|
||||||||
What was the point in having katie on the show then? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#76 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 59,676
|
Quote:
Mind you, one restaurant in Sunderland... She must have known Sugar's not touching that.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#77 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London
Posts: 20,218
|
In theory, Katie actually had a reasonable idea. David Lloyd gyms already have their D.Licious Cafe/Restaurants inside many of their clubs.
These would work near gyms/health clubs that don't have their own healthy eating menu. There's little point in trying conditioning/muscle building if you don't also look at nutrition/diet. Many people will have a pre-workout protein shake, or a post-workout meal or whatever, and you could really tap into that market. |
|
|
|
|
#78 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,966
|
Quote:
He The show has ended up, not nurturing the most talented who need a helping hand, or finding entrepreneurs, or helping good ideas get to market, but showing off many of the worst features of the system. The focus, is on avoiding risk, not taking it, finding something thats ready to go anyway, looking for the biggest quick return, and not worrying about the social impact of , or utility, of which latest idea makes it. Its the same thinking thats produced the mess we are in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#79 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 810
|
Quote:
To me, this accurately focuses on the unsatisfactory nature of the show as it has evolved, unless it is viewed as purely a reality entertainment vehicle - which maybe it is becoming, after Luisa last year and maybe some of this year's lot, If the candidates' main purpose is reality tv exposure and Lord Sugar's is a quick return on a small investment, why is it on the BBC at all?
Reminds me how big brother was good to startoff with as Iit showed more of the phycology of how people from different walks of life interact wjen living together but turned into this mad program whwre they deliberately choose two people that will hate each other and just produce arguments for the purpose of entertainment. |
|
|
|
|
|
#80 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
I'd just like to point out in response to the suggestion that the business prize changed because of what happened with Stella (as I actually have many times on this forum) that the prize was announced before Stella started working for him. The prize doesn't come into effect until the series has finished broadcasting, to prevent leaks - Series 7 was already being filmed by the time Series 6 started broadcasting, because that series was delayed for the 2010 general election. I suppose Stella was working for him as a finalist, as was Chris, so he could have had suspicions about her already, but if that was the case, why allow her to win? I'd also like to point out that although none of the six job winners stayed long-term, Michelle is the only other winner besides Stella that I know of who had anything negative to say. I don't know that much about Simon and Lee, but Tim and Yasmina are very positive about their experiences, and I believe are both still in touch with him. It is common knowledge that Yasmina left purely for personal family reasons, and she gave a very direct interview saying that she's really annoyed about what Stella did, because as a former winner she realises how good an opportunity Stella was given.
I'd also like to point out in response to the person who suggested that Katie's accent counted against her that the third winner of Young Apprentice was a girl called Ashleigh, who had a very thick Yorkshire accent - it was even more broad than Katie's. If Lord Sugar had any prejudices against accents, there is no way she would have got the prize. |
|
|
|
|
|
#81 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
To me, this accurately focuses on the unsatisfactory nature of the show as it has evolved, unless it is viewed as purely a reality entertainment vehicle - which maybe it is becoming, after Luisa last year and maybe some of this year's lot, If the candidates' main purpose is reality tv exposure and Lord Sugar's is a quick return on a small investment, why is it on the BBC at all?
It's on BBC for entertainment purposes. Changing the prize hasn't changed anything except that instead of judging the candidates as potential employees, Lord Sugar now has to judge them as potential business partners. I would say the business partner winners have stuck with things better than the job winners. It's a much better prize for the winner and potentially worth much more than £125K. |
|
|
|
|
|
#82 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,217
|
Quote:
I agree!!! I really liked the apprentice as it shows a lot of elements of business that no other program shows. But it is turning into tooo much of a reality tv show.
Reminds me how big brother was good to startoff with as Iit showed more of the phycology of how people from different walks of life interact wjen living together but turned into this mad program whwre they deliberately choose two people that will hate each other and just produce arguments for the purpose of entertainment. |
|
|
|
|
|
#83 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,217
|
Quote:
Katie should have been fired last night anyway.
Whether it was for creating a disgusting pudding or because of her business plan is irrelevant. Sanjay was more unlucky, but I don't really think he's been much good throughout. |
|
|
|
|
|
#84 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 6,522
|
Quote:
Why waste 10 weeks of her life when the business would never work.
This is why the new format annoys me. And if so, how? |
|
|
|
|
|
#85 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,217
|
Quote:
I was against the business plan prize from year 1 and so are thousands of other viewers. It's just that our lovely BBC couldn't be arsed to do any meaningful VOC to identify what the viewers really want!
