so when Tre and the others got fired, was it in order ie 5th then 4th then 3rd ?
ie in Sir Alans opinion was Tre worse than Simon or did he just fire them randomly, because if he just fired them randomly, then couldn't he have been left with Tre and Kristina for example at the end instead of Simon and Kristina ? So when Katie declined the offer maybe he should have called them all back in and said right lets start again

It wasn't random. Sir Alan had his favourite three, and Lohit and Tre were going to be fired regardless.

I think he deliberated more over Tre than Lohit. That's certainly what the editing suggested.

What I can't understand, is that when Sir Alan told Horseface she was through to the final and turned to Simon and Kristina, he was supposed to fire one of them, but didn't as his attention went back to her. (Where she then 'fired' herself).

So we never found out who he was going to fire out of those two, no-one mentioned it and it was just forgotten. Surely he should have revealed who he had lined up? He must have known. Or has something been said since that I've missed?

He told Katie she was in the final and then was thinking about who to get rid of out of Kristina and Simon. While he was thinking he looked at Katie and realised she didn't look happy at all and quite uncomfortable and so he called her up on it and then that led to Katie quitting. He never made a decision about who he would have fired out of Kristina and Simon because once Katie had quit he had his finalists.

Yes, but had that not happened, he would have had to make a decision on either Simon or Kristina pretty soon. He must have had some idea of who he had in mind to fire out of the two.

FRom stuff he's said he's incinuated he wanted all three and was having a tough time deciding between Kristina and Simon. Idon't think he did know who to get rid of out of those two - so Katie gave him an easy escape.

He probably only made an issue out of her glum face because he was that torn on the other two.

Yes, you could well be right there, as he did seem to be having a tough time deciding.

I think he would have fired Simon!!! He already had Katie whom he describes as "very bright", he needed a sales person to follow the pattern of the last two years:

Tim vs Sara
Michelle vs Ruth

and that is Kristina as she has similarities to Sara and Ruth. She was praised by all 3 advisors and there is no way he would have fired her at this stage. That man Paul wasn't impressed by Simon at all and he described him as a "gross under-achiever". I noticed that SAS takes the opinions of Paul very seriously. That is why he didn't fire Katie despite the fact that the other two weren't as impressed as Paul with Katie.

It would have been a Katie vs Kristina final and Katie would have won and the reason would have been "Kristina's lack of creativity!!!".

Now I expect Simon to be the winner for the same reason. Unfortunately, I believe Kristina is the runner up regardless of whom she is up against!! I really hope I am wrong.

Yeah he would have had to make a decision but Katie quitting meant he didn't. We never found out who he was gonna fire because Katie quitting meant he stopped even thinking about it as it was irrelevant now.

Yes, Lohit didn't stand much chance. To me the edit made it look like Kate, Kristina and Simon were well ahead of Tre, and presented the dilemma, but in "Why I fired them" it sounded like Tre was part of the dilemma too.

Tre calmed down a lot as the series progressed. He improved as much as Jadine did, but didn't get as much credit for it.

I agree, last night it sounded like Tre was a contender yet last week the comments were all about him being a fantasist with bedrooms all over the world etc. I dont think he was ever a real contender. Right at the beginning sir Allen said he didnt need employees who caused friction and trouble. However much Tre improved there would still be that doubt that he is a troublemaker within a team.

I dont know if he would have fired Simon. Based on what his interviewers thought, you would have thought he was going to, but then he didnt listen to their opinions at all and decided to keep katie in. The whole thing was bizarre to me because based on previous performance and on the interviews there is no way he should have kept katie at all.

he said that if Katie hadn't have fired herself, he would have told her that he had changed his mind, and would have fired her. However, I see your point - if he hadn't changed his mind, then who would he have fired? My guess is that Simon would have been a goner.

What seemed odd to me was SAS implied that he was struggling to choose between Katie, Simon & Kristina.

But, he admits to having niggling doubts about Katie's commitment all along.

So, if it was really that tight, why didn't he leap at the opportunity to fire Katie with a good reason?

(IMO, he would have quite liked Tre, but his panel talked him out of it!)

His reason for firing Tre was because he thought he would cause friction (he was probably right). Yet it was a pretty safe bet that Katie would cause friction too, so why put her in the final two?

It doesn't really make sense to me that he picked Katie, because he HAD to have Kristina in the final, his advisors had nothing but good to say about her. And I don't believe he would have had all female final again. His final two had to be Christina and Simon if he had any shred of judgment at all.

I loved Charlie Brooker's description in the Guardian: The final is now a showdown between the sole credible contestant (Kristina), and a shivering puppy (Simon). Surely a foregone conclusion. Surely.

Why do you think Katie would cause friction? She didn't during the series - most of the other candidates liked her. She showed she could work well even with people she didn't like.

You can't hide your true character forever though. The backstabbing and complete disrespect for others is likely to be revealed and upset people in a more permanent environment.