TWoP Forums > 4-2: "There's No 'I' In Team" 2005.9.29

Full Version: 4-2: "There's No 'I' In Team" 2005.9.29

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

Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

polka dots

Sep 30, 2005 @ 11:31 pm

This episode reminded me of season 3's Pontiac episode--where the men also assumed they would easily beat the women. I would have hoped that candidates from season 4 would have at least familiarized themselves with past episodes and try to learn something. [/quote]

I think season 3 was airing just as season 4 was taping. I'm not entirely sure though. But I don't think the season 4 Apprenti would've been able to see the chauvinist-fest that was the Pontiac task in season 3. Even if they had, I still think Team Spreadsheet (hee!) would've acted the exact same way. "We're men! We know cars! It's like, genetic! Hoo-rah!!"

AlmondEyes

Sep 30, 2005 @ 11:35 pm

I thought cameras were intrusive and unnecessary at the funeral for Danny's mom in Real World (yes, I watch! And I'm not ashamed to say it), and I felt the same way for Randal and his family. Sure, Randal agreed to sign his privacy away for the length of time Apprentice was filming, but geez. I mean, for the love of all that's holy, let people grieve. Why does Trump and Co. think it's appropriate to pimp out this footage? Better question - why did they find it appropriate for cameras to accompany the poor guy in the first place?

Notwithstanding what I just said, to the person upthread who wondered whether the casket was decorated with a huge gold T? I'm probably going to hell, but that made me laugh and laugh.

In the words of the great Gordon Ramsey, "shut it down!" [/quote]
Oh, how I miss the hotness that was GRrrrr. Happy times, y'all.

Lisetta

Oct 1, 2005 @ 12:54 am

Sharpy

Oct 1, 2005 @ 1:21 am

I like George and Carolyn, but it's easy to pick out the problems in other people's work. Just once I'd like to see them do a car ad presentation in matching outfits, just to see what they come up with.[/quote]
What was that study they did about a year ago that discovered that almost anyone can be a good boss. What's hard is being a good employee. But I guess that's how G and C got there. Makes you wonder how many great bosses there'd be if only being a good employee were not the first step.

ryan506

Oct 1, 2005 @ 1:36 am

Ho hum, another lame-ass advertising task. This was certainly no cucumber-oriented porn. Has anyone else noticed that, without fail, in these Apprentice advertising tasks, there are invariably grammatical and/or punctuation errors in their print campaigns? I mean, a lowercase "i" in "Italian?" For that, they get a capital "R" in "Retarded."

Bassari99: I thought the execution of the women's ad campaign was amateurish and hackneyed, but they at least got the gist of what advertising is supposed to do.[/quote]
You took the words right out of my mouth. It was a very amateurish-looking campaign, like something that a local dealership would have a local television affiliate make for them (especially with the stupid Tahoma typeface in the title cards... ew).

SmedIndy: I know plenty of women who would have done ANYTHING to skate with some professional hockey players - so the reward was just fine.[/quote]
Makes me wonder if joining them in the shower would've been part of the prize. If so, sign me up...

sesstr: Markus - Good grief this man grates to no end! I just want to reach through the screen, grab him by the neck and shake him until he snaps out of that muddled hypnosis.[/quote]
What about until his neck snaps, instead, and he flops over dead?

Teague: I have to say, my least favorite person on this week's episode? The dick from Lamborghini. What an utter tool.[/quote]
But why? He didn't really *do* anything...

On a slightly unrelated side note, I'm surprised that they included as much footage of Randal's grandmother's funeral as they did. I didn't really think it was entirely appropriate, mainly because the show isn't about her--and this guy will probably get fired at some point anyway.

Kristi: I think that this sums up Shrieky McSouthern in a nutshell... "We need the Rocky music! What is it? Da da da, da da da!" Yeeeahhh... riiight... since Rocky played hockey and all, and had the first two bars of "Mairzy Doats" hummed poorly and off-key as his theme music. I think Trump must have expected the men to win because this definitely wasn't a woman-oriented reward. I'm also not surprised that one of them twisted her ankle.

Markus: I've seen a t-shirt that says how I feel about you... "Your retarded." That's all. Plus, I enjoyed that Trump told Markus to his face that he doesn't see him lasting much longer. I tittered with glee.

Chris: Yeah, yeah, the firing made sense, blah blah... and you couldn't have helped matters any with all of your "Water is life, and it's delicate, unborn fetuscakes, blah blah." Even if you are sort of a dummy, I'll miss the thought of your large hands and... other things all the same. (I'm such a queer.)

Finally, did anyone else catch that the cab number this week was fake? It was "47C7," which isn't even pretending to be a real medallion number.

