Excellent point and makes me sick to be honest. Well now then can that be trumped?????Can I top trumps with my cousin who was in the same academic year as Charles? He passed his 11+ and went to Grammar School. took 4 ‘A’ levels and was predicted (and achieved) A, A, B, C. Had an Oxbridge interview and was declined. But then, His personal statement didn’t say I am a Prince of the Realm …
Not to take anything away from your cousin, and he probably doesn’t care anymore if he’s 73, but even without Charles getting in fairly or unfairly, there are people that get rejected because they simply don’t suit the uni and its style of working. There’s studytubers who got 3 A*s that were rejected from Oxbridge at the interview stage, but people who got 3 As who get in.Can I top trumps with my cousin who was in the same academic year as Charles? He passed his 11+ and went to Grammar School. took 4 ‘A’ levels and was predicted (and achieved) A, A, B, C. Had an Oxbridge interview and was declined. But then, His personal statement didn’t say I am a Prince of the Realm …
So he got an Oxbridge interview with predicted and achieved B and C grades, not all As. So even your anecdote proves you did not need straight A grades to get into Oxbridge back then.Can I top trumps with my cousin who was in the same academic year as Charles? He passed his 11+ and went to Grammar School. took 4 ‘A’ levels and was predicted (and achieved) A, A, B, C. Had an Oxbridge interview and was declined. But then, His personal statement didn’t say I am a Prince of the Realm …
That’s a bit disingenuous to focus on the B and C when this person’s cousin also got 2 As.So he got an Oxbridge interview with predicted and achieved B and C grades, not all As. So even your anecdote proves you did not need straight A grades to get into Oxbridge back then.
William got A B C grades and went to St Andrews not Oxbridge
As you have said Tony Blair had ABC, Prince Charles had no A! His academic results were poor for Oxbridge.Blair got into Oxford with A B C
I would imagine the chance of studying with Prince William boosted St Andrews History of Art applications rather than the other way round. Most of the applicants would likely have been privately educated wealthy young ladies.That’s a bit disingenuous to focus on the B and C when this person’s cousin also got 2 As.
And the discussion was about Charles / Edward not William (or Tony Blair). However I wonder what the typical A level grades were for St Andrews students back in the early zeros. There can be no doubt that being a prince bumps you up the admissions list and that for me is wrong when they have every possible educational advantage already.
No. As I said. He was predicted 2 A,s, a B and a C.So he got an Oxbridge interview with predicted and achieved B and C grades, not all As. So even your anecdote proves you did not need straight A grades to get into Oxbridge back then.
William got A B C grades and went to St Andrews not Oxbridge
So not straight As then, good grades yes but as I said you did not need straight As to get back into Oxbridge back then. Whereas now you need mostly straight A*sNo. As I said. He was predicted 2 A,s, a B and a C.
He also achieved 2A’s a B and a C.
I think it’s their own PR people … who are just as out of touch as they are.I don’t have a problem with some aspects of their PR. The idea that they aren’t as stuffy as previous generations, more approachable etc. Thats good stuff and needed if the monarchy is to survive. I also think the light they’ve shone on mental health should be applauded, of course it’s better to be depressed in a castle than depressed on the streets but the principle idea of seeing royals talk about something taboo can be effective. The problem is when the line is crossed into “oh we’re just like you” Kate spotted in The Range, “only” one nanny, a “modest” 4 bedroom house. But the question I ask is how much of this comes from them and how much is it the press setting them up to fail? We all knew it would happen, they rinsed the Cambridge’s, then put them on a pedastool to compare Harry and Meghan to and now the dragging is starting to creep back.
Still better than Charles though, eh?So not straight As then, good grades yes but as I said you did not need straight As to get back into Oxbridge back then. Whereas now you need mostly straight A*s
I have been wondering, are you Camilla by any chance?Charles got B and C grade A levels and a second class degree not a third so was more than capable of doing the Cambridge history course.
