Sarah, Duchess of York Current Events 16: January-May 2011


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Remarkable. In that first picture, Beatrice has the look of the Princess Royal. I'd not seen that resemblance before.


__________________** Pic ** gallery **

I think that the staff of Harry's Bar are very loyal. I can't remember any reports of overheard conversations or anything like that. Perhaps that's another reason why celebrities like to go there.


Maybe Harry's bar is there favourite restaurant. They shouldn't avoid places just because the press hang out there. Hey, all these pictures can go in the family album. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe Harry's bar is there favourite restaurant. They shouldn't avoid places just because the press hang out there. Hey, all these pictures can go in the family album. ;)

Harry's Bar is a very very expensive establishment in Mayfair. Given all the negative publicity in recent months, I do believe there is a reasonably strong argument for these 3 to stay from expensive restaurants and bars, other than for charity related events.

Whilst there can always be arguments to the contrary, Catherine has very clearly demosntrated in the last few years that it is very possible to dissappear from public view if you so choose to.
 
muriel said:
Harry's Bar is a very very expensive establishment in Mayfair. Given all the negative publicity in recent months, I do believe there is a reasonably strong argument for these 3 to stay from expensive restaurants and bars, other than for charity related events.

Whilst there can always be arguments to the contrary, Catherine has very clearly demosntrated in the last few years that it is very possible to dissappear from public view if you so choose to.

Why should they disappear? The majority of the press that has been created about them is nonsense. The press are always going to hound the York girls and Sarah, they should not let that ruin their lives.
 
Why should they disappear? The majority of the press that has been created about them is nonsense. The press are always going to hound the York girls and Sarah, they should not let that ruin their lives.

Whilst I agree that often the York girls are criticised in the press for no reason, this is a very different situation. Sarah has recently very nearly been bankrupt, and has embarrassed herself very publicly. The press did not make that up, Sarah is the only one to blame for the public spectacle that followed. Flashing her daughters inheritance by regularly dining out at expensive establishments is really not going to do any good.
 
I also don't think its fair to say that she is flashing her daughter's inheirtance by going to an expensive restuarant.

So because Sarah had money problem she can never go to a restuarant where the average meal is above a certain figure? Who's to say that her daughter's paid for the meal? She supposedly made some money from that Oprah show and goodness knows what else.

Is that how Sarah is going to be judged for now on....she had money problems so she can never be seen doing anything (shopping, on vacation, buying anything over a certain figure) that involves money?

I mean, its that realistic? She should just eat at middle income places?
 
Is that how Sarah is going to be judged for now on....she had money problems so she can never be seen doing anything (shopping, on vacation, buying anything over a certain figure) that involves money?

I mean, its that realistic? She should just eat at middle income places?

I think Sarah will be judged by the mosaic of her life. Much of that mosaic is comprised of poor judgement, of which the money "problems" are part and parcel. It's especially true because Sarah repeats her money problems again and again. And now it has an added focus, because she has been getting her money fix from dubious or shady sources.

So yes. There will always be questions about where Sarah obtains her money and how it is being spent. Is it fair? Maybe, maybe not - but it's reality. Is it fair that she receives thousands of dollars in fees to speak at a single function whereas teachers get paid pittances which are begrudged them, either? I think not - but it's reality.

She placed the topic into play. So it's a fair topic.
 
Last edited:
The only people who are interested in Sarah are people who frequent this and other royal boards and the press. Of course, it's fair that she receives thousands of dollars for her speaking engagements. She's the one who speaks, it is a job. You cannot compare apples (Sarah) and oranges (teachers).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Personnally I do not believe that sarah is worth thousands of $ for a speech. What can she be an example for - a good one?
 
i read the book written by diana's housekeeper. in there she said the royals would get most items and services at a really good discount. some as much as 90%. so now i have to wonder, how much did she REALLY pay?
 
i read the book written by diana's housekeeper. in there she said the royals would get most items and services at a really good discount. some as much as 90%. so now i have to wonder, how much did she REALLY pay?


Good point; I've heard that the RF is usually comped for drinks and meals, for example.

There are some family members (like William) who insist on paying, but many do not.

(Catherine also seems the sort who pays her way; I read that the store where she bought her sapphire Issa dress tried to give it to her, but she insisted on paying).
 
KittyAtlanta said:
You cannot compare apples (Sarah) and oranges (teachers).

