General News about Prince Carl Philip & Princess Sofia, Part 1: June 2015 - June 2016

[carlota]

If true I find it interesting that Daniel had to sell his businesses and give up that side of his life. And Chris refused a title as he refused to give up having work outside of being a royal. And yet Sofia is allowed to own businesses.

Why am I predicting that Sofia will get away with this? Madeleine was bashed in the press for this, and if Daniel had done somthing like that, the press would have eaten him alive...

Is she allowed to provide the palace's adress as the one for this "business" Really? Is nobody saying anything about it?

How come the press department knew nothing?

Didn't anybody learn anything from Christina & Inaki?

you all summarized my thoughts. daniel had to step down, chris had to refuse any titles to remain in control of his affairs, madeleine had her share of complaints because of being part of chris' businesses, yet now sofia is allowed to own a business?

and what an odd description of the company! 'Consulting in leadership and business development, Sales in the textile and clothing industry and Management of movable and immovable property, and related business.' it sounds like everything and nothing to me. i do remember sofia owned (still does?) a yoga clothing company. i wonder if she wants to start something similar? however, i have no idea what kind of experience sofia has to do 'Consulting in leadership and business development'... and it seems a wrong thing to do, being princess of sweden. her position at the company could bias her actions as a royal, and maybe give preferential treatment to the companies her business is consultant to.

(and... as if they (royalty) didn't learn enough about cristina and inaki's situation!)

 

[Mbruno]

Well, it's CG who calls the shot and we've seen it many times now, his favourite child CP & in-law Sofia can do as they please. I guess CG still has something to make up for having to stand by and watch CP robbed of his throne, he and Sofia would be future King and Queen, with a male heir in tow.

There are lots of examples of double standards with siblings and in-laws since Sofia stepped onto the scene, this is just one of many. Sofia's CV was whitewashed while Daniel is still the 'fitness trainer' he never got remotely the same support from the court.

The whole topic has already been discussed at length so I'll leave it with that.

I was watching the video from the Swedish Armed Forces celebration of CG's birthday and I couldn't help noticing how proud the King was of seeing his son standing by his side in military uniform as the troops passed by. Carl Philip looked every bit the "crown prince" the King thinks he should have been.

 

[Mbruno]

If true I find it interesting that Daniel had to sell his businesses and give up that side of his life. And Chris refused a title as he refused to give up having work outside of being a royal. And yet Sofia is allowed to own businesses.

And even if there is no rules, I agree after Cristina and Inaki, they need to be very clear what this business is, where the money comes from and the rest. The Swedes don't need a corruption scandal.

I haven't examined the matter in detail, but, on a quick look, Sofia seems to be complying with the guidelines issued by the Royal Court, i.e that members of the SRF are allowed to own shares in private companies, but they are not allowed to sit on the boad or be a salaried employee. I don't see any reason for controversy then.

 

[tausi]

Daniel can remain co-owner of his company, Madeleine can become co-owner of her husband's business, but it is Sofia favoritism?

Thank you!! I was going to ask the same thing! Why doesn't Sofia deserves the same privilege others have been afforded? Carl Phillip also own Bernadotte and Kylberg.

Everyone evolves on their time. And I am glad Sofia stays true to herself and she is not worrying about few people who want her to live in the past.

 

[Queen Claude]

I think that the media should report on things like this. I don't think that there is anything wrong with Sofia starting a business even after she married in, the only thing that raised my eyebrows about this particular business is that one of its classifications is "consulting in leadership and business development." While I don't automatically assume the worst, that is one of those business types where mischief can ensue.

I don't want to put the cart before the horse here, Sofia started a business and is complying with the rules, I am not going to assume that anything shady is going on or is intended but again I like that the media is reporting about the business and is therefore serving as a watchdog.

I think that royals who are not heirs have to toe a fine line, many of them are working royals but over time they get marginalized as the next generation of heirs come of age, so I can understand why these royals try to build something outside the royal fold. Unfortunately quite a few of these endeavors have not gone well, I know people are bringing up the Spanish royals, but I am also thinking about what happened in the British Royal Family with Edward and Sophie and, while not totally apples to apples, what happened in the Danish Royal Family with Joachim. Yes these are cautionary tales, but I don't necessarily think that the answer is for the royals to abandon building businesses and hope that the wealth they inherit will sustain them, their children and their children's children. I'm just thinking ahead thirty years, by then Estelle and Oscar will be adults and they, along with their parents will be the core of the royal family. Carl Philip and Sofia will be less important royals but will likely still get royal perks which is OK assuming that they continue to serve Sweden, however Alexander and his siblings, grandchildren of a monarch, will be expected to make their own way. Of course Alexander and his siblings will grow up very privileged and should be able to build wealth and status on their own, but I can also see Carl Philip and Sofia wanting to be able to build businesses as their "second act" when they are no longer in the top tier of Swedish royals, and also wanting to build wealth to pass on to their children.

