OMG! The $135,000 dress has been revealed!

So who is paying for all of this ?

It’s gorgeous. Prince Harry is lucky to have such a beautiful bride. I hope the wedding goes well, and the marriage afterward.

It says in the headline paid for by Harry’s family.

For that much money, I hope they can actually find some mesh for the neckline that matches her skin tone better than the model's.

It's almost as bad as Amy Farrah Fowler's.

Atrocious.

That IS NOT her wedding gown.

How does one move their arms with those extra special arm trains

Wow, that dress is stunning!

However, I'm afraid that many people will be outraged like R1, and will have major issues with the price tag.

Meh. You can buy a porn star's silence for that much money. I think.

Please God make one of these insufferable cunts get cold feet and call off the wedding at the last minute and put an end to this shit show. Amen.

Those sleeves with their own trains are absurd!

Yes I was a little confused. Was Stormy Daniels wearing a dress, maybe a navy blue dress?

Bargain compared to Kate's which reportedly cost $434,000.

DM photoshopped her head on the model, too funny. I doubt that is the dress. One of the comments points out that the story distracts attention from the alleged annulled marriage gossip.

Kate's wedding dress wasn't very pretty, at least from the waist up. I hope she didn't spend that much on it.

Prince Charles is paying for all of this. Given how notoriously tight-fisted Charles is, you can imagine him weeping as he signs the cheques.

That’s not her dress you Fools

[quote]Given how notoriously tight-fisted Charles is

I've never heard he was tight.

New one to me.

Like a cockroach with a shred of silk stuck to three of its feet.

R2.

I was thinking a moth.

Take off the arm extensions, fix the netting with a nicer line, and it could be a pretty dress.

I was expecting something more along these lines.

After the recent thread about tiaras, am I the only one who hopes she'll wear a simple ivory dress and some motherfucking huge jewels?

Of course she won't, she doesn't seem to have much taste.

Beautiful. Thank goodness for sleeves. The cheap modern-day sleeveless, back-fat-showing, drooping-cleavage dresses are just so AWFUL. Grace Kelly’s dress remains the most beautiful in history.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R17 Charles spends around $28million every year, excluding security and even clothing when he and the Duchess travel (for free) abroad.

He certainly isn't mean.

& HUGELY generous with charities etc...HUGELY.

R17 is a bullshitter/trouble-maker.

It's so kind of Charles to give back a bit of the money that the taxpayers are forced to give him, eh, R27 /R28?

Meghan Markle will always be clickbait for ugly racists, just as Barack Obama was.

They will HOUND her for her entire life.

When right-wing racist pigs focus on something, they will never let it go, like a rabid dog.

Barack Obama, Meghan Markle, David Hogg.... it's like throwing raw meat to wild animals.

Take it easy R27/28. The frugal tendencies of Prince Charles have been quite well-documented over the years.

Doesn't every major wedding come with a false "WEDDING GOWN REVEALED" story?

I swear, publicists make deals with designers to show off expensive gowns, because it both publicizes the wedding and the designer.

Did someone serious call Prince Charles frugal? What?! He is notoriously excessive with his spending, much moreso than Elizabeth herself.

That's not the dress. And regardless of the cost of the actual dress, it won't be what is being paid for it. Diana's dress although valued at a certain price, is not what was paid for. The Emmanuels who designed the gown made a fortune off the commercial exposure of having made the Royal Wedding dress, so they could afford to provide it at cost of materials. After her marriage until her divorce, Diana insisted paying full price for her clothes. Sarah of York however always had her hands open. She was known among designers as "Freebie Sarah".

The only cost to taxpayers for this wedding will be for the extra security and overtime for local police. Everything else is being covered by Charles, the Queen, and dodgy rich friends of Charles.

[quote]Bargain compared to Kate's which reportedly cost $434,000.

But she is going to be queen. This lady is only going to be a divorcee.

I saw a NEW biography about Charles in a bookstore today.

I thought "major eye-roll" - imagine reading some massive book about him. I mean who gives a fuck - or that much of a fuck? A DL thread is about as much as I can handle.

