What is your opinion of Frederik and Mary

[carlota]

Originally Posted by Harmony

If it is based on lies and gossips , would you not just as passionate as defending your own favourite Royalty.:)

i would, but there were users who didn't base their thoughts on lies and gossips and got really bad responses. and if that's the case... wouldn't it be better to kindly explain why the person is wrong, so that he himself can judge wether to change his opinion or not?

[Harmony]

Then support what they have said for eg. 400 shoes, show articles that Mary has 400 shoes, and how can you judge a person by merely looking at pictures ? Can I apply that to all other Royalties as well? Maybe I should start looking at their irises.:p

The facts shown that she has attended so many events associated with her patronages in 2005. Honestly speaking that is an impressive list for a new princess. You do not have to compliment her for that but neither is necessary to put her down for small isuues to provoke. She is trying her very best carrying out her Royal duties within a short period of time in a new country and also trying to master one of the most difficult language , Danish. My respect goes without saying to all other new Princesses who I am sure encounter many obstacles in their way in finding their role .:)

Originally Posted by angele

This information has not been made up, at this moment I am looking for the article that it came from in the first place, and I didn't write it. The post was not meant to provoke at all I was just expressing my opinion, and again if its negative and not pro mary, people such as your self jump on the defence.

angele

Yup, right.. yeah ahh... look, when you find the article, let us know ok??


Jaques D.

[Little_star]

"why do people have to get so passionate about a normal discussion? why can't some people just accept that some users have their own opinion and that it may differ from the others without entering in the stupid argument of "people are getting bored" or "you are jealous of him/her"? that's just childish. i think people admit they respect others opinions but the cruel truth is that they don't. if those people saying silly comments were so sure about their opinions, why do you need to publically humiliate/insult the others with such comments? live and let live is what wise men say...."

I completely agree, I find it more that a little insulting that their are certain posters who continue to use such childish arguments like "jealousy" as a way of stifling any discussion on Mary and then voice their own opinions as though it were fact. The fact is some people don't like her and shock horror, some of them haven't based it on "gossip or lies" (another way of trying to put down and discredit another's opinion).

[fandesacs2003]

Originally Posted by Margrethe II

With all due respect, I do feel you being quite dramatic here fandesacs2003. The same could be said for any royal who is a public figure and active (even not always active) member of a ruling family.

"MII"

ABOLUTELY, my comment was not towards Mary or the DRF, but a general consideration/reflexion about EVERY royal family.

[Warren]

Originally Posted by angele

Mary knew how to pick the prestigious ones! seemed to be looking for the upper echelon male too if you ask me, dated an executive and a swans football star aswell, must have got some pointers in picking the up market ones from the whos who in sydney realestate elite.This is of course my opinion only.

Opinion is fine, facts are better. We've gone from 400 pairs of shoes to 200; that she was a real estate agent when it is plainly on the record she wasn't; "dated a Swans football star" when it is also known that she met him the week before she met Frederik, and went out with him once, possibly twice during that week only. All this (except the number of shoes) is discussed at greater length in the Frederik and Mary visit Australia thread.

I should add that it is no disgrace to look for an "upmarket" partner. I don't think too many of us would boast that we are looking "down-market".

[angele]

Originally Posted by Jaques Demolay

angele

Yup, right.. yeah ahh... look, when you find the article, let us know ok??

$16,300 on phone calls! my mistake

Royal wedding creates $4m debt

There is a large photo of F&M at Amalianborg which accompanied the first Ben English story just before the Oz visit, a picture of the square and Amalianborg, F&M at their wedding and a picture of Fredensborg.

There is a small sub-heading:
'But the queen has discovered a raft of extra costs involved in making life in her household fit for a modern-day princess'

Here is the text (in bits for scanning!):

[fandesacs2003]

Originally Posted by Warren

Opinion is fine, facts are better. We've gone from 400 pairs of shoes to 200; that she was a real estate agent when it is plainly on the record she wasn't; "dated a Swans football star" when it is also known that she met him the week before she met Frederik, and went out with him once, possibly twice during that week only. All this (except the number of shoes) is discussed at greater length in the Frederik and Mary visit Australia thread.

I should add that it is no disgrace to look for an "upmarket" partner. I don't think too many of us would boast that we are looking "down-market".

For ALL these girls who married CP, except Mathilde coming from a high aristocratic family, the same accusation/comment could be brought. Mary/Letitzia/MM/Maxima/Lala Salma/Ranja, ALL these girls married men being classes and classes upper than hers, but thats life. Immediately bad comments start, the same could be produced on the opposite way, prince Henrik(Henri de Montpezat) marrying Princess Margerete, but why it is bad to improve own position??

[angele]

this wasn't the article I referred to but nevertheless tells of the expenses I was discussing earlier. I will now look for the article quoting the average cost and number of Mary's shoes for those who believe I made it up to provoke!

[norwegianne]

If you have something personal to debate with a poster, please do so via the PM system. I'm sure that the rest of the posters don't really want to be subjected to other people sniping at each other.

