If you don't know what this is, you can basically shar your own opinion of The Apprentice (doesn't just have to be this series!) that may be seen as different to the majority.
I have several of these:
*Roisin from last year was so overrated. She was a pretty poor PM on both tasks she led and her business plan failed on numbers, which she should've been best on (she was an accontant). She wasn't that good in the negotiation task, especially with the skeleton and last minute scallops.
*Vana was lucky to get past week three, and if she'd won then, she'd still be vindictive and bitchy. She admitted to changing her strategy after coming across as unwillingly crass.
*Selina wasn't too much of a bad candidate. She did have some business acumen (she won both tasks she lead) but she just had an attitude and *that voice* to make everyone hate her. Plus, I think everyone took against her based on her comments against the show.

In series five, I'd have put Debra in the final. I liked her, I thought that despite her initial failings she did show she was very on the ball and she spotted things others missed. I'd have preferred her over robotic Kate.

Interesting point about Roisin. In week 3 she wasn't a great PM and her team lost. In week 10 despite winning Roisin sidelining Daniel and Solomon in an attempt to take all credit for the win

And I agree completely about Selina. She was a perfectly good PM both times. She's only hated because of her comments about the show

I loved Debra. She was rough around the edges, but I (and I think Lord Sugar) liked that about her. She had so many memorable moments (especially "Intimate" in the final )

I thought Yasmina was a bit overrated, but I think that was just me.


Yeah. I mean, it's quite ironic that Roisin's (some would argue only) mistakes througout the series was that she was so bad with money. Week one, forgot to bring money. Week three, average price £9.50. Interviews, running out of money after less than a year.

Selina was a weird one. It's like no matter what she said, she was ignored or told to shut up. She wasn't exactly liked by the other candidates (was she friends with any of them?) but it was the comments about the show that really tipped the boat.

From what was shown on this series*, I can't understand why Selina was classed as a THE bitch.
OK, she was a moody cow with a face like a slapped arse, but what did she do that was worse that (for example) Charleine? At least Selina moaned about people to their face rather than stab them in the back.

*ignoring any tabloid stories, as they're not necessarily the most reliable of sources

- Ruth Badger is very overrated

- Series 4 is by far the worst series

- Stella should have been fired in week 9 (truffelgate)

- Ricky wouldn't have won in any of the other (10) series

- Whoever will win tonight will be the best winner since the format change

Series 4 was entertaining, no? Lucinda? Raef?

Stella was a pretty poor winner overall, to be fair. Both Joanna and Liz were better than her.

Ricky, yeah I can agree to that. He was very lucky. Nick actually could've been considered a better winner that series, or if Tom's was less ambitious, he could've won. Can't believe Ricky from Total Wipeout of all things was considered the winner.

Really? Oh, right. That actually makes sense. Most decent or middle of the road candidates shoot themselves in the foot with their business plans (Susan, Helen, Tom, Jade, (arguably) Jordan, Neil, Roisin, Solomon etc.).
Tom was a lucky winner. He had the least flawed business plan, though was arguably the worst of the final four (with Jedi Jim a close second)
Ricky was even more lucky. Jade had been a solid candidate, though faltered towards the end and had an atrocious BP. Tom's was overtly ambitious and Nick's overtly complex.
Leah wasn't bad in terms of BPs, as she had clearly thought it out, but she was a very plain candidate. She was a pretty poor PM and throughout the second half of the series made little-to-no contributions to tasks. Luisa wasn't too bad, actually, and I remember fuming when she escaped over Jason. She just was so bitchy (this coming from me, one of Charleine's greatest supporters, lol) and far too talkative. Francesca was cannon fodder anyways.
Last year, I think Bianca should've won over Mark. His BP was stable, but I wouldn't go into business with him because of how untrustworthy he is. Seriously.

Joseph should win over Vana, though I want Vana to. She's not been perfect, but she's been one of the candidates from the beginning. Joseph actually seems more of an all-rounder than any of the winners.

Selina is only friends with the other female candidates who were fired before her. She seems to like Richard and Gary but not sure they like her

I preferred Joseph with the moustache

I didn't think that was an unpopular opinion on here? I was going to say Series 4 is one of the best as mine

Unpopular opinions?

Paul Torrisi for prime minister.

Just came in here to say the same things the OP said about Vana and Selina.

Selina was actually a decent candidate. Not the best, but not bad at all. She often said sensible things, but said them in such a sulky way that she wasn't listened to.

Vana was really rude and bitchy in the buying things in France task and was lucky to survive that. However, she did show herself to be a good candidate later on.

I much preferred Selina over the likes of Charlene and Vana.

just looking at this series - some of them mightn't be wholly "unpopular" so to speak, but may go against some consensus anyway

- April should absolutely have been fired in week one. Dan was useless in fairness but I thought he deserved another go
- I never liked David for whatever reason but thought he had more in him
- I honestly thought Gary was a better candidate than he's given credit for, and he was the stand out performer in week 10
- Scott was the standout performer up until week 7. I just think he completely burned out which was a shame, he was really strong up to that point
- There were too many "firsts" this series, it's starting to look like they are just creating drama for the sake of it, it being a TV show and all. i wish they'd just cut the number of contestants and have one fired normally each week, with no "twists".
- Joseph, elle and Charleine were the most likeable contestants from this series imo. themselves, Brett and Gary strike me as the nicest contestants in real-life

In general...

