I think it was a gimmick for the show but it worked because Solomon's business plan was total rubbish. I think actually it would have been better if C. sat down with him and tore it apart without getting angry. Solomon did look like a fool for that whole process and to be fair, I think he knew that he was just lucky here and was along for the ride.
Claude on Solomon - Your Thoughts?
4 of 4
Originally Posted by BillyBatty:
“I think if Claude had spoke to me like that I would have told him where to go and walked out of the whole competition.”
“I think if Claude had spoke to me like that I would have told him where to go and walked out of the whole competition.”
He had every right to do it. Soloman had not prepared and there was nothing to question him on.
Originally Posted by Diabolus:
“May as well just copy and paste what I said on another thread but largely agree with the above...
Solomon's grinning/ tongue lolling, puppy dog to instant hound dog face was the stuff of legend. Claude played the cameras for all they were worth as he built him up just to instantly destroy him and order him from the room. Lovely stuff. Classic Apprentice.
Welcome to reality tv Solomon.
”
“May as well just copy and paste what I said on another thread but largely agree with the above...
Solomon's grinning/ tongue lolling, puppy dog to instant hound dog face was the stuff of legend. Claude played the cameras for all they were worth as he built him up just to instantly destroy him and order him from the room. Lovely stuff. Classic Apprentice.
Welcome to reality tv Solomon.
”
I found it very funny
Camera work was great.
It was a test of character, he did it to everyone. Claude intentionally made brash statements to test their passion, its that simple.
Daniel argued back, pointing out flaws in Claudes accusations.
Mark refuted Claudes offense
Solomon...crumbled under pressure. He should have pointed out thr glaring contradictions Claude created. "But didnt you say I was innovative, arent you curious?" "Explain to me exactly what of the content is despicable" "Despicable maybe but try to say that you a youtube star who basicwlly does the same thing"
ANYTHING really, but Solomon cracked even asking for PERMISSION to argue back. Solomon should have stuck it out, thats what Claude was looking for.
All of you saying you would have told Claude to shove it or whatever are just proving Claudes point, that you dont have the potential at all. All you ever need to do is point out contradictions, even if you lose you still gain something.
Daniel argued back, pointing out flaws in Claudes accusations.
Mark refuted Claudes offense
Solomon...crumbled under pressure. He should have pointed out thr glaring contradictions Claude created. "But didnt you say I was innovative, arent you curious?" "Explain to me exactly what of the content is despicable" "Despicable maybe but try to say that you a youtube star who basicwlly does the same thing"
ANYTHING really, but Solomon cracked even asking for PERMISSION to argue back. Solomon should have stuck it out, thats what Claude was looking for.
All of you saying you would have told Claude to shove it or whatever are just proving Claudes point, that you dont have the potential at all. All you ever need to do is point out contradictions, even if you lose you still gain something.
Solomon came over as an immature, spoilt kid for the most of the series, but he was still quite likeable.
After his recent comments he sounds more childish than ever. I do wonder if he's ever been said no to before. I also wonder if the 'sex tape' stuff was just PR fluff to coincide with the launch of his reality TV career on The Apprentice.
After his recent comments he sounds more childish than ever. I do wonder if he's ever been said no to before. I also wonder if the 'sex tape' stuff was just PR fluff to coincide with the launch of his reality TV career on The Apprentice.
I'm still not convinced Solomon was there to genuinely go into business with LAS.
To assert that the finances are unimportant, or that the idea was all in his noggin, is the cry of the blagger that wants to be on telly IMO. That being said, after last year with Claude throwing out Jordan for good reasons, I think they've now decided that he will throw out someone every year for "entertainment".
To assert that the finances are unimportant, or that the idea was all in his noggin, is the cry of the blagger that wants to be on telly IMO. That being said, after last year with Claude throwing out Jordan for good reasons, I think they've now decided that he will throw out someone every year for "entertainment".
Originally Posted by lightdragon:
“I'm still not convinced Solomon was there to genuinely go into business with LAS.
To assert that the finances are unimportant, or that the idea was all in his noggin, is the cry of the blagger that wants to be on telly IMO. That being said, after last year with Claude throwing out Jordan for good reasons, I think they've now decided that he will throw out someone every year for "entertainment".”
“I'm still not convinced Solomon was there to genuinely go into business with LAS.