BUT - a book about Princess Michael, I might consider.

The fact that the 'bride' is a hardened old-bag proves that this is a beard arrangement, same as in Spain.

What R30 said.

That would buy a lot of sandwiches.

R25- That's what I also find awful about current wedding dresses. They're all sleeveless and few women past the age of 20 can look decent in a sleeveless white gown.

It looks a good deal like what Lena Horne wore in The Wiz.

[quote] But she is going to be queen. This lady is only going to be a divorcee

Keep hating on the black girl, you rabid racist dog.

Racist, R43? Don't be silly!

No, she's going to be a divorcee because she's an American from a non-upper-class family, which means she hasn't been trained to a life of blindly following tradition, noblesse oblige, and stifling her feelings. Or dealing with the British gutter press. She's going to be unable to cope with the expectations placed on a princess, and she's not going to be able to save Harry from the life he was born into, if that's what he wants.

Oh pick up your chip r43, it fell off your shoulder.

Are you really so fucking moronic you think the ONLY reason anyone could dislike her is racism? Give it a rest. She’s a fame hungry grifter with a track record of using people then ghosting them.

r37, see April's ( or was it May's?) Vanity Fair.

There is an article written by a guy who dated her daughter. What a snarky bitch he is, and I say that as a compliment. He goes into quite a bit of detail about the Kents.

I don't like her that much, but the dress is gorgeous. Stunning.

That...dress...SUCKS, r25.

That dress is very Cinderella's stepmother's 5th marriage.

It's a gorgeous dress.

The British public is paying for the dress. Their tax money supports the freeloading royals.

R41, strapless gowns are out of style now *finally* (of course you can still find one if you're determined). Last year the trend was bridal capes and that continued this year. New this year were hip ruffles, almost like panniers, that look detachable for the reception. Jumpsuits are still being shown.

Princess Margaret's wedding gown was also classic. I think Kate's resembled it more than Grace's but people remember Grace's better.

I've never liked Princess Grace's wedding gown, heavy frumpy thing that it was. It only looked good because Grace's waist was so tiny, she really was the slightest little thing.

Princess Margaret's is also heavy, but at least it has a simple elegance that Grace's lacked. I've always liked simple gowns used to show off massive jewels, Margaret got that right!

Say what has to be said about this Nazi-loving POS, BUT, she had timeless, classic, understated taste.

I'd bow down to Markle if she daringly, thrillingly, appropriately ( not her first marriage, either) wore an updated variation of Wallis Simpson's wedding dress.

[quote]I'd bow down to Markle

She'll have plenty of ass lickers in her married life not to care about you "bowing down" to her.

Thanks for the reminder, r55.

*eyeroll*

[quote]This lady is only going to be a divorcee.

That's TWO-TIME divorcee R35.

I envy them their country home.

She’s not going to be a princess, R44.

How can a dress cost that much? It’s obscene in 2018 for a royal to waste that much money. I’m sure a very beautiful gown could be made for around $10,000.

Kate Middleton's wedding dress cost 4x that amount r60.

I think she should have gone for a Ciara style Oeter Dundas wedding dress. High fashion, long sleeved, medieval ... but with a touch of the strip club.

Oh, dear. I meant Peter Dundas.

Her dress should be African inspired. Made of reeds or burlap. With a big headdress and beads.

Hehe, r64. You're trying to get me all riled up, aren't you?

[quote]Bargain compared to Kate's which reportedly cost $434,000.

Yeah, but Markle has the audacity of doing this while being biracial

Give it up sugars. Right wingers are not the only one who dislikes your sparkle. I am surprised she won't be wearing a red carpet see through gown made up of fish nets and sequins. Why go for the virgin look when we know miss thing probably has had more dick than the average woman.

According to Vanity Fair, for what that's worth, Prince Charles pays for the dress out of his personal funds.

I don't know how he segregates his personal from public funds.

An elderly lady onto her third marriage doesn’t need a white wedding gown. She needs a Chanel suit and trip to the local courthouse.

