Its seems Katie's only real weakness is she is letting the viewers see her for what she really is - a very sly, manipulative, nasty piece of work. In "real life" she would only ever reveal this side to her closest allies (like Paul) who would hang off her every word anyway.

There are people like this in every large company, and usually they are in the top positions as they have no problems stepping over anyone to get where they want to be.

Possibly - she has that aura of Queen Bee which means that others look up to her or if they don't even like her, feel intimidated by her.

It's only when she's shown to the masses that she comes unstuck. She's very much like Grace from BB7 (although I don't think even Grace talked about wanting people dead! )

But as for overall 'success' - yes she'd do financially well and have a lot of status but she can't be a happy person overall if she has to demean others to get what she want. That's not what I aspire to as being a 'success'.
Last edited by Zeb Atlas : 03-05-2007 at 14:14

She lacks self awareness.

Is "Real Life" is the name of a pretentious and crappy company in the Chelsea area? If so you might be right!

Ha Ha! All I meant to say is I've had run ins with people like this in every company I've ever worked for who've made it to the top by being a complete b***h!

I agree with you up to a point. Clearly everyone in the house has been very influenced by Katie and she would probably be excellent at office politics. But she hasn't got much else. The key task for me was the art last week - if she really had business skills she'd have sold at least one painting. She knew she needed to, she got her own way on everything, she had the right accent and manner for the people buying them and she couldn't sell a thing. I've worked with people who are bad at the job but very good at office politics and they can fly very high, but eventually their lack of skill catches up with them. That may be less true in 'consultancy' than it is in most business.

But how clever is she if she doesn't have the common sense to know that you shouldn't say half the things she is saying to a TV camera, because nobody will like you? Has she never watched reality TV? Editing can do so much, but they couldn't make it look like she was saying 'C stream' if she wasn't saying it. Apart from that being utterly unforgivable, can't she tell how that is going to come across? It's not like she's saying it in the heat of the moment or she's forgotten she's being filmed - it's in an interview after the event.

I don't think anyone has handled being in the Apprentice more stupidly than Katie in all three series. I really think Sir Alan could not choose her now, even if she was fantastic in every task from here on, because of how snobbish she has allowed herself to be. He humiliate himself by hiring her.

Katie reminds me of the secretaries in Tory Central Office. All got their jobs through Daddy, all got nasally 'posh' voices, all got the standard Sloane look (patent pumps, blonde hair, pie-crust collars etc. - you know the thing!), far too many of them - and all completely useless. I'm told there's lots of mad activity, shouting, rushing about - a general appearance of big business, but in fact nothing is actually happening and there is zero efficiency. I'm sure that Katie is just like this - an appearance of being a high-flyer, but really just a clone of a CCO 'PA' (although many of them are quite sweet, if dense - I think Katie would wipe the floor with them as far as her malevolent personality is concerned!).

Yes there are many like her....sleep their way to the top. In Katie's case she thought Paul was a winner and slept with him.

What a sad and transparent saddo she really is. She lives in last century if she thinks for one minute this is how women in the workplace get promoted.....only to end up having no staff under them...well female staff anyway.

Needless to say, I've never stuck with a company who ever had a female boss that remotely resembled a Katie.

I'm undecided about her ability. She's only been on the winning team twice, but most of the other candidates rate her ability highly. In most things she has good judgement. She's harsh about Adam, but then he seems generally unpopular and I don't think we can blame all that on Katie.

Like I have stated in another thread, the fact that it is a once a week show, we have no idea of just how bad Katie or Adam is...and how much of it is edited good or bad in either of their favour.

But given the way the production seems to be going, Katie is coming across worse than Adam and we don't know how much influence she is putting on the others against Adam.

If we go by what we've seen thus far, then Adam does not deserve the abuse he has had from Katie. In fact, nobody deserves the abuse they have been getting from Katie.

So is Katie a real baddie or a setup one? Yes I think she is.

However, I bet some of the others are not that squeeky clean either, only the editing are not showing it for some reason. Perhaps because nobody is quite as good at being totally obnoxious as Katie.

That's a pre-requisite of being a climber. Anyone who is self-aware automatically is prey to those doubts that keep most of us a little humble.

Yes, she is a bit like Grace in that she is strong, popular, energetic, confident, capable etc. There is, though, no reason to think that such people are not happy. My observation is that people can be very nasty to others and go through life quite happy like that.

