You only need to read the threads to see that you are the one in a very small minority.

Most people take Lucinda's side on this becase the box and TV advert design, done without her input, are quite simply terrible.

It was pure good fortune that the other team made what Sugar considered to be such a monumental cock-up that they won by default.

As InigoMontoya and I have agreed, there is significant room for interpretation here given the small amount of material we actually get to see.

Unlike you, I'm quite prepared to admit that as I haven't as much information as I'd like I could have it wrong. InigoMontoya I believe takes a similar view although coming from the other direction.

I'm not quite sure why you feel the need, nor feel you have the justification, to be so utterly dogmatic without a fraction of the evidence you'd need to support such dogmatism.

You are just rudely brushing other people's points and opinions aside in a manner that, I'm sure, causes the majority of your posts to be ignored.

And you do have an objective perspective then? Nobody does because this show is edited from hours of footage to make just a one hour show. Yet people seem to think it is an accurate representation of what happened. I've previously pointed out there is a lot of context missed out.

What is forgotten by most is that Lucinda made points as soon as she could. When she saw the box, she commented. She even commented about the advert before it was even made and they still ignored her. If she was commenting so frequently when things had already been done then it highlights how isolated team members were, an error both teams made I felt. Alex admitted himself that he was just content with making her feel like she had some bit of control over something. Yes Lucinda probably brought it up too often, but in my opinion, and shown by Alex's own comments, that had to be her tactic to counteract Alex's own.

As for the boardroom tactics I have already mentioned that:


Yet you referred to it as an 'invalid point'. I think that just highlights that it's not my points that are invalid, but because I have a difference of opinion you believe it to be. Clearly neither opinion will be changed and I doubt we'll ever see the full footage to see the full picture of what went on.

Anyone can see that Lucinda really does have an excellent chance in this show, she wasn't intimidated by two very overbearing males yesterday. With Rafe brutally removed, Lucinda slots in as my number one.

Yes. It's a matter of simple fact that if two team members take on a task in the absence of a third then, from the POV of that task, the missing member is sidelined. Often unavoidable - the other team did much the same - but in this case there was (from my interpretation) a very definate desire on Lucinda's part to get involved in the creative side which was thwarted. Because of the way the programme was edited we can't see exactly what went on.

However, given that she very much wanted to be involved in the creative side and very definitely did not agree with what the others did, I find there is persuasive evidence that she was unwillingly excluded from the creative process.



It's quite clear that Lucinda thought they'd completely and utterly blown it.

I strongly suspect that over 90% of the audience thought the same.

If they had lost, and she had not made her position exteremely clear I can picture the scene in the boadroom:

Sugar: Lucinda, were you happy with the design of the box and the ad?
Lucinda: No.
Sugar: Did you make that clear to the others.
Lucinda: I did say that, yes.
Alex: Can I just say that Lucinda was completely happy with the box and the ad.

We've seen almost exactly that happen more than once.

We see someone express a serious doubt but one or more of the remainder of the team lie through their teeth and deny it.

Lucinda made damn sure that couldn't happen this time (although I'm not sure that was her motivation - I think she was just utterly frustrated by the abysmal job the other two had done and felt her input would have lead to a better effort. I'm sure it would).

Pity you didn't quote the rest of that sentence...

"...but again it would have been good to be called, we are doing this we are doing that, and I would have said as a woman I wouldn't want this in or I would..."

Blame for that lies at the project manager's door.

Oh, I know. No worries. I just thought it was a good talking point because I too have problems with Lucinda in this episode.


I don't think I was, but having now rewatched and transcribed some of it, then yes, I say with greater conviction that Lucinda was bringing things up after the point when anything much could be done about them. For example, before Lucinda went on the location hunt, they'd already fixed on the family scene. Lucinda was there for that. Based on that initial decision, for good or bad, Alex and Lee set about the box design and Lucinda goes to find a location for the family scene. Then, at the casting call, she's all "I'm not sure we should stick to the family scene, we should be more flexible." At this point, a day has gone, they are in casting, location is fixed and box design is fixed. As well as it being a bad time to raise this - in the middle of the casting call - what she was saying was not possible.


How? Box design, fixed. Location, fixed. Casting, in progress. Storyboard, done at least enough to enable them to do a casting call. How exactly were they in a position to change something. And what, besides saying they needed to be more flexible, was Lucinda putting forward in the alternative?


When? When Lee said that they should get on with the casting and leave discussion about the basic idea until later? When she exited the room and Lee and Alex griped about her coming up with this now, after the decisions had already been made? Well, yeah. If this is dismissing her, then to me, there seems to be good reason for it.

Lucinda made one very good point. They could have called her while they were designing the box and got some input. Equally, she could have called them. But other than that, from what we saw, it was Lucinda's behaviour as a team member that was at issue.