To assert that the finances are unimportant, or that the idea was all in his noggin, is the cry of the blagger that wants to be on telly IMO. That being said, after last year with Claude throwing out Jordan for good reasons, I think they've now decided that he will throw out someone every year for "entertainment".
”
I know what you mean. It seems to be that he is carving a niche for his 'don't bullshit me I will own you' persona.
I think it's very unprofessional to use phrases such as 'don't bullshit me and 'you are taking the piss 'in a business interview. As you say it could well be for show or entertainment. It was funny though watching him trying not to laugh when Solomon was having trouble trying to find his way out the room.
OTT. I never approve of rudeness. Perceptiveness, yes, but not this treatment of a viable candidate.
Viable candidate?
Link
Link
Quote:
“"I wanted to have an idea and see where it goes... obviously it is a bit about money right, you've got to make money, but for me it's about having fun. Believing in an idea, seeing where it goes and having fun."”
“"I wanted to have an idea and see where it goes... obviously it is a bit about money right, you've got to make money, but for me it's about having fun. Believing in an idea, seeing where it goes and having fun."”
Anyone see Levi (Keith!) Roots' business plan on Dragons Den?? 
And I bet he's now worth a few million more than this Claude geezer.....
And I bet he's now worth a few million more than this Claude geezer.....
Originally Posted by konebyvax:
“Anyone see Levi (Keith!) Roots' business plan on Dragons Den?? And I bet he's now worth a few million more than this Claude geezer.....”
“Anyone see Levi (Keith!) Roots' business plan on Dragons Den??
And I bet he's now worth a few million more than this Claude geezer.....”
Levi Roots had a product. Solomon is yet another candidate who wants to be famous. Look out for him on Coach Trip and similar programmes.
Doesn't look like Solomon is interested in going into business at all.
It's been reported today that's he's been cast in series 2 of Desi Rascals on Sky Living. Basically an asian TOWIE fake reality tv show. Sad or what!
It's been reported today that's he's been cast in series 2 of Desi Rascals on Sky Living. Basically an asian TOWIE fake reality tv show. Sad or what!
I don't get the Claude love on here, I don't find him entetaining at all. His interviews are staged with obviously rehearsed put-downs, and he's rather pompous, something Nick never was. So now there'll be two people competing to make laboured putdowns in the boardroom scenes.
Not looking forward to the new series without Nick so I hope I'm wrong about Claude.
Not looking forward to the new series without Nick so I hope I'm wrong about Claude.
Originally Posted by allafix:
“I don't get the Claude love on here, I don't find him entetaining at all. His interviews are staged with obviously rehearsed put-downs, and he's rather pompous, something Nick never was. So now there'll be two people competing to make laboured putdowns in the boardroom scenes.
Not looking forward to the new series without Nick so I hope I'm wrong about Claude.”
“I don't get the Claude love on here, I don't find him entetaining at all. His interviews are staged with obviously rehearsed put-downs, and he's rather pompous, something Nick never was. So now there'll be two people competing to make laboured putdowns in the boardroom scenes.
Not looking forward to the new series without Nick so I hope I'm wrong about Claude.”
I think Claude seems pretty authentic. He's a very tough task-master, but I think if I was working for him I would trust him. He does give credit where it's due (such as with Ricky Martin) and I think is probably quite fair when it comes down to it.
Your words about staged put-downs I think apply far more to Margaret than to Claude. She's another one who is rather loved on the forums, and I don't see why. I don't think I ever got the point of her interview; she seemed to exist to read out memorable quotes from people's CVs and pull funny faces at them. I was so relieved that she didn't come back last year. Ricky was a far more productive interviewer.
Originally Posted by george.millman:
“I think Claude seems pretty authentic. He's a very tough task-master, but I think if I was working for him I would trust him. He does give credit where it's due (such as with Ricky Martin) and I think is probably quite fair when it comes down to it.
Your words about staged put-downs I think apply far more to Margaret than to Claude. She's another one who is rather loved on the forums, and I don't see why. I don't think I ever got the point of her interview; she seemed to exist to read out memorable quotes from people's CVs and pull funny faces at them. I was so relieved that she didn't come back last year. Ricky was a far more productive interviewer.”
“I think Claude seems pretty authentic. He's a very tough task-master, but I think if I was working for him I would trust him. He does give credit where it's due (such as with Ricky Martin) and I think is probably quite fair when it comes down to it.