The job prize is discredited because some contestants didn't stay with LS forever or Stella English behaved like a b**tch? Interesting view... There was also always a problem in that the jobs on offer arguably required particular skills. The winners of series 2 and 3 are close matches in experience or style to the jobs on offer, Michelle works in IT, and had negotiated outsourcing contracts - the job was setting up a company to recycle computers , Simon looked right for selling expensive property. By series 4, you logically want someone who will relate to London Transport bosses. By series 5, its doctors. Sales ability with the right selling style,, backed up by organisational skill , and the right look for the custiomer looks whats needed. The job rules out many candidates who might fit other jobs if they were available. Its going to rule out the Sugarlike small traders without experience at a high enough level,, but may be too boring and low level for some of the high flyers. Its very difficult to see how they get round that. The Lloyd Webber music shows looked for singers for other producer's musicals , but they only put in good singers with the right range, and usually an appropriate look,. Even if there was a top job on offer from some other employer, the job requirement would probably be too specific, and the requirement would exclude most people who applied. You need particular skills for selling multi million pound houses, or running a major department. The better the job, the fewer of the Apprentice canddiates they currently cast would stand a chance. You would either end up with lots of high flying corporate types with good degrees, or you would have to run an entry level compettion. In both cases, you would end up with lots of highly academically qualified candidates - that Lord Sugar usually rejects. |
|
|
|
|
|
#86 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 633
|
Quote:
You can't sack the best performer on a business show (at that point) because she's not a great cook It would be .a bizarre reason. its not masterchef. By the rules they are playing too the taste could have been altered anyway if his Lordship felt like it. . She isn't planning to cook her own food or write her own menus either., or putting saffron in them.
And all that is before taking in account her business plan that Sugar didn't like. So, regardless of her being fired for the task or her business plan, it seemed right for her to go. |
|
|
|
|
|
#87 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,865
|
She was far from the best performer, and her poor product, poor presentation (last one at least) and awful marketing, meant she had to go. As the guy on YF said it was seriously "over cliparted" and looked like something a child would do, and certainly didn't deserve the high fives and man love the guys were giving it.
And for all this "she's the mum of the show" attention she was getting, I don't think she came across as a very nice person on the show, and even on YF she seemed very full of herself. |
|
|
|
|
|
#88 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia ♂
Posts: 19,829
|
This thread is spot on. Makes the whole show a waste of time and makes AS look a comets idiot.
Wish one of the candidates had the bottle to just say "why am I even here then, you've eater my time and yours" |
|
|
|
|
#89 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Edgware, Middlesex
Posts: 8,277
|
Quote:
She was far from the best performer, and her poor product, poor presentation (last one at least) and awful marketing, meant she had to go. As the guy on YF said it was seriously "over cliparted" and looked like something a child would do, and certainly didn't deserve the high fives and man love the guys were giving it.
Katie was the only member of the team not responsible for what happened with the branding, and she wasn't the one who dried up during the pitch. So I think there is no way she should have gone based on that specific task. However, in light of the fact that LS was now selecting who would go through to the interview stage it made sense that he would factor in the business plans and it made sense that she would be rejected given how small-scale her plan appeared to be. |
|
|
|
|
#90 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,865
|
Yes but when your PM and when you only have 3 on your team, then your for the high jump should any part fail, regardless of wether you were directly responsible. It was fair in the fact that 2 went, so one did go for the poor branding. It wouldn't of been fair to get rid of Mark, I'm no fan of his, but this was his first major screw up, in terms of task.
If you notice I did say "last presentation", which again she was responsible for in as far as she was swayed to allow Mark, and push out the other. |
|
|
|
|
|
#91 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
Yes but when your PM and when you only have 3 on your team, then your for the high jump should any part fail, regardless of wether you were directly responsible. It was fair in the fact that 2 went, so one did go for the poor branding. It wouldn't of been fair to get rid of Mark, I'm no fan of his, but this was his first major screw up, in terms of task.
If you notice I did say "last presentation", which again she was responsible for in as far as she was swayed to allow Mark, and push out the other. Going into the task, there was no reason to expect Mark to struggle in a pitch and every reason to expect Sanjay to be the weakest of the three. It was never touched on in the episode, but Katie's initial decision to put Sanjay on the final pitch was madness. Why put your weakest performer on the most important pitch? They will surely have been given some basic facts and figures about the respective retailers, which would tell them that Tesco has 29% of the grocery market, Asda 17% and Waitrose 5%. At the very least, anyone with any knowledge of the business world should know that Tesco is the biggest retailer in the UK by a distance - that's hardly a little-known fact. From the outset, Katie should either have put Mark (as the team's best historical sales performer) on to Tesco, or herself because she was PM. I cannot work out what logic led her to put Sanjay on it, other than the fairly feeble "oh, it's the last pitch, he can learn from the other two". |
|
|
|
|
#92 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,865
|
I think with her "over inflated ego" she assumed that by pitch 3 it would be in the bag, so why not let little Sanjay have ago, so when in the boardroom getting all the praise for winning, no one on the team could complain at not being allowed to pitch, unlike the other team where 2 members were actively left out.
