|
||||||||
The Apprentice 16th May's show (no spoilers please) |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#501 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 18,089
|
Quote:
Lohit was with Simon actually....
I thought the funniest thing was this dialogue Lohit: I'm not street Simon: You're not street...... You're not straight!! LOL That was pretty funny actually!
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#502 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 4,982
|
I thought Tre came across quite badly tonight. He let his ego get the better of him and came across all know-it-all. The team worked pretty well as it was but he had to keep putting negatives on everything. The only thing I agreed with him about was that they should have said 10% of profit.
Simon was great tonight. i don't know why but he had me laughng my head off. He obviously works well with Tre (they showed that in Episode 1) but I didn't like seeing Tre bitching about him behind his back at times. Sir Alan should have fired Katie AND Ghazal in my opinion. During the boardroom, Katie was so patronising to Sir Alan - like when she was asking him if he could see the Logo - it was so rude. |
|
|
|
|
|
#503 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 121
|
poor Ghazal
Ghazal was stitched up by Katie but she really never stood a chance. Did anyone notice Tre's tenderness towardws Ghazal? A blosssoming romance?
Simon was fantastic! |
|
|
|
|
|
#504 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 688
|
Quote:
Sir Alan should have fired Katie AND Ghazal in my opinion. During the boardroom, Katie was so patronising to Sir Alan - like when she was asking him if he could see the Logo - it was so rude.
Quote:
Ghazal was stitched up by Katie but she really never stood a chance. Did anyone notice Tre's tenderness towardws Ghazal? A blosssoming romance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#505 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 121
|
Ghazal looked awful
Quote:
Ghazal looks beautiful. I want to wife her
![]() Ghazal loked her worst tonight, over made up and horsey. |
|
|
|
|
|
#506 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,491
|
I'm baffled by people thinking Katie is talented - her presentation was feeble, lacking any conviction, and her smugness shone through. She's manipulative, yes, but that's half the problem. She's on the losing side so many times because she knows how to get the team leader very often to do what she says - and her ideas are rubbish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#507 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,376
|
I thought Simon did really well tonight (I think that's the first positive thing I've ever said about him!). Tre was a bit negative but his ideas were good and he did pull the project together. Jadine was lucky to have the team she did.
Naomi made me laugh - Jadine, threatened by her? Is it right that she's the only one left who's never won as team leader? I'm so enjoying the Katie/Kristina chemistry and am delighted it's still there for another week. I do hope they're on the same team again. |
|
|
|
|
|
#508 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
Another excellent episode. It was really interesting. Actually I thought both teams did really well, but Sir A's point about now knowing what Jam's advert was about was a very valid one and one I didn't think of until he pointed it out. It must be an easy mistake to make then.
I'm very sorry that Katie's miserable ass escaped a good kicking this week again, but I had to agree about all of SAS's oberservations about Gazal in hindsight. Christina annoyed me a bit this week, although I still have her as a contender. I think Naomi is a washout. Tre's ego was still shining through, true to form, but he really did have a point about the 10% of sales. I agreed with him right from the start there, and I'm really surprised the others weren't able to put themselves in consumers' shoes (or even trainers? ) and see just how dictatorial tha would seem. I would never try to sell anything and say that "x per cent of the sale price goes to charity" for exactly the reasons that Tre gave. And I'm not even an advertising/marketting person! In fact, my closest career ally is the departed nuclear physicist ![]() Wonderful entertainment again. Quite the best of all the reality shows! ![]() None of that is Katie's fault. She said what was wrong with the original concept and logo. She tried to change direction but between a non-idea that wasn't working and one that might have. Her big weakness was everyone's - not getting a workable big idea at the start. She didn't defend Ghazal in the boardroom but thats because Ghazal was toast as soon as she took Naomi's concept and logo.She seemed too happy with a nice looking advert - which might have got her sacked - but given the idea was logical nonsense, nice looking was all it could be. Ghazal managed to get an ad campaign done and wasn't offered any good ideas she didn't go with - the should have listened to Naomi point was nonsense - Naomi was still pushing what George rightly saw as a non-idea. She did have the ability to decide to change a bad idea but then it was too late as they were stuck with the idiotic JAM. Naomi and Kristina did themselves no favours. JAM was a meaningless logo and the Image concept was banal. Worse they stuck to both ideas when Katie saw what was wrong early on and Ghazal at least saw where she had gone wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
#509 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 5,992
|
I'm really started to hate the smug look Katie has on her face all the time like she is the bees knees.
Naomi and Lohit have to achieve something next week otherwise I fear one of them will be going. I wonder who will be team leaders next week, my bet is on Lohit and Katie. |
|
|
|
|
|
#510 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,826
|
Katie is beginning to look almost deranged with her weird looks at SAS in the boardroom
Ghazal deserved to go - tonight is the only time she's shown any energy and that was to defend herself against sacking. Why didn't that loud mouth come to the fore when she was PM? Instead she was meek and easily led with no ideas or ability to direct the project. |
|
|
|
|
|
#511 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 35,432
|
Quote:
Ghazal managed to get an ad campaign done and wasn't offered any good ideas she didn't go with - the should have listened to Naomi point was nonsense - Naomi was still pushing what George rightly saw as a non-idea. She did have the ability to decide to change a bad idea but then it was too late as they were stuck with the idiotic JAM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#512 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,295
|
I was actually surprised that Ghazal caved in and changed the "concept" of the advertising from image to music. Neither was a great idea, I don't think there were enough specifics in their ideas if that makes sense - both ideas were too wide-ranging. However, in my opinion, image is more related to trainers (even if the connection is somewhat tenuous) than music is because clothes are part of an image, and clothing includes your footwear. Trainers and music have almost no connection at all.
