I expect you are right, and it will be St. George's.
But Eugenie had a lavish wedding; if Beatrice's is more low-key, it will seem somehow less impressive.

Even if it is exactly the same, it will seem like a rerun.

BUT- if Beatrice were to marry at the Abbey (even if there's no carriage procession and it is more low-key) it will appear grander.
(Or at least different). JMO.

IF Beatrice and Edoardo have a lower key wedding than Eugenie's it will be because it is what they prefer. It will not and should not be connected to Andrew's problems, or pressure from the public.

The first has nothing to do with them, and the second issue is not their concern if it is not being funded by the public purse.

My guess is if they opt for a more intimate and private(by Royal standards) wedding it will be out of concern for Edo's young son, and wanting to shield the little boy from too much publicity.

But, for selfish reasons I hope they go all out. I want to see it all.:biggrin:

I get the feeling that WA is being earmarked for the main heir line. We know from Andrew and his interview that the Queen said Eguenie would marry at St George's ....this is perhaps where the rumors of Andrew wanting W.A. and being told no come from.

If the Queen is making the final decision (again) then it makes sense Beatrice will also marry at St Georges.

Most weddings are basically the same in a Church...it's just the people involved that change things around. I expect Beatrice to have her own individual wedding unique to her style. The same can be said for wedding dresses...they mostly all follow similar lines when you are trying to fit into certain criteria (modesty levels etc).


LaRae

It SHOULD not- but it will.
Andrew's problems are certain to have an impact, privately- funded wedding or not.
The RF has to take public feeling into account, and they probably will.

I think the only thing that might be held back due to the public is the carriage ride. And even then I think there may be a small carriage ride like Peter and Autumn had. But like Eugenie had, no. Between the Andrew scandal, and all the bad press over Eugenie's and security cost, I see it being ruled out.

We know two things. This wedding will have a huge guest list, and it will have the queen and other senior royals in attendance. The royals will not boycot it over Andrew. Beatrice is a Windsor plain and simple.

St George's makes sense. One of the major concerns will be security and the cost of it. If they want to limit people complaining, this is one area. St George's offers built in security, especially if they don't open the grounds to the public. It also offers a local for the day time reception and a night time one as well.

Yes it may be the same church as her sister but doesnt mean will be the same. Music, flowers, readings these all add different touches. And when you have a religious wedding, the real difference lays more in the reception anyways.

I wouldnt be surprised if its streamed. No 'media fuss' for the younger royal but still some show to allow the public to have part.

In terms of the wedding being televised - assuming the location/venue is suitable for televising - another factor may be how popular for the TV station was the last televised royal wedding. I watched Eugenie's wedding live and it was all done very well as far as the camera shots and coverage were concerned and it was, of course, well worth being televised.

I am not sure that Eugenie's wedding was worth televising as it didn't make it into the top 15 shows for the week. At its peak it only had 3.9 million viewers (15th top for the week at 6.9 million). Harry's had 29 million across all the channels.

I am not sure that ITV will think that 3.9 million is enough to justify showing Beatrice's.

Maybe we, in Australia, will have a TV station able to say, as they did for a few weeks in the lead up to the wedding, that they were going to have the 'only cameras inside the chapel'. In the end ITV decided to show it but Channel 7 committed to doing so long before ITV. I am not sure they would do so again though. It would also depend on when it was - a Friday night in the football season would be a no no whereas Eugenie's wedding was in the gap between the football season and the cricket season so it was a empty Friday night for Eugenie's wedding. A spring/summer wedding would be in the football season for the Aussie TV channels (League on Channel 9, AFL on Channel 7 and Union on Channel 10).

Eugenie's wedding had so little viewers because it was Friday, when most of Britons were at work.

I think they will have a family wedding at St George's, with as many spectators turning out as wish to and the local Constabulary taking safety measures as they would for any event . . . Such as the football! Nobody expects the football team owners to pay for the added security. Why should the BRF?

Televising Beatrice's wedding may be a problem in the US because of Andrew.

That's true.
I just feel that, if I were Beatrice and had a choice of venue, I'd want something different than the site used for the last three weddings.

Most likely, if Beatrice's wedding is to be televised in the US, it will be picked up in the US by the TLC channel. They had the exclusive rights to air Eugenie's wedding last year. It will have absolutely nothing to do with Andrew whatsoever. Back in 2018, TLC had this to say about broadcasting royal weddings. :smile:

“Weddings are an essential part of our programming DNA, and having two royal weddings is cause for celebration on TLC,” Howard Lee, president and general manager of TLC, said in a statement. “In May, we were thrilled to provide live coverage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s wedding. Now it’s Princess Eugenie’s turn, and U.S. fans of the royal family will get to witness all the flourishes of this big day only on TLC.”

I imagine it will be the same for Beatrice's wedding (assuming that they want the wedding broadcasted).

I am sure the wedding will be broadcast.
The ones that will not be are to be those of Louise and James in the distant future; they will be at those moments more "distant" royals - probably nephews of the reigning King (giving that Charles will live as long as his father)
And Beatrice is the direct descendant (granddaughter) of the reigning Queen.

Most people that have an interest in watching a “royal” wedding are not going to be put off by the bride’s father. And possible viewership will drive the decision, not any moral concerns about Andrew.

Or she could feel like many brides and want to marry in the “family church” no matter who else in her family married there.

Eugenie’s Wedding wasn’t televised here in America. We viewed it through the royal YouTube channel. I think there will be tv coverage in the UK and on the Royal YouTube channel for Beatrice’s wedding, too.

But it's not a venue site, it's a church, and church that has essentially been the family's parish church for most of her lifetime. This idea that every wedding is an event and has to have unique venue is very odd to me, because it puts the emphasis on the wedding ceremony as theatre, when it's a religious ceremony. There's lots of opportunity for unique showmanship during the reception(s).

Actually, it *was* televised here in the US on TLC. :smile:

TLC announced Thursday it would be the exclusive network to air Princess Eugenie’s wedding. Their broadcast, called Royal Wedding Live: Princess Eugenie, will begin at 4:25 a.m. EST on Friday, October 12, and the cable network will air an encore of the broadcast starting at 7:25 a.m. ET. (The West Coast will be on a standard three-hour tape delay, a rep confirms.)

Chris Ship and ITV were very pleased with the numbers from Eugenie’s wedding. Whether or not they decide to televise Beatrice’s, we’ll have to wait and see.

Oh, yeah, that’s right. Lately, my memory has been letting me down.

Eugenie's wedding got very good figures for when it was and how it was broadcast. This Morning usually gets in the 1 million range, the Royal Wedding Special peaked at 3.9, bosses were very happy with it. That wouldn't be the problem if they want to go that route again.

Terrible press for Andrew is going to be a factor in the run up to the wedding, especially if it is perceived he is trying to go toe to toe or outdo the weddings of the Wales boys etc again, it will be savage. However on the day the focus will be on the couple if nothing else comes out between now and then. On the day people did come out to line that damn carriage route and the media focused on the positive. Plus there was a lot to be milked in terms of clickbait from the many, many videos and pictures the guests kept posting on social media.

But either they're aware of this or they have learned some lessons from Eugenie's wedding controversies by saying it's all being paid for privately right away.