I completely agree with absolutely every single one of these points! had to double check i didn't post it myself

I thought Ruth was very substandard alright and it's clear LS did not take to her quirkiness.

I really liked Mark too - much more so than Roisin who some felt could do zero wrong at all

1. I hated Saira from Series 1 and still think she's just like Charleine, but worse.
2. I liked Lee and felt he deserved to win.
3. I liked Tom and felt he deserved to win.
4. I liked Mark and felt he deserved to win.
4. I thought Yasmina was pretty average and don't get all the praise.
5. Felipé did nothing wrong (*cough cough* skeleton *cough cough*)
6. Series 8 was great.
7. Kate Walsh is one of my favourite ever candidates.
8. The final this year should have been Richard vs Vana with Vana winning.
9. Ansell should have won Series 2.
10. April this year was absolute s**t.
11. Ruth Badger is ridiculously overrated.
12. Ruth from this series was equally overrated just for being "wacky".
13. Paul Torrisi should have won the first series.

14. I like Lord Sugar's jokes (even if they are scripted)
15. The big stretches between meeting point and tasks will never not be funny.

1 - Kate Walsh is the most boring contestant ever
2 - Pantsman was actually a good concept just badly executed

Pantsman was flawless in every single conceivable way - how dare you?!

1. Liz Locke is one of the most overrated candidates of all time. I didn't see anything that amazing from her. I'd say she was even more overrated than Naomi Lay from Series 3.
2. Michelle Dewberry is the worst winner ever in terms of task performance.
3. Though his business plan was the most viable, Joseph was the weakest candidate in this year's final 5, bar Gary.
4. I didn't rate Tom Gearing of Series 8.
5. April from this year was growing on me before she got fired.
6. I rated Francesca from Series 9 more than most other people did, though was admittedly lucky she got as far as she did.
7. Jordan from the same series wasn't very good.
8. I didn't like Yasmina Siadatan. Then again, I wasn't hugely keen on anyone in Series 5.
9. I found Charleine's behaviour worse than Selina's.

Yes there was.

I could be completely wrong here but I can't help wondering if Selina hasn't got something on the programme. This would explain the complete lack of Jack Dee taking the piss out of her on the 'You're Hired' programme. Or frankly in any of the 'You're Fired' shows after she went to the press...

Series 6 was a weird one. The final 6 were all very good but pretty much everyone else was quite poor. Alex shouldn't have been fired in week 6 as he was decent but brought upon his own downfall by not bringing Laura back to the boardroom

Joseph was 3rd best candidate this year. Was considerably better than Charliene too

Tom Gearing was a much better candidate than Tom Pellarau. Tom and Nick were the best candidates in series 8

Francesca I'm indifferent about. Never contributed much positively or negatively. Jordan was very good until week 10 when the boys team who started out so well completely collapsed

Yasmina deserved to win. Anyone who wins as PM 3 times completely deserves to win

Charliene behaved much worse than Selina in week 9 by blaming Selina and getting her fired for personal reasons. But overall Selina's behavior after the show has been awful

Yes, Series 6 was quite an odd series. All of the final 6 were relatively competent, but they each had sizeable flaws. I thought Joanna was the strongest candidate that year. Alex was a strange candidate, I feel. I remember him being good whenever he was in the winning team, but quite dismal when he wasn't. Laura was one of the worst candidates that series, utterly useless and whiny.

For me, there was little difference between the overall performances of Joseph and Charleine, with the latter just edging it. Neither had a decent PM stint between them. (Not counting Joseph's finale stint though.)

Tom Gearing was admittedly quite good, but not near as good as he was made out to be. He seemed to tail off after he lost as PM in Week 8. This may be another unpopular opinion, but I thought Jade was better than him. (If one reads between the lines before her admittedly disastrous Week 7 PM tenure.)

I thought that Francesca contributed quite positively in Weeks 3 & 4, but are forgotten in favour of her poorer performances. I didn't rate Jordan at all. His time management as sub-team leader in Week 5 seems to be glossed over. His sales skills were usually not very good, especially in the caravan task. And yes, he was appalling in Week 10.

Yasmina arguably did deserve to win, but I just didn't take to her. I found her to be a bit overrated too. I didn't feel she was that amazing in Week 2; I realise that cutting corners was the best way to win the task, but a chicken wrap without any chicken? Skimpy. I recall that she didn't brief Kate very well over the pitch, but that could be blamed on Kate too. It's been a while since I saw Series 5, would need to watch that episode again.

Charleine was worse the whole way through. She was patronising, rude, and quite unpleasant. She was particularly awful in Weeks 5, 8 and 9. I do agree with the last point about Selina. She comes over as being a tad unhinged on Twitter.

Sorry for the long post, BTW. Just wanted to reply to every point in detail.