OK, that is all...

Jacob

Oct 1, 2005 @ 6:46 am

Those of us joining the conversation after the CNBC re-airing might benefit from the reminder to please read the entire thread before posting -- those posters who've been participating in the conversation from the beginning deserve equal respect for their opinions, and their time.

blocked writer

Oct 1, 2005 @ 7:10 am

Remember how during TA3, Trump would go on tv and be dismissive of his current TA3 group, but then start gushing about how wonderful in every way...how superior...how beautiful and great...all the TA4 contestants were.

Two episodes in and I'm thinking....this group? Huh? They seem a mixed bag to me, nothing special, just like every other season.[/quote]

I know. As far as looks are concerned, they look decent overall, but with the exception of a couple of stand-outs, they are fairly average, IMO. Personally, I don't care that much what they look like. I'd rather see average-looking, brilliant people kicking ass on the tasks, than a bunch of good-looking people screwing up right and left.

Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate good looks as much as the next person. But TV is filled with gorgeous folks, so it's not like it's hard to find eye candy. On this show, it just shouldn't be the focus Trump has made it.

As far as the much-touted brilliance? Not so much in evidence, so far. Markus, Melissa, and Chris especially have left me underwhelmed. But it does fill me with glee that Trump is being proven to be as much of a blowhard as ever. He hand-picked this cast, and they are pretty much like any of the others.

But speaking of looks, I have to say that I think Randal is gorgeous, large nose and all. He looks like a tall, ebony statue, and his nose gives his face character. I'm so sick of cookie-cutter looks, and botoxed faces on TV. I hate shows like The Swan, who make the contestants look like plastic. I feel sorry for actresses who feel a lot of pressure to look younger to continue to work. But I'd hate to see someone with a striking, interesting face like Randal get it surgically altered. For what? So he can look more like other people? Don't do it, Randal!

I also noticed how Randal's mouth was very unsmiling when Trump made his lame joke about Omarosa. Randal is probably very well aware with the problematic portrayal of blacks on Burnett shows. That might even have been part of why he went on the show, to counteract that troubled history.

The problem I also had with Trump's comments is that while TA helped to create the "career" that the vile Omarosa was, Trump & Co. have also benefited greatly from her. As awful as she is, she did help to make TA the hit it was in the first season. They promoted her in ads as much as possible. So Trump needs to own that fact and shut the fuck up. Because if Omarosa hadn't made such a big deal out of the plaster, there might not be a TA4. If he wants to make digs at her, IMO, he also needs to say, "But thank goodness she was so awful!" Shut it, Trump, you monkey-haired asshole.

ghettofabman

Oct 1, 2005 @ 7:25 am

I also noticed how Randal's mouth was very unsmiling when Trump made his lame joke about Omarosa. Randal is probably very well aware with the problematic portrayal of blacks on Burnett shows. That might even have been part of why he went on the show, to counteract that troubled history.[/quote]

Oh God, I hope so! Randal's presence on this season reminds me of Cedric the Entertainer's rant to Harvey Keitel's character in the movie Be Cool. Here's hoping that Randal shoots down all of those negative portrayals and takes this one home.

Back on topic, was Mark the one admitting that he actually HAD a green Lambourghini?? I had no idea that Lambourghinis came in such a hideous color.

Markus - Good grief this man grates to no end! I just want to reach through the screen, grab him by the neck and shake him until he snaps out of that muddled hypnosis.[/quote]

That's funny.....the one I found wanting to shake the crap out of is that fucking asshole Josh. Man, I hate that self-righteous, condescending prick! I really do hope that Trump axes him before Markus to see his smug face crack!

"We're men! We know cars! It's like, genetic! Hoo-rah!!" [/quote]

Heh, a total Laterrian Wallace moment.

tiggeril

Oct 1, 2005 @ 9:02 am

Finally, did anyone else catch that the cab number this week was fake? It was "47C7," which isn't even pretending to be a real medallion number.[/quote]
They've always been fake. I remember a "Reality Secrets Revealed" or some shit show on VH1 acting like that was a huge revelation.

wormlegs

Oct 1, 2005 @ 9:12 am

Interesting that James refused to join the pile-on Markus party in the Boardroom and chose Chris as the one to be fired.[/quote]

I think this is not so much because he really felt Chris was bad, but because unlike Chris, he could see which way the wind was blowing.

heebiejeebie

Oct 1, 2005 @ 10:34 am

I think this is not so much because he really felt Chris was bad, but because unlike Chris, he could see which way the wind was blowing. [/quote]

It's unclear because of the editing, but it did seem early on that he was refuting a couple of Markus' comments at the start and then decided that Trump was obviously not going to fire Markus and sang a different tune. Was he working with Mark ont he print ads? Because I did think it was curious he did not pick Mark instead as it seemed Mark would have likely been the one to go if Chris had taken him into the boardroom.

