Countess Alexandra and Martin Jørgensen, Current Events Part 3: Dec 2009-Sept 2015


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think the State paying for a Prince's ex wife for the rest of her life is a bit too much IMO but then didn't one of the Queen's cousins receive an allowance for life as well so maybe I'm just not use to it. I don't see why Alexandra couldn't go and work, didn't she have a good job before and as i understand it she now sits on a few boards for extra income. I think it would be different if she was still out doing lots and lots of public duties but she doesn't. I think IMO at the time of the divorce she was still pretty much the main Royal Princess and the mother of two boys quite close to the throne (i think I'm right in saying MAry had just married into the family) so people and politicians felt sorry for her. Now though Mary is massively popular, there are 4 children of the Crown Prince/Princess and Joachim has remarried and has children with his new wife so Alexandra's role has lessened and lessened.
Maybe in future Danish politicians or the Royal court whoever decides these things needs to think carefully about how the decisions will look in the future.

Personally if I was Alexandra i'd offer to drop the allowance in return for some other perks such as not paying VAT or other taxes as the RF don't.
 
Last edited:
Elisabeth get the apanage maybe because her Brother should have been king if it werent for the change of law in benefit of queen margrethe.

Joachim got the apanage because everyone got so excited about alexandra.

Alexandra got the apanage because the former princess should not be connected to various firms. As such she must choose wisely amongst which directors boards she can be connected to. She has to show consideration towards the royal Family in that aspect.
 
:previous: I believe, and several politicians has said so openly that Alexandra got her apanage to maintain the living standard befitting of two royal children, who at the time were three and four in line for the throne. - After Frederik and Joachim.
There was after all a possibillity that M&F would not have children.

Another reason was to avoid a "Diana" at all costs. No bitter ex-wife speaking to the press all the time, so in a sense it was "behave-well-money".
But first and foremost I believe Alexandra got such a good bargain, because it was novel situation. There hadn't been a divorce in the DRF for some 150 years. And beforehand these sorts of situations were dealt with routinely by allocating the lady in question an estate somewhere in the countryside where she would retire and live descreetly and comfortably from the revenue. (I refer here mainly to women married to the "left hand", i.e. official mistresses).
And there were no official papers willing to print anything negative she might have to say back then.

The DRF learned after all from the affair, in the sense that Mary had to sign a considerable less advantageous prenup. And presumably so have our Marie.
(I can imagine a fuming newlywed Frederik grinding his teeth, but no doubt the prenup was very much "strongly advised" by the government).

Everything considered I believe it's money well spend. For some 25 million DKK, so far, the divorce has been most civillized, with very little bad PR for the DRF and as a consequence Denmark.
Joachim had to sell one of his golden eggs, Schackenborg Inn and probably realise some shares and what not in order to give Alexandra a reasonable sum, so the apanage was I imagine an additional incentive for her to accept less of what would otherwise have been 50 % of the estate. Which would propbably have meant that Joachim would have been forced to sell Schackenborg back in 2005 with a considerable less surplus if any.

There is no way Alexandra will be excempted from tax and vat now, that would be politically unacceptable for several reasons. The main reason being that only royals are excempted.

For a woman who is very aware of her public image it would be an obvious choice for her to request no longer getting an apanage once her children have left home. (i.e. no older than age twenty - or they ought to be kicked out :p).
By then she can sell her current large home with a good profit and settle anywhere she should wish. She can also sit on any board she would wish, as she is no longer directly in charge of two members of the DRF, Nikolai and Felix.
She would still retain her high status, as holder of the Order of the Elephant and mother of two Princes.
And you would imagine she would have had time and the means to make enough sound investments for her to live comfortable for the rest of her life.

If she should not offer to give up the apanage in eight-ten years from now, the issue will flare up again, in earnest, and it will be difficult to justify her recieving such an amount. Politically it may be decided to cut the apanage by half or two-thirds and there would be very little opposition to do so. - Any "threat of going public" from Alexandra would by then be of little consequence and actually self-destructive. She would be seen as a "bitter old hag" should she do so. - And to be honest, I don't think she would do anything like that. The DRF and the state have in any way been very fair towards her.
 
There is no way Alexandra will be excempted from tax and vat now, that would be politically unacceptable for several reasons. The main reason being that only royals are excempted.

I was only suggesting she could be except from tax if she gave up the allowance, thus the state/taxpayers wouldn't be paying her anymore but she would have more money than now.

