Apprentice: Unfair and Unjust
RideOnTime
Posts: 4,712
Apprentice loses all credibility with the skeleton purchase in my book. Surely finding a cheap skeleton that met the brief should have been seen as showing some initiative. Lord Sugar over the top shown himself to be completely stupid and narrow thinking...
0
Comments
-
-
RideOnTime wrote:Apprentice loses all credibility with the skeleton purchase in my book. Surely finding a cheap skeleton that met the brief should have been seen as showing some initiative. Lord Sugar over the top shown himself to be completely stupid and narrow thinking...
Agreed. Not often I shout at the telly, but that was one such time...0 -
Agreed. I admired a stroke of genius, creative thinking. Then again, I regularly find the outrage doesn't really stand up to scrutiny. The boardroom responses are totally inconsistent.0
-
Err, are you guys taking it seriously? Since when did it have any credibility to lose?0
-
A fiddle of the fines and process to nuke the guy he wanted to. Could just have easily put up with the rope thing.
Thats what happens when 13 year olds are put in charge of programming.0 -
0
-
bompington wrote:Err, are you guys taking it seriously? Since when did it have any credibility to lose?
Exactly, it's only a TV programme and a crappy one at that
"Arran, you are like the Tony Benn of smut. You have never diluted your depravity and always stand by your beliefs. You have my respect sir and your wife my pity"
seanoconn0 -
Quality link! I like that.RideOnTime wrote:0 -
If I sent you out for a pair of football boots and you came back with a photo of a pair of football boots, you havn't bought me a pair of football boots.
That was the analogy Lord Sugar came up with regards to the skeleton.Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
Yup, and that shows how much he manipulated things. If they had bought back a photo of a skeleton then your analogy would be correct. They didnt, they bought back a skeleton made of something different to the one he wanted. His problem for not being specific.Frank the tank wrote:If I sent you out for a pair of football boots and you came back with a photo of a pair of football boots, you havn't bought me a pair of football boots.
That was the analogy Lord Sugar came up with regards to the skeleton.
The rope wasnt old either, so that shouldnt have counted.
They are just making television. He wanted the guy out so he manipulated the scoring system. No one really cares anyway.0 -
Dippydog3 wrote:they bought back a skeleton made of something different to the one he wanted. His problem for not being specific.
Technically they didn't bring back a skeleton, they brought back a kit to make a skeleton. As Alan Sugar said, you wouldn't go to a party with eggs and flour and say "here, I've brought you a cake".
A collection of bones is just a collection of bones. They're not a skeleton until they're assembled in a specific way.0 -
You order a table from IKEA it will come flat pack. It's still a table.0
-
markhewitt1978 wrote:You order a table from IKEA it will come flat pack. It's still a table.
Well it'll have bits missing but thats besides the point."Arran, you are like the Tony Benn of smut. You have never diluted your depravity and always stand by your beliefs. You have my respect sir and your wife my pity"
seanoconn0 -
So did the other team bring back a skeleton? No they brought back a Plastic Anatomical model of a skeleton , Only different was , is that theirs was plastic and assembled, but using his exacting criteria no more a skeleton than the paper kit the other team brought back.
I would have gone in Highgrove Cemetery and dug his gran up and brought her in if he d have tried that shit with me.
Spurs loving twat.0 -
Penalising the team for the rope being 'too long' was absurd, as well. Would he have penalised the team if they had brought back two diamonds, instead of one? Sugar seems to be bullying and abusing his way through this series, slightly more than usual. Sack the fool and give Lady Brady the top job, I say...0
-
markhewitt1978 wrote:You order a table from IKEA it will come flat pack. It's still a table.
So you'd get it home, empty the contents of the box in the middle of the dining room and call it a table? It's not a table until you've assembled the components.0 -
Ber Nard wrote:markhewitt1978 wrote:You order a table from IKEA it will come flat pack. It's still a table.
