King asks Duke and Duchess of Sussex to move out of Frogmore so Prince Andrew can move in

Smart move, Charlie.

Bitch move, Charlie.

They quit, they lose their free house. End of story.

Ouch, this has to sting for Andrew. The Harkles didn't live there full time, though surely it requires full time maintenance, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask them to give it up, but this has to be a big step down for Andrew.

Better than prison.

I thought Sarah just bought a fabulous townhouse in London and Andrew was going to live there.

What a shit show the British royal family has become. Yeah they were always a mess but this is Tyler Perry levels of shit!

Are there any grace and convenience Kensington Apartments someone could have?

What a complete mess.

So Harry & Meghan paid for the refurbishments of the house. Now, they're being kicked out.

In will move black sheep of the family, Prince Andrew. Although, Sarah Ferguson has her London pad, I would imagine that the police would be unhappy Andrew living there full time, plus if you were Charles, you'd want Andrew out of the limelight in Windsor.

That frees up Royal Lodge for William and Kate, just as they wanted.

R8 I think there would be public upset if Harry & Meghan received a publicly funded grace and favour pad at KP.

Likewise with Andrew. Charles wouldn't want Andrew anywhere near the paparazzi in central London.

It's like a real life chess game moving all of the players around the board.

Oooh, Charles has delivered a public bitchslap! Moving Andrew into a place 1/10th the size of his current one!!

And if Andrew didn't see this coming 50 years ago and save up for the day his mother was no longer around to support him, he's even dumber than Harry.

Don’t these assholes live next door to Oprah in California?

I think it's safe to say they won't be at the Coronation. The Coronation is in early May and the tantrum will still be in full swing.

So, r9? Andrew paid - personally, not out of taxpayer money - 7 million pounds to refurb and get Royal Lodge up to code.

And now he is apparently going to have to walk away from that, just like the Harkles will have to walk away from the 2.3 million pounds they spent like drunken sailors when they foolishly thought the public were gladly picking up the tab. If they had kept it under one million, they would not be out of pocket now. But they couldn't. They had to spend enough to build a house from the ground up, even though all the while they were planning on leaving. They tried to rob the UK taxpayer. They deserve everything they gert.

[quote]Frogmore cottage is much smaller than Royal Lodge, a 30-room mansion at Windsor Great Park which has been the Duke's home since 2003.

I condole him.

Andrew signed a 90 year lease on Royal Lodge. He's bitching about having to pay the running costs now that his slice of the Sovereign Grant has been so much reduced. He doesn't *have* to go anywhere, just to be willing to pony up for his own house if he wants to stay there.

Offering Frogmore to him is indeed a slap in the face, but mainly a symbolic one. He won't take it. He'll do what Charles originally told him to do: Pay for Royal Lodge all by himself.

[quote]A friend of the Sussex's

None of the tabloids have actual sources and the few "sources" they do have are misspelled and imaginary, like this one.

I'll say it on every thread you start about this nonsense: Charles is dim, but not dim enough to put Andrew in Frogmore, at least not before his coronation.

They're getting the boot and using the blacker sheep as their scapegoat. This has stupid person clumsy PR leak dripping all over it: "not only are they being asked to leave their only home (no), that Pedo monster is getting their only SAFE home! Quelle victims!"

Andrew needs to do a Markle and sell stories to the tabloids to fund his housing costs.

Andrew isn't letting go of this. He'll pay, and Charles will have had his revenge on his brother, just as William - now living right next to Frogmore Cottage - has his revenge on his brother for that huge fucking mistake of a book by getting the latter out of Windsor for good.

R16 I don't know. I suspect that William and Charles are behind all these chess moves.

William and Kate, although they've moved to Windsor are senior members of the BRF. I wouldn't be surprised if they've got their eye on the more plush surroundings of Royal Lodge. It fits their status.

Pretty dress 👗 on Tampy

I doubt the gruesome twosome repaid the cost of Frogmore themselves. Charles likely paid it for them and in their names to avoid any backlash from the public and as part of their Megxit deal.

I also doubt Charles "asked" them to leave. More like some legal and official paperwork was sent to them informing them not asking them and without any personal contact from Charles.

I hope it's not true they have until summer to evacuate. They shouldn't have any convenient access to anyone or anything during the coronation.

That's true, r21. I admit I'd completely forgot about that angle. Well, time will tell.

In the meantime, from the Website Which Must Not Be Named, under the hed "Harry and Meghan 'stunned' after being evicted from Frogmore Cottage and 'have until the summer to move out'":

"The Sussexes' favoured royal reporter, Omid Scobie, has claimed that sources close to the couple informed him that they are in shock - and at least two members of the Royal Family are 'appalled'. He does not name them but the Sussexes are known to be close to Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie.

A friend of the couple told him: 'It all feels very final and like a cruel punishment. It's like [the family] want to cut them out of the picture for good. Harry and Meghan have until early summer to vacate. Initially they were given just weeks, but now they have at least until after the coronation'.

Today it was claimed that King Charles started the process of throwing Harry and Meghan out of Frogmore days after Spare was released. The couple have started planning how to move their belongings to California. Royal sources have declared: 'This spells the end of Harry and Meghan’s time in the UK'.

R22 oh, I forgot, Charles is King Tampy

This story seems to have emerged in the Sun, claiming it was "offered" to Andrew last week (who is resisting.) The Telegraph claims it's own reporting (which I bet means chasing their sources to rereport what the Sun broke.) The Telegraph's reporting takes a different tone, emphasizing the request to the Sussexes to give up Frogmore. (I'm assuming the monarch makes a request like the mafia makes an offer you can't refuse.)

In a way this solves a ton of problems. The Sussexes, as the Sussexes, are never coming back to the UK in any meaningful sense (even if all their opportunities continue to wither, surely she will divorce him and try for another bank account before she'll move back to the UK where neither the weather nor the public mood is warm enough for her... though if she's cornered by age and scorn I could actually imagine her trying to brazen it out.) So they don't really need that house. It provides a way for Andrew to live on the money he has, which isn't nothing if the reporting is correct that he inherited from the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh (I assume any money from the Queen Mother is long gone.) A modest house allows him to easily live nicely on his income from those inheritances without relying on more money from the King and allows the Palace to be in the position of saying all the children of the Queen and the DoE live on private finances, although the Wessexes and the Princess Royal receive funding to reflect their ongoing work for the monarchy. Slimmed. Spongers and scandaled done and dusted.

If managed wisely, leaving an estate to settle on his daughters come the day, which most parents want to do. Plus, he may recover some funds from his expenses on the place in return for breaking the lease. It shuttles him out of luxury in his shame and settles the issue. Most of us would thank our lucky stars to be given a house the size of recently renovated Frogmore, even if Meghan Markle did live in it once.

No grounds for this speculation but seems inevitable to me W&K relocate to Royal Lodge. It is likely to be a family home until their children are in or on the verge of young adulthood, before W succeeds. It just makes sense.

I wonder if there is a pattern: King at Clarence House (I don't think he's ever going to BP no matter what they say, but could be wrong.) W in Royal Lodge. The working palaces: BP, Windsor, become much more public and working venues, not homes. Staffs are reduced. The domestic staffs aren't required. The staff that remains are "professionals" maintaining the historic buildings. In fairness, they still have a number of private homes to live well. I think that's the strategy. Make homes (comparatively) smaller places, make the big buildings where the work gets done.

Final speculation with no basis in reporting: I wonder if the Queen really went deeper into the finances and left far bigger inheritances than you might expect to Anne, Edward, Andrew and her grandchildren. Maybe Charles is dealing with a much smaller tax-free inheritance than usual, so he feels less reluctance to reorder the family finances, knowing his siblings have been well taken care of. Slimming down is one thing but it takes a real shit to completely upend the finances of your siblings. Charles can be petulant and selfish, but it's more a self-indulgent selfishness than a cruelty, from what I've read. Maybe the Queen said, fuck it, you want to slim, I'm padding the crash landing for your brothers and sister. Charles and William still have formidable incomes from Lancaster and Cornwall. Charles had the cash from Cornwall for all those years of his mother's reign. He's probably really nicely loaded and could take the inheritance hit. William's got a nice stream of income from it now and inherits in the future. It's hard to imagine either of them struggling to balance the books. It just seems to me there's got to be a connection between the slimming savings and Charles cutting down on family.

I can't make up my mind if the timing is what it appears. On one hand, you could argue by doing it now the Sussexes are offended enough to avoid the coronation, which avoids a lot of awkwardness. On the other hand, this is the coronation team that can't get organized to book the bands in time. Which leads me to final speculation: headlines like Coronation in Chaos coming soon.

Am I the only one that senses that Harry is terribly homesick and can’t figure a way out of the whole colossal mistake?

I agree with much of what you say, r26, and definitely if and when William wants Royal Lodge he can/will take it, but the idea that Andrew will move into Frogmore, with its SoHo House aesthetic, seems a bridge too far for me to swallow. There are lots of other houses around he could move to - perhaps not in Windsor and never as grand as Royal Lodge, but I just can't see him moving to Frogmore.

If William and Kate move to Royal Lodge, then Andrew can move to Adelaide Cottage - MUCH nicer than Frogmore Cottage and not that hideous SoHo House look to contend with.

The BRF should work with ITV to develop a show called "Who Wants To Live in Frogmore Cottage?" in which a series of couples (racially mixed, of course) compete for the chance to live in Frogmore Cottage rent free for a year. But wait, there's a catch: you have to deal with BRF bullshit drama. How much are people willing to endure just to live in a cottage for free in Windsor? Tune in & find out!

I wonder how much Camilla is involved in all of this, behind the scenes?

I wonder if Harry's comments have hurt her and she's influenced some of these decisions. A la how the Queen Mother operated.

R32 what color will the children be?

R29, good point. It's not exactly what seems to be his style. Perhaps this was just a way of forcing his hand. "We offered him an alternative but he wouldn't take it." In a PR match, Andrew's never in a strong position, which of course he never understands. R30 is also right, Adelaide would be a good thing for him. Building on you guys, I wonder if the long term strategy is announce this, then announce a compromise of Andrew in Adelaide so the W&K are taking Royal Lodge (which everybody surely expects?) Then they can avoid the claims of booted out for W&K. I always thought it odd how emphatic the press coverage was about W&K being sooooooo content at Adelaide. There's no room for guests or staff if W&K aren't home at night.

Adelaide is where he was rumored to be moving to before William and Kate took it for some reason, which was speculated to be a big hint that Andrew was never getting Adelaide.

If the Palace refuses to renew Harry's lease and forces Andrew to live at Frogmore it will confirm the speculation that Frogmore is the "punishment house," and that Harry and Meghan really WERE being ostracized when they were given that house. It looks petty and I don't see the Palace engaging in this kind of pettiness before the big coronation ceremony. Afterwards yes I fully expect Charles to crank up the petulance.

R28, some day. Not yet. He's too stupid and he's still married. If she dumps him, then it wouldn't take long but my money is on him relocating to Africa.

Hang on, so who lives in that dreadful Sunninghill House that Andrew and Sarah built out of red brick?

Harry and Meghan will settle into fine, secure lodgings in the Tower of London any time they plop into the UK.

After all, many royal guests have stayed there, memorably.

[quote]I wonder if the long term strategy is announce this

They can't announce anything about this now, not after the tabloids have turned it into a big "Charles says fuck you" situation.

Sunninghill House was sold ages ago and I think it's even been torn down at this point.

Sunninghill House:

[quote]The early 19th-century house burned down in 1947 and a replacement was built in the grounds during the final years of the 1980s to be the official residence of the Duke of York from 1990 until 2004; it was sold in 2007 to Timur Kulibayev for $19.7 million which was $4 million more than the asking price. The house fell into disrepair and was demolished in 2016.

If William and Catherine take Royal Lodge then Euge is going to amp up her support of the gruesome twosome.

Wasn't Euge recently in California? There was some explanation about why she was there but I'm sure she held a private strategy meeting with her cuz Harold.

KC and PW will forever have to be careful about what information Andrew/Fergie/Euge are privvy to even indirectly as it will leak back to the arsonists in Montecito. What a plague Harold has inflicted onto his family with no end in sight. Like COVID, they will be dealing with the ramifications and constant resurgence for decades to come.

Is this a keep your enemies closer kind of thing?

[quote]I thought Sarah just bought a fabulous townhouse in London

Who did the old slapper shake down for the down payment?

What happened to the other thread about this? Deleting threads is making this site less appealing…

Charles is sweetening the deal with a payback for at least a sizable proportion of the money the Sussies put into it. Since all Meghot wants is money, that will please her.

The do called GREAT Royal 👑 dynasties of Europe were ALL gone by the end of the First World War- that’s when the British Royal Family and the titles of Aristocrats should have been phased out.

The British cling do tenaciously to the past. I guess it’s the only thing that Differentiates them from the rest of Europe. That AND driving on the wrong side of the road.

R37 That was sold ages ago.

The interesting one is Fort Belvedere, with all its associations to Edward and Wallis.

R36 Harry always loved S. Africa, and not to sound like a mad shipper loon but I suspect he loved Chelsey too—really loved, not this trauma-bond he seems to have with Megs.

His best bet for this life would be to head back to both. But Chels if she’s got any sense won’t go there again.

R48 Leased out for the past 40 years to Canadian billionaire retail magnate Galen Weston and his wife, Hilary. Weston died in 2021 and it continues to be occupied by his family.

I thought Andrew’s big tittie daughters were squating like queens in all these abandoned mansions

[quote] I suspect that William and Charles are behind all these chess moves.

I do believe that William is so much savvier and more politically ruthless than he’s assumed to be.

Families can be your worst enemies. They can fuck you over like no one else. This is a general statement....not regarding the King's decision here. On that I say....GOOD.

r43 if Charles is wise, it will be. Andrew knows far too much to be set completely loose or slapped *too* hard by Charles, whatever the latter may think of the former.

Fergie recently bought two flats in Mayfair from the Duke of Westminster; renovations should be about done At the time the papers said they are for the girls.

Charles had better watch that surly-looking bitch, Eugenie. I'm sure she got very comfy in Royal Lodge during her teens and I daresay she resents the fact that her kids won't be living it up there at the weekends which, as they are great-grandchildren of a now-deceased monarch, would have been totally inappropriate for them in any case.

I'm not a fan of William, in fact I can't stand him, but I agree R52.

If I'd felt betrayed by my brother, I think I would turn inward towards my nuclear family and commence manoeuvres.

R57 why can’t you abide Wellz?

Harry, with Megan, removed himself from a poisonous family structure. He had only to look at Andrew to realize what might have awaited him. Good for him for funding -- or finding -- his freedom by selling gossip about that horrid family. Particularly Charles -- what a father to have had!

R55 naxt stohp, the Sohvren Grahhhunt!

Yes, poor dear darling Harry! His bedroom area was a little smaller than Willuam's. Oh the horror.

R58 He just grates on me. I've met characters like him in my life. Pretence of goody two shoes in public, but behind the scenes they are manipulative and have a totally different personality.

I sense that he has a temper and has also inherited his father's petulance.

Nonsense, r59. Harry had a good thing going. He would have moved into gorgeous Apt 1 KP, with his best friend and brother as a neighbour, and proceeded to make Invictus into one of the most important and respected military charities in the world. He would have had a great life doing genuinely valuable work, meeting people who could help him put his own complaints into perspective, and would have retained the position of "most popular Royal" until he was dead and much mourned by his family and his country, if not the world.

All this, if only he had a better character and had married a genuinely decent woman.

But, he didn't.

[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.]

What a mess. I don't think Charles is well served by his advisers whoever they are, including William and Camilla. Of course when the Queen dies there will be some moving around and shifting. But now is not the time. It makes Charles look petty (which he is known to be). If I were advising him right now I would tell him to quash the gossip about Andrew's housing allowance. Period. And all the talk about switching houses. All of that can be done gradually and quietly over time, but for now the total focus should be on positive shit about the coronation. As far as Frogmore goes, Harry and Meghan don't use it much at all. Instead of stuffing Andrew at Frogmore, they ought to leave it vacant. It's obvious Beatrice, Eugenie, Harry, etc. all live pretty much away from the UK. I'd make Frogmore a place where any visiting family can stay while in town, and it would "belong" to no one save Charles. Period. And why does Andrew need 30 rooms?

[quote] He would have moved into gorgeous Apt 1 KP, with his best friend and brother as a neighbour, and proceeded to make Invictus into one of the most important and respected military charities in the world. He would have had a great life doing genuinely valuable work, meeting people who could help him put his own complaints into perspective, and would have retained the position of "most popular Royal" until he was dead

If only Mummy hadn't died.

[quote] Harry had a good thing going. He would have moved into gorgeous Apt 1 KP, with his best friend and brother as a neighbour,

They were NEVER best friends. Harry says Wills and Kate rarely invited him over or saw him at all when he was living alone in Nott Cott which was right across the way from them. He was disappointed. Wills always claimed he took care of Harry but when Harry arrived at Eton William said he would not be speaking to him at all, that he was on his own. Iow he did the opposite of protecting him and this was well before Meghan.

The Palace doesn't get the concept of "Bad Optics".

Britain has a real housing crisis affecting ordinary people, but let’s focus on the second homes of millionaires.

They are all scrubs.

William is said to have chafed at being his brother's keeper, for which he has my every sympathy. Harry clearly has mental health issues. It also rumored to one of the main factors for choosing St. Andrews as university. The 'close brothers' angle was merely palace PR. All that being said, had Harry played the game and stayed in his lane, he would have been rewarded.

Being "protected", "protected by others" does seem to be a prominent, recurring theme in Harry's litany of whinge/bitch mightily about Dad/Bro/Late Granny.

I do sense that Charles realises his own mortality and is in a hurry to reform the BRF before he pops his clogs.

Much of what he's doing must be in consultation with William. I suspect Charles prefers to do the evicting now, before he dies, then it will allow William to reconcile in the future with Harry, by saying it was dad that threw you out, not me.

William will never, ever reconcile with Harry. Even after Meghan is out of the picture.

That bridge wasn't just burned - it was nuked from orbit.

William has as much as said Harry is dead to him. There will be no reconciliation.

Maybe William and Catherine didn't invite bachelor uncle Harold over much because he was an angry unstable drunk and druggie and they didn't want him around their children?

[quote] That bridge wasn't just burned - it was nuked from orbit.

R73 I prefer "it was nuked into oblivion", but I gave you a WW anyway.

^^^^ Meant for R74

R74 It's a tricky one. I get your guys points, but the BRF are adept at change. Never, say never and all that.

Sure, cutting Harry adrift is a perfectly sound strategy, but the festering sore of their relationship will be the narrative of his reign. Much in the same way the Queen Mother had it in for Wallis until she popped her clogs.

Harry may have burnt his bridges, he may be stupid, but he has a PR machine to keep him in the limelight for years to come.

William has had, and perhaps continues to have, his affairs, and Harry knows this. That underlies his anger at the way that Megan was used as a bone to throw to the press, to deflect attention from Rose Hanbury or whomever.

Harry can hardly "nuke" a fraternal relationship seemingly defined by the absence of love. Given Charles's failure as a father, the two brothers must have competed for Diana's love, and after her death were never able to escape that struggle.

