This is what I don't get about the show. They could say anything in the pitches, because they aren't running a real company, so they don't need to worry about fostering goodwill, or having good customer relations. In the one year they were supposed to make a bunch of breadrolls, but they only made a tiny fraction of what they promised, so the PM gave the client some money back even though he would never see him again.
I've often wondered about this before, the same goes for the design task where they sometimes come out with "oh yes we can make the chair a bit lower/higher" or whatever.
I'm in two minds; on the one hand, in a realistic situation most new suppliers pitching a prototype would probably be willing to cater to the needs of a retail giant if it would help secure them some big orders. It's not like when they go into a pitch they have already produced huge volumes of stock. On the other hand, it does make a mockery of some of the earlier task fundamentals such as the creation of the product they are pitching.
Although probably not feasible within the constraints of the show I think the idea about letting them pitch and then revise based on feedback within a given time period would actually work better and would probably help the teams who come up with the best concept rather than the ones that execute it with the least flaws first time.
As for the fostering goodwill thing again that has irked me for a while, essentially in some tasks there is no need to actually have satisfied customers, it is just about one-off sales. Take the food tasks for example, in a previous series they had to create a gourmet takeaway and LS said something along the lines of "this needs to be high quality not any old slop" but there was no actual regulation of that in the process - no subjective rating by consumers or a panel, all that mattered was the team that turned the biggest profit on the day.
In the real world, if you served up some ropey food you wouldn't succeed in the long term due to customers not coming back and word of mouth. However in this one-day-only scenario, repeat business is going to be virtually zero regardless of how amazing your food is so there is very little incentive to actually produce good food, all that matters is how much you can sell it for and how much it cost to produce. Sell an unbelievably tasty meal for £5 that cost £3 to make, you get £2 profit. Sell some disgusting slop for £5 that cost £1.50 to make, you get £3.50 profit. Longer term the first option might be more successful, but not under this format.
Anyway coming back to the latest episode, I must admit I did think Francesca was 'well and truly stitched up' as she put it, it seemed very strange having her in the kitchen when she clearly had no clue about food - Louisa played a shrewd game there ducking out of it by playing down her own food business. Should she have tasted the food? Of course, but I'd have hated to be in that situation - on my own for pretty much the first time in the series (team of 3) doing something I know nothing about. Even if she had tasted the food, would she have had time to do anything about it (i.e. come up with something better, given she had no clue about cooking)?