Royal Wealth and Finances 1: Ending 2022

[jacqui24]

Are you now suggesting that Givenchy is a British label?

No one suggested Givenchy is a British label. Don't keep twisting my words. I specifically pointed out how what's bought from them isn't anything that can sell out. Instead, it gave a much higher profile to someone who is British that people, unless they were very closely following ins and outs of the fashion industry before, wouldn't know

She's had the honeymoon period. And if she was disliked by many columnists prior to her marriage, I think she will be even more disliked if she is continually seen in foreign designs and only wear Brtisih to "lesser events"......

When? Again, like I said, nothing about them has changed. So why even consider them.

 

[muriel]

Ah that one Prada suit, of course. Still working once with an Italian brand is far less than UK brands she's donned or Italian designers compared to British designers.

One Prada, one RL, one Dior, one OScar, one Brandon Maxwell, many, many Givenchy.......... and one Emilia Wickstead and one Goat!

 

[Jacknch]

A reminder please that this thread is NOT to discuss our personal opinions of the fashion choices of members of the Royal Family, but to discuss costs, wealth and finances. Opinions on Meghan's specific style can be made in her fashion thread. Thank you.

 

[Denville]

I Members of the royal house can now choose UK brands not just because they are somehow obliged to promote British businesses, but rather because there are British brands which are actually competitive with more traditional international fashion powerhouses. Am I wrong ?

It doesn't matter. Maybe British fashion design is not great compared with the big names in Europe, but wearing British designs, in public, is what Royal Ladies are supposed to do. If she is spending a lot of money on these clothes, which she probably is (or rather Charles is) then it is even more foolish for her to be doing this. If she wants to wear foreign designers, she can keep them for her private life...

 

[Chloep]

[...]

However, what I don't really see taken into account much at all is Meghan's extensive pre-royal working life.

While quite a foreign concept, fact its that Meghan has a considerable amount of liquid, personal wealth that she attained from working hard for the better part of the past decade. With a stable income that was estimated to average out to 50k+ a month over the course of 6-7 years, she has a personal wealth that would allow her to sleep in a bed made out of high end clothes.

I can't think of a single item in her known (a.k.a. RIDICULOUSLY SMALL) post-wedding wardrobe that is just a one-timer and not easily reusable as part of her royal working wardrobe even 10-20 years from now on. All of her pieces are timeless, high quality, classics with most having a nice breathing room for any weight she might put on in the years and decades to come.

Sophie is someone who is quite fond of doing this. That's why no one bats an eye that she goes to regular working events in OSCAR DE LA RENTA or GUCCI or EMILIA WICKSTEAD or VALENTINO or EMILIO PUCCI or PRADA or ERDEM, because she tends to rewear those extremely expensive dresses a good couple times, even years later.


______

I also find the idea of talking about statistics and patterns quite ridiculous with such a joke of a sampling size, and unreliable estimates and sources.

People are busy comparing tomatoes and apples and then are outraged if the two don't taste the same despite both technically being fruits, round and red.

______

With that said, if we don't see a better balance of new items by the end of this year, it WOULD certainly be a very questionable choice. Even if Meghan is very likely spending her own, hard-earned money.

I expect her to start rewearing dresses in about 2-3 months. She has already been rewearing her shoes, clutches, belts and jewellery (which are often counted each time as new by the Daily Fail btw, lol ). So, I definitely see her doing the same with clothes fairly quickly.

 

[JuliannaVictoria]

This thread has long become a circle jerk, it seems.

However, what I don't really see taken into account much at all is Meghan's extensive pre-royal working life.

While quite a foreign concept, fact its that Meghan has a considerable amount of liquid, personal wealth that she attained from working hard for the better part of the past decade. With a stable income that was estimated to average out to 50k+ a month over the course of 6-7 years, she has a personal wealth that would allow her to sleep in a bed made out of high end clothes.

I can't think of a single item in her known (a.k.a. RIDICULOUSLY SMALL) post-wedding wardrobe that is just a one-timer and not easily reusable as part of her royal working wardrobe even 10-20 years from now on. All of her pieces are timeless, high quality, classics with most having a nice breathing room for any weight she might put on in the years and decades to come.

Sophie is someone who is quite fond of doing this. That's why no one bats an eye that she goes to regular working events in OSCAR DE LA RENTA or GUCCI or EMILIA WICKSTEAD or VALENTINO or EMILIO PUCCI or PRADA or ERDEM, because she tends to rewear those extremely expensive dresses a good couple times, even years later.


______

I also find the idea of talking about statistics and patterns quite ridiculous with such a joke of a sampling size, and unreliable estimates and sources.

People are busy comparing tomatoes and apples and then are outraged if the two don't taste the same despite both technically being fruits, round and red.

