I was not fond of either finalist but based on the final task and interview I felt Sugar made a mistake. James really took some initiate and went qagain the grain of public opinion because he had more confidence in his own idea and I actually prefered his viral ad too.

But the final kicker for me was the final stage where Lord Sugar gave them a final interview. They were both good there and then POW, WHAM, BOFF! You could see James really got Zara on the wrong foot and see how she was unsure and lost confidence when he parried her negative points towards him. Zara was nearly speechless.

I think Zara is a very deserving winner and am pleased that she won.

Like you, I didn't like either finalist much, and the success of the games was down (mostly) to the programmers rather than the candidates. I think the deciding factor for LS was when he asked them how they would use the prize money; Zara had a concrete plan whereas James just waffled about "studying economics" - not likely to impress LS IMO.

I thought James had it in the bag right up to the moment when AS asked what they would do with the money and James had no business plan.

James' ad had very little, if anything, to do with his game. Zara's game was derivitive but at least the ad tied in with it. I too wonder how much input either of them actually had to the games as programmed.
Overall James performed better than Zara on the last task, but she beat him over the series. That James hadn't bothered to think of a business idea was an own goal as spectacular as Helen Milligans lack of a business plan on the last grownup apprentice.

Rubbish.
When AS asked what they planned to do with the money Zara new EXACTLY what she wanted to do. That was what won it for her. James just waffled on about economics.
Zara was a worthy winner.

How you can say he picked the wrong person is beyond me.

Zara was a worthy winner, but she wasn't the best overall businessperson in the process - that was Harry H for me.

James' bumbling comment certainly didn't do him any good, but I'm sure Sugar has made up his mind on the winner long before the final boardroom. Indeed, I would be amazed if he didn't know who his winner was before the final even takes place. After all, he has had several weeks to observe them - far more than any job interviewer normally has. The final task itself is just window dressing, really - it gives us something to watch and the illusion of competition.

Not sure what he was thinking but the tasks explicitly tested Zara's ability to do exactly what she was offering to do - there's an awful lot of advertising skill/photographic skill tested in the later rounds.. She passed. He tried Zara out with all his usual anti-female lines - not practical, follower, cautious and his usual anti-intellectual ones - good at words, a presenter. He either knew the arguments were rubbish, was impressed with her defence of them or just didn't think James should win.

James heard the arguments and thought that was the base to launch tn attack on Zara - but he probably ended up repeating arguments Lord Sugar didn't believe and had no substance anyway. Zara didn't need to defend much, and Nick and Karen could defend her. Nick and Karen could also turn the negatives back on James own failings as soon as he went negative. Zara was smarter and spotted the big hole James had just dug and understood why it was such a big hole with this interviewer. She pointed out the hole, which Lord Sugar was already beginning to react to , and then had the good sense to stand back as James dug a deeper grave and Lord Sugar buried him.

Thats before you get to the record over the series and there Zara gives a good version of Kate and Liz with a bigger role leading, some more artistic flare and a stronger more forceful boardroom perfromance. She particularly did an excellent job in the boardroom spotting and defusing threats and spotting who should and would go - but she managed to get there before Lord sugar said too much - which allowed her to escape from the trap of sounding like she was repeating him. On the other side of the equation, James's politics game was immature and didn't nmatch his ambition and his hyperbole about being creative and a leader didn't match his record. At that point , he may have sounded too much like Stuart Baggs or Jedi Jim. Offering to use the money to become an economist was rather like prodding a bull with a red flag (or a large mine with a stick) but I wonder if Lord Sugar would think he was a good investment anyway. In that sense, Lord Sugar may have have learnt from his experience with Liz Locke and Stuart Baggs and called it the other way for once.

My feelings exactly. Zara's plan showed how Sugar's money would help her business grow and keep growing. James merely wanted something to fund his education.

Not only did James not have a business plan it sounded to me like he was expecting to spend the money putting himself through university to study economics. Once he introduced the topic of education I could visualise Lord Alan legging it out of the boardroom at full speed without a backward glance.
Not a big fan of "studying" things is Lord Alan. He likes a "doer"