1) I knew Ruth was going as soon as the Final Three was chosen due to the spoilers in the intro!
2) That was so rude of LS to demean Selina's business in Dubai. I'd have struggled not to have lost it with him if I were her!
3) That was the most tense and feisty boardroom we've had so far - even if I did know Ruth was going.
4) This is one of those weeks where it felt as though none of the people in the firing line should have went. Shame about Ruth. I really liked her.
5) Has Mergim actually appeared in the program yet?

Who is mergim?

Gutted Ruth went x 4.
I liked Scott's magnanimity to his colleagues.

1) Ruth was clearly out of her depth, but shouldn't have gone on this task.
2) Against Selina. Was rude of LS to demean her business plan, but has she done anything right - or with a positive attitude?
3) Charleine seems to be the only candidate who hasn't put a foot wrong so far! Plu
4) David looking like he's a contender.
5) Mergim has been hiding low since his beginning misdemeanour in the boardroom...

Didn't know he was in the show he's been completely anonymous.

1) Richard showing a nasty side to his character (and from next week's preview it seems like he is on a roll).

2) Selina probably should have gone (she didn't do much, we know she doesn't win and after what happened last week it's seems like a publicity ploy).

3) Vana has a very nice looking bum.......hopes for a swimming treat

4) David seems like one to watch, but how is his boardroom talk??

5) There is still too much deadwood in there (April, Natalie, Mergim, Sam).

1) Ruth getting passed over for the PM job because Scott had a dog, one of those two was going tonight.
2) David saying he wanted t-shirts, and then t-shirts being an option, what are the odds?
3) Charleine quick to drop Richard in it for picking the dog sofas, then when they win (and thanks to Richard), she pats David on the back for a job well done.
4) Who's that guy at the end of the table? Sam? Is he a candidate or a cleaner that accidentally got into camera shot?
5) Blimey this years treats have been pretty poor.

1) Scott has been added to my "Potential Winners" list

2) Selina has been added to my sh!t list.

3) Lord Sugar using a "ruth-less" pun to transition in to firing Ruth genuinely made me laugh and I'm so ashamed.

4) I am now convinced the producers give Lord Sugar a location and then give HIM a mission of linking it to the task of the week, because holy cr@p did that stretch from dictionaries to pet shows have me laughing harder than anything

5) You know how Lord Sugar was too busy to meet with the teams last week? The reason why is because he was stumped working out how to handle 4)

I knew Selina was staying because of the "coming up" sequence at the start, her shouting at someone, hasn't been shown yet, has it?

1. The task setting locations really are getting more tenuous. LS went from dictionaries to statues to cats this week.

2. Why did only David, Scott, Selin a, Brett and Ruth turn up this week? The rest of the candidates were basically invisible.

3. Is there anything David isn't enthusiastic about?

4. David is definitelyy favourite candidate now.

5. Charleine really doesn't like Richard does she?

1) David is my new favourite, has irritated me the least lol

2) Lots of dead wood. People I don't even know their names

3) Ruth was very unlucky to go, I loved her enthusiasm

4) Charlene is so irritating, very fake

5) Karen is so smug ergh

When Claude was introduced in episode 1 LS said that the process was going to "get tougher".

How has Claude sitting fairly meekly in the boardroom making it tougher?

The link between Samuel Johnson and pets was laughable

1. David is my new favourite. He is so sweet and he did really well as project manager. I enjoyed seeing his passion for the task.

2. Does Selina ever crack a smile? She always looks so miserable and seems like an unpleasant person. I wouldn't approach her in a sales environment, she didn't look approachable on the task at all.

3. Lord Sugar made the wrong decision firing Ruth. She didn't make any sales admittedly, but she had passion and enthusiasm and deserved another chance. She is also honest and has integrity. Selina didn't technically make any sales, Scott did her sale for her but Selina lied completely in the boardroom and tried to leave Scott out of it. But if Lord Sugar would rather a liar and someone sneaky as his business partner, then fair enough.

4. I still don't know who some of the candidates even are. They haven't had much camera time at all.

5. I really like Brett, but his people skills weren't good when they were deciding what products to buy.

1) Selina can't do sums.
2) Ruth can't shut up; more importantly, she won't be advised. Even on You're Fired, she put her failure down to an off day (like Ronaldo and Rooney) rather than anything in her control.
3) Richard's relationship to the others is odd -- they aren't hostile but they don't accept him.
4) A boardroom split: Claude and Karren differed on who should be fired.
5) Cats are better than dogs.