R67, I'm actually indifferent. My reaction is more to the insanity of disliking someone you don't know and thinking you look normal doing so. I don't even know what the fuck "sparkle" means, because I don't read many of the posts and frankly, not interested enough to find out why you do.

What I have seen is the racism towards her and you thinking you're any more normal than those people, is fucking sad.

These are two people in their 30s who've decided to get married - like a million other people. Why you psychotically think you know them beyond tabloid pictures and a few public outings, is beyond me.

[quote] miss thing probably has had more dick than the average woman.

gurl's jealous

I don't dislike her, but I don't think the marriage will last.

She's a middle-class American, and middle-class Americans think that if you make it to the top of the heap you can do what you want. That's now how life in the royal family works, if you're a royal you do what's expected in public and in private. Do you think Megan is really looking forward to dull christmasses at Balmoral every fucking year, and letting Kate and Camilla and her husband's grandma take precedence over her 100% of the time for the rest of their lives? Naw, Americans always think they get a turn or they can work the system.

Prince Charles receives money from the profits of Dutchy estate of Cornwall as his personal income r68.

"Why go for the virgin look when we know miss thing probably has had more dick than the average woman."

What r71 said.

r67 thinks that's to be judged? To the contrary, if true, Markle earns my respect because of that.

Isn’t it in poor taste to get remarried in a traditional white gown? That is for first weddings.

Before you bash me, I’ve been to second weddings and the brides always wore something less ostentatious and definitely not white.

R54 Wallis Simpson was an ardent Nazi, (the lover of Joachim Von Ribbentrop the Nazi ambassador) and most likely source of allied information passed on to the Nazis. It would be hysterical if mixed race Meagain was channeling a Nazi collaborator.

R76 she would become a Nazi if it meant power and privilege to her. Meghan is every bit as devious as the divorced Wallis.

This post and the article are an excellent example of how fake news becomes real news. The entire article is made up of "sources" and absolutely nothing - repeat NOTHING - has been released by the royal family. And while the name of the designers may turn out to be true - who knows - that photo is NOT the actual wedding dress. Jesus people.

@R75, yes, it is; and as they should.

'Second Brides' who choose the big-white-gowns and over-the-top weddings, expect to see a 'Money Tree' at their just as inappropriate wedding receptions.

Either this or their RSVP cards will infer they prefer cash gifts rather than traditional wedding gifts.

for R78.

The REAL dress >

It looks itchy.

R44, R72, Fab insights. What you point out is also quite accurate for what goes wrong with the vast majority of het relationships in the Western world today IMHO. Essentially a power struggle based on conflicting expectations not helped when various relatives & friends chime in.

Nobody's paying, it's "merched" as they say. No different than a designer loaning out a dress.

So far Meghan's designer loans have come via Jessica Mulroney and are from past seasons. That black thing she wore with the beanie for remembrance day (as opposed to her Carmen Santiago outfit she wore at dawn) had already been worn by Sophie Wessex in a blue version.

Meghan's PR will put out how expensive it is because popular demand, what the public expects (even though there's minimal interest going by the scarcity of street party applications), and hint heavily that Harry (who can't afford it!) or PC paid. Like PC is going to pay for a wedding dress that is more than Kate's clothes budget for a year.

Don't believe the price tags designers put on their clothing. So, if it is Ralph and Russo, here's how it goes down:

1. For months after the engagement Meghan has been encouraging speculation about who will design her dress, hoping a designer will step up with a loaner. A lot of designers turned a deaf ear and ran away. Remember Kate's family PAID for her dress. PC isn't giving Meghan and Harry more money for Meghan's dress than Kate's family paid for her own dress, and designers like to be paid for custom work. Those two are lower status - no way, and besides clearly they have shunned PC's planning team. Meghan is doing this via email and google. 2. If it is Ralph and Russo, they're going to pull one of their Russian billionaire's bride sector wedding dresses from 2016 or 2017 - a runway sample probably, just as they did for the engagement dress (nobody "privately paid" for it, please). They'll throw it on Meghan, take it in, bedazzle it some, and then they'll Emperor New Clothes us with it when she sashays down the aisle - oh it's custom, woven by the Icelandic elf folk with gossamer-sourced lace from, we are keeping the price private but rest assured it cost much more than Kate's!

