TVCH FORUMS HOME . JOIN . FAN CLUBS . ABOUT US . CONTACT . CHAT  
Bomis   Quick Links   TOPICS . TREE-VIEW . SEARCH . HELP! . NEWS . PROFILE
Episode 9/29

The TVClubHouse: Other Reality Shows ARCHIVES: Apprentice II: Episode 9/29 users admin

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through September 29, 2004Gen25 09-29-04  7:12 pm
Archive through September 30, 2004Luvmykitties25 09-30-04  12:28 pm
Archive through October 01, 2004Roxip25 10-01-04  8:08 am
Archive through October 02, 2004Wendo25 10-02-04  12:45 am
  ClosedClosed: New threads not accepted on this page        

Author Message
Babyjaxmom
Member

10-20-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 8:15 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Wendo, I used to work at a private school where the teachers all signed a contract with a clause that basically stated that they were representing the school at all times and could be terminated for any behavior which reflected badly on the school, whether or not on school time. I think a lot of employers use a clause of this type, and I'm sure it was checked out by their attorneys. The reason is to keep employees from doing things that could tarnish the company's image, mainly things like illegal activities (drugs, etc.), but can also cover things like working in a strip club, posing for Playboy or anything else that doesn't reflect the company image. It's very common in the business world. Can't really blame them for letting her go, since they wouldn't want to be perceived by any potential clients as being possibly antisemitic. It is ironic, though, since they initially tried to capitalize on her participation in the show.

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 8:20 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
How ironic is this:

>>With the second season of The Apprentice bowing tonight, we'll be keeping our eye on Jennifer Crisafulli, a Douglas Elliman broker among this season's Rancic wannabes. (Says Elliman CEO Dottie Herman, "While we hate the idea that we could lose Jennifer if she wins The Apprentice spot, everyone at Prudential Douglas Elliman is wishing her the best of luck!") Meantime, you can get to know Jennifer now, especially if you're in the market for a one bedroom apartment on the Upper East Side, priced in the $600,000 range. <<

Babyjaxmom
Member

10-20-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 8:22 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Well, good or bad, it certainly has raised the visibility of Prudential Douglas Elliman. Goes along with the old adage, "There's no such thing as bad publicity." They're now known nationwide!

Rslover
Member

11-19-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 9:25 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
They have always been known nationwide and didn't need the bad publicity. They ranked 9th in the country for sales volume last year.

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 9:46 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Did Prudential rank that high or did Prudential Douglas Elliman rank that high? I bet this is good (even if it is bad) publicity for that particular real estate group (or company or whatever it's called).

Luvmykitties
Member

01-02-2004

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 10:04 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
interesting article in the NYPost. I wonder if somehow her comments will appear differently on tonight's show - although I can't see how...
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/29544.htm

here is an excerpt:

She claims she is a victim of how the show was edited because viewers did not get to see her explain herself and apologize to Stacy R., a co-contestant who is Jewish.

Yesterday, "Apprentice" producers were scouring hundreds of hours of film, taped this summer, to try to find a way to put Crisafulli's comments back into context in an extended version of the show that NBC will telecast tonight, a production source said.

There was also a chance that Crisafulli might appear on a future episode of the show with Trump to explain what happened.





Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 10:49 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Does anyone else feel like I do, that this whole thing is blown up way out of proportion? Like who cares? I honestly think what Jen said was wrong, but jeeze, she was not trying to bash Jewish people. She was mad at the 2 ladies and made some unkind remarks about them being old bags and old bats. Big whoop.



Rslover
Member

11-19-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 10:59 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Prudential Douglas Elliman ranked 9th in the country for sales volume last year. If it was good publicity as some of you think, she certainly would still be working there. I am sure they are totally embarrassed and sorry that they took out that advertising.

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 11:09 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Thanks Rslover. I bet they are regretting those ads in a huge way!

Luvmykitties
Member

01-02-2004

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 11:12 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
I see no problem with her being let go from Elliman.
As Babyjaxmom said, a lot of companies have policies like that.

I wouldn't call the Anti-Defamation League on Jen, but I wouldn't do business with her - or patronize any company she's part of.