BimboKay

Oct 1, 2005 @ 10:35 am

" Markus: I've seen a t-shirt that says how I feel about you... 'Your retarded.' "

If that's a real t-shirt, did you get that the wearer isn't so swift either...both in spelling and sensitivity?

Hamhock96

Oct 1, 2005 @ 11:35 am

but won't it be dull when both she & Markus the Mouth are gone?

[/quote]

Probably not. Someone else will step up, if previous seasons are any indication.

The best part ever was the Excel guys lined up, so in love with their ad that they were all staring lovingly at the TV, while Markus takes the opportunity to turn and smile beguilingly at the client. Talk about needy! Talk about nerdy! Talk about neurotic!

Still, Tana didn't go into full nutso mode until near the end; she was kind of cool at first. Likewise, Craig, who also seemed pretty cool for a long time, then, whoops! So you don't really know who will step up to the crazy plate; someone will.

While it may seem that Burnett and Co target minorities as the crazos, the "white" people are no less weird. Tana? Michael? Brian? Sam? Markus? Jeez, it's just that all white people don't squirm watchin them the way that we minorities do; although, I think that Iowans squirmed on Tana's behalf. So, since there are a lot fewer minority types, I would venture to say that on the percentages, the white people are just as obnoxious as the minorities. After all, Kwame and the lawyer guy from A2 were okay; so was Tara.

Of course, Assorama went out of her way to discuss her minority status and make it an issue on the show (the "n" word and all). Her fans said that the others were "threatened" by her strength, etc. So it was hard to ignore her as some kind of representative. But she damn sure didn't represent me. I don't blush for her.

And, as to Assorama, props to whoever pointed out that without her, A1 would not have been a hit. She certainly kept me watching.

ryan506

Oct 1, 2005 @ 2:04 pm

BimboKay: If that's a real t-shirt, did you get that the wearer isn't so swift either...both in spelling and sensitivity?[/quote]
Indeed it is a real shirt. Perhaps we should buy one for him. It would seem appropriate.

Ashforth

Oct 1, 2005 @ 2:56 pm

Unfortunately, after a well-deserved hiatus, “retarded” seems to be making a comeback as a somewhat socially acceptable insult. In any event, ryan506, though I think you are suggesting that Markus should be given the shirt to wear because you think he deserves to be called retarded, the description of the shirt on the site you linked:

“I guess this shirt is a booby trap for wannabe grammar police. "Hey", they'll whine, "did you know that your shirt uses the possessive 'your' when it should use the contraction 'you're'?"
At which point you'll shake your head, mutter the words on your shirt, and walk away.”[/quote] would seem to suggest that the wearer of the shirt is somehow superior in intelligence to those who think that the shirt itself is, well, retarded.

So I’m not sure the shirt works as an insult to Markus, even though I would certainly opine that it is insulting to polite society in general.

sesstr

Oct 1, 2005 @ 3:02 pm

The problem I also had with Trump's comments is that while TA helped to create the "career" that the vile Omarosa was, Trump & Co. have also benefited greatly from her. As awful as she is, she did help to make TA the hit it was in the first season. They promoted her in ads as much as possible. So Trump needs to own that fact and shut the fuck up. Because if Omarosa hadn't made such a big deal out of the plaster, there might not be a TA4. If he wants to make digs at her, IMO, he also needs to say, "But thank goodness she was so awful!" Shut it, Trump, you monkey-haired asshole.
[/quote]

I used to feel sorry for Omarosa but no longer, seeing what she's done post-show. Yes she was used, but it comes with the territory. Every contestant on a show like this takes that risk in exchange for instant national notoriety. Just like betting, the risk is high when the reward is big. Trump does and would no doubt use any contestant who behaves foolishly or brilliantly to promote his show - it is after all the marketing of Trump himself that the show is all about, so whatever brings viewers back fulfills the goal of the show. Therefore, a contestant cannot honestly pretend he or she is just signing up for an interview and depend on the decency of Trump & Burnett to present them in the best light (or even an okay light). Because it just isn't an interview really, it's entertainment. Cruel? Yes. Can you avoid it if you wish to? Yes.

