Right, so he's not quite in the City and his job ain't all that. Still done alright for himself though.

Saira, Ruth, Kristina and now Claire. Strong powerful female candidates who fall victim to the 'incomplete product'.

Michelle and Simon winning were the worst for me, because they both had tasks where they were totally useless. Michelle just spent one task drinking champagne, and sold like one thing, and didn't get fired. Simon screwed up the TV shopping task on pretty much every level.

Lee and Tim were more understandable and likeable as winners, but I'm still not happy. SAS is so hard to understand sometimes...

Oh please, that hardly equates to Lee's lie. Lee's lie was monumental and undeniable. He wasn't at uni for two years, and there's no way around that.

Michael is so-called 'half jewish'. If he considers himself Jewish, then he's Jewish...and calling himself a 'good Jewish boy' may be something you find corny, or something you disagree with, but it doesn't mean it's a LIE.

I really don't think there is any other evidence of candidates lying on their CV. (Ooh, apart from Alex saying he has 'conversational French'. I speak French, and what I heard him speaking was not proper French! But even that's not a flat out lie; unlike Lee's.)

I'm sorry to be so candid, but it's not hard to suspect that the only thing that SAS didn't like about them is that they have a womb.

As for the CV thing, SAS probably sees lying as an occupational hazard. The fact that BSkyB allowed Amstrad to make digiboxes is evidence that claiming your product is 'reliable' doesn't have to be a truth in the normal sense. After all, what is the difference between 4 months and 2 years functionality?

What annoyed me most was the way Sir Alan was continually trying to play it down. Yes... lots of people exaggerate on their CVs... which I maintain is very different from Lee's outright lie... but that doesn't mean it's okay. That doesn't mean Sir Alan should be on a popular show basically condoning the fact that "everyone" lies on their CVs and he's not bothered about it. I've probably exaggerated on a CV at some stage but I've never lied... and now I'm thinking I should because apparently everyone does it and people like Sir Alan don't really mind.

Obviously why he had two women in the final in series 2.

lol, it's a strange coincidence but every single year when it comes down to the final 2, the one I thought would and should definitely have won it was pipped to the post by the other one.

I didn't mind Tim, and I did think he did the better job on the final task, but I thought Saira would have won considering everything.

I liked both Ruth and Michelle but I thought Ruth had it in the bag too.

Kristina was completely robbed and Simon is the only winner so far that I completely disagreed with. I thought he should've been fired instead of either Jadine (he wasn't brought into the boardroom on that task though) or Naomi.

With Lee and Claire however, I thought it was a closer call and either of them did sort of deserve it. I preferred Claire but I don't mind Lee winning.

I don't mind who won to be honest.They was both the best this year by far.I did think Claire was better, but not by much.

I was happy for any of the last 4 except Helene to win. They all had their good points. But if I was hiring someone, as tough as it would have been, I would have went for Lee mainly because he has a great imagination and has come up with idea after idea on the show. That was really the only thing that stood him out from the rest for me.

As Helene kept going on about how ballsy she was and Lee about how he worked his tits off, it must have been very confusing for Sir Alan to pick the one with the most testosterone if that was his aim.

I thought Sir Alan's explanation as to why he chose Lee was highly plausible considering the job he had in mind for him.

I understand how you feel.

But if I could make a case for Tim. In my view he was the best ever Apprentice he ever had. Tim is what an apprentice should be. He stayed 2 years instead of the required 1 year. But everyone to their own he remains my favourite chosen apprentice ever.

This years Apprentice in my book is the worst in spite of the ratings. Intergity and respect has been lost. So in the end I was not bothered who won. However in this series I have my favourite contestant ever-Raef. Simon a close second. Apart from that thank God its over. Its becoming BB part 2.

Babeth

I just think Sir Alan wants people who are 'yes men' - they'll do what he wants, when he wants, and they won't challenge him. Nothing wrong with that - but he should make the candidates aware so that people like Claire, Ruth Badger, Kristina don't waste their time applying.
Lee was my second choice, but I think Claire was head and shoulders above the rest and showed real determination and commitment all the way through. I hope she goes far.

Sir Alan seems to be looking for an Apprentice type person, not someone who is already the finished article so his decisions make perfect sense to me.

Do you think people like Claire and Ruth and Kristina weren't aware that when they applied so did many thousands of others so the chances of getting on the programme were minimal to say the least? Then when they beat the odds and do get on, the chances of getting through the 12 weeks and making it to the final and being chosen are also quite high.

But if they do get past the first few weeks and show that they are good at selling, good at leading a team, good at adapting and using their initiative, the offers of jobs will probably come rolling in. Some of them won't even want the job working for Sir Alan and will use the exposure as a springboard to other directions. For most of them, the prize is not the year with Amstrad but the 12 weeks on the telly.

