Good evening Katie and Niall, and welcome to the final boardroom!

How does it feel to be here in the final two? Do you believe you've been one of the two best candidates this series?

Good evening Lady Sugar!

It feels really great to be here, and I'm really happy with my work in the final task! Yes I definitely do think I've been one of the two best candidates this series, and I think my performance in the interviews and on this task have helped confirm that.

Good evening Lady Sugar. It's great to be here (sorry for the delay) I do feel I've been in the strongest candidates this series and it's great to be here in the final.

Not sure if Katie's here so I'm going to continue questioning and she can catch up.

How did you feel leading this task? Which parts of it did your team help you out with?

I felt I did a great job leading the task, the team had no disagreements at all and I feel we worked well together.

Me and my team brainstormed ideas together, Kevin suggested the Extreme activities idea we ended up going with because I thought it was a strong concept and the team agreed. Kevin and Tyjet both gave me ideas for the concept on night 1 and gave me some feedback on things like the design and pricing.

I wrote the entire pitch minus the features part and aside the contents picture which Justin did. The rest of the pitch was completed by me as I wanted to show my skillset and I wanted to write the pitch myself.

I think I did a good job leading this teak, however I was aware that the task was all about me and showcasing my skills so I made sure I did as much work as possible to show that. I did lots of work with my team on the first night brainstorming idea, we then put some my ideas together with some of theirs and did some market research, and in the end we decided on one of my ideas. After that I wanted to make sure I was able to put lots of hard work in and show off my full range of skills, so I completed all of the pitch myself, and sent it off to my team to check it, point out any mistakes or anything and make suggestions for improvement. George in particular was really helpful with proof reading

Alright. I'm going to start with Niall's idea.

Your magazine is based around reality TV. A lot of people enjoy one or two reality TV shows but there wouldn't be many that would care for the numerous selection your magazine is promoting. Do you think the mass appeal is there?

I think there definitely is mass appeal. I do think for starters there are lots of people who enjoy watching lots of different reality TV shows, as generally if you enjoy watching one then that will probably mean you enjoy others, as lots of them are quite similar. But even if you only enjoy watching one or two and would want to read it for them, I don't think that's a massive problem - for example if you only enjoy watching The X Factor, they'll always be a really large part on it with lots of exclusive interviews and information, and I'd say considering the fact it's already at a pretty reasonable price you'd probably get your moneys worth through that alone. However I would say it's more likely that if you enjoy watching one reality TV show you'll enjoy watching loads of others, so I think the mass appeal is definitely there!

Katie, looking at your pitch, I see you've gone with "one main activity per issue". Don't you think this will limit the magazine sales? There's the risk that people will only buy select issues rather than buy it every week.

Also what will make people buy your magazine rather than looking up the information you provide on the internet?

On your point about the one activity per issue, we would sell the monthly subscription which is cheaper would reduce the price per unit if you order it monthly. I think people would buy more issues than just one as the magazine is aimed towards extreme activity lovers and I know several people wouldn't stop buying the magazine after one activity as most people who enjoy one activity which our magazine offers, will enjoy several of the activities for instance, abseiling fans will generally like rockclimbing, bungee jumping, skydiving, paragliding and other height related things. For those two main reasons me and my market research said people would buy more copies than just one. I do think people would be more likely to buy a magazine which offers something different each week rather than one which concentrates on the same activity over and over again so I don't think our sales would be limited rather the opposite. There is nothing similar in the magazine marketplace after researching it so I think the concept would be successful.

As for why should readers use the magazine rather than the internet, I suppose the same point could be argued for any magazine. Our magazine would include expert opinions so would be a high quality magazine. We also would offer more than users can find on the internet such as indepth descriptions of the activities, pictures, regular Question & Answer sessions with professionals, our magazine also introduces the readers to new activities they mightn't have heard of and gives them details on that which they wouldn't be able to do through the internet so I do feel the magazine offers more than what the internet would offer readers. Also, not everyone has internet access but anyone can buy a magazine.

A question to both of you: What do you think are the strongest and weakest parts of each others pitches?

I liked the 'features' part of Katie's as I think that helped to give some originality to her product and stop it from being the same as anything else you'd find on the internet, I also thought some of the graphical stuff was good as well, such as the contents page. I had some issues with the concept though as I didn't think it had much longevity with the concept of doing one extreme sport per issue, as although there might be lots of extreme sports, there would no doubt eventually come a time where you run out or start having to theme the magazine about sports that nobody really cares about. I thought it maybe could have been a bit more original as well as I did a google search and it does seem like there's been a few magazines based on extreme sports around before, whilst I tried to create a type of magazine that hadn't been done before.