And after all, Omarosa used Trump too. Without his show she would be a 'nobody'. I think that would be a big improvement, but I don't think she'd agree since she seems so eager to appear in every program that puts her face on TV.

blocked writer

Oct 1, 2005 @ 3:39 pm

And after all, Omarosa used Trump too. Without his show she would be a 'nobody'. I think that would be a big improvement, but I don't think she'd agree since she seems so eager to appear in every program that puts her face on TV.
[/quote]

Oh, I agree, and I never meant to imply that Omarosa deserves pity. Omarosa used TA to parlay her notoriety into a dubious (and hopefully short-lived) TV career. She can have it. But Trump and Burnett used her too, even asking her to comment at the TA2 finale, and promoting the hell out of her appearance.

I don't expect Trump to sing her praises, because the bitch doesn't deserve that. But I think it's disingenuous of him to continue to make digs at her without acknowledging that she and Sam were a huge part of why the show was a hit in the first place. As far as I know, he's never done that. I actually think the Omarosa and Sam factor hurt the show in subsequent seasons, since it seems clear that they started casting for controversy rather than excellence.

Pundit

Oct 1, 2005 @ 4:56 pm

All of the funeral coverage felt too self-congratulatory (on Trump's part) for me. I'm sure the family gave permission for the cameras to be there and it was actually nice to see the tribute. But my opinion of Trump would be higher if he provided the means for Randall to attend but didn't toot his own horn by airing it on TV.

Couldn't believe Chris was so stupid. Those of us who participate in business meetings of ANY type know to LISTEN for which way the wind is blowing and adjust accordingly. Especially when his ass was on the line. Or was he actually too stupid to realize that? Then again, he didn't exactly shine in the task, either. And he let himself be pushed around in the board meeting. The lower-case "Italian" was ridiculous. So, change the font if it doesn't look good, duh.

Does anyone know if the apprentice wannabes have access to blogs, forums, etc. while on the show? I know they use the computer/Internet in accomplishing tasks; do we assume they are monitored for non-task usage and kept away from seeing the viewing public's comments?

LolaLilaLilly

Oct 1, 2005 @ 5:03 pm

WHILE on the show?

I don't think it matters, since the show wrapped up filming months ago.

I remember hearing that while they're not "sequestered" as bad as say the contestants on Survivor and Big Brother are, the Apprenti aren't allowed any TV, Internet, Radio, or newspapers while on the show.

Only the occasional phone-call to family is allowed.

Pundit

Oct 1, 2005 @ 5:09 pm

Ah, I didn't know they wrapped way before airing. Never really gave it much thought. Obviously, there would be some delay, of course.

tiggeril

Oct 1, 2005 @ 5:36 pm

I think they do have internet access in the suite. It may be filtered to keep them from accessing email sites and stuff (coughporncough), but I know that they've researched stuff online in past seasons.

blocked writer

Oct 1, 2005 @ 5:45 pm

Couldn't believe Chris was so stupid. Those of us who participate in business meetings of ANY type know to LISTEN for which way the wind is blowing and adjust accordingly. Especially when his ass was on the line. Or was he actually too stupid to realize that? [/quote]

What I think Chris was trying to do was prove to Trump that Markus was a much bigger liability to the team than Mark. It was risky, but it would have been a gutsy move, even in the face of the warnings he received, if he had been any kind of effective debater.

If he had said something to Trump & Co. like, "I know you think Markus shouldn't be here, and Mark should. But we can learn from the mistakes we made on this challenge, and I think Markus is a much bigger liability to the team than Mark, for the following reasons." Then he could have proceeded to list specifics, like Markus messing up with the walkie-talkies, pushing his "smooth as silk" idea, etc. He could have even focused more on the lack of loyalty Markus displayed, something that Trump himself had noted. But he fell apart under the questioning of Trump and the viceroys, and didn't appear to make any of the most effective arguments.

I do have a bone to pick with George, though. I love George, and I think he's usually right. In fact, he was right about the main reason the guys won: they were arrogant, and presumed a win based on their gender.

However, George was wrong about marginalizing Markus. Markus had displayed enough to show that he was a problem during the task. Chris had listened to the "smooth as silk" idea, and rejected it, at least for the time being. One of the few things Chris did right was to ask everyone on the team to wait until they had talked to the Lamborghini executives before making up their minds about anything. I though that was good planning. After Markus willfully ignored that, as well as other things, I think it was safe to say he wasn't going to be much of an asset.

Others have mentioned that they would have ripped Chris a new one if he had allowed Markus to just run amok. If a team member is disruptive, at some point the PM needs to contain the damage as much possible. George seemed to be implying that Chris didn't know if Markus would have been effective, because Markus didn't have a chance. Markus had more than enough chances, IMO. Other than his point about "green with envy", he WAS a disaster. Even if they had changed the green poster, it wouldn't have won the challenge. So Markus didn't need to be so damn smug about it.

