TWoP Forums > Apprentice Speculation

TWoP Forums > Current TWoP Shows > The Apprentice > The Apprentice General Gabbery

Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46

scarletsmith

Dec 9, 2005 @ 11:17 am

IIRC, Heidi was the first to disclose after TA1 that Apprenti are not allowed to go off by themselves anywhere; they have to go in at least groups of two, which is why when Randal made the decision that they had to go to Party City, they all had to go to Party City, whether Mark wanted to or not.

Forrester

Dec 9, 2005 @ 11:41 am

Except, when Kwame lost against Bill, He was losing in the first half AND the second half. He never got Omarosa under control. [/quote]

True, however Kwame also had a weaker record than Bill and that is what Trump used in making the final determination to hire Bill.

In contrast, Rebecca has the weaker PM score when compared to Randall, and I don't believe TD has ever hired the candidated with the weakest record.

tjmor

Dec 9, 2005 @ 12:01 pm

It is not about what Mark's wanted. I'd think it is more about what was more beneficial at that point of the task. I think Mark's comments are somewhat telling. Rebecca (and Toral?) did not go to the restaurant to meet with the comedian. My guess is that Rebecca decided that having James and Chris go there was sufficient.
Back to Alla/Felisha's TVGUIDE/Fishbowl interviews. A lot of us thought that Alla should've been let go after the Megaphone task - she was the PM, whose decisions were questionable. On the surface at least. But in her TVGUIDE interview Alla said that she was safe after that task because there was something going on behind the scenes, something that we would never see. I had a suspicion right after that episode that the numbers were rigged. Because with all the manpower and megaphones that R&R had, how could the difference be only 5 calls? I think Alla smelled manipulation. I don't know what exactly happened there, but she wasn't fired.
Actually, now I think that they were preparing R&R for a double fire on the Megaphone ep. Otherwise, why even leave something like this unedited, especially if these two are the final 2? (I'd pay to know.)

It looks like Alla moved on with her life and milks her Apprentice fame every way she can - I admire her for that. Felisha, on the other hand, keeps hinting right and left about something she cannot disclose.
I don't know about other seasons, but this one does look to me like a fixup. I hope I am wrong.
Anyway, if Josh doesn't cook up something spectacular for Randal in terms of charity donations, our speculation about double hiring may not come true.

GoddessMelissa

Dec 9, 2005 @ 12:13 pm

IIRC, Heidi was the first to disclose after TA1 that Apprenti are not allowed to go off by themselves anywhere; they have to go in at least groups of two, which is why when Randal made the decision that they had to go to Party City, they all had to go to Party City, whether Mark wanted to or not.[/quote]

I thought about that during the episode 'cause Randal did mention something about the car when they were waiting out front. But what were they originally planning to do, sit around Trump suite waiting for Mark to get back from his meeting?

Booklord

Dec 9, 2005 @ 12:29 pm

I can't help but think that the "you can't split up" rule doesn't apply to the final task. As I think back to the last three seasons, they were always splitting up during the final tasks.

RhondaGC

Dec 9, 2005 @ 12:41 pm

After seeing the episode tonight, I'm more convinced than ever that actually was the case. With all the media surrounding the Apprentice 3 finale at the time the Microsoft Task and final tasks took place and the interviews would have taken place had they happened, NBC was probably very concerned about Alla and her past if she was in the final three, and someone would have slipped that out to the media and potentially caused almost all of this season to be spoiled before it ever aired.[/quote]
What I don't get about this theory is, if Trump knew about her past since the Learning Annex task, and if he was concerned about bad publicity, why didn't he fire her sooner? Was she not on a losing team again until the Microsoft task? I'd have to go look it up to remember. Or maybe the possibility of scandal didn't occur to Trumpy until later?

About the splitting up of contestants on a team, it does seem like you rarely if ever see them split into more than two groups to do anything. I have to wonder if each team is only assigned two cameramen and so they have to work within those constraints. However, I can remember at least one time when people have gone off by themselves (contrary to what Heidi was cited as saying above). Remember in the task in S1 where the team with Troy, Nick and Amy put the advertising on the rickshaws? One of the sponsor's signs fell off or something and so he didn't get a full day of advertising like he had paid for. Nick was all virtuous about it and insisted on returning the man's money. I'm pretty sure I remember him going to the man and giving the money back on his own, without companion. Of course, on that task they may have been down to only three on their team (can't remember) and therefore couldn't always stay in pairs.

