Jump to content

Apprentice Speculation (No Spoilers)


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.

2341 replies to this topic

#1

Blitzkrieg0850

Blitzkrieg0850

    Channel Surfer

Posted Jan 19, 2004 @ 4:02 PM

1. The guys come out of the gate at the lead, showing smarts and potential.

2. The girls start out bickering and whining and screaming at each other.

3. Guys make some crippling mistake somewhere and ruin it for the whole team.

4. Girls get together just long enough to flash their "corporate assets" and take the thing home.

5. The Donald finds a way to fire someone other than Sam.

6. The Donald's Hair gets up and walks away: "This is getting ridiculous."

#2

FeverDog

FeverDog

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 21, 2004 @ 9:22 PM

Any idea how the show is going to work later on down the road? Do the remaining men and women merge (a la Survivor)? Do the tasks become individual at some point?

Next week? Looks interesting. I am rooting for the men, without Sam. I'd like to see a woman finally go home (and be berated for their T&A shows) and hear what Donald thinks of Omarosa.

Edited by FeverDog, Jan 21, 2004 @ 9:30 PM.


#3

DariaG

DariaG

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 9:20 AM

I mostly agree, FeverDog, but Assaroma isn't one of the worst T&A offenders. As a matter of fact, once the team gets going, she plays pretty well. If there's one thing she does well, it's keep the bickering within the group. Which is the way it should be, although I think she's ridiculous and will eventually take the down elevator. If the ta-ta shaking routine gets the women in trouble next week, I'm betting there are other prominent candidates who will be more vulnerable. That's not to say they won't try to set up Assaroma, but the Viceroys are likely to see through that.

#4

Tornado25

Tornado25

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 10:02 AM

I think the previews show the ta-ta world is going to come crashing down around the women next week. In just about every scenario, a woman can "charm" a guy into doing stuff he wouldn't normally do. (See: selling the gold at a loss, convincing the golf shop owner to sell a Big Bertha at cost + 10%--no matter how smooth in sales a guy is, he isn't going to convince a business owner to do this).

Next week, however, managing a restaurant is as much organization and iron-fist management as it is schmoozing the customers. A cold dinner goes away real quick if the pretty waitress or manager lays it on. OTOH, many ordinary New Yorker's probably will not care, since they are coughing up big bucks for good food, not a hot chick.

Next week is where the men finally win and show their true skills--I caught at the end of the preview where Carolyn looks at the women with true disdain and the Donald appears tweaked/disappointed.

#5

some1105

some1105

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 10:17 AM

My bet is that the men lose again next week. What I got from the preview was that both the men and the women act inappropriately; that the women cross the line with the T&A approach, and the men cross the line in either promoting, or allowing customers to think that Kwame is some kind of celebrity athlete.

However, note that when they show the women getting lectured by Ms. Viceroy, they are not in the boardroom. If they had lost, one would think that that conversation could have happened there. Instead, it looked more like a dressing down in a separate room, along the lines of "you may have won this battle [and therefore are not going to the boardroom], but your tactics are not appreciated." Conversely, I think the men may lose because they are actually disqualified; the women's behavior may be disgusting, but the men may cross the line of ethical business practice into some kind of deceptive marketing territory, and get themselves automatically dinged for it.

#6

PhilAlex

PhilAlex

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 10:52 AM

And remember the title of the episode is ETHICS SHMETHICS

Wordy McWord there.

#7

Rabrab

Rabrab

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 11:06 AM

It looked to me like the men toed right up to the ethics line. They may not have put their little piggies over it, though. To me, it will all depend on how strongly they imply that Kwame is some kind of sports dude and how much they let the customers assume it. If they attach his name to any team, then I think that they'll have crossed the line; if all they say is 'Get Kwame Jackson's autograph', then they're roping in the same type of sucker that thinks you can buy a Rolex for $25, and doesn't notice that it's a Rollexx. I'm not really up on pro sports, though, so I have to ask, is Kwame's name similar enough to some pro's name, or are they just trading on the black man+autographs=must be an athlete stereotype?

