Zonk
Administrator
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 13,170
- City
- Somewhere in
- Country
- United States
Let's not stray from the topic of the thread.....duties of Beatrice and Eugenie.
A good few years ago, Lumutqueen. But I can tell you this, Oxbridge employment figures today for new graduates are far, far higher than for overall non-oxbridge graduates. That's a fact. Indeed, even today, one of my old employers still automatically bins non-Oxbridge applications. Snobbish and shortsighted in my opinion, as it may well be cutting out a good pool of talent, but an Oxbridge degree is seen as better by most 'blue chip' companies than Goldsmiths. Beatrice - and in due course Eugenie - are always going to be at an advantage because of their royal connections, but even Beatrice's 2:1 degree would not help many 'lesser mortals' without experience at the moment.....I'm not sure when you went to Oxford, but trust me i've done my research on university's and what I wrote it pretty damn accurate. The past, is the past.
Only insofar as the terms of the trust allow this. And this is law, not discretion........You may not know this yes you are right in saying that. But my point still stands, whatever trust fund B&E have received or shall receive can be used as they wish at their discretion.
On the contrary, Lumutqueen, Oxbridge degrees occupy the top of the firmament in the UK and the world. A recent top level survey included Cambridge and Oxford in the top ten universities in the world along with Harvard, Yale, Stanford and several other top flight US institutions. The only other university outside of the US on this stellar list is the University of Tokyo. As an academic, I know that the University of London is a fine institution (Goldsmith's being one of the U of L colleges, along with the London School of Economics), but it is not Oxbridge. And that exists today and not just in the past. I am very familiar with the way hiring goes and a Harvard, Yale, Oxford or Cambridge degree will trump just about anything else anywhere in the world.
Actually, that could work. After every engagement she can auction them off for charity.I actually think her taste in hats is an asset; it's raised her profile to the point where she's instantly recognizable! If I were Beatrice, I'd wear an outlandish hat on every possible occasion to raise my profile even further. That way people will look forward to seeing her.
A nice idea, Lumutqueen, but we actually do not know this. Under English law, Trusts are private and the terms of the trust are governed by a Trust Deed, which is a private legal instrument. Generally, there are two elements to a trust, income and capital. There are very often restrictions on the use of both income and capital. It is common with some trusts to prevent the beneficiaries accessing the capital until they are 25 years old or so. We don't know what the terms of Beatrice and Eugenie's trusts are. There may well be strict clauses about use of the money - athough thanks to Sarah, we know that apparently the restrictions on the use of trust income were lax enough to allow Sarah to 'leech' [as the papers put it] off her daughters' trust funds. I believe Lord_Royal is a solicitor; perhaps he could help us with English Trust law if he drops by here.
If people in the BRF are really looking to Chelsea Clinton as a comparison--as the article states, then that is really dumb.
If the story is true, it puts the Princesses' Uncle Charles in a very bad light. Really, from the comments they've said on camera, they really don't seem like twits at all.