 

[LadyFinn]

Carl Philip is involved at least at these companies:
CPhB Design, registered 2008, activity: The company will engage in the design of ready made clothing, ceramic and glass products, household and decorative items, graphic design, photography, asset and property management and related business.
CPhB Design AB - Företagsinformation

Bernadotte & Kylberg, registered in 2011, activity: The company will engage in the design of clothing, ceramics and glass products, household and decorative items, graphic design, photography and related business.
Bernadotte & Kylberg AB - Företagsinformation

Carl Philip Edmund Bertil, registered in July 2014, activity: Mixed farming
*, CARL PHILIP EDMUND BERTIL - Företagsinformation

 

[Madame Verseau]

I looked at other comment sections about this story from a couple of blogs; and basically this is not sitting well with a majority of people. The comment section on SvenskDam is really vocal. Complaints about Daniel being forced to give up his interests, double standards, the grief Madeleine & Chris received. But when some comments veer to comparisons to Infanta Christina and Inaki of Spain, it's bad. (That's elsewhere.) I remember the king's interview during his birthday and he complained about what's written in blogs about the family. This must be heartburn-inducing for the king. Even if the actions are legit, perception is reality. The court needs to get in front of this.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

The situations of Daniel and Sofia are not comparable. Daniel is the spouse to the future head of state, Daniel is the father to the future head of State. Closer linked to the head of state is not possible. Daniel will be provided for, all his life long. Daniel's spouse will be provided for, all her life long. Daniel's eldest child will be provided for, all her life long.

Prince Carl Philip has to earn his own living. Princess Sofia has to earn her own living. Their children have to earn their own living too. The right every Swede has to earn his/her own living, is also enjoyed by Prince Carl Philip and Princess Sofia.

 

[quest]

I looked at other comment sections about this story from a couple of blogs; and basically this is not sitting well with a majority of people. The comment section on SvenskDam is really vocal. Complaints about Daniel being forced to give up his interests, double standards, the grief Madeleine & Chris received. But when some comments veer to comparisons to Infanta Christina and Inaki of Spain, it's bad. (That's elsewhere.( I remember the king's interview during his birthday and he complained about what's written in blogs about the family. Even if the actions are legit, perception is reality. The court needs to get in front of this.

Oh please, comments in SvenskDam are the majorities of time negative, when is the scoop? people do not understand and critique the only person.
Daniel, Madeleine, Carl Philip and Sofia, are in the same case, the owner or co-owner of a company, but are passive owners. It is the economic department who advised Sofia to act like that, that created the company in this form and act as a passive owner.

 

[LadyFinn]

The situations of Daniel and Sofia are not comparable. Daniel is the spouse to the future head of state, Daniel is the father to the future head of State. Closer linked to the head of state is not possible. Daniel will be provided for, all his life long. Daniel's spouse will be provided for, all her life long. Daniel's eldest child will be provided for, all her life long.

Prince Carl Philip has to earn his own living. Princess Sofia has to earn her own living. Their children have to earn their own living too. The right every Swede has to earn his/her own living, is also enjoyed by Prince Carl Philip and Princess Sofia.

Carl Philip inherited Villa Solbacken (assess value 6,1 million SEK) and about 5 million SEK from prince Bertil. And about 10 million SEK from princess Lilian. And Ökenäs farm from Bertil Jonsén (assess value 9,2 million SEK). The media told in 2013 that Victoria, Carl Philip and Madeleine had each 30 million SEK at the bank as savings.
Så mycket har kungabarnen på banken _ Stoppa Pressarna – Kungligheter – Kungafamiljen – Svensk Damtidning – Prinsessan Madeleine – Kronprinsessan Victoria
Här är kungafamiljens och Sofias sköna oaser _ Nyheter _ Expressen

Victoria, Carl Philip and Madeleine have private investment firm, Gluonen, which primarily invests in funds. In the summer 2015 there were assets of around SEK 22 million in the company.
Victoria, Carl-Philip och Madeleines klipp på börsen _ Nyheter _ Expressen

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Oh please, comments in SvenskDam are the majorities of time negative, when is the scoop? people do not understand and critique the only person.
Daniel, Madeleine, Carl Philip and Sofia, are in the same case, the owner or co-owner of a company, but are passive owners. It is the economic department who advised Sofia to act like that, that created the company in this form and act as a passive owner.

