I'm afraid to say that out of 10:

Series 1: 8/10
Series 2: 7/10
Series 3: 10/10 (would have been 9 if Katie actually MADE the final)
Series 4: 6/10

Looks like series 3, the anomaly in that pattern, is head and shoulders above the rest. I felt it was a perfect mix of business and reality tv (comedy), had a NUMBER of very funny and interesting characters that blended (or sometimes didn't) well. Series 1 was very good but maybe a bit boring in places as it was a pilot in all fairness. The first half of series 2 was awful really, glad I missed it the first time round. Series 4 was too much backstabbing and either the whole 16 of them were rather incompetent or the editing was making them look that way - I kind of didn't like that. At least in series 3 you tended to see candidates in a neutral light and if it was bad it was hilariously funny and you could tell the editing was intentional (for example Adam Hosker's "I'm a brilliant salesman"... "Can you do it for a quid less?" "No." "nothing?" "no" "not at all?" "no" "ok.")

What do others think?

Series 1: 9/10
Series 2: 7/10
Series 3: 8/10
Series 4: 5/10


Series 1 for me will always be the best by far - most able candidates, best tasks (probably because they were all new rather than recycled as has been the case since), more task focused.

Series 2 and 3 were both pretty solid, but this year if you take Raef out of the show what have you got left? Not a lot really.

Interesting - Siralun was very disappointed at the quality of candidates on Series 1 & 2!!

If he said that it was only as a means of providing good PR for series 3/4. I think it's blatantly obvious the candidates in series 1 were in a different league to series 4.

James, Adel, Saira and Tim were all worthy of an apprenticeship.

The only thing that spoiled series one for me was Miranda getting the boot prematurely and Paul who was, for me, the 'odious little t**t' of the group.

Series 3 was my favourite by far. It had all the most memorable candidates.

Not so - this came out AFTER Series 3 had started. Quite a serious row, by all accounts.

well, it sounds more like a rumour than a fact from what your saying, but I stand by my statement that the final 4 in series 1 are all superior in every way shape or form than any of the final 4 this year.

I think Series 2 would be my favourite. The Badger and no bullying!

I thought Claire was better than Saira. Saira was actually a bit of a disaster area; she made some huge mistakes, eg almost getting them thrown out of the football stadium, or insulting the artist she was trying to represent. TV gold for all the wrong reasons.

I thought Helene was better than Paul. Paul was sexist and it interfered with his performance, eg on the Advert task. Sir Alan now agrees he should not have reached the final; he should have been fired instead of Miriam in the TV task. (Much as he now accepts Raef was wrongly fired instead of Michael; we might have had Raef in the final instead of Helene.)

I thought Lee was better than Tim. In fact, for me Tim flew under the radar for most of the series, and somehow became the last man standing when the big characters fell at the end. Where-as Lee was a big character contributing all the way through.

I'll grant you that James is better than Alex.

What row?

I can'y see what row you are refereing to. (Although as I've yes to watch S2 & S3 it might not mean anything to me anyway).

Any context would be helpful, though.

Check out

http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/tv/r...mentid=4533081

and

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007...oadcasting.bbc

Interesting!

Series 2 for me. Shame the Badger didn't win but still. It had the right balance between being entertaining and contestants that had decent business credentials.

Best moment for me was Syed trying to meet someone on "Wandsworth Bridge".

"I can see Wandsworth Bridge."

"Nicholas?" "Nicholas?"

I can only really comment on the fact that series 3 was full of characters and people who looked very capable in business in comparison to all contenders on series 4 (exception of Raef). It was also much more fun to watch then series 4.

Series 1 : 8/10 - There were no BB wannabees on this and it was very professional and apart from Adele there was hardly any bitchy conflict (although she wasn't strictly a bitch). People generally got on and if they had conflicts they resolved them effectively (apart from Paul who just shouted expletives at anyone who he disagreed with!).

Series 2 : 7/10 - The only series to have my favourite out of the final 4 win so on that account I enjoyed it and didn't feel like I'd wasted my time. The characters were good but the focus on Syed who really annoyed me was a little off putting. The constant crying from some of the contestants was so cringeworthy though.

