All the tasks and boardroom interrogations about how they performed etc, - it has very kittle bearing on the end result. I'm sure AS knows all their business plans and he has pretty well made his mind up at the start. I think we are being hoodwinked TBH. It was far better when the winning candidate was taken on as an employee IMO.

With this year, I agree with you that the business Mark was propositioning earnings were high and that client they got in the final reaffirmed for Lord Sugar that yes there is money to be made here. But the Google UK whispering in Lord Sugar's ear shouldn't have swayed him because Google will be getting some of the money for the searches to be higher up for the SME, Google will have to receive money right so obviously Google will want Mark to get the funding as that's future business for them.

So yes the rest of the tasks in the end didn't mean much, it was just entertainment for us, but the winner could have been decided just by a thorough interview process of Mark himself and due diligence of his business plan.

I agree. The fact that Ricky Martin, my least favourite winner by a country mile, was one of the interviewers, tells me how flawed the 'partner' format is. He was so unlikeable and I can't remember thinking he was anything but useless until he presented his plan.

To be fair, I'd have pegged Mark for the final from early on based on task performance, but not Bianca. Not after she made some truly memorable mistakes. That said, Mark, as compelling and convincing as he was, isn't an entrepreneur. The series proved Mark to be a master of persuasion, whether he was selling, pitching, trying to persuade someone to give him a particular role, or talk himself out of trouble. But once his business scales up beyond just him alone delivering it, it's on shaky very crowded ground. There's no USP beyond him himself.

So what was the point in getting them to be creative and all-rounders if it just comes down to the final plan? And especially if you're just going to end up giving the prize to someone doing their current job only self-employed and with a big cash injection?

If it WAS partly about their series performance and not just the plan, then Roisin should have been there. She'd have easily won in the other format. And walking liability Daniel should have been nowhere NEAR the final 3.

I think the format is confused.

I think he seriously considers two business plans, then adds the rest in to create the TV show.

I saw the Interviews episode, and switched on last night just as Mark gave his final speech. It was like I didn't even need to have seen the episode. He said exactly the same thing. "I know online marketing inside out, I'm ready to work my arse off, Bianca can't make you any money", and then Sugar chose as him as winner. The whole thing is so drawn out just to make a TV show.

I think this year has been a bad year for reality TV. It's easier to see through it than ever before.

Its entertainment and something to watch in the dark winter evenings. But I agree that Lordsugar has pretty much decided who will be at the end at the start of the proceedings while keeping an eye on how the candidate performs. Clare who wanted to open a restaurant with the investment but didnt have a clue and didnt even know what saffron was was a good example.

It seems a good few people agree OP as do I and some friends I've talked to.

The apprentice now has a 'it's fixed' label on it which turns viewers off and is almost impossible to reverse. For the show to go forward now it has to revert back to 'work for me' because the current format makes the first 11 weeks of the program pointless.

I suppose the format could be saved by having a preliminary round or two where candidates pitch for 3 minutes to a panel; all those that appear to be reasonable business propositions then get reviewed and the best 16 start the normal Apprentice process. The panel (or panels, there could be two or three) would comprise people like Claude, ex-winners and respected losers like Ruth Badger and one out of Nick/Karren/Margaret.

In this way all the BPs have been given a once-over and we get a chance to see what they are. LS can then conduct the normal selection process to see if the candidates themselves are people he would consider investable.

But this would remove the gameshow element and make it much more sober (and closer to Dragons Den) and so of course it ain't gonna happen.

Pretty much. The early stages help to discriminate between the competent candidates and the jokes, but the business plans matter so much more than anything else that we can end up feeling a bit 'cheated' by the end when the winner hasn't been the strongest performer. In fact, I don't think any of the winners since 2011 were the strongest in their series, which is when they changed the format.

But it's entertaining, so, there's that I guess.

Couldn't agree more, I've been saying this from the start. It's really a "Dragon's Den" with just the one Dragon. AS must take a look at the business plans of all the contestants before the series starts. He may not decide on the outright winner, but he probably narrows the field down to 3 or 4 that have potential. The rest is just a bit of fun for tv.
I'm not sure we've been hoodwinked, it's obvious when you think about it. LS isn't going to stump up £250k to go into business with someone because they regularly show leadership skills in some meaningless tasks, when their business idea has no hope of success.

Problem is Lord Sugar is semi retired so be hard for LS to award someone a job working for him so being a business partner with LS is the best way around it

The only person who could replace Lord Sugar with a wide experience of business if The Apprentice went back to the old format would be Richard Branson.