It would be impossible for royals to maintain a standard without funds. Most royals will have an investment portfolio, own real estate and/or lands, have co-ownership in companies. In some countries members of the royal family became millionaires by their own clever businessmaking. The late Prince Friso of the Netherlands co-founded and co-owned a big Hungarian airline company (WizzAir), was co-founder and co-owner of the MRI Centre Amsterdam, etc. He never received a cent of taxpayer's money but left his widow and daughters behind as millionaires. Look at Viscount Linley and his succesful business. It is modern life (in fact not because royals have always been investors and owners for centuries).

 

[Missy-]

Carl Philip is involved at least at these companies:
CPhB Design, registered 2008, activity: The company will engage in the design of ready made clothing, ceramic and glass products, household and decorative items, graphic design, photography, asset and property management and related business.
CPhB Design AB - Företagsinformation

Bernadotte & Kylberg, registered in 2011, activity: The company will engage in the design of clothing, ceramics and glass products, household and decorative items, graphic design, photography and related business.
Bernadotte & Kylberg AB - Företagsinformation

Carl Philip Edmund Bertil, registered in July 2014, activity: Mixed farming
*, CARL PHILIP EDMUND BERTIL - Företagsinformation

Does CP's family sit on the board of any of his companies? Her family encompasses the entire business, how is that ethical? I'm so tired of people trying to whitewash Sofia's actions (I don't mean you LadyFinn, I'm just talking in general). She should be held to the same yardstick as everyone else in everything, including her past. You don't get a free pass just because of who you marry.

 

[quest]

Does CP's family sit on the board of any of his companies? Her family encompasses the entire business, how is that ethical? I'm so tired of people trying to whitewash Sofia's actions (I don't mean you LadyFinn, I'm just talking in general). She should be held to the same yardstick as everyone else in everything.

Obviously his family is not there, they can not, but he put friends,
Michael Storåkers, family of his partner (Kylberg), or people working for the king, Axell Calissendorff (Calissendorff sector alone board for Benzo AB, which is owned privately by King Carl XVI Gustaf. He is Chairman of the Board of CPhB Design AB, which is privately owned by Prince Carl Philip). By the way, the king also has a private company. ...

So the 'scandal' of sofia is to have done like everybody else.

 

[Missy-]

Done like everyone else, what are you talking about? She hasn't done anything 'like everyone else'. How many people do you know that have a past like hers, for which she has no regrets by the way? And this is decidedly NOT how a business should be run if you are at all worried about business ethics, which anyone with half a brain who is in the public view should worry about.

She is a public figure who must and will be held up to the microscope, the sooner she realizes this and starts acting accordingly the sooner people like me will have nothing to say. Until then, I will continue to point out her questionable actions.

 

[quest]

Done like everyone else, what are you talking about? She hasn't done anything 'like everyone else'. How many people do you know that have a past like hers, for which she has no regrets by the way? And this is decidedly NOT how a business should be run if you are at all worried about business ethics, which anyone with half a brain who is in the public view should worry about.

Mindless people who accept her without question are just as foolish as she is. She is a public figure who must and will be held up to the microscope, the sooner she realizes this and starts acting accordingly the sooner people like me will have nothing to say. Until then, I will continue to point out her questionable actions. BTW, it's not hatred, it's absolute disgust, big difference.

it has a company, like other members of the royal family, Carl Philip, Daniel, Madeleine, King... Company made in the rules and in agreement with the Economic Department of the castle, She can not get into the board, so it is like the others and put friends, or as it did her family. So who and why we should condemn? The royal family, the court, the castle, well, she had their agreements, since she asked.
When was your value judgments, you can keep them. Nobody forces you to follow the actions of Sofia.

 

[Madame Verseau]

Expressen has finally weighted in:

Prinsessan Sofia har startat ett bolag på Kungliga slottet | Nyheter | Expressen

I'm surprised at the "royals should not sit at the company" lead, and bringing in the quote from a constitutional law professor. I don't think he cleared the distiction between CP's businesses and this one. I think the question how active Sofia really is in this company, and should she be? It looks like this professor believes a princess should not be involved in any business, as if it's against tradition. Whatever it is, it's a PR rake that's been stepped on.