Series 3 : 10/10 - Head and shoulders above any other series for me. None of the characters were a waste of space apart from one or two. The overall standard of the candidates was really good and even if someone acted as a bitch e.g Katie , it was backed up by them being quite able whereas in other series the bitchy contestants were often the ones who knew jack all. I don't feel the winner was "fair" as I felt the decision was not made on the final task or the course of the entire process but instead on SAS' desire from the very start to have a property man and so that was something I didn't enjoy but Simon was still a good winner.

Series 4 : 3/10 (and that's being generous) - One point I'm giving just for Raef being in there otherwise it'd only be 2/10. Congrats to Lee but I still think he is probably the worst winner and was hired purely on tokenistic value. I also disliked most of the candidates immensely and there were too many unfair firings this year. SAS' hypocritical reasons for firing them were ridiculous too. And that's joined by the fact that SAS was just chasing ratings with some of his decisions. He's very rich and has built up an empire so obviously he's intelligent and can work out who's good for your company yet he kept on some of the useless candidates for a very long time. This topped up by the sub-standard quality of the candidates overall made this series awful.

Series 1 and Series 2 are my all time favourites, back when the show was cult viewing and new. This was when there were no wannabes, the conflicts felt real, there was no playing up to the cameras nonesense, and the decisions were generally good. I'll probably pick Series 2 just for the fact that there were more people I liked, and that I remember it more.

I can't believe Series 3 is being seen as the best. It is so overrated! I only enjoyed it a lot because of the characters and how they behaved. When it came to skill and talent, is worse than the first 2 but better than this series. It is probably the only good "pantomime" or "highly talked about" series so far, but I also felt that people like Tre and Katie, good salespeople, where only being focused on for what they did to other people on the show. It focused more on her bitching and his catchphrases than anything else. There was also far more conflict and nastiness, but this was new then, so it was all a surprise and fun. But...

Series 4 was just SO crap. The nastiness was just boring, but then left a bitter taste in my mouth after every episode, I could feel that the lineup and opening was much weaker than before, there were only very very few people that I either liked or thought deserved the job, or where more equiped, but TBH they are too good for Sir Alan. The show has just now become about him, and just to surprise the audience. It had the wrong winner, and he made the wrong decisions.

Great analysis and I'd agree with you except I liked series 1 over series 2.

I can remember the day of the final we were all chatting about it in work and worried that Saira would beat Tim. It's only with hindsight that you could see that he was the right candidate as he used all he'd learnt throughout the series to put across a great event.

Series 1 - 9/10

Series 2 - 7.5/10

Series 3 - 5/10

Series 4 - 3/10 (BB in suits - still the best description of this series and one I wished I thought of myself)

Series 2 by a mile. Paul and Syed made the series.

The current series had a visible drop in quality.

To be honest the first 3 seasons were equally good. This one had horrible candidates and a contrived winner I saw from around the third week.

I even said at the time to my partner it'd be whoever was in the final 2 with Claire and probably Lee.

I wonder which Siralun thinks was the best. I imagine that - if HE thinks the Series 4 candidates were weak - he'll be giving Talkback a shake up, on the basis that his continued participation is dependent on them finding better candidates.

I can't see the series being ANYTHING like as compulsive viewing with anyone else.

If Series 5 is anything like Series 4 then I'm gonna consider giving up TA full stop. I've managed to stop watching BB to a certain extent even if I "follow" it so I'm sure I could manage that with The Apprentice.

Interesting! As it happens, I cannot stand BB, and refuse to watch it. Now BB really IS a programme where the participants are chosen purely to rub each other the wrong way; evictions on BB pander to the lowest common denomintor in the human condition, eliciting mass condemnation by the general public, in a way similar to the old Roman arena (although without the permanent ending!(lol))

TA this season garnered a record audience share, and this for a programme where the public has no possibility of affecting the outcome.

This entire thread probably goes to show that the posters are NOT representative of the GBP, otherwise we would be much more uncritical about the show.

The new viewers were those who hadn't seen any series before therefore had no yardstick to measure this series against. Many people I talked to about this series felt that it was poor and there was no-one they really felt like supporting in the last few weeks.

I saw S4 as it happened from episode 4.

S1 I saw over the course of about 10 days from u-tube.

I can't honestly say one series was better than the other but that may be because of the difference between seeing them over the course of 1.5 or 9 weeks.

Certainly I got the impression that the standard of candidate was higher in S1.

James, Saira, Miriam and Tim were all very impressive in a more rounded way than the final five in S4.

The only reason the show has been getting record audiences this year is because it is on BBC1, which is why I think the show was dumbed down a bit.