Amarsir

I do too. It's tough to balance personal pieces and business followups in a single show and I wouldn't mind them going to 2 episodes for it. Is Pizza really so new that people in the 1960s had never had it? I know it's odd to refer to 50 years ago as "new", but I would have figured it for at least a generation before then. I'm going to have to find a biography or something on Jim because that seems so odd to me, a police officer trying pizza for the first time and going "well that's it, I have to quit my job and start selling this." I'm also a little curious if these followups were before or after their respective shows aired. At first I thought VeloFix selling 5 franchises in a month was superb. But on second thought it probably wouldn't surprise me if they got a bunch of contacts after appearing. Still nice growth though.

I should have posted this last week when it would have been early enough for interested people to actually get tickets. But ... taping starts next week! http://on-camera-audiences.com/shows/Penn__Teller_Fool_Us?sf8383795=1

I don't understand what they felt the episode gained by Willy's "falsely convicted" reveal at the end. It undermined everything: his willingness to push Jeff down the stairs, Jeff's heartfelt plea, the Dean's acceptance of it, Willy's speech in class, or even why he'd be picked for a class spot when he'd be out before the semester ends. It's an idea that never should have made it to final script cut. Which is why I agree with @CletusMusashi that the longer episodes haven't done them any favors. As Blaise Pascal said, "I have made this longer than usual because I have not had time to make it shorter." What we're getting is not added content; it's reduced editing. And that's not good. That aside, the episode had a nice integration of comedy and plot. Elroy is fitting in very well and had a number of good lines. (Better than Frankie even, who seems to only be used as a catalyst.) And Britta's issues in the apartment were handled well, via an issue we can all accept would come up but wasn't overwhelming.

Just a quick breakdown: A Trademark is what you use to identify your business. It can be something as broad as a color (like UPS did with their shade of brown, or Reese's with their orange). But that's because it only applies to the scope of your industry. So you can sell floor cleaner in a solid brown box but can't decorate your shipping trucks like that. To get one you have to demonstrate that you're operating trade under that mark, and then file it. A Copyright is for an artistic work. It's actually granted automatically for obviously original work like a song or piece of writing. Registering it only makes the recordkeeping easier for future defenses. It can also be applied to something like a font - and has been many times. However there's a somewhat higher burden of proof and registration because it's less obviously unique to a casual observer. A Patent is on an invented technique or design and blocks others from using that technique or design. It can be the most powerful but accordingly is also given the shortest life. (20 years)

I don't know if I've mentioned this before, but for what it's worth the Australian Shark Tank (which just started) has two female Sharks as well. And the BBC Dragons' Den has maintained two spots for women since 2011. (They're also replacing 3 spots next year, coincidentally.) So yeah, this show was definitely bringing up the rear for representation.

I guess I have to disagree because I thought this was a very interesting episode. Obstacle races are hot right now. Personally I don't quite get it, but Cuban put in $1.75 million on Rugged Maniac when they appeared on Shark Tank. The combination of zombies ties into another hot trend (which I also don't quite get). As a business it's fine: they had 35% margins on something that can't possibly be taking full time. I don't think there was anything wrong with that pitch at all. The hug vest was probably the low point for me, just because there wasn't much going on. Probably a good product though, especially since it sounds like they've gotten approval for government expenditures. WipeBoard was weird, but I enjoyed the conversation. I'm with David where I think the idea is 20 years too late. But Arlene - who's been kind of the grouch this season (and this episode) - was all over it. I expected she'd make her offer in services not cash, but maybe she figures on just paying herself for marketing anyway so she didn't need the distinction. And the wine fridge did look good. A very polished product which I'm sure Jim and Wek will navigate to the right market. I didn't realize there was such a thing as solid state refrigeration, so following a Wikipedia trip I got an education too. Overall I thought it was fine. Other than Vikram's pattern of "not my area" and having the worst bid in the room, it all pretty much worked.

I miss the plot-irrelevant jokes of last week. The premises were fine but there was nothing particularly funny.* It's like the skeleton was right but the script was never fleshed out. * The exception being Jason Mantzoukas as the director, who I know best from his podcast "How Did This get Made" with Paul Scheer and June Diane Raphael. He was funny and even though I expected the twist it was still well done. But a guest star in 1/3 of the plots isn't enough to carry the show.

It is an exciting group of Dragons, I'm pretty psyched too. Michele Romanow could prove very interesting: not only a female voice but younger and with web, retail, and wholesale experience. Dragons who are willing to go in on anything are the most interesting ones.

Did ... did you read it? "Anything for money" is what the bad guys in Atlas Shrugged do.

Speaking of the Greendale logo, I noticed it was watermarked on Ruffles' transcript. That doesn't make sense on a file that predates the study group. I spent way too long being bothered by that. That's a good point. I like the idea of a late-night emergency as catalyst and certainly it's very Greendale to give a degree to a dog. But it didn't tie together and you're right, that's why. I think it's because the plot was fairly predictable. As soon as we got the setup we all knew the resolution would be something like "Greendale gives everyone a chance, no matter who you are." So it was just a matter of how much they could add to that plot without going external to it. And apparently, not much.

Their website, which includes all modern web design trends while still being awful, throws around the words "pure" and "fresh" to imply there's some benefit there. And if that sounds like a pretty weak claim to you then I certainly agree. Canned pre-mixed drinks are already in existence from Smirnoff, and reportedly they're pretty bad but how much of that is being cheap and how much is the method is harder to say.

So astrology is really that big in India, huh? I did not realize that. Because that's what makes it "real medicine". Make two columns. Call one "Unproven" and the other one "Proven". So if I rephrase your questions as "Why does stuff in the unproven column need to prove itself before it can sell in the proven column?" then I think the answer is self-explanatory. I was a little surprised the show put to tiny deals in the middle like that. One for $15k and one for $20k. Even if they were both worthy of discussion (and I admit the conversations were more interesting than I'd expected) I would expect the show to break them up a little. Filling the show like that makes the whole thing seem small potatoes.

How come nobody used the word "royalty" during the T-shirt segment? He had nice income already coming in and a royalty would fix their objections with little complication. Were I him I'd have countered "$250k for 12% with an 8% royalty until the money is paid back." That doesn't give away too much but protects the sharks against their fear of a short-lived product. It's weird that we used to hear that all the time and now that it would work, no one would bring it up. Similarly, I'm surprised Robert didn't do something more creative with the SEO guy. A few weeks ago we saw him make a venture debt offer to avoid a "down round", right? Well this was the same situation. We don't know what order they were filmed in, but that's how you solve the problem. The pooch pitch was cute and well-presented, but not only is it a weak idea I've personally seen at least 3 other versions of it and I don't even have a dog. The space is more than full.

This Dennis and the con with "Frankito" the week before - that's the Dennis I love. He's at his best as a scheming sociopath. Earlier in the season when he was just raging at one person after another - that got old fast. They also got the balance just right with Mac. He's not gay, he just likes being around a bunch of shirtless buff dudes and no women. That's all.

The show still feels like the good ol' Community, and that's a relief. I also appreciate how Abed's quirkiness was used as a plot vehicle and not an end in itself, and how we got a nice Britta episode. They were pushing on just a little too much Dean in the second episode, but for a B-plot catalyst it was fine. (And I liked the jokes about VR.) Re: Player, watched in browser with no ads (might be ABP I didn't turn off) but slight hitching. Not a problem for me at all. I think it worked for the opener, letting them address the change in characters and other meta issues. But I agree that uses Abed up for a while and while I'm always on board for a good tribute episode I don't think they could get away with a Claymation-style hook now.

