The King of Gelato - Episode 2 Summary

Challenge: Working with Ciao Bello Gelato the teams must first design and produce a new flavour, and then sell it. The team that makes the most money wins.

Project Mgrs: Apex - Ivana, Mosaic - Kelly.

Summary:

This seemed to be a 2 day task.

On the first day, Kelly divided the Mosaic team into 2 groups - Sales which he had Wes lead, and Production which he led himself.

Mosaic stuck together in what Jennifer C. described as "team havoc".

Both teams came down to the wire with coming up with their flavours

Mosaic's production team franticly raiding every Dunkin' Donuts in the area for ALL available donuts in the 25 minutes before the production deadline.

Apex struggled with brainstorming and finally came to a flavour decision 15 minutes before the production deadline.

Mosaic created Vanilla Donut Dream Ice Cream. Described on the Ciao Bella site as "Ciao Bella's best-loved vanilla gelato swirled with Chocolate syrup and the gooey goodness of Dunkin' Donuts donut chunks. "

Apex created Red Velvet Ice Cream. Described on the Ciao Bella site as "a cool and creamy take on the classic rich red cake. Ciao Bella's gelato containing an egg base, touch of Belgian Cocoa, raspberries and white chocolate to recreate and spin the southern classic batter into a rich frozen dessert. (which is slightly different than the Red Velvet they described in the "war room" which included pecans. But there you go.)

While this was all underway, Mosaic's sales team seemed to have little to no success in lining up distributors for their volume sales plan.

Andy suggested connecting with a NPO, and Kevin recommended the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society

Mosaic sat down to discuss strategy and in walked Apex.

End of day one had Apex discussing how to scoop (excuse the pun) Mosaic's street sales strategy, and decided to cancel their existing appointments and hit the street.

On the second day, both teams hit Times Square to sell.

Apex got split up and seemed to lose each other for 3 hours, while they were only about 1/2 a block apart.

Mosaic, all done up in bow ties, moved and charmed their way into lots and lots of sales. Which is good, because their material costs were much higher since they paid retail for all the donuts; and they were giving a cut to the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society

Winners: Mosaic
Reward: Dinner @ Petrossian
Immune:Bradford

Boardroom Antics:

Everyone, and I mean everyone, walked in to the boardroom agreeing that Stacie J. was the one to go.

Bradford was so confident of his performance as the King of Gelato, and obviously of his PM, that he casaully said he’d be willing to waive his immunity. Trump immediately jumped on this offer and then berated Bradford for being “stupid”. But hey, who'd bring him into the boardroom after his performance?

Ivana said I'd rather lose than sell myself, which is likely a comment on last season's tactics. However, Carolyn presented a valid, though emotional response that while they didn't have to use sex to sell, they certainly could have tried using something, anything, to get some traffic.

4 in Boardroom:
Ivana chose to bring 2, no wait, 3 people to the boardroom with her.
Jennifer C., Stacie J. & Bradford

Boardroom Antics redux:

Ivana was negotiating with Jennifer C. to stay strong with the plan in the lobby before returning to the boardroom.

Once back into the boardroom, Trump started on the offensive.

Ivana- bad leader, bad job, indecisive

Stacie J. - everyone "hates" her, doesn't not play well with others.

Jennifer C., - shouldn't be there, but should shut up now Trump has identified this

Bradford- the best of the bunch, but stupid for putting his neck back on the line.
Was it just me, or did Trump seem genuinely annoyed and frustrated by this group of people?

Fired: Bradford

Note: This firing was consistant with some of Trump's decisions in Season 1. Showing weakness, being reckless, or not watching the cues in the boardroom can be more disasterous than failing repeatedly but being being on the ball when negotiating for your job. Take it seriously, treat yourself with respect, and don't put yourself in the line of fire. 'Cause you'll get fired.

The official detailed summary of this episode will be available at NBC's Official Site

And don't miss all the Reader Comments on Episode 2 that came in immediately after airing... wow!

