I think the onus is rather more on you to answer mine as to why you introduced personal remarks and insinuations about 'my world' into a discussion about use of kisses on the Apprentice. You haven't done so.

Kissagrams are now suddenly singing telegrams. Oh, my! How they mutate, seemingly minute by minute.
So what are singing telegrams then I wonder? Poetry readings, perhaps...

How desperate. :yawn:

Yes, you are so desperate to avoid answering that.

Oulandy, I have nothing more to say to you. I have consistently debated the points, on topic, on this thread and you have consistently avoided responding to them - so I can only assume you have no rebuttal.
You keep banging on about my reference to 'your world', portraying it as the height of rudeness and using it as an excuse not to discuss any of the issues I've raised. If you want to see a real display of rudeness on this thread I would refer you back to one of your earliest posts to me (no 18), which, as an example of heavy-handed sarcasm, is worthy of my verbose 12-year-old neice. I did not comment on this at the time as I thought the purpose of this forum was to debate The Apprentice. You seem quite determined not to do this, so as far as I'm concerned there is nothing further to be said.

God, I hope not! Naomi came across as being weak, spineless and incompetent, and I'm so surprised as to why she's still there when others have been fired for less.

She wasn't able to make decisions on her own, constantly asking Kristina (who she foolishly trusts) what she should do. She also took the easy way out in saying that the prime blame was to be laid at Jadine and Geri's door. When in actual fact they were doomed from the start, if she was a good PM, then she would have seen the nonsense in proposing a face painting business on a school day, and have been able to effectively manage someone like Jadine who may have been vocal but essentially was on her side.

SirAlan freely admitted to using the posh pet shops as Red Herrings in Week 2. Surely "Kissogram" could have been there as a trap for someone looking for a cheap way of making money?

Naomi did stitch up Gerri - it was her who asked Gerri to find locations (even though gerri wasn't keen and didn't show many ideas at the first meeting). Later Naomi accused
Gerri of "volunteering" to do locations. I got the feeling Naomi didn't want to be PM as she wanted to bide her time and was annoyed at gerri for asking the whole team if they wanted to be in a vote.
Last edited by mummyhazel : 18-04-2007 at 13:24

Hermesetas prefers blondes imo. I do recall some very attractive brunettes like Karen leaving early in previous series.

Any idea what Lady Sugar looks like?

Try this link

I have discussed my view of the issue that I do not regard the distinction you attempt to draw as an essential one but merely an incidental one. I have not intentionally been rude to you as a person - mild sarcasm in one post simply as a linguistic device for making a point was not intended as a personal attack on you. It seems you took it so and that is why you chose the personal insinuation and tone subsequently with me. I took exception to your personal comment and told you so.

I don't need an excuse to avoid anything. I simply don't see the issue as you do and do not see some of the additional points as advancing your argument or convincing in showing an essential distinction such as when you called a kissogram a singing gram or simply the sending of a greeting. It would be very easy to show why it is not so and why it is just as much - or as little - a sexualised type of service as what they did but I don't think it would convince you of my position either. There is little point therefore in continuing, unless it's wanting to prove somebody right or wrong. As I see it, it's a case of we each have our own opinions and that's that.

I don't know that she was on her side though - I got the impression she was trying to create factions and alliances and a support group of her own. She seems embattled and was shown in a clip saying that they should fear her, as if she is in a war or something rather than a co-operative team.

The kissogram as test or trap for the unwary? Maybe.

I got the impression that Gerri had advocated allocating tasks and responsibilities, so Naomi did and gave her the locations- finding task. My feeling was that Naomi didn't want to be PM because of the aggression and attitude in the group, from Jadine mainly. Sralan mentioned in the boardroom that Naomi didn't like conflict. I guess that's what she found hardest to deal with. It was also something Jadine found hard with Tre in the very first task.

We saw her in the first series at the events put on by the teams - maybe last year too. She is a lot more attractive, elegant and better looking than her husband.

If the boys had used the kissogram idea (and not involved Katie in it) would it have caused the same reaction from SAS and people on this forum? If I was in the girls team I wouldn't want to do the kissogram idea, but if others in the team did, then I'd go with it because it could earn lots of money. In my mind a peck on the cheek is just a bit of fun, and far less embarrassing than the singogram!

I doubt it would. Sugar has always been more censorious generally of women (although with one or two exceptions) and let men get away with far more. If they were flirtatious while selling flowers to women, I'm sure there wouldn't be a peep out of him. And if they did a kissogram he wouldn't associate it with 'another old profession'.

I think most of the women didn't really want to do it but reluctantly decided to do it for the sake of the task/ the group. It's a pity they didn't do the singing gram thing instead. I wonder if they didn't think of it, or weren't allowed to do it because the other team was. From what we saw, though, most of the kisses seemed to be just a peck on the cheek. And didn't we see Nick looking pained at the singing group?

I agree. I didn't see the 'fruit-selling' episode, but it's clear that Sir Alan objected very strongly to the women using flirtatious tactics (the clips I saw were fairly mild double entendres, IMO, and seemed to be much appreciated by the men on the receiving end!).

In the Top Shop task, Syed's behaviour, IMO, overstepped the mark - ogling the girl in the changing rooms!! But I don't recall that being an issue in the boardroom. Paul also took the flirtatious route, though more subtly than Syed (who was just plain creepy - in that instance at least ).