 

[casualfan]

I think that the media should report on things like this. I don't think that there is anything wrong with Sofia starting a business even after she married in, the only thing that raised my eyebrows about this particular business is that one of its classifications is "consulting in leadership and business development." While I don't automatically assume the worst, that is one of those business types where mischief can ensue.

I don't want to put the cart before the horse here, Sofia started a business and is complying with the rules, I am not going to assume that anything shady is going on or is intended but again I like that the media is reporting about the business and is therefore serving as a watchdog.

I think that royals who are not heirs have to tow a fine line, many of them are working royals but over time they get marginalized as the next generation of heirs come of age, so I can understand why these royals try to build something outside the royal fold. Unfortunately quite a few of these endeavors have not gone well, I know people are bringing up the Spanish royals, but I am also thinking about what happened in the British Royal Family with Edward and Sophie and, while not totally apples to apples, what happened in the Danish Royal Family with Joachim. Yes these are cautionary tales, but I don't necessarily think that the answer is for the royals to abandon building businesses and hope that the wealth they inherit will sustain them, their children and their children's children. I'm just thinking ahead thirty years, by then Estelle and Oscar will be adults and they, along with their parents will be the core of the royal family. Carl Philip and Sofia will be less important royals but will likely still get royal perks which is OK assuming that they continue to serve Sweden, however Alexander and his siblings, grandchildren of a monarch, will be expected to make their own way. Of course Alexander and his siblings will grow up very privileged and should be able to build wealth and status on their own, but I can also see Carl Philip and Sofia wanting to be able to build businesses as their "second act" when they are no longer in the top tier of Swedish royals, and also wanting to build wealth to pass on to their children.

This perfectly sums up the situation, except that the business address is one of the palaces? That's going to have to change, for sure.

 

[quest]

Expressen has finally weighted in:

Prinsessan Sofia har startat ett bolag på Kungliga slottet | Nyheter | Expressen

I'm surprised at the "royals should not sit at the company" lead, and bringing in the quote from a constitutional law professor. I don't think he cleared the distiction between CP's businesses and this one. I think the question how active Sofia really is in this company, and should she be? It looks like this professor believes a princess should not be involved in any business, as if it's against tradition. Whatever it is, it's a PR rake that's been stepped on.

The article dates this morning and they just have to copy out the article of Aftonbladet.

 

[Missy-]

I've wasted as much time on this topic as I feel is justified, my opinion stands, we will agree to disagree. But I'm not alone, go read some of the comments in Aftenbladt and Expressen if you think I am alone in my opinions.

 

[LadyFinn]

Expressen has finally weighted in:

Prinsessan Sofia har startat ett bolag på Kungliga slottet | Nyheter | Expressen

I'm surprised at the "royals should not sit at the company" lead, and bringing in the quote from a constitutional law professor. I don't think he cleared the distiction between CP's businesses and this one. I think the question how active Sofia really is in this company, and should she be? It looks like this professor believes a princess should not be involved in any business, as if it's against tradition. Whatever it is, it's a PR rake that's been stepped on.

Expressen's article is from this morning and it quotes Aftonbladet's article. The professor has right to say his opinion. The court has it's own policy which I have posted earlier today and according to it the royals may not be a a board member, ceo or vice ceo of a commercial company, or be full-time employees. As for Sofia's role and how active she really is, I think that it is quite impossible to get information about that.
It will be interesting to see the annual report of Sofia's company.

Does CP's family sit on the board of any of his companies?

Carl Philip's family members are royals and they can't be members of the board of a commercial company.

 

[quest]

This perfectly sums up the situation, except that the business address is one of the palaces? That's going to have to change, for sure.

one of Carl Philip companies have the address of the castle

CPhB Design AB
Kungliga Slottet 111 30 Stockholm Stockholms län

 

[quest]

Expressen's article is from this morning and it quotes Aftonbladet's article. The professor has right to say his opinion. The court has it's own policy which I have posted earlier today and according to it the royals may not be a a board member, ceo or vice ceo of a commercial company, or be full-time employees. As for Sofia's role and how active she really is, I think that it is quite impossible to get information about that.
It will be interesting to see the annual report of Sofia's company.