Tishala
Member

08-01-2000

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 12:31 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Nope. I don't think it's "blown out of proportion" at all. I frankly think that disparaging people who annoy you as "Jewish"--without proof and as an epithet--is inherently anti-semitic. She didn't just make remarks about them being old bags and old bats: she called them Jewish and jaded old bats. If she wants to work in a high-profile firm in an area with a large Jewish population, she might want to keep her comments about Jews to herself. Then, on shabbat, she can go read The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and feel better about herself.

What's almost more astonishing is that Jennifer never thought to tell her employer that she'd said such things before they placed a full-page ad! Did she think she'd get away with it? Or maybe--as I suspect--she just thought it wasn't important. This backlash against her anti-semitism must really be an eye-opener.

Rslover
Member

11-19-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 3:31 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    


Ketchuplover
Member

08-30-2000

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 6:32 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
anybody else watching the rerun? good stuff :-)

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 6:39 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
It's like 2 different shows! These chicks are sooooo CATTY!

The hell w/ the Jewish comment, Jen is a dope regardless!!!!

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 6:41 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
She is self destructing like I never saw anyone else do...

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 6:41 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Man she talks over EVERYBODY!

Rslover
Member

11-19-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 6:49 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Wow, she seems ten times worse with the added footage (if that could be possible). She almost makes Omarosa look normal. At any opportune moment she attacks poor Stacy. She obviously didn't like her and decided to make everything personal with her. She certainly wasn't the one wreaking havoc, it was Jennifer.

Rslover
Member

11-19-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 6:53 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Bill is really on target with his points and questions.

Carolyn will be on DATELINE tomorrow night!

Abby7
Member

07-17-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 7:13 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Darn, there is added footage tonight? I can only record one show while I'm out. I'm going to record "lost".

how long is the added footage?

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 7:28 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
I'm pretty sure the boardroom stuff started at 8:20 or 8:25ish... So I think it has a lot more.

It really made Jen look so much "madder" than on Thursday. And I mean madder like the mad hatter (crazy!)

Abby7
Member

07-17-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 8:12 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Thanks Julie. I've changed our plans and will be home tonight. Dinner is on it's way. I love staying home, instead of going out some nights.

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 8:19 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
I think you will enjoy the show!

At one point, I thought my hearing was going haywire. I was watching from kinda far and all the girls were talking (if you can call it talking) at the same time. Normally when you have two or three or more people talking at the same time, the people talking stop, (or at least slow down), cuz they can tell no one can hear them anyways. Or at least they edit it so you can figure out who is saying what. But they didn't. They just showed all the overtalk. That's when I thought my hearing was going batty, I couldn't believe how long the girls went on talking over each other. Never could figure out who was saying what. And I blame all of them equally-Jen, Stacy, Elizabeth, etc... All of 'em ('cept maybe Sandy, other Jen and Maria).

Abby7
Member

07-17-2002

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 9:36 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
.


Ketchuplover
Member

08-30-2000

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 9:57 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
you said it abby :-)

Tishala
Member

08-01-2000

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 10:09 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Well that was fun. Jennifer seemed somewhat less balanced than she did previously. It was as if she literally wanted to erase Ivana by talking over her each time she spoke. That has to be some kind of pathology, but I can't imagine what it might be called.

Luvmykitties
Member

01-02-2004

Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 10:10 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
I'm kind of disappointed with this week's episodes. I feel like a lot was edited out. I was hoping Saturday's show would include more.

For instance:
- Wed's show did not show the women meeting with Zagat's people. Saturday's show did - BUT neither episode showed the women calling Jen C to tell her that they should dump the Asian Fusion idea and keep it simple on advice from the Zagat people. But yet this was brought up in both Boardrooms. And Saturday's boardroom mentioned pizza! I wish they would have showed that part of the project to see how it really went down.

- Although it's possible, I find it hard to believe that the "Jewish fat ladies" issue wasn't mentioned in the boardroom. Carolyn brought up it being personal, and Stacy agreed. Don't you think that they would have discussed even one of the reasons that made it so personal?

