Amarsir

Wow. Oh man do I wish he would have brought that up on the show. The ensuing comments from the sharks would have truly been Season Finale-worthy.

I think Nick would have been a better replacement for Mark than Robert. Similar sort of energy (and bank account). Because I agree, Robert might have shown interest in some of these. I get it. If you look at the Shark Wheel from exactly the side, it will look like a normal wheel. From the front, it would take up double the width of a wheel but with less thickness. Imagine a pair of wheels, then diagonal connectors going back and forth, then take away alternating redundant portions. The result is something that's wider, but also not, and with a constant radius. I can see why it might do what he says. A normal wheel hits a rock, it has nowhere to go but bounce over or jump sideways. On this one, the wheel is about to shift to the other parallel so it's going around the obstacle. Worst case if the rock is perfectly positioned to jolt the wheel, it's a minor move. All the stability benefit of wider wheels but without the footprint of them. And as for traction, picture the diagonals. That's cutting across the terrain in a way that a normal wheel only would if you were doing switchbacks. So those claims are plausible. Now here's my problems with it. First, I'm not sure it has the same structural integrity. Circles equalize pressure and that makes them stable and hard to dent. I'm not certain his design has that same integrity. Certainly it rules out certain subsequent choices: for example I'm sure he'd love to sell these for car wheels, but an inflated tire on that shape just wouldn't hold. Second, picture what happens when the wheel tilts. Put it on the Sway for example. From the perspective of that diagonal contact you're on a wheel with pieces missing. It will jolt and stutter and probably self-destruct. So as clever as I think that invention is, it's going to be limited in applications. Still might be huge, though. My first concern was the "patented" battery on the bottom. It seems like if you hit a pothole, that thing could bottom out and you've just damaged the most important part and stranded yourself. Also I'm a suburban guy so maybe I just don't get it, but how big is this market that every inventor seems to want? Segways to electric skateboards to aircars to the "Sway" to dozens of other ideas. They might be fun; I've rented a Segway on vacation and loved it. But none of these are being embraced by society at large that I can see.

When Bantam Bagels first appeared on Shark Tank, forum response to the name was lukewarm. I can understand wanting to change it. But I agree with all of you that "Bagel Stuffins" is worse. Unless they're going to try to become a bulk item like "Bagel Bites", sold cheap in every supermarket's freezer section. Then you want a generic-sounding name (which you have trademarked) so you become a household standard. But that doesn't seem like what they're going for. That was 102 (which was the only decent episode of the 3) and they said "Ryan's" was trademarked and "Barkery" was trademarked, so "Ry's Ruffery" is what they could get. Apparently it's working fine for sales.

Something tells me that the health food movement to avoid stuff you can't pronounce and the health food movement pushing us to eat more quinoa probably never met.

Great first episode. It had a clear line for improvement, people who were willing to change, and that personal development issue that Marcus seems to love. I have a little trouble believing that prima donna brother is the only one on Earth who can figure out that it's cheaper not to paint stuff. But he certainly seemed competent enough and if it helped patch that relationship that's a good thing.

This was a return to Britta being nothing but the butt of jokes. But to be fair, Gillian Jacobs is good at it. Otherwise it was a good solid character-based episode. It won't be one of my favorites, but there were lots of interactions and most of the characters felt right. And yes, it doesn't really make sense that all of them would go on the trip (even just for labor you'd pick other people). But that's why I said it's a character episode, not a plot one.

Guests this season have definitely been a notch above. I wonder if they're choosing different or if there's some kind of practice session beforehand. (That said, I also think 3 games with the same guest is too many. Jaime Camil was good but we're still not tuning in for the guests.)