About Carolyn dressing down the women, I agree, it did appear that that took place somewhere other than the boardroom area (probably in the suite), and it seemed to me, especially with the voice-over about 'winning the battle but have they lost the war?' that she was serving them notice that she's not only not going to be going to bat for them when they do hit the boardroom, but that in fact, she's going to be gunning for them.

ETA: ok, some1105, I saw the footballs, but didn't catch the NFL logo. I agree that that would pretty much put it over the line.

Edited by Rabrab, Jan 22, 2004 @ 11:14 AM.


#8

some1105

some1105

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 11:10 AM

I can't say for sure, but it seemed to me that I saw Kwame signing his name on foam footballs that had the NFL logo on them. Even without saying the words "I work for an NFL team," such action strongly implies that he does. I'm not sure whether that puts him over the line of legality, but I'd think that would be enough to get the boys into bad ethics territory.

#9

PhilAlex

PhilAlex

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 11:45 AM

Even without saying the words "I work for an NFL team," such action strongly implies that he does. I'm not sure whether that puts him over the line of legality, but I'd think that would be enough to get the boys into bad ethics territory


I agree.

And if Sam was still on the team, he never, ever ever would have gone along with this.

:)

#10

FeverDog

FeverDog

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 12:38 PM

OTOH, many ordinary New Yorker's probably will not care


Although, it looks like the customers are mostly tourists, as it's a Planet Hollywood type of restaurant. Even easier prey.

From DariaG in the episode thread:

By the way, in USA Today, Trump indicates that he's aware of the women's tactics and fighting, but he's not going to stop them while they're winning. He also indicates that in future episodes "We may change the teams. We may change the rules." (That's a spoiler about the game, not the outcome.)


What kinds of team changes would be interesting? I think after this week (when it's down to 12 players) could be a good time for a change. Then maybe a merge at 6 or 8 with individual tasks?

Edited by FeverDog, Jan 22, 2004 @ 1:24 PM.


#11

splitchick59

splitchick59

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 6:16 PM

Carolyn seems to have dissaprooved of many of the women's antics (i.e. the phallic ad campaign), but The Donald hasn't seemed to care as long as they brought in the cash. I wonder what they were doing during the preview for next week. Were they showing their tits or something?

However, while the women may be crass, it looks like the men could have possibly been doing something illegal. While i'm sure Trump is an expert shyster and is willing to fudge the truth slightly to get the deal he wants, I sincerely doubt he'd approve of actual fraud, and Kwame singing autographs while claiming to be an NFL player most likely applies.

And if Sam was still on the team, he never, ever ever would have gone along with this.


I'll give him that. His business ethics were never in question. His sanity, that's another thing.

#12

Blitzkrieg0850

Blitzkrieg0850

    Channel Surfer

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 8:02 PM

I'm taking votes: Who'll win Episode 4. Men or women?

My vote? Women.

#13

Kromm

Kromm

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 8:34 PM

The promo makes it appear like it COULD be the men.

Ergo, it's probably the women.

#14

SusieCue

SusieCue

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 8:49 PM

However, note that when they show the women getting lectured by Ms. Viceroy, they are not in the boardroom.

That may have more to do with the fact that showing the confrontation in the boardroom would give away which team wins. I think every promo will make it look like the men will win - until they finally do. Just like there was every indication that Sam would leave for three whole episodes - then he finally did. I like the advertising/editing better this way because it spoils less than if they tell us the result will be SHOCKING! (which at least gives away what won't happen)

#15

Truculence

Truculence

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 9:08 PM

As I think was mentioned in the thread on yesterday's episode, it seems that the whole west coast (including me, at least) got the preview for the episode we just watched instead of the new one--would somebody mind filling me in? From this thread I've gathered that they run a restaurant and Carolyn gets mad at the women....anything else that was shown?