- Saturday's episode didn't show the conversation between Jen C and Sandy up in the loft before going into the boardroom. That Jen C thought she had an alliance with Sandy. Knowing this made more sense when Jen C gave her speech in the cab.

- Saturday's boardroom, Ivana mentioned that they got a wait staff. I never saw or heard that. (not that it really mattered I guess)

- I replayed both Wed & Sat episode several times to listen to the part when they are first checking out the restaurant and Jen C said they need to go back to the loft - and she said "where's the little munchkin". It was loud and clear on Wednesday. On Sat, it sounds more like she said "where's the little one". It definitely wasn't as clear that she said "munchkin". But maybe that was just my cable.

And if Jen C was so bitter that Sandy "betrayed" her in the boardroom - why didn't she bring her in??? Even if she brought 3 in. I don't get that.



Fruitbat
Member

08-07-2000

Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 2:28 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Luvmykitties, I came here to post the same thing.

This challenge needed another 1/2 hour of footage to show us more. It was disjointed and empty. I would have liked to have seen more of how they got the interior of the restaurants together, the neighborhoods, Zagat telling them Asian Fusion was not a good choice and so much more.

Having an alliance on this show is just nuts! What was Jennifer thinking? More on that would have been good too.

Carlito
Member

03-26-2004

Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 9:46 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
I have to agree with you Luv. I was so looking forward to Saturdays episode and left thoroughly dissappointed for the same reasons you mentioned.
After tempting us with the first expanded rebroadcast show, the producers have done a lousy job of editing for the subsequent rebroadcasts.The issues brought up in the BR were
not shown and situations shown on regular broadcast were watered down.Especially the part with Jen C and the 2 elderly women,the interview with the Zagat staff was omitted and no mention or airing of Jen C being informed of Zagats recommendations were discussed or shown during the original episode.Frankly, I'm pissed off about it because it made the extended BR scenes too disjointed and without continuity.It also makes me wonder what other information or situations have they chose not to air that would let viewers know what is really going on.I can't believe there wasnt more to the BR than all the women yelling and trying to out talk each other and back stabbing each other.
It was interesting drama for TV but that is so insulting to me because it proposes that all we as viewers are into the show is for the drama and
that we are as mindless as the women they have chosen.More and more it is looking as if business savvy,professionalism, and the ability to work well with and lead a diverse group of people is not the main skills that will allow you to progress to the final rounds of selection for the job.Hmmmmm.
If this continues they may lose me as a viewer. Just heard about Stacie J's new job with the company that wants to buy Trumps casino properties.Karma ..Karma...is alive and well.Same for Kwami from the last season.

Luvmykitties
Member

01-02-2004

Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 11:44 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
I stumbled onto a site that shows some additional footage. dancing (URL at bottom)

Most of it is the stuff shown on Saturdays, but a couple of the videos show additional stuff that didn’t air at all -
Like when Stacy R and Jen M meet with Zagats! Stacy R was the one that urged that they go to Zagat's to see if they can offer any key insights. So Jen C says OK, go ahead.
They don't show much more of the conversation with Zagats. But the guy did say he could offer some suggestions on chefs they could use. (so another thing we never got to see is how the teams went about acquiring the chefs!)

But they do show the women in the cab calling Jen C relaying the information they got from Zagat’s.
Jen C is at the computer with Elizabeth and Sandy sitting next to her.
Jen M & Stacy R are in the cab and Stacy calls Jen C (both phones are on speaker):
Stacy R: “I just want to tell you first of all that there were 2 important things that we derived from the meeting with Zagat. They said Asian-Fusion is good, but it can be complicated.”
Then Jen M takes the phone and adds:
Jen M: “Also, the thing they kept on saying over & over again is keep in mind how much time we have for this task. They reiterated that we have 36 hrs and to KEEP THINGS SIMPLE.” (they show Jen C still typing away at the computer as if she really doesn’t care)
Jen C in confession: “I didn’t want to really voice too much to the team because I didn’t want the team to become unraveled.”
Jen C says in the phone: “You see that you guys keep calling and it’s making it difficult. Thanks.” and hangs up.
Jen C back at confession: “because if I ever let up for a second of insecurity like we should choose – oh I don’t know if Asian-Fusion is a bad idea – our team has a tendency to absolutely SPIRAL into chaos.”
Then they cut back to her at the computer looking over at Sandy and laughs and makes a face like “what was that about?”.

