Junior Apprentice Episode 1 - Part5

Summary

In this episode, two teams compete in a sales task with contrasting outcomes. The women's team celebrates their profit, earning a treat at a Michelin-starred restaurant, while the men's team faces scrutiny after a net loss of £210. The men attribute their failure to poor location, delegation, and mismanagement. A heated boardroom discussion ensues, with team members blaming one another for the failure, particularly focusing on leadership and sales strategy. Ultimately, Lord Sugar must decide who is responsible for the loss and who should be fired.

Takeaways

• 💰 The girls' team made a profit of £14,388, while the boys' team suffered a loss of £210.01.
• 🍽 The winning girls' team was rewarded with a trip to Tom Akin's restaurant, where Tom started his business at age 16 and earned two Michelin stars.
• 😞 The boys' team reflected on their loss, with disagreements on what caused their failure.
• 📍 One major issue was the poor location choice for selling, which some team members blamed on Ree.
• ⌛ Team members also criticized poor delegation and wasted time, which contributed to their underperformance.
• 📉 The boys' team made only £39 from a full day's work at the marketplace, compared to £250 from a bulk cheese sale to a restaurant.
• 🧀 The cheese was heavily discounted, with the boys selling £450 worth of cheese for just £250, leading to disappointment.
• 🌬 Team members mentioned wind as a challenge, but this excuse was dismissed as inadequate by Lord Sugar.
• ⚠️ Tim was criticized for lacking energy and drive to follow through on his ideas, which contributed to the team's failure.
• 🔄 After deliberation, Adam was spared, while Jordan, Tim, and Ree were called back for further review by Lord Sugar, with one of them facing the potential for firing.

Q & A

What were the net takings and profit for the girls' team?

The girls' team had net takings of £64,388 and made a profit of £14,388.

How much did the boys' team make, and what was their financial outcome?

The boys' team had net takings of £28,999 but unfortunately made a loss of £210.01.

What was the reward for the girls' team after their success?

The girls were rewarded with a treat to visit Tom Akin's restaurant, where they got to experience fine dining prepared by a Michelin-starred chef.

What reasons did the boys' team give for their failure in the task?

The boys' team blamed their failure on poor location choice, inadequate delegation by the project manager, wasted time, and poor job assignments.

Who was responsible for selecting the market location for the boys' team, and what was the justification?

Ree initially suggested the market location, and the team agreed on it despite some members expressing concern about their limited knowledge of the area.

What excuse did the boys' team give for the low sales during the task?

The boys mentioned the wind as a factor that disrupted their selling efforts, but this was dismissed as a 'pathetic excuse' by Lord Sugar, especially since one of the team members had experience working on farms.

What was the boys' strategy for selling the leftover cheese?

The boys decided to 'dump' the cheese by selling it in bulk to a restaurant for £250, despite it being valued at £450, as they believed they couldn't sell it all at the market.

How did Lord Sugar react to the decision to sell the cheese in bulk?

Lord Sugar criticized the decision, stating that the boys effectively gave away valuable cheese at a loss, suggesting they were in a 'sell at any cost' mindset.

What did the project manager Jordan and the rest of the team disagree on regarding responsibility for the failure?

Jordan felt that Ree and Tim were primarily responsible for the mistakes, while the rest of the team criticized Jordan for poor delegation and decision-making.

What did Lord Sugar ultimately conclude about Adam, the market seller, in terms of his contribution to the task?

Lord Sugar felt that Adam had more to offer in future tasks and excused him from being fired, focusing on the potential of the other team members' shortcomings.