Claire, a good leader or not?

3 of 3

Ignazio

27-04-2008

Originally Posted by brangdon:
“They needed to find a supermarket that would led them film. This was is the country, not the middle of a city. She got the ingredients eventually but it took time.

The teams seemed about equal on the production side. They won because Claire's team was better at selling. And not just because they got one big last order. The other team only got their big orders by offering exclusive deals, which they didn't have authority to do. If we take away those two deals, which Sir Alan wanted to do, they'd lose 230 litres worth. Claire's big final deal was for 200 litres, so if we take away that too, she still wins.

She was there at the final deal. I think you are assuming that the edited programme shows everything of significance that happened, and that if it didn't show leadership skills from Claire she can't have any. I think that's unfair. She deserves as much credit for her wins as Raef did for his.”

I don't assume the edited programme shows everything - I simply didn't see Claire leading the team and I agree entirely that the sales made by the other team flatters the Sales ability of the so called high achievers in the field. I do, however, spend quite a lot of time with friends in the country and supermarkets are never very far away. A quick phone call to see if they had the oranges, followed by a request to film (not likely to be met with a refusal) - and they could have saved a considerable amount of time. I agree with your mathematics - but that last deal would have been made with or without her. In fact it was Jenny C. who sealed the deal by offering the discount.

My opinion anyway.

Last edited by Ignazio : 27-04-2008 at 17:06

redstar81

27-04-2008

Originally Posted by Vivid:
“What rubbish.

She demonstrated beyond any doubt whatsoever she is an incompetent moron without any redeeming qualities. She has no grasp of managing a project, strategic thinking, in fact of any thinking whatsoever, the only thing that concerns her is status, if she doesn't have it she undermines those who do, and she revels in it and indulges herself in it if she fortuitously has it. She has no respect for others, she has is very stupid and spiteful and has the sophistication of a pig sty. She is nothing but a small-minded ( in every respect ) chav.

You seem to equate her success in winning the task with her competence, to any vaguely perceptive observer she was obviously very very lucky and the team won despite her self-indulgences and appallingly inept leadership.”

exactly

brangdon

27-04-2008

Originally Posted by Ignazio:
“I do, however, spend quite a lot of time with friends in the country and supermarkets are never very far away. A quick phone call to see if they had the oranges, followed by a request to film (not likely to be met with a refusal) - and they could have saved a considerable amount of time.”

For example, when they were selling coffee in task 1 of series 3, there was a supermarket directly behind Andy's stall, but they couldn't use it. They had to buy from some other place the producers has previously got permission from.

In practice places do often refuse permission. I think it's because they have no control over the editing, so they can be made to look foolish if they make a deal too low, or mean if they go too high, or if they are caught leering at the candidates, or whatever. It's a potential risk. They might get the benefit of some publicity, but then again they might not - we never saw where they finally bought the oranges from. I wondered if the cider tasting was part of a quid pro quo; ie they got permission to film on condition they included a shot of the owner drinking with the candidates.

I agree about phoning ahead, though. I don't know if there was a reason for not doing that.

3 of 3