|
||||||||
Vana should have gone...too much oil! |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 5,071
|
Tricky dickie should have being fired on that team and Super Mario plumber fired from the other team.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 895
|
Quote:
I think it was wise of LS to not let the cock ups in the kitchen be a firing cause in the task. It's not really a great chef he's after.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,866
|
^^Hmm No one?
It was mentioned again when David was fired, but that's not uncommon lots of mistakes are brought up when someone is fired. But I take your point, I've said on numerous posts it's not the "Great British Bake Off" |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 900
|
Quote:
Its interesting that none of the suppliers bought into the products. I am sure there has been similar near disasters which the suppliers have agreed that with some tweaking could be a very good product. After all in real life it would take Tesco's a year to produce their own brand based on an established brand - let alone. Concessions should have been made for the two day turn around. Yes I believe this was a 'setup' for the desired results in the board room. 'Setup' in that the suppliers were told not to make a purchase if they were not happy with the actual product in front of them, when in reality it takes up to a year to produce & market test a product. Also I thought if Tescos' et al, did agree to purchase, it would mean that they could not run and claim product exclusivity when they copied and perfected the idea (although I can't believe that this idea is new to them).!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,866
|
But I think their USP was the fact they weren't fried, I think the ones you see on shelves are. That was Richards only real mistake not showing that they weren't fried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,387
|
yes Vana was responsible for the oily mess otherwise her team would have won
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,501
|
Quote:
Exactly, though having said that who was it got fired recently for basically making a mess of measuring in that preposterous builders task. Seems Lord Sugs is looking for a handyman/chef this year.
Quote:
^^Hmm No one?
It was mentioned again when David was fired, but that's not uncommon lots of mistakes are brought up when someone is fired. But I take your point, I've said on numerous posts it's not the "Great British Bake Off" Being good (or even not terrible) at ironing transfers on t-shirts, directing a video, or personally making dehydrated vegetable crisps, and so on, is totally irrelevant. Even more so when you have never done anything like it before. Vana made a costly mistake but it was still based on something of no relevance to whether she might be any good running a business. The tasks provide entertainment but the investment will not be given based on much, if anything, that actually happens during them. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Kingston Upon Thames
Posts: 1,863
|
Quote:
Being good (or even not terrible) at ironing transfers on t-shirts, directing a video, or personally making dehydrated vegetable crisps, and so on, is totally irrelevant. Even more so when you have never done anything like it before. Vana made a costly mistake but it was still based on something of no relevance to whether she might be any good running a business. The tasks provide entertainment but the investment will not be given based on much, if anything, that actually happens during them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,866
|
I think she should of had a "rougher ride" than she got, she ignored the instructions and even refused to listen when her PM asked her to stop. Not saying she was totally to blame, but she did add to the failure of the task as did Richard. But neither of those 2 problems and Brett's dodgy pitch were worse than the other teams. Still thinking it was a fix, and by letting Vana go back it at least guarantees a women in the interview stage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,846
|
I guess because she sold a £1.4m property, he's prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt and overlook the slimy mishap!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,104
|
I actually think they had a decent product, bar the horrible oily mess. Brett shouldn't have gone but not sure Vana could be held completely responsible either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: cardiff
Posts: 12,557
|
Quote:
Brett was robbed Vana should have gone as it was her who chose to override the recommended 50n ml oil and used 150 ml. I cannot understand why Brett didn't bring her back in the boardroom
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 5,853
|
cant put my finger on why but i also feel that Vana should have gone this week and Brett should have stayed. think he could have potentially been in the final so yeah he was robbed
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,056
|
Quote:
cant put my finger on why but i also feel that Vana should have gone this week and Brett should have stayed. think he could have potentially been in the final so yeah he was robbed
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Swansea
Posts: 1,972
|
Quote:
I think he should have taken Vana into the boardroom, because of the oil fiasco. That said, LS made it clear that he thought Richard was responsible for the failure of the task, and Brett contradicted him and backed Richard.
I think Brett decided to take Richard with him because it was clear LAS had more of an issue with Richard's mistake than Vana's so in his mind, he had a better chance of surviving against Richard. Personally, I thought Brett and his team were very unlucky as their product was a good one and it surprised me that none of the stores placed an order, even a tiny one. It all felt like this was set up for both teams to lose from the get go to make it more interesting to be honest. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: South Wales
Posts: 5,866
|
^^ Yes there's no way someone on Bretts team should of gone, I personally think it was wrong of LAS to basically make Brett bring back Richard, the only thing I can think of is they needed a guaranteed female in the interview stages. Because let's face it the women this year have been largely useless, and not one of them has shown any real talent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 22,733
|
Quote:
yes Vana was responsible for the oily mess otherwise her team would have won
Quote:
I think she should of had a "rougher ride" than she got, she ignored the instructions and even refused to listen when her PM asked her to stop. Not saying she was totally to blame, but she did add to the failure of the task as did Richard. But neither of those 2 problems and Brett's dodgy pitch were worse than the other teams. Still thinking it was a fix, and by letting Vana go back it at least guarantees a women in the interview stage.
Vana made a mistake in the cooking but none of them are cooks and at least she gave it a go. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:49.