Admiration for Harry for finding Megan and removing himself from a position of craven dependence.

Your evidence, R80?

For being so independent, Harry sure clings to that title and is happy to sell stories about the BRF.

r79 I do agree that much can change, but I just think that this particular relationship won't change from the dead place it is in now. Not necessarily out of fury, of which I am certain there is much, but more out of a complete lack of trust. For example, how can William ever have a conversation alone with Harry? He can't, really. Even after Meghan and Harry break up, William can never be certain that Harry is not, say, wearing a recording device for, say, his new book. Which in turn means that there will be no real opportunities to rebuild anything between them. And the longer Harry lives inthe States, the more different from the old Harry he will become. I think given all the variables, any reconciliation is impossible now. However, life is strange, so you are right to point out that one should never say never.

Camilla has Ozempic Face

The same gossip you rely on, R81.

R8 My feeling too. Let these unhelpful and embarrassing royals have a few dilapidated rooms in some drafty palace and draw the curtain on them.

I read Spare and Harry made it very clear that bully William treated him with contempt all his life. Ignored him at Eton, ignored him at Kensington Palace. A vile way to treat a younger sibling. Given that, I have no clue why so many people here think Harry secretly wants to return to the BRF.

I don't think there will be any reconciliation. They would probably prefer Harry no longer come to the U.K. My bet is, once Meghan ends the marriage, they will quietly fund him so long as he keeps a low profile. If he continues to whinge and cause trouble, he will be completely cut off.

That’s really sad how they raised the brothers. They shouldn’t have seen each others as rivals. Harry could have been a great asset and counselor to William.

R80 you're full of shit. And I would take anything from Harry's memoir with a lot of salt.

There is no evidence of any affairs.

Charles was not a terrible father. Far from perfect like most of us but not uncaring or cruel.

The boys did not have to compete for Diana's love. Although I'm sure she loved them very much it was clear William was her favourite, probably because he was sensitive and mature for his age while Harry was the one she worried about. Didn't she confide in friends about his behavioural issues?

Harry HAS been economically cut off. He and Megan are financially independent.

Brilliantly, they have done this by monetizing the very thing that was used against them: gossip.

Why a gay GOSSIP BOARD should be so implacably hostile to Harry is a mystery. If either Charles or William were remotely compelling, I might understand, but they really are unpleasant creatures.

Have you ever been at the same school as an older sibling, r87? I guarantee you that what Harry reported was hardly an unusual experience. Especially at boarding school. I can attest to that.

It's part of the stage of development, trying to carve an identity away from family identity. Not always fun for the younger sibling, but do you for a single moment think that Harry wasn't surrounded by loads and loads of his own friends (and hangers on) from the very moment he got to Eton? I can assure you that he was.

WHat about the old farts? Charles has cousins and his mothers contemporaries inhabiting properties too. Evict them all I say. Make a symbolic public gesture and throw out the old codgers. Release a statement to say he is showing solidarity with the many homeless people. OK I was joking...to make a point about the absurdity of it all.

And what about Charles? He has Highgrove and he was at Clarence House wasn't he? And St. JAmes is vacant because the Queen mother died ages ago. My point being that Charles decided he wasn't going to give up Highgrove. He decided he wanted to stay at Clarence House as his primary and use Bucking ham Palace more for ceremonial shit and administrative offices. But of course Edward and Sophie have an apartment there as does Princess Anne. Personally, if I Were WIlliam, I would in no way want the Royal Lodge on the Windsor Estate. Or Adelaide Cottage. The fact is, William and Catherine have three young children and moving houses every time some old fart dies is just stupid.

The Harkles bleat about kindness and doing good in the world, all the while selling gossip. They're trash.

William and Catherine, by rights, ought to move to Clarence House.

Andrew has a lease on the Royal Lodge. He ought to force Charles to buy out his lease.

Am I "full of shit" R90?

Charles, as the world knows, betrayed Harry's mother from the very beginning of their relationship. One in which she was 19 and he was 36 or whatever he was.

Charles, besotted by Camilla, who turned Harry's bedroom into her dressing room the moment he went off to Sandhurst.

I really don't care of William cheats on Kate but I can hardly dismiss it as an impossibility, as you do.

Try to see the larger picture, if you can.

R87 prior to Harry's new version of history he would often say how he looked up to his brother, how Kate was the one who encouraged him to get counselling, how he felt close to their family. Funny how this is all forgotten when alternative facts are required to fit a narrative.

Why, r95? The reason Charles moved there was because he was so close to Queen Mother that he'd always envisaged living in her house (apparently). Clarence House is not 'for' the Prince and Princess of Wales. Just for Charles and by extension, Camilla.

R97. Poor Diana with her taste in married men. I assume Harry takes after her and cheats on Meghan?

Frogmore Cottage is nothing special. In this continuing drama it is basically the royal equivalent to the "Dog House".

I can't see why Harry would be upset, he never wanted it in the first place.

Fergies' flat (not a townhouse) was purchased by her daughters. It may be in Belgravia but even nice areas have low points and she found it.

Grifters Andrew and Sarah are going to finally be sidelined. They knew this was coming.

Andrew is a dog and dogs belong in doghouses.

Sarah can stay in the shed.

r17 They are not being evicted until the summer which is after the coronation.

R97 he was a lousy husband, that doesn't mean he was a terrible father as you claimed. It's clear he was too soft and overindulgent if anything.

You are claiming for a fact William has had affairs and used Meghan to deflect media attention. There is no evidence for this. I wasn't saying it was impossible, just not proven. You are the one who is speaking in categorical terms without proof

r24 I don't believe they are close to Beatrice so the two members are likely Eugenie and Jack.

William is an adulterous bully who felt pressured into marrying a woman he wasn't in love with. He's jealous of Harry who got to date numerous beautiful girls before marrying someone he was passionate about.

William has only dated insipid Kate his entire life!

Fuck off, Surviving Klan Granny.

William doesn't love Kate? Is he gay?

Are there estimates of how much the upkeep of Royal Lodge would be if Andrew is footing the bill? He's a single man, he has absolutely no need of a mansion. And the Sunninghill fiasco was another disgrace, they let it fall into ruins but sold it in a shady deal to the son-in-law of the President of Kazakhstan for millions more than it's worth (the land that is, the house wasn't fit for habitation).

r100 One of the most astonishing things about this whole Harkle Debacle is how severely Diana's memory has suffered in light of Harry's behaviour. I don't mean that any articles have been written to say this - to my knowledge, they haven't - but more that I cannot look at Diana in the same way now, and I used to adore her.

When Harry's trajectory is enough to even slightly sour anyone on the formerly most popular woman in the world, well I'd say that it's a very, very bad trajectory indeed.

I care not for any of these reprobates but, Charles is a nasty, vile cunt and he always has been. He deserves the loathing that so many Britons have toward him. He’s the international poster boy for entitled, self-worshiping, evil rich white guy. I truly do hope he ends in being dragged out of his little castle by a noose around his neck.

Wouldn't Andrew be happy with a nice council flat?

r59 Another poster who should be reminded that Harry and Meghan asked for a half in half out arrangement. The fleeing the awful family narrative was introduced led about later.

R101 Good points. Harry's upset because by taking away their grace and favor house is Charles giving him the middle finger, quite unambiguously.

R103 From Harry's book the picture of Charles is not 'terrible' as a Dad but pretty unavailable, emotionally and physically, not surprising given his upbringing. His detached delivery of the news of their mother's death, then leaving the boys alone in their separate bedrooms is pretty chilling, but very BRF. Afterwards Charles was consumed with rehabilitating Camilla and the boys didn't see that much of him.

It is not normal for an older sibling to totally ignore a younger sibling at school. My oldest brother looked out for brother #2 at school. They didn't hang out together but big brother did keep an eye out should younger brother need help. That is how healthy caring families treat each other, they had each others back. You are some sick fucks to try to pass off Williams dismissal of Harry as normal.

[QUOTE] I cannot look at Diana in the same way now, and I used to adore her.

Nobody cares what a rancid Klan Granny like you thinks. You're hardly an arbitor of public opinion.

R114 are you seriously taking Harry's word for it? Even if it was true William didn't spend much time with Harry as teenagers at home, this is normal, and maybe Harry wasn't very good company?

I know that families are never tidy, but with all of the advisors and PR teams behind them, the BRF should handle things better.

r87 LOL you read Spare and believed it was the gospel truth? Give your head a wobble!

Well, r114, it seems that, nomatter what Harry says, William definitely kept an eye on Harry at school. We have two pieces of evidence for this: first, that the brothers shared a pool of Eton friends, and second, that William chose St. Andrews in order to get away from the protective role he had been playing prior - at Eton.

Also, I'm very glad you had a good fraternal experience at school, but bear in mind not everyone is that fortunate. Most, in fact, are not.

R103, since the BRF is a perverse world in which competing members of the family use an amoral press to plant anonymous stories to bolster their own positions, let us both embrace uncertainty, and recogize that -- short of tapes or photographs -- we won't arrive at certainty.

We can both agree, I think, that it is a horrible if privileged environment to grow up in, and I myself can fully understand why Harry, who comes across as honest and agreeable, wanted out.

Have you read the excellent analysis by the Columbia sociologist Zenep Tufecki in the NYTimes? The clearest analysis of this messy situation that I have read.

I think William resents Harry for the freedom he has had being the "spare".

I think he resents Harry for having a better personality and having the balls to go into the military, actually love it and then be of service to injured veterans. William knows that Harry is the better man for the job and that Harry would love doing the job.

William loves the title and privilege but absolutely hates everything else about being king.

r120 He didn't want out. He asked for a HALF IN half out arrangement so they could have their cake and eat it. The narrative was changed after their half in arrangement request was denied.

I remember my mum lent my elder sister her car on condition she give me a lift to school. My sister made me get out first so she wouldn't be seen with me, and never spoke to me in school 😂 hardly fucking abnormal

Logically, though, R122, why wouldn't he want a half-in relationship. He is a Prince, after all. He wanted financial freedom from his father and brother, but didn't want to give up his role in the military, where he had served with merit.

r114. I was about to give you a w/w until I read your byline.

Perhaps Andrew could ask Virginia Giuffre for a loan to help make ends meet.

r121 This is childlike logic indicative of the mindset of arrested or stunted emotional development that Harry seems to suffer from.

Harry better get his shit together. He's not getting any younger and if doesn't accomplish some new work and projects in his life, ALL his rich experiences and all his relevancy is going to be very much behind him. And then he'll have to live many decades as a has been.

r119 I do think it is a cultural thing. I'm Black, I didn't know any Black siblings that would turn their back on family. White folks take a lot of things for granted.

I am also elder gay, the experience these days might be different as younger Black folks (nieces and nephews) have grown up with less focus on racism and its dangers than those of us who were kids in the 60's and 70's.

r127 expressing feelings out in the open is the opposite of stunted or arrested. People suffering from those types of things behave more like William.

Personally, I would have exited Andrew to a house on the Sandringham estate or Balmoral. Never to be heard of again.

r124 He walked away from the military years ago when he couldn't get promoted and asked to return as a working royal. He also snubbed a military charity event in order to go to the Lion King premiere to shill for Meghan to get a role in a Disney film.

Half in half out has never worked and was denied for good LOGICAL reasons. It is an institution of public service not monetising your fame. But again your post indicates a walking away from the claim he chose to remove himself from the toxic bad royal family because the facts show that wasn't quite what happened.

r124Have you ever gone to your employer - even if it was a family company - and announced that you'd prefer to do no work but would very much like to keep the salary and company car?

Also, the military do not want Harry. At all. They loathe and revile him. Remember, they swore an oath to the grandmother he flung shit at, and they adored the grandfather he sent into the hospital (the day of the Oprah announcement) for the last time. It's a genuine question as to whether even Invictus wants Harry anymore, and he's the founder. Do not underestimate how much the military feel wanting to be shot of Harry and all he now represents.

R120 no I have no interest in reading an analysis by someone in the NY Times or elsewhere, I don't need to be spoonfed. I just find it weird you were willing to assert accusations such a Charles being a lousy father, William having affairs, the boys competing for Diana's love without any evidence.

My view is that no one is perfect, their lives are more complicated than we know and it's a sad affair. Harry however reminds me of people who constantly twist and weave stories to fit their own current narratives so I don't take anything he says at face value.

My first big clue was in their joint 2017 documentary for Diana's anniversary Harry openly credits William and Kate for convincing him to get therapy to deal with his issues and for collaborating on Heads Together as a result. Switch to 2020 and he's claiming he never had mental health support before Meghan stepped in. Just one of many contradictions which lead me to find him a sneak.

And my bias but I can easily imagine him as a tearaway bully in school so I wouldn't want to be around him there either.

r130 Deary me you think that is what arrested and stunted development amounts to a nutshell? You clearly are clueless. Harry's whole mentality is that of a teenager-always offended but never to blame.

Really? Must I do *everything* around here?

:brushes hands briskly together:

Alright then, I’ll say it. FRAU THREAD.

r132 love to have a link that confirms Harry walked away because he couldn't get promoted. From what I have read he wanted to stay where he was but the Queen wanted him away from action and forbid it and ordered him home to begin his royal duties.

r135 you seem to suffer from what you project on to Harry.

r137 Many a royal biographer including Angela Levin confirm he couldn't pass the exam for promotion and left because he didn't want a desk job in the army.

r138 The Netflix series and Spare are one big act of projection.

R134, I am aware you have no interest in reading arguments that don't conform to your biases, but take a look at the opening paragraphs of Zenep's NYTimes article, "Prince Harry is Right, and Its Not Just a Matter of Royal Gossip."

Any close follower of the British media should not have been surprised that after Prince Harry fell in love with Meghan Markle, the biracial American actress, years of vitriolic, even racist coverage followed.

Whipping hatred and spreading lies — including on issues far more consequential than a royal romance — is a specialty of Britain’s atrocious but politically influential tabloids.

People like me, uninterested in celebrities, shouldn’t dismiss the brouhaha around Harry’s memoir as mere celebrity tittle-tattle. He has made credible, even documented claims that his own family refused to stand up against their ugly, sustained attacks against Meghan. In other words, it appears that Britain’s most revered institution, funded by tens of millions in taxpayer funds annually, plays ball with one of its most revolting institutions.

At the very least, it seems clear by now where some senior members of the royal family position themselves in all this.

Among those in attendance at a Christmas lunch in mid-December were Camilla, Britain’s queen consort; Dame Judi Dench; Dame Maggie Smith; and some less luminous celebrities, including the acid-tongued columnist Jeremy Clarkson and the broadcaster and columnist Piers Morgan.

Both Clarkson and Morgan have been among the foremost participants in the multiyear media evisceration of Meghan, a daughter-in-law of Camilla and King Charles.

Clarkson has prior ties to Camilla. His farm was featured in an edition of Country Life magazine that she guest-edited. Just days after that Christmas lunch, he blasted Meghan when he wrote in his column in The Sun, “At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant ‘Shame!’ and throw lumps of excrement at her.”

The palace made no comment about that. Clarkson publicly apologized for the column after a fierce public outcry.

As for Morgan, he has called Camilla “a class act.” More than a decade ago, when many in Britain were still resistant to her becoming a queen consort because of her adulterous affair with Charles, Morgan wrote in his Daily Mail column, “I can’t actually think of a single other woman in the world better suited, or more suitably experienced,” to be queen.

Editors’ Picks

Woody Harrelson Can Play Anyone. It’s Being Himself That’s Hard.

Can Olive Oil Do All That?

Restaurant Review: At Torrisi, the Room Is Showy but the Cooking Is Subtle Morgan quit his ITV morning show in a huff in March 2021 after being roundly condemned for saying that he did not believe Meghan’s claim to have been suicidal during her first pregnancy and that he “wouldn’t believe her if she read me a weather report.” It wasn’t his first such diatribe about her, and it wouldn’t be his last.

But he said Camilla soon “demanded to know when I’d be back on television.”

Clarkson and Morgan are just two players in a swamp of commentators and tabloids that are intimately tied to the royals they cover. Just before Queen Elizabeth II died, Charles hosted the editor of The Sun, something the editor said was a regular occurrence. She wrote that he was always “jovial and cheery” with her. And Charles and Camilla recently hired The Daily Mail’s longtime deputy editor as their communications secretary.

What could Charles and Camilla think they are conveying by maintaining a camaraderie with a tabloid press that has behaved so noxiously to members of their own family, with articles that have been so ugly, and even racist?

r137, It's common knowledge that Harry repeatedly failed the exam to become a Major. Always has been. Even Harry wouldn't deny this. It's been public knowledge for many years.

r134 you need to provide a link to back up all your claims or you are just asserting accusations like you accuse r120 of doing.

Where is the proof for what you say? Are you so insane you believe people should accept what you say is reality?

Why should anyone take what you say as real over any one else here?

So provide some links r141

Yes indeed, the entire Royal Family is fucked up, and they all deserve each other.

I, like all the other posters here, know nothing about the private lives of any of the BRF, but it is clear from all the coverage of Will and Kate that they truly are into each other. Were Will to be having extramarital relations, there would be some photographic evidence of her displeasure, given their amount of press and TV attention. Not unlike the photos of Meghan at Harry’s friends wedding that she supposedly crashed…

R142 the onus is not on me to provide evidence that something didn't happen. I'm not asking you or anyone else to take what I say as real, merely pointing out that people can't make idle claims without evidence.

r143 He stayed a Lieutenant for the last five years of his army career and then left. It's obvious he was unable to progress.

Apparently he took the advancement exam several times and failed each time, and that's why he stayed a Lieutenant for so long (not long for a normal person, but long for a Royal).

Is there a Frogless that might be available?

To the Harry fans on this thread, a serious question: why do you care what occurs with the Royal family? Harry left three years ago and begin a new life on another continent.

Here's one short video from the 2017 Diana documentary where Harry and William discuss how they supported each other. In the same docu Harry credits Kate and William for finally persuading him to get good mental health support.

All of this must be a deflection off of Camellia who has been raked over the coals in the last few weeks. I wonder if it gets tiresome having to come up with these games to keep deflecting off of the current person they don't want discussed.

Baldy and Twigs can't move into Clarence House for the next few years. The King and Queen are still residing there while Buck House is under renovation.

They will surely move there eventually, but who's to say for sure? The BRF tends to hate Buckingham Palace and only reside there out of public tradition. It's not their "family home." And Charles loves to break precedent and shock people, so he might stay at Clarence House permanently, and let the Palace be a full-time tourist attraction to bring in more coin. Hell, they could rent it out for Bar Mitzvah ceremonies!

R152 and for Beckham birthday parties!

R153 Why not? He's never going to be Paul Newman with those bullshit cornish biscuits he sells at Highgrove. He thinks he's a lifestyle brand.

No one wants to pay 40 pounds for dry cookies in a tin with Charlie Boy's face on the lid!

R11 is there really no spare cell in Strangeways? Could always squish a few of the existing inmates in together.

Just more toxic content and horrible p.r. from the crap-fest of a royal family!

Will they get their deposit back?

