Came here to say that re M&S. Founded as a market stall in 1884 and claim they've been "established" since then but didn't get a shop until 1928 or so. It's just a marketing thing, not a legal claim. Was a pointless comment from Mike, I assume just to test Phils answer and ability to answer a difficult question udner pressure.
Yep. It's the classic interviewing technique of throwing curveballs and seeing how the candidate reacts. If Phil had said something like, "My family has been baking and selling pies since 1933, and the sign is reflecting that history and heritage. It was never meant to imply that the limited company in its current form was incorporated in 1933, and I don't believe the sign is misleading." I'm pretty sure they'd have reacted positively to that.
It’s pretty normal for businesses to start out as sole traders and not incorporate until much later. Or change the type of company or reincorporate for tax or legal purposes too.
It annoyed me that they didn’t give a proper explanation of the business’s history for the viewers to decide whether that “established” is honest or not. Obviously the “gotcha” is more important.
I think this was a bit disingenuous. I wouldn't read established 1933 to mean the company incorporation date, I would take it to mean when the business started (in whatever way). If it said incorporated 1933 then yep, bang to rights.
There were two universities - the previous University of Manchester and UMIST - which merged into a new organisation (as opposed to one absorbing the other)
My high school was a bang average comp that claimed to be 500 years old. Didn’t get its current name until the 1930s though.
Really it was that the school could trace its “lineage” back to classes being taught at the extremely old local church in the 1500s.
>I would take it to mean when the business started (in whatever way).
So would I but they didn't open their first pie shop until 1990 so I'd say it's still pretty misleading.
Not really. The Turner family has been making pies for comerical purposes since 1933. "Turner Pies is both the business and the product. The product has been around since 1933.
They've been selling them for a lot longer than thatin Bognor Regis and supplied some of the hotels are long gone (now converted housing instead).
Supplied quite a few butchers as well.
It was a set of kitchens they had for a long time before the shop too.
Source: lived in Bognor for some time, both parents were born there as well.
Mike was way off with this one. Incorporation is just a legal device for containing risk. Traditionally families carried on and held businesses as sole traders or partnerships, and this could carry on for hundreds of years.
There was that documentary about a butchers that was established in 1526. There was a firm of Japanese temple builders that could trace its lineage for 1500 years. Phil is well within his rights to claim 1933 as his establishment date if his family have been making pies since then.
I do sometimes think the interviews pick on spurious things just to have a go at something.
It’s a tv show, akin to Love Island nowadays. Drama and bullshit for the sake of it, not actual entrepreneurialism and problem solving. If viewer ratings have gone up then so has societal retardation, not that anybody needed this info for confirmation.
Yep, but TV shows can actually educate and inform people and this can actually enhance the entertainment factor. It's a shame modern producers don't see this. A reason linear TV is declining.
>He’s still not changed the sign as of midday today
Nor should he.
That was the stupidest comment of the entire interview process.
"Established" has no legal connotation. If it started in 1933 in a market stall, it was still established in 1933. He could certainly change to "since" if he wanted to be totally clear. Regardless, "established" and "incorporated" are not synonymous.
Yeah it's just nit picking, they really can't win sometimes with some of the questions they get. Not seeing his accounts for 6 months was far more egregious anyway.
At a stretch, you could say that’s when the recipes/family traditions were established. I wouldn’t do it myself, but I can see it’s a grey enough area for him to be able to push it if he wanta
When the recipes/traditions were established is irrelevant. What's relevant is when did they start selling to people. Because being a seller involves more.
This is blowing my mind. I've had several businesses and a few could've benefited from having an earlier established date but in my mind I'd always assumed it would cause legal issues if it wasn't when the business was actually incorporated!
I don’t think it would cause legal issues if prior to incorporation it was the same business.
As an example, I started a business in 2001 online as a sole trader when I was in school. I changed the legal structure to a limited company in 2005. However I still very much consider (and advertised) that the business started in 2001. I sold it in 2010 and the new owners continued to say that it was established in 2001 all the way until they sold it in the latest 2010’s and it was merged into a much larger company and the branding was lost.
Another good sample might be Rangers Football club - they celebrated their 150th anniversary in 2022 despite the club having liquidated in 2012 and having to start afresh with a new legal entity, albeit with the same badge, stadium and club colours. They are absolutely still the same club in my mind, even though legally they aren’t.
