Jump to content

Recommended Posts

There's always been an element of quid pro quo in all these programmes. Note the Chrysler vehicles - every episode features the badge at some stage. Similarly the various tasks require the Apprentices to visit different establishments. THey may give their time / resources for free but they see a return in the publicity.


Hardly a scandal - and not unique to this programme. Presumably it makes it slightly cheaper in production costs thus relieving the licence fee payer. Is any one daft enough to patronise the Sun & Doves on the basis it once formed a 30 second clip on Apprentice - or buy a Chrysler on the same basis?


IMO the programme has lost its original appeal and I would see some businesses not wanting to be associated with the brand - which now seems to represent a bunch of whingeing prima donnas that would not survive more than a week in a real business.

I'm off tothe Sun and Doves in my new Chrysler, bought it today on a whim, going to the Sun and Doves on a whim, can't think why I bought the car or why I'm taking it to the pub. Anyone see that Grisham film with Julia Roberts and the young kid is in the Jailhouse and asked if he wants a 'sprite' and the camera shows a close up of a can of sprite for about two minutes full frame ! Still got a case of the stuff under the bed

Kells Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I hear the Sun and Doves have a skeleton for

> sale.....Spotted an opportunity opposite the

> medical school? Well, along the road, first left,

> really.

>

> Edited because I've yet to learn my left from my

> right.


It's easy Kells just say 'In the name of the Father' and the first hand to touch your forehead is your right one.

Easy.

I didn't spot this part as I only really watch the beginning and the boardroom bits, also I didn't bother with it until two weeks ago but was pretty well briefed by various conversations I listened to on the radio and from overheard conversations at work.

Not a patch on the US original.

Donald Trump, a man whose name can mean either a superior suit or a fart, or in his case a combination of the two and who dared to have two different barbers cut his hair at the same time.

Also why aren't these nebishes making more jokes and references about sralan.

'I was trying to sweeten the pot sralan' 'I'm voting him out because he puffs himself up sralan' 'I think I should stay in sralan because I'm the sort of person who won't leave until the job's done and demerara than hen's teeth these days' 'I'm not one to caster spersions sralan...' 'How much did you pay for your knighthood sralan'? etc.

And also at least one team should walk into the boardroom very very quietly humming Sugar Sugar by The Archies.

I reckon ratings would rocket.

Hes got a 700 Million pound fortune HB by manufacturing garbage, 3rd rate techno crap under the guise AMSTRAD aka sralan michael sugar trading. what a Bstard.


I would love to set up an office full of his crap and make him work in there for a month, can you imagine trying to operate the AMSTRAD PC1512 and em@ler and other crap and get results without being Fired.


And the hifi kit, is there any of it in existence or is it just being used for landfill. his cheap garbage is probably so environmentally damaging that it's causing mutinous freaks that wannabe 100 grand a year sralan brown nosing twats. you know that none of it is RoHS compliant, it's got ecological disaster written all over it. apart from that hes quite a good bloke.

Keef Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think it is getting tired, but I do still find

> it fun.


xxxxxxxx


Yeh I agree, well past its sell-by date but still the only telly programme I actually bother to watch on a regular basis!


But I must be very naive, I had no idea this stuff was set up, I know an ex-contestant, and she never mentioned that. I'm a bit horrified by the Sun and Doves thing, surely that's not fair - selling the skeleton made money for one team, and the outcome was decided on profit v value.

Wasn't the AMSTRAD PC1512 a PC from the 80s? I'd wager he would have a high time not getting fired if he were 20-odd years behind his compadres.


Consensus is that the bulk of his money is property these days - to be honest, it's neither here nor there - he's still got a shitload more than we have, but sadly not the humour to enjoy a cheeky sugary bum gag.

That's a real shame.


Most of the fun was thinking these apprentices were genuine idiots. I accepted that editing was going to exaggerate for our amusement, but not actually subvert it.


Theatre works on a principle called 'the willing suspension of disbelief', but the willing bit is lost if the tasks are a set-up.


To know that the whole thing is a performance really takes the gloss off.


This deserves a good attack of camberwell-gate.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...