Now why didn’t they show this little extra bit on Saturday? The whole conversation and confession was less than 1 minute long.
Jen C denied the women ever called her. (Does sound like Omarosa – doesn’t it? ) Even though Elizabeth and Sandy did say in the boardroom that they heard the conversation, I still think this should have been shown! Because Jen C’s body language said a lot.

website: http://apprentice.tv.yahoo.com/
click on the top where it says “Excusive Video
then select the video “Apex at Zagat's (Extended Scene)” to view this particular scene


Pamy
Member

01-02-2002

Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 12:27 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
In a TVGuide article DT says there is someone that makes Oma look tame...do you think he meant Jen???? Or is something really juicy comming up?

Luvmykitties
Member

01-02-2004

Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 12:41 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Although I think it's Jen C, it could probably still be any one of the women!

Biscottiii
Member

05-29-2004

Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 1:10 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
Tishala said: If she wants to work in a high-profile firm in an area with a large Jewish population, she might want to keep her comments about Jews to herself.
...What's almost more astonishing is that Jennifer never thought to tell her employer


Truth in a nutshell and I totally agree. But one thing you pointed out, which I hadn't considered was THIS isn't live TV, she COULD have let the company know before they laid out money/prestige and stuck their foot over the potentially embarrassing (B.A.D. PR) advertising cliff!

There are a LOT of up and coming 'Eager Beavers' that would love to have Jen's real life job - who wouldn't even think of being so needlessly caustic & nasty. Maybe she should have hired out the cleaning so she got some sleep and wasn't so nasty to her customers, JMHO!

I just started watching, it's so very confusing, but if they give more explanations on Saturday, that might help alot. Dang, I wish I had known about Saturdays, too late now, but it sure would have cleared up some questions!




Biscottiii
Member

05-29-2004

Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 1:27 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post    
OK, as I said, I just started watching this show. Happened to catch this series last week in our Seattle Post-Intelligencer newspaper, the Business section, which seemed pretty interesting. If you all don't mind, I will post the one from today, then go back and post the previous ones in matching previous show threads tomorrow. (You might find it easier reading directly at the link because of the headings, etc.)

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/193545_apprentice04.html

ABOUT THE SERIES

What can real-world business leaders learn from the popular NBC series "The Apprentice"? That's the question the Seattle Post-Intelligencer posed to Maureen Moriarty, who uses the show as a teaching tool in her Bellevue Community College course. She'll try to answer that each week on Mondays through the show's regular season.


Maureen Moriarty, M.A., is a professional accredited executive coach, corporate leadership trainer, team facilitator and founder of Pathways to Change. She is teaching a continuing education leadership course based on "The Apprentice" for Bellevue Community College.



Monday, October 4, 2004

'Apprentice' 101: Take pointers from Apex on what not to do as part of team

By MAUREEN MORIARTY
SPECIAL TO THE POST-INTELLIGENCER

Donald Trump's fourth episode challenge was to open and manage a new restaurant in New York City in two days. Each team was given a restaurant space and a chef. The criteria to win: The restaurant that received the best review from diners in a Zagat consumer survey rating the quality of food, service and decor.

The recap: No surprise, the women's team lost for the third week in a row because of their team norm of catfights, whining, crying, sniveling and scapegoating. The Zagat reviewers gave the women's team (Apex) a lower decor rating. Jennifer C. (project manager) brought Elizabeth and Stacy R. -- for personal rather than business reasons -- into the boardroom to face firing by Trump. Trump fired Jennifer C. citing that her "entire team hated her," and she hadn't brought the person responsible for the decor into the boardroom.

The following are lessons learned from my armchair quarterbacking of the fourth episode.


First Downs


Integrity.

In the best display of integrity in this series, Kevin (Mosaic) openly scolded Apex for making Stacie J. the scapegoat the previous week. Instead of going along with the majority opinion of the group, Kevin courageously stood up for his own convictions and principles. He shows great leadership promise.


Protecting and allocating your team resources.