To Clarence House, r152? Why would the Prince of Wales ever move to Clarence House, even after Charles and Camilla move to 'Buck House'?

They have one of the most beautiful London houses in all existence. Why would they ever move to Clarence House?

R92/R114 I was a big sister to a younger one at grammar school, and it's incredible how biased the account my sister gives of our time there is. She insists that I ignored her there, but the opposite was true. I consistently tried to interact with her between classes and at breaks, keep an eye on her, check in, but as she was popular and outgoing and rebellious than me, she repeatedly rejected my care. And I was being bullied and pressured by others all the while, so there was only so much of that I could take.

Selective memory is a hell of a thing.

Didn't the Queen Mother hate Clarence House before moving there and wanted to stay on at the palace. A young Prince Philip practically dragged her out by her hair!

Apparently, r160. There is no accounting for taste.

[quote] Many a royal biographer including Angela Levin confirm he couldn't pass the exam for promotion and left because he didn't want a desk job in the army.

[quote] Harry walked away because he couldn't get promoted. From what I have read he wanted to stay where he was but the Queen wanted him away from action and forbid it and ordered him home to begin his royal duties.

I always found the stories of the power struggle between the Queen Mother and Philip funny. Poor HM being caught between them and her sister as well.

Why all the fighting about these obscenely rich awful people? None of them would piss on you if you were on fire yet you defend them the same way the most rabid soap viewer defends their favorite characters against criticism.

Harry may have wanted to stay where he was in the Army while failing his exams, but it was too embarrassing to have him stay a Lieutenant for too long, since that would have been unprecedented. He was too dumb to see this, but the Queen was not.

R124 - I think he wanted half-in (to work with the Commonwealth outside of the UK) so QEII would not feel she was being abandoned by him.

[quote]To the Harry fans on this thread, a serious question: why do you care what occurs with the Royal family? Harry left three years ago and begin a new life on another continent.

What?? Harry left three years ago and begin a new life on another continent.?

Who knew?

Why is everyone claiming Harry left the army because he didn't progress? Everything in the news and Harry's own book say it's because he was too high profile and continued to be targeted, putting everyone in danger. He was devastated he had to leave the field-- he loved the camaraderie and *cough* killing people.

The army offered him desk jobs-- he hated the idea. The whole point of joining the army was the action. The parts of Harry's memoir dealing with his army days are quite unpleasant. He has no awareness that he was engaged in an unpopular war and that loving battle is not going to endear him to many people. Harry's American ghostwriter should be ashamed for allowing chapter after chapter detailing Harry's childish G.I. Joe enthusiasm for war.

No, r168. He was "a high profile target" and so was pulled out of Afghanistan in 2008. He left the Army in 2015. In the intervening years he was repeatedly taking an exam to progress to Major and failed repeatedly, which is why he eventually left.

Point being, R167, if Harry was successful in his own right the monarchy would be a distance memory.

*distant

R169 I like the thought of the top military brass repeatedly failing him on purpose no matter what he did, both to protect the boys and to stick one up to the family in general. Though I'm aware the Army officials are usually loyalists, so this is probably silly headcanon.

R168 he wasn't becoming more of a target as the years went on, so that as a reason for leaving the army makes no sense

Any ideas on what the exam entails? Is it like logical and tactical reasoning or more intellectual?

It's a nice thought, r172, but the military isn't that independently minded. The military gave him many more chances than they would have ever, ever given anyone else. He failed - repeatedly, and with all the help in the world - because he was substandard.

r174 No idea about that exam, but here's another important military exam he failed in 2012.

^^^They let him take control of an aircraft days after he failed the theory test. Don't tell me he wasn't coddled and helped by the military. And STILL he couldn't progress.

R134 - This is a petty gossip site, and the pettier the better, so we are more than willing to assert accusations.

Harry's whole "military career" was a product of Palace and MoD PR and his own imaginative narrative. He had a body guard during his tours of Afghanistan. The General Staff didn't want him anywhere near the front because of the danger his presence created to both other soldiers and himself. The MoD's statement that Harry qualified as an Apache helicopter pilot was sheer fantasy, given the complex subjects of physics, aerodynamics, flight map drawing, etc. required. "Apache pilots must be self-disciplined, intelligent and confident". Harry is none of those.

Due to his myriad mental issues, Harry has spent his entire life being protected, living in a fantasy world, blaming his father, brother and late grandmother for all of his misfortune. And nothing and no one will deter him from his destructive path.

Well that's certainly true, r178, but you must admit that r134 has a point.

A practical and written assessment, I would guess.

I'm 100% in favor of this completely bitchy move! Well played, Charles and William. Make them stay at a Motel 6 during the coronation.

Andrew is a boorish, entitled idiot. The best I can say for him is that he seemed to love his mom and he's never spilled the beans in a tell-all. Still, I'd rather they give the place to him and kick H/M to the curb. I should favor H/M over a sex pest, but I'm a true DLer! I'll root for the sex pest over the desperate, humorless, talentless whiners any day!

R182, I imagine that in the UK this is a very popular move by Charles: downsize Andy and boot out the nasty, ungrateful Sussexes.

Latest from the DM: King Charles III began evicting Harry and Meghan from Frogmore Cottage just 24 hours after his son released Spare - and the couple believe it is 'cruel', it was claimed today.

His Majesty initially gave his son and daughter-in-law 'weeks' to pack up their grace-and-favour British home in the grounds of Windsor Castle after Harry released his memoirs.

But 'now they have at least until after the Coronation' in May, a friend of the couple has claimed. A source told Page Six that Britain's monarch started the eviction process on January 11 - the day after Spare had its global release.

r159 Selective memory is certainly a hell of an unreliable thing when you used and use drugs, by his own admission, like Harry does. Amazingly everything is a plot and conspiracy, nothing is his or Meghans fault, other people are pantomime villians to blame for everything. Like I said he is emotionally stunted at the teenage level.

Good. Now the brilliant Harry and his charming wife can continue their meaningful luxury Anerican life and everybody's happy

R92, correct. My older brother wanted nothing to do with me until we were in our late teens (he's 2 years older). Then we quickly became best friends. His whining about his older brother ignoring him in childhood just underscored what a endlessly needy sinkhole Harry is.

The gloves have really come off since the Queen's funeral. It's not too hard to find, but if you search there is quite a bit posted by former military on social media taking the piss out of Harry. Some are stories from people who served with him and some are just general commentary on his claims (25 kills, etc.). Just a while back, they were skewering him about a photo shoot from his military days. I know nothing about the military, but it was apparent to those who did that Harry did not know how to wear his kit and rifle he was brandishing was loaded with blanks. I can believe his 'service' was mostly PR fluff.

I have a few friends who are closely associated with Eton, including one friend whose son was there at the same time William and Harry were.

That crowd is pretty tight lipped, but what I've gathered from them, usually after a few drinks, is that if W&H had applied to attend Eton as just regular well-to-do-boys rather than royal princes, there is a chance that William *might* have gotten in on his own merit, but no chance at all that Harry ever would have gotten in. Both because of his lack of academic achievements and his behaviour/temperament. He was entitled and always in trouble, the staff had a difficult time with him.

After that, the palace staff (I don't know which palace staff in particular, those who were there and tell the stories don't specify) were constantly cleaning up in the press for him. The killed stories are about what you'd expect "Prince falls out of nightclub blackout drunk" etc. Some made it to press but apparently it was nearly a full time job cleaning up after him.

Finally, in that same group of friends, there are those who know W&K through charitable and business endeavours and say that they are very hardworking, come to all the meetings, are well informed on all their charities, have inspiring plans for future projects and are very professional. That's not very gossipy but that's all I know.

None of this is really shocking news, but I can at least confirm that it's from reliable sources 1 degree away from the players.

[quote] It's not too hard to find, but if you search there is quite a bit posted by former military on social media taking the piss out of Harry.

Sure, just look at the posts on DL by veterans attacking his military career. No one believes Harry about anything but random posts on social media are gospel.

Find a link by any credible source claiming his army career was basically cosplay. Take your time.

Lol R189. "I can confirm from reliable sources" is the funniest anonymous post I've seen today.

Having them move out is a good decision.

Having them move out to put ANDREW in their place is an idiotic decision.

Give it to someone who's been a good soldier all these years, like Edward and Sophie.

Edward and Sophie are already set up.

Edward and Sophie's cozy cottage.

Frogmore Cottage is a good choice for Andrew although I am sure it hurts his ego to be so downgraded from his current place. Charles settled Andrew's lawsuit. I'm sure he only did so with certain concessions from Andrew, including moving out of Royal Lodge.

Royal Lodge was ridiculously oversized just for the use of Andrew and Fergie (who lives with him) once the girls had grown up. That thing must cost a fortune just to heat.

I will be curious if Charles makes Edward and Sophie move out of Bagshot Park (another oversized pile) once both Louise and James move out.

[quote] Give it to someone who's been a good soldier all these years, like Edward and Sophie.

They don't need it--yet. Bagshot is only about ten minutes' drive to Windsor.

Maybe, R195. Edward and Sophie reportedly keep most of the place closed off so that they do not have to heat the whole thing. They do not seem so status conscious, so they may welcome giving up their lease to move to a more manageable place. Then the Crown Estates can figure out some way to make a profit from it.

What r74 said.

In the unlikely event that, after KC dies, and Harry ever is in the UK, and William allows a re-engagement between the two, if I were Harry, and had a hankering to go fishing, I wouldn't take along one of William's staff.

Fredo did that and look what Michael did to him : "I want nothing to happen to him while our Mother is alive".

Nope r80. That's both Harry and Meghan. That's why they had their SoHO house buddies Gilles Coren and Nicole Cliffe make up and spread that fake news. Both retracted when confronted. So, try again dear.

R190, I don't mind if you don't believe me. My "gossip" was hardly titillating enough to make up though.

I'm with R182, finally some fun gossip from the UK side of the pond. King Charles is moving around the pawns!

(Is the Harry fan in this thread trolling? After all his todger talk, the singing with seals, his framing of basic Meghan as a goddess, those embarrassing interviews, his obvious conspiracy bent of mind and poor mental health, no one can actually take him seriously, can they?)

[QUOTE]I truly do hope he ends in being dragged out of his little castle by a noose around his neck.

r110 - can you tell us your whereabouts on January 6, 2021?

Idiot.

The royals are like trailer trash, now. They all need to go on Jerry Springer and conversate.

[quote]headcanon

I cringe every time this poster (R172) uses one of these god-awful words she's picked up on Reddit or Tumblr or wherever the hell she finds them.

R152, I initially assumed that Baldy and Twigs referred to Harry and Meghan, because of his hair (which is thinning before our very eyes) and her grotesque legs.

They really are an ugly couple in every way. Both butt ugly looking. In that, they are well matched.

I saw Harry trying to be a humorous party guest on Colbert last night. He's so fucking arrogant and it just seeps through. And getting in a plug for the start-up he's the spokesmodel for BetterUp was so trashy. He and the Megster don't aspire to be King and Queen, they aspire to be Kardashians. Now she's merching coffee. She'll be on QVC any day now.

I hope Good King Charles has forgotten about us.

Ah, yes, R201, Harry is so very, very stupid. In his mansion in California, with his hundred million dollar Netflix deal, having co-written the most popular (and lucrative) autobiography ever published, seemingly an excellent father and -- I know this irritates you -- happy with his wife.

But no, he should bow and scrape and be thankful for the crumbs thrown his way by his bumbling father and nasty brother. What a fool not to continue as the cheery side-kick!

More interesting is your unceasing devotion to unlikeable Charles, ferocious Camilla, and temper-tantrum William. Is the result of centuries of subservience, encoded into your very DNA?

[QUOTE]Maybe William and Catherine didn't invite bachelor uncle Harold over much because he was an angry unstable drunk and druggie and they didn't want him around their children?

There was a poster in one of the early tendrils threads (God, was that four years already?!) who said he was acquainted with someone who was in the Cambridge's social circle. Reportedly, Harry would pop in to their KP apartment intoxicated and had to be asked to stop because they didn't want the children exposed to his behavior. I imagine dinner invitations dwindled, as well. This is pre-Meghan, around their "fab three" period when he and Kate were pictured chatting and laughing. If true, this is where the rupture began. I'm sure Harry felt rejected, but in true addict/alcoholic fashion didn't take responsibility for himself, instead preferring to pile on his lifelong resentment of his older brother -- a resentment Kate appeared to temper. Then Harry felt rejected by her, too. He was so, so ripe for Meghan's picking when she swooped in.

Welcome to Prince Dumb's angry PR, always a fount of truthful delight

If they want a house in the UK so badly, they can just buy one, although why bother? They only spend a few days there a year.

“We can confirm The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been requested to vacate their residence at Frogmore Cottage.” - Sussex spokesperson .

Why should Charles continue to let Mr. and Mrs. Harry Mountbatten-Windsor of Montecito, CA, USA have a 10 bedroom home, when they no longer live in the UK?

And why should Charles allow his ne'er-do-well brother, Randy Andy, allow him to live in a much larger residence, when he no longer performs official (or unofficial) duties for the monarchy? Randy Andy should consider himself lucky he has a home at all!

As for Mr. and Mrs. Harry Mountbatten-Windsor of Montecito, CA, USA, they continue to see themselves as relevant to an institution they no longer serve. They serve no purpose other than serving themselves...being photographed on their way into the latest Hollywood bistro and revealing such revelatory news as his favorite smell, which is evidently his wife!!!

Hey R209, lighten up. This is just all gossip. (H&M are gossip gold. Harry's favorite smell? His wife!)

(By the way, your description of Harry's success could easily be applied to Trump, too. I guess he's not so stupid, either!)

Funny how they got their spokesperson to confirm it.

I mean, they hardly ever come here and they've trashed the Royals so much. What did they expect?

[quote] That crowd is pretty tight lipped, but what I've gathered from them, usually after a few drinks, is that if W&H had applied to attend Eton as just regular well-to-do-boys rather than royal princes, there is a chance that William *might* have gotten in on his own merit, but no chance at all that Harry ever would have gotten in.

Not trying to start a fight, but there are probably quite a few Eton students who didn't get in on merit (grades, test scores) only. Seems like they'd have lots of legacy admissions, etc.

I can't imagine Andrew living in Frogmore Cottage. No way. He'll dish out the tax or whatever is required to stay in the Royal Lodge.

What’s the financial situation about Harry and Meghan spending millions to renovate a house they were kicked out of, and Andrew spending millions to renovate a house he was then kicked out of? Do these people get any compensation?

Because they put their own money into a place they thought they could stay in and are now being kicked out for political reasons. I don’t like Andrew, but if I thought I had a guaranteed place to live for the rest of my life and sank millions into it, then got kicked out with no compensation, wouldn’t I have some sort of claim to be reimbursed for at least part of it?

And when H & M moved into Frogmore, at the time there were some comments about structural repairs being needed, like maybe a new roof or something like that, which is very expensive. And you’re supposed to just eat that? In a rental you’re not expected to pay for that, it’s the landlords responsibility.

This should be a business situation, not “I don’t like this person, so it’s fine to rip them off.”

R204 rent free honestly. Haven't you anything better to do but stalk me, weirdo?

I'd consign Andrew to Wood Farm, Sandringham. His dad did it up, so perfect for a Prince and far away from the press too!

I'm sure part of the rationale is if Prince Philip could live happily at Wood Farm, Andrew should be able to at FC. Five bedrooms is more than enough for a man whose only frequent visitors are sex workers and for the occasional visit from the daughters' families.

I don't understand the point of these century long leases. It's not like the children of the lease holders will want to live there in this day and age.

[quote] That crowd is pretty tight lipped, but what I've gathered from them, usually after a few drinks, is that if W&H had applied to attend Eton as just regular well-to-do-boys rather than royal princes, there is a chance that William *might* have gotten in on his own merit, but no chance at all that Harry ever would have gotten in.

That's been true of most of the royal princes who have gone to Oxbridge over the last two centuries as well (most of them did not even graduate after their time there). Edward should not have been at Cambridge--his grades at Gordonstoun were supposedly not good enough. But both he and Charles graduated from Oxford, and they both received lower second-class honors--which put them both in almost the exact middle of all the graduating students.

[quote] And when H & M moved into Frogmore, at the time there were some comments about structural repairs being needed, like maybe a new roof or something like that, which is very expensive. And you’re supposed to just eat that? In a rental you’re not expected to pay for that, it’s the landlords responsibility.

It's a different country than you're used to and a different situation since the rentals originally were supposed to be lifetime rentals. To think about it in terms of calling Schneider from "One day at a Time" to fix your toilet's flush mechanism does not make a lot of sense.

Andrew and Harry are pathologically stupid, and Harry and Meghan are going the same route as Edward and Wallis as Charles quietly strips them of every connection to the royal aura they've been depending on to sell themselves.

Andrew holds a 99 year sweetheart lease on Royal Lodge and spent about 7 million pounds of his own money on its renovation. So far, it is nothing but rumour that Charles wants him out of there, but if Charles does, then it's likely he will buy Andrew out, including the money Andrew spent on renovation, as a very hefty Moving Out Parachute. He'll be just fine.

No one should feel sorry for Andrew. He not only disgraced the family after years of refusing to listen to reason and drop the Epstein connection, but also tried, with Diana's help after the Wales marriage went south, to get the late Queen to ask the government to set Charles aside as Heir and install Andrew as Regent until William came of age. This was in Angelia Levin's biography of Camilla.

Quel surprise! The Queen told Andrew no fucking way. Did Andrew not realise that Charles would never forget his brother's attempt to depose him? Was Andrew as illiterate in history as Harry, and not remembered that after a failed coup the ringleader gets the axe and his head on a spike over Tower Bridge?!

Same for Harry: after three years of slinging shit at the family, didn't he know that with the Queen's death her strategy of quiet grey-rocking would go the way of her staff that the Lord Chamberlain broke in half on her coffin before it descended? And that once the Netflix and memoir were out, the Piper would appear to demand payment?!

It's payback time, darling boy. And as they old saying goes, revenge is a dish best served cold.

R220, one needn't be a stalker to spot your particular brand of insanity from a hundred paces.

Given that stalkers are people who lurk around where they're not wanted, and given that you're a female virgin who frequently discusses gay sex and has used the word "poof" on here, you have a nerve to throw around that accusation.

Harry’s PR has a strong presence in this thread. R80 et al posts lies, just like laughingstock Harry.

The Dumb Prince and His Stupid Wife, indeed.

R228, the Royalist pathologies on display are remarkable. I feel like I'm having a conversation with Pentecostals.

Harry Bad! Daddy Good! Even though Harry's made tens of millions, and claims that he's finally happy.

"...those who were there and tell the stories don't specify) were constantly cleaning up in the press for him. The killed stories are about what you'd expect "Prince falls out of nightclub blackout drunk" etc. "

But that wasn't good enough for Harry! To this day he believes that putting out denials and asking for retractions for every little fucking thing in the press is a more effective way to curb negative coverage and get the public on his side than letting the Palace quash the worst stories! How's it working for you, Harry, now that you've got your own way?

