I agree with much of what you're saying but with regard to KC3's statement, I think you may feel underwhelmed by it partly because you're taking it at face value and not reading between the lines.
For example, to take your point about "grifter getaways', the statement says that any
questions from organisations about the reception to be given to the Sussexes:
"particularly where recourse to public funds may be required, should be directed to Buckingham Palace".
I can guarantee that none of the 100 organisations that this statement was sent to will be contacting BP. Why? Palace statements are always impeccably polite, so I'll translate what that actually means:
"In the highly likely event that the parasitic pair attempt to gain public funding to cover the cost of their clothing, transport, hospitality, entertainment and all else, the answer is no fucking chance. They are not working royals."
HRH - they've already lost their use of HRH, it's in abeyance. I do understand they flaunted this rule whilst in the US but now they are back over here, it won't be tolerated, it'll simply be removed.
Palace website - the King is most likely reluctant to remove them because of his grandchildren. But if they carry on behaving like dickheads, that could happen in the near future too.
Apology - whilst it would be nice, I think an apology is highly unlikely. They appear to have zero self awareness.
Chaos for the monarchy - I don't see this happening. Six years ago they were popular and had credibilty. They've systematically destroyed all of that. Creating further chaos whilst in the UK will backfire on them because charitities and other organisations won't want their brand image to be tarnished by them. It would just be yet another case of them shooting themselves in the foot.
Edited for typo