Do all control freaks break down and cry when you call them a control freak?
“I’m not a control freak <sob>. So stop saying I’m a control freak <sob>. What? You’re not stopping calling me a control freak? I demand it. Oh yeah, <sob>.”
Three hour finale is 12/16 (New episode 11/25, 12/2, 12/9)
Yes! I agree 100%. (or if we’re doing corporate-speak, 1000%.)
Seems that a lot of folks are saying that it was okay for Jen to jump in, because Ivana was doing a poor job of speaking, and thus excusing Jen for her taking credit for the idea. But as monstro points out, Jen could have easily hijacked the speaking part while still giving Ivana praise for her idea. It would have made both of them look good.
And good managers do that kind of thing all the time. Bad managers just take credit for their underlings’ work and also blame the screw-ups on them. Good managers share credit, which actually makes them look better in the end.
Example:
Big boss: The charts you produced were excellent. They really helped the client understand what we’re doing here.
Manager: Thanks! Jane did all the analysis, and Joe really burned the midnight oil making sure they looked perfect.
Message sent: Look at what a good manager I am. I hired good people, used their skills wisely, directed their work appropriately, and inspired them to put in extra effort.
Additional bonus: the big boss sees Jane and Joe and compliments them on their good work. Jane and Joe feel happy to be recognized by the big boss, and very happy with their manager for throwing some credit their way…which leads to good morale and more willingness to do good work and put in extra effort.
Counterexample:
Big boss: The charts you produced were excellent. They really helped the client understand what we’re doing here.
Manager: Thanks.
In both cases, the big boss sees that the manager produced a good product, which reflects well on the manager. But in the counterexample, there are no additional benefits reaped. The manager in this case may think that he’ll look better by taking all the credit, but it doesn’t work that way.
(Of course, the above examples aren’t analagous to the Ivana/Jen situation. The fictional manager does deserve credit for producing a good product. But Jen just stole credit for something that she had no hand in creating.)
Thanks, for your ratings, Mully. I think you’re right to put Kevin in that position. While I personally don’t think very highly of him, he is one of the best of that sorry lot.
I’m surprised to find that I can’t predict more than 1 of the final 4 yet. Kelly is there for sure, but the others are up in the air. Ivana is almost certainly toast, but she just might slide in if she has a decent week or two, and others screw up royally. Sandy is looking good for a 3rd or 4th place finish, but if there is a challenge that requires her to really step up, and it’s something outside her skill area, she’ll be fired. But even if Sandy or Ivana make it into the final 4, they won’t make final 2. Jenn, Andy, and Kevin have shown some real positives and some real negatives, so it absolutely depends on their performance in the next couple of tasks, and it could go either way. None of the 3 is a shoo-in.
The next couple of shows should be very very interesting. I hope they have some good tasks lined up.
I can’t see anyone but Kevin, Kelly or Jennifer winning this thing.
Andy is too young (then why invite him to play, though…).
Sandy is too limited.
Ivana is too battle weakened.
As for Jennifer’s credit grab, I agree it was dishonest, but I don’t think it makes her look bad at all to Trump. That is the important one.
And is it just me or does George work a heck of a lot more than Carolyn?
I’ve always rooted for the underdog, so I’m picking Andy to win, just based on his ability to listen and learn.
Sure, he’s probably not ready to be the head of one of Trump’s business ventures, but I don’t think Bill Rancic is 100% in charge on that construction project.
I think Andy’s just smarter than the others, more aware of how he’s perceived and willing to work on his deficits. He hasn’t developed bad habits or evil character, and he knows he has a lot to learn. I think that trumps the devious and self-serving behavior of the others.
And George has made it plain all along that he’s an Andy fan. And I get the impression that what George wants, George often gets.
Kevin has done okay – but man, that sweating he did this week in the presentation was a major turn-off. If he can’t handle that pressure, how would he be under even more? That’s one thing I’ll say for Bill, he always appeared cool on the surface even when he was clearly not underneath.
Frankly, the only one of this bunch that hasn’t actively turned me off at some point is Andy. So right now he gets my vote, too.