______

With that said, if we don't see a better balance of new items by the end of this year, it WOULD certainly be a very questionable choice. Even if Meghan is very likely spending her own, hard-earned money.

I expect her to start rewearing dresses in about 2-3 months. She has already been rewearing her shoes, clutches, belts and jewellery (which are often counted each time as new by the Daily Fail btw, lol ). So, I definitely see her doing the same with clothes fairly quickly.

Thank you, thank you , thank you. ? ? ?

BTW...I see no hoopla over the DoC very expensive almost 2,000 pound Dolce and Gabana purse today at Wimbledon. Shouldn't she also be repping British fashion houses at all times. The hypocrisy is real. People are up in arms over a very small sample of the Duchess of Sussex's working royal wardrobe that she has only been sporting for less than 2 months while going on a handful of royal engagements. Instead of allowing her the time to breathe, find her footing, and dare I say, let us see some repeat outfits over the course of a year before we start to crucify her.

And another note, this British fashion vs the world...what benefit do these royal women bring to these fashion houses besides exposure? I can assure you, no one is running out to buy a 10,000 pound McQueen dress or a 20,000 Euro Givenchy dress just because Catherine or Meghan wears them. What they will buy are the accessories, the more affordable, couple hundred pound pieces that they wear. They may also purchase those "everyday" wear outfits from the highstreet in the UK or Madison Ave. in NYC. I've been a fan of Strathberry long before Meghan came on the scene, and she just renewed my love for the brand, so I bought a few more pieces to add my existing collection. Catherine already reps McQueen enough and Jenny Packman. There already getting the exposure. Meghan wearing their pieces isn't going to do diddly squat for their bottom line in the course of things, because again, no one is going to buy a 10,000 McQueen outfit unless they are already wearing McQueen.

All this is to say, let the DoS get over the hump of the highly publicised events and get to working on her everyday work wear over the course of a year, and then judge.

 

[Rudolph]

I don’t think anyone realistically thinks every item from top to bottom must be British but I do think royals should fly the flag for Britain as often as they can, and not just in fashion. Prince Charles is a good example of promoting local businesses and produce.

Really to me it just makes sense. Right now when I think of Meghan, I think high end French couture.

 

[Denville]

I don't think you need to be a genius to figure out that whatever happened in the past, modern royals are siupposed to be supporting their own country, its industries and products.. that's part of thteir job... Of course it s not necessary for EVERY item to be British made... or that they never wear foreign designers, but it should be relatively minimal. if they have an itch to wear French fashion, they can do so in htier off duty time...

 

[Curryong]

Queen Victoria (see documentary from my post)

But it wasn't consistent. Yes, Queen Victoria supported some local industries such as lacemakers and the Spitalfields silk weavers, but, as she wasn't known as a fashion icon most of her clothes were made by her own seamstresses and no-one took any notice.

Queen Alexandra, other Royal women and many in London Society, went to Paris for their garments, notably to the House of Worth. Worth was an Englishman but he worked and lived in Paris.

Princess Marina supported the British cotton industry when she wore afternoon dresses of cotton, but she also wore items by French designers. That's not the same as Hartnell dressing the Queen, heir and her sister pretty well exclusively.

I don't think you need to be a genius to figure out that whatever happened in the past, modern royals are siupposed to be supporting their own country, its industries and products.. that's part of thteir job... Of course it s not necessary for EVERY item to be British made... or that they never wear foreign designers, but it should be relatively minimal. if they have an itch to wear French fashion, they can do so in htier off duty time...

Denville, you have seen, I suppose, the long, long list in the Duchess of Sussex thread that two posters put online, which showed every British and Commonwealth designer that Meghan has worn since November last year, just eight and a half months in total, btw?

 

[Osipi]

Cassini was born and educated in France. It's small wonders that his designs are very French. And certainly, as someone has already mentioned, they designed accordingly to the French house designs. However, good luck getting away with that today. Intellectual property and all.

Anyways, my view on who has a say on fashion is first protocol, after that, it's up to the person wearing it and the person paying for it. Never underestimate the power of the purse string.

Aw geeesh... Now I'm finding myself interested in keeping an eye out for British wool in royal wardrobes. This is the guy that floats the boat that pays for Meghan and Kate's wardrobes so I have to think he's going to have some kind of influence in this. Not only with his daughter-in-laws but actually globally.

https://wwd.com/fashion-news/fashio...ol-in-fashion-during-florence-visit-10848914/

 

[jacqui24]

Aw geeesh... Now I'm finding myself interested in keeping an eye out for British wool in royal wardrobes. This is the guy that floats the boat that pays for Meghan and Kate's wardrobes so I have to think he's going to have some kind of influence in this. Not only with his daughter-in-laws but actually globally.

https://wwd.com/fashion-news/fashio...ol-in-fashion-during-florence-visit-10848914/

I doubt Charles cares what his daughters-in-law unless there is a problem. But I would think the person who's footing the bill would have a say when his money is buying trouble somehow.

