nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Apprentice UK 2017

Mr E

https://twitter.com/BBCOne/status/908679298055380993

No start date announced yet.

http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/the-apprentice/news/a838189/apprentice-2017-first-trailer/

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Jamie2k9

waferthinboy wrote: »

Can anyone help please, I missed episode one on Wednesday night.

We cannot access BBC iplayer in Ireland.

BBC doesn't allow replay facility for its big shows like this.

Is it repeated at any time before next Wed?

A couple of seasons back I found a website where I could watch episodes I'd missed, not sure if that's still possible...

Check lSunday night listings, maybe even BBC 2 as well. Defo repeated.

I know an online place but on app so hard to post.

waferthinboy

Thanks Jamie - I have it now.

This year, it's being repeated on Friday nights on BBC1.

Episode 1 will be repeated tonight on BBC1 at 11.55pm!

JaMarcusHustle

"How many bankers do you know that can breakdance?"

This show has officially jumped the shark.

yerwanthere123

Tim Henman :pac:

Meauldsegosha

"Is there a "fur" tree?" :eek::rolleyes:

_Dara_

Dara’s Un-PC Comment Of The Week: Elliot looks really Jewish.

IvySlayer

Right person fired but don't think the boys should have lost solely because they spent more money.

liam7831

Pretty sh1t again tonight

_Dara_

IvySlayer wrote: »

Right person fired but don't think the boys should have lost solely because they spent more money.

I found the parameters of the task really ill-defined.

Also Starring LeVar Burton

Your one with the Measuring Tape is batsh*t crazy.

miamee

Also Starring LeVar Burton wrote: »

Your one with the Measuring Tape is batsh*t crazy.

Elizabeth? I don't know where they found her but she is comedy gold

"Mr. Scarf, would you do me?"

I think she's hamming it up a bit at the moment.

SteM

IvySlayer wrote: »

Right person fired but don't think the boys should have lost solely because they spent more money.

Agreed, but both rooms were attrocious and there had to be some deciding factor. The terms of the task seemed vague this week imo.

IvySlayer

Agreed, both teams should have lost. I think the boys room was slightly better than the girls.

I don't know what Lord Sugar saw that made him think the girls won.

miamee

IvySlayer wrote: »

Agreed, both teams should have lost. I think the boys room was slightly better than the girls.

I don't know what Lord Sugar saw that made him think the girls won.

Maybe the fact that they pulled together, kept their eye on the budget and got the job done (albeit badly) tipped him in the women's favour?
The men's team on the other hand had some bickering, no attention was given to the budget and they blurted out their total expenditure at their pitch.

As he said himslef, the ladies only won because he hated their room less than the hated the lads one. He thought they were both crap.

IvySlayer

miamee wrote: »

Maybe the fact that they pulled together, kept their eye on the budget and got the job done (albeit badly) tipped him in the women's favour?
The men's team on the other hand had some bickering, no attention was given to the budget and they blurted out their total expenditure at their pitch.

As he said himslef, the ladies only won because he hated their room less than the hated the lads one. He thought they were both crap.

So the girls deserved to win just because they agreed not to spend more than 5k?

They each had a budget of 15k and the task was not who spend the least. The experts pointed out a lot more flaws in the girls room than the boys. There was a lot of infighting from both teams.

Both teams should have had a person fired.

miamee

I'm not endorsing the girls efforts, they were shocking as well - just slightly less shocking than the men. It's too early in the series to be firing two people at a time, there are still some participants we've hardly seen or heard from.

OwaynOTT

The boys room was like something out of only fools and horses with the mad yellow paint. The mad blue and red only made it worse.
How would you sleep in that, you'd be insane from the lack of sleep if you stayed there for a week.

_Dara_

OwaynOTT wrote: »

The boys room was like something out of only fools and horses with the mad yellow paint. The mad blue and red only made it worse.
How would you sleep in that, you'd be insane from the lack of sleep if you stayed there for a week.

I think this is ultimately what lost it for the lads. That room was so garish. At least the women’s room was a fairly relaxing colour.

