Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Apprentice (UK) 2008

Options
1…141516171820»

Comments

  • Options
    #572
    Our man in Havana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,476 ✭✭✭✭Our man in Havana


    Yes.

    Sugar keeps them in limbo for the intervening time in temp jobs.


  • Options
    #573
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Was this revealed in the papers?


  • Options
    #574
    ojewriej
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,468 ✭✭✭ojewriej


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Was this revealed in the papers?

    No, they have kind of a FAQ on the BBC website, so it's legit.


  • Options
    #575
    Our man in Havana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,476 ✭✭✭✭Our man in Havana


    It is common knowledge.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apprentice_UK
    In fact, two versions of the final boardroom sequence are filmed — showing each of the finalists winning. Between filming and transmission — a period of about six months — both finalists work for Sir Alan in temporary jobs. Sir Alan does not reveal his decision about who is he is going to hire until shortly before transmission, and this determines which ending is shown. The BBC has issued contradictory statements about the decision procedure. The first version of events is that Sir Alan makes his decision on the day that the final boardroom sequence is filmed, based on the contestants' performance in the final task, and keeps it secret until just before transmission. The second version is that Sir Alan decides after the six-month trial period. Former contestant Saira Khan also stated that "His final decision is not based on the programme that people see. His final decision is based on these two people who have been working with him for the six months."


  • Options
    #576
    BaZmO*
    Registered Users Posts: 18,625 ✭✭✭✭BaZmO*


    "His final decision is not based on the programme that people see. His final decision is based on these two people who have been working with him for the six months."
    It would make more sense if this was the case


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #577
    Acid_Violet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,295 ✭✭✭Acid_Violet


    BaZmO* wrote: »
    What was the deal with Lucinda doing her psycho bint routine in the "You're Fired" show? She could've been a bit more gracious.

    I thought she handled the situation quite well and got her point across succinctly. Helene let herself down with the 'we patched things up' bullshít and then going on to say that Lucinda told her personal things, not necessary at all.


  • Options
    #578
    Todoquetengo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 123 ✭✭Todoquetengo


    I liked Lee but thought Claire deserved to win. If they were each managing their own task then Lee might have fallen apart doing the pres on his own, and Claire was very good with keeping him going. Although he did need it more and maybe the decision was influenced by the 6 months working for surallun.

    Watching the programme I has a feeling Claire wouldn't win though, she was barely on the programme last night, was all Lee and Alex.

    How did Helene get to the final? She was soo crap and Alex was sh1t, so glad he didn't win!!


  • Options
    #579
    Sizzler
    Registered Users Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭Sizzler


    Thats what Im talking about :D Glad Lee won I have to say, he really did earn it and was a consistent performer over the entire series, his only real mistake was the CV spoofing which obviously was realised to mean fcuk all in Sugar's book in the final analysis. Lee was just a genuine lad who wanted it, worked for it and never lost focus, never needed to sharpen up like Claire for example, he had it from the word go.

    I really thought Alex was going to win at the halfway point on the show purely because their product was so slick and the comments after their presentation suggested it was well received but the schoolboy error of not checking out the commericals and picking their RRP from a bingo machine really did catch them out. If they did win that task theres no way Helene was going to win the series thats for sure, even though Alex was 'only' 24 :p

    I have to say I really am surprised that 2 endings are filmed and the contestants fanny around with SAS for a few months before the ending is decided and aired. The logistics of it are obviously difficult to control but it really does remove the drama from it all knowing what goes on in the background.


  • Options
    #580
    MoominPapa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,106 ✭✭✭MoominPapa


    Nick Hewer turns out to be even cooler than previously thought: clicky


  • Options
    #581
    BaZmO*
    Registered Users Posts: 18,625 ✭✭✭✭BaZmO*


    MoominPapa wrote: »
    Nick Hewer turns out to be even cooler than previously thought: clicky
    On reading it first I thought the target was 5 million. I was a little dissapointed when I realised it was only 5K. I wonder will he be getting sponsored by SAS?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #582
    MoominPapa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,106 ✭✭✭MoominPapa


    BaZmO* wrote: »
    On reading it first I thought the target was 5 million. I was a little dissapointed when I realised it was only 5K. I wonder will he be getting sponsored by SAS?

    Yeah hes one of the earliest sponsers, gave a grand. Simon Sugar only gave 20 quid, scabby fec


  • Options
    #583
    Acid_Violet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,295 ✭✭✭Acid_Violet


    Just wondering, would anyone else agree with me that the over-all quality of the candidates last year was SO much higher than the ones this year?

    Maybe it's only because all the good ones were fired too early in this series (Saskia, Simon, Raef, Lucinda, maybe even Irish Jenny) and that I only tuned into last year's apprentice when there were nine left, but it seemed to me that last year's last people (Tre, Simon, Christina, Lowit, Naomi, Jadine, Katy *shudders*) were much better qualified and did much better in their tasks than the last 7/8 guys in this series. Anyone agree or disagree?


  • Options
    #584
    MistyCheese
    Registered Users Posts: 4,005 ✭✭✭MistyCheese


    Saskia? :confused:

    Do you mean Shazia?


  • Options
    #585
    KnifeWRENCH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,148 ✭✭✭✭KnifeWRENCH


    Acid_Violet wrote: »
    Just wondering, would anyone else agree with me that the over-all quality of the candidates last year was SO much higher than the ones this year?

    Maybe it's only because all the good ones were fired too early in this series (Saskia, Simon, Raef, maybe even Irish Jenny) and that I only tuned into last year's apprentice when there were nine left, but it seemed to me that last year's last people (Tre, Simon, Christina, Lowit, Sophie, Jadine, Katy *shudders*) were much better qualified and did much better in their tasks than the last 7/8 guys in this series. Anyone agree or disagree?
    I don't know would I agree with that.This year Lee and Claire were both good candidates (though Claire was better overall). Lucinda was quite a good candidate, despite her battiness. Raef, Sara and Shazia should have gone on longer. I also think Lindi could have been a very good leader, but she never got that chance.
    There were obviously some no-hopers (Nicholas, Kevin, Ginger Jenny, Sophocles) but I think overall the candidates last year were worse.

    Kristina was the only standout candidate from last year for me. Naomi and Simon were ok, but Kristina was much better.
    Sophie was hopeless - she felt guilty about making profits ffs!
    Tre was unhinged - he would have bankrupted Sir Alan.
    Jadine - too emotionally fragile. Would have cracked under the pressure.
    Lohit was invisible for much of the series.
    Katie - need I say more?


  • Options
    #586
    manic56
    Closed Accounts Posts: 79 ✭✭manic56


    I'm just glad that the fat pudding child claire didn't win

    http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/sm3/may2008/9/5/B32D9D71-929D-55C2-AB77E7A6B6811447.jpg


  • Options
    #587
    Sizzler
    Registered Users Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭Sizzler


    Bond-007 wrote: »
    It is common knowledge.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apprentice_UKIn fact, two versions of the final boardroom sequence are filmed — showing each of the finalists winning. Between filming and transmission — a period of about six months — both finalists work for Sir Alan in temporary jobs. Sir Alan does not reveal his decision about who is he is going to hire until shortly before transmission, and this determines which ending is shown. The BBC has issued contradictory statements about the decision procedure. The first version of events is that Sir Alan makes his decision on the day that the final boardroom sequence is filmed, based on the contestants' performance in the final task, and keeps it secret until just before transmission. The second version is that Sir Alan decides after the six-month trial period. Former contestant Saira Khan also stated that "His final decision is not based on the programme that people see. His final decision is based on these two people who have been working with him for the six months."

