If you take one glance at this forum, it is very clear that people do in fact look for one.

He obviously made the decision at some point. He may have even made it at the final boardroom. This doesn't exclude the fact that they also filmed an ending where Bianca won, even if just to prevent leaks (although to me she did not look like she knew she lost).

I don't know, as I've already said. But it doesn't really matter why, because even if he did decide there in the final boardroom, an ending with Bianca as the winner was also filmed.

He could have registered his business whether he had sugar's investment or not.

There's no confirmation that two endings were filmed this year just because they have been in previous years.

The fact that Mark flew his parents over from Australia where the flight itself takes over a day, indicates he knew at least a week before that he'd won, and probably a lot longer than that.

The climb online business is registered under Sugar's business, not Mark. He didn't bother with Bianca's. I agree that Bianca's reaction to losing in the boardroom didn't look convincing but it has been acknowledged that she's quite guarded anyway and perhaps there were bits edited out from the boardroom scenes which made it obvious to her before the final announcement that Sugar was going to pick Mark.

No, but it stands to reason that they would still film a second ending, if only to reduce the chances of the result being leaked to the press. Not to mention the possibility of some showstopping problem being found with Mark's business, in which case it'd be a MUCH easier solution than dragging everyone back to film a "Bianca wins" scenario.

Probably was the plan all along, remember this series was filmed 12 months ago and meant to air in the Spring- So a June date to register the 'winning' business makes sense to me to get the whole thing up and running

No, it was filmed between April and June.

The ending looked the fakest one yet to me - Mark not genuinely elated and Bianca not bothered.

That company data is odd though - wonder whether they were registered initially with Sugar's, or just taken under the umbrella recently?