Kaylee529533

Dec 9, 2005 @ 1:07 pm

Only two guys met with Piscapo, not the whole team of four. Clearly two guys could have met with the commentator--all four didn't need to go to Party City.

donalsduck

Dec 9, 2005 @ 1:29 pm

Elizling

Dec 9, 2005 @ 1:58 pm

I can remember at least one time when people have gone off by themselves (contrary to what Heidi was cited as saying above). Remember in the task in S1 where the team with Troy, Nick and Amy put the advertising on the rickshaws? One of the sponsor's signs fell off or something and so he didn't get a full day of advertising like he had paid for. Nick was all virtuous about it and insisted on returning the man's money. I'm pretty sure I remember him going to the man and giving the money back on his own, without companion.[/quote]

And also, last season one of the women (I can't remember who) spent hours delivering pizza to Brooklyn by herself.

tjmor

Dec 9, 2005 @ 2:04 pm

That was Stephanie.

GoddessMelissa

Dec 9, 2005 @ 3:03 pm

NBC was probably very concerned about Alla and her past if she was in the final three, and someone would have slipped that out to the media and potentially caused almost all of this season to be spoiled before it ever aired.[/quote]

Alla's past was slipped out before the season aired. I don't think NBC would have cared one way or another since she'd work for Trump and not NBC. Hell, even if she worked for NBC, I don't think the network would care.

But in her TVGUIDE interview Alla said that she was safe after that task because there was something going on behind the scenes, something that we would never see. [/quote]

It could have been something that Adam did, like calling the number himself.

tjmor

Dec 9, 2005 @ 5:24 pm

Adam? I would've never thought that about him. He looked so surprised when he heard:"Adam, you are fired!". None of his post-show interviews indicate he's done something funny. But... who knows, you may be right. I still think that had something to do with megaphones and rigged numbers.

LoneHaranguer

Dec 9, 2005 @ 5:36 pm

Have the honking bassoons of doom ever played for a team that eventually won? I'm curious if that is foretelling that Randall will lose.[/quote]
I think they did for Kelly, but it may be that he wasn't favored to win when the edit was done; in the finale it looked like Trump really thought Jen did a better job, but just couldn't excuse her for not kissing up enough during the event.

nodoze

Dec 9, 2005 @ 6:40 pm

I think we're being set up by TPTB to think that Randal might lose just to add some suspense to a previously-foregone conclusion and also to show that Trump's high opinion of Rebecca is not wrong. But just in case, Rebecca is given access to her venue's event-planners, while Randal would have to pay for equivalent resources. Ahem. Even if Randal messes up, I think Trump will find a way to spin it into a win. Randal, you're hired!

Wallyhorse

Dec 9, 2005 @ 9:33 pm

Alla's past was slipped out before the season aired. I don't think NBC would have cared one way or another since she'd work for Trump and not NBC. Hell, even if she worked for NBC, I don't think the network would care.[/quote]

Alla's past came out about 10 days before the season premiered on NBC on The Smoking Gun website in September.

What NBC would have been worried about was back in May. The interviews would have likely taken place on May 18, the day before the Apprentice 3 finale took place. With a lot of media for that finale, it would have been very easy for someone to say something about Alla's past to the wrong person in the mainstream media, and that person, trying to scoop everyone else then discovers that Alla was one of the final three, and if that got out in May to the mainstream media would have spoiled almost the entire Apprentice 4 season (except the final tasks that took place after the "A3" finale). That's why I think NBC cancelled the interviews once Alla made it to the final four, and it would not have mattered which team won, as the other team would have been "fired" regardless.

tjmor

Dec 9, 2005 @ 10:23 pm

O'kay, having read your post again, I am slightly confused, Wallyhorse. Either I am missing a point, or the logic is somewhat incomplete.
If they were afraid the media would learn something about Alla's past and spoil the season later, why haven't they simply fired Alla after they'd learned she used to be a stripper? Let's say they couldn't fire her after the Learning Annex task, which is when the truth somehow came out (I wonder how they learned about it?). But they could've done it later, right? So why did they have to wait until Alla made it to the final 4? They could've fired her for the loss on the Megaphone task, couldn't they? But Alla states she was safe then because something was going on behind the scenes. How does your theory connect to this statement?

phoenixxx

Dec 10, 2005 @ 1:35 am

But in her TVGUIDE interview Alla said that she was safe after that task because there was something going on behind the scenes, something that we would never see. [/quote] Or It could just be Alla saving face knowing that she did a terrible job as PM; we all know she's a little less than modest. Why is her word gold? The only reason why he sent Alla up was because he wanted an Alla/Felisha & Randall/Rebeccas showdown.

Wallyhorse

Dec 10, 2005 @ 6:53 am

Tjmor:

Obviously, we don't know the whole story (and probably never will), however, it's possible some at NBC and/or Mark Burnett Productions only knew about Alla's stripper past, but at the same time didn't know about the "whole story" until after filming was complete.

Given the levels of secrecy that have to be in place when taping a show like The Apprentice, it's very possible that one hand didn't know what was in the other. It's also possible that Alla may have known she was "safe", but some at NBC at the time filming was going on didn't, and once the stripper past came out may have decided at that point that if Alla made the final four the interviews would have to be cancelled and whichever team lost the Microsoft task would have to be "fired" regardless of who it was. This if so would have been well before Alla advanced as far as she did on the show, and if so because they didn't want to leave any hint up to that point her stripper past was responsible for her being "fired" any earlier than she would have otherwise.

That to me would be a very logical explanation if that is the case, though again, we may never know the real truth behind why there were no interviews.

odietamo

Dec 10, 2005 @ 1:09 pm

This does seem logical. I wonder if the truth ever leaks somehow.

I just watched the Finale Preview on NBC. Looks like there will be a very happy ending to this season.

highlander

Dec 10, 2005 @ 2:50 pm

phoenixxx

Dec 10, 2005 @ 6:19 pm

I have the feeling that Trump will look at past history (he did when he fired Clay) and it would be hypocritical not to at the finale. He will hire Randal as The Apprentice but offer Rebecca a job at Trump instead of waiting 3 months before he hired Andy of S2. Trump has liked Rebecca since she broke her ankle and feels she is loyal something he insists on. Randal has show he is loyal when he told Rebecca he will help her get her win as PM on the Microsoft task and she rode his coattails on that task. However, Trump only sees Rebecca's "loyalty." Rebecca was smart to deal with the executives while she sent Chris and James to do the errands. The executives only know her and will give her a good review to Trump. Randal does not have that type of ego and concentrated on the entire task so the executives that Randal needed to impress basically dealt with Mark and I think they will say to Trump that they thought Mark was running the task. Trump will spin this any way he wants to get what he wants. Rebecca sits in that room (yes, she has a broken ankle) but Chris and James are carrying her by doing everything. However, she hobbles to the door, whether to open the door to the suite or the boardroom (see extra footage of her opening the door instead of letting Chris do it) when it would be natural to let the guys do it whether she has a broken ankle or not. [/quote]
I think we get it that you don't like Rebecca...because of her broken ankle...because of her "damsel in distress" routine...because of her "ego"...and because she breathes, talks, and walks, basically.

No need to be so repititious in all your posts re Rebecca.

Anyways, I still think Trump is going to hire Randall. His performance blows all other contestants' performances this season out of the water. With everything he's done this season, he's certainly allowed a slip-up. It's too bad that it has to come in the final task. If he hires Rebecca and not him, there will be many people angry (me included) and the internet boards will certainly be a-buzzing. The double-hiring is plausible, and I agree that he might hire her ala Andy from S2.

RhondaGC

Dec 10, 2005 @ 6:39 pm

Given the levels of secrecy that have to be in place when taping a show like The Apprentice, it's very possible that one hand didn't know what was in the other. It's also possible that Alla may have known she was "safe", but some at NBC at the time filming was going on didn't, and once the stripper past came out may have decided at that point that if Alla made the final four the interviews would have to be cancelled and whichever team lost the Microsoft task would have to be "fired" regardless of who it was. This if so would have been well before Alla advanced as far as she did on the show, and if so because they didn't want to leave any hint up to that point her stripper past was responsible for her being "fired" any earlier than she would have otherwise. [/quote]
Maybe I'm dense, because so many others get it and I don't, but I don't quite get all this theory. Are you saying that he didn't fire Alla when he had the chance the first time because he was afraid at that point it would look like he was firing her "because" of her past and that that in itself, if discovered, would bring up the whole stripper background thing again in the media? I suppose that would make sense as the reason that Alla said she knew she was "safe" because Trump or Burnett told her, or implied it or something.

