I wouldn't class this as a 'twist' though. Boys vs girls never happens in real life business anyway!

No, that's just a practical thing so that in the early weeks when there are many candidates who you haven't got to know yet, it's simple and easy to remember who's on what team. I wouldn't mind having one, or two maximum, crossing over just to change things a little, but mixing the teams fully in Week 1 sounds like more trouble than it's worth to me.

Well I feel they've always done it just because it's interesting to see which sex wins and also they believe that the most in-fighting occurs in a one-gender team, which I can relate to!

There's another picture which looks like there may be a male candidate with a female candidate! Although I'm not sure if that man she's next to is a candidate...

I don't think that's necessarily true. Whilst it is interesting to see which sex wins, I feel that just as much in-fighting has occurred in teams of mixed genders. Think about Sharon's rivalry with the boys, Katie and Adam, Lorraine and Philip, Stuart and Stella... not to mention the first and most infamous, Paul and Saira, which was the only one that was so bad that Lord Sugar had to split them up (or at least, the only one where he was honest about the reasons why - there have been other occasions that I have thought this may be a reason. For example, in Series 8 the girls generally got on quite well, with the exception of Katie who clashed with all of them at some point. In Week 3 Katie was moved to the boys' team where she settled in a lot better, I feel like the arguments may have been a reason for that, but we'll never know.)

I think that is what the producers think though. I certainly wouldn't have thought it would be so we could remember who is on which team but I'm just speculating!

Well, if the producers think that, all I can say is that they aren't keeping very good tabs on the history of their show. It's a rather sad day when people like us know more about a show than the people creating it. It happens quite a lot actually; there have been a couple of occasions on which Dara has quoted statistics on You're Fired! that I know to be incorrect, and it really bugs me. Why can't they do their research properly?

I think mixed teams from start is way to go; the battle of sexes that happens at the start is tired now. Often same gender teams prove to be completely dysfunctional like has been seen in series 10 with the guys and series 8 and 9 with women. Has there been no more accounts of what task is? Could be a similar idea to gourmet or maybe not gourmet street food in series 8.

They were also selling fish fingers - the task has to be to buy fish and kind of make it into street food!

The latest pic on Twitter pretty much confirms to me that it's mixed teams from the start - especially seeing as Claude is following a team with men on it and Karren is following a team with women on it when usually on the first task Nick would follow the girls and Karren the boys.

I do, and I won't hold this against the producers as change is good, feel as though The Apprentice is coming to a stage in it's life when they need to try something new each year to keep it fresh. I'm sure the teams will be split by a certain characteristic - the most likely is education.

I think girls vs guys is good for the first few weeks when we don't know the candidates' names. It is just easier to follow who is in which team.

Anyone know how many candidates there will be this year? I think 20 was too much last year, but wouldn't mind if there were 18.

I wonder if they'll be referring to Karren as Baroness Brady or if Karren will still suffice

I completely disagree with you. Change can be good, if it's done for the right reasons and not just for the sake of introducing a twist. I don't mind doing something different from time to time just to have a bit of variation (for example, in Series 4, 5, 6 and 9 they weren't allowed to see the house before the first task, whereas they have been in the other series) but if you start looking to do something different every year it will get to a stage where it's like Big Brother, constantly introducing new twists, each more desperate than the last.


I agree. As I said in my comment to Tom, variation can be good, but it depends what you're actually doing. Introducing mixed teams from the start would just cause complaints, in my mind.

I really hope that there aren't 18, I think 16 is too much to be honest.


I doubt she'll be Baroness Brady. Wasn't she already a baroness last year, and they just called her Karren? The form tends to be formal title for the boss, and first names for the advisors. Before Lord Sugar was a Lord, he was referred to as 'Sir Alan' and I would imagine that had he not been a knight, the candidates would have had to call him Mr Sugar, because I can't see him just going by the name Alan on the show. Similarly, I think that regardless of titles, if they were going to be formal with the advisors they'd be Mr Hewer, Ms Brady and Ms Mountford. I don't think that will change just because Karren now has a title.