Anyway, I do find it extremely hypocritical of Sir Alan to criticise women candidates emphasising their femininity and feminine attributes. After all, he wears a classic business suit, which emphasises (or creates ) the archetypally masculine broad shoulders. He has a beard; again emphasising his masculinity. And it's a grizzled beard, to match his grizzled hair.

He's essentially announcing his position as the 'silverback male'.

Maybe his main concern is that, as a man, he knows his own weak points, and knows male gullibility and susceptibility to female charms will always give the women an advantage?

I don't agree with the kissogram idea. However, in practically every other arena, Sir Alan has put business over 'morals' (look at Sophie's departure tonight). There is a definite inconsistency in his approach.

Agreed. However, if both teams fail at something, it suggests that the "something" may actually be quite hard and maybe we should cut them a bit of slack.


A lot of them were unhappy to begin with, but apparently all except Jadine came around. Eg Sophie made a big deal out of her opposition, but was seen gleefully counting the money at the end.


The task rules required Michelle to use the VIP room to pick clothes for the team while the others had the meeting. She had no choice about it. Sharon did the same on the other team. Since she was going to use the VIP room the next day, she tried out some of the facilities and, yes, had some champaign. So she had some fun. It's hardly the crime of the century.

Her performance elsewhere on that task was excellent. She ran the focus group better than the rival team and got more out of it. She delegated tasks well. Her big mistake was being slow to realise the VIP room wasn't working (Tuan put Sharon in his VIP room, and was quicker to take her out again.) When she did come out, she did something that took her team from being 25% behind to 5% ahead, which was pretty amazing. Unfortunately we are not told what she did.

In summary: she was stitched up by the edit. She was shown in the VIP room twice, and Sharon never shown in it, but they both used it both days.


No, Sir Alan gave her a duff project. Michelle probably saved him money by killing it. She also had some personal misfortune, and it really annoys me when they blame her for what appears to be shear bad luck.


I agree about not getting second chances; that's a problem in the early episodes. I don't agree Naomi was worse than Andy. Andy was terrible. Naomi was mediocre with some strengths and weaknesses.


I agree, but for different reasons. Gerri was fired for her dreadful boardroom performance rather than anything she did on the task. She allowed Sir Alan to believe she had contributed nothing in the first three tasks, and was a "late starter". She was unable to assess her colleagues and didn't blow her own trumpet. She all but fell on her sword.

(As did Ifti, as did Sophie.)

Brangdon, I take your points about Michelle perhaps being edited unfairly in the Top Shop task (but the edited version is all I have to judge any of them on!). I still think - from the edited shows I saw - that Ruth appeared to be a stronger performer generally, and would have turned out to be a better 'apprentice'. Obviously that's something none of us will ever know for sure.

I agree that Gerri's boardroom performance sealed her fate: AS likes 'fighters', who can justify themselves.

Re the running of the task and the agreement to the 'kissograms', I'm still not convinced. Even if, as you say, most of the unhappy team members 'came round' in the end, is it really good leadership to pressurise female workers to assist in the hawking of kisses to strangers in pubs if it's something they initially feel unhappy about? I agree with an earlier poster who suggested that 'kissograms' might even have been put on the job list as a red herring, to see if anyone was daft enough to try it, or perhaps to see how they would interpret what the job involved. Whatever the truth, AS didn't seem that impressed by what they did.

Naomi is insipid and weak - anyone who can't do anything without checking with someone else first (Kristina) is not for the job, frankly

she was rubbish, just very lucky that Gerri was even worse

I don't think that's what we actually saw, though. There was one argument where she listened to Jadine and then tried to listen to someone else, who happened to be Kristina, and then Jadine got the hump and said that's all she ever did. It wasn't a theme of the show, though; just a theme of Jadine's whinging. We certainly see Naomi listening to other people.

I didn't really notice Naomi much this week. It's such a fine line between success and failure most weeks and perhaps the PM's are often judged too harshly in the boardroom by SAS and also fellow team members. Had the result been reversed this week, and it was so close, Ghazal could have been in serious trouble; especially over the sin of having the resources but failing to manufacture sufficiant product.

Yes, it's easy to blame the boss. I think Sir Alan is well aware of that because he is the boss, and so he can be reluctant to fire PMs unless he has no choice.

This week it seemed to be Naomi who came up with the "Cheeky Monkey" theme. Being on the winning team, you don't get so much screen time unless you do something especially stupid. (Being especially clever will often be cut to conceal who wins and make the ending more dramatic.)

I agree with you completely.

It's extremely difficult for us to say who deserves to get sacked and who deserves to get hired every week, because the entire show is heavily edited. It's edited to project certain people and attatch traits to them that will be entertaining for a TV audience, and it will also edit people out.

It must be obvious now in series 3 that the editing shields certain people.
They tend to hold certain people back until the later shows, as mentioned above regarding Tim and Michelle.

I found it surprising on the Apprentice sister show broadcast just after the main show that a couple of people put Lohit forward as the potential winner.
As we have only been watching very selective edits it was surprising to hear Lohit spoken in such glowing terms.

I know whether or not she wins. And that's all I'll say on the subject.

Naomi will never win. She led her team diabolically a few weeks ago and is making very simple mistakes. Quite clever but not up to the standard required to win this show. Jadine and Katie are the two strongest I have seen so far. Good Leadership and they know their stuff but do it in very different ways.