 

[M. Payton]

I happen to think if this is true of Prince Charles then I am all for it as it brings jobs and money to the country. What is not to love about gorgeous fabrics made in your own country? I can't think of a thing and I try to buy fabrics here all the time and not one would I pay a penny for. As someone who is a homebody and loves sewing and crafts and making my home just for me, I would love to see things made in the US....yet not going to happen to most things now days. Yes I would love to buy wools from England or Scotland for all those plaids are my cup of tea.......so any links to fabrics made in either of these countries send them my way....and Thank you!

 

[Terri Terri]

I doubt Charles cares what his daughters-in-law unless there is a problem. But I would think the person who's footing the bill would have a say when his money is buying trouble somehow.

Are we even sure that Prince Charles is footing the bill for her clothing? Because if he was, wouldn't there be stipulations about how that money should be spent on a working wardrobe? Meghan came into the royal family with her own wealth...she brought her gown for the engagement photos and her own wedding dress. I can see Meghan being the feminist that she is saying, I can spend my own money for my own wardrobe!

 

[Osipi]

This helps explain things.

"Things will change a bit for the couple once they're married on May 19. Once she is officially a member of the royal family, Markle's clothing expenditures for official engagements will be paid for from Prince Charles' income, which is about $28 million. That money also covers Harry, William, and Kate's clothing budgets, as well as salaries related to their public lives (like those of their assistants). Just for comparison's sake, People reports that last year the total came to around $4.8 million."

https://www.glamour.com/story/heres-how-meghan-markle-pays-for-her-incredible-royal-wardrobe

 

[jacqui24]

Are we even sure that Prince Charles is footing the bill for her clothing? Because if he was, wouldn't there be stipulations about how that money should be spent on a working wardrobe? Meghan came into the royal family with her own wealth...she brought her gown for the engagement photos and her own wedding dress. I can see Meghan being the feminist that she is saying, I can spend my own money for my own wardrobe!

They are reimbursed for working wardrobe. There is no reason for Meghan to fund it through her private wealth as she's already had to give up all of her sources of income except for investments.

 

[Terri Terri]

Okay I guess what I am asking is....can Meghan choose to pay for her own clothes from her own wealth?

EDIT....saw jacqui's post after writing the above.

 

[Mbruno]

They are reimbursed for working wardrobe. There is no reason for Meghan to fund it through her private wealth as she's already had to give up all of her sources of income except for investments.

The issue with clothing expenditure by the royals is, however, that the difference between "working wardrobe" and "personal wardrobe" is not that clear cut.

 

[jacqui24]

The issue with clothing expenditure by the royals is, however, that the difference between "working wardrobe" and "personal wardrobe" is not that clear cut.

That's a different issue and I do have a view on it that's different than the current practice.

 

[Sunspot]

Sorry if this has been asked before. If the UK became a republic, would the royal family keep the Duchy of Lancaster, the Duchy of Cornwall and the Crown Estate?

 

[Zonk]

Sorry if this has been asked before. If the UK became a republic, would the royal family keep the Duchy of Lancaster, the Duchy of Cornwall and the Crown Estate?

Its its a peaceful decision to become a republic (and I can't imagine it wouldn't be), than I would imagine that the government would negotiate such arrangements with the BRF and if compensate them for the loss of such revenue.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Sorry if this has been asked before. If the UK became a republic, would the royal family keep the Duchy of Lancaster, the Duchy of Cornwall and the Crown Estate?

No. They aren't really 'private property' in the same way as Sandringham.

The 'Crown Estates' are lands that remained in 'crown' hands as the various monarchs gave lands to their supporters (remember William I claimed ALL the land of England as being his and thus established the 'Crown' as the owner of the land). Over the centuries the monarch lost their power to the extent that now they are mainly a figurehead and the income of the Crown Estates is given to the government to help fund the government expenditures. George III handed it all over as there wasn't enough to fund the army and the judiciary and other aspects of government still in the monarch's hands and he felt that it should all be funded and organised by the government of the day. He asked for enough back to fund his official duties and that of his family (the now defunct Civil List).

In 1992 the Queen agreed to repay the Civil List payments to all of her extended family - only The Queen, The Queen Mother and Philip kept their Civil List payments and the Queen repaid, from the Duchy of Lancaster, all of the other moneys paid.

In 2012 the government changed the way the official engagements were funded again - with the Sovereign Grant which is equal to 15% of the Crown Estates. The other 85% stays with the government to spend as it sees fit. That 15% also has to cover the maintenance of the occupied royal palaces.

As a result - with no monarch there would be no need for the BRF to receive anything from the Crown Estates as they wouldn't be living in the occupied royal palaces nor undertaking official duties on behalf of the nation. That money would presumably be needed to fund the President in their official duties.

