This one just occurred to me... I have heard it said that Young Apprentice had a different approach to the main show in that it focussed more on candidates' achievements, whereas the main show focussed more on messing up. I partially agree and partially disagree - I think that the first two series of Young Apprentice focussed more on achievements, whereas the third focussed a bit more on weaknesses. Different series of the main show have varied as far as this is concerned as well, so I think it depends on a number of factors, like the contestants, reviews of the show and market research. Also I think the production team try to vary it in phases so that it isn't too predictable - the early series of the main show were definitely all about achievement, but by Series 4 it was down the more farcical route. Series 5 was back up there with high-flying contestants though and with the exception of Series 6 the main show was like that for a couple of years, before shifting back in Series 9. Obviously there's loads of overlap, but that's the way that I've seen it being.

But while we're about it, let's think about the standard of contestants between the main Apprentice show and Young Apprentice. What do you guys think? If Arjun, Zara and Ashleigh had been a little older and had tried to get onto the main show instead of Young Apprentice, would they have managed it? And would they have got so far, bearing in mind that there would be more competition?

Arjun - would have gone quite far.
Zara - would have been one of the frontfrunners.
Ashleigh - One of the first firings! I don't think she was that good.

I'm actually not sure that Zara would have got on the programme at all. Not that I don't think she deserved to, she was amazing in my opinion, but I think that one of the things that made her stand out was that she was pretty much a grown woman in a teenage girl's body. If she'd been a bit older, I'm not sure that she would have been noticed by the production team so much as she was at auditions. But had she got on, I agree that she'd have been one of the front-runners.

I think Ashleigh would have got on the programme, but I'm not sure how she'd have done. I admit to being an Ashleigh supporter, but I know she is one of the more controversial winners. She had a massive gap in her skill-set as far as creativity was concerned, but I thought she was an effective leader, was able to speak to the public, was exceptional at budgeting and had common sense. I suppose it would depend on how strong the competition was.

I'm really not sure about Arjun. Like Zara, I think he'd have gone far on the show, but I'm not sure he'd stand out that much at auditions for the adult show. I didn't think he was that big a character, just quietly competent, and they don't take on many people like that.

To be honest, I don't think any of the YA candidates would have got very far on the show - not least because they would have been marginalised by the older candidates just for being 'young' (unfair), inexperienced (reasonable to an extent - all had some glaring gaps in their skill-sets, which is only to be expected) and therefore 'no good' (because obviously all the adult candidates are brilliant ...)

Also, I do think we can't compare task performance like for like. The YA tasks were deliberately made more rigid and less complex, not least because they had shorter days because of the guidelines (or are they restrictions?) around the number of hours children can 'work' on TV in any given day.

I don't think that that would necessarily have made a difference to Lord Sugar though. If you look at Susan Ma, for example, she was young and marginalised by the other candidates because of that, but she was actually extremely capable and Lord Sugar and Nick recognised that quite quickly (Karren not so much). They probably would have been alienated more than they were on YA, but if they were able to take that on the chin and carry on working hard on the tasks regardless, I don't think that it would have made that much difference.

I don't think the tasks were that much less complex. The working days may have been a little shorter, but I feel like the tasks were generally just as challenging as the adult tasks. Admittedly they left out some of the more complex tasks like 'smell what sells' so you do have a point, but the ones that were kept in weren't watered down very much at all in my opinion. Things like the opening selling tasks, the tasks where they have to choose products and negotiate with the sellers and the scavenger hunts were just as demanding as those on the main programme, I think. There was probably a difference in the way that they were treated by the production team, but in terms of what was expected of them, I'm not sure that there was a huge difference.

I agree - probably not a huge difference, but a difference nonetheless. That's not to say the YAs wouldn't have performed just as well as the adults in the 'full' grown-up tasks (it's hard to see how they could do worse in some instances!), more that the tasks were structured to get them from A to B in fewer hours than the adult version, so out of necessity there would have to be some simplification.

I suspect the biggest difference between the two shows was in editing. With the grown-up series, the focus is on the silly mistakes candidates make that lose their team a task. With YA, it was a more neutral presentation that, if anything, sought to show just how capable teenagers can be at business tasks (and rightly so). It would have been wrong to show YA the same way - there's not much entertainment in laughing at kids, much more at laughing at adults who are encouraged to pitch themselves as the next Branson.

I definitely think some of the Young Apprentice candidates would perform very well on the Apprentice. I thought most of them were hugely credible for their age and would outperform a lot of adult apprentice candidates like for example would you rather have Zara or Ashleigh from Young Apprentice or Jazs, Uzma or Natalie on your team, the answer is so obvious. Even though they're a lot older, they didn't show any skill whatsoever on the show whereas I think most Young Apprentice candidates showed some definite strengths and value even within a few tasks. I really hope the adult Apprentice this year has a better set of candidates. It should be on soon now

"Are the French very fond of their children?"

Right - dead capable, that one! Mind-blowingly naive, too, if I recall correctly

She was questioning whether the French were likely to impulsively buy things for their children, which given that they were selling things in France, was a very sensible thing to be asking. Some cultures are more materialistic than others. She phrased it slightly oddly, but it was a slight slip of the tongue and everyone has done that at some point. It says nothing at all about her actual skills.

Yeah, don't bother actually watching any of the episodes or anything. Just take one quote which was taken so far heavily out of context it wasn't even funny and didn't matter as she wasn't in front of clients or anything.

Also way to forget that she PMed Venture to a record-breaking win that very week, largely cos she picked the kid's rucksack/car seat, which she picked thanks to thought processes like the one above.

One stupid comment does not make a bad candidate...

I generally really like Karren, but I feel that that one comment of hers pretty much defamed poor Susan. It's all people remember about her now. Then again, she went into partnership with Lord Sugar without even winning the series, so she's probably laughing.