I disagree I think it says something sad about our society when famous plp get paid thousands/millions for 'nothing' ( and I am using air quotes ) and teachers who educate the future and Drs who save lives get squat - jmo

Yes it's Sarahs job so she has a right to do it and I agree with u in that sense but still think it says something sad about the importance society places in celebrities (which in my book Sarah is over being a Rpysl)
 
Whether it's Sarah Ferguson, Prince Charles, or Warren Buffet, I don't think anyone is worth being paid thousands of dollars to speak. I'll even go farther and state that the millions of dollars movie stars and sports figures receive is absolutely ridiculous.
If someone such as Sarah is in demand, I'm not saying she shouldn't be compensated, but not to the tune of five figures or more to stand up and speak for 10-15 minutes, again, I feel that way for all speakers.
 
Whether it's Sarah Ferguson, Prince Charles, or Warren Buffet, I don't think anyone is worth being paid thousands of dollars to speak. I'll even go farther and state that the millions of dollars movie stars and sports figures receive is absolutely ridiculous.
If someone such as Sarah is in demand, I'm not saying she shouldn't be compensated, but not to the tune of five figures or more to stand up and speak for 10-15 minutes, again, I feel that way for all speakers.


Having a family member who does make a couple of thousand when he speaks I disagree.

He spends hours, if not days, working on the speech, researching the people he is meeting, the cause he is speaking about or for etc.

It isn't just the 30 minutes or so of the speech for which he is compensated but the hours of preparation - Time = Money.

No one has to ask him to speak but if they do they know how much it will cost and that he will do detailed background research to be able to be comfortable in that setting.
 
I also don't think its fair to say that she is flashing her daughter's inheirtance by going to an expensive restuarant.

So because Sarah had money problem she can never go to a restuarant where the average meal is above a certain figure? Who's to say that her daughter's paid for the meal? She supposedly made some money from that Oprah show and goodness knows what else.

Is that how Sarah is going to be judged for now on....she had money problems so she can never be seen doing anything (shopping, on vacation, buying anything over a certain figure) that involves money?

I mean, its that realistic? She should just eat at middle income places?


My point here is that she has recently had a very public brush with a near insolvency situation. There were many creditors who did not receive all that was due to them, and there were people who lost their jobs because of Sarah's situation. Being regularly seen out in some of London's most expensive restaurants, often with your daughters, is really a bit of a slap in the face of all those people. The source of her funding is not about to go away in a hurry, especially when it has recently been revealed that she borrowed from Epstein.


Is that how Sarah is going to be judged for now on....she had money problems so she can never be seen doing anything (shopping, on vacation, buying anything over a certain figure) that involves money?

As to how Sarah will be judged is entirely down to her actions. I am sure nobody would object to Sarah having a nice meal every now and then, but to regularly be seen at flash restaurants, and in a chauffeur driven Bentley is really inviting criticism.

She placed the topic into play. So it's a fair topic.
 
Last edited:
muriel said:
My point here is that she has recently had a very public brush with a near insolvency situation. There were many creditors who did not receive all that was due to them, and there were people who lost their jobs because of Sarah's situation. Being regularly seen out in some of London's most expensive restaurants, often with your daughters, is really a bit of a slap in the face of all those people. The source of her funding is not about to go away in a hurry, especially when it has recently been revealed that she borrowed from Epstein.

As to how Sarah will be judged is entirely down to her actions. I am sure nobody would object to Sarah having a nice meal every now and then, but to regularly be seen at flash restaurants, and in a chauffeur driven Bentley is really inviting criticism.

Agreed...sometimes image isn't always accurate but it is what's conveyed to plp and how we view her (accurate or not) is how she will be looked at....it's all PR
 
Iluvbertie said:
Having a family member who does make a couple of thousand when he speaks I disagree.

He spends hours, if not days, working on the speech, researching the people he is meeting, the cause he is speaking about or for etc.

It isn't just the 30 minutes or so of the speech for which he is compensated but the hours of preparation - Time = Money.

No one has to ask him to speak but if they do they know how much it will cost and that he will do detailed background research to be able to be comfortable in that setting.

I'm sure your family member doesn't speak about fluff but rather something substainal. Here a University paid Snookie more $$& to discuss tanning,drinking and hooking up then they paid Toni Morrison.... Tell me that isn't ridiculous
 
I'm sure your family member doesn't speak about fluff but rather something substainal. Here a University paid Snookie more $$& to discuss tanning,drinking and hooking up then they paid Toni Morrison.... Tell me that isn't ridiculous


Who or what is a 'Snookie'?

Actually to a bunch of undergrads that topic would be a great one - if the topic also was to go into the dangers of exactly those issues - that they can in fact be deadly.
 
She's on' the MTV realty tv show...Jersey Shores...and she recently spoke at Rutgers University. Turns out she was paid more to speak than Pultizer winner Toni Morrison, who admitted that she didn't charge her normal fee of 64K because she used to teach at the university and felt some nostalgia. Its getting some media attention in the States.

