Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York by Andrew Lownie


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I agree, Alison H! I’ve seen a handfull of videos on my YouTube wall, of Mr. Lownie being interviewed regarding the book. He’s soft spoken and very good at coming across as humble, serious, declaring his honest intentions and that everybody from The Palace to the “deep state” is trying to stop the truth from coming out - playing the victim card, that is!
For the sake of the BRF I hope that sensation will blow over soon!
 
Sarah Ferguson's extravagant spending habits back in focus with new book

The Duchess is said to have splurged hundreds of thousands of pounds on Royal staff, hiring foreign villas and insisting on security for her daughters, Eugenie and Beatrice.

One newspaper piece saw her former partner and financial adviser John Bryan disclose that Fergie's estimated £860,000 yearly spending encompassed £300,000 on staff, £150,000 on gifts, £50,000 on flowers, £50,000 on parties, £150,000 on travel and £100,000 on clothes - £25,000 of it during a single hour's shopping spree at Bloomingdales.

The book further claims that the Duchess "thought nothing of arriving at an airport with 25 cases and paying between £800 and £4,000 in excess baggage. At least five of those cases were packed with toiletries and make-up. Another would be used solely for clothes hangers." Author Andrew Lownie recounts additional tales of excess, including trips to New York during which she reportedly used one car for herself "and another for her ten suitcases".
 

See this thread for discussion of the book and the extracts serialized in the Mail :flowers::

 
Sarah Ferguson's extravagant spending habits back in focus with new book

One newspaper piece saw her former partner and financial adviser John Bryan disclose that Fergie's estimated £860,000 yearly spending encompassed £300,000 on staff, £150,000 on gifts, £50,000 on flowers, £50,000 on parties, £150,000 on travel and £100,000 on clothes - £25,000 of it during a single hour's shopping spree at Bloomingdales.

It is alleged that one individual who had loaned her £100,000 for a holiday in the South of France considered taking legal action at the High Court "after she paid back only £5,000, claiming she understood the rest to be a gift".

The narrative also includes an anecdote about her assistant, Christine Gallagher, who was once dispatched on the Concorde at a cost of £5,000 simply to deliver some documents to the Duchess. The former courtier alleged: "Every night she demands a whole side of beef, a leg of lamb and a chicken, which are laid out on the dining room table like a medieval banquet. It's a feast that would make Henry VIII proud."
 
What I find very hard to reconcile is how she believes herself to be a businesswoman...yet cannot apparently demonstrate even the most elementary understanding of basic financial matters....

Here is another little gem I picked up from Andrew Lownie: he believes Fergie actually received £2milllion from Epstein. My mind is boggling - but at the same time, this does make sense to me - £15,000 seems to us ordinary mortals a huge sum of money to owe, but in the circles that Fergie likes to move, £15,000 is two or three couture frocks and a couple of first class flights.... a couple of economies and the £15,000 would be easily repayable by Fergie - but if the sum is really £2million, then Fergie really had problems ....

I know King Charles is ill, but he really needs to remove his head from the sand and get a competent accountant on the case... and Fergie needs to stop right now from relying on her spokesman, aides etc etc... she is running an Empire that she cannot afford......
 
Sarah Ferguson's reckless spending - 'Henry VIII feasts and plane luggage for coat hangers

Lownie detailed excesses such as paying £65,000 to have a personal trainer on permanent standby despite using their services on just two occasions in one year. After a bill of £500 went unpaid, a newsagent reportedly refused to supply the Duchess, while a local butcher, dry cleaning company and car hire firm are also listed among her creditors.

Even the BP card used at petrol stations was allegedly confiscated due to unpaid arrears.

Back in May 2009, the mother of two apparently signed a year's lease on a £3million mansion on Surrey's swish Wentworth Estate, at £8,000 per month. However, after the owners chose to move back in sooner than anticipated, while holding her to a six-month payment, the Duchess reportedly decided not to move in after all, setting up home at Windsor's Royal Lodge with ex-husband Prince Andrew instead. The result was, as Lownie put it, "£50,000 on a house she never lived in".

Lownie also claims Fergie "would regularly miss flights that were not refundable", totting up thousands of pounds in unnecessary costs. Meanwhile, "personal trainers, hairdressers and Pilates instructors were paid hundreds of pounds an hour to wait for her to emerge for the day in the late afternoon. Her butler had to get in at 4.30am to put watercress on ice".
 
Sarah is not government funded AFAIK. For all her faults I am not sure why there should be an outcry on how she wants to spend her money, as it is hers to spend. She is not a public person and has no public role. If she wants to throw her money down the river Thames she is free to do so.
 