So did I, to begin with. Since hooking up with Paul, she may not have been doing as well as she otherwise would on the tasks. I think had she and Kristina worked together on that task, for example, they might have been able to win it. At least, they would have done an awful lot better.

For some reason, he seems to be unpopular with a lot of the others but we don't know enough about the real reason for this to say whether or not it has anything to do with Katie particularly. She gets the blame anyway.

Woo, that's a bit sexist. How do you know that Paul didn't think Katie was the winner and slept with her because of that? And how can you sleep the way to the top in the Apprentice anyway when the only people who that would work with are Sir Alan or maybe Nick and they don't exactly look up for it.

Whatever else Katie is, she's astute and intelligent about business. She let herself down in the art task but she was very good in the dog accessories task, picking the right product and pitching to the right people and completely wiping the floor with the boys.

I don't think she thought Paul was a winner, she obviously just feels at home with posh people and he was about the poshest and most chinless there. Some women are attracted to weak men and Katie is obviously one of them.
Last edited by Dictamus : 03-05-2007 at 23:53

Well for a start if your talking sexist..I'm female and the same sex as our Katie.

And yes you may be right that Paul slept with Katie for the exact same reason. Two beans in a pod...and a heat conductor of some kind there

As for sleeping your way to the top..it depends on your overall attitude in the first place. Katie's attitude in general is last century going by how she looks, acts, perceives herself to others (Maggie Thatcher comes to mind) and finally, how she thinks she can dominate men...and Paul the posh lieutenant...but totally flattered at Katie's attention, fell for it.

So you just need to picture that little scenario and it is not that hard to work out.

As for her intelligence in any of the tasks..sorry, if there was the slightest bit of intelligence as opposed to snobbery and arrogance, they are detracted by her agedness and set in her snobbish Thatcherism ways.

Sexism - welcome to the Apprentice forum!

Paul did actually say as much and that he could learn a lot from her. So yes, he clearly looked up to her. I doubt she looked to him in the same way, or as anything other than a chap she liked, got on with and who probably flattered her with his attention. I would be surprised if she felt there was anything she could learn from him or lean on him for, let alone advancement on the Apprentice or in her career. It's not as if he is powerful or anything.

..and what did he learn from her?

He's out of the show, so he has a lot to reflect.

He may very well have survived if he hadn't been influenced by her.

Don't forget the rest of the team's comments that Paul only listened to 'Katie'.

God forbid that any 'Paul's out there in Iraq meet up with too many 'Katie's'.

We will all be doomed.
Last edited by JTW : 04-05-2007 at 00:33

You would have to ask him.

I don't think Katie would have influenced him to buy bad cheese or to use a tin can to heat sausages or whatever else he did that was daft...

You're right...but she supported him all through, which is far worse IMO.

That's why I think having a personal involvement with him has had a very bad effect on her performance and her judgement. It must have been loyalty to him.

We would need to see other footage from previous shows to see if indeed this is the case.
Last edited by JTW : 04-05-2007 at 01:58

She seemed to perform much better on the first couple of tasks, when Paul was out of the equation.

I think it will be good for her now that he is gone. They were both a bad influence on each other, and would seem to lose focus on the task when they worked together, mainly spending their time hanging off each other and making googly eyes in each others direction.
Last edited by Jamie181 : 04-05-2007 at 02:07

Yes, it's interesting that Sralan, Nick and Margaret all thought Paul was good, until this shambles with the cheese etc when he and Katie seemed to split off from the rest of their team. It played havoc with the team as well as the task. Such a shame.

Especially when SA said that he had high hopes for Paul but was disappointed.

Do you think SA was disappointed more with Paul's task or his relationship with Katie?

I can't help thinking they must have had a lapse in judgement. One thing that doesn't go down well with Sir Alan and co is when people don't take responsibility for their failures and that was certainly the case with Paul.

As far as the cheese went, it was Paul's decision and he didn't listen to Kristina who expressed grave doubts about buying it.
Katie wasn't with him it at the time and didn't look too impressed with that decision either. Paul thought he could pull a fast one on the French selling inferior produce without even bothering to try and present it well. Not only that, he tried to blame Adam on failing the task despite spending £200 more on produce than the other team (I've deducted £100 for the banner which Adam was asked to do).

On the You're fired programme he never once held his hands up and admitted that he'd made mistakes. What a plonker - even worse than Rory.