|
||||||||
Unfair to fire 3 people |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 482
|
Unfair to fire 3 people
Megrim and April weren't the reason the team failed the task. It all falls on Elles shoulders
Their half of the team looked like it did a better job of finding jobs, the other lot looked like they only had the one low value contract. April was accused of "standing back" but how much did Richard & David contribute? Th physical labour was bare minimum and expected so that doesn't count. The worst part is that Megrim wasn't the PM so he had little knowledge of what the other half of the team had been up to so couldn't argue much in the boardroom |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Ireland
Posts: 7,470
|
Quote:
Megrim and April weren't the reason the team failed the task. It all falls on Elles shoulders
Their half of the team looked like it did a better job of finding jobs, the other lot looked like they only had the one low value contract. April was accused of "standing back" but how much did Richard & David contribute? Th physical labour was bare minimum and expected so that doesn't count. The worst part is that Megrim wasn't the PM so he had little knowledge of what the other half of the team had been up to so couldn't argue much in the boardroom Mergim has been a walking firing since day one |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 11,478
|
Shuggs has too many candidates for the number of weeks left, so he was always going to have to do a multi firing at some point. Obviously Mergim and April haven't impressed him up to now. He's checked their business plans and found they don't have a bendy nail file product - so its time to go.
I might've kept April in over David or maybe got rid of all four tbh
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 752
|
Quote:
Their half of the team looked like it did a better job of finding jobs, the other lot looked like they only had the one low value contract.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: London
Posts: 14,737
|
I think Sugar is well aware who he is not up to his 'standards' and he just took the opportunity to get rid of some of the people he wasn't interested in. Nothing unfair about it at all. It's a game remember.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,741
|
After watching the 2010 series and seeing bumbling Tom emerge as the winner, it has proved since then that to last in The Apprentice, you just need an excellent business plan to pitch in your final week.
I don't believe for a second that in the early weeks Lord Sugar basis his opinions on who to fire based on that weeks task. He already knows what their business plans are, and already knows which ones he would be happy to take on as part of his Amstrad company. That's why you get contestants on the losing team several times, scraping through by the skin of their teeth and somehow end up in the final. Tom winning back in 2010 was the biggest piss take, and all the people I know who used to love watching The Apprentice have all become bored of the show since that year. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,413
|
Tom was the least deserving winner ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 3,056
|
Quote:
After watching the 2010 series and seeing bumbling Tom emerge as the winner, it has proved since then that to last in The Apprentice, you just need an excellent business plan to pitch in your final week.
I don't believe for a second that in the early weeks Lord Sugar basis his opinions on who to fire based on that weeks task. He already knows what their business plans are, and already knows which ones he would be happy to take on as part of his Amstrad company. That's why you get contestants on the losing team several times, scraping through by the skin of their teeth and somehow end up in the final. Tom winning back in 2010 was the biggest piss take, and all the people I know who used to love watching The Apprentice have all become bored of the show since that year. I'm not sure how it's organised; perhaps Lord Sugar has the briefest sketch of the business idea. He doesn't show much knowledge. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 223
|
Quote:
April was on borrowed time from week one when she was very lucky to stay. she did very little to justify LS keeping her in the process since, so she was always going to go the next time she made the BR. I'd imagine it's the same case with Sam now
Mergim has been a walking firing since day one |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 629
|
Elle had to go, it was the easiest firing Sid's made.
Mergin also, his team got some jobs but they managed to mess everyone up. In the real world he'd have got money for those. April was responsible for selling them off at £3.33 per hour, that's not a practice that will make you money, as they all said no business acumen. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
After watching the 2010 series and seeing bumbling Tom emerge as the winner, it has proved since then that to last in The Apprentice, you just need an excellent business plan to pitch in your final week.
I don't believe for a second that in the early weeks Lord Sugar basis his opinions on who to fire based on that weeks task. He already knows what their business plans are, and already knows which ones he would be happy to take on as part of his Amstrad company. That's why you get contestants on the losing team several times, scraping through by the skin of their teeth and somehow end up in the final. Tom winning back in 2010 was the biggest piss take, and all the people I know who used to love watching The Apprentice have all become bored of the show since that year. It doesn't matter how good a business idea they have, if they aren't good enough to see it through it will fail. It's in Sugar's interest to pick a good candidate as well as a good plan. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sussex by the Sea
Posts: 19,193
|
Quote:
Elle had to go, it was the easiest firing Sid's made.
Mergin also, his team got some jobs but they managed to mess everyone up. In the real world he'd have got money for those. April was responsible for selling them off at £3.33 per hour, that's not a practice that will make you money, as they all said no business acumen. I think April should have been kept on. She clearly has good presentational skills and is decisive. Better to be decisive and sometimes wrong than to be indecisive and never right. Unfortunately for her, Lord Sugar needed to get rid of a few this week. Not really fair, as the OP suggests, but only one of them can win. For most it's just a question of which week you get fired. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,275
|
I just can't wrap my head around April getting fired next to David who was being utterly useless. I don't understand how you can do a triple firing, with the most obvious deadwood managing to get away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 223
|
Quote:
I just can't wrap my head around April getting fired next to David who was being utterly useless. I don't understand how you can do a triple firing, with the most obvious deadwood managing to get away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,744
|
Quote:
You say that but every year there's a candidate whose business idea, regardless of details, he considers a waste of time or grubby, like the woman in the first year of this format.