Last edited:
Sarah is not government funded AFAIK. For all her faults I am not sure why there should be an outcry on how she wants to spend her money, as it is hers to spend. She is not a public person and has no public role. If she wants to throw her money down the river Thames she is free to do so.

Well, it all goes back to how much money she got from Epstein (and other shady people).

She can spend her money as she likes obviously, but she also spends money she doesn't have and goes into debt. According to Andrew Lownie, Queen Elizabeth bailed her out several times, until she got tired of it because it would happen again and again.

Then Epstein paid off her debts at some point and considering the vast sums involved in her spending, it seems unlikely that it was only 15.000 pounds. That's obviously nothing for her, so why would she need Epstein for that?
 
I bought the book at Foyle's two weeks ago and started reading it this week.

I had forgotten much of the drama in the 90-ties, but it puts the Sussex-thing in a rather large shadow, this was and is so much worse on so many levels. There are so many parallels though, from Ronald Ferguson selling stories to the press, to post-royal 'awards' and charities, to the grifting etc. etc. But in the York's case it was and is far worse.

The shady people and shady money and deals seem very prevalent, with him even more than with her. I am surprised he was ever allowed to be this close to the fire. Him and his ex-wife seem to have worked very much as a team. It leaves me with the impression that his daughters and even son-in-laws must be up to their necks into these money making schemes as well. And I am not even mentioning Epstein & co here.

The absolute shamelesness of such an -IMO- oaf makes a good argument to get rid of the monarchy all together. The more he stays in the shadow the better. Ideally for the Windsors he would join Juan Carlos in the Middle East.
 
Last edited:
The shady people and shady money and deals seem very prevalent, with him even more than with her. I am surprised he was ever allowed to be this close to the fire. Him and his ex-wife seem to have worked very much as a team. It leaves me with the impression that his daughters and even son-in-laws must be up to their necks into these money making schemes as well. And I am not even mentioning Epstein & co here.
I haven't read the book yet, but I still cannot imagine that the daughters and their husbands get involved in some kind of questionable business like their father in law. At least, I hope not!

However, one could perhaps accuse them of ignorance. For years, they and their husbands have been invited to various Arab states, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia, posting photos of their visits and enjoying the invitations.

The relationships with such states were originally initiated by their father, and no one knows whether these relationships were all legal. I don't generally believe that the Arab states only want to maintain diplomatic relations with European countries by inviting Andrews daughters and family. Never saw other british royals there (except Zarah and Mike once in a while). They all have their diplomatic relations with Europe, the USA and other countries of the world
So why every year Andrew's ex wife and the rest of their family are invited?
They are there as private guests and not in any official function.

I always suspected that Andrew had done business with them in the past, but we never found out the details. And I remember too that some Arab head of state gave him valuable jewels for his daughters.

The accusation that could be made against his daughters and sons-in-law is that they did not question why they were invited there every year. Perhaps that will change now?
 
Where is this coming from? How does he know whether or not Sarah paid her dry cleaning bill?!

One of the apparent flaws of the book (of which I've only read the serialized excerpts) is the seeming absence of attributed sources in many cases. However, it is clear that much of the content is derived from decades-old news reports. As you know, the so-called "red top" papers used to employ extreme and sometimes even illegal means to unearth intimate details, so it would not surprise me if the details of unpaid bills were sourced from such old reports.
 
:previous:

There are some diplomats on record about Andrews absolute boorish behavior at various embassies and trade missions. But most sources are indeed anonymous, as is not uncommon for books like these.
 
It is common, let's be honest few people are prepared to go on record slating a member of the RF, but a lot of the stories /revelations do seem to be a lot of those we already knew about but the anonymity means we can't always tell whether they are new or not.

As for Sarah - yes it is her money to waste as she wants but when she was declared bankrupt she agreed deals to only back people she owed a percentage of what they were owed, so I think it is fair to look at her own spending given her past and the fact people have lost out because of it in the past.
 
I read it this week. It was indeed very awful, but I actually walked away feeling quite badly for Beatrice. There’s a chapter about when she was dating Paolo Liuzzo when he was in his mid twenties and Beatrice was just a teenager and Sarah really pushed and supported behavior that as a parent she should have been stopping. Andrew too.
 
The shady people and shady money and deals seem very prevalent, with him even more than with her. I am surprised he was ever allowed to be this close to the fire. Him and his ex-wife seem to have worked very much as a team. It leaves me with the impression that his daughters and even son-in-laws must be up to their necks into these money making schemes as well. And I am not even mentioning Epstein & co here.
Can you elaborate on your impression that his daughters and sons-in-law are very much involved in these money making schemes as well?
 