I think Ghazal was wrong to change the idea halfway through, and she was wrong to listen so closely to Katie but ignore Naomi (because both women had valuable experience and input). Katie surprised me when she was talking directly to camera about the Jam logo being so stupid, when before and after that shot, she was agreeing with the others. Surely if she thought the logo was terrible, that would have been the time to say so! Tre made me laugh when he was talking about himself having "led from the shadows". He along with Simon did start their whole concept, and he was totally correct in the profit/sales argument but he really contributed little else during the day - all I saw was him constantly moaning about things but not offering any solutions. When it dawned on him that they were probably going to win despite all his dire warnings, suddenly he's the one who made it all happen! |
|
|
|
|
|
#513 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,621
|
For which task was Simon PM? I can't remember.
Here's my tuppence worth on old horse face: She won when she was PM against the disastrous Rory. She was also on the winning team when Tre was PM, but if you remember, she and Paul went against Tre's instructions and tried to get a DJing gig for the evening's business. Adam squealed and Tre put a stop to it. Who knows, it they had had their way, Tre may have lost that task. Katie has been on the losing team for every other task. She has been culpable, or partially culpable for decisions which have cost her team victory, such as going for the schmooze over hard sell in the art dealer task. I'm sure others on this board will be able to remember details that I can't recall right now, but bottom line is...Katie needs to go. Last edited by jaybee2 : 16-05-2007 at 23:57. Reason: Edited for spelling. |
|
|
|
|
|
#514 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 209
|
Quote:
For which task was Simon PM? I can't remember.
Here's my tuppence worth on old horse face: She won when she was PM against the distastrous Rory. She was also on the winning team when Tre was PM, but if you remember, she and Paul went against Tre's instructions and tried to get a DJing gig for the evening's business. Adam squealed and Tre put a stop to it. Who knows, it they had had their way, Tre may have lost that task. Katie has been on the losing team for every other task. She has been culpable, or partially culpable for decisions which have cost her team victory, such as going for the schmooze over hard sell in the art dealer task. I'm sure others on this board will be able to remember details that I can't recall right now, but bottom line is...Katie needs to go. Simon was PM for the 'buy these 10 items' task last week |
|
|
|
|
|
#515 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London
Posts: 4,818
|
Good episode but peeved that "she" didn't go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#516 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,621
|
Thanks Pembrokian.
Gosh, that was only last week. How could I forget that already? |
|
|
|
|
|
#517 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,746
|
Quote:
I didn't know Lohit was gay!
Do you reckon he might be Catholic?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#518 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,746
|
Quote:
I am telling y'all.... Simon dancing will work... as a dancer... it would work in reality... but unfortunately the 'experts' are the judges and not the public...
Therein lies the problem with tonight's Show... the measurement of the Task? Regards I thought the actual end products of both teams were atrocious. There's nothing more embarassing than business types trying to be cool and down with da kids. Both teams went for the most cliched predictable ideas but reckoned they were being really different and 'radical'. They just did what almost every single other corporate marketing company for trainers do, approached it by trying to claim that they are 'cooler' than their competitors. Do they honestly believe that they were being any different from what is normally done with trainer advertising? I think that you're right in that an ironic approach may have been a much more original idea. A different angle that would set them apart. Maybe the teams could have genuinely marketed their trainer to young children or old people...but no, they had to show how 'cool' and down with da kids they are didn't they?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#519 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 82,800
|
Quote:
Katie surprised me when she was talking directly to camera about the Jam logo being so stupid, when before and after that shot, she was agreeing with the others. Surely if she thought the logo was terrible, that would have been the time to say so! I hope she goes soon as I cannot take more of that face and smug superiority when she has not demonstrated ability, as SAS pointed out her CV makes lots of claims. |
|
|
|
|
|
#520 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,746
|
Quote:
Those jam trainers are absolutely crapola.
Can you imagine anybody wanting to be seen dead wearing a pair of those ridiculous 'Street' things? |
|
|
|
|
|
#521 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 90,773
|
Quote:
...
Sir Alan should have fired Katie AND Ghazal in my opinion. During the boardroom, Katie was so patronising to Sir Alan - like when she was asking him if he could see the Logo - it was so rude. |
|
|
|
|
|
#522 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 437
|
This is off topic sorry, but there's a guy on this show who was educated at Cambridge, but he's clearly a moron.
I've encountered this more frequently recently, really cretinous people having been educated at places of supposed excellence. I don't get it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#523 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,746
|
Quote:
Katies presentation is patronising and trite
|
|
|
|
|
|
#524 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,746
|
Quote:
Katie's pitch-I LOVE IT!
"14-year-old...he'll undress" Sure he would Katie, sure he would, Jay the most uncool tosser in the world would certainly do that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#525 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 90,773
|
Quote:
I sort of agree with you.
I thought the actual end products of both teams were atrocious. There's nothing more embarassing than business types trying to be cool and down with da kids. Both teams went for the most cliched predictable ideas but reckoned they were being really different and 'radical'. They just did what almost every single other corporate marketing company for trainers do, approached it by trying to claim that they are 'cooler' than their competitors. Do they honestly believe that they were being any different from what is normally done with trainer advertising? I think that you're right in that an ironic approach may have been a much more original idea. A different angle that would set them apart. Maybe the teams could have genuinely marketed their trainer to young children or old people...but no, they had to show how 'cool' and down with da kids they are didn't they? ![]() |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:58.