I mean I think that's what the producers think they need to do! With the PM decision on the spot in Series 9 and 10, and then 20 candidates, and now mixed teams from the start! The apprentice isn't really a format that accommodates twists though - there's only so much you can do with it!

In the first three series, and in the first series of Junior Apprentice, the Project Manager for the first task was decided before they knew what the task actually was. I quite liked that, it showed who was daring enough to volunteer - although I suppose the flaw is that the first task is often quite predictable. It's normally selling some sort of commodity on the streets (and sometimes to the trade), so I daresay if they did that too much the candidates would be able to make an educated guess anyway.

I wonder how much the producers have suggested doing that Lord Sugar has vetoed? Maybe if we saw the discussions that go on behind the scenes, the 'twists' that they do would seem very tame by comparison!

Really?! That had never occurred to me about the first three series... Are you sure haha?! I never realised that!

I think the producers are quite wise in that they probably don't want to do lots of twists like TAUSA! I doubt LS would have to have vetoed many!

Yes. In every other series the first task has been told to them in the opening boardroom. In those four series (1, 2, 3 and JA1), they went back to the house, chose a Project Manager, and then reported somewhere to be told the task. Check on YouTube!

What do you think of that idea? I'd quite like to bring it back.

Nope. Last series was filmed before that happened.

Oh, I see. Regardless, I don't think that they would have a title for her, and not for Claude.

I've been thinking some more about who is likely to replace Dara. I'd still really like to see Nick doing it, but I think that the most likely candidate is Matt Edmondson. He seems to have quite a lot of involvement with the franchise these days - he did the 'funny bits' and 'awkward conversations' segments on the website in Series 8 and 9 respectively, and last year he narrated the '10 years of The Apprentice' special that they had (rather odd that they didn't have Mark Halliley doing it, but no matter). And he's the sort of person that I think the producers would go for. I'd say he's a fair bet, what do you guys think?

I think it's better if people are given the opportunity to take the PM role on tasks that suit them better!



That's a very good point! I think he is looking likely. I wonder how his radio career is going?! Like would he have time to do YF?

I think Matt edmondson is likely to be new host of you're fired, I liked his interviews in series 9. I can imagine teams being split between boys and girls in boardroom and then going to a task briefing and getting mixed or something, they like to go for something different at very start in recent series which I think they need to do. It gets boring if it's same old every year.

They don't normally go to a task briefing on the first task, it's generally given to them in the opening boardroom. They've done it occasionally, but not since the first series of Junior Apprentice and the most recent time on the adult show was Series 3. Not to say it couldn't happen though.

LOL, I must have watched another series 8

The one where she was the only one with a good idea on task 2, and they ultimately went with the horrific splash screen idea Not to mention that she was most well liked contestant on here when she was fired (hardly a Katie Hopkins).

Understand that you don't watch the American version, but it reminded me a whole lot of the coven from Season 2.


As for mixed teams, I would not mind it. As long as there is a thought process behind it (and not just blind picking team members).

For the new host of You're Fired, I would probably stop watching (except for the preview at the end) if Matt Edmondson would become the host. He is like a very annoying kid brother (and not in a good way). My suggestion?? I don't know, probably a mix of the first two presenters. It would be nice to have someone again with some business knowledge also (even if some people were bored by Chiles, he did have expertise).

I think you misunderstand me. I didn't say that to bring Katie down in any way; on the contrary, I completely agree with you about her being very pleasant and a pretty strong performer, particularly on Task 2. That said, the fact remains that on the first two tasks, she did not get on with the other girls, regardless of who you believe to be in the right (I was on Team Katie all the way). I feel like her disputes with them may have been the reason for her being moved to the boys' team on Task 3 - and I felt she settled in better there, she was a good PM on that task and she seemed to get on better with the boys than she had done with the girls.