Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly to marry 17 May 2008

[maidmarion]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

The new princess pushy? Meet Peter Philips' ambitious bride-to-be | the Daily Mail
Daily Mail attempts to be both acerbic and sarcastic about Ms. Kelly and her personal traits. I am disappointed to learn that the couple in question sold their story to Hello Magazine. I have to agree with the Ms. Rebecca English, who quoted one of the courtiers saying, "It's just a bit, well, WAG-ish."

Just like everything else we hear about famous people, soon to be famous people and the likewise, until we actually know them, we shouldn't hold any judgements against them. I am sure they are great people but perhaps they made a poor choice, they are only human after all. Reminds me very much of the writings the "rags" published on Mary Donaldson about meeting Prince Frederick at a pub in Sydney during the 2000 Summer Olympics. Now they just can't get enough of her. Remember how badly and arrogantly the "Brisitsh Papers" treated Camilla and others alike in the her circle. Perhaps the writers and editors should back off and let these kids live their lives. And I hope the British people will also. It's none of anyones business and we should all stop with these "elitist" attitudes about and towards these folks and how they should and shouldn't behave!

MM

[Al_bina]

First and foremost, I have not passed any negative judgements on Ms. Kelly. At the same time, I do have a right to express my opinion about the choice in question. In my opinion, doing photo spreads and selling stories are good for celebrities including WAGs and actors/actresses, but not for members of the Royal Family.

[LadyCat]

I second that! It seems a bit unseemly to cash in on being the grandson of the Queen. "Tacky" is the word that comes to mind.

Cat

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by tiaratop

Wag-ish indeed. They should, at best donate that money to a charity, shame on them both for selling out to a glossy celeb magazine given their financial situation (a few million from his Granny as has been reported)...

They are private citizens who happen to be related to Royality. It's their right to do with the pictures of their wedding whatever they wish. It's not as if Peter gets money from the state for living and his wedding is financed by the taxpayer. There is a market for the pics, people are interested to see them and they selected a buyer. That buyer was not the D.... Mail. So it's clear why the Mail is not happy about the deal at all.

If someone is making money out of a private person, it's only right they should give part of the money to the person involved. Or not?

BTW - the article says that Peter only inherited a share in his great-grandmother's estate. As she had two daughters and 6 grandchildren and (I think) about 10 great-grandchildren at the moment of her death, I doubt his share as a great-grandchild was that much.

If you take a look at the comments about the fact that we did not see more than one pic of the christening of Viscount Severn, I personally am glad to be able to see more coverage of this wedding.

[Al_bina]

The couple in question has got this spread namely because of their royal connections, not because of their personal achievements as private well-to-do or rich citizens. If Peter Phillips were not the grandson of the Her Majesty, there would be little or no interest to them at all.

[LadyCat]

Regardless of how much money Peter did or did not inherit from his grandmother, I still think it was a tacky thing to do. They have pretty much precluded any chance of leading normal lives out of the spotlight and have placed themselves directly in its glaring glory. Maybe that was the plan, but hey, they are the ones who have to live with the fallout.

Cat

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by LadyCat

Regardless of how much money Peter did or did not inherit from his grandmother, I still think it was a tacky thing to do. They have pretty much precluded any chance of leading normal lives out of the spotlight and have placed themselves directly in its glaring glory. Maybe that was the plan, but hey, they are the ones who have to live with the fallout.

Cat

Cat, you're right in this. But that was their choice and they made it. To call it WAG-ish if someone sells the pics of his wedding to an more than interested public is what I don't think fair. There's a market for these pics and they used their chance. Why not? I have no doubt they talked it through with the queen and the Princess Royal and both agreed.

After all anne gets no money form the taxpayer but has to suffer the intrusion into her life only because of her Royal connections. So why should her son not make some money out of it?

[angela]

I must say that I enjoyed the pre-wedding interview in Hello magazine and I hope that there is some exclusive pics in the same magazine of the day itself. However, it cannot be denied that Peter and Autumn have now left themselves wide open for press intrusion. They have openly discussed, for example, when they want to have children and how many so they will not really be in a position to complain if and when the press take an interest in their future offspring. For the reported £500,000 they have earned from this I think they have traded an anonimity and privacy that they perhaps took for granted and will regret, in the long term, losing.

P.S. And please don't give me the sob story about Peter being desperate for cash. We can discuss verbatim about trust funds, legacies etc. Suffice to say that he comes from a family that are monstrously wealthy and I am sure that he is very rich indeed ie the Hello deal is just pure greed.

[wymanda]

Originally Posted by angela

P.S. And please don't give me the sob story about Peter being desperate for cash. We can discuss verbatim about trust funds, legacies etc. Suffice to say that he comes from a family that are monstrously wealthy and I am sure that he is very rich indeed ie the Hello deal is just pure greed.

The reports that the Queen Mum left an estate of six million pounds seem rather at odds with the reports when she died that the Queen had payed off her overdraft!
However, if her estate of six mill was split only with her great-grandchildren that would mean only around half a million pounds each (& James wouldn't have anything unless a provision was made for future children of Edward, Andrew, David & Sarah). If a provision was made then the amount inherited by each individual would have been much less.

[angela]

I don't believe in following wills etc to the letter as I don't think that the wealth of people like Peter Phillips can be so tidily explained. That is not an invitation for a detailed breakdown of how much money he is supposed to "officially" have it is simply my opinion that wealthy dynasties have always found ways and means of passing their money down to the next generation without too much scrutiny and in the case of the Windsors I have never bought into the theory that any of them are short of cash .