The Duchies were set up as a source of private income separate to the Crown Estates so that there was a clear separation between the expenses involved in running the country and the monarch and heir's own personal expenses. As the monarch and heir will no longer have any position there would be no need for that income to go to them. They are also specifically for the 'monarch' and 'heir apparent'. The Sovereign Grant has guaranteed that the Duchy of Cornwall will go to the heir apparent regardless of gender or relationship to the monarch even if they aren't the Duke e.g. if Charles were to die before the Queen then William will have the income of the Duchy of Cornwall but not the title Duke of Cornwall.

They would keep Sandringham, Balmoral and Gatcombe as those properties have been purchased outright but none of the other homes e.g. Highgrove, Royal Lodge or Bagshot Park are although Andrew did pay the 75 year lease on Royal Lodge in advance so he would probably be safe to stay there until the end of the lease.

In short the government would take the Crown Estates, and the Duchies as there would be no reason for that money to go to the royal family if the country was a republic.

The younger royals would be expected to get jobs and earn their own way or live off their existing fortunes. They may pay a pension to the older royals - those over 65 definitely. Andrew has a naval pension but Edward would have to hope he has enough in trust funds to live the rest of his life.

 

[Mbruno]

Sorry if this has been asked before. If the UK became a republic, would the royal family keep the Duchy of Lancaster, the Duchy of Cornwall and the Crown Estate?

It would depend on the kind of settlement the republic would agree with the royal family, but I suppose the royals would give up the revenue from the duchies and the Crown estate after being offered some form of compensation.

 

[tommy100]

Given that in this day and age one of the main reasons the RF could be forced to give up the throne would be for perceived largesse I suspect no government would hand over revenue from the duchies or crown estate. Maybe at most a transitional payment or two but otherwise I suspect they will walk away with Sandringham & Balmoral, some jewels and artwork, the Queen's horses & investments.

 

[hel]

I suspect an argument might be made that, given the work and effort Charles has put into growing the Duchy of Cornwall, some compensation might be due (along the lines of a golden parachute for a departing CEO).

One thing I would bet money on was that if the UK were to become a republic and keep the CE and two Duchies, the property in them would be privatized within a decade and they would cease to exist in any form.

 

[padams2359]

I wonder about the Royal Collection. Who gets the art work, etc?

 

[Iluvbertie]

The Royal Collection is like the Crown Estate - it belongs to the nation and not to the BRF personally so the Royal Collection would be available for whomever the government decided could use it or go on display in the various palaces that would be opened as museums no doubt.

Most of the jewels and art works have been placed in the Royal Collection to avoid taxes over the years - either gift or death taxes. All gifts given on official visits over a certain figure go into the royal collection these days and do not remain the personal property of the royal who received those gifts.

 

[tommy100]

And there is IMO one of the best reasons to avoid a republic - the appearance of First Lady Blair or First Lady Cameron wearing the jewels.

Out of interest I wonder how many of the Queen's jewels are in the Royal Collection and how many are hers personally? Over the years the lines would get blurred.

 

[Fros]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1045044489037828096

Something Harry and Meghan will need to be mindful about their stay in Australia.

While Charles and Camilla had a private stay in Australia before their tour their own expenses were payed for by them but their taff was put up in hotels and their food and upkeep was payed by taxpayers and taxpayers were billed $19000 for Charlies and Camilla's private stay.

Not a great story for the royals in the run up to Harry and Meghan's tour.

 

[muriel]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1045044489037828096

Something Harry and Meghan will need to be mindful about their stay in Australia.

While Charles and Camilla had a private stay in Australia before their tour their own expenses were payed for by them but their taff was put up in hotels and their food and upkeep was payed by taxpayers and taxpayers were billed $19000 for Charlies and Camilla's private stay.

Not a great story for the royals in the run up to Harry and Meghan's tour.

This is just lazy journalism, IMO, and a real non-issue. Costs of the accommodation for security agents and staff are always billed to the local government. Its very much part of the cost of the tour. Its not lavish or high living, just the expenses that come with the territory. Even if there were to be an elected President in Australia, these costs will be incurred.

 

[Osipi]

You're absolutely correct. The bill for overseas travel for any RPO is submitted directly to the Metropolitan Police/Scotland Yard. Its where their paychecks come from also.

It is also that department that sets up the guidelines of what is expected as far as accommodations, travel, expenses and how many hours on the job allowed.
In a few places that I've read, even if Harry's RPO flew with him to Toronto back when he was visiting Meghan, his RPOs (there's always more than just one) couldn't just stay at the motel at the end of the block but was required to be put up in a hotel meeting the standards set.

Its kind of amusing but I remember reading in a few places where the royal was accommodated overnight simply (a tent or friend's home) and the RPOs stayed at a 4 star hotel.

Its not the royal that calls the shot on this.