BrianBoru00

£600 for vintage suitcases - Are these contestants identified for their seemingly complete lack of common sense?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Vintiquewise-Three-Coloured-Vintage-Style-Luggage-Suitcase-Antique-Brown-Set/263134681514?_trkparms=ao%3D1%26asc%3D20170912101845%26meid%3Dbca002bddd364f328cfa63bbae3386b8%26pid%3D100705%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26&_trksid=p2045573.c100705.m4780

Go Harvey Go

BrianBoru00 wrote: »

£600 for vintage suitcases - Are these contestants identified for their seemingly complete lack of common sense?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Vintiquewise-Three-Coloured-Vintage-Style-Luggage-Suitcase-Antique-Brown-Set/263134681514?_trkparms=ao%3D1%26asc%3D20170912101845%26meid%3Dbca002bddd364f328cfa63bbae3386b8%26pid%3D100705%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26&_trksid=p2045573.c100705.m4780

The Guardian's Sam Wollaston may very well say yes...

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/oct/05/the-apprentice-review-another-batch-of-ridiculous-people-who-talk-better-than-they-walk

yerwanthere123

I feel the contestants often get a lot of unfair flack. Tasks such as what they did last night would, in reality, take weeks or even months to execute properly.

jr86

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

I feel the contestants often get a lot of unfair flack. Tasks such as what they did last night would, in reality, take weeks or even months to execute properly.

Absolutely! It's an entertainment show at the end of the day. The tasks in a lot of cases are pretty much setup for failure.

Of course it wouldn't generate near as much discussion if everyone was shown in a favourable light. Similar to the stooges they put in Xfactor auditions, the "useless" candidates cause the main talking points

There's generally a mix of very competent business people and/or complete fame whores. Last year attracted a serious amount of the latter.

_Whimsical_

jr86 wrote: »

Absolutely! It's an entertainment show at the end of the day. The tasks in a lot of cases are pretty much setup for failure.

Of course it wouldn't generate near as much discussion if everyone was shown in a favourable light. Similar to the stooges they put in Xfactor auditions, the "useless" candidates cause the main talking points

There's generally a mix of very competent business people and/or complete fame whores. Last year attracted a serious amount of the latter.

I think this year has too.

It used to be much more interesting when the balance favoured the more competent contestants. So far this year it's all feeling a bit like Big Brother, a hotchpotch of strangers doing ridiculous things very badly.

SimonTemplar

The first 4-5 episodes of each season tend to be the least entertaining because it's impossible to properly get behind and root for someone.
For example, Alanna was an underdog last year and it was actually great to see her win. I'm hoping the season will improve in its later half.

That being said, I do think the series is well past its prime which was about 4-5 years ago. Personally, I think the producers saw how popular Stuart Baggs was for ratings and therefore attempted to populate the show with more crazy characters.

And to play devil's advocate, this week's task was a bit unfair. Alan Sugar banged on about how business is done in the board room, but in the real world, a group of entrepreneurs would hire an actual design company and work with them through a lengthy collaborative design phase. They certainly wouldn't design the whole thing in 48 hours.

I know it is primarily entertainment, but the fact that the previous winners own and manage genuinely profitable businesses providing employment is always in the back of my mind.

yerwanthere123

Best episode so far this week, it'd finally beginning to kick into gear. Main takeaways:

- That Siobhán wan is a loose cannon
- I liked Michaela, even if she did lead the team to a loss
- It seems a bit pointless to go on this show if you're a lawyer/barrister, they're always cannon fodder

gmisk

That woman with the big chin....would drive me bloody insane!
Right person went this week

[Deleted User]

Ah jeez lads. Have you not heard of pyjamas?

Im not exactly svelte myself but seeing your man wobbling about in his boxers was enough for me to revisit my dinner.

jr86

I think this series has already been a step up from the last two (albeit poor) series

Michaela definitely in it for the long haul. Still a bit of deadwood to go but a double elimination is surely imminent

_Dara_

My fella thinks Michaela is trying to be a bit like Alannah with the whole “I’m not confident” thing, trying to build a “journey” narrative. I’m not sure if she’d be that calculating myself but I have to say that the “I’m unconfident” thing didn’t ring true to me. I think she’s well confident, she wasn’t a bit concerned at leading the lads and was adept at selling.

Meanwhile, lack of confidence came out of Alannah’s pores.

BrianBoru00

Siobhan is a bully - plain and simple. She is obnoxious and should be fired from the show/ At least the others have cottoned on to it now.

The question re further development of the balancing robot was perfectly valid. I would have asked the same thing and yet Siobhan jumped down that girls throat.
Despicable