- I wish Apprentice would go back to Spring/summer months, the show finishing up around Christmas just seems weird to me!

Ruth (this series) was one of the stupidest firings in the history of the series

She was competent and had an entertaining personality and went far too early

Stella in series 6 was a strong winner but the trouble is there was no job at the end of it.

I disagree. Ruth was entertaining but would have been dreadful as PM

Someone mentioned Scott being stand out performer up until week 7. Scott was very good on most tasks but was poor as PM on the pet show task as well so had no chance of winning

I thought Paula had more to offer than Yasmina, and I would've fired the latter the week of the sandalwood scandal.

Unpopular opinions? Here's mine:

The vast majority of people posting in this sub-forum, seem to be completely unable to grasp the fact that The Apprentice is not a so-called reality show in the way that Big Brother, I'm a Celeb, TOWIE, etc. are. Those shows are made using moronic contestants for even more moronic viewers who want to live their lives vicariously through the on-screen personas of the people involved.

The Apprentice is about finding a business partner for a real start up business with real money. It matters not one jot how likeable or unlikeable the candidates are, who shagged whom, what clothes they wear or what facial characteristics they disport.

There is no public vote, no producer in Lord Sugar's ear telling him who to fire and who to keep in, it's all down to which business plan and which person he feels he can work with.

Another few:

April was a strong candidate and deserved to go much further in the competition.
Ruth's 'quirkiness' got very tedious.
Liz from Series 6 was entitled and bratty, and I was glad that Stella beat her.

Mine

-I really, REALLY dislike Ricky Martin. Even more so now reading his Twitter feed, he does think he's a brilliant recruiter when in fact he gives the same advice I'd give to wannabe recruiters. His business plan was so boring and failsafe, set up a recruitment agency with a speciality against the other million in the UK. Only reason companies will use him is because of his links to The Apprentice. I have no doubt in my mind he isn't the least bit credible.

-This year was one of the weakest for candidates

-Selina and Charleine were my two standouts. I loved Selina, I didn't care about the attitude because she did well and I 'got' her personality. I would've loved to have known her business plan.

-Gary shouldv'e been nowhere near the final five

-As much as it pains me to say it, if Richard's idea was a brand new idea rather than an offshoot of his current business, I would've had him in the final over Vana

-Vana's business plan let her down

-And finally, Joseph? Prime Time Plumbers? It's got the same start to a name as a famous recruitment agency throughout the country!! And sounds like an offshoot of them.

I didn't like Ricky either, to be honest. His business plan was stable, which could not be said for the other three. Had he been on any other series he'd have been nowhere near the final five.

This was a pretty weak year for candidates, but we have been getting somewhat "different" candidates since the format change.

Not sure about Selina, but I really liked Charleine. She (and Vana) were my favourites this year (but I slightly prioritise Charleine!).

If I could "throw another thought into the thought pond"...
* Series six was (excluding series eight, obviously) the worst series. The candidates were poor and the only one I really liked was Liz, and she was fired in possibly the most unjust firing of all time (it depends on where you stand on Miriam, though).
* There's too many tasks with the candidates being set up to fail. It's pretty difficult to come up with a good superfood/health snack in a matter of hours, and whilst it was pretty easy to see through some flaws, it's hard to pitch in that field. I think that if something goes wrong in that respect, LS shouldn't fire them unless they failed at something business related (i.e - pitching, branding, etc.).

I have a lot:

1. I find Yasmina from Series 5 to be slightly overrated. She deserved to get to the final, but Kate should've won.
2. Roisin, also, very overrated.
3. I feel Ruth this year was only liked so much because she was such a different candidate, not because she actually did anything that great.
4. David was one of this year's best candidates.
5. Series 8 was not boring.
6. Mark was a great winner, and I don't get why he was so disliked on here.
7. Nothing Katie Hopkins did on the apprentice was that unlikeable and I thought she had every right to be so annoyed with Christina and Adam for bringing up her relationship.
8. Selina, despite being annoying and an attention seeker, was one of this year's stronger candidates.

I think Ricky would have made the final 5 in every season since he won, but wouldn't have won any of them. Ricky would have made the final 5 instead of Francesca in season 9, Daniel in season 10 and both Charliene and Gary in season 11. I agree that Ricky is overrated and a bit arrogant

Had Ricky entered when the prize was a job then he would have been ripped to shreds in the interviews like the late Stuart Baggs. Similarly, I think Stuart or Joanna would have won had the prize been Lord Sugar's investment in season 8. Out of the final 5, Stella and Chris were very corporate while Lord Sugar never seemed to like Jamie (though Lord Sugar may have been interested in a property based business plan which Jamie would have offered)