throbber Posted February 18, 2023 Share Posted February 18, 2023 1 hour ago, 19QOS19 said: They did but that shouldn't have been allowed as it wasn't the brief. The buyers should have been under instruction that they were only to place orders if they thought it would be suitable for ages 6-8. If that part of the task is irrelevant then they should just say "for kids" from now on. They still put a pitch in and got good feedback and got orders in even if it wasn’t for the right age group. I don’t see why you think it shouldn’t have been allowed, if the people they were pitching to liked the product and put orders in then everyone is happy and that’s how business and capitalism works. The other pitch got crucified. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karpaty Lviv Posted February 18, 2023 Share Posted February 18, 2023 As someone who works with primary school children, when I saw the caterpillar, my head was in my hands. I actually thought the treasure chest idea was quite good, but it was terribly designed and less said about the app the better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted February 18, 2023 Share Posted February 18, 2023 11 minutes ago, Karpaty Lviv said: As someone who works with primary school children, when I saw the caterpillar, my head was in my hands. I actually thought the treasure chest idea was quite good, but it was terribly designed and less said about the app the better. I thought the chest was alright but it was more aimed towards boys. The pitch and the app was pathetic of course. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted February 18, 2023 Share Posted February 18, 2023 2 hours ago, throbber said: They still put a pitch in and got good feedback and got orders in even if it wasn’t for the right age group. I don’t see why you think it shouldn’t have been allowed, if the people they were pitching to liked the product and put orders in then everyone is happy and that’s how business and capitalism works. The other pitch got crucified. Because they made a product that didn't fit the target age group. By your logic they could have went in with a lunchbox covered in dummies and nappies and still won because they still did a pitch. They made a product for 6-8 year olds that absolutely no parent of a 6-8 year old would have bought and still won because their product would suit a toddler. I don't have an issue if that's what's allowed but just don't put an age group on the task. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 17 hours ago, 19QOS19 said: Because they made a product that didn't fit the target age group. By your logic they could have went in with a lunchbox covered in dummies and nappies and still won because they still did a pitch. They made a product for 6-8 year olds that absolutely no parent of a 6-8 year old would have bought and still won because their product would suit a toddler. I don't have an issue if that's what's allowed but just don't put an age group on the task. There’s a massive difference between putting nappies and dummies on the lunch box and making the product more friendly for a 3 year old than a 6 year old. If you’re a 20 something with no kids you can easily make a mistake like that. If you’re a business wanting to make profit and make a product that sells its still better than a product that doesn’t sell even if it wasn’t to the originally intended purchaser. I don’t see why you have issue with this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 9 minutes ago, throbber said: There’s a massive difference between putting nappies and dummies on the lunch box and making the product more friendly for a 3 year old than a 6 year old. If you’re a 20 something with no kids you can easily make a mistake like that. If you’re a business wanting to make profit and make a product that sells its still better than a product that doesn’t sell even if it wasn’t to the originally intended purchaser. I don’t see why you have issue with this. I have issue because they had a criteria that they failed to meet and were allowed to win a task regardless. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 4 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said: I have issue because they had a criteria that they failed to meet and were allowed to win a task regardless. I don’t think they failed to meet it they sold 1500 units. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 They missed the trick of making the lunchbox the shape of a cock and balls of course: There’s a huge market for that like with captain pugwash and peppa pig, it gives the parents a cheap laugh and it stands out. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qpfc Posted February 23, 2023 Share Posted February 23, 2023 Another painful viewing tonight. Was nice to see sugar take the decision away from the pm on who to bring back to the boardroom. 100% that pm would of took the 2 who were in charge on the entertainment side of things (and they did really well with that in fairness) Cant say I’m favouring anyone this series. I’d be curious more than anything to see Avi at the interview stage but he must be a nightmare to work with. Simba my predicted winner so far 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albertlegend Posted February 23, 2023 Share Posted February 23, 2023 I think the winning team won in spite of Avi not because of him. He is a total pain in the arse! You would string him up if you had to work with him. Mark was a dick the whole way through, he has to be kicked out tonight. Thought the Scouse girl was lucky not to go as well. She does nothing in any of the tasks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSU Posted February 23, 2023 Share Posted February 23, 2023 The Apprentice take on the Stanford Experiment was disappointing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Tunbridge Posted February 23, 2023 Share Posted February 23, 2023 (edited) Has there ever been an episode where it has been that obvious who is getting sacked after 10 minutes of the episode? The Scouse girl is a horrid cow. The bit where she chirped up saying you wouldnt get first class for £180. Of course you wouldn’t it’s a figure of speech fs. Edited February 23, 2023 by Scotty Tunbridge 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewDon Posted February 24, 2023 Share Posted February 24, 2023 Sugar should really have intervened as soon as Victoria failed to grasp the concept of a metaphor and fired her on the spot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willie adie Posted February 24, 2023 Share Posted February 24, 2023 Tbf Megan is bloody gorgeous 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Minertaur Posted February 24, 2023 Share Posted February 24, 2023 This has to be the worst group of candidates yet. Nobody seems to have a clue really and in most other series Mark would have gone weeks ago. Good riddance though as he was appalling There must just be 1 candidate with an absolute dynamite business plan. Sugar wants in so they need to make sure they win. I'm not sure which of the candidates would have an interesting enough business plan based on their backgrounds below. The final 5 will be: Marnie, Megan, Simba, Victoria and Bradley. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted February 24, 2023 Share Posted February 24, 2023 Agree with what's been said. The Scouse lassie has been incredibly lucky she has been in winning teams as she has done very little. Nice to see her knocked down a peg or two with Sugar bringing her back in. Luckily for her the PM was absolutely awful. The same goes for pouty as well tbh. She's terrible. The PM literally flung in the towel mid task as he obviously knew he was fucked. Another week and yet again I can't pick anyone with any redeeming qualities. I expect we'll know the winner as soon as we hear the business plans as no one's performance throughout the show will have any bearing on the outcome given how shite each and every one of them has been. Really want Avi to go as he's becoming even more insufferable every week. His smug face when he won was infuriating. The other team were absolutely appalling mate, calm yourself down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbornbairn Posted February 26, 2023 Share Posted February 26, 2023 Avi should have been fired on the motorbike task. He was given an explicit task by his boss and he went away and did something completely different. He's useless, insufferable, arrogant and a twat. Why one of the customers hasn't smacked him in the face for his condescending preaching at them on pitches I have no idea. Pouty McBotox should also be booted. These two are the most appalling examples of inadequacy left on the show. The rest of them are just averagely clueless 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bert Raccoon Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 They're just at the wind up now surely? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soapy FFC Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 The wife commented that something that colour will mark the skin, and guess what. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iminavest Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 Avi constantly looks like he's shat himself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.