I'm quoting my response from another thread.


Seriously though,does anyone posting here think that the programme really is a very public interview to be employed by Sir Alan Sugar?

It's intended both to promote business skills and to entertain. If it was just entertainment, Sir Alan wouldn't be doing it.

Sorry but I disagree.

Imho it is purely an entertainment programme.


By the way,how do you know what Sir Alan's motives are?

Well when he's practically a billionaire it can't be for the money!!

No but just look at the self promotion he is receiving.

Donald Trump doesn't need the money either but the free publicity is wonderful.

Because he's said so in interviews, and because it makes sense and is consistent. It also fits with the part of the BBC's remit to "educate and inform".

Why do you think he is lying?

OK.

I don't think I actually said he was lying,did I?

I think the show has become a victim of its own success. I loved the first series and thought the right candidate became the Apprentice. Although Michelle wasn't my cup of tea I could see why SAS chose her over Ruth. This series however, I'm struggling to see why many of them were chosen as candidates and can only conclude that they are there to boost the ratings. In short it has now become a "highbrow" BB, rather than a programme where candidates and (to a lesser degree) the public learn about the intricacies of the running of large corporations. I think this was most telling when SAS gave one of his reasons for firing Jadine as "she's not the finished article", to which the counter argument is surely, if she was the finished article why is she on a show called the Apprentice.

I think the candidates this time are much better than the candidates in the last series. The last six last year were Michelle, Ruth, Paul, Ansell, Syed, and Tuan. Just compare them with the last 6 candidates this year!

Perhaps the edit of the program is becoming more and more like BB. I think the program should focus more on how the winning team won: the contributions of each one in the team, the PM decisions, ..etc. as much as they focus on the loosing team and the boardroom. For example Jadine has been on the winning team 6 times but in many of the tasks we don't know her contributions: We barely saw her on the Selling Art task, the selling to the French task, the purchasing task. The same applies for Lohit.

On firing jadine: SAS said he is not an educational institute and he has gone beyond teaching the BASIC THINGS in business. Surely, he thought Jadine lacks skills in key areas in business. I don't think he meant the apprentice should be a completed article as a business man rather than a completed article for SAS (as an apprentice) .. someone who knows the basics in business and has all the necessary skills to develop them further.

I agree, I find it disappointing that I do not get any business learnings out of the programme, the editing makes it impossible to see the reality of what actually happened (it's much the same with Dragons' Den, where you don't actually learn the skills necessary to start your own business, it's all about the dragons).

The Apprentice is (as someone has already said) BB for the highbrow - albeit with less pond life in it, at least the Apprentice people actually have brains.

How does it promote business skills?

The situations the candidates find themselves in make it seem like Blue Peter for adults and are only analogous to real scenarios at about four degrees of remove.

The only lessons to be learnt are generic ones which apply to all communal situations - stop and think rather than rushing ahead for the sake of it, treat your colleagues and their ideas with respect but don't allow yourself to be overridden particularly if you're the one with the management responsibility, trust your colleagues if they earn it but don't trust them on faith, etc, etc.

It's an entertaining programme and gives Amstrad publicity that money can't buy. Offering a one year contract to somebody at 100k is worth it to SAS for the kudos it gives him and his company. Therefore it's a win win for everybody. We get a really entertaining show, the BBC get ever increasing ratings and Amstrad get a heap of good publicity via their own "drop dead shrewd" boss.

Has anyone noticed how the size of SAS's empire has not changed in 3 years? It has always been £800m. It doesn't look like he's being very successful in using this show to increase sales of anything.

SAS = Special Air Service

AMS = Sir Alan Sugar

I dont like correcting english, especially as i am so poor at it myself. But considering Sir Alan already has a set of initials in common use, i cant understand why posters dont use them??? Unless its a sort of joke??

The problem with this type of programme it that when it shows signs of becoming popular the producers start to pander to the 'reality tv' crowd.

While the initial intentions of 'The Apprentice' (and I would also include 'Dragons Den' in this) may have been good and well intentioned it ends up being yet another stage managed 'reality' show.

While we are not privy to what goes on behind the scenes, what is broadcast does suggest that 'the contestants' are selected on their ability to 'make good TV', provide points of conflict and generally come across as quite objectionable examples of the business community. Yes, examples of this behaviour exist in every area of business, but it is by no means widespread and to use the tired old excuse that 'business is tough' is just lazy.

So far I have seen little evidence of actual business acumen, in fact I would go so far as to suggest that many of the current crop are incompetents who have managed to bluff and hoodwink their way to their current positions.

I remember reading a while back that Sugar was considering pulling out of 'The Apprentice' because he was unhappy with the calibre of the series 2 applicants and demanded a higher level for series 3. I've seen absolutely no evidence of this. In my opinion the series 3 contestants are even more unworthy than the series 2 participants.

I feel that the UK apprentice has gone the way of the US version, its a vehicle for Brand Sugar (similarly Dragon's Den is only interested in Brand Dragon), its stage managed to provide conflict based entertainment, provides no discernible insight into business (or selection process) thinking and has become nothing but puff entertainment with a pseudo business wrapper.

Some of the Series 3 contestants have proved themselves to be embarrassingly inept. Bring on the shopping channel task!

Get over yourself. SAS Sugar.Sir Alan

There's no need to be rude. You could simply have said "SAS = Sir Alan Sugar" to explain. Perhaps it is you who should get over yourself.

For what it's worth I think it's an entertainment program, one with a possible beneficial outcome for SAS and for whomever wins, and also anyone who performs well on the show. It is primarily entertainment. It's very good entertainment. It is also probably designed to promote enterprise, seeing as the BBC is funded by a license fee approved by HM government, who are always seeking to promote enterprise.

I think it's an excellent idea and very good at what it does...

Maybe he's doing it for fun? As you said, he doesn't need to make any more money so it wouldn't necessarily be for the business either. No, fun and vanity are my best guesses as to why he does it. I don't mind which, it's a great programme and by far and away my favourite TV contest.

Come on, let's be honest, yes he's a very rich man but of course he is doing it for the money!

look at the participants, he's an idiot

Er you started off by criticising me - correcting my English. If you had merely asked "what does SAS stand for?" then that would've been different. Oh and I didn't come up with SAS it's been in general use on this forum for ages.