Seriously, his book was a compelling read, because I've never seen a celebrity expose himself as such a complete idiot in a book before. I mean, he talks about doing drugs or getting blackout drunk in one chapter, and then rages about the press printing "lies" about him being drunk or using drugs in the next! He's so fucking clueless that you can actually see him failing to understand other people's actions through his own eyes, you can see Meg using his fear of the paps to manipulate him, and you can see Charles despairing as Harry goes off the deep end, yelling that if the RF doesn't use all their resources to protect Meg the press will kill her like they killed his mum. He's stupid and crazy, and his publisher let the whole world see just *how* stupid and crazy.

I hate days like these, when the feeble minded diabetics who cling to the Sussexes show up, trying to argue for one of history’s great lost causes. Klan Granny, Kate attacks, William attacks, lame brained “I thinks”(like you monkeys think)…. the usual mess of tired and discredited rubbish. You people are so fucking stupid. How do you function in the actual world? I’m assuming you’re all on benefits? Who’d pay you with such limited intelligence?

[quote]Harry's made tens of millions, and claims that he's finally happy.

If Harry is so happy and rich why is he complaining about the 'cruelty' of being kicked out of a house he never liked, in a country he says he despises, given to him by a family he says are toxic bullies? And if he has millions to burn can't he buy his own grand country home in the UK if it's that important to him?

The other thing that's interesting about this story is that it explains those constant leaks about Harry demanding an apology or he won't go to the coronation.

But Harry and Meghan have known since the day after SPARE came out that the King not only won't apologise, he doesn't care whether they attend or not. If he cared, he wouldn't have canceled the lease. It was a clear signal from the top that they'd finally gone too far.

Harry calls King Father's beloved wife a villain and dangerous in a book; King Father kicks son's arse out of Grace and Favour residence. Now, who could have foreseen that?!

They've known since January that they'd look like whipped dogs if they went to the coronation after being kicked out of their Crown Estate property. The apology stuff was just to try to make it look like they were punishing Charles by not going.

When they're not going because the King with this action announced he was done with them and cut one of their last remaining claims to membership in the Royal Club

One wonders if Harry's title will be next.

There won't be enough popcorn in the cinema if so.

[quote] If Harry is so happy and rich why is he complaining about the 'cruelty' of being kicked out of a house he never liked, in a country he says he despises, given to him by a family he says are toxic bullies? And if he has millions to burn can't he buy his own grand country home in the UK if it's that important to him?

Bingo, R232. Why indeed.

[quote] [R228], the Royalist pathologies on display are remarkable. I feel like I'm having a conversation with Pentecostals.

You must be having a “conversation with Pentecostals”…..in your head, R229. Speaking of pathology, you write delusional in all your BS posts.

Read R232’s and R233 posts. Someone who is “happy”does not go on hours-long Oprah, 6 hours of Netflix and multiple hours of interviews and writes a book endlessly whinging and complaining. Nor do they sue everyone they meet.

Perfect!

These idiots literally filmed themselves packing up Froggy Bottoms for Netflix. It is no longer there home and hasn't been for some time. Do they think we do not remember?

It's too bad Charles agreed to let them stay there for Coronation. Like many bad renters, they're the type to trash the place out of spite.

"Harry calls King Father's beloved wife a villain and dangerous in a book"

He doesn't, he portrays Charles as kind and hard-working, if a bit out of touch. And he doesn't say much about Camilla, except to say that he *thinks* she or her people were responsible for a couple of leaks to the press he obsessively hates.

It's pretty clear that he was deliberately going easy on The Bank Of Charles in the book. Harry and Meg are idiots, this is the only sign of common sense I've seen in them.

[quote]Charles, besotted by Camilla, who turned Harry's bedroom into her dressing room the moment he went off to Sandhurst.

This is the silliest complaint. Whose bedroom didn't get turned into a box room when they went off to school?

Harry continues to see normal occurrences as personal insults.

The Todgers did not pay in full for "renovations," according to Rebecca English, and per the official accounting last year they were in arrears for rental. Whatever the numbers, the lawyers can hash it out, and smart of the BRF to keep enmeshment with them as simple as possible. Ditto on the lawyers for the pampered, entitled Yorks.

HaRrYs MaDe MiLlIoNssssss. He has, off his connection to the BRF, and not a cent due to his own ambition or creativity. 38yo loser.

He's welcome in Hollywood cause he's the ultimate nepo.

Harry and Meghan did not get as much as what their PR proclaimed. Deduct all of their expenses from the total amount they did receive (production costs, legal retainers and fees, staff, agents, managers, mortgage, purchasing awards, paying off people to keep quiet for this, that or other, weed, blow, fugly clothes, piddly charity donations and polo) and I guarantee you they are in the red.

Maybe they could just stay at a local Super 8 or Hotel 6 for the Coronation. I'm sure they could get folding hideaway cots for Archie and Lillibet.

[quote] Harry could have been a great asset and counselor to William.

R89, would you honestly recommend that anyone turn to Harry for advice?

Do kings have to “ask?” Don’t they just “decree?”

Harry and Meghan have spent just a few weeks in the UK since they left 3 years ago. Even on the rare occasions when they do visit the UK they are probably at Frogmore for a night or two at most. They don't need to lease a whole residence that stands empty for 51.5 weeks of the year. There are plenty of places in London, Windsor and other parts of the country where they can stay if they need. Harry can even use one as his official UK address for personal and other business.

R245, Kings ask people to vacate, in the same way that American presidents ask staffers to resign.

I think asking the Harkles to vacate Frogmore has very little to do with the property itself, and the timing is highly significant. By making the “request” so soon after the release of Memoirs of a Ginger Whinger, The King has moved on subtly from the greyrocking approach, while still remaining above the fray.

It looks very much like a tit-for-tat move, and if Harry had any sense (highly doubtful), he would be asking himself what Charles’ next move is likely to be if Meghan or Harry continue to take shots at the institution. Really, after this, the only thing left would be for The King to remove the dukedom from the pair. And Charles wouldn’t even need to instigate action himself - there are plenty of Conservative parliamentarians who are appalled at the damage being done to the image of the monarchy, and they would be happy to raise the issue in parliament. From that, it’s a very small step to the monarch feeling (reluctantly, sadly) obliged to take action “on the advice of his ministers”.

I’m loving the King’s power move.

American, r248?

No, r250. I’m British.

r209 What about Harry's unceasing devotion to royal titles? You do realise the 100m Netflix and other figures are bs? Please tell me you aren't daft enough to fall for that self important PR guff of theirs? He wouldn't be doing this upcoming broadcast therapy chat if he had 100m. Give your head a wobble.

So why are you spouting such bullshit ignorant rubbish then, r251?

King Charles has had sufficient

[quote] Harry and Meghan confirm they're leaving Frogmore for good

Sussexit just got another layer.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are leaving Frogmore Cottage following an eviction from King Charles III.

A spokesperson for the couple confirmed to PEOPLE, "We can confirm The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been requested to vacate their residence at Frogmore Cottage."

The Sussexes did not comment on who specifically asked them to leave or why.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who stepped down as senior royals in early 2020, haven't lived in the mansion since they crossed the pond, first to Canada, then to California.

According to The Sun, Harry and Meghan are making arrangements for their remaining belongings in the home to be sent to them in California.

The Sun reports that King Charles ordered the Sussexes out and is giving the property to his disgraced brother Prince Andrew.

Andrew, of course, was accused of sexually abusing then-underage Virginia Giuffre when she was being trafficked by his close personal friend, convicted sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein. Though he paid Giuffre a settlement after she sued him (likely with the Queen's help), Andrew maintains his innocence.

Andrew reportedly hasn't yet accepted the offer of Frogmore Cottage, which resides on the sprawling grounds of Windsor Castle.

The Sussexes previously repaid nearly $3 million to the Sovereign Grant that they spent renovating Frogmore before they moved in 2019.

While they haven't lived there since moving to North America, they continued renting the property, including when they stayed there during the Queen's Platinum Jubilee in June 2022.

The Sussexes hosted daughter Lilibet Diana's first birthday party at Frogmore during the same period. Harry and Meghan also let Andrew's daughter, Princess Beatrice, stay at Frogmore temporarily with her husband Jack Brooksbank.

Harry and the rest of the royals, save for Beatrice, have been at odds since his and Meghan left their senior royal roles.

The Ginger Prince has taken public shots at King Charles, Camilla and Prince William, accusing them of planting negative stories about him and Meghan in the press and for not protecting Meghan from racist attacks in the media and from "The Firm."

It remains to be seen whether Harry and Meghan will attend Charles' coronation, as Harry has said he'll reunite with his family when they apologize to him and his wife.

R47, do do tell.

R47, a constitutional monarch as head of state is not "the past" - it's the present and it's fine.

[quote] So why are you spouting such bullshit ignorant rubbish then, [R251]?

Don’t be so feeble.

If you are going to try to be dismissive and haughty, you might try refuting any of the points I made. Are any of them impossible, or even unlikely? Go on Einstein, summon up your Bagehot-like knowledge of British constitutional procedure and tell me why I am wrong.

Is this the same King who wants the whore he married, to be called "Queen?"

This is another non-story, but I do wonder just who these spokespeople for the Harkles are and just how they make their statements to People magazine.

I bet Camilla's fingerprints are all over this plan.

Hardly feeble, r258. Your entire premise that this is some kind of tit-for-tat from Charles is complete nonsense. But, just one example: who exactly are these Tory MPs who are chomping at the bit to remove Harry's title? Because I don't believe that there is a single one.

Are you a gay man, r259?

[quote] Your entire premise that this is some kind of tit-for-tat from Charles is complete nonsense.

Yes, I’m sure it’s a complete coincidence that Harry received a request to vacate the day following the release of a book attacking half of The Royal Family.

I hate the phrase "Keep it simple", however, I'm going to keep it simple by asking, Does anybody else but me think it's possible that KC just recompensated the Sussexes the 3 million the paid back for the renovations and then told them "You're out. Locks have been changed."

That way if the Sussexes complained, the obvious response would be you wanted out and you've also been paid to get out.

[quote] But, just one example: who exactly are these Tory MPs who are chomping at the bit to remove Harry's title?

Forgot to add, while 3 million is a lot of dough to me and probably most of you, still, that's easy money to the wealthy KC, especially when it solves a couple headaches and pulls a few thorns out of his hide.

I am concerned that my favorite royal, the Duchess of York, has a place to live. Sarah and Andrew should get remarried so that they have a proper roof over their heads together--and even if they don't remarry, they should be allowed to live together. The royal family has so many damn houses, let Sarah and Andrew stay at Royal Lodge. But if Will and Kate eventually move into Royal Lodge, then Sarah and Andrew can move to Adelaide Cottage.

That Frogmore Cottage is tainted, soiled with the stain of the Markles. Granted, the Markles should be kicked out of Frogmore Cottage since they left the family willingly, and they cannot expect to have Frogmore remain empty for the very, very rare occasions that they might visit the UK. The Markles were shamed into paying for the renovations in addition to never having any intention of living there, but instead moving to California was always part of their plan. They thought they could skip town and never pay for the renovations. But paying for renovations doesn't entitle them to free access whenever they want.

The Duchess of York needs a place to live with Andrew. Don't continue treating Sarah with contempt. Charles and Camilla are no examples of good behavior. Sarah has been through enough nonsense from the royal family particularly Charles. Andrew is not going away even if they want to shun him. And the Markles stain of Frogmore isn't it.

One more thing, Charles needs more working royals. Put Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie to work. They are willing and capable, and despite all of the royals scandals throughout the years, those girls have never caused any trouble whatsoever.

If I remember correctly Harry paid out of pocket to quite large sum in reimbursement for the upgrades that were done to that property. He should bell pops "fine we'll give it up as soon as I get back all the money I paid to upgrade the old hovel".

[quote] But, just one example: who exactly are these Tory MPs who are chomping at the bit to remove Harry's title? Because I don't believe that there is a single one.

“Tory MP Tim Loughton said: “The Duke of Sussex has refused to take the advice of his grandfather Prince Philip of ‘look up and look out, say less, do more, and get on with the job’. The way he has conducted himself in such a public way is embarrassing to the residents of Sussex and deeply hurtful to his family coming so soon after the death of the Queen. “He has clearly opted out of the job and therefore he should opt out of the titles and the perks that come with it.” “

The Sussexes are so lucky. But they should be quiet for a while.

[quote] But, just one example: who exactly are these Tory MPs who are chomping at the bit to remove Harry's title? Because I don't believe that there is a single one.

Tory MP Scott Benton added that Harry's comments on anti-monarchist Stephen Colbert's The Late Show - where he declared the US his home - and other TV interviews this week including with ITV's Tom Bradby has sparked fury from his Blackpool South constituents.

He told MailOnline: 'Many of my constituents are instinctive supporters of the Monarchy and I suspect that they will feel badly let down by Prince Harry and his comments. So much so, that a number of them have written to me demanding that he is stripped of his titles.

'His comments have reflected badly on the institution, and by virtue of that, have harmed the reputation of this country around the world. The Monarchy is one of the things that makes our country so special and by washing his dirty laundry in public, he has not only come across as spoilt and petty, but has let down the institution which so many of us cherish so much'.

And that's about it, r266 and r272. Parliament will never vote to strip Harry of his title and the King would oppose that.

The revoking of the lease is not a punishment. They don't live in the UK and are never here, they don't need a whole property they are never at.

You're just a mirror version of the Sussex stans who think the royal family is about to collapse.

[quote] Families can be your worst enemies. They can fuck you over like no one else. This is a general statement....not regarding the King's decision here. On that I say....GOOD.

Ain't it the truth?

She's fine! She sends her love!

Just as a reminder and small caution, I am not dying. Not any time soon.

Others, however....

R209 There's never been any $100 million Netflix deal. They can't even pay off £2.4 million so they certainly don't have much dear.

[quote] That Frogmore Cottage is tainted, soiled with the stain of the Markles. Granted, the Markles should be kicked out of Frogmore Cottage since they left the family willingly, and they cannot expect to have Frogmore remain empty for the very, very rare occasions that they might visit the UK. The Markles were shamed into paying for the renovations in addition to never having any intention of living there, but instead moving to California was always part of their plan. They thought they could skip town and never pay for the renovations. But paying for renovations doesn't entitle them to free access whenever they want.

[quote] The Duchess of York needs a place to live with Andrew. Don't continue treating Sarah with contempt. Charles and Camilla are no examples of good behavior. Sarah has been through enough nonsense from the royal family particularly Charles. Andrew is not going away even if they want to shun him.

You want to know the true mark of a Klan Granny? Read R268.

They trash Harry and Meghan from head to toe, for doing nothing more than being an annoyance to the BRF.

Yet they completely excuse Andrew's awful behavior and association with rapists Epstein and Maxwell. And he/she also excuses Fergie for all the stupid shit she did while divorcing Andrew, like the toe-sucking, and selling out the BRF for cash.

Andrew and Fergie shit on the BRF and tarnish their reputation? That's perfectly fine with the Klan Grannies.

Harry and Meghan move away and make their own life? They're the worst people in the world, deserving of hatred, racism, vitriol and character assassination.

And you fuckers have the nerve to say it has nothing to do with race.

But they haven't really made their own life, have they?

[quote] The Duchess of York needs a place to live with Andrew. Don't continue treating Sarah with contempt.

If Sarah and Fergie want her to be treated a member of the royal family again, it's up to them to make her legal. Whatever their living arrangements, currently they are not married, and so she is not a member of the BRF.

Charles owes Fergie nothing by the way. The fact that YOU like her doesn't mean anything whatsover to him (or to anyone else, frankly). She's not liked much at all in the BRF or indeed in the UK as a whole because she was publicly exposed by a sting operation where she revealed she would sell access to her ex-husband to foreign influencers for money. Charles and Philip reputedly never cared for her because they thought she was loud and obnoxious. Elizabeth II liked her (there weren't many people the Queen out-and-out disliked), but she's gone now.

[quote]Andrew and Harry are pathologically stupid

I hope the world is readying itself for a Spare who is anything but.

I'm watching every move of my savvy parents.

Parliament would never legislate to remove Harry and Meghan's titles.

Because if they can do that for them, then they could do that for a King or Queen in future.

George V stripped his German relatives of their British titles during WW1. It would only take the election of a radical political leader, a Corbyn MK2, to do the same.

You want a castle, Meghan? You want Meghan to have a castle, Harry?

All right.

Here. Your legacy.

Now fuck off.

Contrary to reports that the Markles paid for the renovation of Frogmore Cottage, the truth is according to royal expert Russell Myers--the Markles have not entirely reimbursed the taxpayers for Frogmore's renovation. They still owe money.

Entertainment Tonight is actually calling it an EVICTION from Frogmore.

That's a weird way to put it.

[quote] Entertainment Tonight is actually calling it an EVICTION from Frogmore. That's a weird way to put it.

What would you call it instead? The Ol' Heave-Ho?

Markle is hated among the British royal family. Harry is barely tolerated. GTFO!

Escorted out of the building by security!

I guess we can expect some kind of tearful interview with the Harkles whining about how much the loved Frogmore as it was their first home as the most in-love couple in the history of mankind.

They had to know once the Queen was g one, the gift she had bestowed on Harry was gone. Everything the last monarch did was subject to revision.What was done can be undone. The Queen gave Anmer Hall to Will and Kate and no one reached for it. It's part of the Sandringham Estate but it was a gift from the queen. And BTW the title of Duke of Edinburgh was supposed to go to Edward. His parents wanted it that way. And Charles changed that too.

But see, I don't get it. Because IMO if it was a gift, then Charles had no right to countermand his mother. And if Andrew has a lease, Charles has no right to break it , all of this with the stroke of a pen. Fuck Charles.

These people are parasites.

I just want to know that Sarah, Duchess of York is safe and comfortable. Harry and Markle are scum.

[quote] IMO if it was a gift, then Charles had no right to countermand his mother. And if Andrew has a lease, Charles has no right to break it , all of this with the stroke of a pen. Fuck Charles.

Exactly.

Charles is acting like a real cunt, and I hope it comes back to bite him in the ass!

Andrew is rather grand, but he did sign a 75-year lease.

But I'm thrilled the two-bit, lying, grifting victims H&M are being evicted. You left. You don't get a five-bedroom house on your way out the door.

The house was not a "gift," it was tied to jobs as working royal; they allegedly paid rent for it upon the glorious Megxit. Charles has every "right" as HOS to make these decisions.

Harry is s sight for sore eyes in OP's pic. And Camilla is also a sight.

Sarah’s pathetic. Clinging to her her ex while he fucks hookers and teens all around her. Get a life, girl.

Harry and Meghan should take their millions from "Spare" and buy an expensive luxury apartment in London, and a beautiful estate in the North of England.

Who wants to live in those shitty old BRF homes, any way?

They can buy their own property and own it outright.

Fuck Charles and William.

[quote] But see, I don't get it. Because IMO if it was a gift, then Charles had no right to countermand his mother. And if Andrew has a lease, Charles has no right to break it , all of this with the stroke of a pen. Fuck Charles.