    By PURE fluke got chatting to a guy from the BBC today on a flight, cutting to the chase he said the above is bollox. There is absolutely not two endings filmed. The ending as we saw it was shot a fortnight ago and it was a closed set and both finalists are asked to sign an NDA till airing.

    Guess the only way to really know is bump into Lee or Claire !


  • Options
    #588
    Our man in Havana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,476 ✭✭✭✭Our man in Havana


    Not the first time Wikipedia was wrong.


  • Options
    #589
    Todoquetengo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 123 ✭✭Todoquetengo


    Sizzler wrote: »
    By PURE fluke got chatting to a guy from the BBC today on a flight, cutting to the chase he said the above is bollox. There is absolutely not two endings filmed. The ending as we saw it was shot a fortnight ago and it was a closed set and both finalists are asked to sign an NDA till airing.

    Guess the only way to really know is bump into Lee or Claire !

    But does he hire both of them for the time in between? Is that part true do you know?


  • Options
    #590
    OPENROAD
    Registered Users Posts: 11,692 ✭✭✭✭OPENROAD


    Todoquetengo wrote: »
    But does he hire both of them for the time in between? Is that part true do you know?

    Yes.


  • Options
    #591
    ojewriej
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,468 ✭✭✭ojewriej


    Bond-007 wrote: »
    Not the first time Wikipedia was wrong.

    Strangers on a plane are not that trustworthy either.

    The two endings version is not only from Wikipedia, it's on the BBC website as well - see the very bottom of this page:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/apprentice/about.html

    And to be honest, i don't really see a reason why would they lie about it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #592
    cooper38
    Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭cooper38


    I honestly dont think most of those contestants were chosen for pure entertainment value. Most of them were ridiculous particularly that eejit Lucinda


  • Options
    #593
    Our man in Havana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,476 ✭✭✭✭Our man in Havana


    ojewriej wrote: »
    Strangers on a plane are not that trustworthy either.

    The two endings version is not only from Wikipedia, it's on the BBC website as well - see the very bottom of this page:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/apprentice/about.html

    And to be honest, i don't really a reason why would they lie about it.
    How does Sir Alan decide who the winner is?
    Sir Alan decides the winner on the basis of the final task and boardroom. He makes his decision on the day of the final boardroom. Because there is a gap between the shoot and transmission (to leave time for editing), there is a concern about keeping the secret of who has won during that time, so as not to spoil it for the viewers. In order to ensure that the secret is kept, two endings are filmed, and Sir Alan doesn’t reveal his decision of who he has chosen to the finalists and the production team until the day before transmission of the final programme.

    What happens to the finalists between the shoot and the transmission of the series?
    As both finalists would not be able to seek employment until after transmission, and they cannot be out of pocket as a result of that, Sir Alan finds both of them temporary jobs somewhere within his group of companies.
    That came straight from the BBC's website. No reason to doubt them.


  • Options
    #594
    Sizzler
    Registered Users Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭Sizzler


    ojewriej wrote: »
    Strangers on a plane are not that trustworthy either.


    I posted what I was told in good faith.


  • Options
    #595
    ojewriej
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,468 ✭✭✭ojewriej


    Sizzler wrote: »
    I posted what I was told in good faith.

    Sorry, i didn't mean to sound like I was questioning what you said. I believe that you've met the guy, and he told you what you said he did. After all you clearly indicated that you aren't entirely convinced yourself.

    What I meant is that I would go with what BBC says about it.


  • Options
    #596
    Sizzler
    Registered Users Posts: 5,430 ✭✭✭Sizzler


    Whoops!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/07/02/bcnappre102.xml


  • Options
    #597
    OPENROAD
    Registered Users Posts: 11,692 ✭✭✭✭OPENROAD


    Just a heads up for anyone with Sky Digital, Dave ch 111 is showing the complete series 1 of The Apprentice daily at 15:00. I thought series 1 was one of the best. Episode 1 was on Monday.

    http://uktv.co.uk/dave/episode/listing_id/86303009/channel_id/3854


Advertisement