Your words about staged put-downs I think apply far more to Margaret than to Claude. She's another one who is rather loved on the forums, and I don't see why. I don't think I ever got the point of her interview; she seemed to exist to read out memorable quotes from people's CVs and pull funny faces at them. I was so relieved that she didn't come back last year. Ricky was a far more productive interviewer.”
I agree with you completely about Margaret's interviews. Claude's interviews are better but overrated for entertainment value. He clearly understands business and will give credit where it's due. He was very complimentary of one candidate's plan last year as well (forget who it was, but I'm sure you will remember).
I just think he'll be duller as an adviser than people seem to expect. Seeing him one episode per series is one thing. Having him on every week is something else. Nick and Margaret made entertaining advisers because they were very subtle, lurking in the background but always ready for the telling glance or aside. I just can't see him doing that. I hope I'm wrong though.
Edit: I just realised I posted this in the wrong "Claude" thread, but it sort of fits here as well.
Originally Posted by allafix:
“I agree with you completely about Margaret's interviews. Claude's interviews are better but overrated for entertainment value. He clearly understands business and will give credit where it's due. He was very complimentary of one candidate's plan last year as well (forget who it was, but I'm sure you will remember).
I just think he'll be duller as an adviser than people seem to expect. Seeing him one episode per series is one thing. Having him on every week is something else. Nick and Margaret made entertaining advisers because they were very subtle, lurking in the background but always ready for the telling glance or aside. I just can't see him doing that. I hope I'm wrong though.
Edit: I just realised I posted this in the wrong "Claude" thread, but it sort of fits here as well.”
“I agree with you completely about Margaret's interviews. Claude's interviews are better but overrated for entertainment value. He clearly understands business and will give credit where it's due. He was very complimentary of one candidate's plan last year as well (forget who it was, but I'm sure you will remember).
I just think he'll be duller as an adviser than people seem to expect. Seeing him one episode per series is one thing. Having him on every week is something else. Nick and Margaret made entertaining advisers because they were very subtle, lurking in the background but always ready for the telling glance or aside. I just can't see him doing that. I hope I'm wrong though.
Edit: I just realised I posted this in the wrong "Claude" thread, but it sort of fits here as well.
”
Yeah, interesting. I think that I will probably like him as an advisor, but I agree that others will probably find him dull. I don't want him to be ridiculously harsh with everyone for no reason - if he has reason to be harsh, that's different, but I want him to be authentic. I want to see more of the real Claude, I suppose - I doubt other viewers will find that interesting, but I'm not the type who likes unnecessary drama. There are some wonderfully dramatic moments, and if they're natural that's great, but I think a lot of the time TV producers try to force it, and that takes away from the magic of the occasions when it really is genuine. One of my favourite ever Apprentice moments is that time in Series 1 when Saira showed James the wolf jacket and neither of them could contain themselves - you never get moments like that anymore!
Oddly, I can't quite remember which was the business plan that Claude liked last year. Off the top of my head, I think it was Bianca's, but it could have been Mark's.
It wasn't quite how I remembered it. I just watched bits of it back on youtube. I knew he'd been very positive about somebody. He was extremely complimentary of Solomon's CV then slammed his non-existant plan. Dismissive of Bianca's idea. Quite positive about Mark's answers. Even more positive in the boardroom, comparing him to Ricky.
Originally Posted by allafix:
“It wasn't quite how I remembered it. I just watched bits of it back on youtube. I knew he'd been very positive about somebody. He was extremely complimentary of Solomon's CV then slammed his non-existant plan. Dismissive of Bianca's idea. Quite positive about Mark's answers. Even more positive in the boardroom, comparing him to Ricky.”
“It wasn't quite how I remembered it. I just watched bits of it back on youtube. I knew he'd been very positive about somebody. He was extremely complimentary of Solomon's CV then slammed his non-existant plan. Dismissive of Bianca's idea. Quite positive about Mark's answers. Even more positive in the boardroom, comparing him to Ricky.”
Claude was dismissive of Bianca? I need to watch that series again! (I've only seen it once, that's why I'm not remembering as much as I normally do. I know I have a bit of a reputation on here for remembering obscure details, but I can do that with some series more than others, usually the ones I've watched numerous times.)
Who was the one who was really positive about Bianca then? I remember someone being.
4 of 4