[MARG]

Originally Posted by angela

. . . .Suffice to say that he comes from a family that are monstrously wealthy and I am sure that he is very rich indeed ie the Hello deal is just pure greed.

Or more likely an attempt to "control" the media thirst for the inside scoop on the wedding. Doing an interview probably seemed like a small price to pay for some degree of privacy.

Just a thought, does anyone actually know what they are going to do with the money?

[LadyCat]

If I remember correctly, the Queen Mother's estate didn't consist of much in the way of liquid assets, mainly jewels and property. I believe she owned some sort of parkland in England, didn't someone get in trouble for building a road on it a few years ago? I'm not sure if she owned Glamis Castle in Scotland or if it is even still in the Bowles-Lyons family. I assume/hope it is still in the family.

At any rate, the bulk her estate was left to her daughter as Queen to avoid estate tax. One assumes QEII distributed it in accordance with her mother's wishes. As far as any actual money, there probably wasn't much for Peter or any of the other grandchildren and great grands.

Cat

[wymanda]

Originally Posted by LadyCat

If I remember correctly, the Queen Mother's estate didn't consist of much in the way of liquid assets, mainly jewels and property. I believe she owned some sort of parkland in England, didn't someone get in trouble for building a road on it a few years ago? I'm not sure if she owned Glamis Castle in Scotland or if it is even still in the Bowles-Lyons family. I assume/hope it is still in the family.

At any rate, the bulk her estate was left to her daughter as Queen to avoid estate tax. One assumes QEII distributed it in accordance with her mother's wishes. As far as any actual money, there probably wasn't much for Peter or any of the other grandchildren and great grands.Cat

Glamis passed down the male line through the Queen Mothers brothers & their offspring. If I recall correctly the current Earl of Strathmore & Kinghorne is her great nephew.

As for the trusts, I seem to recall that the funds were put into a trust for her great grandchildren in the early 1980's and were divided up when she died. Nothing unusual about that, most rich people create trusts for their offspring.

[rmay286]

Originally Posted by wymanda

The reports that the Queen Mum left an estate of six million pounds seem rather at odds with the reports when she died that the Queen had payed off her overdraft!
However, if her estate of six mill was split only with her great-grandchildren that would mean only around half a million pounds each (& James wouldn't have anything unless a provision was made for future children of Edward, Andrew, David & Sarah). If a provision was made then the amount inherited by each individual would have been much less.

Louise wouldn't have anything either then, because the Queen Mother died in 2002 and Louise was born in 2003.

I know Peter and Autumn were paid a fairly enormous amount of money for this interview, but I wouldn't necessarily say the money, or greed, was what motivated them to do the interview. With Peter being the first grandson of the queen to marry, I'm sure there were more than a few media outlets pressuring them to do an interview. If it were a case of Peter and Autumn going to the papers and asking to sell their story that would be one thing, but it seems probable that the papers were after them. And if magazines are asking for your story and you're about to get married and excited enough to tell the world how you fell in love, why not?

I don't have a huge problem with what Peter and Autumn did, all things considered. Fame is an odd thing which more often than not has little to do with a person's worthwhile accomplishments (think Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, who seems to be in the news more frequently the more mistakes she makes). Sure, Peter and Autumn are taking advantage of the fact that Peter was born royal, but they're not the first royals to be in Hello!...Princess Anne was in the first issue.

It's just the way the world works, the rich and famous-for-no-reason have more opportunities than others. Not particularly fair maybe, and I think it would have probably been a better decision for Peter and Autumn not to sell their story. But they did, and it seems pretty harmless, not some blatant expose of their private lives.

It's their decision to invite the public into their lives, now they'll have to deal with the consequences (increased public interest).

[Claire]

Originally Posted by wymanda

However, if her estate of six mill was split only with her great-grandchildren that would mean only around half a million pounds each (& James wouldn't have anything unless a provision was made for future children of Edward, Andrew, David & Sarah). If a provision was made then the amount inherited by each individual would have been much less.

It is illegal in British law to make provision for children not yet born. If the amount was to evenly split only already living children would inherit as was the case with George VIII which only Anne and Charles got money from, simply because the others weren't alive yet.

[zembla]

I am looking forward to seeing this spread in Hello...and whether it is as tacky as people are saying. But it's easy to cast Autumn in whatever light the media wants to since so little is known about her and furthermore how little is known about Peter. I mean can anyone even name an ex-girlfriend he had, I don't remember him ever having much attention...

[branchg]

It was reported The Queen Mother created an irrevocable trust with her remaining liquid assets, estimated at approximately $10 million, in 1984. The trust paid an income to all of her great-grandchildren, with the exception of William, for her lifetime. Upon her death, the trust dissolved and the principal was distributed in equal shares to her grandchildren, excluding Charles.

That means Anne, Andrew, Edward, Viscount Linley and Lady Sarah split the remaining money, which was estimated to be about $5 million. Her great-grandchildren probably received about $100,000 annually for 15 years, undoubtedly to provide for their expenses and education, but not enough to become wealthy.

[Lamyah]

I find it interesting that Daily Mail as always starts attacking one of the most private royal members, in this case Peter and Autumn. Perhaps its ticked off, neither couple had a sit down with them, which might amount to them claiming Hello paid them off. Besides, if Autumn was tacky or money hungry, then its funny way of suddenly materializing after 4 years of dating a non-titled son of a Princess who works for a living and not on taxpayers payroll. I'll post few snippet of the actual Hello Transcript which is far from all the trash the tabloid media stated:

What’s your state of mind as the we