And I can understand them not wanting Alla to get to the interviews because of awkward questions about her past that might come up. But if so, why didn't he just fire Alla for the Microsoft task (honestly, it could have been justified just as easily as firing both) and then gone on with the interviews for the top three? Was he assuming that Alla might end up on the winning team for the Micosoft task and therefore end up in the interviews by default? Now *that* would make sense to me, I guess, and would justify the cancelling of the interviews in advance--because it's pretty clear to me that was a decision made ahead of time.

So, is this the basics of your theory? If so, I understand after all and I think I agree with most of it.

illogic

Dec 10, 2005 @ 11:11 pm

The strange thing about all of this is that I couldn't see how Alla's past, both as a stripper and with Acremant, could have possibly taken anyone at NBC even remotely by surprise. If they had her previous name, Alla Kosova (and they would have, through some basic public crecords searches), a simle Lexis-Nexis newspaper search would have revealed articles about the murder trial.

I don't think they were worried about her stripper past even coming up at the interviews. The interviewers are typically captains of industry -- the kind of people who know not to run to the press. Maybe NBC/Trump were worried that she might get through the interviews intact. If she made it to the final two, and outperformed Rebecca or Randal, which was entirely possible, Trump would have to hire her. But at the same time, Alla was good TV,which is why Trump sent her up after the Shania task. So if the fix was in, it would have been in during the Microsoft task.

Or maybe I'm wrong about all of this. This season seems way off, and a lot of the intrigue seems to be around Alla.

Wallyhorse

Dec 10, 2005 @ 11:11 pm

It's possible Mr. Trump does a double hiring, but:

I don't see it happening on the show.

I still think Randal wins with Mr. Trump looking at the overall performance and noting he could not control the weather. If he also hires Rebecca, he will do so separately, after the finale, but perhaps if we have a repeat of last year where the runner-up appears on Conan, his coming out and doing so on that show (taping of "Conan" is early enough in the evening for Mr. Trump to do such and have it make the late local news in most of the country).

Having said what I did, one other possibility for the "shocker" if he does also hire Rebecca on the show is that it actually winds up a triple hiring and he also hires Alla to manage his Las Vegas properties (which would make sense since she lives there). I say that is possible, especially if it turns out the double "firing" on the Microsoft task was because the interviews had been cancelled once Alla made the final four and there was concern by those at NBC and/or Mark Burnett Productions that Alla's past could have come up during the interviews, be leaked to the mainstream media in town for the Apprentice 3 finale and wind up spoiling the entire "A4" season.

With all that said, I still think the finale "shocker" is what I said upthread (Katrina being part of NBC's Sunday Night NFL Football next fall), especially since it's the kind of thing that would get talked about the next day on sports talk radio, especially in New York on WFAN, where I'm sure "Mike and The Mad Dog" (Mike Francessa and Chris Russo) would talk about it.

odietamo

Dec 11, 2005 @ 12:06 am

Or maybe I'm wrong about all of this. This season seems way off, and a lot of the intrigue seems to be around Alla. [/quote]
May be.
Personally, I am more intrigued with the Rebecca controversy. While I have nothing personal against Rebecca, but Trump's "Rebecca is a star " sounds like a joke to me (but more as an insult to my intelligence). I hope one day he will explain. Or, as a surprise, he will show us some extra footage with Rebecca having great ideas, being a great leader and wonderful person - something that made him think she was a star.

Robert Loblaw

Dec 11, 2005 @ 1:34 am

The sneak peek at nbc.com shows much more than I thought they would reveal. I especially like Randall slurping his spaghetti at lunch with Rebecca.