I agree, once the boys are older it will be highly difficult to justify the allowance, part of the problem seems to be that there is no real official reason given for the allowance, it it part of her divorce, to keep her sons in a Princely style, to keep her quiet, to keep her on good behavior, to stop her working for undesirable companies? If a reason was given it would make it more understandable to taxpayers maybe. It looks to me as if quite frankly everyone panicked at the first royal divorce so the government agreed hastily to a lifetime allowance but will in future come to regret it.

In a way I can see that the DRF (maybe not the State itself but the DRF) have benefited as they have avoided a Sarah Ferguson situation, selling stories, products etc all linked to the BRF. But should the danish taxpayers be paying to keep an ex Princess quiet?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh yes, I think you nailed it.
However, it would be bad form to say in public the real reason for Alexandra getting such a good deal, even though it IMO requires very little thinking to reach that conclusion...

I understood what you meant in regards to taxes and vat, but it would be much more politically unacceptable and also much less palatable for the public to grant her exemption from taxation (she's after all a commoner now) than to continue giving her her current apanage.
The general view being, she got a good deal to begin with and she has had time and means enough to secure herself for the rest of her life.
The very best she can expect now is to keep her current apanage. Should she complain if her apange is cut she would be committing PR-hara kiri.
So Alexandra will be wise in keeping her mouth shut in any way.

The politicians don't seem particularly interested in the issue and there is one more thing to consider:
Joachim got such a good deal from sale of Schackenborg that his two oldest children may not even need an apanage when they turn eighteen. At worst it might be an Benedikte as far as the state is concerned. I.e an expense account/limited apanage, because that's basically what it is.
 
Last edited:
At the time of the divorce I dont think anyone questioned Alexandras ability to maintain a economic standard. After all alexandra has a good education in economics and left a job in hong kong at the time that paid 1 mill kr a year.
 
Does Joachim not pay child support?

I personally feel Alexandra's apanage should have stopped when she remarried with payments from Joachim towards the upbringing of the two princes.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app
 
Just thought that now Joachim has sold Schackenborg Castle he could present a way out of this. Give half of the money from the sale to Alexandra as a lump sum for child support and stop the payments to her from the state.
Unlikely I know but it would mean Alexandra gets a fair payment for divorce and is not left financially unsupported with the state having to pick up her support.
 
:previous: That would be an option, but an unwise option I think for Alexandra's image
She would be seen as greedy and her skinning Joachim,as it is not the DRF but the Parliament that decides the apanage.

That would amount to at least 35 million DKK or fourteen years worth of apanage and it would also mean that Nikolai and Felix would get twice as much in inheritance from the proceeds of the sale of Schackenborg than bette Henrik and Athena, rather than an equal share as it is now.
 
In retrospect, I think the best thing would have been for Joachim and Alexandra to settle their finances between the two of them at the time of the divorce, without the government getting involved at all, (or maybe with the government giving Alexandra a lump sum "buyout" so to speak, as recognition of the very good work she did as a Danish princess). It's not, or shouldn't be, the concern of the government whether junior branches of the royal family are able to provide a standard of living for their children befitting their station. Nikolai, Felix, Henrik and Athena are entitled to whatever lifestyle their parents are able to provide for them, IMO, no more, no less, just like every other child whose parent isn't the monarch or the future monarch, ( and I realize at the time Felix and Nikolai were much higher up in the line of succession, but Frederik had already married Mary at the time of J and A's divorce and, realistically, everyone would have known the chances of one of the boys becoming king one day was slim to nil).

That being said, I remember when the divorce was announced and the great emphasis on how civil everyone planned to be. Also, the timing of the divorce was fortuitous in that Alexandra had been the one and only young Danish princess for all of her marriage and hadn't had time to be demoted, so to speak, by the arrival of the new Crown Princess, (to contrast, I doubt anyone would seriously suggest Marie get any sort of financial support from the government if she and Joachim divorced today).

I agree that the most fitting thing would be for Alexandra to voluntarily give up the apanage once Felix turns 18. I wouldn't agree with the government taking it away from her - they made a commitment at the time of the divorce, right or wrong, and should honour it. I also think that, if Alexandra gave up the apanage earlier, she should be able to take any job she wants and is qualified for, including in business, finance, whatever.
 
I wonder if it was because of that civility that Alexandra got an allowance for life, I wonder if the Government thought she would continue to support charities and organisations in a similar way to the way she did as Princess. If she had and still did, becoming a very civil former Princess still supporting charities etc, then I could see why she might need an allowance.