He's no longer just a prince: he's The King. That means of course he has every right to break it--that is exactly what he gets to decide to do as King. Same thing with Edward's title: the bestowal of titles is the living monarch's purview, and his authority on this matter has to supersede the wishes of the dead. "La reine est mort; vive le roi!"

there's a story that when Queen Victoria died in January, 1923 at Osborne House on the isle of Wight, her eldest son Bertie, who was now the monarch, took the royal yacht with her body in it home. He was puzzled when the boat was underway that its flag was being flown at half-mast. He asked about this the ship's captain, who replied, "Sir, the Queen is dead." "Raise it!", declared the new Edward VII, "The king lives!" (They immediately raised it.)

1923??

We are not amused.

1901

Lolz

[quote]I guess we can expect some kind of tearful interview with the Harkles whining about how much the loved Frogmore as it was their first home as the most in-love couple in the history of mankind.

Probably. When they hated it up till now.

They are in too much debt to even buy her false eyelashes r298.

I still don't see why this family has so much drama and why they're constantly stirring the pot with stuff like this. Why is it necessary to take the house away from the Sussexes and move people around? I don't like H&M and am not in their corner, but why do this now? This family can't go two months without some new intra-family event that has to be reported on.

r305 The DM has a story up about the timing, saying it's intended to clear the decks before the official start of Charles's reign.

Harry, his own worst enemy.

From Business Insider, 22 Jan 2013

Prince Harry: Shooting Hellfire Missiles At Insurgents Is Like 'Playing Video Games'

[quote] As co-pilot, Harry was in charge of the weapons systems in a two-man cockpit, firing Hellfire air-to-surface missiles, rockets and a 30-millimetre gun. He described the weapons systems as a joy.

[quote] "It's a joy for me because I'm one of those people who loves playing PlayStation and Xbox, so with my thumbs I like to think I'm probably quite useful," he said in interviews released Monday after the end of his posting.

I wonder what the further implications of this wil be. For example:

So lacking a non-domicilliary UK address, what other impications am I missing -

- To be a Counsellor of State Harry must be UK resident

- What effect will this have on Harry's mysterious USA visa status?

- Which also begs questions over his IRS status?

R305. It's all about money. The UK is going through very difficult financial times. Reports are that inflation is much worse in the UK than in the US--as bad as it is here. Charles is taking a look at all royal expenses. Charles does not want the royal family to be living high while the rest of the country suffers. Charles wants the monarchy to survive, so he's cutting back on unnecessary expenses. Frogmore Cottage is sitting vacant. The Markles left town. Charles is pissed at them for all the bad news they have brought the royal family, so part of this is punishment.

On the other hand, Andrew is living at Royal Lodge, a near-palace in Windsor that is incredibly expensive to maintain and currently needs renovation. Charles is hoping to move Andrew out of Royal Lodge and have him live at Frogmore Cottage, a decent house that has been recently renovated, but not nearly as grand as Royal Lodge. There are also reports that the Markles did not fully pay back the money that was due on the renovation of Frogmore Cottage. They are not working royals. They stepped away at their own doing. Do you really think that they should have a house gifted to them for doing absolutely nothing?

The Markles now have plenty of money on their own to provide their own accommodations should they return to the UK, which will be extremely rare. Or if they'd like, they can probably stay at Windsor Castle or Buckingham Palace for a couple of nights if they visit. But to leave a house vacant that they don't own but just want to have for convenience is an expense Charles is not willing to carry with the royal budget.

Andrew is a different story. The family is pissed at him, but they are not going leave him homeless. One last thing to keep in mind. The royal family gets just about everything given to them. None of them including Charles, Andrew or Harry think they should have to dip into their onw savings and inheritance, which in all cases is enormous. They expect grace and favor house at every turn. This is Charles' first step to say no to freebies. Don't worry, they won't be out of freebies. Charles is just trying to curtail the bad impression that free housing gives to the public.

And there are probably more cutbacks coming down the road. The whole family will have to tighten their belts--at least for a while until this financial crisis passes somewhat. Also, Queen Elizabeth spent a bit more freely. Charles is a bit of tight wad.

Whattadump!

King Charles has my respect now, for the first time ever.

They live in a mansion in California! So what if they can't go back to a rented cottage? Are they too poor to get a fancy hotel room while in Britain?

No mere hotel will be "secure" enough for us!

Good for Charles. It’s a start anyway.

Move it along, toots x 2.

If they've moved away, then they don't need Frogmore, r278.

How is any of what r268 wrote "racist"? Yes, it's histrionic, but so are Harry and Meghan so that's how some will respond to them.

They don't even need to stay in a hotel, r313. There's room for them in Clarence House, Kensington Palace, Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, Sandringham and Balmoral.

R309, Harry is a Counsellor of State and will remain a Counsellor of State for several decades, depending on how long Charles lives, either until Louis is 21 or George's eldest child is 18. He might even pass away before that.

Harry cannot act as a Counsellor of State, however, because he is not physically in Britain and cannot therefore stand in for the monarch.

He also isn't a UK resident, as for that he has to be in the country for 185 days a year and tax based here.

It's vaguely interesting to recognize the hatred for Harry and Megan burning in some of the posters here. One wonders why they are so troubled by these two, given they are financially independent, while the royal family is an exempla of inherited parasitism and general nastiness. I don't think it is racism, rather I think they simply left, and hell hath no fury greater than internet fraus (who may be men or women) scorned. It's a bad romance.

My hope -- and I see this as a real possibility -- is that the combination of Charles and William will lead the UK, or what is left of it, into a republic. Were I not a republican, I would be tempted to hope, too, that Harry and Megan be made King and Queen of an independent Scotland. However they seem happy in California, so l hope they stay there.

There isn't constant drama and pot stirring with this family, r305. There's the shit-stirring tabloids, the public hate campaign against them from an embittered and entitled Harry and Meghan, and dumb members of the public who believe everything they hear.

How is it drama for two people who live in the US and rarely visit the UK to give up the lease on a property they don't own and have only stayed in for a handful of nights in over 3 years? There are also many other family residences they can stay in on the rare occasions when are in the UK.

Take Harry out of the picture, and the royals are totally drama free. Although, no doubt, the press would try to find something else to make stories up about.

The other sign of common sense in the Harkles was their shaking down a fortune from American corporations and media companies.

Let's hope they don't spend it all in 10 years on private jets, polo and god knows what.

[quote] Sarah’s pathetic. Clinging to her her ex while he fucks hookers and teens all around her. Get a life, girl.

R297 you'll be happy to hear that the youtuber "River" featured Sarah in his video yesterday - she was leaving a private club, dressed in a rather business-like tweed jacket and skirt - and he pointed out a big hole in the front of one of her stockings.

But I assume she was having a grand old time in the private club, hobnobbing with the beautiful people. (she sure didn't look like one, but hey, she's got the cred to belong - and so does Andrew. Why are they bitching when they could retire and enjoy themselves. Andrew was a military person and working royal for long enough to deserve to be "retired" anyway, imo.)

Sarah is featured at minute 26 (if I manage the link)

Ginger Whinger and his fancy woman aren't bothered.

$Ka-Ching!$

See Daily Fail link to follow

[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.]

Did this ginger bitch get hair implants?

That's hilarious. They are trying so hard to look 'SOOOOO HAPPPPPEEEEE'.

Sure they are.

It's weird - I basically hate their guts (the bullying of staff - Harry's bragging about killing when in the army etc ad infinitum) BUT I was glad to see them together, going out to dinner, with friends even (apparently)

Now if they'd just settle down and do stuff like the other Hollywood flakes - just stay out of politics, empty-head-Meg!

Frog(NO)more!

r319, i'm sorry to break it to you, but the Harry and Meghan circus has done more to shore up support for the Royal Family than anything else I've seen in my lifetime. Even with questionable Charles, support for the family is sky high.

If you are a genuine republican, you should hope these two go away and stay as silent as humanly possible for the rest of their lives, because every time the Harkles so much as show their faces, the BRF go up in the polls.

Surviving Angel - 80 year old frau in a care home with nothing to do all day but post every two minutes on this thread.

[QUOTE] because every time the Harkles so much as show their faces, the BRF go up in the polls.

Polls in which only Boomers participate. Gen Z love Meghan and detest zombie Charles and his repulsive wife.

R331 is right. There is a generational divide in support between the two camps and thereby hangs the rub. We've got, for better or worse, two courts. The dour court of King Charles and the exotic court of Megs and Haz.

As has been previously said, there is, and will always be drama between these two courts. Whether it's stoked by the press or the BRF or Haz & Megs. For H&M, everytime they open their mouths publicly, it will be for $s.

His domiciliary status is interesting. I'm not sure on what basis he's in the US, perhaps you guys can throw some light on that. The lack of a UK domicile and his residence in the US will have the tax advisors and constitutional experts pouring over their books.

The next ramping up of things will be around nationality. I'm guessing, but at some point, if Haz is resident in the US, he will become a US citizen. That will be a conundrum for constitutional experts. The 5th in line to the throne, the son and brother of a monarch being an American. Sure the BRF can boast ties to all of the European royal families, but an American in the family? To use DL parlance...MARY!!!

"Take Harry out of the picture, and the royals are totally drama free. "

Why do you Harkle obsessives keep forgetting about Andrew???

If Harry had never been born, they'd be looking at Andrew for drama and shit-stirring, there's plenty of shit to stir there! Andy has to thank his lucky stars every day that Harry was born, because if Harry weren't around, maybe the rags would be looking at where Andrew's money comes from.

Dream on, r331 and r332.

You're both entirely deluded, but that's just fine by me: after all, I'm hoping the Harkles never go away, and keep entertaining us while bolstering support for the Monarchy at every turn. Works out perfectly for me.

Is he transgender, R322? I can never watch him for more than a minute.

No, he says he's not, r335. Just a fey gay who likes a string of pearls.

I wish I could unsee him. R322 should have provided a trigger warning.

I adore River. Amusing, smart and self-aware. Refreshing all round.

He's a campy youtuber. Fine, good performance, if that impresses you. But he knows and adds nothing.

[quote]Were I not a republican, I would be tempted to hope, too, that Harry and Megan be made King and Queen of an independent Scotland.

Stupid even for a Megtard.

To look at the Mail, somebody's into the bronzer again.

Thank you, R336.

R337, I'm not a fan either but I suppose I do applaud him for not lopping his cock off and calling himself Jennifer. I just can't watch him because of how tacky and vulgar he is - even more so than "Lady Colin" Campbell, which I wouldn't have thought possible. And, as R339 so nicely summarises, he knows and adds nothing.

I will say his respiratory health is superior to Lady Colon's, but they're both peddling bullshit.

In the end, this is simple. The Sussexes have left. They can easily and securely be put up if they come back, which they seem unlikely to do. It is pointless to keep a house for them. Someone else put it really clearly and truthfully: there isn't really discord on a grand scale in the royal family. There's just discredited Andrew, with no clue his leaks to the press do nothing to aid him; the irredeemably, irrelevant, hot air Sussexes, lying in their own bed and finding it as comfortable as reason the proverb was written; a media that strikes oil blowing every minor thing into something above and beyond; and the reliable readers identified by PT Barnum, who club together on Twitter as well.

I don't buy the Palace wants the decks cleared before the new reign really begins. Does the Coronation smell that much like a fresh start? Maybe to them it does. Andrew and the Sussexes are the gift that will never stop giving so far as the tabloids are concerned, but maybe it is best to get them all sorted into undeniable adjacency so things can move on insofar as what's under CIII's control and what is not. I don't believe this is motivated by spite so much as as desire to put them on the sidelines so their collective and endless whining is linked to nothing more than their own inability to act like adults.

Separately, I sometimes wonder if Charles and William will damage the monarchy, not so much by popularity but by slimming it down too much. If you kill too much of the day to day majesty, doesn't the scheduled stuff - like the Trooping or the Garter or the State banquets - start to look silly when it does happen? I read that William seeks to focus his work (in his case the environment, in hers early years.) Fine. I get that. But there's thousands of little hearts won day in and day out by visits to the Nowhere on Sea, cutting a ribbon at the local museum and visiting the new daycare. I don't know. I'm a monarchist, not because of the people but because I like it as a function in government and who doesn't like the pageantry? Nothing rivals it. But the late Queen, in my view, has left a massive, massive void. She ran a big show and ran it generally quite well. What's left seems flat to me somehow. I wonder if the British actually want an IKEA monarchy. Maybe they only want the big show they can love one day and resent the next. Just musing. Something seems missing to me in the monarchy since the Queen died.

I think the timing was to do with the content of the book. Apparently they let the Harkles know a day after it was published, meaning they saw what was in it and immediately pulled the trigger on getting him and his awful wife OUT OUT OUT.

I don't think they move that fast, even when they're pissed. I just don't, but I've no way of knowing. Just seems out of step.

^I'm guessing (though aren't we all) that the house thing wasn't a reaction so much they told Harry that if he crossed certain lines (including attacking Cam & Kate), this would be the resulting consequence. Clearly Harry crossed them with the book (though Megs was strangely silently during his PR campaign) and now the impacts of those choices has occurred. Though as someone else wisely noted, it's also a financial/public perception issue with the financial crisis in the UK, two royals clearly out of favor with lavish homes and the need to at least create the perception that the BRF are buckling down too.

Good to see the York girls are nice troll back again. Quite a force field around that one.

Fergie's not a member of the royal family. She's just got nowhere else to live, apparently.

It sounds to me like Charles has not kicked Andrew out of Royal Lodge, a property he has a long term lease on, but rather has drastically decreased his yearly allowance which makes it impossible for him to keep the place up, therefore requiring a relocation. Charles has apparently offered him Frogmore Cottage as alternative digs. And since Frogmore is also part of the Crown's holdings and not the personal property of The Suxxeses Charles has the authority to make whatever changes he so desires.

Frankly, these grace & favour residences should have been stopped long ago. I know QEII did decrease them, but she never completely cut them out. IMO the only members of the Royal Family that should receive a taxpayer paid residence should be The Monarch. And there should only be one. The Monarch should have lodging in Buckingham Palace, and all other properties should either be sold, or (as in the case of Windsor Castle) turned into 100% tourist attractions. Charles, now owns enough magnificent properties on his own that the taxpayers should not need to provide even more. If he can't get by on living in Buckingham Palace, Sandringham, & Balmoral, as well as the other lesser properties he owns outright, there's something wrong.

Since his beloved Highgrove House is technically owned by The Dutchy Of Cornwall and now passes to William I have to wonder if Charles is giving it up or if there is an agreement that he'll retain it until he dies. It's been his family home for 40 years, and I can't see William giving it the loving treatment Charles has.

I read somewhere there's an agreement that provides for Charles' tenancy for his lifetime.

Maybe Charles offered Frogmore to Andrew on the basis it's such a step down Andrew can reliably be expected to swan off elsewhere. Seems pretty firmly established that Andrew can't afford the upkeep on Royal Lodge.

King Charles will have to pay rent on Highgrove to The Duchy of Cornwall. The Duchy is bound by law to maximize all of its assets.

The rent is reported to be £700,000 per annum.

I wonder why Forbes used a picture of Osbourne House on The Isle of Wight?

King Edward VII gave that house to the nation in 1902, Queen Victoria was the only Monarch to ever live there.

He should start doing Cameo videos.

In his 60 Minute interview with Anderson Cooper to promote the book, Harry said, quote: ". . .[Camilla] was 'dangerous' because of the connections she was forging with the British press. 'There was gonna be people or bodies left in the street'".

If it didn't appear in the book, it appeared in his promotion of the book. That's never mind putting into the book Charles' desperate plea to his sons literally over the new grave of Charles' own father.

Harry actually thought that Camilla should have been unconcerned about the staggering level of vitriol that she had endured for years and would go on enduring for years because no one would ever hold the sainted Diana to account for the failure of the Wales marriage. Camilla's desire , to rehabilitate her image in the press as she and Charles decided to marry and settle down together at last in the public eye was somehow heinous. And dangerous. In point of fact, for 17 years Camilla has kept her head down, done the job more than respectably, and actually won the respect and affection of the Queen, who had felt anything but that way toward Camilla at the outset.

Camilla seems to have handled her relationship with Charles' children with discretion and care.

It is Harry's public image that has been massaged all these years by the Palace, his messes cleaned up by courtiers, women he harmed in drunken rages paid off by the Palace, etc. But that isn't dangerous: that's fine! It's only when Camilla does it that it's dangerous.

The only thing Camilla is guilty of is sleeping with a married man with whom there was clearly a strong mutual emotional attachment going back a very long time.

What Harry is guilty of is spreading filth over his family, especially his brother about whom Harry is clearly eaten alive with envy, and bringing into the family a viper who would do lots of Harry's dirty work for him.

Oprah (whilst Philip was dying and the Queen in the incipient stages of bone marrow cancer), Dax Shepherd interview, the appalling Netflix show, and then the memoir . . . private conversations revealed, photos of places they were filming without permission from the actual owners, lies, contradictions . . .

Harry is a vile POS in a way his stepmother never was. Diana was part and parcel of the collapse of the Wales marriage. She was emotionally damaged just like her son, and the Panorama interview and the Morton book finished off her marriage.

Her son has followed in his mother's footsteps baring his self-justifying soul to the public, only instead of losing a spouse, he lost an entire family, a decent life within a ready-built framework, never having to worry about money, and accepting that even being born second put him in a place of privilege none of us will ever know.

This boot to their butts, will generate a new Pity Pot Tour. Harry's latest PTSD trauma. Meghan's strong, proud, WOC besmirched yet again.

Too bad America thinks they are silly now.

Chaz timed it right. Who knew he still had so much starch in his todger, unlike Harry who has to beg on his knees to retrieve his bollicks from someone's hand bag. Maybe his is the clearest proof of all that Harry isn't his.

What is the deal with Charles not giving Edward the Duke of Edinburgh title yet?

Is he waiting for closer to the Coronation to make a big deal about it?

Or is he hesitant to do anything with titles as it will stir Haz and his harridan to start squawking about titles for their kids? Could there actually be an "of the body" issue that is preventing Charles from giving the kids titles and he doesn't know what to do so he's doing nothing? It is odd that the OBGYN who supposedly delivery Lilibet suddenly closed up her practice and disappeared rather than be scrutinized.

Or is Charles just being a jerk to his brother?

Charles won't be giving the Duke of Edinburgh title to Edward. He's already made sure that it's been "leaked" that the title will go to Lady Louise instead.

Sorry, I meant Charlotte, not Louise at r359. I knew I had that wrong the second I posted it.

Why make her Duchess of Edinburgh? She will stop using the title when she is created Princess Royal after the death of Princess Anne.

It doesn't make much sense.

The Forbes article is a joke. Most of those properties are held in trust for the nation or owned by somebody or something else. Charles owns Balmoral and Sandringham. That's it. (Not bad, but that's it.) The rest are Crown Estate or owned by trusts, like the Castle of Mey.

You are too amusing, R356. Is there some kind of drug that you have taken that makes you believe all of this? Camilla is an ANGEL, come down from heaven to redeem our fallen world....

When he was alive, Prince Philip was the unofficial "manager" of the family's finances and residences. Before him, the Queen Mother took the lead. The monarch is expected to be too busy with affairs of state to manage the family's homes and grace-and-favour bullshit, so the consort or a senior royal becomes the decider and the rest of the family falls in line.

Who takes that role now? It won't be Camilla - she's too new to the family, and they won't abide by her decisions. By right it should probably be William as the heir, but he's about to be very busy with his own "job." So who's left? Princess Anne, I say. She's frosty and decisive, and senior enough to command the respect of her trashy relatives.

They like to consider the family like a business firm. If that's the case, they need a managing partner to assign physical space, payroll, and whatnot.

Prince Phillip was the official manager of Windsor, he held the title of Ranger of Windsor Great Park.

There's also the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, a cabinet minister that manages the business affairs of that Duchy (the formal name for the BRF's business and real estate holdings). This government department runs the finances with a transparent process, but does not manage the properties owned personally by the BRF (Sandringham, Balmoral, etc).

Holding the Edinburgh title back is sensible. It's the highest profile Scottish title available, referencing the capital, and to give it to Edward, who has next to nothing to do with Scotland, would be pointless and provocative, plus losing the title to the monarchy for generations or for ever. When Philip was given it in it was another another world: handing it out to a lesser royal today would be a gift for the Nationalists. If it is going to be used, it should stay in the direct line, so there are fewer grounds for complaint (they will always complain). If they give it to George, say, he will be king of Scotland in the normal course of events, so a Scottish link is implicit and reasonable, plus the title comes back for future use as well. If Edward has to be a duke, upgrade the Wessex peerage. Personally, I think they should stop giving out hereditary titles altogether and just award them for life or at pleasure, which would stop a Harry or Andrew situation from recurring..

The Princess Royal title is not automatic

R367 Didn't Edward pick the Earldom of Wessex in 1999 because he liked the title in the movie "Shakespeare in Love?" And he declined the traditional dukedom at his wedding because he wanted his father's title someday?

Those were his wimpy decisions, and that should be the end of it. He and Sophie do a great deal for the family and the country, but people already know them as the Wessexes. They'd lose valuable branding if he took a new dukedom.

Upgrading it to a hereditary Dukedom of Wessex is sensible, but then it just reinforces how hollow all this shit really is. If titles can be juggled and changed so loosely, then do any of them really matter anymore?

R368 You are correct, but the title has been given to the eldest daughter of the Monarch (excluding Queen Elizabeth II obviously) for the past 5 generations.

Charles is 74. Charlotte is 7. I doubt he's strategising 20 years-plus in advance to when he is in his mid-90s to give the title of Duchess of Edinburgh to Charlotte on her marriage, if she marries.

IMO, Frogmore was never meant to be a permanent home, it was a stopping off place. If Charles is smart he will re purpose Frogmore as a sort of Royal B&B and use it for all family and extended family when they're in town.

Andrew is already complaining that it's a "step down" because it's smaller. With five bedrooms, there's a place for him, for Sarah, his two daughters, and a nursery for their kids. But no room at all for staff, or most especially for the shady friends Andrew can entertain at the Royal Lodge.

I think Charles feels like Andrew bears watching, as does Fergie, who just told People magazine how very much she loves and supports Charles and Camilla and the monarchy. Fergie, bless her, is a survivor. And who knew she wrote best selling romance novels!

Andrew will always and forever be looking for his "chance." He is very much prone to "deal making" with unscrupulous "businessmen." And Fergie is not far behind.

What is done can be undone and whatever Charles confers on Charlotte, Louise, Edward, Sophie, etc.etc. can be "revised" when William becomes King.

Liz hasn't even been cold for six months, and the fuckwits are already tearing at each other like drag queens at a wig sale. Typical English bullshit.

[quote] Why is it necessary to take the house away from the Sussexes and move people around? I don't like H&M and am not in their corner, but why do this now?

Because it's FUN!

[quote]If titles can be juggled and changed so loosely, then do any of them really matter anymore?

The truly significant part of a Dukedom isn't the location part, it's the Duke part.

Megan is a ROYAL Duchess, isn't she? Duke of Sussex is a royal Dukedom. I never really thought about how high a title she got.

MegHan

R376 None of it is significant in 2023. They have no powers or privileges anymore, and they'd all be in the royal family with or without the little titles.

If Edward had fallen out of any other crotch, he'd be some unemployable idiot. But he's royal, so he can be an unemployable idiot AND have a nice house for nothing.

Nice house is an understatement. He has a grand traditional country house.

[quote] If Edward had fallen out of any other crotch, he'd be some unemployable idiot.

Isn't that true for all of them? Why single out Edward?

How many days did they live in Frogmore after leaving the UK? A week? They can go to a hotel. They also apparently only paid back $650K of the $3 million + they spent to renovate the place.

They filmed there for their Netflix show and I don't imagine the royal family appreciated them doing that, especially when they whine so much about security and how everybody is trying to murder them.

Meghan and Harry went out to a restaurant after contacting Backgrid to tell them to get some paps there to record their evening out. So much for their privacy and hatred of paps.

True, r381, and I always find it an unfair charge. Yes, they were all raised in a weird way with weird expectations and weird skills that don't translate into the typical career or workplace.

If they'd "fallen out of any other crotch" they'd have been raised differently with different expectations and different prospects. And yeah, some would be complete fuckups, like, gee, so many fuckers that were born into every other class in humanity's history.

In the same way I don't feel sorry for Eton dealing with Harry, which was mentioned above. Eton was set up as a place to send the sons of the idle rich and the titled elites. Oh, some of them turn out to be drunken assholes? Really? Well no shit, bitches.

[quote]How many days did they live in Frogmore after leaving the UK? A week? They can go to a hotel.

Fair point. Most European royalty bunks at Claridge's and they seem to have made it out alive.

Once again, I believe the best thing to do with Spares (Andrew, Harry) is when the Heir has produced an Heir, the Spare should be humanely euthanized.

"Drunken Andrew and Fergie Trash Royal Lodge Upon Receiving Eviction Notice!"

Good for them r386. Make them drag you out of there Andy, hollering and fighting all the way. I think that Cops! show is long gone, but they should bring it back for a very special episode of Royal Eviction!

R384 The British Royal Family usually favour The Goring Hotel in Belgravia, Queen Elizabeth II used to dine there occasionally. It has a Royal Warrant.

R388 Why bother paying for a hotel in Belgravia when they could just take a room at Buckingham Palace for a week?

Do they really not keep spare rooms for visiting royals? I mean, almost all of them are based in London anyway, so they'd have little need for a hotel OR a room at BP.

R389 Some people want more privacy? I never stay with friends or family, it makes me uncomfortable.

Her late Majesty leaving the Goring, accompanied by the remarkable Managing Director

I hope he had good balance.

They could stay at Buck House, at Kensington Palace, St. James Palace, Windsor Castle - especially considering they never stay over a couple of days. Ridiculous claiming it's their house when the upkeep on an uninhabited mansion is not negligible. They probably wanted rid of it and want Charles to give them the money they spent on it back as they are living so far above their means. It was probably mutually agreed but the Harkles spotted a new victim narrative for themselves.

R389, Sophie and Edward, and Princess Anne have apartments at Buckingham Palace for times when they are in London. I imagine there are other apartments too. But right now the whole place is undergoing renovations that were desperately needed. Serious structural problems, etc.

Up thread someone posted that the RF, Charles owns Sandringham and Balmoral, but Charles also owns Highgrove, right? And he will never give it up. He has some kind of "spiritual connection" to the place.

Now I know he is staying at Clarence House right now, but St. James Palace is also available for use although I did here it is also in desperate need of repair. One thing has been very obvious especially if you follow the RF on Instagram. Charles has the cousins working their asses off. All those grace and favor cottages are getting their money's worth out of the freeloaders. Elizabeth let them coast, but no more.

No, he doesn't own Highgrove. It was purchased for him by the Duchy of Cornwall. So technically William is his landlord. They are very clever about using other people's money, as most rich people are.

R392 Liz was probably only nice to him so he wouldn't eat her.

I really do miss the Queen.

R395 Prince William owns Highgrove, King Charles is his tenant.

"The Duchy of Cornwall owns Highgrove, and bought the house, garden and nearby farmland now known as Duchy Home Farm in 1980."

I sometimes wonder whether people who are writing a post containing a correction just ignore other posters' existing corrections so they can get it on the record that they, too, are issuing a correction.

William doesn't own the Duchy of Cornwall, it was established to provide income for the Prince of Wales, but the Prince of Wales does not own the assets in his own right.

R401, when I know something is incorrect I often write the post and then go off to find a substantiating link during which time the thread updates, so when I've been guilty of it, that's why. Other times perhaps one poster is on block so the person writing the correction doesn't see it. I have a number of people on block on these threads.

[QUOTE]who knew she wrote best selling romance novels!

Seriously? This must be where she got the money for the two Mayfair flats. Somebody on one of these threads said the seller was the Duke of Westminster, so I wonder if he sold them at a very favorable rate. What pseudonym does she go by?

Having them stay at an apartment at KP or BP or any Royal residence defeats the purpose. Haz and his harridan can't be trusted. They can't be amongst the family where they can gather information, record activities or conversations, abuse staff or try to stage their own solo walkabouts. If they were tolerable or trustworthy, they would have received the apartment at KP next to W&C. They aren't to be trusted and have become even worse since they were denied the KP apartment. Is there some kind of Royal discount at Claridges or The Goring? A punch card where after five visits they get sixth visit free or something of that nature like at the frozen yogurt shop I frequent?

You just know Andrew is disgusted at the very thought of "downsizing" to a five bedroom house.

Imagine working for a living and buying whatever house you want with your hard earned money. What a dick.

Do you think that someday, maybe in one year, the Royal conversation will be mostly free of Prince Todger"s doings? I believe he won't undertake anything that is helpful or particularly interesting to warrant much bandwidth, although post-Megxit he undertook an online course in movie production so there's a chance he will turn out to be a mogul. There's no broken romance from here, I'm happy to see his flat pasty ass and struggle hairdo fade from my view.

It's one property - a mews house in Mayfair. Subsequent reporting says the daughters bought it for her as land registry documents show she can't sell it without their agreement.

It's unlikely the Duke of Westminster (through his property company, Grosvenor) sells off freeholds. Grosvenor owns entire streets and neighbourhoods and works in property development and leaseholds.

R407, I would except she's still got a book to write. After that, I can imagine coverage of them as they continue to their adventures and accomplishments but not in relation to the royal family... that will have exhausted itself once she's had one final whine her book.

If they stay at any of the royal residences, they can easily be isolated from other royals and monitored by security staff to make sure they don't walkabout and record. I think they would not want to stay there due to their own paranoia about being monitored surreptitiously by the Firm.

The Fail originally said Fergie bought the two flats from her friend Hugh..

I can see how those things may happen, R403, (particularly posts from blocked accounts being invisible) and thus account for at least some duplicate corrections.

I think the Sussexes should bunk with Uncle Andy and Auntie Fergie whenever the grace England with their presence in the future.

Unfortunately they have at least 15 more years of material through their children to keep them in the public eye. Just like they turned the tables and called the RF racists after all the accommodating they did, they will turn the tables and BLAME Charles for the lack of relationship with his grandchildren. They will never take responsibility for the fact they took away the children, withheld them or probably filled their heads with racist accusations about the RF. More tears, "trauma", books and interviews about how their children have been ignored and treated second rate to the Wales children.

That's where I read it, r411. I distinctly remember the Mail pointing out that they could be converted to one unit.

Except at some point isn't it actually boring? As their children grow, so do the Wales kids. The nice ones. With futures. In the system.

I found the article... you're correct if the Mail's correct: two flats purchased from Westminster.

[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.]

Well Arthur Edward's Camillas good friend has just admitted in print that Charles took away the cottage because Harry revealed Camillas behavior. This is the crux of it. It wasn't to rip the band aid of as today's Daily Heil suggests. It was a nasty I'm going to take away your UK home because my wife is upset reaction. The BRF look nasty the reaction to this has been overwhelmingly negative towards the BRF and once again Camilla is at the centre of it.

" The King has asked the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to move out of Frogmore Cottage for good to allow Prince Andrew to move in, The Telegraph understands."

🤣🤣🤣🤣

[quote] One wonders why they are so troubled by these two, given they are financially independent, while the royal family is an exempla of inherited parasitism and general nastiness.

This is so funny to me. How did they get to be "financially independent"? By trading on Harry's status as a member of the royal family. They're not self-made; Harry was born between third base and home plate and thinks he hit a homer. And for general nastiness, you need look no further than a certain red-haired (for now) rageaholic man-child who never stops complaining or betraying his family's privacy.

[quote]As their children grow, so do the Wales kids. The nice ones. With futures. In the system.

No doubt that the Wales children are more dynastically important, R416, and also more important in that they will play a role in British public life but it's unfair to imply that the very young Sussex children aren't "nice".

Evictions don't include Daddy paying off certain debts in order to gain control over a piece of property sitting unused in the center of the Crown's piece of Windsor territory.

But "Don't Let the Door Hit You in the Ass, Cunts" does have a nice ring to it.

And apt.

In the Mail story Fergie looks like one of the crazy neighbors on Coronation Street.

Here's what Arthur Edwards actually said, which was an opinion.

R422, the reference was in relation to the Wales children not the other ones, but I get your point. To be clear little is known about the other kids to be able to draw an opinion.

R284 - According the the spokesperson for The Crown Estates and the Daily Mail, the Sussexes HAVE paid for everything in full regarding Frogmore Cottage.

It's made-up nonsense, r425. Especially telling is how Charles is supposed to have "evicted" California residents Harry and Meghan from Frogmore so as to give it to Prince Andrew, when the last but two tabloid fabricated hysteria story was about Charles allegedly booting Andrew out of Buckingham Palace and revoking his security.

Well, this is a rare case for DL, everybody's correct about Fergie's real estate. It is mews house separated into two flats, previously owned by the Duke of Westminster. As to the girls' signatures being needed for sale, the article says she purchased it as an investment for her daughters.

R419 What Camilla wants Camilla gets!

The tabloids and the "quality" press are desperate for royal scandal. They first tried to create it around the Coronation, with their frenzied campaign to get Charles to publicly disinvite Harry. The royal family just ignored that pressure, and it went away. Now they're onto this non-story of Charles allegedly evicting the Harkles from a property that they don't even live in.

But months later the Mail reported this about the daughters:

[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.]

Does Camilla know that Arthur Edwards is her good friend, r419? He writes in that nonsense piece "We still don’t know if Harry and Meghan intend to attend the Coronation in two months’ time."

I'm pretty sure Camilla and Charles already know.

R310 - If what you say is correct (and it very well may be correct), why do the Waleses have three homes: a very grand apartment in Kensington Palace, Adelaide Cottage and Anmer Hall?

I am surprised Camilla's ex has never, ever said one peep about his ex hausfrau becoming Mrs. Princess of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall and now Queen. Not.one.peep. That is some tight shit. His sphincter must be like the eye of a needle.

Two separate properties in different posh neighborhoods possibly bought under favorable terms for different reasons? Edoardo is a real estate developer. Is this another shady scheme the Yorks are known for, only run by better brains that married into the family? The Brooksbanks can't have that much money if Jack had to leave the UK to obtain work. I have no idea what Edo's financial situation is, but all of these properties carried a hefty price tag. Who knows maybe Fergie made a bank romance writing.

R436 - I read long ago before Charles and Camilla married that for a man of his status in their social circle it was almost a point of pride for the wife to be mistress to the P of W and of service to the Crown, not the embarrassment of cuckoldry. Along with new wife, he attended C&C's wedding. The English upper classes are different.

The price was £5M for the two flats, and the question is, who will live there when renovations are complete

Where did the York daughters get that kind of scratch? Was it their inheritance from granny? Did they blow it all on their disgraceful mess of a mother? She will make them regret it.

They don't really have legitimate careers of their own, and one of them is married to the former brand ambassador for George Clooney's unlicensed tequila.

Andrew PB cheated on Camilla from the day they married, his second wife Rosemary was one of his mistresses. It was like a fucking big swingers club.

Nope r310. Inflation here is 4x what it is in the UK.

[quote] [R310] - If what you say is correct (and it very well may be correct), why do the Waleses have three homes: a very grand apartment in Kensington Palace, Adelaide Cottage and Anmer Hall?

Because he is the single most important member of the royal family by far after the King. So he gets the most stuff after the King (and the Queen who lives with the King).

One day he will be King. And he lives with his son Prince George, who is the second most important member of the royal family, since one day he will also be King. They get the best of everything except that which the King allots to himself.

[bold]The royal family is not an equitable system.[/bold] The entire point of it is that certain people are more important than others by dint of birth order and descent.

I do not understand why Dataloungers do not seem to understand this (and especially why Harry, of all people, does not seem to understand this basic fact either). if it were an equitable system, none of them would be royals: just having royals at all in a system presumes inequity.

I predict the Duke and Duchess of Waaagh's knee jerk retaliation will be to buy some ostentatious, hugely expensive and totally out of their budget London or Country home.

Disagree. She doesn't like the UK. Publicly she may be moaning about it but privately she's probably thanking her lucky stars. The community property case just got a lot stronger.

R445 God bless those California divorce laws!

Still, though, before she met Harry, she was trying everything to get an introduction to some British guy--not even any one in particular (though she tried to get with some football player). Just wanted to date one.

r445, oh not because she wants to live there but to exert power and to make the RF uncomfortable that she's still around and they can't get rid of her. Narcissistic stalking and "hovering". Of course, it's cutting off their own noses to spite their faces because they can't afford it and like you said, she doesn't even like it there. At the very least, they will pretend to shop around for homes in London to create buzz.

Which won't help Meghan in any way tee hee! R446

R448 - that I'd believe.

Beatrice and Eugenie likely each inherited quite a bit of money from their Windsor grandparents, who absolutely adored them both. I doubt they will ever have to worry about money again (which is probably fortunate, given how much their parents have bungled things up).

What is Eton?

R452 Thanks, but I've already eaten today. Lucky Charms!

R451, recall to the the Queen Mother was believed in 1994 to have transferred into trusts about 2/3 of her private wealth for her great-grandchildren. Beatrice is 34, Huge is 32... reasonable to expect they came into that money by now.

Sorry, I know this ^ will trigger the the Queen Mother was broke and the Guardian and BBC can't be believed troll.

R454 Which is a good reminder for young people:

DON'T GET SUCKED INTO SUPPORTING YOUR PARENTS!

It never ends, and they'll die, and then you'll be broke in middle age with no one to help you catch up.

R455 The Queen Mother was broke because she began transferring her wealth into trusts for her Grandchildren in the 1960's, there was no reason to believe that she would live to 101. She had colon cancer in 1966.

Her Mother had died at 76 and her Father at 89 (pretty good age for the time), but 101?

Please, I beg you, don't awaken the Queen's Mum's Trust Troll. I can't go through all that again.

Nobody has to worry about Sarah Ferguson being comfortable. Her daughters were left well off and will take care or her. Andrew will be a pain in the ass until he dies, but the more Charles marginalizes him, the less anybody will care.

Taking Frogmore from the Sussexes makes sense, as once the Coronation is over, it's unlikely they'll return to the UK until Charles' funeral. Meghan certainly won't, and what does Harry have to return to?

Indeed, R457. She was the only one of her large family to live past 77 years of age and her last surviving sibling predeceased her by 34 years (Countess Granville).

Could Tom Parker Bowles actually be the son of Charles? Could that be possible?

After Camilla married Andrew, she and Charles didn't resume their affair for a few years. It's accepted in their set that you give your husband a genuine heir before you start fucking around.

I can't stop laughing at this eviction. Lolololol!

R461 nah, he looks exactly like his father

Progeniture doesn't just apply to royals, it applies to all the aristocracy. If there isn't a direct legitimate male heir (born of the body, adoptees don't count), the title and property go to the most direct male heir - sometimes a cousin who doesn't even know the person whose title he inherits.

Prince Andrew is in a pickle; HRH likely cannot continue to afford keeping up Royal Lodge, but sees being busted down ranks to Frogmore Cottage as a diminishment in status.

While her late royal majesty Elizabeth II was alive Prince Andrew was the blue eyed boy of family, seemingly could do no wrong, well until final sex scandal broke, thus something would have been done. That's all over now that KC3 is in charge.

Prince Andrew long knew his elder brother would do it to him upon becoming monarch. Hence Duke of York tried to get as much possible out of his mother while she lived.

Don't see anyway out for Prince Andrew; KC3 isn't likely to be offering any sort of funding or employment that would help is brother keep up Royal Lodge. Failing that Duke of Andrew will either have to spend down his own resources and remain at Royal Lodge, or accept the inevitable and move into Frogmore Cottage.

[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.]

According to newly released poll Prince Harry is less popular than his uncle Prince Andrew in USA.

Presumably all these royal residences cost a fortune in upkeep. Harry should be relieved not to have to pay for Frogmore. Meghan obviously has no intention of returning to the UK and Harry will be prevented by her from doing so. So what's the point of maintaining a mansion they never use?

Andrew should have shaken enough out of the old lady to keep him in style for the rest of his life. The man is in his early 60s and would be approaching retirement even if he had ever had a real job. He should take his ill-gotten gains, buy his own house, and STFU.

Ahem

Andrew's problem - like Harry's - is the standard of living to which they aspire. They want to live like they're the King without being the King. They're entitled spoiled brats. They want to be billionaires not pathetic millionaires.

Didn't Andrew have a lot of sleazy business deals before he became so completely toxic? Didn't he keep any of that stolen loot? Or did it all go out as fast as it came in? I mean, it's not like any of these people were raised to think hard about where money comes from and where it goes, but still, put a little in the bank, bitch.

As someone said further up this thread the current Royals do not like to spend their own money.

Good part of Prince Harry's money that he brought into that marriage is likely tied up in trusts, thus beyond reach of CA divorce property laws one assumes. Whatever was earned afterwards including proceeds from "Spare" would be a different matter.

Foolishly Prince Harry refused requiring the Markle woman to sign a marriage contract/pre nuptial agreement. In event of divorce MM will take PH to the cleaners far as any joint assets accrued after their marriage.

Prince Harry is in USA on a "special talent" visa (same as Mrs. Trump used to get into and remain in USA prior to her marriage), which at some point will need to be renewed. Wonder what chances are US immigration will see PH is not "special" and deny renewal. He's married to an American and his children are US citizens, if PH is that fed up with UK let him do the thing properly and formally emigrate to USA.

On second thought forget it; cannot see PH giving up his UK citizenship, nor US government denying what likely would be considerable diplomatic pressure to continue granting PH "special talent" visa renewals for long as wished.

You mean why hasn't he sold his story to the tabloids, r436? Why should he?

R474 the UK is the US's closest ally and Harry is stirring shit against the Brits. The State Dept may decide we've had enough of the spare.

Tom Parker Bowles understands that there are only two cardinal sins among the rich and influential: losing all your money and opening your big fat mouth.

R474, British citizens don't have to give up British citizenship in order to become American citizens.

If Harry becomes a US citizen, he automatically loses his titles. And HRH Meghan, Duchess of Sussex would never stand for that!

I would not be surprised if the Queen Mother left money to all her great-grandchildren except Harry and William. It was assumed they would always be provided for.

Plus, apparently they were never anyone's favorite grandchildren or favorite great-grandchildren. Everyone of Elizabeth II and Philip's grandchildren was said by the press at one time or another to be their favorites EXCEPT Harry and William.

I'm sure the Queen Mother left plenty to Margaret's kids. She'd have no reason to leave money to Harry but she may have left money to Anne, Andrew and Edward's kids.

The Queen Mother's favorite great-grandchild would of course have been Margaret's daughter Lady Sarah Chatto, universally agreed to be the nicest member of the entire royal family.

"Frankly, these grace & favour residences should have been stopped long ago."

I disagree, I think the one thing a person with a shit-ton of empty real estate should do is provide housing to people who need it, and if that means elderly relatives then I'm fine with that. He shouldn't give free flats to anyone who can has money of their own, of course, but the Old World is full of aging and unemployable aristocrats with little or no money. If he wants to give his broke relatives a free place to live, okay.

Of course, I think that retired and broke royal servants should get pick on the grace-and-favor residences, the royal family actively owes them.

No, he doesn't, r479.

Lady Sarah Chatto is the Queen Mother's grandchild, r482, not her great-grandchild.

I imagine it was being doled out regularly before the old gal's long awaited death, planned in concert with the estate planning by the Queen and the DoE. In the UK if you gift something seven years prior to death, you escape the estate tax, which grabs 40% of everything over 250K pounds. All the poshies do it. The Duke of Westminster inherited nearly 9 billion with barely a dent, but that's mostly because it was all tied up in trusts. Nobody expected the previous Duke to die so young. It's actually kind of a crap example. The current Duke of Devonshire is worth about 500K pounds and is age 78. His son and heir is already taking a more active role in the whole circus so you can guess the plan is in motion, though the house, Chatsworth, is protected within the Chatsworth House Trust.

Frogmore is not a mansion

Frogmore House...

Not to be confused with Frogmore Cottage...

Then you have Frogmore mausoleum...

Frogmore Cottage at least long has been seen as a place for royal outcasts. Those who have to go somewhere but lets not have them too close or in very grand accommodations.

Frogmore House OTOH is another matter...

Highgrove House is owned by Duchy of Cornwall, neither KC3 nor Prince of Wales technically own anything.

Again people this is how families (including BRF) do things; properties are often owned by trusts not individual persons.

The Duchy of Cornwall is an entity totally separate from HM or Prince of Wales

R486 I don't imagine the estate of Prince Phillip had a high cash value either, his parents died aged 62 and 76. The most advanced age of his siblings was 87 (his sister Sophie). Living to 99 seemed unlikely.

Rich people in the UK plan their estates to avoid inheritance tax decades ahead.

"The Duchy of Cornwall (Cornish: Duketh Kernow) is one of two royal duchies in England, the other being the Duchy of Lancaster. The eldest son of the reigning British monarch obtains possession of the duchy and the title of 'Duke of Cornwall' at birth or when his parent succeeds to the throne, but may not sell assets for personal benefit and has limited rights and income while a minor."

Fairly common to European monarchies Duchy of Cornwall was created to provide a living for heir to throne so he wouldn't necessarily be reliant upon the monarch/crown.

Princess Alexandrina Victoria was never made "prince of Wales" for obvious reasons, so she never received income from Duchy of Cornwall.

OTOH as Prince of Wales Edward VIII squirreled away quite a bit from revenues out of Duchy of Cornwall. Extent of which was not known (IIRC) while negotiations were being made to provide now Duke of Windsor with a living. All while former king was crying poor mouth he was not that bad off thanks to that little nest egg. Where do people think then Prince of Wales and afterwards as D of W the former monarch got all that loot to spend on Wallis Simpson.

It also helped that as Prince of Wales through rest of his life Duke of Windsor was famously cheap. People commented how HRH would excuse himself from table when invited to dine out just before check arrived.

Brits, what are the tax implications for Harry re permanent residence in the USA vs the UK?

Typical millennials.

R497 Wouldn't he be liable to pay tax on all of his income from any source (trusts, dividends etc) in the US?

The UK has some big concessions that the very wealthy take advantage of constantly.

R497

See...

The UK - unlike the US - doesn't tax citizens who are resident abroad so as he lives full-time in the US, he doesn't have to pay UK taxes on income earned in the US. In the US, has he been paying taxes? I wonder. If he's on a diplomatic passport, he may not have been paying taxes here in which case if his diplomatic passport is revoked, he's up shit creek without a paddle.

And...

The title Princess Royal is customarily given by the monarch to his or her eldest daughter, unless there is a Princess Royal still living. Queen Elizabeth II, when princess, did not receive the title because her aunt, Mary, Princess Royal, Countess of Harewood, was living. Following this custom, Princess Charlotte would not be eligible for it until William is king and her great-aunt, Princess Anne, is dead. Also, on the subject of the possibility of Charlotte becoming Duchess of Edinburgh, daughters have not in the past been given royal dukedoms. However, the passage of the Succession to the Crown Act (2013), which makes birth order of sons and daughters equal, created the new scenario of an older daughter (Charlotte) being ahead of a younger brother (Louis) in the succession, which might cause the monarch, whether Charles or later William, to change the practice of giving daughters royal dukedoms. Other European royal families have given daughters dukedoms for many years.

[post redacted because independent.co.uk thinks that links to their ridiculous rag are a bad thing. Somebody might want to tell them how the internet works. Or not. We don't really care. They do suck though. Our advice is that you should not click on the link and whatever you do, don't read their truly terrible articles.]

The papers also claimed Charlotte is being raised in the expectation she'll get a job. So why does she need another title if that's the case? This monarchy feels slightly adrift. I'm not sure it is, but it (may) feel that way. The Palace is coping with the media around them as badly as ever. The chatter around housing, Edward's titles, the Wales children, the trio of shame, should be silenced with some clarity. It's leak city.

It looks like SNL tried to get Harry but talks broke down at the last minute.

I hate to say it but the British Monarchy is looking more clownish by the day. The time is rapidly approaching for them to start dismantling that antiquated mess.

R507 thank you American, where our democracy is teetering on the edge of a knife.

In another time Prince Andrew would have scouted about for an heiress or some other woman who had buckets of money and was keen on being a royal duchess. HRH solved his financial problems while the lady in question received royal rank and other goodies.

Harry could have investments that are out of reach of the British tax authorities (Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Cayman Islands, Panama), but are regarded as income by the IRS.

Could be fun to watch his world collapse over the frogxit.

[quote] The papers also claimed Charlotte is being raised in the expectation she'll get a job.

This seems like a bad idea. Some PR bitch probably thinks it's awesome right now, but down the road it will be some stupid stunt job at some fucked up nonsense company, well connected and full of shit, and a disaster waiting to happen.

[quote]I hate to say it but the British Monarchy is looking more clownish by the day. The time is rapidly approaching for them to start dismantling that antiquated mess.

You don't hate to say it. You're not fooling anyone.

If King Charles plans of a slimmed down Monarchy come to fruition, it will be essential for Charlotte and Louis to be full time working Royals.

Otherwise we end up with just a King & Queen trying to cover all of the bases.

I posted the bit about Charlotte's job but I agree R513 and R511. The one thing about the monarchy was it's institutional predictability. It all feels unnecessarily ambiguous to me at present and, if I'm right, that weakens it.

"Evicted" from Frogmore works perfectly for all concerned. Harry and Megs have already leaked it was the "the last place they felt safe" in the UK. Now Megs can victim 'splain her non-attendance at the coronation and, perhaps, Harry too can blame his non-attendance on having "no home to return to" , so neither of them have to face the boos of the British public. Not good for their brand. And, with Harry and Megs no longer having a place on palace grounds, Charles pushes them further into the Hollywood influencer crowd and less connected to the BRF, which also is not good for their brand.

Only cads and bounders "kiss and tell" a gentleman never would; thus don't expect Tom Parker Bowles to be spilling dirt anytime soon if ever.

TBP allegedly threw down a hot fuck; hence so many females in society anxious for a slice of that for themselves. Naming names would cause no end of scandals across Britain.

I do hope that Tom Parker Bowles doesn't do a kiss-and-tell on Camilla, particularly as she's his mother. (Her ex-husband is called Andrew.)

R515. Boo friggin Hoo for the Markles. Why wouldn't they "feel safe" bunking at Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle for a couple of nights if necessary. They barely stay beyond that anyway. And they moved away. Too bad, but you don't get to keep a house that isn't yours. And despite reports to the contrary, the Markles did not repay all the money the owed on the renovation. And yes, renovations cost a lot, but they didn't purchase the house, so it's not theirs to bitch about. Besides, they knew all the while that they were not staying in the UK, the whole time the renovations were underway. They just thought--and pushed for--that "half in/half out" arrangement to which the queen (along with Charles and William) said NO.

The Markles didn't get their own way so they announced that they are leaving, which they were always going to do anyway. They were dishonest from the start, and now they are being booted. It took a while, but the royal family always plays the long game. On the other hand, the Markles are shortsighted and transactional for moment almost all the time. Although the wife was very calculating when she set out to bag Harry. He thought it was love. Markle on the other hand was on a mission. And still is.

[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.]

None of that is really surprising, R189. Appreciate the info from those who were there, though.

So sorry, I meant to say that heiresses aren't as title-hungry as they used to be, and neither are the parents who used to force rich girls into the aristo marriage market or into actual arranged marriages.

The exception being Michael Wittstock of South Africa, which is why I included a picture of Princess Charlene sobbing at her own wedding. Sorry, I didn't realize the link came from the Forbidden Rag.

R518 The problem isn't the fuckwit and the whore feeling safe. The Royal family doesn't feel safe with them around and don't want to provide content for the next book or Netflix show.

It's doubtful they will ever stay in any Royal houses/Palaces etc again.

To be clear, I throw down a hot fuck, too. R516 & R517

For all the bitching about Frogmore Cottage, it's not a bad place especially for lesser royals. It would have been fine for the Markles had they stayed even though they thought they deserved more. Most photos always show the back of the house, which isn't all that photogenic. But the front of the house is kind of nice. And now that it's been renovated, it's more than nice.

Although I can understand why Andrew thinks it's a comedown. Who wouldn't?

Perhaps a move to Palm Beach or Lake Worth is in order re taxes. Plus, it's near Wellington for polo. R502

Did Harry and Willian get any monetary inheritance from the Queen after her death?

What is Charles' bitch about Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie? Why won't he make them senior working royals? They are nice girls, very devoted to the monarchy; they're willing and able --and never had any scandal around them at all. They are very nice girls. And they have caused no trouble whatsoever despite all the nonsense that has swirled around them.

Yes, I know Andrew is their father, but is that the reason? And now they are getting to the point on their lives with husbands and kids of being rather removed from the actual working royals that it may be difficult to have them become working royals if Charles needs them. And he's going to need them--he just won't admit it. And George and Charlotte are not going to be ready to become full-time working royals until at least their mid-20s.

I don't know that the York girls necessarily want to be senior working royals right now. They are both mothers of extremely young children, and Eugenie is pregnant again.

Frogmore Mausoleum is OUR home. We will not be evicted. R490

Edward made a big mistake in settling--or asking for--the title of Earl with his wife a Countess...and with the hope that Charles would give Edward the Duke of Edinburgh title when Elizabeth died. He should have taken accepted a dukedom when offered. Now it seems a dukedom for Edward is becoming out of reach.

Andrew at least knew that Charles was going to be rather ruthless after Liz Windsor died. Edward instead depended "on the kindness of strangers," (meaning Charles) to have generosity of spirit. And now that Charles has the top job, generosity is out the palace window, so to speak.

The insider source who alleged Meghan was hurt and angered is a Royal Expert who thinks this is what Meghan is feeling. She is on the front page of the Daily heil. So a made up story. And those that doubted my post about Charles kicking the Sussex out because of Camilla its now the headline article on most major tabloids. Camilla is yet again in the middle of chaos within the BRF

Link, please, to all these headlines.

I realize these things are mainly symbolic and "statusy" but what would be the practical effect of being a duke for Edward, as opposed to being an earl, r530? Isn't he really the son of Queen Elizabeth II more than anything else that can ever actually be done there, in terms of his status in the world, or would being a duke actually change his life in any way? Is there an income attached to these titles, a house, a friggin red cloak and a gold chain or something, anything at all, or just another title that is really, frankly, redundant compared to Royal Prince?

r419 The ripping off the band aid psychologically and being angry at his snipes at Camilla(He didnt reveal anything about her behaviour, he made evidence free allegations and teenage mindset grumblings) are not mutually exclusive and so both can be true.Very often in reality things happen for more than one reason.

R528. I believe that Beatrice and Eugenie would have accepted roles as working royals had it been offered years ago. They have always been devoted to the monarchy. Yes, it may be difficult now with young children. But they were full grown adults for many years without children when they could have been used as working royals. As far as them having young children now...well, when Queen Elizabeth was alive, Kate had had very young children, and she was still a working royal except when she would take time out for pregnancy leave.

Yes, now that Beatrice and Eugenie have their own lives it might be difficult for them to be working royals. But Kate managed. and they could have managed. But Charles kept on blocking them from moving up the ranks. I still maintain that at least Beatrice would make a perfect working royal. Charles just didn't want them. But he will. Charles is dealing with the Markles fairly appropriately by pushing them out since they walked away, but Charles excluded Beatrice and Eugenie out of spite.

Andrew wasn't always in trouble, and he remained a working royal for years. Granted, he's on the outs now. But his daughters could have been used as part of the working royals many years ago even if their closeness to their father is awkward now. Beatrice and Eugenie could have been given low key roles while this Andrew cloud over them passes somewhat.

The York girls were good for looking odd, wearing ugly, expensive clothes badly, and feeding the tabloids through their many holidays. They have earned their right to be put out to grass.

R533. Status is everything in royal circles. Also, it's the only thing. And who knows, there may be some monetary perks involved once you're a duke in the inner circle. Come on, Earl of Wessex versus Duke of Edinburgh--there's no comparison. Edward wasn't thinking by taking an earl title because he saw it in a movie.

Take the dukedom while you can--don't wait unless it's an iron-clad guarantee that you will get it if you wait. Now that Elizabeth is gone, Charles ain't playing despite what may have been promised to Edward many years ago. Now it seems, the Duke of Edinburgh title will revert back to the crown, and Edward is still an earl when he could have been a duke of something else when he got married and Elizabeth was in his corner.

Never give up the dream, Yorkie troll.

r489 She died in 2002 and Edward had no kids at that point.

I meant r481 in r539

[quote] Now it seems, the Duke of Edinburgh title will revert back to the crown,

It already has reverted to the crown. Charles inherited the title of Duke of Edinburgh as the eldest son when his father died, and then he became King. Duke of Edinburgh is now part of the crown's titles, and if Charles does not give it to someone else, it will pass on to William just as the crown does.

I think that Charles will relent and give it to Edward fairly soon. He'll also probably make it revert back to the Crown upon Edward's death and not be passed on to his heirs.

So if the Queen and Prince Phil wanted Eddie to be Duke of Edinburgh why didn't the Queen give it to him when Phil died? It seems like that would have been the right thing to do. Now along with everything else Charles touches it is mired in bullshit. I miss the Queen. At least things were clear, and orderly and there was decorum and not all this mess.

R543, because it passed to Charles upon the death of his father.

R544, if the title passes back to the monarch when the titled person dies, how did it revert to Charles. The Queen was the reigning monarch and could have conferred the title on anyone she wanted.

Quit your bitching, R543, Charlie's doing well.

It was always going to be like this after the Queen died. She reigned for 70 years for god's sake and rarely put a foot wrong. It's a tough act to follow. It will take a long time to truly settle into anyone else as monarch.

Chill the fuck out. If the Queen wanted Eddie to have it, she'd have maneuvered Charles into doing that . She wasn't some flibbertigibbet of a woman, she was THE QUEEN.

In the same vein, if she had wanted Beatrice and Eugenie to become full-time working royals she's have made them full-time working royals many years ago. She did not do that and she did not want that.

No, R545, the title reverted to Charles because it was set up that way when it was conferred upon Philip by the Queen.

Now it is the King's to do with as he likes. If he confers it upon Edward and his heirs, that's one way. If he confers it upon Edward and takes it back to the Crown upon his death, that's another way.

It's entirely up to Charles what he does with that title and how he does it. It doesn't always have to be done the same way.

Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich were all granted to Prince Phillip via letters patent same as anyone else; remainder to legal heirs of his body in order of primogeniture.

Thus as with any other duke (with some exceptions such as Fife, but that is another story), Prince Charles inherited his father's peerages as the eldest son. That he was Prince of Wales and future monarch really didn't play into things that much except of that upon becoming monarch all titles held by then Prince of Wales merged back into the crown to be used again.

Prince of Wales was at once given to Prince William, but there still remains question of KC3's father's peerages that in theory are now free to be granted again to anyone.

Late QEII only other option was upon Prince Phillip's demise take what was by right Prince Charles's (said peerages) and give them to Prince Edward. That would have been complicated, messy and may have involved Parliament.

Thus famous agreement was hatched between Elizabeth II, Prince Phillip and Prince Charles to "give" Prince Edward his father's peerages upon their being free. That would not occur until two events happened; PP died *and* so did Elizabeth II triggering PC to inherit throne.

Trouble is monarchs have few ways of forcing their heir to do certain things after they are gone. In matters concerning BRF the monarch has final say period.

If Prince Edward is so keen on being a royal duke he should have taken one when it was offered (at time of his marriage) instead of pfaffing around with wanting something to do with "Wessex" due to his infatuation with "Shakespeare in Love.

There are a number of dukedoms that are extinct thus ripe to be given out again. Prince Edward could have his pick. Some such as dukedoms of Cumberland and Teviotdale would be problematic, but there still are others.

Just find something and get it over with instead of all this shilly-shallying.

KC3 has waited longer than any heir in recent memory to inherit besides Edward VII. He won't have a long reign so will have to act quickly in order to make his mark and leave some sort of lasting legacy.

One assumes all this reorganizing of BRF and other changes are being done in consultation with Prince of Wales. No sense in making changes that the heir will simply void or otherwise undo. Especially when that clock ticking on wall says current monarch certainly has more days behind him than in front.

From what I have read, Charles consults with Camilla and his sister Anne. They're very close. When it comes to family matters those two carry a lot of influence. William has influence too, but it doesn't have as much weight as Anne and Camilla. Charles f eels like this is a time for a kind of "Master class" for William. I think Charles and Camilla are pleased with Catherine and William as far as work goes, but Charles will consider William's advice and opinions, but he will assign more weight to others.

[quote]In the same vein, if she (Elizabeth) had wanted Beatrice and Eugenie to become full-time working royals she's have made them full-time working royals many years ago. She did not do that and she did not want that.

Perhaps, but Charles was very influential over the queen and blocked Beatrice and Eugenie at every turn especially as the queen got into elderly years.

There is nothing to suggest the Queen did anything the Queen did not want to do.

Keep trying, York girls troll. It's amusing.

Page Six.- ‘Disgraceful’ Meghan, Harry ‘provoked’ King Charles to evict them: royal expert.

R535

Kate Middleton signed on knowing full well as princess of Wales and future queen consort she very well would be a working royal.

The York princesses have done some work in past and very well may or may not want to do more in future, but they are married women who possibly didn't or don't see themselves as major working royals.

Camilla's ex need not dish any dirt, but how is he not hounded every day by the tabloids to wish her will or congratulate her in becoming the Queen?

I don't know if Harry hosting SNL would've been an entertaining train wreck or a cringe train wreck. He certainly has some charm, but he's also stupid and defensive. His recently broadcast Q&A segment with Colbert had a few funny bits, but overall was awkward and painful to watch Colbert navigate through.

(His biggest laugh line--answering "cockpit" when asked "window or aisle"--at second thought highlights his unrelatability: sitting in the cockpit killing chess pieces or sitting in the cockpit of a private jet.)

I recently decided to binge-watch Succession, as I had never seen it. I got through one season and bailed, because not one of the characters was the least bit likeable or had any redeeming features. Reading all the drama of the BRF, this musical chairs activity, the tit-for-tat sniping leaked by the ever-obliging press, I'm starting to feel the same way. Who the fuck are these people that they live off the backs of other people's labour? Why do they have numerous lavish homes from which to choose, none of which have they bought themselves?

Enough already.

^^We'll put you down as a "maybe."

I love when UK Royals meet Continental Royals. It's a small club.

If Charles slims down the monarchy, how on earth are they going to manage all of the engagements between them?

The BRF are patrons of thousands of organisations. The Gloucesters, Kents, York & Harry, undertake/undertook lots of engagements. Charles & Camilla are no spring chickens, likewise Anne. Edward & Sophie have work hard, so where's the slack. Wills & Kate can't do it all.

I can't see how the many good causes will get highlighted with a slimmed down BRF.

Maybe King Charles want's the lavish lifestyle, the todying, and far slimmed down royal involvement in "good works".

The problem is, all that system of patronage would be devastated by a royal withdrawal. A paradigm shift. All that good will lost. Wouldn't help the image of a constitutional monarchy.

I think the Firm was thrilled by the addition of Meghan. UK is super woke nowadays. And then Harry and Megs were both not up for the role. They could have had everything and risen in respect and soft power. All they had to be is gracious and somewhat close-lipped. Bonus points if one of the babies was darkish.

Could Charles destroy the British monarchy ANY faster?

R96 Hello magazine reports that the lease is £250 per week. So with 55 years to go that would only be around £715,000.

It's also reported to have serious damp issues and needs a new roof. And if those were fixed, Andrew would have to move out during repair anyway.

Charles throwing Andrew out of Buckingham Palace, and potentially out of Royal Lodge, is sending a signal.

Camilla is shit hot on domestic abuse, so I suspect her hand in these moves too.

shit hot?

Like Michael Douglas and Catherine zeta jones they could rent an apartment at St James palace if they want a safe place to stay

Anne didn't become Princess Royal until 1987, r503.

Charles isn't destroying the monarchy, r563.

The Markles could stay at The Stafford. A much nicer, more discreet hotel.

A favourite of The Queen Mother's and Zara Phillips. Zara, of course is also a non-working 'royal' so it would be a perfect location for Haz & Megs to stay. VERY handy for Buckingham Palace and Clarence House, without being on royal premises.

[quote]They also apparently only paid back $650K of the $3 million + they spent to renovate the place.

That's not true, they paid back £2.4 million to the Sovereign Grant which is reported on the official royal website.

I suspect Charles discreetly paid back the 2.4 million as part of their Megxit deal and to avoid any public backlash.

From the full Sovereign Grant annual report for 2020-2021:

[quote]Frogmore Cottage was the official residence of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex until 31 March 2020, when they stepped back from performing official duties. From 1 April 2020 Frogmore Cottage became the private UK residence of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, subject to an annual licence to occupy. In addition to commercial rent paid in the first five months of 2020- 21, a lump sum of £2.4m was received from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in September 2020 to re-imburse the Sovereign Grant for expenditure incurred on the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage. However, not all of the payment received in 2020-21 is recognised as income within this accounting year, as it has been offset against the rental payments due for 2021-22.

[quote]Of the cash payments received in 2020-21, the equivalent of 12 months of rental income is recognised in the Income and Expenditure Account for 2020-21, in accordance with the related performance obligation to provide accommodation. This is included within Property rental income.

[quote]The licence has been renewed for a further year to 31 March 2022. At 31 March 2021, the equivalent of the rent due under the licence for the year to 31 March 2022 is treated as deferred income under current liabilities in the Statement of Financial Position, and will be released to the Income and Expenditure Account in the year 2021-22 as it is earned and the related performance obligation to provide accommodation is met.

[quote]The balance of the cash payments received during 2020-21 is recognised as income in 2020-21, on the basis that a licence to occupy does not extend beyond 31 March 2022 and there are therefore no enforceable obligations at 31 March 2021. This is included within Recharges for functions and other income.

All true, r531. In one of the now-deleted threads I said that I didn't think Charles would be stupid enough to do this on the eve of his coronation, unless you were right and it was Camilla pushing for it, and it turned out to be exactly what had happened.

Camilla is absolutely terrible at PR. She was openly palling around with that ugly show host guy just 36 hours before he published is "strip Meghan naked and throw shit at 'er" op-ed, and now she's done this, which is ridiculous, because neither Harry or Meghan care about Frogmore, but she wasn't smart enough to realize that.

I suspect the Palace figured it out, which is why they had to send out one of their paid "royal experts" to lie and say Meghan is upset at the loss of Frogmore. No one sane believes a royal expert in the UK has any idea what Meghan thinks about anything.

On top of that, Charles got the brilliant idea to basically say "I've evicted my son and his family and am giving the home to my disgraced sex pest brother instead."

We've just seen a King bow to a petty request on his Queen Consort's part and happily do something ugly and ill advised just before his own coronation. It's unseemly.

Charles made it publicly known that he evicted his son from Frogmore in favor of his disgraced sex pest brother, r572. He's not even TRYING to avoid public backlash.

As seen in the report at r573, from April 2020 Frogmore Cottage was being used by Harry and Meghan as a private residence - it was no longer their official residence as they were no longer official working royals. They had an annual lease and paid rent.

As they don't actually need Frogmore anymore, it makes no sense for them to continue to pay rent and for the lease continuously to be renewed each year. Perhaps the Markles themselves no longer wanted to pay rent on it and so gave it up.

Also, £2.4 million for refurbishment is a heck of a lot of money, especially for a property that was presumably in good condition. What the heck did they spend it on?

Losing Frogmore is a blow to the Markles' pride more than anything.

However, if they visit the UK, it's not like they will have nowhere to stay. And they don't have to go to a hotel. They can get a few rooms at Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace, St. James Palace, Windsor Castle, etc., etc. And they will have plenty of space, security and privacy for the few nights that they might be visiting. This high drama over losing Frogmore is humiliating to these two lying grifters, but it's not like they will be pitching a tent in Great Windsor Park.

Frogmore was only a gift if they were working royals and lived in the UK. And they didn't even pay back the entire amount of the renovations. Charles did--and it's been kept quiet so as to not infuriate the British taxpayers.

"I suspect the Palace figured it out, which is why they had to send out one of their paid "royal experts" to lie and say..." - Do people really believe this shit?

Charles likely GAVE them the money to pay back the 2.4M and let them take the credit for the repayment. Charles trying to mitigate anger from the public over the renovations at the time. Those two didn't even pay Sunshine Sachs who were on their side until push came to shove.

All these made-up stories about how Charles did all sorts of nice things to "mitigate anger" or "avoid public backlash" are even more ridiculous in the wake of all this.

"My wife got mad at what my son said, so I evicted him from his home to punish him and am giving the place to my disgusting useless brother instead. Also, I made sure the tabloids were told about this, and in the most dramatic terms possible."

I don’t understand why people are complaining about not having enough working royals. Don’t they realize that the money for working royals comes from their tax dollars? If Charles wants a slimmed down monarchy, then charities will have to just do what other charities do—get patrons from the entertainment or sports world. Or just try and fundraise on their own. Someone upthread said it, there are thousands of patronages out there, how does the BRF support them all anyway? A visit once every 3-4 years from Edward? We’re not talking about a lot of people here..

R581, we don't pay our taxes in dollars in the UK.

The royal family isn't even funded by the tax payer, but through the Crown Estate. Their costs come to around £100 million a year.

The BRF doesn't have thousands of patronages.

The slimming of the monarchy troll is so kind, isn't he?

R574, very funny!

R443 - What you say is correct but I think it is very bad optics for the British Royal Family to live this way during very bad economic times. William & Kate do not need Royal Lodge at this time as another home. I think they should stay put at Adelhaide Cottage for a couple of years.

Could I just point out Andrew hasn't left Royal Lodge and there's been no announcement that William and Kate are or will or intend to move in?

That's the problem with these discussions, everybody starts assuming facts not in evidence as the truth.

^^We don't need evidence. We've been studying these things long enough. We know what's happening and what will happen.

[quote]The papers also claimed Charlotte is being raised in the expectation she'll get a job.

If Charlotte continues to look like the perfect monarch and she can maintain good relations with George despite this, the Firm would be mad not to employ her themselves. She could learn the courtiering ropes under William and end up George's private secretary (chief of staff, for the Americans).

R582, I was repeating what r560 said about the BRF being patrons of thousands of organizations. Not sure actually what the number is…does anyone know? Might be in the hundreds. Also, yes, it’s not tax dollars, it’s pounds. The Sovereign Grant appears to be, however, funded by the government. Is that not taxed money? If it’s not where does it come from?

R551 I agree. I think Charles resisted a larger role for the girls because they came with so much baggage. Fergie and Andrew would attach themselves like leeches on the Princesses. It is a well known fact that Fergie regularly sold information to the tabloids back when Diana and Charles were going through their mess. And Andrew was making demands. For example he demanded security for his daughters and raised hell with Mummy when it was removed. He was also always insisting on them having grace and favor housing at Kensington. If they had assumed more duties as working Royals, Andrew would have been goading and pressuring them and Charles to give up more money and perks.

I also agree with R557. I think at this point, Andrew is probably haggling with Charles about the Lodge. After all, he does have a lease, and maybe he is insisting that Charles buy him out of the lease.

I'm not sure that William and Catherine would want Royal Lodge if it needs extensive repairs, they've already experienced public backlash over the refurbishment of 1a Kensington Palace and to a lesser extent Anmer Hall.

They chose Adelaide because everything was done, It's emphasized it the announcement of the move there.

Given how you spell the word "labour," R557, one assumes you yourself live somewhere royal adjacent, either in the UK or the Commonwealth because it's spelled "labor" in the USA.

If so, it would seem "Who the fuck are these people that they live off the backs of other people's labour?" can be answered easily: they're yours. You figure it out.

We're just here enjoying the show.

Human leeches, half of them inbred and probably barely literate, feuding over who gets taxpayer-funded housing and the flashiest "job" of cutting ribbons and unveiling plaques.

Pathetic.

How many properties are there in Windsor Park? It seems a new one pops up whenever a Royal is house hunting.

R594 There are a few, then consider Sandringham with places like Anmer Hall and Wood Farm, then Balmoral with Birkhall and Craigowan Lodge. There's loads of these posh houses tucked away in various states of repair.

The Sovereign Grant is funded from the Crown Estate, r589.

[quote]The Crown Estate is an independent commercial business, created by an Act of Parliament, with a diverse portfolio of UK buildings, shoreline, seabed, forestry, agriculture and common land. The business generates valuable revenue for the government and over the last 10 years has contributed £2.6 billion to the Consolidated Fund.

We take a modern approach to managing our portfolio, but our history and heritage date back hundreds of years.

Since 1760, the net income of The Crown Estate has been surrendered to the Exchequer by the Monarch under successive Civil List Acts, passed at the beginning of each reign.

The Crown Estate is though owned by the Monarch in right of the Crown. This means that the King owns it by virtue of holding the position of reigning Monarch, for as long as he is on the throne, as will his successor. Responsibility for managing The Crown Estate is trusted to us, under the Crown Estate Act, and the King is not involved in management decisions.

By contrast, the King also has private assets, which include Balmoral and Sandringham, and are his to deal with as he chooses. But by no means all of what is commonly called Crown land or Crown Property forms part of The Crown Estate.

In the UK "the Crown" is used not only to describe the Monarch, but also the Executive and the Judiciary. Thus properties owned and managed by Government departments are also Crown Property; these have nothing to do with the funding of the Monarchy or The Crown Estate.

Although the ownership of some property can be traced back to Edward the Confessor, the estate as a whole essentially dates from 1066. After the Norman Conquest, all the land belonged to William "in right of The Crown" because he was King. Despite centuries of change in law and custom, the underlying ownership of The Crown still exists and there is always a presumption in favour of The Crown unless it can be proved that the land belongs to someone else.

The Sovereign's estates had always been used to raise revenue, and over time large areas were granted to nobles. The estate fluctuated in size and value but by 1760, when George III acceded to the throne, the asset had been reduced to a small area producing little income - revenue which George III needed to fulfil the Sovereign's fiscal responsibilities to the nation.

By that time taxes had become the prime source of revenue for the United Kingdom and Parliament administered the country, so an agreement was reached that the Crown Lands would be managed on behalf of the Government and the surplus revenue would go to the Treasury. In return the King would receive a fixed annual payment - formerly known as the Civil List. This agreement has, at the beginning of each reign, been repeated by every succeeding Sovereign. Crown Lands in Scotland were included within the arrangement from 1832.

In 1955 a Government Committee under the Chairmanship of Sir Malcolm Trustram Eve recommended that to avoid confusion between Government property and Crown land, the latter should be renamed The Crown Estate and should be managed by an independent board. These recommendations were implemented by the Crown Estate Acts of 1956 and 1961, which established The Crown Estate as it is today.

Under the Act of 1961, the estate is managed by a Board who have a duty to maintain and enhance the value of the estate and the return obtained from it, but with due regard to the requirements of good management.

In 2011 the Sovereign Grant Act became law. Under the Act The Crown Estate continues to give its entire annual surplus (net profit) to the Treasury. The Act simply provides a mechanism that will be used by the Treasury to determine the amount of Government funding for the Monarch by reference to the amount of our annual surplus.

Meanwhile, regular people in Britain are suffering through the worst housing affordability crisis since The Blitz. Working people with middle-class incomes are being priced out of homes, and public housing is falling apart, and rich people are losing their leases to zillionaire expats.

Who gives a FUCK where these apes have their third home?

Adelaide Cottage is lovely but it is not a palace. The ex-Cambridges have made a decision to live in Windsor ostensibly for their children's schooling, but clearly to be closer to Kate's entire family in Berkshire. Once fixed up, Royal Lodge would work a treat. And Andrew would be fine in Adelaide Cottage, and if not...two bedroomed Nottingham Cottage awaits.

I'm sure kicking them out of Frogmore was triggered by them filming for Netflix at Frogmore. Sneaking around was not a good look.

Is Rr507 Lainey or Omid?

r517 laughed out loud