Kaylee529533

Dec 11, 2005 @ 7:44 am

There's an old saying--if you hear hoofbeats behind you, you look for a horse before assuming that it's a zebra (unless you are on the plains of Africa, of course). For three seasons the interview phase blew chunks because they showed such disconnected, disjointed snippets--it's likely that they just decided to not do them at all this year. I think that devoting a show to them would have been interesting, but if what you see is what you get over the past three seasons, I say junk them now. It's much, much more likely that canceling the interviews is connected to all the other changes this season rather than being connected in any way to Alla.

And as for the Rebecca hate, Rebecca's unworthy, it's all fixed, Rebecca was tipped to the dinner thing, Rebecca got the easier task--plenty of people like Rebecca, not just Trump. There's an honest difference of opinion going on here--there doesn't need to be a conspiracy. Both sides have some valid arguments on their sides--each candidate has strengths and weaknesses. I think that the PM record disparity is misleading and that Rebecca is a great candidate. It would be legitimate to hire her mainly for the fact that's she's managing her staff so much better this time around than the first--she's grown tremendously in 6 weeks, while Randall seems to be actually losing focus and coasting on his laurels a bit. I think that she will be hired based on the final task--Trump said that this is twice as hard as anything that they've done so far. I'm glad that it's not me up there because if Randall wins, folks within the Trump organization will whisper behind his back that he was hired because he's black, and if Rebecca wins, people in the Trump organization will whisper behind her back that she was was hired because the boss has the hots for her. Sucks to be them.

TriumphantComic

Dec 11, 2005 @ 11:42 am

In previous seasons, the Final Task was usually the task that would either make or break a candidate. During Season 1, Bill outperformed Kwame on the Final Task (Omarosa really ruined it for Kwame) and The Trumpster hired Bill. During Season 2, The Trumpster was more pleased with Kelly's performace on the Final Task than he was with Jen Massey's performance on the Final Task and Kelly ended up getting hired. Both Pamela and Chris (two of Jen Massey's Final Task subordinates) weren't happy with the way Jen Massey was leading them. During Season 3, Kendra performed way better than Tana did on the Final Task and she was hired. It's a possibility that the Final Task for this season would most likely determine who will be hired. If Randal outperforms Rebecca on the Final Task, then Trump will hire him. If Rebecca outperforms Randal on the Final Task, then there's a chance that Trump will hire her. We'll have to wait and see how they overcome their obstacles on the Final Task this coming Thursday.

angusgreen

Dec 11, 2005 @ 1:08 pm

Four possibilities

A: Double hiring
B: Randal hired
C: Rebecca hired
D: Double firing

Because the previews explicitly say 'only one can be hired' then A is pretty much eliminated (though Trump could offer the defeated candidate a lesser job afterwards). The positive tone of the sneak look seems to mean that D is eliminated leaving B and C. Out of those two I'd guess C was more likely since:

* As discussed elsewhere the softball match isn't a success (though the preview clips seem to be more sympathetic to Randal than the total disaster implied in the spoiler). The fact that its the only complex non marketing task all season means it matters much more than in previous seasons.
* The sneak preview implies that the format of the live finale will be closer to series 1 (decision made by Trump not by public accalmation - which would favour Rebecca).
* Trump's (outrageous) comments about Randal being lazy aren't really the kind of comments he would say about someone he is about to hire.
* Trump's comments about Rebecca and her general edit last episode (the latter are important since both Kendra and Bill had generally positive edits).
* This would fufill the surprise quotient.

I think the tone of the finale and the edit for both the candidates will avoid the excesses of the S3 finale.

I'm going to predict that if there is an alternative shocker that its that one episode will be filmed in Scotland because of the prescense of the Scottish First Minister in S5 (according to Wikipedia).

With all that said, I still think the finale "shocker" is what I said upthread (Katrina being part of NBC's Sunday Night NFL Football next fall), especially since it's the kind of thing that would get talked about the next day on sports talk radio, especially in New York on WFAN, where I'm sure "Mike and The Mad Dog" (Mike Francessa and Chris Russo) would talk about it.[/quote]

Katrina was a reasonably strong candidate but I think the general population have moved on somewhat from S1 - I doubt NBC would be too concerned about what a talk radio station would think - even one in New York (I stopped listening myself to it a few years ago).