I think Niall's pitch is quite lengthy and very detailed in places which is really strong. The issue-by-issue part of the pitch is strong and the general presentation is good.

The weakest point, honestly I think the actual idea itself. There's nothing really original or creative about a reality tv magazine - there are so many reality tv & gossip magazines and websites such as, Digital Spy for instance. There's things like TMZ, OK, Now, Radio Times, Closer, Hello etc which offer reality tv / celebrity gossip. I don't even read magazines and I've read half the stories on the magazine cover online and I'm sure it's in all the magazines too. Things like the X Factor & Strictly Come Dancing are on the front cover of most magazines & newspapers, I question just how creative and original the idea is and I feel Niall's pitch is written brilliantly but the idea really let's it down and the concept should be the key thing.

I personally just think creating a new magazine which has no competitors / nothing similiar to it but has demand for it, is a stronger concept than creating something which is similiar to loads of existing magazines. I feel it's important to take risks, be creative, be original and be innovative especially on the final task.

ETA: I don't mean it to sound like I'm bashing Niall's idea - his pitch is well written but The X Factor & SCD are on the front of every TV magazine I just don't think it's creative, original or innovative in any way.

I wouldn't really say no one cares about the my magazine talks about. If no one cared about them they wouldn't exist. I listed about 25 sports in my pitch / answers because doing a different sport / activity each week would ensure the magazine doesn't get stale. Also I don't agree with the BIB at all. How many magazines have Strictly Come Dancing exclusive / X Factor shocker on the front cover in comparison to things like abseiling / rock-climbing. I'd say I tried to find a magazine which hadn't been done as much where as you just copied everything which already exists.

It's a magazine I'm sure loads of people would buy. Is it creative, original or innovative. In my opinion not really but I guess we'll agree to disagree.

I understand where you're coming from but coming from another perspective, maybe putting all Reality TV into one magazine is innovative considering people are so interested in it.

Perhaps the reason there are no Extreme Sports magazines is because there's no market for it?

The reason I chose a market which doesn't exist is because task after task you've told the candidates to be creative and be original with our ideas and I think going for something new and emerging does that and is a better concept than just following what the market leader does. As they say when your at the top there's only one direction to go.

I would say Extreme Sports magazines is an industry which is growing and I feel creating a magazine there isn't much similiar to would ensure my magazine would have no competition. Honestly me, my whole team and my market research ruled out creating something similiar to market leaders as it's all been done before, isn't original and has too much competition. There is a market for extreme sports, so many people participate in the activities, more and more each month statistics show so I feel developing a magazine to meet that is an original and strong concept.

Okay, moving away from the task now and onto why you should be my Apprentice.

What qualities do you possess that the other candidate doesn't?

I mean you would probably have to end up getting to sports nobody cares about because you would have already gone through all the good ones quite early on. And it's not the fact that it reports on SCD or X Factor that makes it original or innovative - it's the fact that it's a magazine completely based on Reality TV, which is something that's never been done before. I think people take originality as too much of an important factor in this game sometimes, yes it's important, but not always the most important factor. I think it's much better to take a well loved concept that you know has a big following and lots of interest in it, and try and make it into an original and innovative idea, rather than create something that is completely 'original' and never been done before, that in turn has no interest and following and nobody would buy it. There are lots of aspects of magazine other than the SCD/XF reporting that make it original anyway.


Yeah, that's precisely my point and what I was trying to do with the magazine.

I'd say I'm more of an all rounder than Katie. I do think she's really strong in some areas, but I'd say in this task alone I've been able to show that I am able to apply myself to anything you throw at me and perform it to the best of my ability. I think I've tried my hand at pretty much everything possible throughout the competition, and always completed it to a high standard. I think what Katie had above of me before this task was that she was deemed to be a harder worker than me, however I think I actually turned that around with this task as although I don't know what went on for her throughout the task, I think from looking at both pitches it looks I put more work into mine and it's more well thought out and detailed. I'd also say I've been easier to work with and more approachable than Katie, as a considerable lesser amount of candidates have had problems working with me than they have with her - and I definitely think it's important in business and to be your next apprentice that I'm easy to work with and am able to easily maintain a good working relationship.