To be honest it seems a little like she is imprisoned in a way, neither part of the RF but not free to get any job she wants or likes (although I can't be that sorry for her getting an allowance that big from the Government)
 
I agree. Alexandra should have been allowed to start her own business or get employment at any firm. And considering her education and prior bisiness experience there would have been a wide range of firms that would have been interested.

Instead she got an apanage and as she had to say goodbuy to a great career the government shpuld maintain this apanage.
 
:previous: I believe, and several politicians has said so openly that Alexandra got her apanage to maintain the living standard befitting of two royal children, who at the time were three and four in line for the throne. - After Frederik and Joachim.
There was after all a possibillity that M&F would not have children.

Another reason was to avoid a "Diana" at all costs. No bitter ex-wife speaking to the press all the time, so in a sense it was "behave-well-money".
But first and foremost I believe Alexandra got such a good bargain, because it was novel situation. There hadn't been a divorce in the DRF for some 150 years. And beforehand these sorts of situations were dealt with routinely by allocating the lady in question an estate somewhere in the countryside where she would retire and live descreetly and comfortably from the revenue. (I refer here mainly to women married to the "left hand", i.e. official mistresses).
And there were no official papers willing to print anything negative she might have to say back then.

The DRF learned after all from the affair, in the sense that Mary had to sign a considerable less advantageous prenup. And presumably so have our Marie.
(I can imagine a fuming newlywed Frederik grinding his teeth, but no doubt the prenup was very much "strongly advised" by the government).

Everything considered I believe it's money well spend. For some 25 million DKK, so far, the divorce has been most civillized, with very little bad PR for the DRF and as a consequence Denmark.
Joachim had to sell one of his golden eggs, Schackenborg Inn and probably realise some shares and what not in order to give Alexandra a reasonable sum, so the apanage was I imagine an additional incentive for her to accept less of what would otherwise have been 50 % of the estate. Which would propbably have meant that Joachim would have been forced to sell Schackenborg back in 2005 with a considerable less surplus if any.

There is no way Alexandra will be excempted from tax and vat now, that would be politically unacceptable for several reasons. The main reason being that only royals are excempted.

For a woman who is very aware of her public image it would be an obvious choice for her to request no longer getting an apanage once her children have left home. (i.e. no older than age twenty - or they ought to be kicked out :p).
By then she can sell her current large home with a good profit and settle anywhere she should wish. She can also sit on any board she would wish, as she is no longer directly in charge of two members of the DRF, Nikolai and Felix.
She would still retain her high status, as holder of the Order of the Elephant and mother of two Princes.
And you would imagine she would have had time and the means to make enough sound investments for her to live comfortable for the rest of her life.

If she should not offer to give up the apanage in eight-ten years from now, the issue will flare up again, in earnest, and it will be difficult to justify her recieving such an amount. Politically it may be decided to cut the apanage by half or two-thirds and there would be very little opposition to do so. - Any "threat of going public" from Alexandra would by then be of little consequence and actually self-destructive. She would be seen as a "bitter old hag" should she do so. - And to be honest, I don't think she would do anything like that. The DRF and the state have in any way been very fair towards her.

I wonder what was changed in Mary's pre-nup - as the mother of the future King she surely gets at least a house and a lump sum.

I understand this is what was guaranteed in Alex' pre-nup, and there is nothing wrong with that. I also find the apanage ok since Joachim's children live with her. Still, I think the apanage should have been discussed when she married Martin, and it should be discussed when both kids are adults.
I still don't get why the state has to pay for it and not Joachim or the DRF. If taxpayers are unhappy about it, I can easily see why.
 
At the time the apanage was decided it was also decided that alexandra would have to pay tax if she remarried. So therefor there was no discussions at her wedding with martin.

I dont think it was wise to give Joachim apanage just because he married. And i think it would have been better if alexandra got the right to find any Work she would like. As she had a good education and an impressive caareer before her marriagee she would not be sitting in the local supermarket.

But when Joachim got an apanage due to the happiness about alexandra she sort of earned the right to the apanage.
 
I realise that some of you, many of you in fact, are...fascinated by the attire of Joachim and our Marie, so here is a good overview of the dress code that evening.
https://app.box.com/s/zb9qn89p5hxxv3fcb9bx
https://app.box.com/s/63gee0q228vujznoa1m8
https://app.box.com/s/6d0nokq5ndwryulspsl5
https://app.box.com/s/n99dgnuxv9m5zd236wfv
https://app.box.com/s/rjgzqi4pzahkfkhzzq9k

Here are a few details about Marie and Alexandra's dresses:
https://app.box.com/s/toaxw3gd3ia94a44h7v9
https://app.box.com/s/by0fanhoanmu41aekuzz

Marie's dress was silk-knitted and her wristband was in silver as well.
Alexandra's dress was by Elsa Adams and made from silk-satin.