So you'd get it home, empty the contents of the box in the middle of the dining room and call it a table? It's not a table until you've assembled the components.
Nothing said the skeleton had to be 'assembled'...0 -
Ber Nard wrote:markhewitt1978 wrote:You order a table from IKEA it will come flat pack. It's still a table.
So you'd get it home, empty the contents of the box in the middle of the dining room and call it a table? It's not a table until you've assembled the components.
it would stay unassembled for a long time if I was involved0 -
He didn't acknowledge the fact that they thought on their feet and then cynically manipulated the outcome of the task.0
-
But what about Dan? A pretty unlikeable character throughout the entire series. Comes good last night and really surprised me in the task.
Then reverts to complete weasel in the boardroom when distancing himself from skeleton gate.
I know the haters always think they're all idiots but this year they seem more unlikeable than usual. The diamond thief looks like a clear winner. Wonder if her business plan is any good?0 -
Interestingly, the team that won, did so because the diamond dealer was clearly charmed by the lady and wanted to make some kind of impression and in the real world wouldn't have sold a stone for 50 quid... unless he is an idiot of course.
If one wants to be picky, that part was clearly and openly sexist, showing that you can succeed in business on the grounds of having a pair of blue eyes... very 1950sleft the forum March 20230 -
ugo.santalucia wrote:you can succeed in business on the grounds of having a pair of blue eyes... very 1950s
It is a TV programme. It is not a documentary, it is not real.....0 -
orraloon wrote:ugo.santalucia wrote:you can succeed in business on the grounds of having a pair of blue eyes... very 1950s
It is a TV programme. It is not a documentary, it is not real.....
In that moment of space and time it's real. Everything is set within some parameters. I hate when people say oh you work in a University (I don't) that's not real life. Of course if ****ing is it's real life in a University and just as real as if you worked down a mine or on reception in a sperm bank or an Ebola clinic.0 -
orraloon wrote:It is a TV programme. It is not a documentary, it is not real.....
Is discussing TV programmes not permitted..??0 -
He's just looking at her in complete adoration.
I just love you.
I just love you. :roll:0 -
Sugar doesn't like a) lawyers and b) people that are cleverer than he is. He came out of that show looking like a tool, whereas the person he sacked came across as a great guy. Agree it isn't real though. They came to our office on a selling task a few years ago (selling lunchtime sandwiches), the whole thing was arranged weeks in advance but was portrayed as a spontaneous final few minutes fire sale. Made me appreciate that the entire thing is stage managed. Sugar will have chosen the winner based on the business plans before they have completed a single task.0
-
ugo.santalucia wrote:Interestingly, the team that won, did so because the diamond dealer was clearly charmed by the lady and wanted to make some kind of impression and in the real world wouldn't have sold a stone for 50 quid... unless he is an idiot of course.
If one wants to be picky, that part was clearly and openly sexist, showing that you can succeed in business on the grounds of having a pair of blue eyes... very 1950s
Very 1950's ??? I think you ll find that boat still hasn't sailed 0 -
ugo.santalucia wrote:If one wants to be picky, that part was clearly and openly sexist, showing that you can succeed in business on the grounds of having a pair of blue eyes
...not to mention a fantastic rack...0 -
morstar wrote:Agreed. I admired a stroke of genius, creative thinking. Then again, I regularly find the outrage doesn't really stand up to scrutiny. The boardroom responses are totally inconsistent.
Totally agree, Lord Sugar reminds me of an old boss, one day you could do something and be praised for it and the next day do the exact same thing and get shot down for it.
An example is, when a team leader doesn't listen to their team and it works out Sugar praises them for using their initiative, if it doesn't work out he shoots them down for not listening to their team.
He contradicts himself a lot. I've stopped watching it now0 -
bernithebiker wrote:ugo.santalucia wrote:If one wants to be picky, that part was clearly and openly sexist, showing that you can succeed in business on the grounds of having a pair of blue eyes
...not to mention a fantastic rack...
rack? bike rack...0