Really...whether or not Sarah (or other speakers) are paid a small, medium or extremely large sum is not Sarah's problem. I respect teachers, firefighters, police officers, etc and while I agree that they deserve more pay.......again...its not Sarah's fault or problem that society doesn't pay them enough.

Let's see...what else should we blame or criticize Sarah for.... I miss the good old days in this forum when we could discuss Sarah's positive and negative aspects but in an objective matter.

Honestly, this forum is not so fun to read or moderate...its the same ole same ole people talking about stuff that happened fifteen years ago...how Sarah should act with her children and how she should conduct herself in public because of financial issues (preferably never be seen on vacation, eating out in public, taking a mode of transportation that isn't public, etc.).
 
Last edited:
She's on' the MTV realty tv show...Jersey Shores...and she recently spoke at Rutgers University. Turns out she was paid more to speak than Pultizer winner Toni Morrison, who admitted that she didn't charge her normal fee of 64K because she used to teach at the university and felt some nostalgia. Its getting some media attention in the States.

Thank you for that. I don't wathc reality TV at all so that is probably why I have never heard of her.

Really...whether or not Sarah (or other speakers) are paid a small, medium or extremely large sum is not Sarah's problem. I respect teachers, firefighters, police officers, etc and while I agree that they deserve more pay.......again...its not Sarah's fault or problem that society doesn't pay them enough.

Let's see...what else should we blame or criticize Sarah for.... I miss the good old days in this forum when we could discuss Sarah's positive and negative aspects but in an objective matter.

Honestly, this forum is not so fun to read or moderate...its the same ole same ole people talking about stuff that happened fifteen years ago...how Sarah should act with her children and how she should conduct herself in public because of financial issues (preferably never be seen on vacation, eating out in public, taking a mode of transportation that isn't public, etc.).


I thought it was only me that was finding not only this forum but this board not as enjoyable as it used to be with the vitriol or saccharine, depending on the royal concerned but...
 
Let's see...what else should we blame or criticize Sarah for.... I miss the good old days in this forum when we could discuss Sarah's positive and negative aspects but in an objective matter.

Honestly, this forum is not so fun to read or moderate...its the same ole same ole people talking about stuff that happened fifteen years ago...how Sarah should act with her children and how she should conduct herself in public because of financial issues (preferably never be seen on vacation, eating out in public, taking a mode of transportation that isn't public, etc.).

I do agree that the general tenor on the forums is rather different these days, and I often find the relative level of knowledge is lower than it used to be.

That said, IMO, your reference to the general Sarah bashing is not particularly justified. There has been absolutely no reference to events of 15 years ago that I am aware of - the issues raised all relate to the last 6 months.

I used to be very appreciative of the way Sarah had apparently rebuilt her life in the US as an independent professional, and felt she was a good role model for her daughters. Unfortunately, the events of the last 6 months or so have caused me to change my view of her quite considerably. You also may not have noticed but just last week I had posted (in relation to Eugenie's 21st birthday celebrations) that sometimes the York girls are unfairly criticised.
 
Last edited:
:previous:Actually Muriel...those posts have recently been deleted...as they have nothing to do with Sarah's Current Events.

I share your sentiments about Sarah...she was definitely a favorite of mine in the years past and I will admit that I am VERY VERY disappointed in her recent behavior. I think that the criticism of some of Sarah's actions are very justified...what i disagree with is the tone...and the unrealistic belief that Sarah should simply sotp doing certain things because people can't get past her financial mishaps. She shouldn't be seen on a holiday, at a fancy restaurant, in a nice car, with a new purse, etc.

I don't expect everyone to like Sarah if you don't, I don't expect gushy posts all the time but some of the burdens and thoughts that are thrown out there are really just too much.
 
Last edited:
I think that the criticism of some of Sarah's actions are very justified...what i disagree with is the tone...and the unrealistic belief that Sarah should simply sotp doing certain things because people can't get past her financial mishaps. She shouldn't be seen on a holiday, at a fancy restaurant, in a nice car, with a new purse, etc.

I appreciate your argument, but with respect, Sarah has been seen at a lot of very expensive restaurants in London in the not so distant past. Nobody will resent a holiday or two a year, but when you get to 5-6 jaunts a year, people will start to question who is financing them.
 
I understand your point especially in light of her debts being paid by someone with dubious association

HOWEVER

I think the public certainly has the right to question public officials (i.e. those who utilize public tax supported funds) on how many expensive dinners, vacations they take but Sarah as everyone likes to point out is a private individual with a public life.

Unless she is required by any court system or Parliament to account for every nickel and dime she spends its really none of our business. We can say that its bad taste to flaunt money after her businesses failed and people weren't paid, and it is. But she doesn't owe us an explanation on how she lives.
 
