The only "mistakes" she made were not even her fault.

1.How was she to know the other team would offer to do the other jobs for free

2. It was reasonable to expect the people would accept the small sums of £100 and £80

3. Even IF she had offered to clear the jobs for free...the other team did the same so they might have been picked anyway.

Her bid to the desks guy was for him to pay them, not to offer him money for the goods. That's what Susan suggested and the idea was dismisssed.

They would have won if they had offered 50 quid for the desks, and sold them.

That's the name of the game. It's not like the other team had any information she didn't, and still did better.

She was the PM of the losing team... that's enough reason to at least consider the possibility of firing her. It's kind of how the show has worked for the last 7 series.

Oh no I know that perfectly...but it just seemed (in the edit at least) LS was considering her and Edna at the end.

He should have considered her. Lets say she ****ed up the first day due to no fault of her own. What did she do to save it on the second?

Business isn't about "ifs" or "could have beens". Do you think you could raise those three points with your bank when your business is on the brink of bankruptcy? Do you think they'd care?

For dramatic purposes then I guess. He seems to like to scare people into believing they were close to getting fired.. probably to see if they up their game!

She didn't understand the task; she didn't listen to people who questioned her understanding of the task; she cried when it didn't turn out the way she had thought; she spent the whole of the task trying to set up Susan as the one being responsible for the loss should there be one.

She knew she would score points by making everybody sound as if they were wasting time trying to decide who was to be pm and then stepping up to do it herself.
And she knew she would score points admitting to her mistakes in the boardroom. Well what else could she do? They were bleeding obvious.

On the basis of this task, Zoe had to go.

She only lost by £6 out of £700, which is less than 1%, so her team didn't do disastrously. Although she didn't get either of the set jobs, in previous tasks those set jobs have often turned out to be poisoned, so I wouldn't hold it against her, especially as they did almost as well without them. Susan happened to get it right this time, but she doesn't always, and Edna was on the same page as Zoe so I don't blame her for that, either. I don't think she was trying to set up Susan.

She was poor at morale management, with Glenn and Susan being better at motivating the troops. It wasn't a great task for her, but she didn't deserve to be fired.

I don't know if the hatchet-job done on Edna was justified, but she never stood a chance.

To be fair the only mistakes I seen her make were

1 Having no strategy
2 Then having the wrong strategy
3 Breaking down and demotivating her team (actually good on Glen there even if I don't really rate him)

That aside she played a blinder

But even the guy who was the Your Fired programme on BBC2 says he charges to take stuff away, so Zoe wasn't wrong in asking him for money to take away the stuff!! She just didn't know the other side were going to charge zero!!

Who then, based on this task, should have gone in your opinion?

Out of those three, and based on what we saw, Edna. Especially given her boardroom performance, which was hopeless.

Probably Zoe should have brought Leon back instead of Susan. Had that happened, we'd know more about what he did.

But Susan wanted to offer in excess of £100, so she was just as extreme as Zoe (albeit in the opposite direction).

Also, the guy on You're Fired insinuated that most rubbish disposal people do charge.

It was a task that rested on taking gambles.

Am i really reading this? She was one of the worst PM's i've ever seen, she made Vincent look like Bill Gates.

Rude to her team mates, clueless about what she was doing, emotionally weak/unstable, and on the 2nd day it was the team that held it together, nothing to do with her motivating them after spending the previous night crying!!!!

Agreed. She knew she'd score points with the 'not faffing about with the team leadership because we were losing money', and after that it was downhill only.

The OP reads just like a readers letter to Viz Magazine.

Zoe did deserve to go. Breaking- down, like she did, was enough reason, on it's own.

Oops, shoulda read this thread before creating my thread which means exactly the same thing.

Zoe was a bad PM, she wouldn`t listen to suggestions from her colleagues.
I couldn`t understand why Leon wasn`t one of those brought into the boardroom. What exactly did he contribute to the task.
As most PMs do they take in those they perceive to be the weakest overall & not the ones who were poor at the task.
She just wasn`t up to the job.

She wasn't, because the teams don't ever know what the others are doing during the task.

She is the PM, they are always automatically in contention to get Fired.

When you burst into tears when things go wrong your not a great PM.

Another pitiful decision from Sugar. She should've been booted.

He listens to that prick Nick far too much.

She should have been fired for taking in the ones she had a grudge against alone as Leon and Glenn were both a lot weaker than Edna and Susan, both of the girls did work on both sides, Leon and Glenn seemed to faff about a lot and Leon especially has been coasting along.