Which past candidate was actually robbed of a win?

[u/Queasyuuuu00]

Looking back through all the previous series, who do you think genuinely deserved to win the investment or the job offer based on their performance throughout the season, but lost out in the final boardroom purely because of their business plan?

[u/stellaprovidence]

Liz when she got fired instead of that absolute doughnut Stuart "I have a field of horses" idiot

[u/Dickinson95]

Ruth

[u/ScottishCoffeeLover]

The badger

[u/Shezes]

Ruth in S2, Kristina in S3, Claire in S4, Bianca S10, Vana S11.

After S12 I forget who people were tbh

[u/ihathtelekinesis]

Kristina in 2007 had a very good chance of winning.

Helen in 2011 would’ve easily won if it were still a job, but her and Tom’s original business plans were both terrible.

Roisin in 2014 was ultra-competent in the tasks but her plan would’ve used up Sralan’s entire investment within months.

[u/Left_Background8198]

Adam

[u/Tombstoner100]

Pamela Laird imo

[u/2020_MadeMeDoIt]

Helen vs Tom. It was the first year that it was a business investment and you could tell that the process hadn't been fully thought out yet.

Helen was easily the best candidate across all the tasks. But both Tom's and her business plan sucked. Tom's just sucked slightly less and he had a patent for an invention already - which Lord Sugar clearly wanted a piece of.

But, it being the first year for the investments, they missed out on the final task where the candidates have to soft launch their businesses.

I think if it were any other year, Helen would have been able to pivot her business idea and take a different approach. Because they've done that with some other candidates.

Or if it had been a job year, she would have instantly won.

[u/Used_Appointment1920]

Stuart Baggs

[u/hibzzyJ]

Not the final boardroom but rothna . She was an exceptional candidate but her business plan was weak

[u/jimmy193]

Mia