Summa

Dec 11, 2005 @ 4:46 pm

Trump's (outrageous) comments about Randal being lazy aren't really the kind of comments he would say about someone he is about to hire.[/quote]

When did Trump say that Randall was lazy?

GrinAndBearIt

Dec 11, 2005 @ 5:10 pm

Summa, it's here in the media thread. http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/in...dpost&p=4129376

Wallyhorse

Dec 11, 2005 @ 6:17 pm

Cooler said on December 2:

Wallyhorse, you asked me a while ago to ask my girlfriend at Mark Burnett about the schedule and changes. I was in her office today, and asked her point blank if NBC modified the schedule. She pulled it out of her bottom drawer, complete with partial coffee cup stain, and had all the dates of the episodes from day one , episode 401 to the mid season recap to the finale on the 15th. No changes, no deviations. The number of the weeks and the number of candidates was decided before filming. Trump just decided how and where to cut them. The only thing I do not know about is the interviews. Last time, Craig was fired in the first 15 minutes, it was not an entire episode dedicated to interviews, so the number of weeks was always 13 with the number of candidates being 18.

I did see on her paper that the final tasks are involving Yahoo! and Outback Steak House. It said, " Episode 412-12/8, Brand: Outback Steak House/ Yahoo!"[/quote]

Originally, I thought you were right, but having seen the last two episodes of Martha's version and based on what I have read elsewhere (including on the board here for Martha's version), I'm no longer sure if they didn't have that paper you mentioned there in case anyone asked about any possible changes concerning Trump's version (I know I would have that there to make it look like there were no changes in a situation like that).

I say this because the last two tasks on Martha's version, which were for the Buick Lucerne and for Song Airlines look much more like they were originally scheduled for Trump's version, but were moved to Martha's because Trump's season was possibly shortened from 16 episodes to 13 at the last minute (and in that case would be possible because filming on Martha's version I believe went until June 30, so those could easily have been slotted there in place of a couple of non-sponsored tasks on Martha's show). That would suggest what I said earlier of there being 18 candidates for reasons mentioned earlier in this thread, coupled with the fact when they go to Los Angeles for Apprentice 6, there will only be 16 candidates instead of 18.

King Solomon

Dec 12, 2005 @ 2:37 pm

Who will be hired??? That is the question of the week. However, that was NOT one of the 20 questions this week on the Yahoo Fantasy Game. Not only is that a logical question to ask, it has been the final question on previous versions of the Yahoo game.

My guess is that the question wasn't included because there won't be a wrong answer.

The one thing NBC has total control over is editing. There is no way they would edit Rebecca as they have, including the extra footage on Yahoo and the NBC.com preview if she was not going to be hired. Although Trump is unlikely to bring the wrath of a nation down upon himself by not hiring Randle after having built him up as a demi-god all season, the editing does leave open this possibility. However, the mutual respect NBC has been emphasizing recently, especially in the balcony dinner on the NBC.com preview leads me to believe they want viewers to see how well Rebecca and Randal get along because...they will be co-workers.

donalsduck

Dec 12, 2005 @ 2:51 pm

Well, that would explain it, and be quite logical, considering the recent editing. But why, in that case, the NBC preview video emphatically screams: "ONLY ONE OF YOU WILL BE HIRED!"?

King Solomon

Dec 12, 2005 @ 4:17 pm

Well, that would explain it, and be quite logical, considering the recent editing. But why, in that case, the NBC preview video emphatically screams: "ONLY ONE OF YOU WILL BE HIRED!"?[/quote]
I know, what do you make of that? In order for my theory to play out, NBC would have been misleading everyone in order to create more drama leading up to the Biggest. Finale. Ever. and you know they would never do that.

veritykindle85

Dec 12, 2005 @ 5:42 pm

The more I see promos blaring "Only ONE!" the more convinced I am that both will be hired. Heck, every commerical for TA:M last week showed her saying "ONE of you will be fired" and two went. So in NBC new math, 1=2.

angusgreen

Dec 12, 2005 @ 6:11 pm

I know, what do you make of that? In order for my theory to play out, NBC would have been misleading everyone in order to create more drama leading up to the Biggest. Finale. Ever. and you know they would never do that.[/quote]

I disagree, the 'thirteen week job interview' quote accurately indicated the multiple firings. Having multiple hirings would run the severe risk of destroying any tension regarding future series since if Trump hires two this time there will be no logical reason why he won't do in S5 and S6. I also think that the double hiring will reduce the drama.

IMHO The whole point is to find an outright winner - that's half the challenge. If there are two hirings this time Kwame and Jenn C (esp Jenn C) both have every reason to be aggreived since the difference between them and Bill/Kelly was pretty small (obviously Tana has nothing to complain about).

Personally, I want Randal to win but I'd rather Rebecca wins its outright than both candidates jointly win it. This show has been run into the ground by constantly mucking around with the format - I think NBC have indicated that they want a 'back to basics' approach with the reduction in the numbers of contestants to 16.

I do envisage Trump offering the defeated candidate a senior job (though not the actual apprentice role). Also, I can see the consolation prize being more substantial than the sales job offered to Amy or the project manager job to Andy. I could easily imagine Trump saying:

"Rebecca, you're hired .... however, Randal because you were so good up to the final task and I feel that you have a brilliant mind I'm going to offer you and your company (the consulting company that Randal owns) the chance to do a joint venutre with my company in this new project that we're doing". In some ways that would be perfect since it would be far superior in terms of pay, actual responsibility and prestige (he would be a business partner not a lackey) while making sure there was only one winner. From Trump's perspective (though not from the point of the viewer) this would be ideal - he gets Randal's consulting and engineering skills while giving Rebecca the hands on job.

Of course it would be far better to hire Randal and give Rebecca the consolation prize.

(edited to correct punctuation).

scarletsmith

Dec 12, 2005 @ 6:15 pm

Kwame and Jenn C (esp Jenn C)[/quote]

I think you mean JenM (Jennifer Massey), runner-up from TA2. JenC was Jennifer Crisafulli, the one fired for the "two Jewish fat ladies" comment.

angusgreen

Dec 12, 2005 @ 6:17 pm

Kwame and Jenn C (esp Jenn C)

I think you mean JenM (Jennifer Massey), runner-up from TA2. JenC was Jennifer Crisafulli, the one fired for the "two Jewish fat ladies" comment.[/quote]

Yes, my mistake.

(indeed I think on the final task in S2 Jen M actually performed slightly better than Kelly).

donalsduck

Dec 12, 2005 @ 9:21 pm

Cooler

Dec 12, 2005 @ 11:40 pm

My girlfirend at Mark Burnett just forwarded me an invite to The Apprentice afterparty at Bed, Friday December 16th in Manhattan. Interestingly, it says that a portion of the proceeds will be donated to "autismspeaks.org". It makes me wonder if Randal's team didn't raise the most money, and this is a way to supplement.

Wallyhorse, I am afraid you are overthinking the schedule/dates/candidates/firings for TA4. My friend has been with both NBC and MB for at least 10 years. She signed a 5 million nondisclosure contract she said "looked like a phonebook." We have been friends since college, and she is telling me things she believes are being kept in confidence. There was no "planted" paper to throw anyone off about scheduling. It was the same crumpled schedule she has had since August. I have seen it a couple of times during this season, but her info is limited, because she is working on made-for-tv-movies for Burnett now. I didn't mention it did say at the top..."all dates subject to change," they just never did change. She has NO idea I make these occasional postings and would be really pissed if she found out.

Wallyhorse

Dec 13, 2005 @ 2:12 am

Cooler:

As I said in the earlier post, I simply was not completely sure based on what I had seen on Martha's version of the show with the last two team tasks, coupled with what I had read and what had already been announced concerning "A6" (cutting back to 16 candidates) had me wondering if some changes were made at the last minute for this season plus all the other theories that some had said (including by former candidates) about this season (it being cut short in the middle because ratings for "A3" had tumbled, etc.).

angusgreen

Dec 13, 2005 @ 8:12 am

Well, it seems that they have changed the tune. Until recently, there used to be a Yahoo Apprentice ad banner on Twop, declaring: "Only ONE will be chosen!". If you look up on this very page now, you can see a Yahoo Apprentice banner that says: "Finally, a task where everyone will win!" (some reference to Apprentice charities, seemingly).[/quote]

The NBC promos haven't changed their tune however (and since they show Trump being generally positive about both candidates) it seems more and more likely that there will be a consolation prize for the losing candidate, just not the actual apprenticeship (or joint victory). I'm still predicting (unfortunatly) a Rebecca victory followed by Randal being involved in some publiclly announced joint venture with Trump.

CheekyCricket

Dec 13, 2005 @ 11:39 am

The NBCUMV.COM promotional release has been posted: see here. It's fairly generic, just like last week's release, although it is referring to "one big decision" and a new "employee." Who knows: maybe only one candidate will be hired, maybe more smokescreen:

DONALD TRUMP TO HIRE HIS FOURTH "APPRENTICE" ON LIVE FINALE OF NBC'S "THE APPRENTICE" (DECEMBER 15, 9-11PM ET)

NEW YORK ? December 13, 2005 The entire season and one big decision has come down to this night--"The Apprentice" live finale, Thursday, December 15 from 9-11pm ET. The two-hour finale will be broadcast live at Lincoln Center and will feature the conclusion of the final two tasks-- managing the Outback Steakhouse VIP Softball Challenge (led by Randal) and running the Yahoo!All-Star Comedy Benefit (led by Rebecca), as well as a cast reunion and ultimately the live boardroom hiring.

Trump's newest employee will receive a $250,000 'apprenticeship' and join the ranks of the three previous winners-Bill Rancic, Kelly Perdew and Kendra Todd. It's a race to the finish and the final boardroom. [/quote]

GoddessMelissa

Dec 13, 2005 @ 12:39 pm

angusgreen

Dec 13, 2005 @ 12:41 pm

I was just going to write something about what the surprise will be when I saw this from a newspaper a few weeks ago (and remembered the previous speculation about S1's Katrina).

HIT 'EM: Here are the top television-related searches according to yahoo.com:

* So You Think You Can Dance

* Lauren Sanchez

* Over There

* Tripping the Rift

* NBC Nightly News

* Canadian Idol

* Katrina Campins

* Kathy Griffin

* Project Superstar[/quote]

Maybe the sideline reporter speculation isn't so far fetched after all.

Nocturne

Dec 13, 2005 @ 12:56 pm

I'm not totally buying there being a OMG Yooge Suprise.
I'm wondering if Trump is allowing an ex-Apprentice comptete again in a future season, like LA Apprentice.
Burnett likes to do this sort of thing on Surivor.[/quote]

That's what I've been thinking all along. To me, it seems to make more sense. Either that or the huuuge surprise will turn out to be nothing more than "meh".

Booklord

Dec 13, 2005 @ 2:36 pm

I'm still hoping that Trump fires Kelly. It would make my week.

CheekyCricket

Dec 13, 2005 @ 2:40 pm

If you think about it, Kelly's one-year apprenticeship should be just about finished, so maybe . . .

Either that or the huuuge surprise will turn out to be nothing more than "meh". [/quote]
That's my vote. Even a double hiring would seem "meh" to me at this point, after the two double firings and the quadruple firing.

Wallyhorse

Dec 13, 2005 @ 5:14 pm

While I still think Katrina is very possible, I had a new thought on the "shocker":

Randal is hired as Trump's Apprentice, while Rebecca (if she does in fact lose) is immediately hired afterwards by CNBC and starts there on Monday (if so, in a deal NBC-Universal and Dow Jones, who jointly own CNBC would have been allowed to work on with Rebecca by Mark Burnett with the provision that it would be voided if she was picked by Trump).

Far-fetched? Not at all! Rebecca is a financial journalist, and CNBC is embarking on a revamp of its format that begins Monday. This includes:

A new program, Worldwide Exchange that will air early weekday mornings from 4:00-6:00 AM ET/1:00-3:00 AM PT.

Squwak Box moved up an hour from 6:00-9:00 AM ET/3:00-6:00 AM PT, and a new sister show Squwak on the Street that will air from 9:00-10:00 AM ET/6:00-7:00 AM PT.

A couple of personalities who were on CNBC and then left are coming back for the new lineup, and I'm sure NBC-Universal and Dow Jones would love to be able to announce the runner-up of this year's Apprentice if it is Rebecca as a new personality as if that happened she'd be coming into a revamped lineup directly off the show.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.