I disagree I think it says something sad about our society when famous plp get paid thousands/millions for 'nothing' ( and I am using air quotes ) and teachers who educate the future and Drs who save lives get squat - jmo

Yes it's Sarahs job so she has a right to do it and I agree with u in that sense but still think it says something sad about the importance society places in celebrities (which in my book Sarah is over being a Rpysl)


As a teacher, I can honestly say that I don't begrudge Sarah a penny of what she earns for public speaking. Of course I'd personally like to earn more, as we all would, but if you accept the capitalist system in which we live, you have to accept that in the private sector, the fair price for a persons' services is whatever another person will pay for them.

If you want the Duchess of York to speak at a function, you pay top dollar because there is only one Duchess of York. Scarcity in the marketplace leads to higher price. As a public sector worker, my pay is something that needs to be decided by the society in which I live - I can argue that society doesn't accord enough value to what I do, but that's an argument based on other issues than simple economics.

As to what people say about the restaurants, the holidays, the chauffeur driven car, etc etc... I think what people sometimes refuse to understand is that Sarah's lifestyle, as defined by her position and her expectations over the last 25 years or so, is inevitably going to be very different from ours. She is part of a social elite. That's natural, and that's not something she should be ashamed of, cowering away from the cameras, lest she should be judged by those who've no right to judge her.

Judge her on her charity work, her passion to help others, her books, her love for her daughters, not by some facile meaningless rubbish about what restaurants she goes to, or how often she goes on holiday!
 
I understand your point especially in light of her debts being paid by someone with dubious association

HOWEVER

I think the public certainly has the right to question public officials (i.e. those who utilize public tax supported funds) on how many expensive dinners, vacations they take but Sarah as everyone likes to point out is a private individual with a public life.

Unless she is required by any court system or Parliament to account for every nickel and dime she spends its really none of our business. We can say that its bad taste to flaunt money after her businesses failed and people weren't paid, and it is. But she doesn't owe us an explanation on how she lives.

I agree that as Sarah is a private citizen, the public really ought not to question her finances. The issue only arises as she is so joined at the hip with the Duke of York, and more obviously, her daughters, who no doubt have inherited reasonable sums of money from HM and the DoE.
 
...its the same ole same ole people talking about stuff that happened fifteen years ago...how Sarah should act with her children and how she should conduct herself in public because of financial issues (preferably never be seen on vacation, eating out in public, taking a mode of transportation that isn't public, etc.).

Zonk - it's not things from 15 years ago. You've touched on the very point. Fifteen years, twenty years, twenty five years that Sarah has been dancing in the public light and she has yet to do more than get herself in over her head in every respect, bleat and cry, then do it again.

I applauded her the first time that she dragged herself out of debt. I loved her brilliant Weight Watchers ad where she dumped a pitcher of water out a window on a presumed reporter.

So fifteen years later, twenty years later - she has learned nothing. What she herself serves up for us to discuss - is what we are discussing. Her utter inability to control her greed which leads her into financial trouble.
 
....She is part of a social elite. That's natural, and that's not something she should be ashamed of, cowering away from the cameras, lest she should be judged by those who've no right to judge her.

I can assure you that there are many, many genuine members of the "social elite" who live quiet lives. They certainly attend many of the same venues and events that she would like to attend, but I can assure you that their quiet manner is not "cowering" away from cameras.

She chooses to live flashily and somewhat trashily, and cares not who funds her frolics just as long as it never stops. Part of that "scene" is being "seen."

The only think that the true "social elite" would "cower" from, would be being lumped in with her in the minds of the general public.

It's social season in WPB. I'll ask a few to see.
 
Right. It's the same with a soloist for a wedding or a music group playing for an event. The person isn't being paid for singing a couple of songs. The fee includes practice time, years of music study, travel to and from the site, proper clothing, etc.

No one has to ask him to speak but if they do they know how much it will cost and that he will do detailed background research to be able to be comfortable in that setting.
 
True. There could be people gnashing their teeth whenever they see Sarah living the high life in spite of her insolvency. People have helped her with her debts because of who she is, but what about the office worker who loses a job because their employer is owed money by Sarah or people like her?


My point here is that she has recently had a very public brush with a near insolvency situation. There were many creditors who did not receive all that was due to them, and there were people who lost their jobs because of Sarah's situation.
 
I have a lot of respect for Sarah's charity work and her kind heart. She's a fine public speaker as well. However, I do believe that she's not helping her cause by being "out on the town" so much. I wouldn't call these reports "meaningless rubbish." They aren't made out of thin air.


Judge her on her charity work, her passion to help others, her books, her love for her daughters, not by some facile meaningless rubbish about what restaurants she goes to, or how often she goes on holiday!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom