Quite. He was actually nice but rather dim. To watch the truth about their ad slowly dawning on the other members of the team in the boardroom while Raef, deaf and blind to all the cues, remained blissfully confident of his brilliance was a perfect illustration of his limitations.

To the poster who said that Alan Sugar is a chav and nothing else, you seem to have omitted the fact that this chav has had the energy, wit and intelligence to make a massive amount of money through commercial aptitude, and has given away tens of millions of pounds to charity. If that's a chav, we could do with a few more of them in this country

I think Michael will go soon. Surallan is just waiting for the right moment to step on him. Raef went in the last challenge because the team's gravest sin was to jettison commercial focus for artistic tangent - and looking at Raef and Michael, one of them must have seemed more obviously responsible. Apart from the fact that Raef was team leader.

Indeed, Raef was still in denial on the You're Fired programme. Hearing him say "Well, if that's what the public like, God help us", that was a clear sign that the right decision was made. Raef took his eye off the ball. The ball is to cater to demand, not whether you find the public's taste beneath you. If the public like cheap, pink, plastic and flashing and are prepared to pay for it, the credible businessperson gives them that exactly that; and the person whose aesthetic sensibility is offended might be able to call themselves an aesthete but can't call themselves commercially minded.

Saying that SAS is waiting for the right moment to fire Michael is just beyond me. He had so many right moments. What about Helene in the previous task when she was a PM and ade a mistake after mistake and wasn't fired? Is SAS waiting for the right moment to fire her as well? The reality of it is that SAS has been waiting for the right moment to fire Raef. SAS was the one who made Raef PM in the first place. Some will argue it was Raef's turn but SAS made Claire a PM for the second time in 5 weeks when he needed her to prove she is a worthy candidate. Given that Michael asked twice to be a PM, didn't volunteer in the wedding task, he should have definitely been forced to be a PM in this task.

Raef was certainly not in denial. He clearly said in the show that artistically they were better and commercially they completely failed because the competition was the apprentice and Britain's next top director!!!

I agree that Raef screwed up on the task, but Michael was no better and was also swept away by his artistic aspirations. Neither of them said "what is the point of this ad?" Claire and Helene had to point out that they needed a close up of the box.

However, Raef had presentation skills and customer service skills that Michael did not. That is one reason he should have been kept over Michael. Michael was not even a good salesman as he proved at the NEC. The week he won his task with the cards, it was Raef's idea that won the task.

I think Sir Alan values sales ability higher than creativity or customer relations, but Michael doesn't seem to possess any one of those qualities in abundance.

SAS is reportedly worth eight hundred million pounds and I dont think he is scared of anyone doing better than him!

sir alan is the epitomy of what chav is about.


Now that is snobbery.

all this talk about intellectuals . . .
anyone noticed that what's missing in the apprentice hopefuls is everyday common sense???!!!

As has been said by several others, SAS has been very successful at making money and has no reason to fear Raef.

A few years ago I read an article by SAS where he criticised the trend in employing management consultants, who tend to be very slick and well spoken but actually add no value (i.e. reflect back to the company's directors what they already know). I could see where SAS was coming from since I have often worked alongside such people in the past. My guess is that SAS saw some similarities in Raef, even though Raef is not a management consultant. i.e. Raef is very slick, with great presentational skills, but may deliver less than he promises in terms of ideas and creativity that can be put to practical use.

I liked Raef and was sorry to see him go. I would have preferred to see Michael go, and I don't think Alex has done much either. However I do wonder how much substance there was to Raef.

Basically, I wouldn't employ any of them.
Last edited by Vivacious Lady : 25-05-2008 at 18:32

I think it's been noticed and mentioned quite a lot.

Certainly Margret has remarked upon it.

Having just watched the first three episodes on youtube I was absolutely gobsmacked by the complete and total lack of business sense by all the candidates (except possibly Shazia).

In the first episode the girls boys didn't check the local fish prices (to make sure they were competitive and get some clue) and then didn't check the pricing as performed by that ridiculous barrister.

In the second, the girls picked the price for doing laundry out of thin air.

In the third, the boys never established a correspondance between the cost of producing an meal and the price of selling it. They also ignored the wholesaler's list that AS gave them and went and paid supermarket prices (always high for meat and vegetables).

In the fourth the boys came to a complete stop for some hours (IIRC) rather than establish a working method to make sure the correct items were produced.

No wonder the expressions you see on Margret and Nick's faces are usually baffled wonderment.

I don't think that SAS fears intellectuals. He is just a human with preconceptions. SAS's long experience in business is reflected in his decisions.

When SAS fired Nicolas he said: This confirms that academics, lawyers, and the like are quite clueless when it comes to business.

Of course this statement is not generally true. For example, he made the wrong decision when he fired the lawyer Karen in series 2.

In the case of Raef, perhaps SAS has come across many who talk and dress like Raef and were just "a lot of hot air". As far as I am concerned, SAS failed to look beyond the cover.

We have to accept that SAS is human after all and can make mistakes. All respect to the man for his financial success. Most of the time SAS gets it right and a few times he makes errors in judgement.

I think this is spot on. Past frustrations in dealing with certain types of individuals over the years will have undoubtably influenced SAS's decisions. I agree that this may well result in a tendency to judge a book by its cover. Where I slightly disagree with you is that I think he may have been right about Raef (but then I have preconceptions as well and so that might be unfair to Raef).

Onwards&Upwards, I want to hug your post.


Whether or not it is an error of judgement is a subjective assessment, absent of detailed information about Raef's career to date and in the future. As SAS's conclusion matched what I'd thought of Raef for some time, I tend to the view that SAS knew exactly what he was talking about.

Raef, an intellectual? Haha!

I agree Sugar's gone bonkers over Michael. Can he really see himself in Michael (as he claimed?) He's Sugar without the brains, business acumen, common sense, without any redeeming features in fact, simply wanting money & air time.

As you said, an error of judgement is a subjective assessment. I believe he has made an error of judgement regarding Raef. We are all human and we all have experiences and preconceptions that shape our decisions. What I want to say that every one has the right to dispute SAS’s decisions without resorting to personal insults. He has made a few errors in the past and is likely to continue to make errors in the future.