I'm at a bit of a loss as to what she was supposed to have done wrong. She didn't like the school idea - she was right. She didn't like the sumo idea - she was right. When she calmly and eloquently pointed out that bank managers wouldn't like to roll around in sumo suits Alex lost the rag completely; shrieking down the phone like a fishwife. Subsequently, the managers were show grimacing at the sumo suits and Alan Sugar clearly hated the idea. Again, Leah was absolutely right. And is it Alex who gets the grief for this on DS? Nah, it's Leah. Funny that.

Well if she hated it so much, why did she just not go with it? She is PM and it's her decision, not Alex's. In Young Apprentice Sean Spooner was fired because he went with The Professional Woman cookbook, even though Maria screamed and shouted about it until he just gave in to her. Why is Leah any different?

Firstly, because her team didn't lose. Secondly, because, while she agreed to them getting it, she insisted it was only a fall back option. It wasn't used as an activity. They shouldn't have got it at all, but the lads did kind of pile up on her about it.

I think Leah's getting a very dodgy edit at the moment, to be honest. She can't have changed that much from when she was first on screen. She was lovely in the first couple of episodes and distanced herself completely from the bitching. Everyone has a few fraught moments every week, I'd imagine; the difference is, for the past couple of weeks we're being shown all of Leah's. On top of which, she's still not bitching and she's still smart and effective.

She doesn't bitch, I'll say that much for her. She just hasn't really shown that she's that amazing to me yet. She came across well in the early episodes because the other girls were bickering a lot and she stayed out of it, but since then most of the girls have settled down a bit. Now that she doesn't have so much antagonism to be compared with, I don't see what is so special about her. But of course there are other tasks that she can prove herself on.

I think she thought he was full of s**t, which he is a bit. Before the task was announced Luisa commented something to that effect to ?Myles.

At the same time, I think she was feeling jittery because she'd been on the losing team three out of four times and the team only won on the fourth task after triple-winners Jason, Jordan and Myles swanned onto the team. Sugar had been pretty blunt he thought the girls had been pathetic en mass.


I don't believe for a moment that she didn't want to win. It wouldn't be in her interests to be on a fourth losing team.

She did go on and on about him which was boring (although so did Alex in his weekly paddy). It's probably hard to cope when you think someone is full of it and then they tell you to throw the maps away, and keep insisting that oud is a fragrance. (They're aliens from Dr Who. Duh.)


She didn't call for a vote. I know they said she did in the boardroom, but it was Neil who called for it. (It's in the 10th minute of the episode if anyone wants to check.)

I'd say overruling the school idea was both decisive and a good move. It was a sh*t idea. She was probably right to change the theme after talking to the client too. Good doctors do change their prescriptions after actually meeting the patient (contra Sugar).


I thought it was the other way round tbh.


True.


It was a gamble, but it came off, whether through luck or judgement. If you give her the benefit of the doubt, it was a masterstroke which won them the task.

I agree that we have to give Neil credit, even though it hurts! I was astonished when he started his speech and it was actually quite engaging.


Agree with all that, but I think the problem was she didn't suggest anything else when they suggested the suits.

As they ended up needing them, pointing out that she knew how stupid they were wouldn't have won her much credit.

She is probably blue square premier now

Day 1 was terrible for Leah, she chose the wrong products and it was definately her fault that the electric bike and kids bags producers chose the other team...

However, I thought she did a good job on the selling day, she made some good sales for the kids bags, and she got the closest to a sale with the retro camper van. It looked like she wanted the team to win this time. So hopefully she'll pick herself out of this dip.

she goes next week imo.

It was her fault the team lost the products. She doesn't come across as enthusiastic but as sour and difficult.

How did she choose the wrong products? She wanted the same products as the rest of the team, didn't she?

I agree she didn't really seem enthusiastic enough for them (I think that's just her manner though; I think she felt she was being enthusiastic). It wasn't wrong to ask about discounts though, and I wouldn't be surprised if the other team did so also, though we didn't see it.

I think the "she wanted the team to win this time" is a bit loaded. I have never seen any reason on any task to suppose that she didn't want the team to win.

If you watch it back, in the boardroom Myles makes a comment along the lines of "in the brief ..." which is then cut short by an edit.

I'm 99% certain it's stated in the brief that teams must ask all vendors what discount they would be willing to give. The skill in getting that right is to read the person's verbal and body language to know when there is scope to push a bit harder and when you have over-stepped the mark. In the episode, I think we saw Natalie pushing the electric bike lady repeatedly, way beyond the point of being rude.

