Originally Posted by TomC (Post 9729785)

I read both yes

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 9729785)

what you said was Sarah shouldn't win or the series would be ruined.

Originally Posted by Santa Corbyn (Post 9728186)

Sarah better not win now or else this great series has been wasted

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 9729785)

Which is quite nonsensical considering the premise of the show.

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 9729785)

It's plainly wrong to say Sarah shouldn't win bc she's not entertaining enough.

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 9729785)

It's views such as these that have bee the ruination of the show!

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 9090357)

Why should I support the person who's the best business person when it's not a series business competition anymore?

I gave up trying to look for good reasons why people should win about three years ago :worry:

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 9729841)

Incorrect!

Originally Posted by Santa Corbyn (Post 9729843)

Oh dear.



The premise of the show is for Lord Sugar to find a business partner. Let me reiterate - that's Lord Sugar's job. Not mine.

I'll also point out again that this hasn't been a serious business programme in a decade. The premise may well be, but the way it is edited, the way it plays out, and for Christ sake even the way it is casted (these are nowhere near the best entrepreneurs in Britain) has all the hallmarks of an entertainment show. And do you know why? Because it is one. A primetime entertainment show on BBC One.



Except I never said that, proving just as I expected that you didn't read my post.

I said Sarah 'better not win' which does not have the same meaning as 'shouldn't win'. The latter implies she doesn't deserve to - which I've made no allusion to in any post in thread. Rather, what I've said is, I don't care who 'deserves' to win because that would require me to care about their business skills or plans. Again. I don't. Because I'm not Lord Sugar. The former - which is what I actually said - implies I would rather she not win, because it would sour the ending (not ruin!) of what I think has been a great and entertaining series. That's a personal preference based on the role (or lack thereof) she's played in this series as a character on an entertainment programme. It has nothing to do with whether I think she or anyone else 'deserves' to win. Because I don't care who actually 'deserves' to win.



Is it really now? Perhaps you need to look closer to home then :whistle:

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 9729852)

I hereby cancel myself. Good ****ing bye.

Good job on the detective work btw. Perhaps more effort needed at getting that rod out your arse though.

Originally Posted by Santa Corbyn (Post 9729865)

:hehe: you're welcome my friend!

But just a reminder that it was you who initiated this discussion with a patronising question! Everyone knows how I work by now - give it and expect it back. I respond in kind to whatever the tone of the post. I'd have been happy to have a civilised discussion, you chose otherwise.

Originally Posted by Robert. (Post 9731900)

I'm dreading a Sarah and James Final 2, just because Michaela, Elizabeth, and Joanna all sound like risky business partners even if they've been capable of high reward. Those last 3 would be fantastic winners but if it turns out the other 2 have some kind of stellar business plan after all it's curtains for me.

Originally Posted by Vanessa (Post 9731814)

Can't wait to see my lovely James in the interviews :amazed: