I just went over to the Brenda's Facebook page to see if there were any Patron pictures and saw a rather large post from Brenda where she says she's explaining and answering questions she's received. According to her, she had to field a lot of messages about these topics. I love how she explains that she is NOT Lalande mastermind. Coulda fooled me, Brenda!
I'm just going to copy and paste what she wrote here, instead doing my usual screen shots, as it's long - I did do one screenshot so you can see it's legitimate.
Make of it what you will, but it's just more covering of Stephanie and her lies with regard to Patreon. Of course, she doesn't mention how Stephanie herself said she would provide accountability with regard to Patreon expenditures! I did find it interesting that at the end, she outlines what and in what order she would do the work required at the chateau and, for once, I agree with her.
View attachment 2367012
Good afternoon everyone.
There have been some posts over the last few days which have raised some questions, & created a lot of messages for me!
For those who are confused let me try to explain, but first I must say I am not a Lalande mastermind.
I will speak generally, for specific questions, if you are a Patron send a message via Patreon, if you are a follower here send an email to Natalia.
- Patreon is NOT a charity.
- Patreon is a platform where creators can upload their work, in Stephanie's case a video based on her life & living at Lalande.
- People can subscribe, there is a charge for the subscription which has various tiers, to her channel & receive video content each week. There is a choice of tiers, some come with more than the video content.
- Stephanie receives the subscription revenue from Patreon, less their commission.
- The money Stephanie receives from Patreon, is hers, it is her income/proceeds from her business, that business is the production of a weekly video made available to her subscribers.
- No Stephanie legally does not have to provide ANY information on her finances relating to Patreon or any other income source to Patrons.
- Stephanie, like every other tax payer will have to provide an income & expenditure detail to revenue.
- A non-profit organisation was set up for Chateau de Lalande & the estate. This covers the restoration & maintenance. As a NP organisation they will benefit from attractive rates relating to revenue charges on eligible expenditure. It does NOT mean Stephanie will not being tax, it means certain aspects of her interests will have lower rates.
- The B& B is exempt from the non profit, and will be accounted for as a stand alone business requiring full accounts to be presented, showing income & expenditure. Natalia, Maria & the housekeeping staff will come under this umbrella.
- I would assume that the non profit accounts will include capital expenditure, that is, any works done to the building & estate, to ensure its survival.
- However, it would not include improvements which would increase the value of the asset, such as internal renovations. It would not include running costs incurred in the day to day management of the business, the B&B.
- The same rule of thumb as above would apply to Stephanie's You Tube Channel, this will also be dealt with as an independent business & have no preferential rates applied.
- There will also be consideration for personal use within the accounts.
- The You Tube channel will provide a salary for Philip & will be Stephanie's main source of personal income.
- How she spends that income is a matter for herself.
- Stephanie, made a personal decision to use her income from Patreon to carry out restoration & refurbishments to Lalande. Not all projects will fall under the umbrella of non-profit, & will be subject to full rates within the taxing system.
- So when remarks are made that patrons are paying for Stephanie to own a chateau, that is a twisted concept. If I worked for tesco or walmart, I would receive a monthly salary, just as Stephanie does from Patreon. If I use that income to pay my mortgage buy a new car & go on an exotic holiday...would you say tesco or walmart paid for it? No, my job with them enabled me to do those things. Just as Stephanie's Patreon account, her video creation & her popularity have enabled Stephanie to improve Lalande.
- Does Stephanie have to tell us how she spends her money, no absolutely not. It is her personal income, if she files tax returns & some elements of those are available to the public you can view away at them. But Stephanie does not legally, have to provide her Patrons or followers with forensic details of any elements of her accounts. I am sure anything that is available to the public will be on the relevant government site. That said, Stephanie may choose to say what she has spent or is going to spend etc...that is her choice, not an obligation.
- If Stephanie was a Billionaire, & still had her Patreon account, with 4000 subscribers who she continued to create a weekly video for, she would be doing nothing wrong, she is not taking money for nothing.
- Amaury, Nick, maintenance staff, garden staff would fall under the non-profit remit & may carry preferential employers rates...I am unsure.
- Employment taxation rates are high in France, mainly in relation to health I believe. It is therefore easier in some instances to employ registered self employed/business to carry out work as there will be less red tape & long term commitment.
- For me personally, I would tackle the main building 1st, roof, windows, heating, dry lining etc. A room at a time until every room was finished. Then I would do the terrace, followed by the chapel & my very last priority would be the lake. I could live without a jaunt on a boat....but not with a cold home. But, everyone is different, we all have our own ideas & thoughts about how we would do something....& we all think our idea is better.....but is it really....probably not.
Brenda attempting to rewrite history….not so fast Brenda!
1. Fanny promised on multiple occasions to be transparent with the accounts….after dozens of delays and more promises and assurances, she never mentioned it again. She did say, at one point, that the accountant needed to hide some info on individual salaries, as Fanny felt it wouldn't be right to share that info publicly. Then, nothing ever again!
2. Fanny changed the terms on Patreon without notifying patrons. Patrons were named members of the association. Not sure what wording she now uses, as im no longer a patron.
3. it‘s absolutely correct that Fanny can spend her income as she chooses, however, this does not mean she cannot be criticised for her personal spending habits, when she continually asks for help to save the chateau. She is a public figure by her own choosing.
4. Fanny, friends and her most loyal fanatics censor, delete, ban and block any and all legitimate questions and concerns, using fake aliases and proxies like Brenda and Gooder, among others to control the narrative, and in some cases, lie, in her favour. If shes doing nothing wrong, then why the need for an arsenal of brand defenders?
5. Lalande is just another large old rural property in France, not protected, and has very little to offer in terms of significant history, architecture or features (staircase, paneling, painted frescos, grand ballrooms or original historical features, other than the defences) which brings us to the biggest lie…Patrons are saving what exactly? Why? And for whom?
As far as I‘m concerned any registered business (she likely draws an income from a corporation) pulling in millions of dollars, as is Fanny, let alone one that is entirely based on sharing her life with viewers, is open to legitimate public scrutiny. A registered not-for-profit has additional disclosure rules.
I get that many people fell in love with the romance of it all, and Fanny’s charm, but snake oil is still snake oil. Trust in influencers is actually at an all-time low, rightly so because they do wield power for personal gain. Other than Tattle, who else is holding Fanny to account?
In my opinion this is wrong: The con princess will probably spend an obscene amount of money on the puddle, but first milking patreons for a couple of years....when she ought to have paid the poor African girl she was supposed to help so she did not have to walk for hours, starve, and feel like such a failure that it lead to tragedy. This is where money should have been spent, but they went to fill a closet and pay for travel.
she probably just gave the message to Isabelle and she went and replied to the original message. 