Options
I'm surprised Liz didn't get a "With regret" firing.
parthy
Posts: 5,408 Forum Member
✭
Despite her having gone down in my estimations after last week's ugliness, I think she did deserve a "With Regret" firing. She was a good candidate.
0
Comments
Alex??
They're always a bit random though, Mona got one last year and I didn't see any reason why she got it rather than anyone else.
You've missed my point. I'm saying she deserved a "With Regret" firing. It wasn't a comment on whether or not she deserved to be fired.
Just kidding.
Well, it was tough one. Maybe he was looking so shifty because he knew he was keeping Baggs for all the wrong reasons.
I think it was that nice marine Christopher Farrell who got the "with regret" firing.
Perhaps, but in some ways I can see why he would choose Stuart over Liz.
Stuart can be moulded into whatever he wants him to be.
Stuart can be quite impressive in some ways and also amusing but not without many flaws.
I loved the bit where he said they had mutual respect for each other over the turf wars with Chris, I think he makes SAS giggle.
I hope you're referring to Liz there and not Stuart!:p
Liz being fired was a complete shock. I was sure it was going to be Stella as Stuart would be kept in to further entertain or annoy the viewers.
Maybe they were kept in for entertainment as per the task the other week!
lol lol lol! OP, I am also very surprised she didn't get a 'with regret,'.
Yeah, that's it... I never really realised it was based on his very personal feelings, and not around 'you've done very well, just not well enough'.
I was also suprised that Alan Sugar didn't mention Stella's rotten idea of Cockney London and then getting lost with her bemused group of tourists.
Yes, on police bail for fraud, sacked from his financial job, and a previous conviction for weapons offences.
So there's an element of editing in this too.
It seems LS only takes on people with previous business experience. So why put Liz on the show in the first place. Same with chris and stella.
That's even softer than a with regret I think
Not sure about the nice bit. I doubt Sugar would have said "with regret" if he had a crystal ball and found out a bit more about the guy! Just this week, Mr Farrell has been charged with mortgage fraud and could serve some time in prison.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1336862/The-Apprentices-Christopher-Farrell-charged-4-counts-fraud.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
I think from what he said to Jamie that he saw the actual tour as unimportant since other than additional income from tips it had very little impact on the success of the project.
Cockney London could be a big seller, and although they mostly showed her getting lost and the bus going through grotty backstreets, they also had a clip of them meeting a Pearly King, which would be very authentic 'London' experience, and she took them into Spitalfields Market area which she rightly said is off the tourist track but is really nice.
The pricing and selling of the tour were where it fell down and Stuart exluded Stella from those decisons and activities by making her swot up for the tour.
I don't think you could really blame her for the theme since The Brand made it clear he knowingly put her on the spot by choosing it. and she could have said that there were no other ideas put forward if she was criticised.
And I read something about an incident of domestic disturbance or something of that kind involving him and his wife. Unfortunately I cannot remember the details of what it was.
There were allegations that he had hit his wife with the knuckledusters but she did not press charges. He had a two years conditional discharge and fined around £800.
Apparently he was sacked from an earlier job for viewing/downloading porn at work.