Sophie
Natalie
Uzma

Don't we usually have a poll? I couldn't see one...
I've made it multiple choice as I think he said 'at least one of you will be fired'.

I think Natalie should have gone. Didn't have strong feelings about her before now, but really...

Some things you can't be blamed for as PM but if a whole lot of average ideas come together to form one sh*te one on your watch that's not good.

The shrieky schoolgirl thing in the boardroom was just awful too. Dignity is in short supply this year (not that it's the first time).

Natalie. Messed up the task IMO. Wouldn't have complained if Uzma went but Sophie deserved to stay in my view.

Sophie, for not doing anything of note (except complaining about not understanding the concept).

I voted Natalie, but Uzma should have done more about the design, it was a poor effort.

Sophie wasn't at fault at all as far as I could see, but she's a bit quiet and doesn't add much to the dynamics of the show (like bitching and being obnoxious!) so that's probably the main reason she went

Uzma.

There should be an option along the lines of 'Every single one of the girls with the possible exception of Rebecca'. I'm excluding the latter as she did at least try to point out that the box was bobbins. Seriously, what was wrong with those women? A frigging box?!?!?

Natalie should have gone for me.

Embarrassing effort from Uzma given her so called 'design credentials' but for me, Natalie was a nightmare from start to finish.

I can't believe some people still try to use the defense that because their colleague is the 'expect' in a certain field, they just blindly follow their lead. It doesn't take a genius to see that what they came up with looked absolutely terrible. Just because you're not the designer doesn't mean you can absolve yourself of any responsibility- just take look at the abomination and veto it!

The screaming match between Uzma and Natalie in the BR was appalling to see as well. Don't they ever learn?
Uzma was embarrassing but for sheer shriekability, Natalie takes it, and IMO should have been fired.

She also acted all episode like Luisa's lapdog and has terrible people skills to boot by ignoring/ talking over Rebecca.

Sophie seemed nice enough although displayed nothing really of note, and paid the price. Oh well, I don't either Uzma or Natalie have what it takes to go all that far.

I wasn't pleased with LS decision. He had a go at Natalie and Uzma and ends up firing Sophie.

Natalie should have gone for me...... She did nothing unless Luisa approved of it first and refused to listen to the sensible objections which the more sensible members tried to raise (eg Rebecca!)

Sophie was a victim of flying under the radar, and although she wasn't responsible for the failure of the task, the fact that she didnt do much to enable its success didnt help her case...... LS's summing up was a bit weird as one minute he was harping at the other 2 and then - Pow! "Sophie - you're fired!)

I think Lord Sugaryness got it right actually. It wasn't Sophie's fault that they messed up but she was too young and inexperienced. He could see that she was being trampled on by the other women. She's better off waiting a few years before coming back.

Natalie was very poor and allowed herself to be manipulated by some of the others and Uzma was full of BS but ultimately Sophie didn't really contribute very much.

As much as Uzma annoys the hell out of me I can see why Sophie went. She wasn't likely to win and I would be surprised if the other two did either so it comes down to the question of entertainment value. As lovely as Sophie appeared to be (although she clearly has a sting in her tail for those who say You're Fired) she offered less potential entertainment value than the bickering harpies.

Wasn't Francesca coming up with the idea? Her and probably Uzma?

As much as I would have liked Natalie or Uzma to be fired, I knew it was going to be Sophie when she said 'I don't pitch, I don't design, I don't sell' etc...

She was obviously not willing to go out of her comfort zone and more than willing stay in the sidelines which isn't something anyone looks for in a business partner. Sugar would have been right to fire all three of them, but I do agree with his decision.

Exactly right that Sophie did herself no favours. It left the question "What do you do?" I don't think Lord Sugar would be interested in a £250k business plan for market research!

That said, I thought Sophie deserved one week more, and be made the project manager to see if she was capable of stepping up to the task.

Natalie's business plan involves design, and she agreed to this concept - I thought she should have gone.

BIB - I thought exactly the same. She should have been given the chance to prove that she doesn't 'hide in the background'.
I thought Natalie should have gone, she approved the idea and design, and furthermore, when Lord Alan asked Rebecca if she liked the idea of their item, Natalie was quick to pipe up that Rebecca had said nothing at the time. But she was sort-of stunned into silence when Lord Alan added that it was reported back to him that Rebecca was the only one who did raise objections - showing she just didn't listen or was plainly lying/too quick to blame anyone else.

I thought the same. Natalie failed to get any real grip on the task at all, whereas Sophie at any rate did her part of the task fairly competently. Natalie should have gone.

I was split 3 ways - during the task I thought Uzma was heading for disaster, but in the boardroom I felt she should be the most safe and had the most to offer. With Natalie freaking out while arguing, it was rather embarrassing and it showed that she was cracking under the pressure and couldn't handle the process, so I thought she was going.
But then, on reflection, I think Sophie had the least to give and had also had 1 warning for not contributing enough before.

Sometimes not doing stuff is as bad (if not worse) as doing bad stuff. I think that's what did Sophie in - never put herself out there.

(entertainment arguments are probably reasonable too, though!)

Any of them could have went really. I am glad Uzma stayed though.

What about the question of who actually makes you want to watch by being really hot? Sophie should have stayed on that basis

I would have fired Natalie, and then made Sophie PM in the next task to force her to show what she could do (or couldn't if that ended up to be the case). If Uzma finds herself in the boardroom for a third time Sir Sugar might typically start to worry why she's making a habit of it.

It wouldn't have mattered one bit what Sophie and the "research" sub team came up with, as the design team had decided what they were doing.

As for all this "flying under the radar" cobblers, it simply wont wash I'm afraid as the sub team did what was asked of it.

Whether it was simply the way the episode was edited, the boardroom came across like a kids playground, and frankly Natalie on what was seen onscreen couldn't manage a cockle stall, let alone a £250.000 investment, her "woman" management skills are non existent.

And as for Uzma, she should have gone, (no doubt its her business plan that's kept her in), and if she can get away with her performance in ep 3, she must really screw up to get the push.

Sophie's big mistake was openly saying 'I don't sell, I'm not creative, I don't pitch'... Suicidal. I get that she was trying to point out she did exactly her remit in this task, but she did make it sound like she would always just be a worker-drone to other people's ideas.

Also, especially in the early weeks, I think part of it is due to their business plans/industries:

Who have we had fired so far:

1. Jaz - education (Jedi Jim had a plan involving online learning which LS wasn't keen on)
2. Tim - food/drink (see Jane and Duane from last series)
3. Sophie - food (repeat no.2)

It was obvious that Sophie was going to be fired, up against Natalie (creative, fashion) and Uzma (beauty industry).

We've seen from the last 2 series the kind of industries that LS is particularly interested in. That's why the likes of Neil, Francesca, Jordan and Luisa are going to go the distance. Leah will be there on merit but she'll most likely fail on the plan, a bit like Nick from last year and Helen the year before.

Uzma for me. Amazing how much she's gone on about being a great designer yet the box on wheels looked absolutely awful! If designing is her best asset then I worry for her...

Can understand why Sophie went though, she has done nothing for three weeks and it didn't help when she said she can't pitch, design or sell