High performing teams strategically allocate team resources by matching individual talents and skills with the requirements of the task. Mosaic put artistic John in charge of creating art for the walls. The result: The men got higher decor ratings. Mosaic, wisely, hired a cleaning crew. The result: Their team was refreshed, fun and energetic with customers, resulting in higher service ratings.

This, however, counts as a penalty flag for the women. They used their limited, valuable team resources to scrub floors until 4 a.m. the day of the opening. Do you think Trump cleans his own bathroom? The result: an exhausted, irritated team that hovered over customers like nervous vultures. One Zagat diner response, "They were like seven uptight stewardesses."



Working hard and working smart are two very different things.


Penalty Flags


Respect.

Trump's lesson for the episode: "Be respected." The antithesis was Jennifer C. whom Trump justifiably fired. You don't earn respect by backstabbing, eavesdropping, barking orders or making comments to your team such as, "you are contaminating our living quarters just by being here." Respect is earned via qualities such as integrity, character, trust, competence, generosity, emotional intelligence and self-discipline. Sadly, the "best and the brightest" women of Apex simply do not display these traits.


What is the plan?

High performing teams take the time to develop strong strategic plans, no matter how short their task time frames. This plan should include critical path tasks that need to be completed with clear delegation of who is responsible for which tasks by when. A leader should use a visual timeline so that every member of the team knows whether they are on schedule for project completion. When will we see this on "The Apprentice"?


Teams need collaboration to succeed!

To be successful, a team must be able to operate as a cohesive unit. The women of Apex began their task as an angry, dysfunctional team and continued their downward spiral. Apex needed to invest time, energy and focus on mending what was broken and try to build a team that could work effectively together. Instead, team members were continually expending energy watching their own backs rather than focusing on getting the job done as a team. An effective leader cannot afford to overlook conflict and must resolve issues impacting the team's performance.


Emotional self-control: Don't let them see you cry!

The Apex team was embarrassing to businesswomen everywhere by their overly emotional displays of tears, catfights, backbiting and whining. Like the baseball coach in the movie, "A League of Their Own," who said, "There's no crying in baseball," my coaching advice to businesswomen: "There's no crying in the boardroom!"

Personal authority, which is at the heart of leadership, is lost in the workplace when leaders (men or women) lose control of their emotions.

According to "Primal Leadership," a book by Daniel Goleman, the best leaders are those who are comfortable with emotion. He defines emotional intelligence as one's capacity to deal effectively with your own and others' emotions.

A reader asks, "How do you resolve the personal problem to get to the core team problem?" My answer is "therapy and coaching to develop emotional intelligence, and, in the case of the women of 'The Apprentice,' lots of it!"


Continual interrupters make poor leaders.

Jennifer C. wins the award for the greatest interrupter and no surprise, got no respect. She interrupted everyone: her team members, customers, Trump and his lieutenants, Carolyn and last year's winner Bill Rancic. What Jennifer C. missed, when she interrupted Carolyn, was possible advice that might have helped her in the boardroom. Jennifer C. could benefit hugely from valuable feedback from wise mentors about her leadership style and impact on others. Unfortunately, she was too busy interrupting to hear it.


Stereotyping in the workplace -- a major no-no.

Jennifer C. displayed her stereotypical fangs with comments about customers such as, like, "the pinnacle of two fat, New York Jewish old bags."

And Chris on the Mosaic team described a table of four male customers as "four gay guys on their way to the theater -- they're going to be critical."

There is zero tolerance in today's workplace for stereotypical comments. Lawsuits aside, making comments about customers' or employees' gender, race, religion or sexual preference is just plain wrong.


= = =
ABOUT THE SERIES

What can real-world business leaders learn from the popular NBC series "The Apprentice"? That's the question the Seattle Post-Intelligencer posed to Maureen Moriarty, who uses the show as a teaching tool in her Bellevue Community College course. She'll try to answer that each week on Mondays through the show's regular season.


Maureen Moriarty, M.A., is a professional accredited executive coach, corporate leadership trainer, team facilitator and founder of Pathways to Change. She is teaching a continuing education leadership course based on "The Apprentice" for Bellevue Community College.