Carl Philip's family members are royals and they can't be members of the board of a commercial company.

thank you LadyFinn for all the data, and to put things in context.

personally I'm not here to defend Sofia, it's just that I do not see why we should condemn it for something other than 'royal' have (since people compare), and the more it has done with the agreement and the rules that have been requested to follow. And I think it's many stories about not much. That she just closed her old society, because there it was the only representative, and to create the new with the court rules. it is the same industry with the addition of movable and immovable property.

 

[rominet09]

thank you LadyFinn for all the data, and to put things in context.

personally I'm not here to defend Sofia, it's just that I do not see why we should condemn it for something other than 'royal' have (since people compare), and the more it has done with the agreement and the rules that have been requested to follow. And I think it's many stories about not much. That she just closed her old society, because there it was the only representative, and to create the new with the court rules. it is the same industry with the addition of movable and immovable property.

I really agree with you (from Liège by the way !!!!)

 

[carlota]

this situation is very confusing. so madeleine got bashed for being a member in chris society (who very cleanly gave up any titles to continue his activity), but CP and sofia each have their own societies, which no one complains about, not even the court?

The situations of Daniel and Sofia are not comparable. Daniel is the spouse to the future head of state, Daniel is the father to the future head of State. Closer linked to the head of state is not possible. Daniel will be provided for, all his life long. Daniel's spouse will be provided for, all her life long. Daniel's eldest child will be provided for, all her life long.

Prince Carl Philip has to earn his own living. Princess Sofia has to earn her own living. Their children have to earn their own living too. The right every Swede has to earn his/her own living, is also enjoyed by Prince Carl Philip and Princess Sofia.

i am sure that CP and sofia, and their offspring will enjoy a very privileged lifestyle, whether their parents own companies or not. it's not as if, once victoria becomes queen, they will be thrown out of their properties and left homeless. it's not either as if, without any fortune amassed by themselves, their children will not afford an education with which they will be able to start their own businesses, should they wish that, or their careers.

Done like everyone else, what are you talking about? She hasn't done anything 'like everyone else'. How many people do you know that have a past like hers, for which she has no regrets by the way? And this is decidedly NOT how a business should be run if you are at all worried about business ethics, which anyone with half a brain who is in the public view should worry about.

Mindless people who accept her without question are just as foolish as she is. She is a public figure who must and will be held up to the microscope, the sooner she realizes this and starts acting accordingly the sooner people like me will have nothing to say. .

sofia is indeed a public figure. and so is CP. making up their own rules is just arrogant and un-royal in my opinion. you have everything provided for, and your role for that privilege is to represent sweden. it just doesn't look good if, in a selfish manner, you take the best of being royal, with the best of being a private citizen, and make your own definition of being a diplomat. one takes the full package. how does this sound to a taxpayer, who pays for the royal family for their representation in supporting causes that will make his country better, only to realise that, in fact, they are only doing that part time because they have their private businesses to attend to?

should sofia have wanted to head a business, then she is no different to chris, who refused any royal privileges to allow for that. why, then, is this getting approached differently for chris and for sofia? had it been the other way round (sofia refusing titles to focus on her business, chris taking the royal position and founding his own company on the side), i can hear the uproar of the feminists on how life is unfair and that 'females are being treated differently in the royal family'.

i am baffled by the inconsistency and the hypocrisy operating in the swedish court...

 

[MARG]

OK, I am officially confused. It is alright for Prince Carl Philip to be co-owner of a company but not for Princess Sofia because princesses traditionally don't? What a load of old cobblers.

As to the company itself, is it not a private, family owned company, i.e. not listed on the stock exchange nor a listed charitable foundation. That being the case, there is no commonality between her company and that in which Christiana and Inaki were involved.

As has been pointed out, Daniel was not forced to sell his share of his businesses but rather turn the running of them over to others (of his own choice) and stepping down from the Board.

Sofia is not on the board, merely an owner as is her husband of his companies. This neither breaks nor bends any rules, it seems the root of the problem is the personal animus with which many treat Sophia?

 

[casualfan]

one of Carl Philip companies have the address of the castle

CPhB Design AB
Kungliga Slottet 111 30 Stockholm Stockholms län

I stand corrected.

 

[royal rob]

I have read most of the posts but I couldn't see what the business is.
Is it something to do textiles ? Eg retailer, wholesaler , have her parents had a business before ?


