April and/or Brett.

Then again, sometimes big loud characters can fall early as well. Think about Bilyana in Series 8.

I try to judge people on their actions rather than whether I think they're likeable or not.

As far as I'm concerned, April was the only person who had the authority to prevent that disaster so she should have gone.

Maybe it's too early to speculate but I wonder if AS is already allowing the credibility of the candidate's business plans to colour his decision-making?

Does he look at them at this early stage? They looked like they'd just been left at reception. (Obviously I'm presuming the production team do, and it contributes to who gets selected to go on the show.)

Business is not about running around the streets, trying to sell over over priced salad to complete strangers.
That is cold calling, very difficult if that part is not in your personality, you have to have a bit of a screw loose to be able to do it.
Good seliers are also ten a penny, good business people are not.
People do business with people they like, Dan was likable , I would have kept him
Suger got this one wrong imo

Should have been April. Her choice of food to sell was absolutely terrible. Tuna nicoise salad for £9? I don't live in London but I'm guessing even the "city types" she was aiming at wouldn't pay £9 for street food for lunch. Compare this choice against the fish fingers of the other team. Her salad requires preparation of not just the tuna but the other ingredients, chopping olives, tomatoes, boiling eggs etc, the fish fingers were made quickly in the kitchen and then just required slapped on two bits of bread at point of sale. The ingredients in her salad also massively reduced her margin - the fish fingers on bread had very low cost attached (note the profit this team made even considering the wasted stock of calamari).

He does, though he doesn't know them in detail. In Series 7 (the first series with the new format) he didn't know them at all, and had some awful business plans in the final. Since then, he has had a brief look in advance - he's vaguely interested in all of them, but obviously some more than others, and he doesn't know about the figures etc.


In fairness, they spent very little on the calamari ingredients (hence why it was so low-quality) so dumping it probably didn't cost them that much. Look at it another way though - if the cold box mistake hadn't been made and they could sell it, they'd have made a massive profit!

April should have gone - basic business - watch your margin - your selling price should exceed your buying price - and she didnt consider that at all. Was kinda strange that the other candidates didn't attack her for that, as that was why they lost - not because of poor sales, timimg issues or over large fishcakes.

Dan couldnt sell but kept trying. Unfortunately, though, he hung himself in the board room.

I always think that the candidate's behaviour in the board-room is often as revealing as the way they act during the tasks.

If the candidates aren't able to figure out where the blame really lies, if they're unable to justify their own actions or if they're dogmatically clinging to their reasons for doing things in the face of evidence that they did wrong then it gives AS a very good idea about whether the person has a talent for critical thinking, whether they're capable of spotting an opening and whether they're able to think on their feet.

I suspect that a lack of these abilities is often as responsible for their elimination as their actual performance in the tasks.

April for me!

She was domineering, wouldn't listen to any changes moon sense from the others (completely closed down Ruth when she tried to raise issue of coatings), chose the wrong dishes, didn't negotiate (again ignoring the others who tried to get her to look around), and was too busy blaming everyone else for the failures in the kitchen.

That said - Dan talked himself out of the process in the boardroom with all the negativity. He obviously is capable of running a business, but it's not essential for every business person to be good at everything themselves..... That's why you employ people who are good at the things you're not!

I'm like Dan in that I hate face to face interactions..... I can do party plan selling because that's low key and to people who are interested in what I'm selling - but I'd hate to approach strangers in the street like the candidates have to.... That said - I'm an accountant by training, and a crap salesperson - but then - why train for all those years to do one job - then go and do another unrelated one!

No, it may not be a part of business in the real world but it is a huge part of "the apprentice" which is a business-based TV game show.

But, the one thing a task like this does show up are those people who are not willing to push themselves out of their pre-defined "comfort zone" and not just sit back and say "this is not something I have not done, and there I am not going to do" because if you're going to work with AS then that is a phrase you don't say to him.

Dan was only fired as he is a poor fit among the rest of the gobby barrow boys

April didnt shop around for produce and put the price up too high. Should have gone

April should have gone. She chose to be project manager; she wasn't bounced into it (usually I think 1st episode PMs deserve a bit of slack because they take on a role nobody else wants). She also made all the stupid decisions - £9 salade Nicoise?! - and didn't listen to other suggestions. She didn't negotiate on the price of fish, either, dramatically reducing the profitability of the task. Basically, she was responsible for all the main mistakes her team made. I suspect if she wasn't so striking looking and didn't have potential as a 'character' on the show, she'd have been out on her ear.

Dan didn't fight for it in the boardroom. I think he sealed his fate saying he didn't know who should be fired. It was more like he didn't care. He's probably a nice bloke in real life, but he came across to me as someone who was being nice for effect, if that makes sense, so it all felt a bit deliberate. I wanted to like him, I think because I like Chris Addison, but you've got to have a bit of fight in the board room. I think if he'd played the boardroom better he could have survived his behaviour on the task.

April should take responsibility for the wrong choice of food too slow, from what we saw. But I think there is a case for giving someone who puts themselves up for project manager a second chance. I doubt either of the two that were saved tonight will last long, unless this was very misleading of their general abilities.

It always feels a bit unfair that anyone goes on the first task.

Exactly Dan hung himself in the boardroom, he was asking to be fired when he admitted that he couldn't do most of the stuff required in the tasks, could easily have been a double/triple firing.

i thought it was strange that there were no food entrepreneurs in the candidates unless some of the mute ones didn't say; April had a food blog but clearly didn't understand anything about the business side of it; usually there has been a few who are going into restaurants or launching a mass market food product. I don't know if April does have a business plan for food trading, if she does, she most definitely should have been fired.

I think April should have been fired. They didn't lose the task because of Dan. They lost it because of bad decision making which falls with the PM.

Having said that, Dan didn't help himself and dug himself a bit of hole with his "I can't do this or this or that" If he defended himself a bit better or gave a "I want to show you what i can do" speech, then he may have saved himself.

Dan should have specified when arguing. E.g. "I can't sell well on the streets because I haven't had much experience, but I can sell in XYZ area" or "I can sell a product to an audience" rather than saying "I can't sell to the general public". I think that was a nails in the coffin moment.

I probably would've fired Brett on balance, for gameplaying and losing sight of the main aim; arguably only making 1/3 of the fishcakes contributed to the loss. Overall though, April was to blame for the loss, for not costing the products before choosing them which led to the whole plan being a disaster from the off. You can't just choose tuna nicoise and fishcakes without first working out your cost and your margins. There were a lot of mistakes, but if they'd had the costs and margins clear from the off, at least everyone would know the framework they were working in and what their leeway on pricing and selling was. Also some thought should have gone into how quickly they could make the products - really, product choice was the huge flaw in this plan and that was solely down to April.

I like her spark and leadership though and probably would have given her a second chance for that reason, and seen how she worked as a supporter rather than a leader in another task.