We don't know that Jordan bought the props, do we? He was trying to keep track of the budget, but I doubt it was his decision. (Whoever did make that decision needs their head examining, though.)

I don't think Natalie is that strong. She had major depression as a child and self-harmed so I can't see her being tough enough to win the show.


http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view...ted-childhood/

Compared to the likes of Luisa and Leah she's seems a bit fragile but who knows, she may have more fight in her.

I thought Rebecca was going to blank Luisa for a second when they gave their final hugs. lol She just suddenly leaped over to Francesca , then gave Luisa a less involving hug.
She probably would have had the right to do so given how rude Luisa has been with her. But I think Rebecca was just a bit too dignified for that.

Though one thing I thought was interesting was on You're Fired Rebecca said she'll be very interested seeing how Luisa does going further in the process. She did it quite suggestively in a wink-wink kind of way. Does she know how well Luisa does or how well she doesn't do? Or maybe I'm just reading too much into it because one of the things keeping my interest is hoping Luisa gets a harsh dose of reality, which may happen if she reaches the interview stage and tells them she hates the corporate world.

YASS. I lived. The boardroom catfight between Luisa and Fran :drool:
I can tell LS wanted to keep Luisa for drama

Just one little problem with this. These people were NOT ''bankers'' at all, they were branch managers. The retail staff are a completely separate entity from the city bankers, any bonus they get is performance based, and trust me, it's not that much. They're completely unrelated to city bakers' wages.

My fella used to work as a cashier at Barclays and was on minimum wage like his colleagues. Every day without fail, he'd get countless people having a go at him for being a banker on a huge bonus. He wasn't, of course, and nor were any of his colleagues, including the branch management team.

People really ought to get their facts right.

Agree about the boss though!

Felt very sorry for Rebecca. Luisa (and Jordan) both showed themselves up as horrible people this week, and Jason is sooooo weak and pointless. But Francesca should have gone, it was a very badly managed task. Lord Sugar is still bleating on about it being a bad idea to hire a real motivational speaker, but that was the only thing they did right.

Neil's speech was "my dad died and now I'm the manager of the local 5 a sides parks"; how the f*** is that motivational? At corporate events I've been at we've had Sir Ranulph Fiennes, Alain de Botton and (very close to home) Karren Brady.

Feel like the wrong person went, but I think she'd given up to be honest, that house looks like a worse place to be than the BB house. They're all so nasty and grasping and vacuous. I think Myles and Kurt are the only ones I haven't seen being utter assholes (discounting Jason because he is a buffoon), and I can't see how any of them merit an investment. This series is just hideous. Whoever picks the candidates should go away and have a good think.

Jeez, what a horrible episode, watched most of it in one long cringe peering round the back of the sofa.

For Sugar to sit there and bitch about hiring the motivational speaker, the one actually vaguely professional bit of either of the days, just shows what's wrong with this entire Apprentice "process".

The funny thing is the show spends so long painting how completely incompetent every single one of them is its entirely impossible to believe that the ones at the latter stages are actually there for any real reason. It's gone a bit "X-factor: the tone-deaf numpties audition".

I wasn't surprised that Rebecca got so many green cards on YF. Clearly, based on who was most responsible for losing the task, Francesca should have gone (glad she didn't though, as I really like her). I think it would also have been reasonable to fire Luisa on the grounds of her admitted inability to work with other women (and her general unpleasantness). But Rebecca? Sheer nonsense.

While Leah did deserve some criticism for her handling of the task, I don't think indecisiveness was a fair one. Yes, she changed the plan - after talking to the client and realising her original plan was not going to meet their needs. There's nothing wrong with changing your decision in the light of new information.

Neil is doing pretty well, but I wish he wasn't, as I still think he's a huge big-head.

I don't think it was changing the plan that was the problem with Leah, it was that she changed the plan rather arbitrarily, and there was no evidence to suggest that the army theme would be any more successful than the other one. If she had changed the plan actually based on what the customer said, that would be different.

Neil is definitely getting The Winner's Edit at the moment - I can't stand him, but there's no way he won't get through to the final 2 (or however many get to the final stage this year.)

The task should have had the profit element removed, so we could judge the teams on their ability to devise and organise the events rather than scrimp on costs to the point it becomes a farce. Can the teams deliver quality?

And yes, in the real world, costs are important but that is dealt with by handing the teams a fixed budget (and not one that can be infinitely expanded for Jedi Jim's Harry Potter biscuit promotion).

The corporate catering task in Yasmina's series suffered in the same way. Teams "control costs" to the point where even the winning team loses, and would get no repeat business. Indeed, that may be why we have had to wait so long for a similar task.

Of course, this also depends on the producers getting their act together and structuring tasks properly.

Francesca did pretty much what Zee did. One candidate with a plausible reason (though Francesca's reason for bringing in Rebecca was less valid than Zee's for bringing in Leah) and one who shouldn't have been there at all. I'mnt a fan of Luisa, but she worked hard and effectively in the task and was not bklameable for it;s failure. In fact, by showing commitment and effort despite her valid feelings against 'corporate-speak bull', she deserved extra kudos. There were valid reasons for taking in Jason and the other J boy with the beard. Not Luisa.

I thought her reason for bringing in Rebecca was that Lord Sugar basically threatened to fire her if she didn't bring Rebecca back.

ugh i always miss these threads

Rebecca revealed on YF that Francesca had specifically promised her that she wouldn't be brought in. I guess that's why she apologised when she did it. I think she knew that if she brought back Jordan and Luisa (as I think she'd have liked) she'd be fired for bringing the wrong ones back. Actually, though I'd personally have fired Luisa, Jordan and Rebecca would probably have been a better choice.

Lord Sugar told Francesca that she'd be fired for bringing the wrong people back, after highlighting what he felt were Rebecca's failings on the task... She had no choice but to bring back Rebecca or be fired.

Francesca bought the props - she said so in the boardroom.

I think Jordan would have been a viable person to bring back, if the person whose spending he'd supposed to be monitoring wasn't the Project Manager. If Francesca had brought him back, her argument would have been "he didn't control my rampant over-spending enough" and I don't see that going down well as an argument. She might have got rid of him on the grounds that Lordalan doesn't seem to like him that much on a personal level, but even that is a bit of a punt.

"I'm gonna give you two the benefit of the doubt, you're 25"

No other reason for Rebecca being fired. This would not have held up in a court of law, and precisely why we need anti discrimination laws!!!

Having depression and self-harming in the past does not mean she isn't tough.

Her ability as a candidate is a different issue.