where they were pitched lacked footfall so even the greatest salesman would struggle.

I would of said 30 was achievable, there's what 30k plus people there, they didn't really try to sell any, I think they sold maybe 10, was more my point. Had they lost either of those 2 would of gone. Probably Daniel as Mark would of stuck up for Felipe for allowing him to sell the tubs.

I'd estimate they sold up to a dozen handbags - and no trailers - giving them their final total of £500. I'm dubious as to whether it was a suitable product, but even so a dozen is a pretty poor return.

The handbags (and the wellies) were a bad product to be selling in that task. Given it's the pure sales number that win the task you want to only be selling high-priced items like the swing chair or the bike attachment.

IIRC wellies were £ 45 and the chair was £ 395. That meant you had to sell nine pairs of wellies for each chair sale. It takes less effort to sell something cheap, but if you sell two chairs you are doing much better than the welly salespeople.

Daniel got it completely wrong. If I was told that Mark is taking over the selling of the hot-tubs I would be laughing. Why...? Whoever sells the most high-priced items has won the task, so I am out of the board-room.

If Mark screws up and doesn't win the task I can point out that Marks bad sales lost us the task and also point out Felips bad leadership.

So Daniel should have shut-up and spent his time just selling handbags.

You're missing the point, he wanted to show Sugar what he could do, and he was denied the chance by someone with an agenda of his own. Sugar was a wake-up to this, and told him so in the boardroom

One more thing, and this isn't aimed at anyone here, but I do tire of the term 'tantrum' being used, that's to describe a child-like reaction to something, and to scream and shout. These people aren't having tantrums, they are having disagreements that boil over into arguments. Saying they are having a tantrum is just a way to demean them even further. Adults can express anger without being referred to as kids.

Just a bugbear.

Yes, I know he wanted to do that, but he should have realised that letting Mark do it would get him further in the game. It would have made him look better than his sulking that he didn't get to sell hot-tubs. The problem is that Daniel isn't very self-aware.


That wasn't a disagreement, that was a tantrum with a full on sulk. I see better articulated "disagreements" in Sainsburys when a kid doesn't get a chocolate bar.

There was a task to be won.

Win- and nobody goes home.

Although Felipe looks a bit bemused a lot of the time he was 100% right to have his best salesman selling the high priced product.

It's not like being back at school when everyone has to be given a chance. Daniel was given his chance to 'impress' by securing the right to sell the hot tubs- but most seem to agree that was more down to Katie (plus James ruining his teams chances by getting the mans name wrong).

Everyone wanted the chance to sell the hot tubs, everyone wanted the chance to prove themselves. If I were there I would have wanted to sell them. Not everyone gets the chance and no one had an automatic right. It is a game, and one that Daniel failed. If he'd had any foresight what so ever he should have made sure it was him with Felipie on the first day, or would have prepared a good counter argument. It's basic contingency. It's what people do in business, everyone wanted the best job or to do get the best deal or product and it goes to the people best prepared which Daniel wasn't. I'd say the same even happens in normal job interviews. You can't just make assumptions or you'll lose.

I'd argue that tantrums are more than just screaming and shouting. It also includes sulking and other irrational behavior to not getting what you want. Daniel may not have been shouting but he would not shut up about at all. It all came back to how hard done by he was etc...

Adults can express anger but there was nothing adult about in the slightest. When I was a kid I would have been told off by my parents for far less than that (and probably taken home for being an embarrassment). Adults need to be articulate, be able to get on with things despite it, and generally have reasons for being angry other than 'it's not fair'. Daniel didn't even have that greater reason to be angry, there was a 1/4 he would have to sold them anyway, some had to, and even the PM was.

If all this is true, if everyone is being totally reasonable and Daniel is the only c*** in the classroom as you all think...why did Sugar ask why he didn't get to sell the item he helped to procure, and state that he'd been stitched up!! There has to be something in it doesn't there!

Yes but Felipe didn't have has best salesman there, because he was the best salesman, he had him there because Mark did a number on him. He only came up with that excuse half way through the day to shut up Daniel, then we had the cut scene of Daniel leaning against the stall sulking. If Felipe rightly as it turned out thought that Mark was the best person, he should of said so right at the beginning, thus stopping Daniel from banging on about it all day.

Answer me this, why didn't Felipe just send Mark off with Katie, if he's the best seller then he should have been on the team procuring the goods. Instead he was lolloping around with Felipe choosing crappy flat cap hand-bags, Mark engineered the whole thing, it was planned from the outset!

Summit sold just one chair (I'm guessing a discounted £350 or thereabouts) - they sold much more in wellies. If you ask me, they were both terrible products.

The trouble with the wellies were they were a fashion item not a practical item. Ok for yummie mummies, to mooch around Sloane Square, when getting to their chelsea tractor, but not very good for mucking out a cow shed at 5am on a cold, wet, winters morning.

But that was James's fault why bother sending 2 people to look over the items, then totally override them. He made a point on cost, well the dog tracker was the same price as the wellies, about £45. The only thing I can think of is they didn't appreciate how crap they were and convey that to James.

Because as nice as he is, Felipe is a weak team leader and a bad manager. He didn't shine at all in this task, and I don't think he has the strength of character to always make sound business decisions. He absolutely should have sent Mark off instead of Daniel.

He must have known Daniel would want to sell the product, it could have all been nipped in the bud if he'd kept Daniel with him to choose products.

So, its ALL ENTIRELY Felipe's fault...correct?

No, probably the only one not at fault was Katie. Mark was underhanded, Felipe was weak, and Daniel ineffective. Daniel could have suggested he should go with Felipe, instead he wanted probably wanted the glory of both. If I were that position I'd have probably have kept Daniel with me the entire time knowing his past record to keep an eye on him (I would have stated that very firmly at the beginning and tolerated none of the rest of it).

Why are you so keen to absolve Daniel of any blame? The others seem fair game to attack but he can't be anything other than a victim? Even though he's a grown man with apparent business experience that he's yet to prove, who put himself willing in that position? I'm 20 and can see what Mark is doing and would know better than to rise to provocation and go around with Daniels attitude. If he didn't rise to it and make it about a fight he'd be a much better position, a bit like Roisin with James. Work well, and calmly point out Marks tactics when he sees them (a bit like that time in the boardroom where he called him out on the 'pound for every time phrase', more of that and less of the childishness).

I think Mark and Roisin will be the final two and Mark has got a comparatively poor edit despite his success in lots of tasks just to warm up the audience for a Roisin win.

I agree. They did look awfully flimsy, didn't they?

And that is what Daniel did.

Can you by any stretch of your imagination call what Daniel did a mature and reasoned argument?. I know I cant, it was a strop by a bloke who SHOULD (but patently doesn't) know better.

And as to the second BIB, what he did WAS demeaning. If he cant get a grip and get on with a task then he is worthless in business.

I wouldn't hire Daniel now. Someone who goes into a strop because his manager didn't agree with him...? And then he whines in front of customers, causing less sales than expected. He would be fired.

(Well, he would be put on a plan to manage him out of the business...)

Completely unprofessional.

so surely you wouldnt hire felipe either because felipe was arguing back too infront of customers, so he wasnt being professional either

had felipe just gotten on with his job and sold with a smile and left daniel to stew in his own mess, it wouldnt have looked so bad and would've made daniel look even worse.....

but with felipe contributing to the fall out by arguing infront of potential customer, he didnt do himself any favours either.......