Pundit

Oct 1, 2005 @ 6:03 pm

However, George was wrong about marginalizing Markus. Markus had displayed enough to show that he was a problem during the task. Chris had listened to the "smooth as silk" idea, and rejected it, at least for the time being. One of the few things Chris did right was to ask everyone on the team to wait until they had talked to the Lamborghini executives before making up their minds about anything. I though that was good planning. After Markus willfully ignored that, as well as other things, I think it was safe to say he wasn't going to be much of an asset.[/quote]

When I said Chris let himelf be pushed around in the boardroom, I was referring to George's "marginalized" accusation. Markus screwed up on the simple walkie-talkie task and Chris took him out. In that particular instance, Chris demonstrated good leadership. Ditto the scenario above. It would only have taken a few sentences to deflect the "you marginalized him" accusation, but his response was ineffectual.

Where Chris went wrong was in personalizing his issues with Markus. Then he couldn't see the forest for the trees.

Nutjob

Oct 1, 2005 @ 6:08 pm

Where Chris went wrong was in personalizing his issues with Markus. Then he couldn't see the forest for the trees.[/quote]

While I agree with this, I also agree with Trump & Co. that the marketing sucked. Unlike last epi with Melissa, where the team could have won if she would have stopped being distracting and hustled more, Markus's disturbances had nothing to do with them losing. It was the fact that the rest of the guys didn't come up with a good campaign. Unfortunately, Chris let this get personal in two ways--he wanted to get rid of Markus, and he wouldn't sacrifice his bff Mark (whom Trump clearly would have considered firing) in order to save his own skin. So yeah, IMO, Chris totally deserved to go.

blocked writer

Oct 1, 2005 @ 6:13 pm

When I said Chris let himelf be pushed around in the boardroom, I was referring to George's "marginalized" accusation. Markus screwed up on the simple walkie-talkie task and Chris took him out. In that particular instance, Chris demonstrated good leadership. Ditto the scenario above. It would only have taken a few sentences to deflect the "you marginalized him" accusation, but his response was ineffectual.[/quote]

Thanks for the clarification, Pundit, and I agree.

meowing

Oct 1, 2005 @ 6:25 pm

Markus = good TV

Hope he lasts for awhile.

Pundit

Oct 1, 2005 @ 6:28 pm

Yes, Nutjob (love that name!), I agree that they failed at the task. But I think Chris would have stayed if he'd had boardroom survival skills. He failed to deflect George's criticism. He persistently refused to acknowlege why they lost the competition, choosing instead to focus on Markus. And then, ultimately, by personalizing the Markus issue and bringing only him into the boardroom, he gave Trump no recourse but to fire Chris. And Trump did so very reluctantly, it seemed to me.

I thought at one point that maybe he was trying to be loyal to the other team members in focusing so much on Markus. (Even so, there would have been more than one easy face-saving ways to bring one of them into the boardroom, too.) But I didn't get that impression from his comments in the cab. I think his focus on Markus as villain rendered him incapable of seeing the big picture (i.e., the forest).

goobaletta

Oct 1, 2005 @ 7:17 pm

Markus reminds me of a man I knew when I lived in RI. Just a little too sure he knew something about everything, way too enthused, and essentially kind of useless for most things because he's too busy running his mouth to listen to anyone else. However, he's probably a nice guy.

Kristi makes me embarrassed to be Southern and that's a pretty neat trick since my FoS is the American South. And, frankly, I couldn't help but wonder if there was more to her issue with Marshawn than stated outright.

I cheered when George was on fire in the boardroom. It made up for his lack in epi 1 when Carolyn was berating that nutty woman whose name I can't even recall now. Heh. Memorable, that one.

Lucabella

Oct 1, 2005 @ 8:49 pm

The slogan could be "You lookin' at me? You lookin' at me? Who the fuck do you think you're lookin' at?" or "Lamborghini: Making you an offer you can't refuse." [/quote]

Just had to give this the BWAH! it deserved.

As for the "green with envy" controversy, nothing about the slogan makes sense to me. It's a green Lamborghini, right? So what is it envious of? Aren't the other people or... cars or someone... supposed to be envious of it? So shouldn't the other cars be green? With envy? Question mark or no question mark, it doesn't really change the fact that the ad doesn't make sense. Or maybe I'm just missing something.

Bassari99

Oct 1, 2005 @ 10:19 pm

If he had said something to Trump & Co. like, "I know you think Markus shouldn't be here, and Mark should. But we can learn from the mistakes we made on this challenge, and I think Markus is a much bigger liability to the team than Mark, for the following reasons." [/quote]
This may have been effective assuming, of course, Trump was going to be magnanimous and indulge Chris in pursuing this line of reasoning; I don't think Trump was interested in going there. When is he ever? The ol' hairball can become quite surly when he thinks he's being forced to suffer a fool. Trump had already made up his mind that Mark was the screw-up on this specific task and not Markus. He kept harping on it. Even if Chris was able to remain calm, deliberative and unintimidated, he still would have tested Trump's patience. And, as we've seen, Trump is not above being rude and telling these apprentice wannabes to just shut it, if he takes a whim to. I don't think Chris was gonna win this battle, and he should have known better.