Disbursements. Live off the excess profit of your business according to the percent of it that you own. It's different from a salary which happens despite profit/loss and your ownership share. If you're not profiting enough to live on, hustle more or accept the idea might not work. This is especially true when you're asking for investors, who don't want a salary draining their money into your pocket but could accept part of the profits going out to everyone. It's not an easy answer but far from a no-win-situation. I liked the Zoom discussion. I lean on the side that says they should automate the process more, but not with an app. (They're too platform-specific and process-heavy.) Make a good website with mobile capabilities, which I'm sure can be done for less than 6 months and $100k. But then we missed a lot of the discussion, so I don't know how much scalability they have already. I get that, but my answer tends to be "money talks". In less time than it would take to say "but you really want to hear my offer...", any other shark could just spit it out. In this case, if Lori called out "$110,000 for 10%" (beating him by $10k) it'd already be too late for Mark's "don't hear them out." But they don't want to do that either. (Remember the time Daymond gave 10 seconds and Lori talked for the whole time but didn't say a number until he finished.) In Mark's case I think it's also a test. Are you a decision-maker who knows what your business is worth? Then why would a tech guy giving you what you asked for be something you can't answer quickly? Or 1/2 weeks ago it was just him and Kevin, and his stance amounted to "you know nobody ever prefers Kevin's offer so why waste time?" I suspect this is how he runs business all the time and if you're not someone who can make fast decisions then he'd just as well not partner with you anyway. That said, I do think debates and competing offers are more interesting for TV so I'm not a huge fan of the shot clock for that reason. But I don't think it's a character flaw.

This is absolutely true. The best grift/heist/scam plots are the ones where you don't realize that's what they're doing. (And I can tell you one that really worked on me, but if I did that would ruin it for you. So instead I'll recommend Nine Queens to anyone who doesn't mind subtitles. It's an Argentinian film and while you do follow the scheme closely you won't spot everything.) However, being a comedy they have a lot more leeway. For example, what if there was a fairly intricate plot with like 3 twists in it, and then when they're congratulating themselves Leonard comes by and points out a plot hole with it. That way we get the benefit of a "clever" heist while the takeaway hangs a lantern on it so we're not bothered with flaws ourselves. Or for something truly clever, the show could have started setting it up a few episodes in advance. This would work especially well for the Yahoo medium because they have more time per episode, they knew they have a full series order, and upon this episode's reveal it would have prompted people to go back and rewatch the previous ones. But I guess it wasn't worth that effort.

From the Zero Pollution Motors Facebook yesterday: So they're already scaling back to golf-cart-esque models, and have yet to go throguh crash testing.

I for one am sick of outsourcing down the street. All my stuff is Made For 327 Elm Street Apartment 14B, BY 327 Elm Street Apartment 14B!Seriously though, while you have a good point I think the virtue of "Made In America" is that you can observe any part of the process at any time. When you outsource overseas they can cut corners at any time and sending back an order is not only a huge hassle it will put you months behind schedule. And China has gotten a reputation for dishonest business practices. Maybe that's unfair and they can turn it around. But for now it's a negative. Kevin for one has certainly argued that if a product needs better margins you shouldn't rule out going overseas to a quality vendor. But even he hasn't beaten that drum in a season or 2.

Agreed. This was good, but it could have been brilliant and just wasn't. (Also The Sting is a great movie and I'll not stand by and have it trashed.) It also didn't help that the comedy was back-loaded. There were a couple decent laughs in the last third, but in the 18 minutes before that there wasn't much.

The company's Facebook page makes it sound like the deal is still on, if not finalized. I'm also inclined to agree that there's just no way this is a viable business.

A few games we hadn't seen in a while. I can't complain about that! I thought Compilation Album was hilarious. Not Wayne's catchiest song, but they took Colin's complication and ran with it. That's improv at its best: breaking out of the games to make it even more unexpected.

Isn't Annie still a pharmaceutical rep? I know she wasn't satisfied with that but I didn't think she'd quit.

I had to double check that they weren't filming the episode in Boston. The only way I could reason him mentioning it so much is if it was literally downstairs from their studio.

Like most episodes this season this one was a good bit longer than an NBC slot would allow. But unlike those I felt it used the time well. The insane movie from recycled footage was a plot we'd never get on another show and I liked the Jeff/Abed scenes. I even liked the subtle reference to Hickey although his absense has never been mentioned nor explained. The only thing I would have cut was the end tag with Chang in the recording booth. And maybe him slinking back to the group, although that closed it up nicely. Otherwise, a good episode and another one that puts the "community" in Community.