So the question is: What motivated Bradford give up his immunity? Stupidity? Cockiness? Desire to be part of the team and not set apart? Confidence? Or some combo of all the above?

Comments

[Margaret]

Bradford getting fired seemed like the most nuts thing. And Ivana should have protected her best team member by leaving him out of the board room. Bradford wasn't being stupid, he was showing that he was CONFIDENT enough of himself and his performance that he didn't need the immunity. I applaud confidence and putting your neck on the line for believing in yourself. I doubt I will watch the show again.

[maryse]

bradford was stupid and short-sighted and as soon as he offered his immunity up i knew trump was going to pounce on him. you do not get to the top by giving up the upper hand, no matter how confident you are or how talented.

[Zed]

Personally, I think that Trump firing Bradford was the DUMBEST thing that Trump has done to date!

Bradford did the honorable thing in waiving his immunity. Business should have a bit of honor in it - not jsut "dog-eat-dog" do anything it takes to get to the top. What kind of values is he showing support for?

Brad contributed greatly to the team effort and he should have been allowed to continue!

I think there should be some popular support to get Bradford back onto the show!

Maybe we should get an e-mail campaign started to tell the Donald how badly he fucked up!

Z.

i thought bradford was putting his performance on the line. THAT's what he was fired for. they were starting to bicker about who should be called in to the board room...he ALSO volunteered to to go to the other side before any argument broke out...ivana should have been fired. she brought in a valuable memeber of the team an put him at risk...

[Jiggy]

What Donald Trump did was show that he is more interested in getting ratings than anything else. If anyone needed to shutup, it was the Donald. The boardroom is used to determine your ability during the project -- and he did fine. What Bradford did was not egotistical and not at all stupid -- instead, he showed that he would put his neck on lind the for the betterment of the team. In the real world, everyone is assessed -- even the CEO. I don't think the president of the United States talks to his subordinates the way Trump talked to the team.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the most disturbing part of the show: Ivana calling that meeting of the APEX team and not including Stacie.

Granted, Stacie is "out there" but are these ladies "women" or "children". How childish of them to get up and walk away when she simply asked what was going on.

If any of the members of APEX had any back-bone, they should have spoken their feelings to her face instead of behind her back!

Oh, and the red velvet flavor was not the traditional red velvet. I don't know what the heck Maria was describing, but it wasn't any kind of red velvet I know of.

And I'm with Margaret, I doubt if I'll watch the show again. I've already kicked "The Benefactor" to the curb (or, as I like to call it: Lowering Yourself and Ruining you Self-Esteem for Dollars) - The Apprentice last night just made me realize how much of a success most people truly are compared to those seventeen Bozo's!

[Teresa]

Ooops!! I left the above comment. Sorry! Oh, forgot, saying you're sorry is a sign of weakness. :-)

I missed Episode 2!!!!! Ahh!!! Someone please tell me when and what channel it's going to re-air on. Anyone???

On my way to a meeting this morning, it dawned on my why Trump was so put off by Bradford deciding to give up immunity. It wasn't Bradford's to give up! It was Trumps. The Donald gave him this immunity and it wasn't really Bradfords to give back!

Earlier, Trump offerred Ivana the chance to bring back 2 or 3 people into the board room and she originally chose 2. Trump reminded her that her odds of being fired are LESS with 3 and Ivana decided to go with the max.

This indicates that Trump keeps a close eye on the odds and couldn't stomach Bradford's clear disregard for the odds.

[stephen harris]

Ivana said it best - OMG OMG OMG ! But in the end, Bradford was not the best leader in the house. He was brash and dictatorial. OK - he stepped up and sold ice cream and took a huge chance. And, he was fired.

I have to ponder - should Trump have fired him? Did Bradford have a chance to state his rationale for his "stupid" decision? Honorable yes, stupid yes. Perhaps Trump was thinking - if you have a competitive advantage - keep it. I would have taken Ivana out and warned Bradford he was on extremely thin ice.