People regularly got into Cambridge with A B C in the 1960s or lower as barely anyone got straight A grades before grade inflation
There is no job description for an heir to the throne, you can do as many or as few royal duties as you like until you actually become Monarch in which case your day will clearly be set out with affairs of State. As the Sovereign Grant mainly funds official duties you don't get as much if you do fewer duties anywayI think it’s their own PR people … who are just as out of touch as they are.
Strip away Dan Wooton’s <spit> purple prose and it said exactly the same about William’s feelings about his upbringing as Harry has said about his.
If the are going to be People Like Us … then they don’t get to pick and choose which parts of the job description they aren’t going to do. If the are People Like Us then if they are working part time or doing lighter duties then the pay should be reduced accordingly.
i actually think William and Kate have done pretty … they had as normal a start to married life as an heir to the throne ever has, they were excused onerous Duties while William was air ambulancing. They only really became full time working Royals around 2017 and now it’s being mooted that he’s only wanting to work school hours. I mean, come on man, you’re 40. Time to start earning the shiny baubles.
Still better than Charles though, eh?
At least he had 2 of ‘em.
There might not be but when you're taking PUBLIC money for your role and you're paid very well for it you'd think guilt would kick in and you'd get yourself into gear and do something. That and when you're 90-something year old grandmother works more than you and your wife combined the guilt should definitely kick in....There is no job description for an heir to the throne, you can do as many or as few royal duties as you like until you actually become Monarch in which case your day will clearly be set out with affairs of State. As the Sovereign Grant mainly funds official duties you don't get as much if you do fewer duties anyway
They don't take public money for their role unless they are doing royal duties or overseas tours which the sovereign grant covers and for security which they would get however many hours they work. The less duties and tours they do the less sovereign grant they get. They also are paying full rent on Adelaide CottageThere might not be but when you're taking PUBLIC money for your role and you're paid very well for it you'd think guilt would kick in and you'd get yourself into gear and do something. That and when you're 90-something year old grandmother works more than you and your wife combined the guilt should definitely kick in....
Well ‘public money’ takes many forms. Even if the actual sovereign grant varies, they have an endless array of palatial homes to live in, huge retinues of staff and pretty much unlimited private wealth (accumulated down the centuries as a result of being royal).They don't take public money for their role unless they are doing royal duties or overseas tours which the sovereign grant covers and for security which they would get however many hours they work. The less duties and tours they do the less sovereign grant they get. They also are paying full rent on Adelaide Cottage
Let's be fair what institution is going to turn down the prestigious chance of having a future King as one of their alumni.Someone from my school got into Oxford with 2 E's based on his personal statement and interview! I would imagine Charles' personal statement to get into Cambridge would have said 'I'm Prince Charles'. and he would have turned up to his interview and been Prince Charles.
Half their homes are privately owned, so nothing to do with the public or the state. Two belong to the Crown Estate, one of which they pay full rent on and the other is just an apartment in London which they need for duties done in the Capital and which was refurbished for that purpose.Well ‘public money’ takes many forms. Even if the actual sovereign grant varies, they have an endless array of palatial homes to live in, huge retinues of staff and pretty much unlimited private wealth (accumulated down the centuries as a result of being royal).
Paying full rent on Adelaide Cottage…when you have 3 other homes that you have been gifted and the taxpayer has paid for the extensive reno of (in two cases). Goodness I’ll hunt out my tiny violin!
I agree. And honestly, most high up politicians have a press office and play pr games. Same for companies. It’s not as if they are only judged by their work.I don’t have a problem with some aspects of their PR. The idea that they aren’t as stuffy as previous generations, more approachable etc. Thats good stuff and needed if the monarchy is to survive. I also think the light they’ve shone on mental health should be applauded, of course it’s better to be depressed in a castle than depressed on the streets but the principle idea of seeing royals talk about something taboo can be effective. The problem is when the line is crossed into “oh we’re just like you” Kate spotted in The Range, “only” one nanny, a “modest” 4 bedroom house. But the question I ask is how much of this comes from them and how much is it the press setting them up to fail? We all knew it would happen, they rinsed the Cambridge’s, then put them on a pedastool to compare Harry and Meghan to and now the dragging is starting to creep back.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?