Please could I help with a little information about some of what Lumutqueen has said?
I'd just like to say that as far as clothes, car hire and drinks go Beatrice and Eugenie as with probably every other 'younger' royal is bound to get them for free or for a significantly reduced prize. If a Princess wears a designers dress, that designer is pretty much guaranteed to reap the benefits. Look at Catherine, a royal nobody, and she's praised as a fashion icon because the clothes she wears sell out in seconds.
I cannot speak for Beatrice and Eugenie, but so far as most Royals are concerned, they do NOT 'get freebies' - they are NOT allowed to accept them. The Times' fashion correspondent and Vogue have, over the years, made the point that members of the Royal Family pay for what they wear, although there has always been speculation that some sort of 'special rate' is allowed.
Princess Michael of Kent according to London gossip over years does get free clothes; she was
rumoured to be in receipt of 'freebies' from Roberto Devorik [London-based Argentininan fashion entrepreneur], ditto Gianfranco Ferre when he was alive. Princess Michael herself also mentioned to a journalist that she had a relative who worked for the Parisian fashion house of Nina Ricci, who also helped her access clothes to borrow as well as keep. Whether this is true or not we don't know.
So far as Fergie is concerned, during her marriage, her staff approached a number of designers looking for freebies. One of these, Zandra Rhodes, actually was quoted in the press turning the request down with the immortal words ' Darling, I don't need the bad publicity'. [This unkind-sounding remark has to be placed in the context of the times - Sarah was being roundly criticised for her wardrobe and indeed her figure, at that time]
Quick point, a degree from Goldsmiths or Newcastle particularly a 2:1 in Beatrice and Eugenie's fields are just as could as an oxbridge degree.
However unfair it might seem, I don't think this is actually true. I went to Oxford, and however unfair it sounds - and indeed snobbish -, believe you me, it opened doors for me in a way that a degree from Goldsmiths never could have done. Like I said, it is very unfair, and the actual quality of the degree is probably not that different in theory, but in practice, there is a world of difference. It's a good few years since I was job hunting, but any Oxbridge graduate is exposed to a recruiting process that most other university students could only dream about. Newcastle is a 'better' university in theory [whatever 'better' really means] than Goldsmith's, because it is a Russell Group [a bit like 'Ivy League] University and Goldsmiths is not. It may be nasty, narrow-minded and uinfair, but I am afraid that most employers, faced with identical CVs stating 'Goldsmiths' or 'Oxbridge' would almost always go for the Oxbridge candidate.
Peter Phillips as a practical private citizen was IMO right to take the Hello! publication deal, and it was a good thing to see the BRF sweat over their public image they so often hide.
In my humble opinion, Peter Phillips was NOT right to take the money. He might be a private citizen, but his wedding was peopled with Royal relatives and if he had had nothing but 'private [i.e.' unknowns'] citizens' at his wedding, no magazine would have wanted to pay him for his nuptuals. This is why B and E are going to be in a 'no win' situation if they are not careful - i.e. they could fall between two stools, being both 'royal' (albeit without defined royal roles), which would make it hard to classify them as private citizens.
Beatrice and Eugenie have a trust fund, it is theirs to use as they wish and when they wish
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.
Hope some of this helps,
Alex