I'm not sure how it's organised; perhaps Lord Sugar has the briefest sketch of the business idea. He doesn't show much knowledge. He'd be investing a lot of money into a project. He isn't going to take risks over that. What would happen if he fired people based on how well they'd done in the weeks' tasks and ended up with two competent candidates in the final who were excellent in tasks but who both had awful business proposals? Would he really take them on and risk it all simply because of some silly light entertainment TV show? |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,858
|
Quote:
I'd bet that he knows a lot more than the briefest sketch of an idea.
He'd be investing a lot of money into a project. He isn't going to take risks over that. What would happen if he fired people based on how well they'd done in the weeks' tasks and ended up with two competent candidates in the final who were excellent in tasks but who both had awful business proposals? Would he really take them on and risk it all simply because of some silly light entertainment TV show? The reality is almost certainly just a case of the tasks being used to generate reasons to get rid of all the "dead wood" as and when the opportunity arises. I'm not even sure if this is likely to impact on the integrity of the show. After all, out of 16 business proposals I'm sure AS can find half a dozen that he thinks are viable (which will probably already have been arranged at the pre-selection phase of the show anyway) and he only needs for one or two of those candidates to avoid acting like total pillocks and getting themselves fired. And then there's the interview phase as well, which can legitimately be used to get rid of anybody with a weak business proposal even if they've been a strong candidate in every task. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 301
|
I hope that if there is a next series, they do the handyman task where I live. I've got more than enough jobs I could give them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 2,546
|
Quote:
Megrim and April weren't the reason the team failed the task. It all falls on Elles shoulders
Their half of the team looked like it did a better job of finding jobs, the other lot looked like they only had the one low value contract. April was accused of "standing back" but how much did Richard & David contribute? Th physical labour was bare minimum and expected so that doesn't count. The worst part is that Megrim wasn't the PM so he had little knowledge of what the other half of the team had been up to so couldn't argue much in the boardroom But David should have gone instead of April as far has I am concerned. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 2,546
|
Quote:
I hope that if there is a next series, they do the handyman task where I live. I've got more than enough jobs I could give them.
You must be easily pleased ! |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 2,546
|
Quote:
David might have been useless in this task, but he's been impressive in other tasks, so that's probably what saved him. April meanwhile had nothing impressive to fall back on, so it wasn't a surprise to me that she got fired and he didn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 223
|
Quote:
Such as ?
Task 2 (Cactus Shampoo): Came up with the product name and directed the ad to help the boys to a win with what Lord Sugar said was the best marketed item on the show so far in any series. Task 3 (Cross Channel Shopping): Got the Louis Phillippe mirror for 30 Euros. The girls team couldn't even find one. On the winning team again. Task 4 (Pet Show): Project managed his team to a win (and his enthusiasm helped them win the best lower cost items, particularly the balloons, which the other team also wanted but lost out on). Task 5: Was apparently more trusted as sub-team leader by Charleine than the person she actually named sub-team leader (Richard). On the winning team. Task 6: First time on the losing team. I think the previous weeks outweigh his bad performance in Task 6. I stand by my comment that April by comparison had done very little over the weeks to justify her staying. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,519
|
Although I've never know M'lud fire more than two people in an episode, it has to be said that the three who went this time all had it coming - they were completely useless!
I was in business for over 35 years and I've always enjoyed watching the Apprentice contestants making their way through the series. It amuses me how many of them think they're God's gift to business and Lord Sugar will be glad to have them, etc. ... ! Yeah, right! |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 699
|
It is AMS money, he is going to invest in one of the contestants .
It wouldn't surprise me if he already has a short list of who to invest in and who to ditch as soon as possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 2,546
|
Quote:
Task 1 (Fish): On the winning team; seemed to be one of the bigger sellers.
Task 2 (Cactus Shampoo): Came up with the product name and directed the ad to help the boys to a win with what Lord Sugar said was the best marketed item on the show so far in any series. Task 3 (Cross Channel Shopping): Got the Louis Phillippe mirror for 30 Euros. The girls team couldn't even find one. On the winning team again. Task 4 (Pet Show): Project managed his team to a win (and his enthusiasm helped them win the best lower cost items, particularly the balloons, which the other team also wanted but lost out on). Task 5: Was apparently more trusted as sub-team leader by Charleine than the person she actually named sub-team leader (Richard). On the winning team. Task 6: First time on the losing team. I think the previous weeks outweigh his bad performance in Task 6. I stand by my comment that April by comparison had done very little over the weeks to justify her staying. If so you would have been annoyed when Ruth was fired Were you ? |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 223
|
Quote:
I could take issue with a number of the points you have made but notwithstanding that you feel that he is entitled one poor performance.
If so you would have been annoyed when Ruth was fired Were you ? David by comparison never claimed to be good at being a handyman, but unless his business plan or even the other tasks involve being a handyman, I don't see his bad performance in this one task being very relevant, so yes, I think he can be allowed this one bad performance. Unlike Elle, Mergim or April, he's project managed a winning team, which I think means he's shown more promise, and deserves a second chance. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:48.