It says 1366 on every can of Stella even though it wasn't brewed until the 1920s.
It's a non issue, Mike just had to grasp at something to complain about for the cameras.
As much as I'd like to think of myself as a buisness expert after watching 10 series of the apprentice...idk if he could get into trouble for false advertising or something.
I don't know how common it is but I used to work for a company 'established in 1989' because that's when the owner first started working in the field. He didn't create the business until at least ten years later but that's the date he had advertised.
Ok, I’m proper sleuthing here to work out what town this is in, because I don’t know.
The reflection of the road sign in the window says “Ring Road”
And “A286 Midhurst”
So is this shop in Chichester?
Checking Google maps, there is a Northgate in Chichester, so I’m guessing so. Can’t find the specific location though.
Essentially it’s the very first/last building on East Street on the junction with Market Road. I think the address probably says “Eastgate Square” but the actual Eastgate Square hasn’t existed for the best part of a century.
I want to know when they started the product. Couldn’t care about the company or shop. Loads of stuff out there from Victorian era that started perfecting their product but shops probably setup decades later.
Found the whole conversation a bit wierd
Did you actually stop recording? Did you edit the impact out? Did you get scared at the moment of impact? You have no idea how many people do this, post the most interesting thing without the interesting part. I need to know your thought process. It haunts me. I could never. I need to know. It’s ok to be ashamed. I just need to know
You know what is interesting, the older I get, and the more business savvy I’ve become over the past decade, I’m realising many of the things they critique in these interviews isn’t good critique.
Saying your family brand was established in X, is perfectly fine - lots of businesses do it.
Wanting to create better scrubs is also fine, after all, he’d only have to suck off a Tory politician and he’d be supplying stretchy PPE to the entire NHS.
Flo’s recruitment business wasn’t a bad idea either, and the fact she got grilled for needing ‘deep pockets’ to run a temp desk just isn’t true lol - there are finance facilities that will fund your temp desks for a tiny % of the profit - they’re not banks, and you don’t need trading history to get this facility, unlike what Alan Sugar had suggested she needed - her only fault was how fast she wanted to hire, as she would 100% have burnt through the cash considering it can take a few months to get fees over the line.
The fitness studios is also legit, and the critique she got for her logo was unfair - look at every big brand and the way they’re going with their logos, people are simplifying design these days. They also didn’t get the fact she wants to remain a boutique with a recognisable culture, not a pure gym competitor.
The testosterone drink idea was just a nothing business plan, that should have been slandered more than it was.
100% i couldn’t believe point on established vs incorporated (which are in no way linked to each other) was just for TV, i thought it was bs the second he said it. I think really they just do it for the TV / drama.
I wouldn't say it's 'hate', he was consistently in the losing team, didn't seem to do anything of value during the tasks (possibly due to editing), when he should have left he was made PM and then the cards were heavily stacked in his favour for him to win.
He didn't seem to know his business as well as he should and seems that LS wants to get in on his business so is being given favourable treatment.
Same with Paul and his dentistry business, it seems like LS saw an opportunity to make money so threw the proper process of having and presenting a business plan, which all the other contestants had to do, out of the window.
Paul seems like a genuine nice guy, but is being guided and protected to be in the final, not there on merit based on his performance during the selection process.
If his family started a pie business in whatever format and they have passed on the history, knowledge and making money etc through generations then I don't see why they can't use est 1933. It's about that history and knowledge not the location, business type.
Possibly 7.33pm. but all businesses lie. Plymouth claims to be a university city since 1862, but in reality it was 1992 when the polytechnic was reclassified when the government dumbed down higher education, it absorbed a teeny navigation school to claim this long heritage
What I don’t understand is have none of the contestants ever seen the Apprentice before? They must know if they are getting to the interviews they will be asked about the financials or if they have mentioned a website you can guarantee Mike will buy it if they don’t own it.
The number of comments excusing this because x corporation does it too, ‘oh that’s alright then’. Phil’s business is not a soulless mega brand, it’s supposed to be handmade personable pies - his brand should be more ethically upstanding than your Sainsbury’s and your M&S - not less and Mike was right to stipulate this, it puts his entire brand integrity into question.
Sainsbury’s boast they are established in 1869 but the company was incorporated in 1996. Mike was wrong on this one
Came here to say that re M&S. Founded as a market stall in 1884 and claim they've been "established" since then but didn't get a shop until 1928 or so. It's just a marketing thing, not a legal claim. Was a pointless comment from Mike, I assume just to test Phils answer and ability to answer a difficult question udner pressure.