I think the players need to understand; Trump is not about teams - he is about the power of one - and controlling teams to do his bidding. In that light, Bradford gave away an ace in his hand - and that is punishable by - firing. Trump is not a team builder. He is using the team format to shake out the weak links and find a "true?" leader.

At this stage -who? I do not see anyone rising up yet.... Read more of my commentary for Episode II: http://ApprenticeViews.blogdrive.com

I can't help but wonder if there was some behind the scenes pressure on Trump to fire Bradford for giving up the immunity. Immunity is a new feature of the show this year and for Bradford to give it up was kind of an insult to the producers. After season 1, Trump was all over on the media talking about how this show DOES mimic real business situations. NEVER in business does one have "immunity" -- you can get fired any time.

The immunity is obviously a ploy to get ratings and compete with other reality shows that have it.

For Bradford to give it up, I think he was reitterating something he said earlier in episode 1 that he is there to perform and go after a job and win based on his performance. He wants his performance to stand for itself and not hide behind artificial protections such as "immunity". I say 'way to go' to Bradford for calling the producers out on this silly new "twist". This season's immunity feature makes this show even farther off from the real life of business that I'm sure I'll watch it less frequently.

[joshua.michael]

I thought that Bradford showed a great deal of confidence by putting his performance on the line. I don't think he was being reckless, I thought he simply believed that he did well in the challenge, which he did.

The move ended up being stupid, however he probably thought Trump would possible view this a different way and give Bradford credit for his bold move. Something in me thinks that if Trump was in Bradford shoes, he may have done the same thing.

I have a feeling by Trump doing the unpreditable was simple a move for ratings. It seems that Trump is less interested in finding the best person for the job, and more interested in his show. From a entertainment standpoint I guess I can't blame him. However, by firing Bradford the show loses some of its credibility.

[Ron Goulter]

I am still in shock. I can't wait to see the leading comments next week from the 'shocker' of this week...and then shut it off. I don't feel entertained anymore, just betrayed.
I'm quite sure this will be all over the tube next week too with the morning shows, etc.

BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT

[Stephen Harris]

There are plenty of comments on the Apprentice boards about how wrong this firing was - even consipiracy by the producers. I think it did make for good tv and drama, and displayed a positive management style. Read on...

In the end, The Apprentice is about one winner and '17' losers*. In the real world, no one has immunity. However, in situations where a manager will stand up with his team when things go wrong - does show character. How many managers have you worked for that "spin" their way out of harms way when something goes wrong? How many stand up with the team to take the hit?

Read more of my comments at http://apprenticeviews.blogdrive.com

I watched all of last season and was looking forward to this season more then any other show. The thing that I liked about the show last year is that the show stayed within the "rules" that were depicted. "May the best man or woman win"
This week was an obvious case of selling out for ratings and shock value. The only problem with the way the shock came is it left many viewers dejected.
Also, there are not very many players that we can identify with, Bradford was one of the few you could say you either liked or hated. Now we have to start over next week trying to figure out who to identify with. If you are still interested.
The Donald messed up and I think made a "Stupid!!" decision. Bradford showed loyalty and in the cut throat world of business, loyalty is one thing you cant teach or pay enough for. He should have stayed within the boundaries of what we came to appreciate the apprentice for. "May the best man or woman win"

"Bradford showed loyalty and in the cut throat world of business"

How the hell does a person actually make that statement without seeing the obvious irony? If it's "cut throat", and you voluntarily sacrifice immunity from that "cut throat" environment for just one night, you don't freakin' BELONG in the "cut throat world of business".