Looking at Martin Jørgensen's jacket and especially shoes you must admit that Joachim was up against some stiff competition!
But of course Joachim, being a gentleman, prevailed.

I also notice Alexandra was some 17 millimeters from sporting a builders crack.
Marie's dress was admittedly... noticable, but she faced competent competition from Nina Wedell-Wedelsborg, but being French Marie, naturally, came out on top.
 
Last edited:
Today is the first day of school for most pupils in DK (0 graders often start a week later).
And so it was for Felix, who was taken to school with his bonus-dad Martin Jørgensen: Første skoledag: Her ankommer prins Felix uden mor - Royale | www.bt.dk
(Who as usual is not shaven. Once you are past a certain age stubbles are no longer cool - just ungroomed).

As you know Nikolai will start at Herlufsholm boarding school.
 
I still don't get why the state
has to pay for it and not Joachim or the DRF. If taxpayers are
unhappy about it, I can easily see why.

IMO because Joachim could not afford child support as well as
alimony! In 2005 he had to sell property from the Schackenborg
portefolio ( Schackenborg Slotskro) in order to pay for the house
Alexandra was entitled to according to her pre-nup!

As mentioned in different thread, the apanage granted to Alexandra
back in 2004 was not seriously contested, because she remained in
the DRF as a HH Princess and kept her patronages.
The discussions slowly evolved after her marriage to Martin
Jörgensen, when she left behind the RF, the title and about half
of her patronages. The ensuing decline of public interest in her
activities and the new marriage of Prince Joachim a.o. only added
to the discussion!

The predicaments have changed and there's no official reason why the
tax-payers should pick up the bill! I for one don't mind contributing,but
I understand why many are against it.
Maybe the DRF could fork out her annual allowance? That's a
good question! They're not the wealthiest RF around!
The problem is that the ongoing discussion reflects in a negative way on the RF.
Somehow I'm surprised that there hasn't been any attempt
of damage limitation!
viv
 
I feel that it is no coincidence that this discussion about Alexandra's apanage (and patronages) started again shortly after the Danish people learned that Joachim has sold Schackenborg and is a multi-millionaire now.
All my Danish relatives and friends are now less willing (or not willing at all) to pay the bill for Joachim - so to speak - than they were before. And there are probably more Danes who feel the same way.

And yes, IMO Joachim and Alexandra have been quite problematic for the DRF (though less problematic than other royals in other royal families) and I can see more problems in the future. Quite amazing, if you remember that they once were seen as the perfect couple/royals.
 
I feel that it is no coincidence that this discussion about Alexandra's apanage (and patronages) started again shortly after the Danish people learned that Joachim has sold Schackenborg and is a multi-millionaire now.

The discussion about the allowance has popped up regularly in the
past year or so because of two DRF-critical journalists! However
the Turkish luxury property ventures of the Jørgensens did not
do Alexandra any favours and added fuel to the fire!
That said there's no doubt that the discussion flared up after the
sale of Schackenborg!

And now you mention it: Public admiration is a fickle commodity!

viv
 
Last edited:
The discussion about the allowance has popped up regularly in the
past year or so because of two DRF-critical journalists! However
the Turkish luxury property ventures of the Jørgensens did not
do Alexandra any favours and added fuel to the fire!
That said there's no doubt that the discussion flared up after the
sale of Schackenborg!

And now you mention it: Public admiration is a fickle commodity!

viv

Perhaps Alexandra and Joachim could work out a deal where Alex received a portion of the profit from the Schackenborg sale and voluntarily gives up the public allowance?

Alexandra, of course,should be in a reasonable position to earn her own income, and a good one at that, but I do understand the concerns Joachim and the DRF might have regarding the potential pitfalls of a former royal seeking employment.
 
The debate about the apanage (to keep it simple) Countess Alexandra gets continues in BT today: Tjener penge ved siden af årpengene: Alexandra får formue af schweizere - Danmark | www.bt.dk

Apart from her apanage (and other investments she may have) which constitutes 2.1 million DKK, she is also a member of the board in the medical company Ferring Pharmaceuticals. And as members of boards in medical companies recieve a veru high salary, it is estimated based on reports from the company that Alexandra recieves some 250.000 DKK.
On top of that she is chairman of the company's ethical and social affairs, for which she most likely also recieve a handsome salary.
So in total she has a salary between 250.000-500.000 DKK from the medical company.

