[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: The Royal Wedding and the Bank Account

[Shaun Hately]

On 14/04/2011 6:51 PM, Steve wrote:
> We can always count on Shaun for an intelligent and informed opinion as
> well as information. Thanks for that response.
>
> But, I'm still puzzled, as I mentioned I'm in the USA, far removed from
> Britain, and there are countless magazines and books about William and
> Kate. That represent A TON OF MONEY. And, none of that money goes to the
> Royal Family???

Basically, no.

It is considered very gauche to try and make money out of being royal. 
Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, ran up against this a few years ago. For 
a time he owned and ran a television production company (Ardent) but he 
was constantly being accused on his royal connections - which was 
undoubtedly true, but as the main reason he used them was so he could 
make fairly good documentaries about British history it wasn't as big a 
deal as it might have been. In the end though, even this was seen as 
incompatible with his status.

> Now, reasonably, throwing a Royal Wedding is going to cost a pretty
> penny, so there are Royal expenses involved. Even a commoner wedding is
> not cheap.

The wedding is being paid for by the families of the Bride and Groom 
(not surprisingly far more by the latter than the former). The costs of 
security and transport - not inconsiderable - are being paid for by the 
government. Yes, it is expensive but they can afford it, and this is a 
cost they are expected to bear.

> But, I just don't see how so many people around the world can be
> spinning such large profits off this without the Royal Family, or at
> least William and Kate getting a cut.

They are not even getting wedding presents (well, they will from a few 
actual genuine friends and relatives I am sure) but have set up a 
charity specifically for people who would like to give them something to 
donate to.

> Countless books and magazine, memorabilia, Television broadcasts, and
> things I probably haven't even thought of. This has to be in the MANY
> millions, perhaps a 100 million, worldwide.
>
> I can see a certain amount of this simply being pawned off as news or
> public interest, which it certainly is. But again, people world wide are
> generating substantial revenue. I just don't see how they can do that
> without William and Kate getting something out of it?

Something to understand - being royal, while certainly a privilege, is 
actually meant to primarily be seen as a duty - and that is how modern 
members of the Royal family have been raised. Even if something might 
not be fair to outside observers, they are expected to simply accept it 
as part of the duty. Fairness doesn't come into it. This has been 
especially true since Edward VIII abdicated - he is held up as a man who 
failed to do his duty, who put personal happiness ahead of his country 
in a way that was utterly unacceptable. His brother did not want to be 
King - but had to shoulder that burden and shouldered it well until his 
death.

> And as a secondary thought, though there are years ahead to see if my
> prediction will come true, I think William and Harry have the potential
> to be the best love Royals in a long long time. They are certainly the
> most down to earth and relate-able of any Royals in living memory. A
> huge portion of the character of William and Harry is thank to Princess
> Diana, who gave them a very normal upbringing, or as normal as possible
> under the circumstances. Based on a documentary about Charles, he had
> anything but a normal life, and as such seems like anything but a normal
> person. Though, given his life, he turned out better than he could have.
> He seems the essence of a pampered prince, whereas, from my limited
> view, I don't get that pampered prince vibe from William and Harry.

The Prince of Wales isn't quite as odd as he's often presented in the 
press, but, yes, his sons are far more 'normal' than him. That's not 
just their mother's influence, but their father's as well - he wanted 
his sons to have a more normal life than him (and it's the primary 
reason why many observers think the idea of him not taking the crown in 
preference to William is unlikely - he wants William to have as normal a 
life as possible for as long as possible, and that means taking on the 
burden of being King on himself even if he'd prefer not to). I have met 
William (and I mean, I've genuinely met him - technically I've met his 
father as well, but that was a very very brief encounter) and while I 
won't say much about that, I think he is a very normal person, and a 
very decent one. Harry, by all reports is the same.

> Still back to the money, all kinds of people are making money right and
> left off this, and world wide, and yet, none to little of this goes to
> William and Kate? That just doesn't seem right.

Right or not - the motto of the Prince of Wales is "Ich Dien" - I serve. 
That kind of sums up the expectation.

Bear in mind, Prince William is a wealthy man in his own right - his 
mother left her personal wealth to be split evenly between her sons. 
He's only allowed to access the interest until he's 30, but as his 
overall fortune is estimated at about 28 million, the interest is 
substantial. He really is in the position that he doesn't need to worry 
about money.