As an aside, I have a cousin that has actually met Prince Andrew many, many years ago at a Scouting event and he said he was the most boorish, ignorant person he has ever spoken with. He told me this years ago before all the scandal hit and I was taken aback as that was not the impression everyone had of Andrew at that point, now I know that his observations were absolutely true.
 
As an aside, I have a cousin that has actually met Prince Andrew many, many years ago at a Scouting event and he said he was the most boorish, ignorant person he has ever spoken with. He told me this years ago before all the scandal hit and I was taken aback as that was not the impression everyone had of Andrew at that point, now I know that his observations were absolutely true.

I didn't quite meet Andrew myself, but I was in the room when he did an engagement at my workplace as part of his UK Trade Ambassador role, back in 2002 or 2003. He wasn't as bad as what you describe here, but his demeanour was definitely overbearing, verging into arrogant. What I remember most clearly is that he kept interrupting people, and made a joke about one woman's job that he obviously thought was hilarious, but was actually deeply patronising.

I wasn't surprised when the stories about his behaviour later came out. Nobody who was in the room with me that day came away from the experience with a good opinion. They didn't think he was evil or bad - just that he was a clueless, upper class moron.
 
My understanding is that Andrew Lownie is a serious biographer, and I am sure he has made some effort to verify his sources' accounts, but as an initial reaction, some of the anecdotes verge on parody:

“Once playing golf in a group of four, Andrew hit an especially good shot on to the green. One of the other golfers said: ‘Good shot.’ The prince fired back instantly: ‘That’s good shot, sir, for you.’

If he walked into a room and people didn’t acknowledge his presence, he’s been known to clear his throat, say, ‘Let’s try that again’, leave the room and come back to make sure everybody stands, bows and curtseys.
[…]
Lucy, a former stylist who dated him, was surprised that when she offered to take him to the cinema and said she’d buy the tickets, he expected her to get all seven, to include his security.”

[...] maids [were] summoned from four floors below to open the curtains beside him. […]

‘Apparently his bedtime habits as a single man left a lot to be desired,’ she [Wendy Berry, the housekeeper at Highgrove whose son worked at Buckingham Palace] said. ‘A collection of scrunched-up, soiled tissues usually lay scattered around the bed each morning for staff to collect after they had made his bed.’
[...]
One day a train taking the duke to Birmingham was cancelled and he was told he could wait in the VIP lounge for the hour until the next one departed. He was furious […] He flicked his hand and shouted: ‘That train over there, for example, why can’t they divert that train to Birmingham?’”​

Well, in an opinion piece for the i Paper, writer Harry Mount put his name to a curtseying anecdote which resembles the one reported in "Entitled":

"Thirty years ago, a friend, then in her twenties, was staying in a house in Yorkshire when Prince Andrew – still young, dashing and still the Duke of York – was invited to dinner.

Nervous, in a bit of a tizz, she curtseyed to him when he walked into the room.

“No,” he said. “Not right. I’m going to go out of the room, come back in and you’re going to curtsey properly.”

And so he did. She dropped even lower when he came back in. But she has loathed him ever since – and would never have curtseyed to him ever again."​

 
Well, in an opinion piece for the i Paper, writer Harry Mount put his name to a curtseying anecdote which resembles the one reported in "Entitled":

"Thirty years ago, a friend, then in her twenties, was staying in a house in Yorkshire when Prince Andrew – still young, dashing and still the Duke of York – was invited to dinner.​
Nervous, in a bit of a tizz, she curtseyed to him when he walked into the room.​
“No,” he said. “Not right. I’m going to go out of the room, come back in and you’re going to curtsey properly.”​
And so he did. She dropped even lower when he came back in. But she has loathed him ever since – and would never have curtseyed to him ever again."​

Stories like this one are EXACTLY why Andrew now finds himself alone and twisting in the wind of public opinion with literally no one except his immediate family in his corner.

He has no allies in the media to take up his cause (unlike Diana and Charles during the War of the Wales)

He has no childhood friends that he has remained close to.

He made no friends/colleagues during his long military career that will vouch for him-truly incredible imo.

Even though I still feel there are some aspects of his current predicament that are regrettable and even unfair, his downfall seems truly karmic in retrospect.

An arrogant, greedy amoral man humbled to this level will, under ideal circumstances, develop spiritual resources that he can fall back on.
 
Last edited:
The author Andrew Lownie took part in a podcast regarding his book 'Entitled The Rise and Fall of the House of York' and the latest scandal surrounding Prince Andrew.
 
Back
Top Bottom