Not signed in (Sign In)
Welcome to The Watercooler, the companion forum to Northern Attack and all things concerning The Office on NBC.

Guests are free to browse the forums, although you will need to register for an account if you wish to participate in the discussions or use any of the advanced features of the forum (bookmarks, history, etc).

If you already have an account, please sign in now.

The Watercooler is powered by Vanilla, the sweetest forum on the web.

Bottom of Page
I just hope that you and I can remain friends: how long before Michael finally gets let go?
  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. >
31 to 43 of 43
Oct 8th 2007

13 percent is significant but by no means impossible. For all we know he crammed everyone into a smaller suite to save rent, and people lost their offices (hence the desk corral).

Sorry to be so British, but what is a desk corral?

Oct 8th 2007 edited

Michael Scott reduced costs by 13% when he took over as RM at Scranton without losing any staff...does anyone know where this comes from?

Believe that's the first thing David Wallace said to him in the interview in The Job, and it referred to the merger, not when Michael very first took over Scranton.

Another reason not to fire Michael is who would replace him. Jim doesn't want it, Stanley's apathetic, Dwight has zero leadership skills and zero respect from the staff, Andy's a moron, Angela's a bitch, Karen's gone. It would probably be pretty tough to convince someone at another branch or an outside hire to move to Scranton, and Scranton doesn't seem like the kind of place overflowing with management candidates.

Oct 8th 2007

It's not a common phrase, I don't think, but then again, I haven't worked in an office in three years, so maybe I'm forgetting. Anyway, a corral is basically a place where lots and lots of cows or sheep or what have you are penned together -- hence the "shootout at the OK Corral" that made the name of Wyatt Earp. It's also a verb, meaning, "to group together". So think she's referring to the way that almost everybody's desks are in the same little room, in circles like at grammar school.

Oct 8th 2007 edited

"Desk corral" is not a common term. I just see all those desks crammed into the middle of the room, and at Stamford they had orderly rows of desks with lots of space and perhaps private offices for some of the people. Scranton seems very much like a making-do kind of space.

And I am a serious cynic in real life, too!

Oct 8th 2007

That desk corral would drive me crazy, especially with the desks facing each other. Cubes aren't much better, but at least they afford some privacy.

Oct 8th 2007

Wow - now I know about desk corralling. And I also now know I sit right in the middle of a desk corral in my London building.

I just see all those desks crammed into the middle of the room, and at Stamford they had orderly rows of desks with lots of space and perhaps private offices for some of the people. Scranton seems very much like a making-do kind of space.

Really observant KarenX, something that hadn't even crossed my mind about the two offices. I noticed more how Stamford was very dark (similar to the kind of place Jim was in emotionally speaking), while Scranton was a much lighter contrast. But enough about pathetic fallacy...

Oct 8th 2007

But enough about pathetic fallacy...

Penises aren't pathetic, they're beautiful things (to a woman).

Oct 8th 2007

Hmmm. Well the thing is though, that even after David Brent (the UK's Michael Scott) had been made redundant, he continued to come back to the Office and harass all the staff, so it wouldn't be like he wasn't in it anymore...obviously though it would be THE END of DM Scranton as we know it.

This wouldn't work. For one, when Brent was fired it was the last episode of the show, and the scenes with him coming back are from the special. That was a one episode-movie type thing that would only work in a like situation. It wouldn't be feesable for entire seasons to go by with Michael just visting, the show runs on the fact that what he does daily set off a series of events that affects everyone else. He can only do that as a boss. Two, the scenes where he is visiting are beyond ackward, they are annoying. I never liked them and was glad when they banned him from the office. It would be the same with Michael, he would definitely come in emotionally bedraggled and messed up and mope around and just lose all the funny because you feel bad for him. Not that Ricky Gervais is a better actor than Carell it's just that he set up his character differently, so that you didn't ever feel bad for him because he's kind of a jerk. No, he's just a jerk.

Oct 8th 2007 edited

I just read in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MichaelScott(TheOffice)#ComparisonwithDavidBrent) that Michael Scott reduced costs by 13% when he took over as RM at Scranton without losing any staff...does anyone know where this comes from? And also does anyone know how he did it?

Believe that's the first thing David Wallace said to him in the interview in The Job, and it referred to the merger, not when Michael very first took over Scranton.

I can't find it....Here's what Wallace said:

Oh, great. I've been meaning to thank you by the way. You didn't lose a single customer during the merger, and you still managed to trim the budget? That is nice work.

No mention of staff (which he did lose in the merger, anyway), and no 13% figure. I think the Wikipedia thing comes from the pilot, but it's still off on a couple different points:

What is the most important thing for a company? Is it the cash flow? Is it the inventory? Nuh-uh. It's the people. The people. My proudest moment here was not when I increased profits by 17% or when I cut expenses without losing a single employee. No, no, no, no, no. It was a young Guatemalan guy...

Oct 8th 2007 edited

Yeah, but that guy sucked.

I was so busy looking up that quote, only to find that Nathan already found it. And that brings us back to the original question, when did they lose those customers, if not in the merger. He can hang on to all of Scranton's customers, incorporate all of Stamford's customers, even as he drives nearly all the Scranton staff away? But then he loses customers over prices? Incon, meet sistency.

Oct 8th 2007

I think those clients that he lost had less to do with his ability as a salesman and more to do with Dunder Mifflin still operating as if it's 1970. Those customers would have gone somewhere else regardless of who was branch manager. If I had to venture a guess, I would say the net flux of DM customers is negative.

Oct 8th 2007

I suspect that we have already seen the closest Michael will come to being fired in Branch Closing and his relationship with Ryan will be one long, mutually aggravating migraine. I would not be at all surprised if Ryan gets fired at some point in the next couple of seasons, though my hope is that he will stay on, get promoted, mismanage the company, and the show's final episode (X number of years in the future) will see Dunder Mifflin liquidated. Ryan will jump the sinking ship to manage a hedge fund. David Wallace will go work with Josh at Staples. Michael will become an adjunct business school lecturer in Scranton.

Jim and Pam? No idea what they'll do professionally. But they'll be fine.

Nov 25th 2011

Well, Science, and everyone else in the circle, I guess, I think Michael has about 7 seasons left in him. Yes, I said seven. No, seriously, I think the show will go on that long. But it won't stop after he leaves, it'll actually keep going afterward. Why....are you laughing at that?

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. >
31 to 43 of 43
Top of PageBack to discussions