I think the thing with the t-shirts is the teams have a binder with all the prospective items already in. It's like the buying task last week, they have a folder with the items in plus in very small type which normally the viewer can't read, are the specific instructions pertaining to that item.

That makes sense. I'll change my thought of the week to "HOW MUCH for that ugly t-shirt???"

Selena's enterprise is Dubai is almost certainly a rich daddy start-up hence LS rolling his eyes...and to play the "I'm a woman in business" card was equally pathetic.

1. Lord Sugar has shown himself up for the way he spoke to Selina

2. I've liked David since the shampoo task however this week when he was PM, he did fantastically. His enthusiasm is brilliant.

3. Richard is completely unlikeable.

4. The advisors are very poor compared to Nick and Margaret - nothing pleases them

5. Scott isn't as good as the rest of DS seem to be making out. He wasn't a great PM, and delegated as much as he could so to shift blame if/when they lost the task. Very weak and not a great personality. Oh, and why does everyone seem to think Gary has some amazing selling quality? He hasn't done much at all.

Scott was given plenty of chances in the boardroom to shift blame on to Selina (for her only sale being with his assisstance) and on to Ruth (for being too talkative) and both times he stuck up for his teammates. I have now idea where you get the idea he was looking to shift blame, if anything he was doing the opposite.

I pretty much agree with most of this.

David was brilliant directing the shampoo commercial in the second task and his enthusiasm is infectious.

It seems that the candidates also find Richard hard to get on with. David commented on the shampoo task that he was like a second director on the commercial so that he could take credit if it went well and absolve himself of blame if the boys lost. Then this week he made a joke about Dicky redeeming himself which Richard didn't take well. Then of course there's the feud with the equally unlikeable Joseph and Charleine has several times jumped in to criticise Richard in the boardroom only for the smug smirk to come out again when it's revealed that his team has won.

Karren just seems to complain and Claude's been very much in the background.

I certainly don't rate Gary. He did nothing on the first two tasks then admittedly he did well with the toy boat last week but that was negotiation rather than selling and then this week when Scott moved him over to the the expensive products he said he wanted to sell 2 in the time remaining. He sold 0 and came out with an excuse that no-one buys anything that late! Well if that was the case, why did Scott move him over and why did he state he could easily sell two?!

Apologies, I did mean for it to say it was during the task it appeared that way. Scott is like one of those characters who have absolutely nothing about them. It was almost as if it was his plan to do it during the task, but then in the boardroom switched again and seemed completely passive to everything. He just seems boring to me, there's much much stronger candidates than him in the process.

Agreed. They never pick up on the positives, only the things the candidates have done wrong - Karren in particular. She's a vile person, to be honest - she deliberately tries to sabotage candidates' chances of success, takes against them (I feel she took against Jenny) and tries to bring up things that were pretty unrelated (did Jenny really need to ask the manager for mussels when the assistant said it was "categorically no"?) What I think's worse is that she champions women in business, but I can't recall her ever saying positive about any female candidates (except maybe Claire, but she wasn't an advisor then). In fact, I remember she even went as far as to lambast them in series six, when there should really be no difference between men and women in business.

Claude's not so bad, but he is quite doughy at the minute. Lord Sugar was berating Selina based on advice from Claude, and when he confronted her, he seemed a bit "out of his element". He was quite good as an interviewer, if a bit theatrical, but here it seems he's just toned everything down.

Nick was a good advisor - I've never been told what his job was exactly, but he always picked up on the good (Susan in series seven) and the bad (Luisa, series nine). I don't remember much from Margaret, but she seemed quite complimentary on a few contestants. She called Lorraine a "Cassandra" - she got it right when no one was paying attention.

I think Karren used to be an okay advisor, back in series six and maybe seven, but more recently (from nine onwards) she just seems to point out the negatives.

Ahhh fair enough, I do think of all the candidates he is my favourite. but that might be down to process of elimination rather than any actual talents he possesses.

Though maybe the editor is only showing the negative comments from Karen and Claude and none of the positive, to present a tougher show as it were?

Nick was in corporate PR. When Amstrad went public, ie floated on the stock exchange, in the early 1980s, Nick did the PR and Margaret was the lawyer. Claude has also worked for Sugar at a high level for more than 20 years.

It is important (imo) to remember that they have been working together for decades because it means firstly they know each other, like each other, and implicitly trust each other. Secondly it shows Sugar's boardroom act is just an act (as is Claude's) because otherwise he'd not have been able to keep pretty much an unchanged senior management team.

Karren is the odd one out in this regard as she never worked for or with Lord Sugar.