Not true. No one knows how much the Middleton’s put toward the wedding.

They probably paid for the cakes.

[quote]How can a dress cost that much? It’s obscene in 2018 for a royal to waste that much money. I’m sure a very beautiful gown could be made for around $10,000.

She probably could have found a dress at Oxfam for $50.

[quote] They probably paid for the cakes.

They probably made the cakes. Weren't they party planners?

Linked is the above recommended Vanity Fair article. "Bananas are considered too exotic by the BRF."

The more I read about the history of the Royal Family finances, the more laughable the extravagant amounts thrown about by the media sound, including the assumption that when a RF member marries, they just have to turn on the spigot to get an unlimited budget for the dress, reception, home reno, etc.

When Edward VIII abdicated, he worked out a deal where his brother George VI would give him 25 million £ annually for the rest of his life (to cease upon his death even if Wallis outlived him) George VI later broke the agreement to give his brother a much smaller amount after it was revealed Edward VIII had saved about a million pounds from the Duchy of Cornwall, having told his brother it was only ninety thousand pounds. Typical of the British Royal family since years, they tried to fob off Edward VIII maintenance on the government (imagine, and this is the 1930s!) No luck. George VI also had to buy out Edward VIII's shares of Balmoral and Sandringham. At the end of the day the shares got Edward VIII around 11 thousand pounds tax free income annually, and his brother gave him 11 thousand on top of it. Their home in Paris was given to them by the French government for a pittance in rent and it was suspected the same applied to the purchase of their country home. Before he died he persuaded QE II to continue to pay Wallis an allowance, which the queen did - 5,000 £ annually! That's not a lot even in the 1970s, but Wallis had all the jewelry Edward VIII walked away with and other assets, so she did alright, even though she was desperately fearful of becoming destitute.

The family's wealth is all tied up in income producing instruments and in property that has been either w/the family or the Sovereign Estates for generations. They're not like Asian billionaires who can buy up half of Manhattan or give each of their kids a yacht. You're going to be extremely comfortable, to say the least, but it's a country life, and if you want to vacay elsewhere you're best advised to make a of well-heeled friends.

The house in r58 where they will live seems the sort of place you would expect to find "Nigel Fairservice", a former RAF pilot who was discharged under "mysterious circumstances", "Miss Carlotta Thorndyke", the innkeeper, sinister silk merchant, "Mr. Wang" "Hans", the German butler, "O'Toole", the Irish gardener, "Bull Craigan", the "brutish gamekeeper", the two Scottish "McAllister" sisters and "Peppo the Dwarf", a retired circus performer ("the little man with a big secret")

I'd love if Markle had the guts to wear a dress that's not white. Or eggshell, ivory, cream, or ecru. How about a mild gold? She'd look great in golden tones!

I bet Harry likes it when she does untraditional, unexpected stuff, I can't imagine he loves the life of stifling tradition and correctness that he was born into, and that's one of the reasons he's marrying an American. I wonder what he'd think if she wore a red dress, like an Asian bride?

R90 she should have the common sense to NOT wear white.

The conventional thing to do at a second wedding is to wear an ostentatious off-white gown. And what's the point of being an American in Britain, if you can't do something a little unconventional?

Maybe a little color like blush or gold, maybe a dress that shows her arms? Or worse, her ANKLES!!! Imagine the horror-stricken commentators if her dress didn't go all the way down - they'd be shitting themselves and fainting!

No, they wouldn’t r92. In general they’re a lot more open to non traditional things than the average square state dweller. It’s not like they’d have a collective fit of the vapors over a nip slip at a half time show, now *that* would be just ridiculous....

What Princess Anne wore for HER 2nd marriage.

The Prince Charles / Camilla wedding - second marriage for both.