Roisin played a dangerous game with Daniel, I noticed LS raised his eyebrows when it was mentioned that Daniel had been left out, Roisin then goes on to defend her discission, which then prompted Nick to mention that Tesco's liked his pitching. It was a dangerous idea that could of backfired had she lost. |
|
|
|
|
|
#93 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 2,345
|
Quote:
I think with her "over inflated ego" she assumed that by pitch 3 it would be in the bag, so why not let little Sanjay have ago, so when in the boardroom getting all the praise for winning, no one on the team could complain at not being allowed to pitch, unlike the other team where 2 members were actively left out.
Roisin played a dangerous game with Daniel, I noticed LS raised his eyebrows when it was mentioned that Daniel had been left out, Roisin then goes on to defend her discission, which then prompted Nick to mention that Tesco's liked his pitching. It was a dangerous idea that could of backfired had she lost. If Katie really did think that, more fool her given that Tesco is bigger than Asda and Waitrose put together and has 3-4 times as many stores as the pair combined. As it turns out, Sanjay ended up on the pitch he should have been assigned to in the first place: Waitrose. |
|
|
|
|
#94 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: London
Posts: 65,903
|
Quote:
He's either judged the final 5 by a different standard , than the 2 who went this week, - or he's identified the one or two he wants, and has stuffed the final with good car crash material - before he gives them the win.
When it comes to it, LS's idea of an attractive business is quite narrow. He doesn't seem to like anything too provincial (you would have thought Sunderland was somewhere in the Orkneys), he doesn't like anything too IT based, he doesn't like anything that smells every-so-slightly of the Daily Star, he doesn't like social enterprises... Quote:
which then prompted Nick to mention that Tesco's liked his pitching. It was a dangerous idea that could of backfired had she lost.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#95 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,109
|
Quote:
It wasn't the business idea - as the restaurant could have made money - but he doubted her ability to make it into a successful chain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#96 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
He's ended up dismissing two plans but sending two people to the semi-final who can't possibly win - without the BBC equivalent of men in white coats dragging him off. There, waiting with them, he has two candidates whose contributions and insights have been pretty invisible. He's got people who can't win on task performance, but excluded some because he doesn't like their plans. He's either judged the final 5 by a different standard , than the 2 who went this week, - or he's identified the one or two he wants, and has stuffed the final with good car crash material - before he gives them the win.
He had to sack two to get down to five for next week. Solomon and Daniel survived by being in the winning team, nothing to be done about that, so their places in the interviews were assured. So he had to cut his losses and keep the best of the three losers. Realistically the choice was either Mark or Katie. Based on their respective track records before the show and their performances in it, Mark was the best bet. He had no option. If he'd sacked either Daniel or Solomon the cries of fix and foul would have been massive. |
|
|
|
|
|
#97 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,865
|
Quote:
this, he gave her the opportunity to show healthy ingrediences as well as budgeting skills - she didn't know anything about saffron £££
She should of at least had a stab at her idea, after all Jim promised the earth to ASDA's a few years back, so she could of at least said something along the lines of "these puddings are around 300 calories, in the final production run we're looking at getting them down to around 100". Or at least sent the boys to do the ingredients, and done her own marketing and POS, and got that element right. At least then she may have got some compliments for the marketing and could of used that as ammunition against the guys. As it was she failed everywhere and demonstrated she had no idea's when it came to food and food marketing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#98 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: In the real world
Posts: 1,163
|
Quote:
The production team will inspect the business plans, not Lord Sugar. A ten week tussle for a chance to pitch to big dawg. You get your foot in the door by impressing the elves
Sanjay? Token good looking bloke your mother would want you to take home to her. Oh, and he's gay to boot - so we'll have the housewives and gay men watching - tick. Katie? Distinctively northern and loud - that's the north-easterners watching and the 'entertainment' taken care of - tick. And so it goes on. That's how television works, kids... |
|
|
|
|
|
#99 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: In the real world
Posts: 1,163
|
Quote:
I thought Daniel might actually cry. He hasn't had much praise this series, has he?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#100 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Edgware, Middlesex
Posts: 8,277
|
Quote:
That was my argument on another thread, while she couldn't in all likelihood come up with a completely healthy range of puddings in the time constraints given. She could of at least demonstrated that she had some idea! She failed on costing, she failed on flavorings (on at least one item) and failed on design and POS.
As for the cost of the saffron, it was entirely irrelevant as the only criteria was sales, not profit. So what if her team would have made no profit (or even a loss)? The more value in the product the more value to the buyer as, presumably, they were paying the same price regardless. |
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:17.