It’s just you, Watson. George is less popular with the viewers, because he’s not as pretty as Carolyn, and he doesn’t bring the snark as consistently as she does. So he gets shuffled off to make room for more viewer-friendly Viceroys (notice how often they’re flying Firemarshall Bill Rancic in from Chicago?), while Carolyn (who has her own t-shirt at Television Without Pity) is always present. Personally, I think they need to ditch George, Bill, Bernie, and all the other not-Georges, and get that little old woman from last year’s final 4 interviews to be the other Viceroy. She’s not as photogenic as Carolyn, but she’s waaay snarkier.
I was actually under the impression that George probably actually has real business to conduct, that often involves meetings in other parts of the country; whereas Carolyn manages golf courses close to NYC and doesn’t really have a reason to travel on her regular job, so is always available. That makes sense, to me, at least. All snarkiness aside.
Fashion is huge huge huge money, first of all. Second, everyone could find their way to some extent in those tasks because everyone wears clothes, most have been married (or been in a wedding or to lots of weddings) and most have seen a fashion show and shopped in a high-end store where fine clothes are sold.
But most importantly, the tasks took almost everyone out of their usual milieu. With the exception of Sandy and the bridal task, the fashion jobs forced the contestants to think on their feet, find the parallels between what they were asked to do and things they’d done before in their regular businesses, and play to their strengths, or fail if they couldn’t.
As a control freak – more to the point, a female control freak – yes. I will admit, I’ve been there, done that. Not on national television, though. And not in front of people I was competing against (and therefore should not get to see my weakness).
I’m officially laying it on the line, feel free to quote me later:
I think this is Kelly’s game to lose.
Failing a spectacular flame out from him next week, he’s the only one who hasn’t IIRC, ever received a dressing down from Trump that revealed that Trump thought that he demonstrated particularly egregious weakness. And therein lay the rub; that was the common point between Bill and Kwame last year, and it’s Kelly’s trump card (haha) going into the last rounds. Also, given that standard, I think Kelly’s opponent in the final matchup is going to be Andy.
And that positive assessment of Kelly has nothing to do with the fact that he’s my new secret TV boyfriend!
I agree with Mama Tiger. Don’t assume that George is being shuttled off now and then because he’s not as purty as Carolyn, or as hard-nosed. Why assert that hidden manipulations are to blame, when there is quite likely a more mundane explanation?
I’d like to confess that I like Kelly. There, I said it! And I agree with TeaElle’s assessment.
Mullinator, best ratings yet!
I didn’t mean to give the impression that ratings are the only reason George is being shuttled off so often, but I do think ratings are a part of it. And I certainly don’t think that George’s numerous “important business trips” are any indication that he works more than Carolyn does. I think that a lot of George’s meetings could be moved to New York or rescheduled if they really wanted him there for the show. But they don’t especially want him there for the show, because he’s not all that popular with the viewers. He doesn’t pull in any ratings, and let’s face it, this whole deal is all about the ratings.
Carolyn, however, is a draw. She’s polarizing–the viewers either adore or despise her, but either way they always want to see what she’s going to say next. Trump’s not a complete idiot, so he keeps his ratings draw available for all the shows. He makes sure the mountain comes to Mohammed, in other words.
And I seriously doubt there’s any real business reason for Firemarshall Bill to be in New York every few weeks. He’s got a building to work on in Chicago, after all, and while Trump certainly wants to keep tabs on him, a man like the Donald isn’t going to just take Bill’s word for it that everything’s going fine. If he wants to see how Bill’s coming along, he’s going to hop over to Chicago and see for himself. Having him be the not-George is just an attempt to play on last season’s ratings.
or yooge, yooge, yooge money!
Crazy Cat Lady , FWIW, I agree that Mark Burnett and Donald Trump know quite well to play the ratings game by keeping Carolyn around and rotating NotGeorges.
Andy impresses more and more every week. He is at a distinct disadvantage because of his age; but he is really the sharpest of the bunch. He’s got a blunder or two, losing the phone cost him dearly, but he also has big wins. He led very well with the Police Video. That task was all him. He also stepped up during the house remodeling and probably saved the day when he found an alternate contractor when the first was failing. I doubt he’ll win but he most deserves it, I think.
With all due respect, do you have any evidence for those gradiose claims of yours? Have either Trump or Burnett said that they don’t want George on the show? If they didn’t want him there, I’m sure that he could be replaced on a regular basis.
I’m also curious about your belief that George’s meetings could be moved to New York or rescheduled, as necessary. On what basis do you make that claim? No offense, but do you know something about George’s schedule that we don’t?
I’m not saying that your claim is impossible. Not at all. It just seems to me that without any direct evidence, it’s all just supposition.
While we’re on the subject of minions, Carolyn needs a new line. “No brainer” has to go. Unless it’s some kind of dig at Donald.
If I were Trump – and there’s a reason I’m not – I’d make sure to hire somebody I could stand being in the same room with for more than 5 minutes. For weeks now, that’s been Andy and Wes. (Kevin rubs me the wrong way; he’s too in-your-face.)
Wes’s exact moment of must-be-fired occured when Maria got her pointy finger up in his face and told him to Back Off, and he backed off. I’m sorry for him, but that was the end. The world is full of Marias and if you can’t control them, they’ll eat you alive. I do wish they had kept the odious Maria around, though, to see how well Andy could stand up to her at her worst. Perhaps they’ll bring her back for the final faceoff.
At this point I’d hire Andy in a heartbeat. He’s the last remaining candidate without serious personality defects. (OK, Kevin’s personality defects aren’t serious, but I just like Andy better.) I like Andy’s youth and inexperience, actually – he’s malleable. I’d be looking at this guy, if I were Trump, thinking “I can train this kid to do anything, and it won’t be too unpleasant.”
I agree with what you’ve written, but I just think Trump doesn’t agree with us. Didn’t he mutter something like “Andy’s got to step up. . .” at the end of the Boardroom sequence Thursday? Maybe Andy needs his own P.R. flak. . .
And about George, isn’t he a high mucky muck finance guy for Trump? Seems to me that kind of job would require his being away from taping sessions more frequently than Carolyn’s golf course management job. (And all the George Wannabes pale in comparison to the real thing. Rancic is especially insipid. I never liked Rancic much anyway.)
See, I believe that George would have reason to be away from New York easily, whereas I don’t think it matters to Trump whether Bill has a business reason to be in New York – his business reason is being NotGeorge. So I find it easier to believe that Trump would pull in substitutes when George is gone than that he’d deliberately drop George from the show one week.
Also, didn’t George say last year that he works when he wants to and if he wants to, and doesn’t if he doesn’t want to? So he may be out playing golf at one of Carolyn’s courses while Bill or someone else is NotGeorging in his absence.
Andy’s got credentials for a fairly callow youth, and has done a good job to date. At least that we’ve seen. The question is, has Trump seen how much Andy did, particularly in that NYPD ad campaign, to realize that the kid does have backbone and picks his battles carefully?
But I agree that it’s probably Kelly’s to lose. I can only remember Trump getting on him once, when Carolyn set him up with the exaggeration business. Otherwise, he’s in a better position to just walk straight into a job, plus of course he’s got that military background of discipline and leadership that I’m sure Trump respects. Military academies can turn out incredibly solid and inspiring leaders; my hubby’s boss is a Naval Academy graduate, and man, has he commanded the loyalty and devotion of everyone working for him. It’s fascinating to watch.
Agreed. There’s simply no reason to surmise that there’s some hidden conspiracy to reduce George’s camera time. If you know ANYTHING about the world of corporate finance, you know that high-level managers must frequently go away on business trips. And even if that weren’t the case, it’s not hard to imagine that George may have duties that take priority over spending time with the apprentice wannabes.
In fact, I find it rather distasteful to insist that Burnett and/or Trump simply want to have George appear less frequently on camera. Without any reasonable evidence to support that view, there is simply no substance to that claim. Why assert that there’s some backstage collusion at work, when more mundane explanations are entirely plausible?