Neil and Jason certainly appeared to be selling the folding tent/trailer wossname at a slight discount: £10,000 and £10,500 as opposed to £11,000 list.

That said, I get the impression over the whole series that this year's contestants are more savvy about the tactics to employ on any given task -- prioritise big ticket items; schmooze manufacturers; sell to public rather than trade; start high then drop prices.

Difficult though. Lord Sugar's criticised people severely for not asking for discounts, and its lost several tasks. Depending on his mood and hindsight he can blame you for pushing, or not pushing.

Yep. I've mentioned on another thread that their £30,500 in sales appears to be 1x£10.5k (Neil) and 2x£10k (1 each). This would certainly suggest the maximum discount they had negotiated was £1k, which makes sense in real world terms too. I often wonder how much of a helping hand (i.e. direction) they get in the brief, but certainly it's hard to imagine that at least some of the candidates haven't carefully learned the lessons from previous years. They may look silly at times on the tasks, but none of them are THAT stupid.

He is frustratingly inconsistent at times, but like I said I'm pretty sure they are told in the brief to ask everyone for a discount - it's a sure source of friction that manufactures the opportunity for the kind of errors for which people get fired. My point is that candidates need to read the seller's attitude and body language. There is a point at which it should become clear that they will go no further, and some people are better at spotting it than others. And then some people will fail to read the signals, keep pressing hard because they think they're being tough negotiators, and then things go rapidly downhill. It's a fine balance - all part of a good salesman's technique.

I don't think she started well. I thought she was full of crap from the first task and nothing has changed. She's all 'me, me, me' and so busy thinking she's right all of the time and bigging herself up when she's actually pretty rubbish. She's had an attitude problem from the beginning and permanently looks like she's got a bad smell under her nose

In the first task Luisa had an unwarranted go at her, dismissing her for being "just a doctor". (I'm sorry, and you are WHAT, exactly?) In each of the first few tasks we saw Leah closing a good sale, so she's clearly established that she has a good sales technique. The bad attitude is certainly there - and it's unfortunate that she is one of those people who naturally looks sullen - but it has only really come to the fore since the Dubai task.

Again, this week, I'm not entirely sure why so many people are against her. She showed a lack of enthusiasm in one moment for one product - bad, but it happens. She asked for a discount once - I'm fairly certain the task brief tells the candidates to ask every vendor for a discount, so you can't really fault her for that. And we know she outsold Natalie on the stand, although presumably not Alex. who we saw sell a roof-box boat for £550, more than a third of their £1,479 total sales.

I'm no big fan of Leah's - sad to say it, but I think Luisa (who I really don't like) has the best business instincts among a pretty bad crop of girls this year - but I genuinely don't think she deserves the battering she's been getting.

He sure is!
Of course , There's a difference in seeking a discount when you're buying to trying to get a creator/producer to agree to allow a discount when you're selling on their behalf.

It still great to persuade them to allow you to discount as it gives you extra leverage to sell, but it has to be handled more sensitively and I think Leah and especially Natalie failed to read the signs

It could easily have been Myles nauseating manner that lost the products .

Absolutely, and as I've said I'm convinced that one of the stipulations in the task brief is "ask for a discount" - although I'm sure the candidates understand this type of task well enough by now to know that they should do that anyway.

I'm not sure Leah did misread the signs, though. From memory (and correct me if I've misremembered), we saw Leah ask for a discount once - which is entirely fair - and Natalie press much harder a couple of times, which is where I think she missed the vendor's signals and overstepped the mark. Of course, it's difficult to tell for sure in the brief edit we see, but to my eye Natalie was much more at fault than Leah.

Yup, she is the only female who has been consistently professional and she undeniably bright.

I saw Leah use the phrase 'you know yourself what it's like at a exhibitions,' twice to the box lady and once to the bike lady, neither seems to agree with her.

However I agree that Natalie's pushier style when Leah's request has already been rejected by bike lady was the one that would have got my back up.

I wouldn't do business with any of them apart from Leah, Jordan and possibly Jason, so what do I know

Are you talking about Leah? Your description only matches Luisa

Yes, that was an unfortunate turn of phrase which was clearly an attempt to build rapport but probably achieved the opposite.

It's like when people say "to be perfectly honest" to me. You can't be perfectly honest - you either are or you're not. The 'perfectly' is usually only dropped in as an indicator that they're about to say something critical about you, and that using 'perfectly' somehow justifies this.

He was polite. Nowt wrong with that.