The Apprentice 2013 Thread

Natasha Whittam wrote:

I'm losing patience.

Me too. Both teams were complete shite abnd totally uninspiring. At least the Call centre cheered me up.

Haven't watched it yet but invariably will at some stage. I have to say how glad I am that this lot are not representative of the young entrepreneurs I work with as this lot couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, have serious personality flaws and have little or no understanding of business and the skills required to be successful.
Why these dicks are willing to put themselves up for national ridicule is a concern, but I guess it's the fame and notoriety rather than the crap £250k dogface is putting up - for a 50% cut. What a bunch of useless assholes.

Natasha Whittam wrote:Rubbish episode last night, both teams were utter crap.

I don't know whether Sugar is an idiot or it's edited to make him look stupid but he, once again, said it was a task not just based on profit but on quality too.

So the losing team pay £600 for a professional speaker who went down well and the employees thought was the best bit about the whole day, then Sugar blames that "mistake" for them losing.

Then he tells that Franchesca woman that if she brings the wrong people back he will fire her, so she does just that by bringing Louisa back, and he doesn't fire here.

I'm losing patience.

The Apprentice was great when it started but it's way past it's best now. Just look at the candidates it attracts and how repetitive it is. It's becoming a parody of itself. Give it up now Nat.

It's more of a parody of Big Brother. Uses the same editing techniques. Same Formula too i.e. put a bunch of attention-seeking no hopers together in a house and give them challenges. Good formula commercially as it works for loads of other "reality" shows.

xmiles wrote:

The Apprentice was great when it started but it's way past it's best now. Just look at the candidates it attracts and how repetitive it is. It's becoming a parody of itself. Give it up now Nat.

The show is at its strongest when the candidates are fighting and slagging each other off - there has been very little of this in the last two or three series.

A bit more thought into the tasks wouldn't go amiss either - last nights was a dead duck.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

xmiles wrote:

The Apprentice was great when it started but it's way past it's best now. Just look at the candidates it attracts and how repetitive it is. It's becoming a parody of itself. Give it up now Nat.

The show is at its strongest when the candidates are fighting and slagging each other off - there has been very little of this in the last two or three series.

A bit more thought into the tasks wouldn't go amiss either - last nights was a dead duck.

Fair comment and I think that's true of all "reality" TV shows - the only amusing bits are when they're having a go at each other and when the challenges are actually a challenge.
On this show, if they actually had a project manager who was allowed to run it properly, had a great strategy, executed it well and won by a mile it would make a difference. However they are obviously playing to stringent rules that limit their ability to win e.g. the maximum of 2 subteams when there are multiple tasks that individuals could complete. Not enough cameras to go round?
Every week it hangs on a simple premise to keep us guessing (not!) e.g. will high sales at low margins outdo lower sales at high margins?
Unless they get real contestants (and they'd have to offer a lot more money to get them) and give them a free hand in meeting the objective of the challenges I can't see the viewing figures doing anything other than falling.
.

I like Louisa she's got that whole thick thing going on.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:I like Louisa she's got that whole thick thing going on.

Do you not like the whole "corporate" thing either?

definitely not.

bullshitters united.

I suppose I started losing interest in The Apprentice when a blatant bit of apparent cheating was rewarded a few series ago. The task was to design a breakfast cereal for kids and sell it to supermarkets. Team A did a good job and sold a reasonable amount to all the supermarkets. Team B sold nothing to the first two supermarkets but clinched an order for some unbelievable amount (200,000 units?) from Tesco largely on the promise that they had negotiated and agreed a nationwide TV advertising campaign.

It all seemed bizarre to me. Why would Tesco agree to buy so many units of an imaginary item? Why did anyone believe there really was an advertising campaign to sell this non-existent product? Why was it never mentioned in the boardroom? It made me wonder just how "real" the show was.

I think this series has been great, although I can see why people preferred it back when the candidates were selected with a bit more class.

I thought last night's episode was hilarious in parts. I think Louisa is emerging as the breath of fresh air of the series that sees through all the bullshit rather than the cliche I originally had her down as.

doffcocker wrote:

I thought last night's episode was hilarious in parts. I think Louisa is emerging as the breath of fresh air of the series that sees through all the bullshit rather than the cliche I originally had her down as.

Going off last nights episode I tend to agree.

doffcocker wrote:I think Louisa is emerging as the breath of fresh air of the series that sees through all the bullshit rather than the cliche I originally had her down as.

Yes, learning to decorate muffins could turn this economy right around