#16

splitchick59

splitchick59

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 10:13 PM

From the preview, it also looks as if Kwame is autographing NFL balls and possibly selling them to people. I'm not sure what that's about. FWIW, the episode is apparently titled "Ethics Smetchics", so draw your own conclusion about what they might have did.

#17

PhilAlex

PhilAlex

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 10:58 PM

If carolyn was bitching at the women OUTSIDE the boardroom, here's something:

Carol-baby was with MEN in Episode 1.

Carolkins was with the WOMEN in Episode 2 (Remember the look she gave 'em?)

Carol was, I think, with the MEN in the latest one (Dunno about this.)

If that's the case, then she's with the women next time, probably?

(Unless Sam has her "taken out" and gets one heck of a disguise!)

C'mon. You wouldn't put it past him...

#18

jcpdiesel21

jcpdiesel21

    Stalker

  • Location:Springfield, MO

Posted Jan 23, 2004 @ 8:43 AM

From the preview, it also looks as if Kwame is autographing NFL balls and possibly selling them to people. I'm not sure what that's about.

I got the impression that Kwame is pretending to be some sort of famous or semi-famous sports star, the way that the people are all wanting his autograph on the footballs, and some of the guys don't think that this tactic may be right.

#19

Skycatcher

Skycatcher

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 23, 2004 @ 12:35 PM

I am so annoyed at the NBC/Apprentice site. There's a box about next week's show, but unlike the CBS/Survivor site, there's no copy of the preview available. I'm in Los Angeles and was wondering if I'd lost my marbles when they showed "previews" of the show I'd just watched! OK, so next week, on either Thursday, but maybe Wednesday, but on some day, I'll get to watch the "all new" show I've just seen??????? Sheesh NBC, will you please get your act together, or The Hair will FIRE your corporate ass!

Kwame's balls (heh) - totally not right if he's letting folks assume he's a famous player. Illegal if he's "forging" someone's name, since the autograph market is big money these days. But I believe it's only very bad ethics if he's writing his own name.

Edited by Skycatcher, Jan 23, 2004 @ 12:37 PM.


#20

pistachio

pistachio

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 23, 2004 @ 2:30 PM

From the preview, it also looks as if Kwame is autographing NFL balls and possibly selling them to people.


If he's selling them, that is *definitely* unethical. But my take on it was that he was just handing them out to get people to come to the restaurant. Not that that is much better...

#21

mtvcdm

mtvcdm

    Fanatic

  • Location:Watertown, Wisconsin

Posted Jan 23, 2004 @ 6:36 PM

Well, business ethics is a very murky field. They try to teach you in high school (I had a business class, in which I managed an A) that it's not, always do the ethical thing.

Problem is, too many people are out ultimately trying to screw everybody else for that to work 100% of the time. So what it becomes is you trying to gauge how ethical you are in relation to everybody else. You find yourself thinking "Well, at least I'm not as bad as (name of whatever complete sleazebag will make you feel better), and that's where this is likely to start. The other possibility is you're in the position of Versacorp-- namely, your main competitor is relying on underhanded tactics (e.g. sex sells) to win, and they wind up kicking your ass. So you begin thinking that if you don't want to go bankrupt, you have to stoop to their level. Either way, you wind up dirtying yourself a bit. (Then there are those who decide to be as sleazy as possible from day one, but we won't get into that.)

That said, Versacorp, as previously stated, is in position 2. The question is, how unethical are they in relation to position 1? Are they:
*Deciding that 'Kwame Jackson' sounds like a football name (which it kinda is), buying up a few footballs, slapping Kwame's name on them, and simply saying things like "Come see THE Kwame Jackson today at the (name of restaurant which I forgot)! Today only!" and being maddeningly vauge about Kwame's actual accomplishments on the field ('showed a lot of hustle', 'you can't miss him at the Meadowlands', etc.)? And are they handing out the footballs?
*Or are they selling the footballs, and giving Kwame a team and statistics ('Jackson led the league in yards after contact by a running back 3 years running for the Baltimore Ravens!') And are they getting the footballs in a fashion that does not involve them buying them (e.g. trying to get them for free from a sports store and leading them around as well)?

