Beatrice and Eugenie banned from Ascot

[Viviennemary]

Beatrice and Eugenie have been banned from the royal box at Ascot and from royal events in the foreseeable future. That's according to a headline in the Daily Mail. A little part of me feels a bit sorry for them as they're not their parents. I don't like them much but they do seem to symbolise all that's wrong with the royals. Money and immense wealth and priviledge for very little return.

No problem 👍

Can you remind @jeffgoldblum and @BillericayDickie what they’re apologising for?

@noonames, thanks for the thought but I’d prefer if you didn’t bring me into this , I prefer not to directly interact with that poster. 👍
plus this thread should probably return to discussion of the ops title.

Understood. People on high horses demanding apologies from other posters for no reason doesn’t sit well with me and I think behaviour like that should be challenged - but tbh there’s very little point in challenging the kind of people who would post like that in the first place.

I understand completely .

I have already explained why when I showed you all who I tagged with the screenshot that your accusations where wrong and so yes you should apologise. But you want to continue to ignore the fact thay you pile on me for bringing up M&H but dont pile on those who didd it much earlier ...you dont go oh yeah sorry your right and some of you were the ones you did yourselves but then accuse me.

So you say you want challenge people on their high horses ...what about yourself. You yourself mentioned them before I did but you think it okay to accuse me? Then double down on challenging people on high horses cos its not right...meanwhile ignoring your own hypocrisy in this

Unfortunately the posters you are demanding apologies from are not the posters in your screenshots. Hence the confusion - what are they supposed to be apologising for? You make yourself look foolish when you behave like this. You have no right to go around demanding apologies from people that have done nothing wrong.

Good grief!

The funny thing is that this all started when someone made a point about the Yorks, this PP assumed they were talking about H+M and leapt to their defence. Which does kind of suggest there are similarities there 😬

Anyway, end of derail 🫡

Back to B&E, I can’t remember if I said it on this thread or another, but if I was them, I’d renounce my titles and say from now on, I’d be known as MrsHusbandname or MsWindsor as they prefer. I wouldn’t choose York or Mountbatten Windsor as too closely aligned with their disgraced father.

That exactly what they need to do. And move out of their palace boltholes. But will they? I doubt it - not unless a king forces them to.

Dropping the York titles would definitely be the right course of action! They would still be princesses, that surely should be enough in this day and age.

There is interesting speculation out there in the press. One view is... the Royals tend to take action when something will be breaking, so the no Ascot royal box and carriages might lead to something more connected with them. It is also suggested that the two women are more involved than people realise.

As I have said before, I think they should voluntarily give up their titles and go very low key..

Someone said somewhere 'What is the point of them??'
I'm inclined to agree. 😂 They aren't working Royals. What IS the point of them (with huge benefits and grace and favour London apartments etc)

I’d love AMW or the grim Ferguson to write a tell-all.

I'm catching up here but just got to say I'm hugely surprised that the tell -all Ferg's apparently hawking round (I think) US publishers has allegedly been systematically rebuffed.

I wonder if that's more down to the cost/terms of the deal she's trying to cut than content?

Because I'm convinced there's a fair bit of mileage in her tale-tank.

One view is... the Royals tend to take action when something will be breaking, so the no Ascot royal box and carriages might lead to something more connected with them. It is also suggested that the two women are more involved than people realise.

I think both of these will prove to be the case.

We've already seen the royal machine swing into action more than once shortly before additional sleaze on MW breaks.

None of it seems entirely coincidental.

I am not sure this will change until the Public Accounts Committee inquiry in the Autumn looking at value for money for taxpayers.
It can't come soon enough!

I hope it spotlights every grifting lease the royals have benefited from.

I'd love to see a demand for any shortfalls in 'market rent' identified to be repaid but I'm not holding my breath.

I wonder if that's due to the Epstein element. I can't imagine many publishing houses would want to put their names to "yes, I knew Jeff was a peadophile who had gone to prison for attempting to sex traffic a minor but I reallllllyyyyyy needed money and the nasty, mean press were being extra hideous to me, so it wasn't really my fault". No matter how much tenuous gossip they might also get about the firm.

I wonder if it’s a bigger picture in that publishers are not interested in either poking the hornets nest in US of their elites (not sure if SF has any ‘names’) if their own president and LE institutions seem to be erasing / silencing - or who really wants to hear grimy gossip from a gross woman. Probs politically and commercially high risk.

Yes I think you are onto something there, the US doesn’t have the appetite to deal with or look too closely at Epstein and his American friends at the moment.

B&E could announce that they are giving up their titles and palace apartments. HOWEVER I don’t think they will as things stand at the moment, for three reasons.

1. volunteering for the same treatment as their father has had (losing their titles and royal lodging) makes it look like they are admitting the same crimes. And you can understand why they wouldn’t want that. Whatever they might have done isn’t remotely comparable to what he has done.
2. They would have to both agree to do it at the same time. But from the sound of things they aren’t entirely aligned on their reactions to the whole thing, partly for the reasons above, partly because their in-laws will have views on it all, partly because Beatrice is allegedly still in contact with her father.
3. The King doesn’t seem to want them to lose their titles. I suspect he feels a lot of compassion. As discussed ad infinitum on this thread and others, you can’t choose your parents and they have been landed with pretty awful ones.

For it to happen, I think there would need to be well evidenced revelations eg that they have knowingly, independently profited from dodgy AMW contacts as adults, and/or have not told the truth to the King about their activities.

Maybe they should now agree to an ethics check on their investments??

I think this is very possible.

Andrew Lownie couldn't get his book 'Entitled' published in the US, he had a publishing contract with Simon and Schuster and they pulled out at the last minute citing the book as 'unpublishable' and 'unreadable'. Lownie had to self-publish over there and is suing Simon and Schuster for breach of contract. I expect the publisher got very twitchy and decided, on balance, they'd rather fight the author in court than one of the US elites.