To the best of my recollection that has happened once, with someone asking Mark to weigh in. (He's also offered unprompted advice many times.) I do think it's an interesting dynamic and he'd be a good guy to ask for a fair answer. Not to say you shouldn't like Robert, but just a counterpoint: http://www.cnet.com/news/stiffed-by-shark-tank-vc-startup-ceo-perseveres/

If you want to dispute the Sharks' historic valuation, IMHO the best way to do it is tell them the payback period based on demonstrable growth rates. Saying "You'll get all your money back within 2 years" is a lot more compelling than "well it's a big market and I have other investors". More importantly, where are these investors who threw money at her without even asking for projections? Can I make them a pitch too?

I'm going to say "Flamingos and Fishing" (or as they officially called it, "Walking on Water") is probably the weakest show they've had. I wasn't overly impressed, and that was before the judges revealed how much editing helped them with dead air and errors. Too bad, because the competitors seemed like good guys, but I guess something has to be weakest. Seeing it in the credits again, I was reminded how much I really liked Shimshi's backflip trick last week. That's a creative idea to take a physical feat and turn it into a trick. (And a well-done trick at that.)

It's the Penguin music! Danny DeVito's role in Batman Returns (1992). (And yes, it is a Tim Burton movie.) In it he had pale skin, black teeth, and wild hair. They recreated all that and then had the same musical cue. I loved it.

On the bright side, the trendiness of it has made it a lot easier for people with actual gluten problems to explain the issue and find alternatives. Four years ago being at a restaurant and asking "is this sauce gluten-free" would get you weird looks and an "I don't know I'll ask ... what's it called?" Now that question gets answers like "It's not, but this other one is and I can bring you some gluten-free bread if you like." Plus there are more products catering to it. (e.g. Gluten-free pizza dough.) I was on Atkins before it hit big 15 years ago and the explosion of low-carb alternatives was very convenient. (Even if most were terrible.) Not disagreeing with either of you but I want to point out that it's a bit of a Prisoner's Dilemma-type game theory. People ride in the back anyway. Riding in the back would be safer with seats. But buying seats gives you a third party to blame and that third party doesn't want liability So we reach the compromise of no seats being available.

I think the structure covered the downside though. He gets to collect 7% and if the guy defaults Mark can foreclose on the whole business. That covers the flake factor. Beyond that it's a long shot, but that's what Mark likes. Nice followup on Mo. I agree that if you don't know who Mo is then it's no more compelling than the other bowties they sell at Needless Markup locations. But it's no worse either.

I didn't mind Sasquatch Man. Part of the show's tone for me is that it doesn't take itself too seriously. And that sometimes pays off on long shots, like when a cereal called "Holy Crap" turned out to be a huge seller. (Not that they weren't a serious business, but the name would get them objections already.) It also helps me stay lighthearted during the serious market / awful pitch moments. Like the ones with scam-type health claims, or the ridiculous-valuation-and-not-budging people. I do think they need to keep it moving for momentum though: keep stuff on screen only as long as it's interesting. But I don't think one silly pitch hurts the presentation of what comes before and after.

Personally I liked the domino prediction better than the pick vanish. Even though on a second watch I was also able to see how it was done, and I only have vague suspicions about how they teleport objects, it still seemed more hands-off to me. I guess that's a difference between the magician judges and me as a non-performer. They're giving extra points for difficulty whereas I don't know enough to do that.

I'll join you. I even remember the scene where they gave one of their steal answers to the other family. Also I believe 227 was another sitcom to appear, though there have probably been several. It is made for that kind of thing. Which is why I didn't love this episode. It feels a little like a Hollywood "insert characters here" plot. The gang was good and very much in character, but I prefer a more organic plot that only Sunny could do.

If you want to win deals, look how David did made that offer for the socks. He gets the protection of a debt structure and they get a better valuation. Wek was awesome with his 85% offer, just kind of railroading a couple punks who thought they knew what hardball was. That's exactly what the show needs sometimes and even Kevin couldn't have done it that well. The Hockey strategy guy was both crazy and boring. I'd have rather seen one of the quick pitches get expanded, even the cereal pants. I'm just glad we got the abridged version and not 10 minutes of powerpoint. The squib product was really interesting. It immediately seemed like a very small market, which they honed in on. But it could work. I could totally see the industry making them the standard, and that's a nice solid business.