Page 7 | Would you willingly subscription for the Royal family?

chumsnut · 2023-11-13T21:07:06+00:00

If people were given the choice to pay a small monthly subscription to royal family to do appearances, promote charities and live or rent out a few properties, would they do it?

ClareBlue · 15/11/2023 00:13

They have no claim. It's not theirs and it has never been anything but a stare mechanism to fund them

ClareBlue · 15/11/2023 00:21

The crown estate sends all it's profits to the government. The government then pays the Royal family. So the crown estate doesn't pay anything to the RF directly. It's just something that has been embedded to avoid scrutiny of the costs of having a RF.

Dinglewoop · 15/11/2023 00:25

ClareBlue · 15/11/2023 00:10

Don't fall for that old crap peddled about to make them seem less of a tax burden. The crown estate is owned by the tax payers. So it is a business run on behalf of the taxpayer to fund the Royal Family. If we had no Royals it could still be run and fund something else. It's taxpayers money.

Show quote history

I'm sorry but that's just not true. The crown estates are the property of the reigning monarch held in trust (although not privately and not managed by them). Maybe if we got rid of the monarchy the government would take ownership but nobody really knows what would happen as there's no precedent.

I imagine if this did happen, a large chunk would still go towards what the money goes towards now, for instance maintaining grounds and buildings as they're culturally important. I'm just not sure it would be the money saver people seem to think it would be.

Mutters123 · 15/11/2023 00:35

Fuck no!

ALongHardWinter · 15/11/2023 01:09

Is this a wind up?!

Angrycat2768 · 17/11/2023 07:05

Dinglewoop · 15/11/2023 00:25

I'm sorry but that's just not true. The crown estates are the property of the reigning monarch held in trust (although not privately and not managed by them). Maybe if we got rid of the monarchy the government would take ownership but nobody really knows what would happen as there's no precedent.

I imagine if this did happen, a large chunk would still go towards what the money goes towards now, for instance maintaining grounds and buildings as they're culturally important. I'm just not sure it would be the money saver people seem to think it would be.

Show quote history

The status of the Crown Estates is murky because its meant to be murky. So it looks like they are giving us our own money. When it comes to renovating Buckingham Palace and all the other Royal residences when they want to put in an extra kitchen/ tennis court they belong to us, but when they pretend to give us money it belongs to them.

Zebedee55 · 17/11/2023 07:08

No chance.

whatdoyouthinkplease · 17/11/2023 07:29

Sounds a bit like what we all currently do!

OhNoForever · 17/11/2023 09:11

I don't think we'd need to still be paying for continuous renovations no. We could rent out plenty of it. Any of the more culturally significant places could be open to the public and pay for themselves via entry free, gift shop etc.
Perhaps even generate some money for us, rather than us all paying for their profligate lifestyle while a good chunk of the country doesn't have enough to eat. It's Dickensian and in need of a good overhaul.

NiceViper · 17/11/2023 10:07

Well, a lot is open to the public (some permanently, others seasonally) and there are gift shops etc, but they're not free.

They do hold events, profits of which go to upkeep, but then they are criticised for allowing commercial use at normal ticket prices eg pop up ice rink on KP's helipad, which is not now going ahead. So they're in a bit of a "can't please them all" with that one

Which bits do you think can/should be rented out (in addition to the parts of the country estates that already are)?

Roussette · 17/11/2023 10:16

They do hold events, profits of which go to upkeep, but then they are criticised for allowing commercial use at normal ticket prices eg pop up ice rink on KP's helipad, which is not now going ahead. So they're in a bit of a "can't please them all" with that one

Because that was all about lining pockets. Or Peter Phillips to be precise, he was going to make a packet on that one. As he did on the hampers for the Queen's 90th street party. He made £750K for that. More than twice the amount it raised for charity. Thank god the ice rink has been shelved, let's hope it never sees the light of day again.

TitInATrance · 17/11/2023 10:22

No. Still no if they had no other source of income.

NiceViper · 17/11/2023 10:38

Roussette · 17/11/2023 10:16

They do hold events, profits of which go to upkeep, but then they are criticised for allowing commercial use at normal ticket prices eg pop up ice rink on KP's helipad, which is not now going ahead. So they're in a bit of a "can't please them all" with that one

Because that was all about lining pockets. Or Peter Phillips to be precise, he was going to make a packet on that one. As he did on the hampers for the Queen's 90th street party. He made £750K for that. More than twice the amount it raised for charity. Thank god the ice rink has been shelved, let's hope it never sees the light of day again.

I never saw the tender documents, so have no idea whether the bid was a suitable one.

The prices to the public were entirely in line with others in the area, so I doubt the company cream-off can have been much different from the other operators.

I mean its the same snag for PP isn't it? Runs an events business, which spends most of its time unexceptionally running events at normal market rates. But if they get a contract that's anything to do with royals, then it's outrageous.

The plan in on hold, citing security reasons (has UK threat level gone up recently?) So may well be back next year, if threat levels permit, and I really don't see why PP's company should not bid.

Roussette · 17/11/2023 10:47

But if they get a contract that's anything to do with royals, then it's outrageous.

Yes it is. Cashing in.

As for PP's company bidding, I imagine it's a done deal before any bids. He approached Charles to get his approval, it's doubtful that would be available for other bidders. If there were any. Charles agreed to it and having seen the huge profits he made out of the Street party, I find it too much, but everyone to their own opinion.

threecupsofteaminimum · 17/11/2023 11:08

Not in a month of Sundays. I'd rather we just got rid of them.