When, exactly, were Alex and Lee overbearing?

what i dont get about this part of the show is:

a) if like she did, wanted to do the designs, but allowed alex to take the lead and went to location - then sir alan says she should of been stronger and done the design.

b) if she had of been stronger, no doubt she would of been accused of being distruptive.

no win situation

That's an assumption too far for me but I get that our mileage varies on this. I would not count her subsequent view of what they came up with as having any bearing on what she said or did before she went off on the location hunt. It's retrospective and I can't see how it can influence her behaviour beforehand.


I personally don't like anybody positioning themselves for the boardroom. It goes on a lot and I lose respect for each and every candidate who does it. For me, the ones I like best are those who get on with the task, those who are a good team member and work to get the win. So to some extent, Lucinda does poorly for that alone. But watching again, I'm also struck by the emptiness of what Lucinda actually says. Her point about flexibility was meaningless. She doesn't seem to follow up with a practical application of what she's saying. They have limited time and limited resources and I just don't see the value of her approach in those circumstances. So I'm not convinced her input would have led to a better result per se.


I did in a subsequent post and I agree that this was a good point on her part although it works both ways. And yes, the fact Alex didn't is down to him.

Almost all the problems hinge on this last point though don't they?

The team didn't communicate. Maybe Lucinda should have more (we don't know much about what communication did take place over the task as the editing was very bitty), but the responsibility is ultimately with the project manager. Raef also failed here to a lesser extent.

Listen again to the section where Alex talks about Lucinda to camera, he is dismissive about her and it is with that in mind that I judge his tactics. Which is furthermore backed up by the antics in the boardroom where he said her antics were 'borderline upsetting' (not shown by the clips beforehand).

Also, I (too) don't think Lee did much wrong - it was more Alex who was dismissive of her, Lee was pretty fair apart from his misrepresentation of the location saga, but then we didn't get the full picture.

Alex to me was the main problem, he didn't have much experience with Lucinda and therefore seemed to think she was less of a threat as a candidate, that is reflected in what he says and does during the task. Like Raef and Michael, I believe the pair of them got carried away with what they were doing and vitally didn't contact Lucinda.

I agree.

Unfortunately, like office politics, you can't just ignore it if you want to get on and everyone else is doing it.

We've seen several people lie through their teeth and others where Sugar has shown an unbelievable lack of insight (I'm not sure how much of the footage he sees before the boardroom scenes).

The sad fact is that if anyone does not make some provision for what happens if their team fails they are very likely to be treated unfairly in the BR.

Precisely.

Sir Alan is losing consistencey. He changes the goal posts depending on whose sitting in front of him in the boardroom.

You are utterly confused in your analysis and comments.

For a start I didn't make the post you are commenting upon in your last paragraph.

My perspective is based on the evidence available. Your perspective seems to based on nothing but wishful thinking and an unthinking bias in favour of Lucinda that is at variance to the facts.

Yes we know the programme is edited down, but the evidence presented is consistent as is the attitude of both Alex and Lee, Lee who has been a supporter of Lucinda.

Lucinda did understandably comment on the box as soon as she could and she wasn't involved in the design. Alas her comments about the packing were incessant from that point onwards when NOTHING could be changed. She is entitled to make her opinions felt but to persist with destructive comments as evinced by the footage was indicative of political positioning for the cameras and the boardroom.

She did offer ideas for the theme of the advert and Alex chose to go with other ideas, she had to accept that Alex was entitled to do this.

Her persistent and destructive antics were highlighted when they were doing auditions for the advert, she wanted to spend time criticising the packaging and decisions that had been made about the theme when the time for changing those decisions had past. She was taking every opportunity, however inappropriate and obstructive, to snipe at Alex and the past decisions. Her behaviour in this regard is a matter of fact and contrasts with your wishful thinking.

Alex did indeed mention that he was happy for her to do some mechanical editing tasks, so what????? So would I just after she had suggested that they couldn't use the pack shot because of a couple of droopy flowers! Anybody making such idiotic suggestions needed to be removed from any important decision making process.

Alex was remarkably tolerant of the sniping, the attention-seeking, the political positioning and idiotic suggestions that he was having to deal with. He should have told her to shut up and do as she was asked and make a positive contribution rather than a negative one.

Yesterday's programme was damning evidence that Lucinda is totally unsuited to any responsible role in business.

I'm pro-Lucinda regarding last night's task. Time and time again in all series of The Apprentice we've seen people hamstrung in the boardroom because they haven't protested loudly enough during the task. And we also saw last series, Jo receive praise in the boardroom for criticising the choices of her team-mates. She was called obstructive too, if memory serves... except by Sir Alan who thought she had integrity to her belief and had been spot on in her assertions.

That's how I felt watching Lucinda last night. And if she had ANY savvy at all before coming on this show, she's watched the series and knew that she had to reiterate her objections to the crapness of their approach. There's nothing obstructive or snide about it. She's participating in the most perverse and cut-throat job interview possible, which abandons most of the normal rules of engagement such as being a compliant, obedient, team-member because you'll get the sack if you don't. On The Apprentice, the opposite applies: not speaking up could get you the sack; and saving your objections for the boardroom can often backfire.