And as the boss Sugar has the right to make whatever choice he feels fits him and his organisation best, despite what the viewers want and think. As he said, Sir Al sometimes gets it wrong but he is in the best position to make the right choice for him, not us.

Perhaps Siralan hadn't forgotten that Claire has a tendency to undermine the person in charge in front of other people. It's not a trait I'd be keen on in someone working under me.
She did well and clearly has ability, but I wouldn't want to work with her and I wouldn't mind working with Lee. Maybe that's what it came down to in the end.

I don't have a problem with Lee winning out over Claire, but equally I wouldn't have had a problem with Claire winning. Unlike previous years, there didn't seem to be any great disparity between their skills and abilities. I think it's fair to say that the Badger and Kristina were robbed, but it would be an exaggeration to claim that Claire was as well.

The only decent winner was Tim, even though I think Saira should have won. Sir Alan only wants to hire people who aren't the all round very good, or the finished article. He wants someone with flaws, or wants to pick someone who has been on a very "tough journey". You could say that most of his decisions are "rags for riches" motivated, or that he just sympathises with this people. I think he should be emotionally attached to these people when it comes down to the boardroom meetings, IMO, because it can really fabricate what that person is really capable of.

I still believe Claire should have won.(Mind you, I probably cursed her because my favourites in reality shows ALWAYS come bloody second lol...Rhydian, Chris, Jessie, I could go on and on...)

Not a Lee fan myself but I did warm to him a little by the end. I think because he performed so well consistently on all the tasks he got the edge over Claire. Claire also wouldn't be as malleable and easy to control, though that has been said several times so it's an obvious factor really. She took the defeat well. Well done to both of them.

Going back to the original question, Sir Alan probably hired the right person for him but, had I been boss, I'd've hired Claire.

Could it be that Sir Alan wanted Lee to win - put him with Claire to strengthen his chances, and then manipulated the feedback obtained via the industry people at the presentations. There was leeway for a fix, since this final task wasn't about either team making more money - it was a presentation of a male eau de toilette.

We were advised that the dual bottle of Alex/Helene's product was too expensive for any profit to be made if it retailed at £29.95. We were also made aware that the dual bottle was the designer's idea, not Alex/Helene's or their team's. We weren't privy to the actual costs of making their dual bottle we were just told it would have been too expensive.

We know that someone didn't like Alex and Helene's product's smell. We also know that some were unhappy with the gambling aspect of Lee and Claire's product.

We were also informed that Claire handled the presentation very well, and that Alex's presentation was wooden and ineffective. That would mean that Lee's presentation would have won the prize for the worse presentation ever presented on Planet Earth.

We weren't told how many of the delegates liked either scent. We weren't told how many of them liked either presentation. If they had voted and had these votes counted - now THAT might have been interesting! It might also have meant a loss for Lee's team.

There was no selling of the product involved - I assume this would have been just too chancey - Lee's team might have lost!!

So we don't REALLY know what the people at the two presentations thought of the product and presentation, nor the actual costs we just know certain figures and percentages that were mumbled to the screen by Sir Alan.

So did Sir Alan Fix It for Lee to win ?

Is this an ineffective way of finding an employee to fit into the jobs Sir Alan has available? You can't help getting the feeling that more able candidates are thrown away as the series trundles to it's conclusion. Would not a CV, an interview, some post-interview checking and good references be fairer. But the show is very good TV!

I've always thought Siralan seems to pick the wrong one, however not this time - never liked Claire and can't imagine anyone wanting to work with the 'rottweiler'.

I never forgave the girl for treating people like dirt in the early programmes and her voice is also irritating.

It was clearly a fix. The other 2 were put together for a reason, leaving the 2 faves to go through. Their perfume idea was better.......Clare was fab but as someone else said, Sir A doesn't like strong women, nor does he like women of child-bearing age. !

strong doesn't just mean bolshy

I think he genuinely liked Claire (and Saira for that matter), but neither of them knew when to shut up

I agree, I think he liked Claire, but just didn't think he could work with her. I liked her too, but don't think I could work with her. I really don't think it had anything to do with the fact that she was of child-bearing age.

I think the only catastrophic mistake he's made is with Michelle. She was terrible imo - but at the same time, Ruth did feel just too good for the job.

Tim was an Apprentice whereas Saira was a bit gobby - and after she upset the man from Tottenham with her attitude, she was kind of on a backfoot. Miriam should have won Series 1 anyway

Simon was the right choice as well in my opinion. Kristina was good - but she made some really bad business decisions. The selling kisses idea, and the giving sweets to children then asking their parents for money were both unacceptable - plus like Saira she had a knack of upsetting people.

Lee was the right person over Claire as well - he had an impeccable boardroom record, and really you can't argue with that. He delivered and he worked hard - whether he can present well or not is beyond the point - thats a skill he can pick up along the way. And his presenting last night was better than the tissue task.