Obviously, option 2 is the sleazeball route which I wouldn't condone. Option 1 is the trying-to-survive sleaze level which I wouldn't like, but they would need to do to win. In option 1, they're not trying to fleece anyone out of any money; just getting them in the restaurant. So I'm just waiting to see the method in which they do this until i pass judgement.

#22

Kromm

Kromm

Posted Jan 23, 2004 @ 7:24 PM

Well if one Corporation loses 4 times in a row, you KNOW some kind of swap will be coming--just to keep the men around in SOME form.

#23

PhilAlex

PhilAlex

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Jan 24, 2004 @ 1:05 AM

Y'know, I don't believe no one has mentioned the first "reality show" producer on Planey Earth:

PT BARNUM

When he brought Jenny Lind (The Swedish Nighengale) to sing in America, he auctioned off the first ticket, telling his friend Genin the Hatter to pay anthing for it, the publicity would skyrocket his business.

(Hatter only bid to $50, tho)

Barnum wouldn't have hesitated to have Kwame sign footballs. Wouldn't have batted an eyelash.

#24

jmmirman

jmmirman

Posted Jan 26, 2004 @ 2:23 AM

wrong place- I think.

Edited by jmmirman, Jan 27, 2004 @ 12:36 AM.


#25

archer1267

archer1267

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 28, 2004 @ 11:57 AM

Dude. Don't ask people to speculate about spoilers! That constitutes spreading the spoiler to the spec thread. Think before you post.

Edited by Miss Alli, Jan 28, 2004 @ 1:12 PM.


#26

cutecouple

cutecouple

    Stalker

Posted Jan 28, 2004 @ 2:07 PM

As a Mark Burnett production, I'm wondering what kind of cheezy ending they're going to use. I can't imagine that this would end in front of a live studio audience or have Donald Trump taking the Trump Plane, Trump Train, and Trump Automobile to get to the scene of the final decision.

#27

Celina

Celina

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 28, 2004 @ 5:52 PM

Remember this is a Mark Burnett production, so I wouldn't be surprised if they do a team-swap thing, a la Survivor, or a team merge or something else that we haven't seen before on one of his shows. Burnett's modus operandi is doing the unexpected.


I would love to see the teams merge. That's when some entertaining alliances could be formed. It would allow for more sneaky strategies too. Much more fun than "girls vs. boys."

I do hope that we don't have a "return of the ousted," although that seems to be the reality TV fad of this year.

#28

Mama Tiger

Mama Tiger

    Stalker

Posted Jan 28, 2004 @ 7:28 PM

I'm just kinda sorry that we won't be seeing Sam and Assorama on the same team. Now that would be a match worth recording for posterity.

#29

Bigwheels1971

Bigwheels1971

    Fanatic

  • Location:Maine
  • Interests:Reading (especially mysteries & autobiographies), acting, swimming, listening to music, the Internet

Posted Jan 29, 2004 @ 1:40 PM

Feverdog wrote:

(when it's down to 12 players) could be a good time for a change. Then maybe a merge at 6 or 8 with individual tasks?


I think this is a great idea! Assuming the women win tonight, what I'm hoping hapens is, the teams are divided up 6-6, with two guys on each team. I'm hoping they don't pick teams though by some random method like picking names out of a hat (tm Omorosa). I hate that.

They play things out until it gets to 8 players. At 8 players, challenges become individual. Both Viceroys observe everybody at this point and together they pick the 2 people to face DT

Edited by Bigwheels1971, Jan 29, 2004 @ 1:42 PM.


#30

PhilAlex

PhilAlex

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Jan 29, 2004 @ 2:12 PM

I'm thinking there's not a whole lot of pre planning.

But the women will win tonight, I assure you.

(And the jury's still out as to whether Carolyn is razzing the girls or the boys. It's PROBABLY the girls, but MB would be likely to use trick editing to lead us to believe what he wants.)

More George and Carolyn!