Alan Sugar always claims that the production team do not have any say in who he choose as his Apprentice and if they tried he would leave. However by now he probably knows exactly the three he wants to get to the end and Sara wasn't one of them. Hopefully Michael isn't one of them either nor Helene but they are more likely to provide entertainment value for the next week or so than Sara was going to and I think that's why she went last night.

He basically said he fired her for having an annoying voice. He was going on about the way she talked-- not mentioning the content of what she said at all, just talking about how she spoke-- and said it was listening to her talk that made him think "do I want someone like this around me?" I swear, it was the voice.

He implied something similar about Jenny M last week, though he mentioned a lot of other reasons with her too.

Which, I can see his point of view in both cases. But Michael's voice is MUCH more annoying and it doesn't seem to bother him. Claire's is pretty bad too, but not as high pitched. I reckon if you're a woman with a high voice who talks fast, you need to get some voice training before going on that show. Or yer fired.

I wasn't suggesting the production team had any influence. Sugar had some other reasons than the ones he gave for getting rid of Sarah. I think he doesn't like intellectuals, the demure, the polite or sophisticated, he wants a blagger and a bruiser combined with a business brain.

I agree he has decided already who he wants and he is now going to make the criticisms of candidates fit in with his longer term objectives.

I honestly don't think he fired her for "business" reasons. I seriously believe he couldn't stand the sound of her voice! It seemed that every time she started speaking he winced or told her to be quiet. I believe that he thought to himself "I couldn't listen to that voice all day". On YF Sara said she didn't sound like herself on the programme and was surprised at how she sounded. Away from the pressures of the house and the competition she sounded quite nice but, I have to agree in the BR she did "rat-tat-tat but not in a good way.

But my good Laura- can you imagine listening to Michael whinge-whinge-whining away all day????????? His voice has a much higher irritation factor, methinks.

I know I thought the same after I posted. But, it appears that SAS has a soft spot for Michael and does seem to want to listen to what he has to say. Whereas Sara he cut off at any given opportunity. This really wasn't a business sacking but, personal. I know it sounds daft but, on the editing that we've seen I can't think of any other reason why he would fire her over Michael.

His reasons for firing Sara were pathetic.

Michael cheated and lied last week and Sir Alan told him he was on his last warning, so what does Sir Alan do? Lets him make another mistake and tells him 'just one last chance'. Is it any wander Michael keeps making mistakes. He probably knows by now Sir Alan has a soft spot for him and will forgive him regardless. The look Nick gave Sir Alan when he didn't fire Michael was priceless. This is not becoming a show about being competent, its becoming a show where no matter what you do, as long as you are liked by Sir Alan, you will be safe. I bet if Michael is PM next week and fails, he will still get another chance and someone else will be fired. Maybe its time Sir Alan stepped down and the apprentice changed hands because Sir Alan has really disappointed me this series. Firing Shazia, firing Simon, firing Sara, keeping the likes of Alex, Helene, Michael and Claire in week after week

Stupid decision.
Helene was one of the worst PMs we've seen, and she was really poor the last time she was PM too, when she bulleid Lucinda.
Last week Jennifer was fired for being a poor PM yet Helene did nothing in this weeks challenge but saunter around looking awful in a dress and she got away,
Either herself or Michael shoudl have gone.
Michael was WAY worse at sales than Sara, and has been consistently awful.
WRONG decision!

Absolutely, that look said it all really.

I agree. I was glad to see the back of Sara. From my own observations, I found her worse than useless in most of the tasks and, as she stated herself, she is not a team player. I was never impressed by the content of her whiny boardroom speeches either.

Of course, in this particular case, once Helene was let off the hook, Michael should have been the one to be fired. There was nothing between him and Sara in terms of their failure to make any cake sales but the balance was tipped by it being Michael who came up with the geographical division of labour.

I think Sara herself said it best, she isn't a team player; contradicting something I said in another thread.

She was good when she lead, but perhaps with the animosity around her she didn't feel good enough to give her all in tasks. The problems with the other members, would have put a lot of pressure on her to do well in all the tasks. So perhaps for her own sake it was just as well she went now, having reached a good standing in the contest.

Unlike Raef or Claire, I have never been 100% convinced about Sara being the Apprentice winner. So maybe this is what SAS saw in her, as well as the fact that she might not have been as big an asset as someone like Raef.

If it is any consolation, I really wanted Michael or Helene to go.

Whilst I agree that Michael should have been fired first I also agree with Sara going. She was absolutely terrible selling those cakes, I would have run a mile from her.

She has never seemed to me to be part of the teams, more on the outskirts looking in.

Spot on! In fact he may well even want Michael to get to the interview stage, to totally humiliate him. Whereas Sara may as well just be binned now, as she is never going to win, and makes the programme boring.

Fifth isn't better than fourth: it's first or nothing.

I've never been a fan of Sara because, as she said herself, she is not a great team player, but Helene is utterly useless.

I really wanted somebody to raise the point - what does she actually do during each task??

She just stays in the background and lets everybody else do the hard labour, then if it all goes wrong she goes into the boardroom and washes her hands of any responsibility.

I think Michael was about to go until BBC bosses said the rate your going SAS there will be no candidates for the finale so only fire the one.

Sara may be slightly more competent than those two at something, but that still doesn't say much for her.

What happens when the show's over, in your opinion?
The winner, his new employee, is hired as an entertainer?

I sat open-mouthed as Sir Alan laid into Sara on You're Fired.

Since when has Sara complained that everyone is against her? Sir Alan did that himself when he accused the others of bullying her in the boardroom!

And what about her performance on prior tasks? Sara excelled during the Bollywood and Moroccan tasks.

Poor decision

I'm pretty sure Sara did say that Helene did nothing throughout the task but this seemed to be ignored in the boardroom by Sir Alan and Helen and Michael.

That's also something I don't get. Nick and Margaret have also said she's really annoying and always moaning.

I think perhaps she's unfortunate to have one of those naturally moany voices. Alex does too (but he's utterly useless with it!).

They see a lot more than we do.

Yerr, that is true! Loved how they were taking the piss out of how screechy it was on during Week One on 'You're Fired'.

Yep that's true but I'd have just thought if she was whiny as they say she was, they'd have shown a lot more in the highlights. They love to show a different villain every week.

Meh, while Michael certainly is crap and deserves to be fired, Sara has hardly distingusihed herself at anything, glad to see her and her anoying voice go.

The last task lasted 2 days, and we saw around 30 mins of it. Nick and Margaret are there all the time. So if you assume 8 hour days, we saw about 3% of it, or 1.5% of what each team did.

Sara may well just be a bit of an habitual whinger, with no real instances standing out. This wouldn't make good telly, especially when brutal editing is required in any instance.

Margaret is a highly succesful lawyer, and doesn't strike me as the sort of person who would make something up for the purposes of telly.