New book on the royals - first chapter especially interesting

[PoePoePoePoePoe]

https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/456305/abolish-the-monarchy-by-smith-graham/9781911709305

Interested to know if anyone is planning to buy it. The first chapter entirely debunks the tourism myth.

Coat of arms. Not a royal one.

I'm on fire 😁

RF doesn't award coats of arms. That's done by the College of Arms.

College of Arms issues them under Crown Authority.

But the king and RF aren't involved with awarding the coats of arms. You apply and buy coats of arms. I think the Earl Marshall is in charge of the process but i don't know how much he (Duke of Norfolk) is actually involved. I shouldn't think very much, tbh.
Taxes are collected under the Crown Authority but the king has nothing to do with that either.

Not exactly. The College of Arms operate by Royal Charter (currently, it’s one granted by Queen Mary) and then the individual Heralds are appointed by the Crown on the recommendation of the Duke of Norfolk. They get paid a nominal annual salary of between £15 and £50 pounds a year.

If you read their website any company incorporated in the UK can request a coat of arms, if they are prepared to stump up £25,000 for the privilege. Obviously, some do!

Oh, somehow I ended up quoting the wrong post! My post above was in response to this:

College of Arms issues them under Crown Authority.

Anyway, this is why I have little interest in engaging with the arguments of passionate Republicans, as they often demonstrate clear errors and false assumptions to shore up their positions.

That “Brand Expert” report is probably about as reliable as the one that gets posted here all the time to allegedly prove that the Royal family bring no benefit to the charities they work with: full of clear errors, loads of things expressly excluded from its ambit and not very persuasive conclusions. At the end of the day it’s very hard to empirically prove this kind of thing. What I think can probably be said about the tourism point is that having a Royal Family does not adversely impact tourism to the UK.

If you read their website any company incorporated in the UK can request a coat of arms, if they are prepared to stump up £25,000 for the privilege. Obviously, some do!

I don't think there's anything particularly odd about the Brand people wanting a coat of arms - why not, if they reckon it'll look good on the website and impress people?

No I won’t be reading 😂

Would put money on it not being the best seller he'd like it to be.

Anyway, this is why I have little interest in engaging with the arguments of passionate Republicans, as they often demonstrate clear errors and false assumptions to shore up their positions.

Yet here you are engaging anyway...

If you read their website

The homepage of which highlights the senior, granting heralds (Clive Cheesman being one) as being 'in Royal service'

I see no-one's addressed the presence of Ben Marson at now apparently unrelated launch jolly as yet.

Wonder why.

The company had applied for and been granted a coat of arms. They threw a launch party at which a senior member of the College or Arms explained about coats of arms. And if Clive Cheesman is in 'royal service' so is every member of government (see 'Crown authority.')

And before you ask, no, I've no idea why the other bloke was there. Nor do any of us. Some deep dark conspiracy, no doubt.

If you don't think the launch of an opaquely commissioned but favourable report on the royals ten days after receipt of a commercially valuable coat of arms is significant, how do you feel about the similarly opaquely commissioned yet favourable puff piece released in 2012 (pricy jubilee year) by the same firm (one incidentally that found in favour of Prince Andrew's trade envoy role despite the rumours surrounding it even then)?

BTW Clive Cheesman made the following comments in said puff piece:

“A company with a Coat of Arms is not simply using the oldest and most flexible form of visual identity available; it is demonstrating its standing and reputability in its field, and showing that the Crown is aware of this.”

which indicates a rather closer link with the crown than many members of government enjoy.

Intriguingly enough BF have recently issued yet another favourable report estimating an eye-watering £958m economic benefit to the UK from royal activity this year.

Surely coincidental when so many are questioning the equally eye-watering costs of the three tax-payer bankrolled royal circuses we've seen over the past year.

I don’t think it’s particularly interesting at all tbh. The RF is not a manufacturing facility or financial services firm so we are never going to see a direct £ value, there’s no £ input and £ output, it’s a bit of a waste looking for one. We can see how much we spend but not usually how much they spend. And indirect benefits like soft power, tourism, etc are hard to quantify. That said, they own acres and acres of profitable land which they voluntarily pay tax on, crown residences tend to attract more visitors when they are inhabited, having the spotlight on charities patronised by royals does tend to drive up donations, they have the ear of many foreign leaders which helps with business, climate, etc - everything considered it would actually be quite a challenge for them to try not to generate any economic benefits, so you should be highly suspicious of reports that tell you there are none whatsoever.

how do you feel about the similarly opaquely commissioned yet favourable puff piece released in 2012 (pricy jubilee year) by the same firm (one incidentally that found in favour of Prince Andrew's trade envoy role despite the rumours surrounding it even then)?

I don't feel anything about it, largely because until reading your post I wasn't even aware of it. I'm just slightly bemused by how ardently and closely professed republicans follow royal issues.

Omid Scobie (that 'royal' correspondent who is totally neutral) will be publishing a book in august about the RF... title something like 'endgame', about do we need the RF, is it time for their demise? So right up the street of the OP. I wonder if he will be fed info from his favourite couple just like he wasn't in his last book. After all they also want the demise of the RF if the past few years are anything to go by. Despite merching the hell out of them and keeping the titles for themselves and the kids.

That'll be an incisive well thought out and well argued analysis, I don't doubt. 🙄

I'm hoping that the circus will have run out of steam and no one will be interested. His finding freedom (free on Amazon kindle recently) was pretty boring.

I don’t think it’s particularly interesting at all tbh.

And yet it's the findings from reports like this that are drip-fed through the press and permeate public consciousness leading to the perception that the royals are pulling their weight and somehow doing us a favour in the process when all the evidence is to the contrary.

After all they also want the demise of the RF if the past few years are anything to go by.

Hasn't Harold said he's not against the monarchy or somesuch?

He won't want it gone until he's milked it of every last drop and I don't think he's there yet.

Still can't get worked up about it. It's about 945th on my list of concerns right now.

Well we watched the coronation and thought wow we really should go and look round London again as tourists and are planning to do so during the summer holidays so I guess it works on some of us Royal events and major sporting competitions surely provide a good advert for the UK across the world even if people aren't specifically visiting the Royal palaces etc. I think it's pretty impossible to quantify.