Harry likes the IDEA of being a rebel, but if you watch him watch her big foot it through all of her engagements, barging ahead of him, talking at people instead of engaging, sort of doing it like "you, you you you you you! There, done! Let's go!" and talking more to men than to women, he doesn't like it. He knows how it's supposed to be done, and he wants it done right. He only wants to be a rebel in ways that get him praise. He thinks marrying a woman who is biracial is "rebellious" and the more conservative he can paint the RF, the better he comes off, he thinks. The RF couldn't care less that Mr. Sixth in Line is marrying a woman who is biracial. He thinks sneaking off personal vacations when he's supposed to be working is clever. Where he's concerned, I bet he minded more being caught out wearing a Nazi armband than he did being naked in Vegas (he probably thought that was cool). There are cool ways of being rebellious and uncool ways. Being an dick in front of the cameras and the "common folk" who have gotten up early and rehearsed how to handle themselves when they meet you, or who have lined the walkways of a place you are visiting is uncool. That's the kind of crap Meghan does. Showing disrespect in how you dress is another uncool way. When Markle showed up sleeveless, barelegged, with strands of hair hanging in her face and porn star make-up (you know, the "Hi! I've just been fucked!" kind of heavy contour and lip that passes for "natural" in that world), it was distasteful since everybody else was extremely low key. There was nobody trying to dress to impress. She was out of key. That kind of rebelliousness is going to get her very unpopular and drag Harry down with her.

R88 here - above should of course say the deal between Edward VIII and George VI was for 25 THOUSAND pounds per annum, not twenty five million.

r96, do you think we will see a change in Meghan's behavior/dress or do you think she'll keep it up and there will be fighting in private until they start going their separate ways?

[quote] Harry likes the IDEA of being a rebel

Harry is no rebel. Johnny Yuma WAS a rebel.

R98, I don't know. She seems like she's really going through the motions and can hardly pay attention, which is not the attitude you'd expect of someone who has yet to actually get the ring on her finger (worst case scenario) or is actually prepping for the job (best case scenario). She seems really distracted and not actually trying. She doesn't seem to know the basics. I don't know what it means. It could mean anything from the wedding is cancelled at the last minute, which she knows, because this whole farce is some type of arrangement, to she is really that half-assed about things outside of her social media presentation, has Harry by the short hairs (she must have a lot of video of him on her phone) and has some long game from which the day-to-day of being a royal is paint by numbers for her. I have no idea. Sincere, she's not. She's too smart to be fucking up like this, and I don't think she's "rebelling." That's not what it looks like to me. It looks to me as if she's relentlessly trying to stay "on brand" but why she wants to when her life is changing, I don't understand. The royal stuff just seems incidental to her in some big picture in her mind.

Maybe the Obamas will pull her aside at the wedding and say, "Gurl, don't fuck this up."

The Obamas won't be there.

That is NOT the wedding dress. You'll see.

R101 if she needs a classy black lady to pull her aside and set her right she needs Moira Stewart, beloved British news reader.

[quote]Maybe the Obamas will pull her aside at the wedding and say, "Gurl, don't fuck this up."

I'm sure that will work.

No one's going to call her "Gurl" for many years to come - unless she comes on DL.

I agree with R100.

I'm not sure if she really doesn't care or if she is not too bright. (I'm not sure how tough it is to get a "Communications" degree.) Even the slightest interest in finding out about the duties of members of the Royal Family would have enlightened her about some of the dos and dont's and helped her avoid some of the flak she's gotten.

If, indeed, they are the "family she never had" (and presumably always wanted) then at least, at first, one might expect that she would bend over backward to try to fit in. It's like she can't help herself. Or doesn't want to.

Time will tell.

Why anyone would want to belong to the Royal Family is a mystery to me. And even the most basic research would have shown her that the idea that Prince Harry has an unlimited fortune of his own is just not true.

A *white* wedding dress? After two failed marriages? Surely she doesn't think anyone believes she's a virgin.

[quote] Surely she doesn't think anyone believes she's a virgin.

Harry isn't very smart. He just might.

^^^^A cleverly placed elastic band and some ketchup in the lady ham.

R107, it worked for me!