To be honest, I thought Lucinda's anger and frustration was a lot milder than my own would have been in the face of the boys' persistently dreadful creative choices. Her 'losing it' was almost comically mild-mannered. And I actually think it took a lot of courage for her to stick to her guns against those two, particularly when - as we saw the week that they were both instrumental in turning against Sara - they've proven quite formidable opponents.

During the actual filming she composed herself and agreed to take a back seat so that Alex could direct. She was also very positive at that point, saying "absolutely" with as much enthusiasm and agreement as she could muster. Considering that by this point she'd had very little creative say during the whole project, and was clearly in ongoing conflict with the two boys, I found that quite conciliatory. I also thought that her feedback to Lee after the presentation was honest yet diplomatic. He was ****ing dreadful. If anything, Lucinda shows a certain naivete with her honesty: she hasn't quite learned how to play the insincerity game as we saw the week she expected Helene to back her against Jennifer M and stupidly brought her into her argument when it was absolutely not the right thing to do.

That would probably be my main reservation about Lucinda: that she has a naivete that affects her interactions with people. Also that she's possibly a better delegator than a doer; and a better leader of people than manager of tasks.

On a totally separate note, to all those people saying "if Alex had done what she'd done he'd be slated... yadda yadda". Alex wouldn't have done what she'd done. He'd have smirked to himself, kept his trap shut and gobbed off to the camera before saving his bacon in the boardroom.

This is a specious argument.

No one is saying that Lucinda was not entitled to make her feelings about the box etc known, but she didn't restrict herself to expressing a clear and honest opinion which she could then repeat in the boardroom and use to distance herself from her team and its decisions. She followed a persistent and destructive campaign of sniping at every opportunity about the box design after the point at which any changes can be made. This was not mature, constructive team orientated behaviour, it is attention-seeking, selfish, spiteful, immature, idiotic and destructive behaviour.

You argument is simply invalid.

Yes, Alex is very good at keeping quiet during the tasks themselves. But you can bet your sweet cheeks that if they'd lost he'd have covered himself with glory whilst explaining at length how negative and 'unmanageable' Lucinda had been.

And before you defend that approach too: a good leader would have dealt with the personality issues involved during the task itself; taken Lucinda aside, identified her underlying problem, cleared the air, negotiated, empowered her, maximised her commitment and used her skills. Not waited for an apposite moment and grassed to their own superior, which is what I suspect Alex would have done. He demonstrated NONE of the leadership qualities Lucinda has done during her stints as PM, which have rightly earned her the praise of the experts observing her, not to mention some of her team-mates.

I agree with much of your post and thought much the same.

Alex should have tackled Lucinda's attitude earlier on for his, hers and the team's sake. He was actually quite conciliatory for much of the time and he did allow her to take important roles in the places like the edit suite, but I am not sure she has many skills to exploit or to empower. Fundamentally he did need to work harder at getting the immature, self-indulgent bint to think about the team and focus on winning rather her personal situation and he was often inclined to just let her rant rather than metaphorically giving her a spanking which is what a woman like her needs periodically.

Hmm, having dismissed her in the past I think she a) Came into her own on the wedding dress task and b) knew what she was on with on the ad task. She said the box was garish, she said she hated the pic of the blowing nose on the box, these were both negatives that SAS picked up on. I think Lucinda is a case of stlll waters running deep. Just because she isn't aggressive like Claire and Lee doesn't mean she can't cut the mustard. More often than not it is the empty vessels that make the most sound.

This made me laugh, your saying exactly what I am thinking but you are able to be blunt and straight forward

Sorry but I disagree.

Alex is a wretched snake and Lee is aggressive, good on her for fighting her corner. She was right to air the concerns she did. They only won by default beause Raef's lot forgot to say what they were advertising!! lol.

Clearly I am not confused, but you are.

I quoted myself to point out I had already said something along the lines of what you said (Lucinda's boardroom tactics) in reply to my post, yet you dismissed it as 'invalid' (pointing out that clearly for you, whatever I say will be invalid).

I never claimed you said it, in fact my "As for the boardroom tactics I have already mentioned that:" before the quote made it clear.


Same as yours then, only you are biased against Lucinda.

She aired those concerns but did not suggest anything better unless you consider gay tissues a good idea.... Fighting her corner? She wasn't being attacked she was the one that was doing all the attacking and criticising

Well they wouldnt have won with gay rights tissues or tissue boxes with someone in an armchair sipping a cuppa, so it was just as well Lee & Alex got on with the task and let Lucinda throw her toys out of her pram. I think they were amazing for keeping their cool and not letting her self centred whiny personality get to them

Lee is a pussy cat, never heard any of the others say anything against him other than the evening he said what he tought of Sara. However loads of the others commented on how difficult Lucinda is and how she manulipates things to make her look hard done by.

They won because Lee & Alex read the remit and followed it.

I'll agree to differ!

She was right about the garish box and pictures though you do have a point re the gay tissues!!!

As a female myself, I wouldn't want to be on a team with those two, I can tell you!