I feel I've a much more varied skillset than Niall does and also a better ability to understand ideas. Before Niall goes on about how great he was on Task 3. Let's remember Task 3 - I was the one who came up with the winning idea which was praised by all three buyers - I contributed to the two best selling pitches which shows I'm good at pitching and I priced all three of our holidays and our pricing got praised by all three buyers / the other team got criticised for their pricing. I was the driving force behind my team for that task not Niall contrary to what he believes. If I wasn't on that team you would have had a different idea and different prices and they were the two reasons we won as all the buyers said.

The creche task I again showed this varied skillset I was praised for my management skills, design skills and ability to create a strong product by you for our list of activities. I've been praised by several viewers for my answers to their questions - Niall hasn't IIRC. I’ve been praised for taking risks and I feel I'm more of a risk-taker than Niall - even on this task he chose reality tv which was the completely obvious choice to go for, I think coming up with creative and original ideas is a skill I possess which Niall doesn't. I also feel I've a stronger ability than him at spotting good ideas namely Italy and the creche task idea where Niall was in my team on both tasks.

I also think to win DSA you need to actually contribute to tasks rather than do virtually nothing. I've worked with Niall five times I believe and I've mentioned in my task evaluation on four separate tasks that he contributed less than others. I feel in order to win DSA you need to actually contribute to tasks. If previous task performances decided who got to the final rather than interviews there'd be no chance in heck Niall would be in the final. Niall would've been fired on the creche task had we lost because he contributed virtually nothing - the reason we won was my idea and the activities I suggested so if it wasn't for me performing like that Niall wouldn't even be in the final for a start. I feel had we lost the two tasks I was PM on Niall would've been fired and he really has me to thank for him even being in the final. Also, I've came up with the winning idea on three tasks I've won and if IIRC Niall has never came up with an idea his team have went with once which really says something about his creativity or lack of it. I don't think you need to back your own ideas all the time but if in ten tasks no one has backed any of your ideas it really speaks volumes about your creativity and I feel it lets Niall down.

Yes, Niall contributed a lot on this task, he wrote a lot more than I expected him too but I feel it's a case of too little too late. He's been virtually invisible sometimes, where as I feel I've contributed a heck of a lot more on multiple occasions.

I've never clashed with a candidate on a task. You said that yourself on the last task. What on earth are you talking about? Seriously, if your only way off putting me down is by talking about things off-task then that's quite frankly pathetic. We've been over this time and time again, it's like a dog with a bone just let it go. Also, saying I'm unable to work in a team - the two people I've clashed with the first one I worked well with on this task and I wanted because they are a hardworker (Justin) and the other one I apologised to a week ago and tried to put the issues behind us.

ETA: Also if you want to talk about how I argue with others I wouldn't exactly say you and Amy in the boardroom the other week was a great ability to show how approachable you are

Also, quality is a more important thing than quantity just because you wrote more doesn't make your idea better.

What I worry about with you is that you come across as very confrontational and quite aggressive, even how you speak about Niall here. Harmony in the workplace is very important for any teamwork to be successful.

Also Niall, any response to Katie?

It's such a non-issue though, you've even said yourself to me on MSN TWICE things which happen externally from the process have no bearings on task.

I'm passionate about the process, fair enough maybe I appear confrontational in the boardroom - who hasn't? My apparent confrontationalness (sic?) and "aggressiveness" has never affected tasks, Niall said that himself in Task 10 I haven't worked with him since because there hasn't been any other tasks. Now it's an issue, I'm confused? I thought we're being judged on task performance and like I said I've never been aggressive or confrontational on task. I agree harmony in the workplace is important hence why I've never clashed with anyone during a task - something which all the candidates have agreed on.

I'm not talking about off-task. When did I once mention anything external?

Hmm.

I've told you several times in the boardroom as have all the other candidates who got to the interviews that I've never been to use your words "confrontational and quite aggressive" during a task but that I've maybe been it off-task as in the boardroom. I'd deem not on task external and everyone has agreed multiple times that I've never been confrontational or aggressive on task and that the apparent issue has never affected team's harmonies.

Honestly, everyone argues in the boardroom why is it being used against me? It's never once affected my performance on task. Like I've said multiple times and as have other candidates who've said multiple times I've never clashed with anyone on task, if it wasn't on task then why is it being brought up by Niall? It just seems desperate to be honest.