Bradford felt confident about his performance during the task and wanted to display this confidence in his abilities by giving up his immunity. He thought it would make him look good because he was confident and because he worked hard even though he knew he had immunity.
Mr. Trump plainly said that Bradford was the strongest candidate in the room at the time of the firing.
His rationale for firing Bradford was that Bradford's decsion to give up his immunity was an impulsive decision that only hurt his chances of winning, therefore it was a stupid decision. Because stupid decisions that are made impulsively cause companies to fail, Bradford was fired.
It has already been mentioned that Trump fired Bradford for shock value and ratings.
It has also been mentioned that Trump fired Bradford because Bradford somehow insulted Trump and unjustly superseded his actual status on the show by giving up the immunity that was given to him by Trump himself.
I propose a different motive for firing Bradford. Trump has seen that the men in this season are organized enough to beat the women, and he wants to see them do it. Everything that Trump said and everything that went on during the show before Trump stated his reasoning for firing Bradford was evidence AGAINST firing Bradford; there is high suspicion of an ulterior motive. Trump clearly said that Bradford was the strongest candidate in the room at the time of the firing. Both of Trump's advisors suggested to fire either Ivana or Stacie. The entire women's team suggested to fire Stacie and the majority highly questioned Ivana's leadership. In the boardroom, Ivana displayed the flaws in leadership to Trump that were reported by her teammates and Trump's advisors.
And yet, Trump fired Bradford. Why? Because he wants to see the men beat the women. Trump doesn't take orders from anyone, most likely not the producers of his own show. He has enough money and he doesn't need this show to sustain himself. The ratings are for his own amusement and just extra money on top. The show is also unscripted and it sounds like it. Last season, Trump said he was embarrassed as a man because the men lost 4 times in a row. I propose that he is squaring up the teams for another men vs. women match because he believes that the men are competent this time and he wants to see them beat the women.
This is his show for his entertainment as much as ours. He knows and we know that we're all going to watch it every week even if last week's firing was uncomfortable for us.
Elizabeth is a very strong candidate; watch out for her.

Ignoring the controversy about tv ratings and shock value, this competition is about elimination. who would you eliminate next. any good and justified reason would be accepted. the teamwork is required, but at the end one has to justufy himself/herself. so why would someone put his neck in line ? are you here for teamwork or to get selected ?

[mark]

that's the way life is

[New Guy]

For all you poor people who feel betrayed by The Donald, and say you will never watch again...who cares?
Do you really think he does? For every one of you who are crying on your remote and promising never to watch again (yea like thats gonna happen) there are 100 who heard about the controversy and will take your place. Enjoy your re-runs of Nanny and the Professor. See you next week!

[Loren]

I think that many people (including The Donald)may have missed the logic behind Bradford's decision to forfeit his immunity. Far from being impulsive, altruistic, or motivated by loyalty to his teammates, his decision was a strategic decision to take a calculated risk whose likely benefits outweighed the seemingly small chance of an unfavorable outcome.
To begin with, it did not seem likely that Bradford would be chosen to face elimination. He was a strong and valuable member of the team, and was therefore not only critical to the future success of the team, but also someone you didn't want to go against in the boardroom. In addition, even if he was chosen for the final four, it seemed unlikely he would be eliminated due to his strong performances in both episodes. Also, Trump had seemingly nothing to gain by firing the strongest candidate in the group. In fact, such a decision would likely be detrimental to Trump if he valued the strength of his emploees.
Now let's examine the likely benefits of Bradford's move. Firstly, he would be signaling his confidence in his performance so far in the competition. Certainly the Donald would reward, not punish, well-founded confidence. More importantly, by sticking his kneck out Bradford stood to gain the respect and admiration of the team, which he had lost to some extent due to unilateral decisions during the first challenge. Anyone who has ever managed a group of employees, or played on a sports team for that matter, should know the importance and power of the respect gained by going into battle for your teammates, or by taking one for the team. Had Bradford's maneuver worked, he would have emerged in a much stronger position within Apex.
So what went wrong. I can think of two possibilities. The first many people have suggested: that the Donald loves to expose vulnerabilities and punish weakness, in this case some sense of loyalty to the team. However, I am willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt and argue that he fired Bradford because he refused to defend himself by showing the calculated reasoning behind his actions. Bradford did finally give his explanation in the cab ride home, too late to help him (unless the breaking of the rules in next week's episode involves Trump admitting to a mistake and reinstating Bradford). At any rate, Trump likely fired Bradford either because he felt the decision was impulsive and not thought out as I have suggested, or at the very least because Bradford failed to clearly explain his reasoning when his kneck was on the line. One may consider this harsh when one takes into account the pressure faced by Bradford in the boardroom, but if Bradford wasn't prepared for all possible outcomes of his decision, he shouldn't have put himself in such a vulnerable position.

[ohpuleaz]

Mr. Trump's tv mask is finally cracking. This boardroom is proof that if Trump says the "Sky is green" if you want to remain in his shadow, you darn well better agree. He's old school yes man.

Mr. Trump, Carolyn et.al. misinterpreted Ivana's OMG carpping after the Bradford firing. Here's how I read it. She called in Jennifer and Bradford with the idea they would back her on Stacie. First problem: never count on anyone but yourself to cover your arse. You bring three people into the boardroom you then become the Shark Bait. That's the only reason why Trump has the option this season. Three people ganging up on the team leader. She was OMGing about Bradford being fired. She expected everyone would back her and Stacie would be fired. Too convinent and no one would tune in for Episode 3. These witless candidates forget it's not about them, it's all about NBC!

And this assinine carp about "failure". Mr. Trump's view of failure is bizzare. The women are acting like the Wife of Bath from the Caterbury Tales. When you are involved with the task, it is team work, when you are one of two or three called into the boardroom, then it's about you. Simple.

Oh yeah, and Mr. Trump's dig on higher education B-School's...who the hell is he kidding? He surrounds himself with the best educated.

Also, the man owns every stupid beauty contest. This man is so stuck in a "I Love Jeannie" time warp. Yes Mr. Trump sex sells. But from the way you were blithering on about it in Boardroom 2, the impression is that you believe women should be seen, and not heard. In other words, it sounds as if he expects the women's team to hike up the skirt and deck out the push up bra's. Ahhhh can anyone say "ratings".

[Vasudev Brahma]

IS OMAROSA UPTO HER OLD TRICKS AGAIN?

After watching the first two episodes of Apprentice 2, now many people are veering towards the conclusion that Omarosa, while a ticking timebomb in apprentice 1 for all her colleagues, especiously ruinously for Kwame, no doubt, was also a great personality with good intelligence and an innate knack for catching the viewers' attention with her deadly antics and precision comments. The NBC rewarded her contribution for Apprentice 1 series by asking her to post her commentaries on the episodes of the new Apprentice 2 series. They must also paying her big bucks for doing that, I am sure. It seems that Sam Solovey, another famed charecter from Apprentice 1 series, has seized the opportunity that Yahoo TV has provided him and has been posting his comments on the episodes as soon as they televised on the Thursdays every week. Yahoo TV web site was better because of Sam's commentary on episodes 1 and 2 and NBC TV web site was better because of equally good and lucid commentary by Onarosa on the episode 1 of Apprentice 2. Does anybody know or will NBC volunteer information or would Omarosa herself provide inforamation about why she has not posted her commentary on episode 2 of Apprentice 2 series. Is she pre-occupied with more important tasks? Has she some problems or some quarrels with Apprentice 2 production or editorial team? Or is she plainly pulling a fast one on NBC and others, once again? I am curious to know what is happening here?

[dolphin]

Ivana's OMG was not because she herself wasn't fired but because she didn't expect Bradford to be fired. did u see her and Jennifer exchanging glances after that ... as if "OMG - what happened , this was not what we expected. we expected Stacie to go" Trump's comment looked like he failed to fathom the actual reason.

I am not sure if Trump saw that if Bradford was gone how would the women perform now. The past two episodes saw Bradford was better than all the women. Okay now take away Bradford and just plain see how the all women team perform. (tv ratings and interest)

and why Jennifer was brought in is what i have seen a woman's way of working. Jennifer was brought in not because Ivana thought she performed less , but because she felt that she can find a sort of support with Jennifer in the room. Lack of leadership what you may call. was it Jennifer who first suggested Ivana as project lead ?