i don;t really get the point of this programme anymore - it has pointless tasks with results that completely miss the point -

i realise that this is an entertainment show but lets take the last show as an example:

they had only 1 day to produce an item and the "losing" team would have had repeat business and made a far better profit over time - after all anyone can make a few quid for 1 day especially if they're never seen again - i mean who on earth would buy a 2nd bar of that shite?

the task all really come down to selling only as well - why? after all doesn't Alan want an apprentice who does more than selling?

rant over

I think it's pretty well accepted that this is a comedy programme now rather than anything seriously to do with business.

Sugar is so wildly inconsistent both in which aspect of performance he examines for any particular task and the way he applies the 'rules' relating to that aspect.

It's obvious that the production team are editing the raw footage to give potentially inaccurate views of candidates and that the firings are biased towards keeping 'characters' in the process.

Despite all that it's still one of the most entertaining programmes on TV!

It didn't come down to selling. The team that sold the most, lost.

It's first and foremost an entertainment programme and profile booster for all involved...and for that you need to keep the viewers interested...which in turn means you need contestants who are watchable.

It's a bonus if they're employable as well.:yawn:

I think it is ludicrous to describe it as a comedy programme.

Clearly this is another form of reality tv. Probably much better described as light entertainment. Doesn't relate to the real business world in any way at all

Something that contains so many mistakes, both by the candidates and Sugar himself, that make you laugh out loud qualifies as a comedy in my book.


I think you mean 'unreality' TV.

The tasks were also tests of initiative, judgement, anticipation, leadership. To know what to do, not just doing what one is told. Paula would have made a superb product designer and merchandiser, but as manager and budget controller regrettably she failed. Siralan was most annoyed Paula described herself as someone in Human Resources, who presumably does not want to venture outside her own comfort zone.

Would I have given Paula a second chance? It depends on whether I was looking for a product designer which she was or a responsible leader which she was not.

The project leader of the losing team always goes into the sacking interview, so one chance in 3 to get the boot. Can anyone offer stats on how often it is the leader who gets the boot?

In series 1: 3 out of 10.
In series 2: 5 out of 10.
In series 3: 6 out of 10.
In series 4: 6 out of 10.
In series 5: 2 out of 4.
Total: 22 out of 44, exactly 50%. So that's higher than the 1 in 3 we'd get if each had an equal chance.

However, I still feel he usually tries to avoid firing leaders if he can. There is some distortion due to the "Alexa effect", where a poor candidate who ought to get fired is given a second chance as leader instead, and fails miserably and is fired then. I use Alexa's name because s2ep4 is the earliest example I can remember, but it's happened a few times since (eg Adam in s3, Michael in s4).

And low-brow comedy at that. How long can it be before we have fart jokes in the boardroom?

i think its a shame as it almost makes watching so called "reality tv" watchable

It is a shame, particularly because they 'dumbed it down' when they moved it from BBC2 to BBC1.

I'd like to see what would have happened if they'd moved it the other way, to BBC4, and got someone like Gerry Robinson to take on the AS role.

You do? Most people I know who watch it class it as comedy.

I think the fact there's never been Apprentice specials where you see what's happened to the winner - does anyone even know if Lee McQueen is still working for Sugar? - does suggest it's more about the content of the show rather than a serious job interview process.

It would be interesting to do one-off Apprentice winner episodes to see how they got on working with Sugar, what they were doing. Like other fans of the show, I have no idea what Lee McQueen actually does for Sugar. It seems once you become the apprentice you disappear from attention and I do think it would be worth the BBC showing the viewers what the winner of The Apprentice actually does. It might lend the main Apprentice show that extra bit of credibility.

I don't think fans of The Apprentice take it that seriously. It's all done for entertainment. I'm sure if Sir Alun really wanted a new apprentice he could find one via a formal job interview process and not by making a tv show!

Oh and none of the candidates is ever fired. This is a gimmick. To be fired you have to be HIRED and the point of the show is to hire someone. How can you fire someone yet to be hired? So you see how silly the show is!

I'd call it a comedy programme as well. Just think about what the apprentices are trying to produce each week and only a couple of days to the finished article.
I can remember the junk AMSTRAD produced in the 70's and 80's music systems, satellite dishes & boxes etc. that just managed to last the warranty period.
What does the AMSTRAD business do now?

He works for Amshold, developing digital display advertising.

Simon Ambrose still works for Sugar, in his property development company, Amsprop.

Amstrad was bought by Sky TV two years ago (it manufactures Sky+ and Sky+ HD boxes for them) - and has nothing to do with Alan Sugar since he stepped down as chairman last year.

Every year the employees get an all-expenses paid trip to Amsterdam, with as much Amstel Bier as they can drink.

Amstraordinary!

Product design is well outside Human Resources.

Yes, it makes sense only as a comedy programme.

Evidently, we're supposed to smirk as the smug desperadoes make fools of themselv es.

Lol! - very good

Product design is the very essence of a resourceful human. how many products are designed by computer?

Human Resources do not just run the Payroll. Many are involved in headhunting. I think Paula was trying to say cold-hearted bean-counting was not her thing, rather reminiscent of the much-missed Lucinda.

Unfortunately it was very much Siralan's bottom line.

Poor Simon, won't be much reward in property for the next few years.

Maybe Nick and Margaret will put a whoopee cushion on his chair and then giggle like naughty children when he sits down.