The Royal Family #40

Notice
Thread ordered by most liked posts - View normal thread.
O

Onetwofour

VIP Member
It's not because it was seen as ok in the past that it makes it fine nowadays. The education Charles and siblings - and many other children from that time -received has been proved to be detrimental for their development and long term well-being. Charles suffered from having cold and distant parents but didn't manage to be that better with his own sons because he was himself lacking in ressources to deal with the emotions that a close bound would require.

Nowadays most parents having the kind of career including regular business trips make their best to always have 1 parent at home while the other is abroad. It's one thing to let once per year the children at home with their nanny for a few days, it's another to do it regularly. If people think that Kate and William are not enough dedicated to their duties maybe the best is to not have a monarchy - or to give them lower allowances to perform less duties etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Gym&Tonic

Gym&Tonic

VIP Member
Couchcollie said:
No of course it isn’t as bad as what happened after Diana died. I think the point is that now that the Queen is gone, any goodwill from the public to her heirs (particularly William) is gradually being chipped away. Any missteps will attract more attention and the more that people question the need for them the greater they are at risk. So whilst not as catastrophic a PR disaster I don’t think they are in a position to weather any scandals as well as they might have in the past.
Click to expand...
Thank you. You’ve just articulated what I was trying to say above.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
C

cee-bee

VIP Member
stardust21 said:
This is more common than you’d think. It’s a way of stopping people opening a business using your name. For a high profile company (in this instance due to their family relations) it’s essentially just a way of stopping someone from trading off their coat tails as it were…
Click to expand...
But..
the company was created (or rather, registered with companies house) in 1992. It predates any sort of famous association. The dormant accounts go back to then.

And if that’s the case, where is the genuine company? And if the trading name is different to the business name.. why isn’t there an active company under Carole/Michael’s name registered on companies house? They are all dormant and have been for years
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
J

jkroche95

VIP Member
Spid said:
What damages? I don't think being left alone is why Andrew liked going to Epstein's island.
Click to expand...
yes but people often criticise the previous generations of royal parents for being 'cold' and 'unloving'.

Yes i agree that Catherine could do more local engagements and still be home in time for dinner/bath/bed. But I do think people would also criticise them if they were on foreign tours all the time (as they did the queen and charles).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
H

Honeystar

VIP Member
Tatooine_legend1 said:
I may give it a watch, but before i do, is it mostly about rugby? I'm not a fan of rugby and know little about the sport so would it be worth my time?
I actually think the royals should do a podcast. Just talking about their experiences throughout the years, likes and dislikes etc. I'm sure it would be popular.
Click to expand...
Theres a rugby focus but it’s more about sport as a whole I’d say. I too am not a rugby fan so just skipped past a few bits :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
B

Boring Monday

VIP Member
Honeystar said:
Being controlled and keeping physically fit and slim is not the same as having an eating disorder. Just like liking things neat and tidy is not the same as OCD. It’s really not hard to wrap your head around.
Click to expand...
I don’t know, really … I think it’s on the cusp at least. If you’re avoiding certain foods and calculating input versus output then its <scales hands> for me.
(NB: that at is my comment on that situation, not a comment on Kate).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
W

Whatamadworld

Chatty Member
What is happening with Harry's African documentary thing? Is it actually going to show anything new or is it another jolly to Africa to film something for the sake of it? It does seem like the Africa stuff has been done to death with Harry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
elliebee27

elliebee27

VIP Member
Lammington said:
I'm not really sure about the idea that Charles is a "caretaker monarchy." I feel like it's an assumption that's been made due to his age, but Charles has shown more passion and real commitment to a cause than many royals, so it seems odd to think that he'll be simply keeping the seat warm for William, who will somehow be more memorable and transformative. That this is often said in the same breath as discussing William's seeming lack of passion and lack of work is particularly strange.

While I think it's fair to assume Charles won't have a long reign, given the human body can only last so long, I don't think that necessitates that he's just holding the seat for William.
Click to expand...
I use the term also because Charles seems still very disliked and for some reason William is insanely popular.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
FenellaTheWitch

FenellaTheWitch

VIP Member
Spid said:
Remember all the bollocks when Charles became king that he'd kick Andrew out of the massive house and Andrew was really worried. What a load of rubbish. They feed this crap to the papers people lap it up.
Click to expand...
I actually believe that. Charles just hasn't got Andrew to budge. Getting him to move to Frogmore makes perfect sense to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
kingseven

kingseven

VIP Member
elliebee27 said:
I wonder if I can watch it with a VPN or if it will still be available on ITV's streaming player in 3 weeks when I'm over there!

I'm curious to see the itinerary and such for the Kenya tour. Camilla's work with women's charities is always so good to see. My favorite Camilla moment though is having an all female body guard squad in the Middle East - what a statement that was!

W&K's statement is good and undoubtedly written by a very skilled Private Secretary who knows what line the government wants them to take, too.
Click to expand...
I wondered if it was the new ‘emotionally intelligent’ CEO?

news.sky.com

Prince and Princess of Wales searching for chief executive officer with 'low ego'

The royal couple are breaking tradition by searching for a chief executive officer to manage their royal household, valuing qualities like "emotional intelligence" and humility in the candidate.
news.sky.com news.sky.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
FrostyChops

FrostyChops

VIP Member
CuriousCat92 said:
It’s weird though isn’t it? As someone whose whole career is mapped out for him, it doesn’t really matter if he passes the exams or not (I accept there are good reasons why it would be best if he did). It must be so strange to have no choice over what the rest of your life must look like.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter but he still needs to do it - he will have a place either way, but can you imagine the reaction if he didn't bother sitting it along with all the other pupils?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
stardust21

stardust21

VIP Member
cee-bee said:
But..
the company was created (or rather, registered with companies house) in 1992. It predates any sort of famous association. The dormant accounts go back to then.

And if that’s the case, where is the genuine company? And if the trading name is different to the business name.. why isn’t there an active company under Carole/Michael’s name registered on companies house? They are all dormant and have been for years
Click to expand...
We have dormant companies to stop people using the same name as our business and we’re not famous tbf! It’s really cheap to do and adds a tiny bit of protection (although obviously copyright and trademarks are way better protection). I haven’t looked into their companies but I thought you said there was one with tiny assets of £250? So I imagine it was that one as they’ve gone bust 😬
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Isa_Drennan

Isa_Drennan

VIP Member
Multi-21 said:
It’s the English and Welsh FA and I suspect the Scottish would be more upset to have an English president than William not doing it

full disclosure I’ve no idea who theScottish president is so might be English and they don’t seem worried that Princess Anne is for rugby so I’m possibly talking nonsense!
Click to expand...
Each home nation has its own royal for rugby. It feels unnecessary and a lot like finding a way to shoehorn them into national sport but at least it’s consistent. Unlike William, Anne isn’t future monarch so the optics are not quite the same. It would make more sense to have individuals who have made their mark in clubs and from each home nation take on the roles than royals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1