Wasn't it brilliant when(after weeks of asking myself why no one was asking) the "bulldog" interviewer completely tore apart Tre's supposed international business. He also asked Katie why someone supposedly on 90k a year,who jetsets around the world wants to go to a job where in the words of SAS "she would be lucky to get out of Mile End"

I dont quite understand how Tre got lambasted about his international conglomerates (obviously Tre was using a bit of artistic licence here) but no-one seemed to pick up on the fact that "internet entrepreneur and property developer" Simon actually flogged a few things on the net and rented out a room in his house!!!!!! Another blagger but he got away with it (AGAIN).

Take the point. They all just want to be on telly anyway. Maybe they should do a programme about the real " apprentices" that go to work at Amstrad. Everyone knows that if any of those on the TV were half as talented as they think they are they wouldn't have to be on TV to be spotted.

Those bits of the interviews didn't make any sense. The Tre question wasunasked - what went on in those 15 offices - even 15 people working part time was worth exploring and more than Simon could boast. . The Katie question was plain silly - Michelle was on 100k + last year and Katie was better qualified to move on with better or equal performances on the show. Ruth also was on a high salary. No reason to major on the question for Katie any more than for them.

But don't you think that after weeks of being told about how successful he was,chairing board meetings at 18,working in New York,offices all around the world etc etc you found that basically he was a bullshitter of the highest degree-he worked for his Dad and really he doesn't seem to have any job of note. With regards to Katie she again appears to have got her career on the back of someone else i.e marrying the owner of the company. The both of them were a bit useless and not half as smart as they thought they were.

This reminded me of an article I read about the bone headed MTV series "I'm From Rolling Stone" where they basically filmed a bunch of wannabes pretending to audition for a writing gig with the famous music magazine whilst basically acting out like a bunch of weird kids at summer camp. One girl apparently treated interviews like dates and the editor gave the impression of never having read a word by any of them. Meanwhile the real interns who could actually write but weren't associated with a trendy TV production were treated like unpaid dogsbodies. The piece claims that Rolling Stone has a totally corporate and professional management structure any way and that shameless shilling to the youth market was utterly ludicrous and fundamentally dishonest and cynical from the outset.

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critic...evision_friend

Has anyone actually checked these salaries?

And if so are they basic salaries or do they include:

Potential bonuses
Benefits in kind - eg healthcare, car allowances etc
Pension contributions
etc etc

It's perfectly possible for a salary of £50k or £60k to be "talked up" so it is described as a £90k package.

The beauty of capitalism is that you can't be paid 90k unless someone pays your employer 90k. Its possible he overpaid her (or under paid her ) for her contribution but someone was good enough to make the money. Is she still working for him anyway?

Tre seems to be making money somehow and organising 15 cousins or whatever with skills that evidently can sell suggests some ability. The bottom line was was he making any money or was he making good progress towards naking money? I agree he makes it sound like he runs Microsoft but SAs starts with a barrow so he can't really sniff at someone with 15 relatives or mates working away on lcomputers in their bedrooms - its bigger than a one man barrow.

Guess it helps if you marry the boss.

Wasnt Michelle's £100k last year only actually one long term contract she managed to get extended to a full year which wold have paid her a turnover of £100k. Turnover of £100k and salary of £100k are not the same - if you had a business turning over £100k a year your salary would be whatever was left after you paid out all expenses (office costs) , tax , staff salaries etc

Isn't Katie's £90K salary from her current job at the Met Office in Exeter? She presumably didn't marry the boss to get that.

Give her time and I'm sure she'll put that right