Again, I have deleted several posts that were off-topic and not really related to anything on this forum.

If either party has a problem with it, PM either each other, me or another moderator.

Norwegianne
TRF Moderator

[Warren]

Originally Posted by angele

... even where she was living in Sydney was the it area.
This is of course my opinion only.

A curious assertion. Mary shared a terrace house in Paddington (conveniently within walking distance of work at Belle) and in a place located in a quite ordinary part of Bondi Junction (not to be confused with Bondi Beach). Paddington, though a diverse suburb, is neither "it" nor IT.

[angele]

Originally Posted by Warren

A curious assertion. Mary shared a terrace house in Paddington (conveniently within walking distance of work at Belle) and in a place located in a quite ordinary part of Bondi Junction (not to be confused with Bondi Beach). Paddington, though a diverse suburb, is neither "it" nor IT.

I always though Paddington was an upper echelon area of Sydney.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by angele

this wasn't the article I referred to but nevertheless tells of the expenses I was discussing earlier.

The expenses of the wedding of DK's Crown Prince ? Let me assure you that whether the name of CP Frederik's wife had been Mary, Maria, Katja, Thyra, Louise or whatever - there would have been expenses in connection with his wedding. Even though Mary was one of the two principal participants, these expenses are not due to her.
Had she not married Frederik, he would have been on honeymoon with whomever he had then married. Expenses the same; it was the wedding of the future king, that costs and there is nothing unusual in that.

Some of the deficit mentioned is also due to Prince Henrik's 70th Birthday only one month after the wedding; and the acquisition of a new heavily secured car for the royals as far as I remember - and ongoing restauration of the palaces at the Queens disposal.
Nice fluffy article - but nothing to do with Mary's alleged expenditure. The bit about the costs of taking the trip to Greenland is silly; then it should be mentioned as an extraordinary expense every time QMII visits the Faroe Isles or Greenland

[Warren]

Originally Posted by angele

I always though Paddington was an upper echelon area of Sydney.

No. Paddington is a mixed suburb in terms of real estate values. Although at the higher end of the scale it is not "upper echelon". It's not the slum area it once was, nor is it all millionaire's row. The land is valuable, many of the houses and terraces less so. Like most of inner Sydney, it is fairly diverse. The junkies are an extra delight.

[angele]

Userdane,
I put this article in the thread to support the supposed lies that I made up about Mary's telephone bill from calls to Australia. I was not discussing the cost of Fred's wedding or any details about other royal costs I was merely supporting my discussion on Mary's spending.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by angele

Userdane,
I put this article in the thread to support the supposed lies that I made up about Mary's telephone bill from calls to Australia. I was not discussing the cost of Fred's wedding or any details about other royal costs I was merely supporting my discussion on Mary's spending.

I see; still I don't see how it can only be 'Mary's spending'. I suppose the figures referred to (I don't know where the article is from and whether their assertions are researched properly) is the entire phone bill for F&M's 'household'?

[Larzen]

Originally Posted by angele

Userdane,
I put this article in the thread to support the supposed lies that I made up about Mary's telephone bill from calls to Australia. I was not discussing the cost of Fred's wedding or any details about other royal costs I was merely supporting my discussion on Mary's spending.

And this article says nothing about Marys spending, its about general costs, and Im not really blown away by the fact that Frederik and Marys household has such a phone bill in a year, its not like MAry talked for all of it. Wonder how it compares to Margrethe and Henriks households phonebills, or Joachim and Alexandras . I remember reading about the Norwegian royal phonebills and they were of similar size

Further just because an austrailian paper/magazine writes something does not make it always true (no matter if it is nice and flattering news or not so flattering news) most of theese magazines and papers dont even seem to have a correspondent in Denmark.

[angele]

"Mary spent much of her time on the phone to family and friends in Australia."

the correspondent appears also to be from London.

So is all the fluffy pro articles gospel then if this is not true and the figures are incorrect? It really is quite scary how people jump on the defensive whenever negative comments are broached on Mary. Everyone is entitled to their opinons be them negative or positive.

[Warren]

Originally Posted by angele

Userdane,
I put this article in the thread to support the supposed lies that I made up about Mary's telephone bill from calls to Australia. I was not discussing the cost of Fred's wedding or any details about other royal costs I was merely supporting my discussion on Mary's spending.

This is not correct. What the article says is, quote: "The report showed Mary and Frederik's telephone and postage bill was $16,300 last year." end quote.

The article does not state what the bill was the previous year, so no comparison can be made based on the figure given; it does not state if the telephone and postage expenses are official or private or both; it does not state what proportion of this amount is attributable to Mary; and it does not state the amount Mary spent on private telephone calls, domestic or International, or to Australia.

So we have a cost figure and no details, and no comparisons. Based on this all we can say as fact is that, according to this newspaper article, F & M's phone and postage cost $16,300 last year. Anything else is pure speculation.

[angele]

Originally Posted by Larzen

And this article says nothing about Marys spending.

No I agree it doesn't directly, the original article I was looking for discusses Mary's spending in more depth, including the cost Mary has spent on shoes aswell.