Yeah it's an odd choice to act out because they're mostly about subtlety. A cabinet swings open on its own, one person says its a demon and someone else says they're crazy. Repeat for 90 minutes. The only virtue I think is that they ramp up to a posession at the end and we know Wayne would do a fine job of trying to be normal and then having something happen to him. But from the performance I wasn't sure if he'd seen them either. Eh, good enough.

She was really comfortable on stage, as if playing the character not the game. Previous guests have been able to lead Colin/Ryan around the table by going "Hey what's this?" but Adelaide made it seem natural. I was very impressed.

I would say markup, up-front pay, and variable pricing. At a club they charge just to have the table and get so much for it that they can afford to let it sit open just in case or lower prices as the night go on. So the club lets you reserve in advance at a nice high price. If no one buys they can lower it later. If someone accepts and doesn't show up, you charge them anyway. So bookings are pure win. For the stool it's like a table reservation, but on a product where people don't expect reservations. Unlike dining, bars can handle excess capacity via standing room and the price per drink is the same (although sitting customers may order more). So there's no advantage to leaving the stool open: most people would be offended at the idea of paying just for the seat, and you can easily fill it anyway. Yes. But followups aren't really about information. They're about providing another advertising boost to help out the relevant shark(s). So this was Barbara's week and she felt the sauce needed help. Which it might. $10m in sales over 5 years, including a retail store (which IIRC they had already started on before Barbara got involved). They're not doing terribly, but that's not amazing. And any given supermarket easily has over a dozen bbq brands on the shelf. So it sounds like they got a trial run at Sams Club and wanted to pump sales to inspire a reorder.

I noticed they ADR'd the "steel" in "steel drums", if not necessarily the "drums" part. It made me wonder what that line was originally supposed to be. So I searched and Dan Harmon tweeted: Which I think sheds light on a number of the issues we've seen in earlier episodes: the scripts are rushed. As I said above, I did like this one. But it shows, especially if Yahoo isn't exercising control the way NBC did to create more editing and review process. Until your comment and a rewatch, I had no idea there was any nostalgia component in the show at all. I still don't, to be honest, as even though the band and game are "from the 90s" both are fake. Is product placement so awful that we can't tolerate parodies of it either? We can say it's been done, both Arrested Development and 30 Rock did their bit on it in addition to a prior Community episode. But if it's that pervasive it's also fair game to mock.

This might have been the best episode of the season for me. The plot was simple but I was laughing throughout. Plus it was educational. I for one did not realize the 2015 CR-V was named Motor Trend's Sport/Utility of the year - not just for it's fuel economy and driver-assistive safety technologies but also the Earth Dreams™ powertrain technology and newly-redesigned touring trim. So you know, it's nice to learn something.

Oh this was a lot of fun! Cedric was great, they let him play Questions which was fine, and Superhero movie may be the best round of Words Worst I've seen in a long time.

I thought all the stuff with Officer Cackowski was funny. But not until they explicitly 4th walled "trilogy" did I connect to the pen episode, so I couldn't figure out why they thought the Pierce's will episode was so good they needed to redo it. A fine topical concept, but I probably would have been happier had it developed in a different direction. Why not let Britta carry more of it, dwelling on her conflict between encouraging and preventing the performance? And I agree that a fair amount of it seemed out of character, even with newer undeveloped characters like Frankie. I don't understand why Britta and Abed switched places as the "one person who didn't read" - sure you can justify either, but it seems likely that their choice of actions in the first act would be the same in the second. Overall I thought it was a fine concept with a few decent lines, but could have come together better.

There's gratuitous nudity, like the woman removing her skirt just to put it back. There's gratuitous covering up, like Daenerys clutching a sheet over her chest while in bed with her lover. But the Loras / Olyvar scene managed to do both at once. To be fair, it's a hard request to fill. I think if you survey women about how much nudity they want to see, you'll get a much broader range of answers than if you asked men the same question. (Not that all men would answer alike.) But they could have been a lot less clumsy, in both directions. This felt like they never knew what shot they wanted until the day of the shoot.