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Missy-]

this situation is very confusing. so madeleine got bashed for being a member in chris society (who very cleanly gave up any titles to continue his activity), but CP and sofia each have their own societies, which no one complains about, not even the court?



i am sure that CP and sofia, and their offspring will enjoy a very privileged lifestyle, whether their parents own companies or not. it's not as if, once victoria becomes queen, they will be thrown out of their properties and left homeless. it's not either as if, without any fortune amassed by themselves, their children will not afford an education with which they will be able to start their own businesses, should they wish that, or their careers.



sofia is indeed a public figure. and so is CP. making up their own rules is just arrogant and un-royal in my opinion. you have everything provided for, and your role for that privilege is to represent sweden. it just doesn't look good if, in a selfish manner, you take the best of being royal, with the best of being a private citizen, and make your own definition of being a diplomat. one takes the full package. how does this sound to a taxpayer, who pays for the royal family for their representation in supporting causes that will make his country better, only to realise that, in fact, they are only doing that part time because they have their private businesses to attend to?

should sofia have wanted to head a business, then she is no different to chris, who refused any royal privileges to allow for that. why, then, is this getting approached differently for chris and for sofia? had it been the other way round (sofia refusing titles to focus on her business, chris taking the royal position and founding his own company on the side), i can hear the uproar of the feminists on how life is unfair and that 'females are being treated differently in the royal family'.

i am baffled by the inconsistency and the hypocrisy operating in the swedish court...

No one gave Chris or Daniel a pass, why should Sofia get one? And they both started their businesses long before they ever married into the family. Ok, Daniel is a special case because he'll be prince consort some day and is held to a higher standard, but Chris refused a title so he could continue his business and still had to bear criticism and make changes to his company because of how it reflected on the SRF. Again, why is Sofia any different? Why did it take a media outlet digging this up before this was made public if there is nothing to hide? Where is the transparency?

 

[Mbruno]

this situation is very confusing. so madeleine got bashed for being a member in chris society (who very cleanly gave up any titles to continue his activity), but CP and sofia each have their own societies, which no one complains about, not even the court?



i am sure that CP and sofia, and their offspring will enjoy a very privileged lifestyle, whether their parents own companies or not. it's not as if, once victoria becomes queen, they will be thrown out of their properties and left homeless. it's not either as if, without any fortune amassed by themselves, their children will not afford an education with which they will be able to start their own businesses, should they wish that, or their careers.



sofia is indeed a public figure. and so is CP. making up their own rules is just arrogant and un-royal in my opinion. you have everything provided for, and your role for that privilege is to represent sweden. it just doesn't look good if, in a selfish manner, you take the best of being royal, with the best of being a private citizen, and make your own definition of being a diplomat. one takes the full package. how does this sound to a taxpayer, who pays for the royal family for their representation in supporting causes that will make his country better, only to realise that, in fact, they are only doing that part time because they have their private businesses to attend to?

should sofia have wanted to head a business, then she is no different to chris, who refused any royal privileges to allow for that. why, then, is this getting approached differently for chris and for sofia? had it been the other way round (sofia refusing titles to focus on her business, chris taking the royal position and founding his own company on the side), i can hear the uproar of the feminists on how life is unfair and that 'females are being treated differently in the royal family'.

i am baffled by the inconsistency and the hypocrisy operating in the swedish court...

Just to put things in context, it must be said that CP and Sofia do not get direct public funding. The bloc grant that is allocated to the Royal House is divided between the King's household, the Queen's household, Princess Victoria's household, and the Royal Mews. A separate public grant is destined to the maintenance of the Royal Palaces.

As mentioned by other posters, regardless of public funding , Carl Philip is still a fairly wealthy person on his own. Although not exactly "super-rich", he shouldn't have trouble providing for his family.

 

[princess maggie]

Thank you, I'm glad not everyone here is taking the 'give poor picked on Sofia a chance' attitude.

No one gave Chris or Daniel a pass, why should Sofia get one? And they both started their businesses long before they ever married into the family. Ok, Daniel is a special case because he'll be prince consort some day and is held to a higher standard, but Chris refused a title so he could continue his business and still had to bear criticism and make changes to his company because of how it reflected on the SRF. Again, why is Sofia any different? Why did it take a media outlet digging this up before this was made public if there is nothing to hide? Where is the transparency?

As has been pointed out in earlier posts Sofia is a Swedish citizen, Chris is not. Chris did not refuse a title to keep his businesses; he cannot receive a title because he is not a Swedish citizen.
I really don't get the problem here. All above board IMHO. Sofia is not using taxpayer's money so she can do what she wants with her own money.