Bard Guy

Oct 1, 2005 @ 10:57 pm

To add my scorn for "ego-driven", besides definitely not being a compliment, it is also the only adjective in a string of nouns. So it was stupid on multiple levels.

pikabill

Oct 2, 2005 @ 12:15 am

Give a moment's consideration for those poor agency personnel who have to work with those Apprentice teams whenever there's an ad campaign challenge.
I'm in the ad business and routinely work with agency creative teams. The artists working with "normal" agency teams would have a great deal of input in the final product. Writers and creative people aren't necessarily visual people and they routinely depend on the talents of graphic designers, digital artists, photographers, cinematographers and editors to bring their concepts to life. It's an extremely collaborative process. Obviously, in these cases the pros are under strict instructions to keep their mouths shut, grit their teeth and just crank out exactly what's asked for. I would think they are fairly senior people as well, otherwise they'd go nuts dealing with some of the bonehead decisions that are made. Personally, I can't imagine junior people being able to deal with the situation.... and certainly not with some of the personalities. Does anyone know how these brave souls are chosen and compensated? Are they rewarded... or is this punishment? At some point I hope they all get together in a bar somewhere and write a book.

blocked writer

Oct 2, 2005 @ 12:51 am

This may have been effective assuming, of course, Trump was going to be magnanimous and indulge Chris in pursuing this line of reasoning; I don't think Trump was interested in going there. When is he ever? The ol' hairball can become quite surly when he thinks he's being forced to suffer a fool. [/quote]

It's true that there was never that much of a chance for Chris to pull off convincing Trump to fire Markus after he ignored the advice to take Mark in the boardroom. And you're right, Trump can be quite rude and irascible.

However, I seem to remember at least one occasion where someone was able to talk his way out of being fired when it looked like he was definitely on the chopping block. I don't remember who it was for sure - was it screaming Chris from last season?

Anyway, it was definitely a bad move not to take Mark with him. But if he was going to do that, at least he should have made all the good arguments he had against Markus. Had he done that, at least he wouldn't have gone out looking like such an idiot, and he might even have been able to save himself. And I'd have enjoyed seeing him make a good, logical case for himself, instead of blathering senselessly like he did. Oh well, it was an opportunity missed.

Pundit

Oct 2, 2005 @ 3:21 am

IMO, the case against Markus had to be made before he took him to the 2nd meeting. That's when he needed to spin his actions as effective leadership rather than petty marginalization.

Truth be told, even if he were able to do that successfully, it would have been for naught. Because Markus was not the reason they lost the task.

Chris knew he hadn't made a good case, hadn't convinced Trump and George, in particular. So it was really insanity for him to go in there with 50-50 odds vs. 33-1/3% if he took anyone else in with them.

marylou

Oct 2, 2005 @ 3:33 am

I wasn't real impressed with the comment about Markus maybe playing for the women's team.

Which of the loser guys said that again? I hate him.

Ashforth

Oct 2, 2005 @ 9:20 am

Question mark or no question mark, it doesn't really change the fact that the ad doesn't make sense. Or maybe I'm just missing something.[/quote]
Lucabella, I don't think you're missing anything. It was a stupid ad that didn't make sense either way.

Chris got fired because his argument made no sense. Trump and the viceroys were obviously aware that Markus is a doofus and soundly disliked by his team. They seemed to think that Chris did a good job as a leader, including his effectiveness at dealing with Markus. Then Chris blew it. The decision to bring only Markus to the boardroom was so stupid that it alone was reason to fire him.

Chris seemed to be in denial that the ad campaign was a failure and that the client didn't like it. He refused to even suggest that the people who made the decisions to do the things that the client hated most about the campaign were responsible for its failure and instead tried to blame Markus, who did not make those decisions.

blocked writer

Oct 2, 2005 @ 9:49 am

Truth be told, even if he were able to do that successfully, it would have been for naught. Because Markus was not the reason they lost the task. [/quote]

It would have all been for naught if Trump always fired the person most responsible for the loss. But there have been a few occasions where Trump has fired people for other reasons than the loss. He fired Bradford for giving up his exemption. He fired Stacie J. because her teammates convinced him (at least temporarily) that she was unstable. He fired Erin for making a wisecrack in the boardroom. Tammy was fired for so-called disloyalty to her team. In all those cases, the person fired wasn't the one who caused the loss.

So it's not outside the realm of possibility that Trump would have fired Markus instead of Chris, had Chris given a good, strong, and logical argument against Markus. Trump had already expressed doubts about Markus, and he seemed to be very reluctant in the end to fire Chris.

Well, it's a moot question now. I bet Chris is kicking himself, not only for refusing to take Mark in, but for making such a poor argument to fire Markus. Hopefully, his firing will serve as a lesson to others.

Pundit

Oct 2, 2005 @ 11:35 am

I agree, blocked.

Although it would be interesting to know if Chris ever really "got it." He's a smart guy, so probably eventually...

apprenticekid

Oct 2, 2005 @ 11:45 am

It is a giant leap of faith to suggest that Markus' only contribution was the “Green with Envy” punctuation issue. There is a lot we are not shown. I think it is also insane not to present as many ideas before the lamborghini and advertising executives while you have them. Chris is no marketing genius by a mile and his leadership is lacking since he refused to use all the assets on his team, including Markus. All I ever saw was Chris complaining about Markus / AKA covering his ass.

Why not have a few ideas to present at some point during the interview? Eliminating ideas that the client dislikes is an incredible opportunity to not get killed at presentation. I love the fact that Markus HAD THE BALLS to speak up and “float” an idea. The frat boys took Donald's claim about Markus talking too much and made him a marked man, Period.

The whole claim about disloyalty on Markus' part is also a joke. The frat boys were abusing him this entire task and he fought back and spoke up. Wait a second Trumpy, I thought people were supposed to fight back. Josh said Markus needed to get some balls - well, it looks like the boys don't like Markus with balls.

Burnett is obviously twisting every bit of footage on file to portray Markus as they please. All that ridiculous background music whenever Markus talks is just too obvious. None of the other Candidates are treated to this kind of ridicule by Burnett's hacks.

Everyone is going to harp on the talking too much thing no matter what Markus does. These guys should have enough brain power to come up with something original on Markus, I am tired of the broken record.

blocked writer

Oct 2, 2005 @ 12:39 pm

It is a giant leap of faith to suggest that Markus' only contribution was the “Green with Envy” punctuation issue. There is a lot we are not shown. I think it is also insane not to present as many ideas before the lamborghini and advertising executives while you have them.[/quote]

There's a lot we're not shown on every episode. IMO, it's just as much a leap of faith to think Markus made any other contributions. Unless they show something in the Yahoo extra footage, which I don't watch, there's no way of knowing.

I'm still confused as to what exactly happened with the women's team regarding Marshawn's exemption. Did she do something later to change the minds of the ones who thought she was lacking as a PM? Did the win convince them that her approach was the right one? Did they give her the exemption as a political gesture of goodwill? From the footage that was shown, it's hard to say exactly what happened. We can only guess.

As far as presenting as many ideas as possible to the client, I have to disagree that this is a great plan. That sounds more like a brainstorming session to me, not something to do in front of a client. It seems that a better way to do it is to listen to the client, get a feel for what's important to him or her, then brainstorm for the best idea later.

The whole claim about disloyalty on Markus' part is also a joke. The frat boys were abusing him this entire task and he fought back and spoke up. Wait a second Trumpy, I thought people were supposed to fight back.[/quote]

I have to respectfully disagree with this. When Markus spoke up at the presentation and said he was the only one to disagree about the green sign, I thought it was incredibly disloyal. No matter what differences they had, I don't think anyone should say something like that in front of a client. There is plenty of time in the boardroom to air that type of thing. Markus strikes me as someone with no sense of the fitness of things, no idea of when it's appropriate to say certain things and when it's not. YMMV.

ghettofabman

Oct 2, 2005 @ 12:45 pm

I wasn't real impressed with the comment about Markus maybe playing for the women's team.

Which of the loser guys said that again? I hate him. [/quote]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that it was that asshole Josh who said that.

nilknarf

Oct 2, 2005 @ 2:10 pm

I'm not sure. I thought it was Mark; who said that. Mark got alot of onair time this week... so he may be due to get the axe soon.

Of course, that's what I thought would happen to Markus, this past week.

wormlegs

Oct 2, 2005 @ 2:11 pm

Why not have a few ideas to present at some point during the interview? Eliminating ideas that the client dislikes is an incredible opportunity to not get killed at presentation.[/quote]

Well, the main reason "why not" is because the client hasn't told you what they want yet, and it leaves a bad impression on the client when the agency comes in with preconceived notions. I've been the client in these situations, and it's tiresome when an agency (for advertising, PR, design, whatever) wastes our time bouncing ideas off us in an initial meeting when that meeting is an opportunity for the agency to get its bearing and hear what the client wants. There is no reason for Markus to think that Lamborghini would be interested in "smooth as silk" unless he heard the company reps say something that would lead him to believe that. All it does is make me as a client think that the agency has some ideas that they want to get out whether I like them or not.

Pundit

Oct 2, 2005 @ 2:39 pm

I have to respectfully disagree with this. When Markus spoke up at the presentation and said he was the only one to disagree about the green sign, I thought it was incredibly disloyal. No matter what differences they had, I don't think anyone should say something like that in front of a client. There is plenty of time in the boardroom to air that type of thing. Markus strikes me as someone with no sense of the fitness of things, no idea of when it's appropriate to say certain things and when it's not. YMMV. [/quote]

ITA. You can have a fallback plan in a presentation meeting, but you don't show differences of opinion in front of your "customer," no matter what the setting. Markus acted inappropriately. If he couldn't get the team to buy his ideas before the client presentation, then he needed to suck it up.

Re "smooth as silk," he didn't handle that well, either. Each time Markus speaks up, it is like a little boy saying, "I'm the smart one here, listen to me!" He was always out to trump (no pun intended) the others. That's what I found annoying about him, not the constant talking or whatever other faults he's shown. He lacks finesse.

Obleek

Oct 2, 2005 @ 3:03 pm

Chris seemed to be in denial that the ad campaign was a failure[/quote]

I got that too. For me, the moment he said that Mark's mistake was his (Chris's) mistake, I knew he was a goner. Pride goeth before a fall and all that.

None of the other Candidates are treated to this kind of ridicule by Burnett's hacks. [/quote]

Sure they are - all the time. Keep watching.

Trader Joe

Oct 2, 2005 @ 3:50 pm

BassetHound
Honestly, most women are too smart to spend $150-250,000 on a car that they will only occasionally drive.
[/quote]

Yeah, but they'll spend a couple grand on a pair of shoes that they were only occassionally....

Lisetta

Oct 2, 2005 @ 4:19 pm

There is no reason for Markus to think that Lamborghini would be interested in "smooth as silk" unless he heard the company reps say something that would lead him to believe that.[/quote]
Yes, plus if its a lousy idea (as Markus' was), it gives the execs a bad impression of the team right from the start.

Chris told him not to, that should have been enough. If there'd been a moment, later, when it seemed appropriate to float ideas, Markus might have been cued to talk then.

Bottom line was that Markus' idea stunk. The exec hated it. Sharing it when he was specifically told not to just wound up getting the whole job off to a bad start.

And chiming in at the end with "I knew it!" wasn't just disloyal, it was completely unprofessional. He should have been fired for that alone.

Lucabella

Oct 2, 2005 @ 5:29 pm

Honestly, most women are too smart to spend $150-250,000 on a car that they will only occasionally drive. [/quote]

Yeah, but they'll spend a couple grand on a pair of shoes that they were only occassionally.... [/quote][/quote]

It's my bank account rather than my gender that dictates how I spend my money. For what it's worth, I've never spent more than $100 on a pair of shoes and then I wore those bastards until they disintegrated on my feet.

Next time they should really just draw names out of a hat and save us from the endless generalizations and assumptions about gender-based teams.

DeepInTheHeart

Oct 2, 2005 @ 6:02 pm

I wasn't real impressed with the comment about Markus maybe playing for the women's team. Which of the loser guys said that again? I hate him.[/quote]I also marked this one as coming from Josh. Josh can be amusing, but comes across as something of a smart alec(k)? as well. Also, Josh was on the "bash Markus" team in the boardroom -- not an impressive week for him.

blocked writer

Oct 2, 2005 @ 7:26 pm

Each time Markus speaks up, it is like a little boy saying, "I'm the smart one here, listen to me!" [/quote]

This cracked me up, Pundit. And it is so true. Markus wants approval so much, which is what I think has been behind some of his actions, especially in this episode. He wants to get someone, anyone to tell him he has a brilliant idea, or that he did something great.

The sad thing is, he had a big chip to use to great effect in the boardroom with the green/envy thing, but he blew a lot of the advantage he had. Had he kept his cool at the presentation, he would not have attracted negative attention from Trump, and he could have used that chip as a power play.

Markus was lucky that Chris botched things in the boardroom. Because he totally mishandled his one advantage, and I think it will haunt him throughout the game unless he does something mind-blowingly wonderful. Right now, he has been pegged by Trump and his team as a disloyal blabbermouth, and he has no one to blame but himself.

Mark has some ground to make-up too. But at least he hasn't dug himself the kind of hole Markus has.

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