ChatterBank1 min ago
Tom Pellereau!
34 Answers
So Tom, Tom Pellereau won 'The Apprentice'. Well I'm glad that Susan didn't she was a pretentious cow. I think it was 50/50 between him & Helen.
Did anyone agree or disagree?
jem
Did anyone agree or disagree?
jem
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Jemisa. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
I thought that, based on the final business plans, the finalists seemed best of a bad bunch.
Helen dropped off badly with an ill-conceived idea - she was favourite all the way through.
I liked Susan, and I didn't see the 'Hired' section, but I believe Sid has offered her a discussion on a future deal.
Jim was all talk and he fell down badly when asked to back it all up.
And that left Tom - with a vague idea which Sid obviously wasn't keen on, but he was the best of the bad bunch, and someone had to win.
Hope they go back to the original formula for the next series - or change the name. It's a bit silly calling a programme 'the Apprentice' and then never mentioning the term from start to finish!
Helen dropped off badly with an ill-conceived idea - she was favourite all the way through.
I liked Susan, and I didn't see the 'Hired' section, but I believe Sid has offered her a discussion on a future deal.
Jim was all talk and he fell down badly when asked to back it all up.
And that left Tom - with a vague idea which Sid obviously wasn't keen on, but he was the best of the bad bunch, and someone had to win.
Hope they go back to the original formula for the next series - or change the name. It's a bit silly calling a programme 'the Apprentice' and then never mentioning the term from start to finish!
Personally, I think he was the right choice. Helen would have won the ordinary apprentice format, she was a brilliant administrator and would be a great asset to any business.
However, it is Tom that stood out as offering something different. He has a huge way to go, but as a business partner with brilliant ideas, a fantastic sense of humour and loads of enthusiasm who will take on board graciously any advice,then Tom was always my choice.
I foresee great things for him.
Let's face it if you take on a partner in your business it's not always because they have great business accumen (sp) It's about innovation. You can be taught about running a business successfully, but if you haven't got that spark then you will get nowhere.
However, it is Tom that stood out as offering something different. He has a huge way to go, but as a business partner with brilliant ideas, a fantastic sense of humour and loads of enthusiasm who will take on board graciously any advice,then Tom was always my choice.
I foresee great things for him.
Let's face it if you take on a partner in your business it's not always because they have great business accumen (sp) It's about innovation. You can be taught about running a business successfully, but if you haven't got that spark then you will get nowhere.
All as thick as sh*t and would never have been employed by anyone who knows anything about commerce - let alone Sugar - in a million years if it weren't part of a 'popular' TV show. Why do people swallow this nonsense, and think more of the candidates than they're actually worth? They can never hold an intelligent, honest, common-sense conversation with anyone they come across, and wouldn't last 10 minutes in the real world.
Quizmonkey - I think you are being a little harsh here.
Remember, the programme footage is heavily edited in order to make entertaining TV - so you never get both sides of any exchange, or comments in context.
You can level a variety of accusations against the contestants, but I don't think stupidity is one of them.
Remember, the programme footage is heavily edited in order to make entertaining TV - so you never get both sides of any exchange, or comments in context.
You can level a variety of accusations against the contestants, but I don't think stupidity is one of them.
Thick as Sugar. I don't think so!! That is a bit unfair. They may not be master minds, and most of them are young and full of their own importance and need to grow up and have some experience - but thick as Sugar is just unfair.
And we know it's all set up for TV viewing and choreographed. It would hardly make good viewing if the the contestants were all boring, ultra intelligent, experienced business people.
It's entertainment and most people that watch it for that entertainment. We are not gullible.
And we know it's all set up for TV viewing and choreographed. It would hardly make good viewing if the the contestants were all boring, ultra intelligent, experienced business people.
It's entertainment and most people that watch it for that entertainment. We are not gullible.
Yes bednobs - business accumen and general knowledge are not connected - and if you pick up a couple of mistakes and highlight them, you can make people appear far more stupid than they really ara.
In his autobiography,Sid admits to quite a few errors in his earlier business career, some of which cost him a lot of money. I am sure he woud be the first to admit that his own accademic education is lacking when compared against his business skills, but he is n't looking for members of his pub quiz team, so it's not really that important in the context of an entertainment show.
In his autobiography,Sid admits to quite a few errors in his earlier business career, some of which cost him a lot of money. I am sure he woud be the first to admit that his own accademic education is lacking when compared against his business skills, but he is n't looking for members of his pub quiz team, so it's not really that important in the context of an entertainment show.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.