Another reason it probably won't last: Harry undoubted likes that this biracial America girl is different than the sort of girl he was expected to marry and is wildly unconventional by the standards of the royal family... but if she's signing up to be a princess then he'll expect her to be able to be conventional and correct when appropriate. And to know when he thinks it's appropriate.

Of course the World's Most Eligible Bachelor will expect the girl he marries to be able to read his mind and to do whatever he thinks she ought and now what she wants to do, why would a prince settle for less?

Whatever the dress (please make it not be that hideous thing at OP) I will have to make copies of it for spoiled daughters of very rich men. I make custom one of a kind gowns, but yet, the women who can afford them have no imagination at all.

I'm tired of her being compared to Diana, Kate, or even Camilla. Megan is marrying the second son, who furthermore now has 2 nephews and niece before him in the line of succession. Her wedding should be much more simple and subdued, especially since it isn't her first and she will never be Queen, unless she is a mass murderer. From what I've seen of her so far, I think she is going to have a problem being a supporting player for the rest of her life, since no matter what she will never be the star of the Royal family.

[quote]Her wedding should be much more simple and subdued,

It already is, by being out in Windsor and not in London. Andrew's do, was a much bigger event than this.

Andrew was the son of a Reigning Monarch, Harry isn't.

I don't remember Edward's wedding AT ALL.

R113, being a supporting player in the royal family has a lot more job security than being a supporting player on a TV show!

Of course the marriage won't last, but she'll do her best to stick it out for a few years.

As a Brit I have a terrible confession to make.

I have never been in the UK for any Royal event - ever, My Parents always hated The Royal family.

When I was small 1972? Princess Anne married so we went to Portugal, In 1977 it was The Queens Silver Jubilee so we spent the summer in Cyprus, Prince Charles wedding Majorca, Prince Andrews in Sardinia.

As an adult I seem to have inadvertently carried this on. When Edward married I was in South Africa, Charles 2nd marriage in Turkey, The Queens Golden Jubilee in Sicily, Williams wedding in Rome (for my Mothers 70th birthday) and I'm off to Rhodes (the Greek Island) for 3 weeks on Saturday to celebrate my 50th.

Doubt that there will be any more to avoid in my lifetime, though I will ensure that I miss the coronation of King Charles & Queen Camilla.

Princess Eugenie is getting married on Oct. 12th if that counts.

Thanks R119 I'm sure I can find somewhere to go.

I did once end up in Malta when Prince William was there to celebrate 50 years of Independence from Britain. Not sure that counts though.

Meghan looks distracted because she’s preoccupied with thoughts about how she’s going to revolutionize the British Royal Family. Being an American, I’m sure she thinks the royals are too stuck up in their silly ways and her mission is to teach them a modern approach to all the world issues, sprinkled up with a true Hollywood glamour. She doesn’t appreciate the traditions because they mean nothing to her, and she thinks she’s smarter than everybody in the royal family because she got where she is by winning the Olympics in social climbing, while they were simply born into it. She’s in for a rude awakening. But I’m sure she’ll be fine. She’s smart enough to have a child or two by any means necessary, be it IVF, surrogacy or adoption, she’s smart enough to recognize Harry’s issues and use them against him (I’m sure he’s determined to make his marriage different from the one of his parents, so he’s going to feel guilty about cheating and won’t be inclined to divorce). Meghan is not nearly as vulnerable as Diana, she’s a seasoned player, she won’t let the sharks smell the blood and she’s not divorcing Harry unless she can upgrade (which would mean finding a billionaire who can provide better lifestyle with none of the responsibilities).

Nice article and pics on the Royal tiaras for Meghan to pick from. I bet she will pick the Spencer tiara. (I know we discussed this before but these are some great pictures.)

[quote] Nice article and pics on the Royal tiaras for Meghan to pick from

Ha.

She doesn't get to pick, at least not from whatever she might like.

If the Queen loans her something, the Queen chooses what to offer.

Or, they might buy her a bright, shiny new one which would indicate they don't think she'll be around for long and don't want her to wear any of the heirloom items.