Is the series winner decided by who wins the final task, ie like who makes the most money for selling something - or does the final task tend to be one where no actual definitive result is possible and it's down to Sugar's interpretation who did the best?

If it's the latter, does he also bring past performances into play or is purely who he thinks did best in the final?

Cheers

Neither really - Sugar will just employ the one he wants regardless of anything else.

On the face of it the final alone decides who wins.
In reality the final is always structured such that a winner isn't decided by any measurable means - ie no sales quantities, no items to collect. Every final has been a presentation with industry worthies feeding back to Lordalun, who then puts his spin on it and picks the winner based on that.
Except he doesnt as historically two endings to the final boardroom are shot each with one candidate as the "winner" and then the two candidates work for Lord Sid for a few months. Lordalun decides close to transmission date which of the two is his winner and the relevant boardroom scene is shown.

Just to be pedantic, the final in the first series, had Saira take more than double Tim's ticket sales. I think in the second series, Ruth was slightly more financially successful too. That only goes to prove that it is spun to suit the one chosen off screen. Series 3 onward have been concept, then a consumer product and presentation. Though unlike the property concept of S3, they have nothing to do with any business that Sugar runs (or is likely to), the product item is perhaps more tv viewer friendly (ie easier for us dumbarses to understand )

Past performances seem to count for nothing.

Joanna had the best record on tasks (as did Lucinda a couple of years ago), but both were eliminated at the interview stage.

Chris's record is weak, but he's landed himself a place in the final.

The second one.


He can include everything. The decision isn't made until a few days before broadcast. I suspect he takes into account public reaction to the episodes already broadcast, and the legal issues about some candidates that only came to light after principle filming. Everything.

You would have to say Stella is clearly ahead on points and should she also outshine Chris in the final task but not get the job for 'other reasons', the programme would surely lose much credibilty?

Yep, Stella should have this in the bag.

She has proved herself to be a far stronger candidate to Chris (whom I like also). The final should just be a formality.

Lord Sugar does seem to take past performances into account, or maybe he chooses his winner and picks out the relevant facts needed to defend his decision.

On the You're Hired show following the final, after Lee won he pointed to the fact that he had never been in the bottom three in the boardroom, and he did have the second best win/loss record of the series (just 1 more loss than Lucinda)
Plus, after Yasmina won, he acknowledged that she won all 3 times as project manager and that when leading the team in week 2 she immediately concentrated on the very thing that caused the girls to lose the previous week - the costs. Let's just casually leave out the Sandalwood/Cedarwood fiasco, afterall I think that was more of a mix-up in ingredients rather than just going about it in the wrong way like in the cleaning task.

You've got to remember - they have both been working for Siralun for a year already by now - because of the scheduling delay of this series on account of the election.

Who he picks very much depends on how he finds them over that time. Even then, its not just sales. Apparently Kate sold 4 times as many Amscreens as Yasmina last year - but he still picked Yasmina.

I understand that this year the prize is not just a 100k job for a year - but something more management oriented with a larger budget.

JJ

True to a degree but that the finals are deliberate arranged so that there is no outright winner.

And so Sugar can choose to emphasise any points he wants to in order to pick his candidate.

So, for example, if one team comes up with the best flavour and the best advert and he wants the other candidate he'll concentrate on the presentation and the design of the label.

But its inherently got a credibility problem anyway.

The definition of apprentice is never spelt out - arguably Joanna would be the best fit this series as someone young, inexperienced and who has shown real raw potential.

The job determines who is best placed to fill it - both in who could and who wouldn't fit it. chris and Stella are very different they might not both fit the job.

The period spent working for LS could be decisive and remove any quesions left on the show.

History looks different when evaluated with time.

He hasn't got his best candidates to the final.There's very often a silly firing and his choices are driven by things unrelated to the show like life stories, TV needs and people blagging (Bagging?) him.

How he counts the last task is often random.

How you count points so far depends on what LS believes he has seen from whats happened so far. If you follow the story put together by the editors so far, Chris has the major plus of his tour week negotiation on his side and is better at sales. Stella is usually steady, but has no really big highs and the truffles disaster keeps on turning up on the summary shows as a big, informative, error. I agree Chris hasn't got much in his record, but thats because I don't think he had whats been spun as the one brilliant moment in the series. You count what you see.

Ah, that scene had my all-time favourite Apprentice quote. Yasmina's worked out that they have to count half the cost for the perfume for some reason I've forgotten. Then Nick points out that they chose Sandalwood and that therefore they've just spent £400 on the perfume alone. Yasmina starts to argue with: "No, half of fourhundr...shit!"

I did heart her.

It lost it in 2007 with the Simon/Kristina final if that's the case.

Ironically a very similar final to the one we have now. Well-educated toff with little experience vs slightly older, quite stubborn working parent who seems very efficient.

I supported Simon back then, but this time I hope things are the other way round.

But he'll do his best to take both into consideration.
Or, at the very least, put a spin on it so it suits whatever he's decided.

Joanna would have been the real fairytale rags to riches story had she won, but feel her challenged petered out towards the end.

I think the term 'apprentice' could be applied to anyone aspiring to do something at a higher level to which they had previously experienced, so think it is a fair title for the show, despite the bullshit some of the contestants come out with about how much money they make and how successful they already are

I have to disagree with you re Chris and the tourism negotiation - I really believe he didn't know what he was letting himself in for there and that it was a mistake on his part that he agreed to such a deal - luckily it worked out well for him though - but absolutely no way was it an act of genius

It's also worth noting that, particularly for this series, the job may have changed between the time they filmed and the time he made his final decision.

It seems odd that someone like Sugar would effectively keep a job open for six months or more. It would be saying that for six series he knew of a £100k* job that needed doing and left it empty or that he knew of a £100k job that was going to open in some months time.


* We know that the £100k is paid by the production company so the job may not actually be one that really pays that.

Apart from maybe the germator task, chris really hasent been the reason the team lost. Hes done quite well for being on the losing side so many times

I agree. If you were looking for someone who needed teaching how to work in a big organisation, who needed some basic skills and who would benefit from having their business instinct honed, its Joanna. Starting with more skills and less instinct it might be Laura or Sandeesh or Jaimie who might find working for LS added just what they don't yet have. If you want to have someone to run something, its more Stella or Liz, if you want someone to sell something its Liz or Jaimie or Chris or Joanna. If its property CV s may drive it. If you want a gambler its Chris - but I don't think you can rely on him making you money.

I am with you on Chris - I tend to discount the shrewd decision too - we will see if it turns up tonight in the argument.

For both Lee and Yasmina it wasn't a job that others weren't doing already. He just added another position for them. At that salary, which he has mentioned in interviews, does cause some problems ie the others are paid less. Both Amscreen and Viglen are doing well, so there's bound to be some places available if push comes to shove.

Talking about past performances, I'm surprised Liz was considered the favourite when her win/loss record was pretty much on a par with Chris's.
Right up to the last task before the interviews (where she was fired), they had both won 4 tasks (1 as project manager) and lost 6 tasks (again 1 as project manager), plus they had both been in the bottom 3 in the boardroom 3 times. Yet Chris was constantly criticized for losing so much.

Stuart's record was slightly better with 5 wins (1 as PM) and 5 losses (1 as PM), and again was in the bottom 3 in the boardroom 3 times.
So if Lord Sugar wanted to blag his way to explaining keeping Stuart over Liz he could say that Stuart's past performance was slightly better.

Both Stella and Chris have been working for Lord Sugar for the last 6 months day in day out.

I expect his final decision on who to employ as his apprentice had far more to do with what they did in those six months than what they did on the final task - LS isn't in the alcoholic drink business!