Its not that the plans are on offer are nonsense or non existant - though possibly half are/or the people are incredible. Its that what he rules out most of the possibly viable ideas too . He excludes what poses too much risk, whats too small or large scale, whats a big career change, what needs too much effort, and what produces a return, but too small a return. After that there's probably only Ricky or Mark left.

We could now pretty much produce the identikit for his winner as he's revealed more and more of his calculation this series. Indeed, if no one else starts a thread how to win, I am tempted to do so because, between us, I think we could write a pretty good winners guide to what to propose.

Agreed, but it's a poor state of affairs if the production team can't scrape together 10-14 people with a viable business plan who are also relatively entertaining. Out of the whole of the UK? Really?

That was Katie. She doesn't need to know what saffron is - she's not going to cook the food, or have it in her food. - what she needs is a nutritionist and a cook to write her a menu. Her problem isn't that she can't run a restaurant - she's competent enough to run most things. Its that she can't make anything like as much money as Mark, Mark proposes sending people out on £10 an hour to service at least 2 customers a day for £400 each His overheads are minimal. . She needs to pay for a restaurant, employ staff, buy food, and cook it- because she is trying to do something in the real tangible economy. He's offering, an expensive service, at low cost, in an industry that's charging a lot because its created its own advertising arms race, while producing nothing much. A good traditional low profit industry, just doesn't appeal to Lord Sugar's desire for a get rich quick scheme, with minimal risk, maximum returns and minimal effort.

You probably could say the same about at least some of Ella-Jade, Jemma Pamela, and Felipe- who might all probably have been able to do what they were offering - but it didn't appeal . They were (in some cases, much) less capable than Katie , but probably capable enough in their own fields. it remains to be seen too if Bianca and Roisin can achieve what they want to with a more entrepreneurial investor/industry player behind hem.

The basic problem is it doesn't matter much what you do for 10 weeks if you are in a sector that can produce large amounts of money for little outlay, or have a nail file, and if you can employ workers on peanuts to replicate the service, or the product. .

There probably are 10 viable business plans there - for someone who will accept a 10% return , or invest more than a trivial 250k, or take more risk, or do more work. The problem is that there's only one, or two, that stand the slightest chance of winning on his criteria,

If you want to match performance to having a chance at winning you have to go back to a having a job as the prize - although that's often been decided on the specifics of the job too,. Or, you have to stop him throwing people out on their business plan - with someone else throwing out the people with nonsense plans pre- casting, and then denying him sight of the plans at all. He could then end up with a choice of a restaurant in Sunderland and a tights business, and low calorie ready meals . The problem is he would probably still remove the best performers before week 11 , and preserve the wide boys , and some years he might not have a good choice at all. There is a logic, though, that if the best performers have a bridal shop in Glasgow, or a restaurant in Sunderland, and a scheme for the dyslexic in London, those ought to be the options he has to choose from. The show isn't meant to be about adding the biggest sums to his fortune, any way he can.

I agree as well, it is for TV so I guess it doesn't really matter. I mean why do they let all these candidates actually get on the show if their business plan is rubbish? He's not looking to hire anyone to work for him anymore - yeah they may be great and win all the tasks but then end up having a bad business plan and it just works out being a big waste of time.

He must know what their ideas are and he may think some of them are great but I guess the rest are just there for a TV show. I've concluded that the entire series of The Apprentice now is just one massive dragged out episode of Dragons Den. I like both.

Yes, that's very well put.

The problem for a lot of the candidates is that they genuinely have a good business going, but it's limited and local. In an effort to appeal to LS they make a business plan in which their business is 'rolled out', nationally or even internationally; but it is almost never likely that this will happen.

If you take someone like Lindsey, the swimming teacher, - she obviously had a good local business, built solidly round gaining a good personal reputation, and getting word-of-mouth referrals. No wonder she was so averse to flashy cold-selling; it was everything her business is against, the the take-the-money-and-run sharkiness of a lot of the tasks. Every client Lindsey has will hopefully be a client in three years time, and will have referred friends who will become long-term clients as well. In time, she may well think it is time to expand, and launch a swimming academy in a neighbouring town. Give her a few years and she might have several, over a whole county.

And Lord Sugar will never be interested, not even slightly. What on earth would ever be in it for him? The prospect of doubling his investment in five years time? But in terms of a solid, reliable business that will last for years, I think she has one of the best.

Just gonna say that I see it as a two stage process. Stage one you battle it out against the other candidates for the opportunity to have your business plan evaluated. Stage two is the actual evaluation of the business plans and deciding the winner. It's the only way it makes sense to me.

I can't help but think that the whole "business plan" is a convenient scapegoat for certain people to claim that their favoured candidate was never going to win because the show had been rigged for someone else to win all along. Was it unfair that Roisin so clearly dominated the field yet got canned at the interviews because of a bad business plan? Perhaps. But to flip that question on its head, would it have been fair for Lord Sugar to fire Daniel and Mark even though they had good business plans, as part of some gamble that Roisin would somehow pluck a better plan out of the air overnight?

As for the strongest candidate not winning, well, that's really nothing new. The strongest candidates in the first four years were generally considered to be James, Ruth, Kristina and Claire respectively, yet the winners we actually got were Tim, Michelle, Simon and Lee.

I agree, it in fact in my opinion reflects reality better. Because if you think the tasks being the candidate "on paper" so to speak - an artificial environment designed to highlight a specific skill/personality trait etc and the business plan shows the raw potential. At the end of the day it is the candidate that has the best combination of the two that is going to win it in the end. You can be good in specific scenarios but if as soon as you have to apply those scenarios to the wide context you stumble then your no good to anyone. At the end of the day that is what happened to Roisin and its what happened to Helen in series 7 (I use her as she as far as I am aware, George if you see this please correct me if I am wrong, the best performing candidate to never win it).

BIB, exactly that. The premise of the show is supposedly to encourage entrepreneurialism and give people the confidence to start new businesses. Therefore why should it matter if it doesn't generate large, easy returns, at least in the early years? It's not like Sugar needs the money. As you say, his criteria are so specialised because he wants easy returns for minimal effort. With the dragons, at least they offer tangible assistance and expertise in the product's field.

The Apprentice winner should have a viable but useful and worthwhile business idea (not SEO) which has the possibility of scale once the original model is established. I liked Lindsay's swimming academy for instance, even though she didn't enter that as her business idea.

I've enjoyed your posts which succinctly sum up the problems with this series and the business plan premise in general. You summed up the disconnect well recently but I can't find your post - something along the lines of the process/performance having no connection to the result? Perhaps you could restate it as it captured for me why I find the show, or at least the final, so underwhelming since the format changed.

But stage one, the tasks , ought to count for something - -quite a lot - it takes up 80% of the air time. And stage one has to work for everyone, And, on performance on the tasks, neither Daniel or Mark would reach the final . They could be excluded on results, or flaws detected, firing flaws, or there being people with the same merits, without the flaws. Indeed, as the two worst performers on results, you could put several people into the final ahead of them, with a decent idea.

The question is who really has a proposal that won't work, and whether he can be allowed to set criteria that only very few people can fulfill. Roisin's might work, or not, with a bigger investment at greater risk - does she get into the show? How do you judge whats viable without doing detailed research on the proposals? Can you know if Bianca is viable or not, before someone in that trade looks at her business plan and amends it? ? Do you want to exclude the dance schools, swimming schools, small shops, medical causes, and restaurants- because he wants more return than anyone who does invest in such things? Can you call the show, the Apprentice ,when he says he doesn't want to do much?

I agree the first 6 series had disconnects between who was most impressive, who won, and who was fired early . I wouldn't argue all 4 of those were the strongest, but the winners needed to fit the job on offer too, and Tim fitted the early idea of what an apprentice was better than James. The difference between then and now is that the frontrunners on the tasks are even more likely not to make the final, or get the prize nad there's often now more than one clearly better task performer standing behind the winner. Two of the winners since series 6 have a weaker record than any other winner and 10 runners up. .

LS will allow a few people with what he sees as poor business plans to last a long way, either because they are 'entertaining' or because they are doing well at the trials - take your pick - but the question is, would he jettison someone with a really attractive business plan because they were obviously struggling? How many times did Tom Pellereau bumble charmingly into the board room before he won the series?

Tom Pellereau was useless in the tasks, was always in the boardroom, had a crap business plan but got hired because he had something Sugar wanted - an in to the beauty business.

There have been a number of excellent candidates who were booted because they didn't have a business plan Sugar was interested in. So they could never win. The whole concept of the program is now seriously flawed.

I'm not always convinced that most of the plans are poor. Many of them may simply be a bit rough and need working on to smooth out the edges, as with most business plans.
It's probably less the case that they are poor plans and more the case that AS simply doesn't like them, can't be arsed with them, or hasn't got the inclination or motivation to put any effort or invest time into them.

Last year Neil got all the way to the interview stage and looked the obvious winner, but had a totally useless business plan (like Roisin this year?).

It's quite sad when this happens.