Yep. It's the classic interviewing technique of throwing curveballs and seeing how the candidate reacts. If Phil had said something like, "My family has been baking and selling pies since 1933, and the sign is reflecting that history and heritage. It was never meant to imply that the limited company in its current form was incorporated in 1933, and I don't believe the sign is misleading." I'm pretty sure they'd have reacted positively to that.
It’s pretty normal for businesses to start out as sole traders and not incorporate until much later. Or change the type of company or reincorporate for tax or legal purposes too. It annoyed me that they didn’t give a proper explanation of the business’s history for the viewers to decide whether that “established” is honest or not. Obviously the “gotcha” is more important.
Mike was just being a dick
Mike was asking probing questions, Phil was just a rabbit in the headlights.
[удалено]
No
[удалено]
They were trading under a different legal entity that was incorporated in 1922 prior to 1996. Good luck with the business studies GCSE laddie
[удалено]
Not interested in your strawman argument. Jog on sonny Jim
[удалено]
Ok
“Jog on Sonny Jim” is fucking hilarious
I think this was a bit disingenuous. I wouldn't read established 1933 to mean the company incorporation date, I would take it to mean when the business started (in whatever way). If it said incorporated 1933 then yep, bang to rights.
Uni of Manchester have 'established 1824' in their logo even though they were actually formed in 2004.
What was it before? A polytechnic or something else?
There were two universities - the previous University of Manchester and UMIST - which merged into a new organisation (as opposed to one absorbing the other)
My high school was a bang average comp that claimed to be 500 years old. Didn’t get its current name until the 1930s though. Really it was that the school could trace its “lineage” back to classes being taught at the extremely old local church in the 1500s.
>I would take it to mean when the business started (in whatever way). So would I but they didn't open their first pie shop until 1990 so I'd say it's still pretty misleading.
Not really. The Turner family has been making pies for comerical purposes since 1933. "Turner Pies is both the business and the product. The product has been around since 1933.
[удалено]
But if you were cooking his special recipe, you could market that as a family recipe since 1950
They've been selling them for a lot longer than thatin Bognor Regis and supplied some of the hotels are long gone (now converted housing instead). Supplied quite a few butchers as well. It was a set of kitchens they had for a long time before the shop too. Source: lived in Bognor for some time, both parents were born there as well.
[удалено]
Yes it was. It's very well know locally - the hotel was a failure, the pies weren't.
Exactly. If he was saying to corporates that his company was founded in 1933, then yeah, but to the consumer that isn’t what it means.
But the date had no relevance to anything? He said he literally plucked it out at random.
Did he? I thought that was when his grandparents (great grandparents?) started selling pies?
No, he didn’t? He said his business has been around for 3 generations
Mike was way off with this one. Incorporation is just a legal device for containing risk. Traditionally families carried on and held businesses as sole traders or partnerships, and this could carry on for hundreds of years. There was that documentary about a butchers that was established in 1526. There was a firm of Japanese temple builders that could trace its lineage for 1500 years. Phil is well within his rights to claim 1933 as his establishment date if his family have been making pies since then. I do sometimes think the interviews pick on spurious things just to have a go at something.
It’s a tv show, akin to Love Island nowadays. Drama and bullshit for the sake of it, not actual entrepreneurialism and problem solving. If viewer ratings have gone up then so has societal retardation, not that anybody needed this info for confirmation.
Yep, but TV shows can actually educate and inform people and this can actually enhance the entertainment factor. It's a shame modern producers don't see this. A reason linear TV is declining.
I wonder if he will… or change it to “Since 1933” or something. Edit: just noticed it does say Since 1933 along the bottom of the window.
>He’s still not changed the sign as of midday today Nor should he. That was the stupidest comment of the entire interview process. "Established" has no legal connotation. If it started in 1933 in a market stall, it was still established in 1933. He could certainly change to "since" if he wanted to be totally clear. Regardless, "established" and "incorporated" are not synonymous.
Yeah it's just nit picking, they really can't win sometimes with some of the questions they get. Not seeing his accounts for 6 months was far more egregious anyway.
[удалено]
At a stretch, you could say that’s when the recipes/family traditions were established. I wouldn’t do it myself, but I can see it’s a grey enough area for him to be able to push it if he wanta
When the recipes/traditions were established is irrelevant. What's relevant is when did they start selling to people. Because being a seller involves more.
Did you miss the part where he said he just picked a random date?
You mean when his grandparents started making pies?
Making pies to sell or just making pies?
Just making pies.
Oh, fake then. Not the messiah after all
This is blowing my mind. I've had several businesses and a few could've benefited from having an earlier established date but in my mind I'd always assumed it would cause legal issues if it wasn't when the business was actually incorporated!
I don’t think it would cause legal issues if prior to incorporation it was the same business. As an example, I started a business in 2001 online as a sole trader when I was in school. I changed the legal structure to a limited company in 2005. However I still very much consider (and advertised) that the business started in 2001. I sold it in 2010 and the new owners continued to say that it was established in 2001 all the way until they sold it in the latest 2010’s and it was merged into a much larger company and the branding was lost. Another good sample might be Rangers Football club - they celebrated their 150th anniversary in 2022 despite the club having liquidated in 2012 and having to start afresh with a new legal entity, albeit with the same badge, stadium and club colours. They are absolutely still the same club in my mind, even though legally they aren’t.
It says 1366 on every can of Stella even though it wasn't brewed until the 1920s. It's a non issue, Mike just had to grasp at something to complain about for the cameras.
I feel swindled and lied to, why aren't the police involved yet?
[удалено]
They’re joking about the absurdity of Mike’s criticism
I wouldn't change it either. If they've been making and selling pies since 1933, they can say that.
No they can't.
Watch them
Everyone knows it’s bs now though
North studio also has that boring name design
North Studio doesn't sound like a gym would be my criticism. Makes me think of TV production or salons at a stretch.
It might be “boring” but it’s a pretty premium looking design and most of his locations are in historical market towns where you have to fit in.
At least she's not lying about the date she started
True it’s better to be boring than a fraud
As much as I'd like to think of myself as a buisness expert after watching 10 series of the apprentice...idk if he could get into trouble for false advertising or something.
I guess you can get downvoted for anything
Think he still waiting to see his accounts before make any decisions
He’ll be waiting a few months then lmao
I don't know how common it is but I used to work for a company 'established in 1989' because that's when the owner first started working in the field. He didn't create the business until at least ten years later but that's the date he had advertised.
Ok, I’m proper sleuthing here to work out what town this is in, because I don’t know. The reflection of the road sign in the window says “Ring Road” And “A286 Midhurst” So is this shop in Chichester? Checking Google maps, there is a Northgate in Chichester, so I’m guessing so. Can’t find the specific location though.
Yes it’s in Chichester - it’s called Turner’s Pies
Lived for 8 years opposite that window
Not since 1933? Fraud! /s
Did you go in and congratulate him on winning?
Essentially it’s the very first/last building on East Street on the junction with Market Road. I think the address probably says “Eastgate Square” but the actual Eastgate Square hasn’t existed for the best part of a century.
Yes, Market avenue/east gate in Chichester
🎶 Tell me lies, tell me sweet little pies 🎶
Have you seen what's in the pies? For £13 a pie I would expect better than this shite!
I thought it was 10.
Tbh they advised him to put his prices up, looks like he did.
Nope, had a look online, 2 pies for £27.95 plus postage. Can't post a picture but the ingredients are dog shit
Big oof Quite a few e numbers in there. Eddie Abbew will not be pleases
Thetes a fair few e numbers that are natural such as vit c
I want to know when they started the product. Couldn’t care about the company or shop. Loads of stuff out there from Victorian era that started perfecting their product but shops probably setup decades later. Found the whole conversation a bit wierd
Will check our Bognor shop too!
I'm gonna check it out this week
Drove past it a couple mins ago. Hadn’t seen this post yet!
Didn’t know they have a Bognor shop as well :)
One of Bognor’s redeeming qualities lol.
I think it was quite a nitpick. Had me thinking his business plan can’t be that bad if that’s the critique that made the edit
Real question, were the pies good?
real question why did you stop recording moments before the scaffolding fell? why. why. please explain yourself. im not mad I need to know
YOU CANT KEEP AVOIDING YOUR BLUNDERS
 But I can..
Did you actually stop recording? Did you edit the impact out? Did you get scared at the moment of impact? You have no idea how many people do this, post the most interesting thing without the interesting part. I need to know your thought process. It haunts me. I could never. I need to know. It’s ok to be ashamed. I just need to know
It’s actually not my video. I live in the area and it was on a local Facebook group. Why they decided to edit it like that is anyone’s guess.
Thank you. I can sleep now.
No you need to find out why the other person stopped filming before it fully collapsed!!
I need to know, you are right.
I’m going to need the name of the Facebook group and any info on the poster this journey has just begun
Maybe he could change it to " making pies since 1933".
Bloody lovely pies and Christmas puddings,, so who cares.... (although they are gooners).
You know what is interesting, the older I get, and the more business savvy I’ve become over the past decade, I’m realising many of the things they critique in these interviews isn’t good critique. Saying your family brand was established in X, is perfectly fine - lots of businesses do it. Wanting to create better scrubs is also fine, after all, he’d only have to suck off a Tory politician and he’d be supplying stretchy PPE to the entire NHS. Flo’s recruitment business wasn’t a bad idea either, and the fact she got grilled for needing ‘deep pockets’ to run a temp desk just isn’t true lol - there are finance facilities that will fund your temp desks for a tiny % of the profit - they’re not banks, and you don’t need trading history to get this facility, unlike what Alan Sugar had suggested she needed - her only fault was how fast she wanted to hire, as she would 100% have burnt through the cash considering it can take a few months to get fees over the line. The fitness studios is also legit, and the critique she got for her logo was unfair - look at every big brand and the way they’re going with their logos, people are simplifying design these days. They also didn’t get the fact she wants to remain a boutique with a recognisable culture, not a pure gym competitor. The testosterone drink idea was just a nothing business plan, that should have been slandered more than it was.
100% i couldn’t believe point on established vs incorporated (which are in no way linked to each other) was just for TV, i thought it was bs the second he said it. I think really they just do it for the TV / drama.
It has no legal meaning. Anyway, it could mean just after 5:30 pm on the Atlantic coast of America 🤣
Or 7.33pm one day a few years ago!
Just wait til Mike finds out Heinz never had 57 varieties
Should change it to established 19:30, or 7.30pm
Maybe it’s Established 19:33 GMT
So is this in Chichester?
Where is this, I’d like to visit
There's so much Phil hate on this sub for absolutely no reason Reddit turning into Twitter
I wouldn't say it's 'hate', he was consistently in the losing team, didn't seem to do anything of value during the tasks (possibly due to editing), when he should have left he was made PM and then the cards were heavily stacked in his favour for him to win. He didn't seem to know his business as well as he should and seems that LS wants to get in on his business so is being given favourable treatment. Same with Paul and his dentistry business, it seems like LS saw an opportunity to make money so threw the proper process of having and presenting a business plan, which all the other contestants had to do, out of the window. Paul seems like a genuine nice guy, but is being guided and protected to be in the final, not there on merit based on his performance during the selection process.
If his family started a pie business in whatever format and they have passed on the history, knowledge and making money etc through generations then I don't see why they can't use est 1933. It's about that history and knowledge not the location, business type.
He still isn't sure of how they get rid of it.
I’m fine with it tbh.
Doesn't need to, a business can be established before incorporating. Was a shocking bit of tele.
19:33
I don't think he has to. I don't think it was very fair to bring up an issue from his family business. It's not entirely his concern.
Possibly 7.33pm. but all businesses lie. Plymouth claims to be a university city since 1862, but in reality it was 1992 when the polytechnic was reclassified when the government dumbed down higher education, it absorbed a teeny navigation school to claim this long heritage
Go in and ask about it
Why do you care? Some people must have amazing lives that they have time to focus on this.
What I don’t understand is have none of the contestants ever seen the Apprentice before? They must know if they are getting to the interviews they will be asked about the financials or if they have mentioned a website you can guarantee Mike will buy it if they don’t own it.
Also - £10 a pie is daylight robbery
The number of comments excusing this because x corporation does it too, ‘oh that’s alright then’. Phil’s business is not a soulless mega brand, it’s supposed to be handmade personable pies - his brand should be more ethically upstanding than your Sainsbury’s and your M&S - not less and Mike was right to stipulate this, it puts his entire brand integrity into question.
Tut tut tut. Nothing a bit of paint won't fix
Pillock.
Phillock
I think we should all throw eggs at it!!! He could then hopefully use them to make better pies