I see no problem with any products sold by Party Pieces.
If this year they carry more products for 90th birthday themes or more royalty related items I still see nothing wrong with this.
If other party supplies stores can carry royalty related items to celebrate a royal Jubilee, a royal birthday or baby items to celebrate a new baby, there is no reason why Party Pieces cannot. Just because it is their grandchild it is not cashing in.
Anything related to their business is acceptable.
IMO, there were only two times that I think the Middletons crossed the line.
One was attending church with the Queen on January 10th.
It is only because it stood out. William and Catherine have lived at Anmer for over a year, yet the only time the Middletons have attended church is with the Queen. If the Middleton family had been spotted going to church with William and Catherine on any occasion without the Queen then I would not have felt they had crossed the line on January 10, 2016.
It had nothing to do with not expecting her family to join Catherine to celebrate her birthday but the lack of church services attended by the Middleton family with Catherine and William that did not include the Queen.
St Mary Magdalene church has services throughout the year and I am sure that the Middleton family has visited William and Catherine at Anmer Hall when the Queen was not at Sandringham.
Had the Middletons attended church services at Anmer or Sandringham on any occasion when the Queen was not in residence or if there were reports they attend church service to celebrate birthdays of family members at any other time then seeing them at St Mary Magdalene would not have been out of the norm.
The second time I criticized the Middletons was Carole's writing career. It was out of the norm and not a natural evolution from Party Pieces. The problem with her 'column' was she did not write anything in the 'article' and it was nothing more than a link to her website. Had it contained information about planning a children party and been an actual column/article I would not have had a problem with this even if it included her website..
.
Or if the article had been about her as a career woman and then a link to her website, I would have seen nothing wrong with her doing an interview. Yes she would have been selected because her daughter was famous but she was a business woman before William met Catherine.
I would not have seen anything wrong if she was interviewed and said one or two things about either William, Catherine, George or Charlotte as long as most of the article was about her as a business woman. It is common practice to ask a few personal question, if you are related to someone and have a job in the public.
This is the reason, I see nothing wrong with anything Mike has done.
The natural evolution of a retired sports personality is to do television.