Amarsir

Yup, good call on Juli, @RealReality. My initial impression on Erin was that he's good at figuring out what a person wants to hear. But now I think he's just good at getting them to answer it for themselves and taking credit. "This is a challenge to figure out if you want to invest." "Why should I invest in you?" "This is a challenge to figure out what's wrong with these finances." "You're not making money. Why not?" Not a coincidence he flopped harder and harder the further they got from the BS "interview" stuff. Good first impressions, can't back it up. I thought these challenges were more grounded, even if the first resembled busywork more than any clear questions. Maybe there was an opportunity for one of them to impress at Sweet Pete's - but certainly none of them took it. I am becoming more comfortable with the idea of Juli or Peilin winning though. They aren't Marcus-level visionaries surely, but I could believe either would make a competent employee.

Cody has street smarts. His education is questionable, as he couldn't pronounce "hors d'oeuvres" and there was at least one other glaring vocabulary problem with him. But he's not dumb about people. He confessional'd that he wanted to split up because Gina is more likely to evac if she thinks she's letting down her friends. But he said to them that "You do better if Makani isn't there taunting you". Not only is it clever to play both sides, but it takes a certain amount of observation to even recognize those angles. You're a better person than I. The meanness is exactly what I enjoy about it. If any of these were better people I might feel bad about what they're going through.

Good point. Both groups had in-the-tent conversation cams going with movement. One I could maybe pretend was one of them using the tablet, and even that would be a stretch. Both, no way.

The power of a good villain. It worked out pretty well for him, although he lucked into Makani as an ally. I'm sure she would have been happy as a team member, but the campers forgot her once they realized 4 is a majority of 7, and she didn't do anything as forward as saying "hey what about me?"

I was curious so I looked it up: an inflamed appendix can be caused by infection. So quite plausibly caused by bad water. (Maybe you all knew that, but I was like "Appendicitis, is that a coincidence?".)

It would predate The Profit so probably not. The suit sounds like sour grapes from someone with nothing to lose. The business was failing and Marcus didn't bail them out, so why not try a lawsuit? And I'm not just saying that out of favoring Marcus. It'd be a weird thing to do to sabotage a competitor like that and there would surely be lots of evidence.

I feel like they're almost daring us not to watch. Last week didn't Lorraine practically say "This is a baking competition. You can't make meringue on here!"

They're all pretty dark in Season 1, but I think the special appeal of that premiere is that it's the most plausible for present day. They're willing to lose audiences who aren't ready for a punch in the gut, but didn't want to lose people who find the premises too abstract. Also Thai food isn't hot enough until it makes you hiccup, imho.

Still more tuned in than me. The closest I've come is watching two episodes of "60 minutes".

To be fair, that's probably the point - so beginners at home learn from watching the Food Network now.

I thought I'd like the format because A) something different could be interesting, and B) some of these idea are unoriginal I really wouldn't want to see full pitches from both. Shark tank has that problem with an app where every 3 episodes contains at least one app, subscription, and common food product with a slightly customized recipe. Presenting it as head-to-head seemed like it would make sense. But in practice it was too short of a pitch to make that determination and we're left wondering "what if". Maybe if they'd done full pitches and then the editing put them up head-to-head it might have been more interesting. Also the dark and dramatic lighting was far more serious than is called for. This is the most work she's ever had to do on this show. Flipping coins and everything. No wonder she seemed unpracticed at it. Actually to be fair, she's probably used to asking leading questions to get talking heads and then having her questions cut out. If all we'd heard was "I think I should have mentioned the numbers as they said" then we wouldn't be blaming her for asking.

That's the strategy I've been holding in my pocket, although I think it works better for getting people to spend then getting them not to spend. I could say "buy me a $30k tent or I'll cost you $100k" and the math is pretty straightforward. But if I say "don't buy an $8000 pizza or I'll cost you $100k", they might call me and say "fine, then it's a $108k pizza. We're getting it anyway."

Comparing it to The Apprentice, it's very visible how low-budget the tasks are. Which I guess makes it more real and less showbiz. But if you're going to sully yourself with Target plugs anyway, how about something bigger than 15 minutes coaching basketball and playing minimal-prep street vendor? I too would have gone with single-item candy, @AyeshaTheGreat. But that had me wondering how much branding and variety was actually available to them. Can you get a colorful cart filled with 8 kinds of candy and a giant "Sweet Pete's" sign? Or would it have just been a stack of jars looking like a clearance sale? Speaking of which, as amateur as the chalkboard and zero signage looked, that was a Marcus Lemonis technique. How many shows have we seen where he takes in thousands on leftover inventory with an "everything must go" approach? It wasn't dumb of Erin to make that an angle, but incredibly weak that it's all they had.

The important thing to remember is that they're all terrible people. At the beginning of the episode Cody was messing with my premise by trying to play peacemaker. Plus he legit is about getting the money there and carries almost as much as everyone else put together. But he's also perfectly happy to dig the screws in and play hypocrite so no points for him either. Makani is the most entertaining to watch but she'd probably drive me nuts too. Or make them a lot more expensive. They were what, 30k? That's a pretty cheap investment. It could have cost $100k and then the fights would have been so much bigger. You're right. Every one of them gets mad at the others for doing something while doing the exact same thing. And really needles it in with terrible personalities. For example, the last 2 food buys were both reasonably fair. This week MaCody spent $15k on 2 and the others spent $30 on 4. Last week it was peanut butter + sandwich + burger for 4 vs peanut butter for 2. I do think the survivalists are being much smarter in their buys, but the indulgent 4 are being reasonably fair with food. They just have such shitty attitudes about it that they get no credit for doing so.

Erin sure dropped the ball, even giving him some leeway for the fire. I think he's probably the sharpest in terms of figuring out the objective and changing to match it, but he also has a commitment problem. In the first week he said his history was bailing on Goldman Sachs a week from his start date to go vacation in Pamplona. That doesn't describe a guy I'd want representing me; I couldn't trust him to follow through. Marcus seemed to take it as a positive, but I'm watching for it because otherwise I think Erin would be the guy to beat. Overall this week though, thumbs down to Marcus for giving them an hour and expecting it to be a branding exercise. An hour to pick items and then overnight to create a strategy, great. But he specifically said they only had an hour for strategy. And if they don't realize that no one gives a shit about kiosks, of course they're going to focus on the accounting more than the marketing. It was set up for disappointment. Also is this the first time we've heard that the half million is over 3 years? It makes me wonder what catches are on the equity part as well?

At this point it actually wouldn't surprise me if all 6 do last, unless the producers throw a new complication in. (As in an even less hospitable campsite or a need to give something up.) Once they get halfway the desire to stay is really strong, and with 2 tents now the lodgings are almost assured to be better than the worst of what they've already endured. Sure, they'll all be getting hungry and the possibility exists of getting sick. But the easy drops have already dropped. Unless of course the feud gets so bad that they push each other out purely on a personality basis, which is possible. They Righteous Four could start spending money just to ensure there's nothing left, or Cody could literally destroy both tents just to set them back to Square 1. Neither would surprise me. But I think if they didn't quit after a shelterless night in a storm, it's unlikely now.

Maybe, but the whole premise of the ad was Erin's idea. He conceived the "lead by experience on a mountain" back at Target when he bought the mountaineering supplies and we heard him present it to the helper. I'm sure the quality of the shot, layout, and copy were the assistant's doing. But we know the source of the main idea.

I loved the vacuum guy. He did everything right and it was so right that it made the Dragon's skeptical. Good that it seems earnest. And according to Jim's Twitter the deal is still on, so maybe the vacuum is legit.

BTW I like how involved Marcus is in this process. He didn't just tell them to make a poster and then disappear to judge the final product. He walked around and interviewed them at Target, observed the photoshoot from the background, etc. He's definitely making the most of the opportunity to figure each of them out.

According to the site she's from Massachusetts. I can't even figure out where her accent is from, let alone where it goes on vacation.

What an interesting show. I'm glad I stumbled on this forum here at Previously because I would never have crossed paths with an MTV show otherwise. And it's safe to say that I hate everyone on it, which I'm pretty sure is the response viewers are supposed to have to people on MTV. So it's nice to be one of the cool kids! And I think casting gets applause for picking people who managed to create sides in a team game. A lot of reality show games play on the Tragedy of the Commons principle. (Wherein individuals benefit at group expense, thus creating waste.) But often it's solely at the result of producer manipulation. (e.g. The Mole's free pass in return for keeping money out of the pot.) This is one of the greatest displays I can remember of contestants acting it out: "We don't need a tent." "Well we're getting a tent." "Well then we're sharing the tent." "Well then we're getting our own tent. And some food." "Well then we're getting our own, more expensive food." It's delightful. One of them (Alex) compared their situation to Lord of the Flies, but at this point they'd have to elevate themselves to get to that level.

Hundred-Dollar Baby. S02E05. There's some really great character-driven comedy in it. It's a fairly common approach to episode development in that they have a theme and each reacts to it in their own way. And it's far enough in that Dannie DeVito has joined the cast yet isn't depending on callbacks that a new viewer wouldn't know. I can't guarantee the show is for everyone, but watching that episode should give you a good idea if it is or not.

I'm fine with the caliber of the contestants. There's a ceiling on applicants as no one who's uber-successful is going to drop their life to work for Marcus. Also the nature of this show wants to expose flaws (something Marcus himself isn't subject to). And they are applicants trying to pitch themselves, which is anything but an authority position. Yet authority is exactly what we would want from The Partner. So I did like second challenge. That should have been their opportunity to come out with strong, reasoned opinions and they really didn't. Too much "I want to ask follow-up questions." Which is not unreasonable but clearly not what Marcus wants. For having a stance (and for having the poster closest to what I'd have done), Buffie jumped up in rankings to me. What I need to see is each of them with authority and vaguer rules. Erin is (IMHO) really good at figuring out the objective and delivering it. That's why he had the best poster and was the first to figure out that Marcus wanted to hear "terrible concept". He's also good at giving pluses and minuses when asked for group feedback (the latter of which make for good show clips). That doesn't make me confident that he could walk into a struggling retail store and say "get rid of X and start doing more Y" unless Marcus was standing across from him hinting it's the right answer.

Actually a quick run by Wikipedia suggests that Anne's finalist is female 6-4, but the collective opposing captains have a woman finalist 7-3. For whatever that's worth.

And what a bad sell. Just namedrop namedrop namedrop. I know that's an aspect of marketing but there were no sales or actual value to back it up. I'm tempted myself! This makes 2 weeks in a row with a product I'm at least thinking about if not ready to order just yet. BTW, how many rings does one woman need? I'm legitimately curious why someone would become a repeat customer of those bath bombs, no matter how nice the ring is, since there has to be an upper limit for non-sentimental jewelery. No?