Alex was very good on the tasks his team won, but was brought back to the boardroom every time his team lost. I agree with you about Laura and Christopher did nothing of note except for the fatal mistake that got him fired in Germany. Christopher was a poor PM on the advertising task

Joseph was a good PM on the France task. I know it might be an unpopular opinion, but other than struggling to manage Richard, Joseph did a good job

As for Tom, he was a poor PM in week 8 but other than that performed reasonably well. Even in week 8, he was unlucky to have been up against Gabrielle as the other PM who knew a lot about art and was able to win the task. Jade was underrated, I agree with you there and other than losing as PM she was consistent

Jordan may not have been a strong seller but he was a good PM twice and was very creative

Babygrows.........next


Yeah, Tom P. never existed

(mind you, Stella was also abysmal in the second half of series 6)



You can skip the "most" there

I would have liked Alex to have been given another chance, but there was no choice given the circumstances. I felt like he was picked on a bit, especially by that awful Paloma, just because he was a tad irritating. I could not abide Laura; I felt a bit sorry for her when she lost as PM in Week 2, but her shocking behaviour on Old Compton Street was unforgiveable. Didn't like Christopher either, he was a tad sleazy and a rather poor candidate.

I don't think Joseph was a very good PM on the France task, IMO it was Brett's sub-team that won it for them.

Tom was quite sub-standard even after that. He, along with Adam, got drunk on the wine task, forcing Nick and Jade to work more than they did. Week 10, he was a very poor negotiator, as none of his deals were accepted, and was quite lucky to be in the winning team. I don't remember why I didn't rate him on the luxury brands task, but I don't think he was that good there either. I never understood all the "Jade is useless" nonsense. I rated her from the very start, and I feel that many people's opinions are skewed on the Week 7 task, solely because she wasn't prominent before then.

Jordan was a good 'delegator', but that was the problem. It always felt like he was riding on people's coattails and seemed to contribute less than his subordinates when he was PM, especially on the Online Dating task. Not to mention that he was terrible on the Away Day one, though his mistakes could arguably be applied to Rebecca and Francesca even more so.

That product was so good that it pretty much sold itself, anyone (Unless your name was Melissa, of course) could have sold that item. Though I can't remember who secured it for the team. Was it her? Her PM skills weren't very good either.

Tom P wasn't as quite as bad as he was made out to be, but his stint as PM in Week 8 was possibly worse than Michelle's dismal Week 7 one.

Stella was pretty shocking from about Week 4 onward, bar Week 8, of which she only won because of Joanna.

LOL

Cannot agree enough, and she strikes me as completely up her own rear end. Remember the YF with Elle and Mergim, both great fun and down to earth, and then she came on- with about as much personality as the wall!


Me too. I know a lot of the BR stuff is prob scripted, but he actually is very witty in tv/radio interviews.

I think series 6 and 9 are the two series's when I've agreed with Lord Sugar's decisions most weeks. In series 6 I only disagreed with Alex and Liz's firing, while in series 9 I thought Sophie had more to offer than Natalie and Uzma while Alex was unfairly stitched up by Myles. Rebecca was fired harshly considering that she hadn't been PM yet but she made bigger mistakes than Francesca and Luisa was a better candidate anyway. Firing Jordan or Jason would have been fair enough that week

The boys team in series 9 were a strange one. Started out really strongly (even though Jason and Kurt were poor as PM first two weeks) but worked very well as a team. As the series progressed there was a lot of game playing as everyone wanted to get rid of Alex. That said, had Myles been fired in week 9 then Alex, Jordan and Neil would still have suffered a similarly poor collapse in week 10

There's always one candidate who gets really far despite being quite invisible. Since I've started watching those people have been Howard, Christopher, Tom, Jenna, Francesca, Sanjay and Gary

1. Charleine was awful - aggressive, abusive, condescending, inarticulate, over-sensitive, back-stabbing and immature. Her only redeeming feature was she was quite good at selling.

2. Selina wasn't as bad a candidate as she's painted - often she'd be talking sense (like on the French task), but the others just didn't want to know because they didn't like her.

3. I didn't think Joseph did much through the process that was particularly impressive. I don't think he was very instrumental in winning the French task, and the only week he really stood out was helping Elle in the DIY task. I'm sure him being a Lord Sugar fanboy didn't hurt his chances of winning.

4. Vana was a terrible PM on the French task, and should have been fired if not then, then in the Health Food task. (Although she was impressive in some tasks, like the Property Selling).

I would say that Joseph's performance in the Handyman task was the singularly most impressive performance by a candidate ever.

I thought Luisa was the best candidate in S9

No way should she have been fired in the health food task, she's not a food scientist.

I thought his interview performance was also the best so far.

He sold me a 9 year old car last year

Vana was very lucky not to get fired for soaking the snacks in oil.

It doesn't take a food scientist to work out that putting in three times the amount of oil specified in the recipe will result in a snack so greasy it's like the Exxon Valdez oil spill happened in the bag.

Got something? Like what?

They decided to show a bit of class by not slagging her off, something she has unfortunately been unable to do.

Surely that's quite a popular opinion? I was tempted to post the opposite as my unpopular opinion. I hesitated because I've spent so much time defending her here before.

I agree, especially about Charleine.

I actually didn't think Gary's business idea was that bad.