• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • TV Shows: Reality
  • The Apprentice
How on earth was 22 yr old Lindi earning £6000 per month??
<<
<
3 of 3
>>
>
apprentice_fan
22-04-2008
Originally Posted by Give It Up:
“If "leadership" means wasting as much time as possible, waltzing around with your two cronies, stopping off at coffee shops (and bars and restaurants, not shown), barking orders down the phone and laughing at the members of the team who were actually doing the work, accusing them of whingeing while your two pals behave like nodding dogs in the back of a taxi then, yes, Raef is capable of great leadership.

How was the team fracturing Alex's fault? The team fractured because the previous week Nick, Michael, Kevin (the archetypal bully's mate - weak and scared and doing and saying anything to be the bully's friend so as not to be bullied himself) and Raef realised they had s'd, c'd and f'd the task up big time and decided, as they were the part of the team clearly to blame, that they would unite to bring the others down. One of them went instead. Tough! I wish it had been Raef.

Then the guys win the next task and because Raef just so happens to the be the project manager, he is suddenly the Saviour. The Saviour full to his bouffant with food, wine and caffeine in the back of a taxi.

Very little style and absolutely no substance, that's Raef.”

I agree that we have seen very little to judge Raef's business skills. However, I think I have seen enough to say that his leadership style is very effective:

1- At the beginning of the task, Raef asked who is good at what and therefore delegated the roles very effectively. Simon took the admin role, Alex and Lee were in face to face sales, Kevin (as a banker) was the negotiator, Michael was responsible for the pricing and finding what is necessary to get the job done (the plastic bags, the temperature of the washing, etc.)
2- Raef used the rift that has been created in the first task to his advantage and split the team accordingly and that is why they worked very well together.
3- Raef was decisive on the issue of sharing the irons with the girls without wasting too much time discussing the morality of the whole thing.
4- Raef left every one to get on with his role without much interference. That gave every one in the team the impression that he has an important role in the task and that is why they all gave their best.
5- When Kevin negotiated the Hotel deal, Raef did not interrupt him and avoided looking unprofessional. You can see that Raef was surprised when Kevin did not negotiate for more that 200 pounds but he did not play the blame game (as Alex did in the previous task). He quietly took the order and quickly realised that (unlike Jenny the other PM) that the rest of his team has to start working on it and ordered them to stop selling and go back immediately.
6- Realising that the negotiation skills of Kevin are not that great, he took initiative in negotiating the second order. He was decisive not to take the order as the price was very low.
7- Had Raef returned to the laundry to help the others, they would have definitely lost the task. Instead he looked for more business and that won them the task.
8- Throughout the whole task Raef kept his cool.

All the team gave their best and Simon did an excellent job. But I think that Raef being a PM was vital in the win. And as you said they had their coffee or whatever in the car on their way back. so they didn't waste very much time IMO.
*Laura*
22-04-2008
Excellent summary of why the guys won the task under Raef apprentice_fan.

I still think he's to "posh" to be the Apprentice but, I have to admit after a shakey start (awful Alex playing the class game and I actually fell for it. ) he has slowly become my fave.
Slow Alex
22-04-2008
For me the key to winning the laundrey task was the Hotel contract. Whoever won that (ie the guys) would go on to win the task as it's a) a large amount of money in one swoop b) logistically it's easy to identify the hotel laundries eg bed sheets
apprentice_fan
22-04-2008
Thanks *Laura*

I completely agree with you .. he won't win and I am still not sure that he has the necessary business skills needed for the job. But I think we have to give him credit for the leadership qualities he displayed in the laundry task.
pammi_i
22-04-2008
Originally Posted by susie-4964:
“To be honest, I'm struggling to see how any of them could managed to get out of their own front doors in the morning without written instructions. This year's lot have definitely been chosen for entertainment value rather than ability. Shame to see the Apprentice going down the BB route.”

I agree, I'm going right off it already, especially with The Boss continually firing those who seem to us to least deserve it. It's a very bad example to set of behaviour in the workplace. Frankly in most places I've worked if anyone behaves like some of AMS's apparent favourites they get a strip torn off them and told to act more civilised.
Book-Club_Babe
22-04-2008
They all appear, to me, to be delusional and full of bu11sh*t. They talk a good game, but display as much common sense as a kitchen table. I have yet to warm to any of them this year.
pammi_i
22-04-2008
Hmm, that's ~ £300 per day. About what I earn in a week . As she was the one with the 24 hour "support line" idea (wasn't she?) could it be that she's actually a call girl?
apprentice_fan
22-04-2008
Originally Posted by Slow Alex:
“For me the key to winning the laundrey task was the Hotel contract. Whoever won that (ie the guys) would go on to win the task as it's a) a large amount of money in one swoop b) logistically it's easy to identify the hotel laundries eg bed sheets”

I agree that the hotel order was vital in the boys' win. However, if the girls had won the hotel order, they still would have lost under Jenny's leadership. Jenny was far too busy securing sales to notice the simple fact that she needs to send some of the girls to start working on the laundry earlier in the day. The "payment after delivery" rule would have prevented them from winning the task. Comparing Jenny to Raef, every thing he did right, she did it wrong which led in the end to the girls' loss.
The_abbott
23-04-2008
This thread should come with a 24 hour hotline.
bingbong
23-04-2008
Originally Posted by Slow Alex:
“For me the key to winning the laundrey task was the Hotel contract. Whoever won that (ie the guys) would go on to win the task as it's a) a large amount of money in one swoop b) logistically it's easy to identify the hotel laundries eg bed sheets”

Not sure it was. I think the Hotel Contract was meant to be a poison chalice, i think on a per item basis it was a lot of work for not a great return.
Sweet FA
23-04-2008
Quote:
“Originally Posted by Slow Alex
For me the key to winning the laundrey task was the Hotel contract. Whoever won that (ie the guys) would go on to win the task as it's a) a large amount of money in one swoop b) logistically it's easy to identify the hotel laundries eg bed sheets”

Originally Posted by bingbong:
“Not sure it was. I think the Hotel Contract was meant to be a poison chalice, i think on a per item basis it was a lot of work for not a great return.”

Indeed it was. A hell of a lot of work for very little margin. I was sweating just watching it at home! It was basically a loss leader. Think Raef realised this too.

Besides, without effective leadership and team-working, absolutely any contract (or task) can be royally c0cked up!

Thought everyone knew that.
Shrike
23-04-2008
I have to agree the price the boys got for the hotel contract was far too low.
Hotelier "I was thinking £200"
Kevin "Ok - £200 then"!
Admittedly the edit could have made that look a bit more numptyish than it was

Especially when you consider they got £20 for just 1 duvet!
The only thing in its favour was that they had too little time to go round randomly knocking on doors to find 10 people who would trust someone on the doorstep with their duvet...
badfelafel
23-04-2008
That had been bothering me a bit - yes it does look like a poisoned chalice, with an unrealistically low price. Surely had those working been paid for their time, it would have been a lossmaker. Which means the girls should have zooooomed ahead!
<<
<
3 of 3
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map