To put it into perspective, a yearly salary of 400.000 DKK is considered a very solid middleclass income.

There are again suggestions that the DRF should pay her apanage, but she is no longer a part of the DRF. Alexandra's income is a matter between her and the state.
And if that was to become the case, it would only meam that the DRF apanage should be raised proportionally. 2.1 million DKK is too big an amount to just pull out of what is basically a company's expences. Ultimately that would propably lead to people at the court being laid off, and that would be even more unpopular and damaging for Alexandra.
 
Perhaps Alexandra and Joachim
could work out a deal where Alex received a portion of the profit from
the Schackenborg sale and voluntarily gives up the public allowance?.

There's a point there, Camelot but I don't see that happening! They've been divorced for almost ten years!

IMO the crux of the matter is that the original Parliament Bill
regarding Alexandras apanage/allowance didn't include a clause
providing for a future revision! Something like, ' should A's
circumstances change to the effect that she's no longer dependent
on the state allowance, the Bill can be revoked'.
Then again, back in 2004 noone knew how things would develop
and especially, noone had the foggiest that Alexandra instigated
the divorce and had embarked on a relationship with Martin J!

Many Danes want to know why they still have to pay for her upkeep.
I doubt that they'll ever get an answer. And to repeat myself :whistling:
the only answer I can think of is that the 2004- finances of Prince
Joachim and the Royal Family weren't up to it! And there's no way
the RF will ever admit that!
What's done is done and that's why I think that we should leave it
there! But convincing her critics is a different matter ......
viv
 
Last edited:
The parliament didn't decide to give appanage to Alexandra because of Joachim's ability to pay Alexandra or lack of ability.

Joachim paid according to the negotiations during the divorce.

And the parliament decided to give the appanage due to the conservative party especially pia Christmas moeller. A lot of people and also the parliament was blaming Joachim for the divorce.
 
And not to forget, back then Prince Joachim, Prince Nikolai and Prince Felix were the numers 2, 3 and 4 in the line of succession, directly after the Crown Prince.

Would the separation and divorce happen now, with Joachim and his children so low in the line of succession, the State of Denmark would most likely not have been that generous.

:)
 
Do you think anyone would be agreeable to Alexandra receiving the appendage up to the time both Nikolai and Felix reach 18 or complete a University-level degree. Such a deal is quite common for "alimony" here in the States -- the mother will receive $$ until the children are "of age" or complete college.
 
Do you think anyone would be agreeable to Alexandra receiving the appendage up to the time both Nikolai and Felix reach 18 or complete a University-level degree. Such a deal is quite common for "alimony" here in the States -- the mother will receive $$ until the children are "of age" or complete college.

That is a nice deal but the point is why the common Danish taxpayer has to pay for this arrangement?

:whistling:
 
The parliament didn't decide to give appanage to Alexandra because of Joachim's ability to pay Alexandra or lack of ability.

No, of course they didn't! That's what I've been saying in several posts:)!
Everyone reading Danish can find the premises and the proceedings of the 2004-parliament Bill by googling 'årpenge for prinsesse Alexandra"

viv
 
thanks for the google hint - out of interest what does it mean when it states - 'she can not receive remuneration for public service' in part 2? it almost sounds as if the bill at the time doesn't allow her to take on other jobs - but she has?! Or does it just mean jobs paid by the State/Government?
I'm quite surprised the bill specifically states that she will continue to receive the allowance if she remarries (although she has to now pay VAT). Clearly when it was written the bill set her up for life.

I guess if I was a Danish taxpayer (and I love the DRF and like Alexandra) I would want to know why an ex wife of the 2nd in line to the throne is being paid by the State. As others have said Joachim paid out for the divorce from private funds so why was this publicly funded allowance needed? Yes in the immediate time after the divorce it may have been expected that Alexandra would carry out some duties still but could these not have been funded by the Royal Court?
No other Royal house in Europe pays out for a royal divorcee - so i can see why the Danes might not be happy about this.
 
Last edited:
At the moment of the divorce the children, both Princes of Denmark, were the number three and four in the line of succession. I can see why the State of Denmark gave a form of apanage to ensure the proper upringing of these two royal princes, but in hindsight it was an arrangement turning into an open invitation to critics.

The same in Belgium, where the sister and the brother of the current King, the Number 5 respectively the Number 11 (!) in the line of succession, are given a lavish dotation from the State. Also that arrangement turned out into an open invitation to critics.

Once a promise has been made, an arrangement between the State and the former Princess Alexandra, it is very difficult to change. In aftersight it was a poorly thought arrangement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom