Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

Are you ready for William and Kate's Superbowl moment in America?

278 replies

tatala · 28/11/2022 14:01

That seems to be the main talking point from the press. It has been referenced by PageSix and the Today show in America.

William and Kate’s US trip highlights how they’re not Harry and Meghan

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
Original poster
tatala · 01/12/2022 15:28

MarshaMelrose · 01/12/2022 15:08

Setting up a charity does cost money, even more so on an international scale. You have outlay on buildings, equipment, recruitment, etc. If you set up a local cats charity, think of where your costs come from, like catteries, insurance, licencing, and these are all front loaded.
However, the charity commission has the ruling that if a charity's expenses cost more than 50% of the money raised, it would need to explain itself. Your figures would say it's over 50% but as it's the first year, it's difficult to judge.
If you remember, the charity commission rapped H&M over the knuckles over their uk foundation. Practically all the money raised had gone on the admin of starting and closing it. It wasn't that the charity commission thought that they had broken any laws or done anything sinister, but rather that there had not been enough thought over future planning so money had been raised and wasted. So the charity commission is very on the ball and isnt constrained by whether the foundation founder is Royal or not.
The charity commission is very active in the uk at monitoring charities,and have triggers that activate investigations. You can always lodge a complaint with them if you think money has been wrongly spent.
I have no truck with publicly raised money going to line the pockets of the founders with high salaries and misused expenses. So I'll be interested to see the future accounts of the charity. I'm glad to live in a country where charities are so transparent in their accounting. I've been surprised that that isn't the same in other countries.

Show quote history

Extremely pitiful spending but make all the excuses you want. What a waste of money, costs would be higher this year seeing as they felt they need to go to America 😑

OP posts:
antelopevalley · 01/12/2022 15:29

The Charity Commission is not on the ball. Its funding has been decimated and it only gets involved in the more serious cases.

Both William and Kate and Harry and Meghan's charities were reported to the Charity Commission. A report found that both had acted lawfully but criticised the use by Harry and Meghan's charity of 50% of income on overheads.
www.newsweek.com/prince-harry-sussex-royal-charity-cleared-breaking-law-faces-criticisms-charity-commission-1594529

Earthshot may be doing the same. It was the first year of Harry and Meghan's charity but that level of expenditure is always seen as a poor use of finances.
But with charities you have to look yourself at whether what it is doing is a good use of money and it does depend on the type of charity. So a dogs shelter upgrading all of its pens and kennels is in that year going to spend a lot on building work. A charity like childline will always spend a lot on phone bills.

MarshaMelrose · 01/12/2022 15:38

The Charity Commission is not on the ball. Its funding has been decimated and it only gets involved in the more serious cases.

I don't know about funding cuts, but it's not true to say they only get involved with serious cases. They are involved with a small local charity that I know of.
As I already said, the charity commission holds the view that any charity that spends over 50% on expenses would need to explain themselves. Which, of course, does not mean that charities that spend more than 50% have necessarily done anything wrong. It depends on the nature of the charity.

antelopevalley · 01/12/2022 15:51

@MarshaMelrose There has been lots of press about spending cuts to the Charity Commission. I know of a charity where a worker was defrauding a lot of money and is still in post. The Charity Commission were not interested. The police were not interested.

Readinginthesun · 01/12/2022 15:56

I wonder what percentage of Archewell’s income will be used for expenses ?

MarshaMelrose · 01/12/2022 15:59

Extremely pitiful spending but make all the excuses you want. What a waste of money, costs would be higher this year seeing as they felt they need to go to America.

£5m is not pitiful spending. They had committed in the first year of fixed financial awards for a fixed number of prizes. They would not have over-committed because they wouldn't have been able to predict how much money they'd have raised. They have also committed to continuing financial and practical assistance in the ongoing implementation of these projects.

I understand that you don't like W&C because you're defending H&M. But this is not about that. This is about both couples doing charitable work that benefits others. H&M have made donations in important areas and by doing so has shone a light on crises to enable other people to donate. I've written a lot about charities but I've never criticised Archewell. I support charities and therefore I support H&Ms work. My criticism would be the lack of transparency of US charities so you can't see what is spent. We have no idea if they're taking 90% in expenses. (I feel 100% sure they're not! Lol.) Hopefully, Archewell will publish their accounts openly. But they too could have spent £7m setting up. Would you be equally as sneering?

MarshaMelrose · 01/12/2022 16:07

antelopevalley · 01/12/2022 15:51

@MarshaMelrose There has been lots of press about spending cuts to the Charity Commission. I know of a charity where a worker was defrauding a lot of money and is still in post. The Charity Commission were not interested. The police were not interested.

It sounds to me like you're basing your claim that they only get involved in serious cases on the fact that they didn't get involved in that charity. It's impossible to answer because theft is theft and if the police are saying there's nothing to investigate, it sounds like there was no theft. However, who knows with the police? I can't comment really because I don't want you to think I don't believe you. It must be frustrating for you.

All I can say with 100% certainty is that the CC are involved in investigating a small charity near me.

antelopevalley · 01/12/2022 16:08

@MarshaMelrose You are basing your claim they do get involved based on your owner experience. We are both talking based on personal anecdotes.

MarshaMelrose · 01/12/2022 16:42

😁 This is true, @antelopevalley . Except that not investigating a charity means that they didn't investigate this charity but we don't know why. Maybe indeed lack of funds, maybe lack of interest, maybe a screw up.
But them investigating a charity means that they do investigate small charities.
So the first one is inconclusive whether they investigate small charities.
The second one proves they do investigate small charities.
What can't be proved by either, though, is how many more would have been investigated if they'd had no cut to funding. A good time to bury charity theft to misquote Jo Moore's infamous phrase. 😉

Roussette · 01/12/2022 19:41

Readinginthesun · 01/12/2022 15:56

I wonder what percentage of Archewell’s income will be used for expenses ?

Bingo!!!!

CathyorClaire · 01/12/2022 21:23

Speaking of, did you know that of the £12 million Earthshot funding last year, only £5 million went to the prize winners. £7 million was spent on promotion/awards ceremony. Is that good use of money?

There was a thread on this at the time.

I'm in the appalling waste camp especially as office rental was cited as an expense when KP has acres of such space available for pet royal projects.

The Charities Commision is a toothless tiger.

It unsurprisingly found nothing inherently wrong in the transfer of funds originally donated to causes supported by the Royal Foundation (The ironically dubbed Fab Four set-up) to Harry's private company Travalyst. The one that's too small to file detailed accounts and yet managed to somehow magic up both debtors and creditors during a global pandemic with heavily restricted travel.

CC has admitted that the funds have been placed beyond their scrutiny.

Convenient that.

knitnerd90 · 02/12/2022 01:38

MarshaMelrose · 01/12/2022 15:59

Extremely pitiful spending but make all the excuses you want. What a waste of money, costs would be higher this year seeing as they felt they need to go to America.

£5m is not pitiful spending. They had committed in the first year of fixed financial awards for a fixed number of prizes. They would not have over-committed because they wouldn't have been able to predict how much money they'd have raised. They have also committed to continuing financial and practical assistance in the ongoing implementation of these projects.

I understand that you don't like W&C because you're defending H&M. But this is not about that. This is about both couples doing charitable work that benefits others. H&M have made donations in important areas and by doing so has shone a light on crises to enable other people to donate. I've written a lot about charities but I've never criticised Archewell. I support charities and therefore I support H&Ms work. My criticism would be the lack of transparency of US charities so you can't see what is spent. We have no idea if they're taking 90% in expenses. (I feel 100% sure they're not! Lol.) Hopefully, Archewell will publish their accounts openly. But they too could have spent £7m setting up. Would you be equally as sneering?

If it's a proper charity, i.e. a 501(c)(3) under the IRS code, then it must file a 990 with the IRS, and must make that available on request. Things like how much is spent on admin vs. programming is meant to be there, and websites like Charity Navigator will publish it. Archewell is new enough, though, that the data isn't available.

MarshaMelrose · 02/12/2022 02:49

If it's a proper charity, i.e. a 501(c)(3) under the IRS code, then it must file a 990 with the IRS, and must make that available on request.

It's a registered public charity so, yes, a proper charity. I was aware they submitted a 990 form but couldn't find out where their public accounts get shown. I've been asking if anyone new where to fund these accounts for ages because I couldn't understand why Americans would be ok with not seeing the accounts of public charities. So I'm so happy you sent me this. Thank you very much.

It's too early for Archewell so I searched the only other charity I knew, the RFK HR organisation. It actually lost money on the Ripple of Hope Gala to the tune of about $200,000. Doesn't the met gala do the same? Surely they could find a way to make it pay?
And Kerry Kennedy, the president, got remunerated $550,000 in 2018, rising from $320,000 in 2017. And $250,000 in 2015.
Those are some pay rises. But then, charity begins at home. 😉

Readinginthesun · 02/12/2022 11:08

Roussette · 01/12/2022 19:41

Bingo!!!!

Show quote history

How clever . Yawn.

ZZTopGuitarSolo · 02/12/2022 16:04

There are also state requirements that are often more stringent in terms of audits and publishing accounts, dependent on which state the non-profit has been registered in.

I build websites for non-profits fairly often so I look them up to see how they’re managing their money before I quote them a price. It’s amazing how some do incredible work very efficiently while others spend millions on things like CEO salaries.

ZZTopGuitarSolo · 02/12/2022 17:20

The NY Times is running a story about the visit.

www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/us/prince-william-kate-visit-boston.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

It pretty much says what most US residents in here have said, including complaints about traffic around Market Basket 😀

Are you ready for William and Kate's Superbowl moment in America?
MarshaMelrose · 02/12/2022 21:48

I wondered, @ZZTopGuitarSolo , if them registering Archewell in Delaware rather than California where it has its HQ, is because its more opaque there. Also they can spend much more in expenses than they can in Califoria. 95% to 60%, I believe? But of course that could just be cynical of me and it was just registered there because that's where they put all the businesses. Which seems more practical really.

What surprised me about the RFK HR org was not so much the salaries are quite large - because they may not be by America standards. (In the UK, we'd be gasping at that much!) It's more the pace and amount of the salary rise for the same declared working hours. But the detail available was fantastic and very much to be applauded. From the site it seemed like they are about 3 years behind the current tax year so it will be a while before Archewell produce their accounts and it will be interesting to compare the amount of detail given.

Readinginthesun · 02/12/2022 22:29

Wow ! POW rented her dress and it looks amazing .

MarshaMelrose · 02/12/2022 22:33

Rented. What a genius idea for those particular awards. Very clever. I'm not loving the dress, but I'm loving her.

Readinginthesun · 02/12/2022 22:39

Wearing the choker that Diana wore .

TheTantrumoftheToddlerIsThere · 02/12/2022 22:44

I’m not keen on the colour but my God she looks amazing. And the Diana choker is genius!

MarshaMelrose · 02/12/2022 22:58

That choker is gorgeous. The RF do do nice jewellery.

antelopevalley · 02/12/2022 23:03

What photo are you all talking about?

Readinginthesun · 02/12/2022 23:04

antelopevalley · 02/12/2022 23:03

What photo are you all talking about?

From Twitter

Are you ready for William and Kate's Superbowl moment in America?
antelopevalley · 02/12/2022 23:05

So are you all talking somewhere else?