Sarah, Duchess of York: "Cash for Access" - May 2010

[rmay286]

Starting a "fresh" in the US? Impossible! It's just not a realistic move, if at all being considered as a serious alternative.

I totally agree with you, Sarah likes the U.S. because it's very important for her to be liked, and she gets acceptance there, or appearance of acceptance anyway. (Sarah thinks the United States loves her for herself; I think they just like her because they love any celebrity, plus they see her as a hard-done-by member of an outdated institution (thanks especially to Princess Diana).) Ten years ago Sarah tried to market herself as someone who had been "reborn" in the U.S., and what does she have to show for it now? No money, and still making the same mistakes over and over again. And Americans might still sympathize with her, but I don't think Sarah is going to have the same opportunities to make money in the U.S. anymore either.

Sarah needs to grow up and take responsibility for her actions. Repeating "I hate grownups and love children" is childish, and so is running away (if that's what she's thinking of doing) to the United States, where everyone seems to accept her. I'm not too impressed with Sarah's behaviour at the moment. It seems like she just sees herself as a victim of people who don't like her (the UK press). Yes, the British press doesn't like her and sometimes I also think they have it in for her, but that doesn't excuse her latest actions. This latest scandal was all her own fault, and not just for being "caught" or falling for the trap of a set-up.

 

[lilibet80]

I really can not beleive people are so outraged that the Queen won't give Sarah any more money...

Early on Sarah ran up an overdraft of 250,000 pounds. The Queen bailed her out by writing a check for the full amount. Once Sarah made the same mistakes the Queen may have just lost her patience with her and said no more.

 

[lilibet80]

Regardless of any smear campaigns, I have a soft spot for Fergie!

She is so refreshingly un-royal, and that's what made her not just a royal, but a celeb, at the time of her marriage, and beyond.

The Royal Family and the gutter press have made her what she is now.

No one made her what she is except herself. The gutter press and the royal family could not have done her any harm if she had behaved herself in the first place. She had a 2 million dollar a year contract from Weight Watchers. She was with them for three years. She receives $90,000 a time for a lecture. She wrote a book and made money. She has been given all kinds of perks and monies. I also have always had a soft spot for Fergie, but please! She has made such a disgrace of herself this time I don't know what she will do with herself. Nothing and no one would make me sell out my husband and embarrass the royal family. I agree that her divorce settlement was ridiculous, but she did a ridiculous thing and shamed herself and her husband by her behavior. I don't want any harm to come to her and I think Prince Andrew will be kind about it, but something must be done to police her spending and keep her in check. There has been talk that she may leave England altogether and live in America. It will be interesting to see if she keeps getting into the same trouble if she does live here. Can you imagine what is going on at the palace? I wonder if smoke has stopped coming out of Prince Philip's ears and I would love to be a fly on the wall at Gatcombe Park. Princess Anne must be in fine form over this matter. It is Sarah's daughters and Prince Andrew I feel sorry for. Those two girls are sitting their examinations, they don't need this.

 

[Hereditary Thane]

I am disappointed in the duchess, but I am also disappointed at the memebership here. The woman has done her best; she isn't some media savvy Eurotrash celebrity and what morality lies behind a newspaper mogul deciding to destroy someone whom he disapproves of.

And as for those Christians here who advocate the Duke of York cutting her adrift and evicting her from her home, please do remember she is the mother of his children, and if he worked harder and provided for her then perhaps she would be as compliant in public as many of the other royal spouses are. Three cheers for someone near the royals who lives in the real world.

 

[Zonk]

I am disappointed in the duchess, but I am also disappointed at the memebership here. The woman has done her best; she isn't some media savvy Eurotrash celebrity and what morality lies behind a newspaper mogul deciding to destroy someone whom he disapproves of.

And as for those Christians here who advocate the Duke of York cutting her adrift and evicting her from her home, please do remember she is the mother of his children, and if he worked harder and provided for her then perhaps she would be as compliant in public as many of the other royal spouses are. Three cheers for someone near the royals who lives in the real world.

Actually what you are witnessing is disappointment.

A lot of people, myself included, have defended Sarah to the ENDS of time. We have over looked a lot of things (the affairs, the using the DoY title to earn a living because really she couldn't get another type of job, the Turkish debacle, etc.) but really this is it. Its ridiculous and quite sad.

She tied Prince Andrew to the idea that he a member of the British Royal Famiy was for sale. And that is unforgiveable.

 

[Renata4711]

Has anyone considered that the undercover press pack might not even care whether Fergie did "it" ?? The role of newspapers has undergone a massive change - they hide their own misbegotten actions under the "public interest" banner, but really they only do it for .......money, of course.

 

[Vasillisos Markos]

Actually what you are witnessing is disappointment.

Nicely put, Zonk. I agree that most commentators are disappointed in Sarah's behavior; notwithstanding the newspaper's motivation, whether it was to sell papers or publicly embarrass Sarah, at the end of the day she is responsible for her actions, even if she was tempted by the undercover reporter's actions and offer of money.

 

[October]

I'm personally far more disgusted with the NOTW than I am Fergie. They secretly recorded, what to me appears to be an emotionally unstable drunk person, with-out said person’s knowledge or consent in a deliberate attempt to create a scandal for their own use. Yes, she's an adult and what she did was unethical, but I still put what they've done as worse. This newspaper is also owned by Rupert Murdoch who I suspect has had it in for the RF for years; I think it was this paper that recorded Sophie with-out her consent and it was the Sun (another Murdoch rag) that bugged William's phone. I also don't see how what she did was illegal, unethical and stupid yes, but illegal, I'm not sure?...However if it's not illegal for a tabloid to secretly record someone for financial gain than it ought to be. It is also absolute bull that a concerned friend of Andrew’s asked the NOTW to set this up because they were concerned for Andrew. I don’t know what is more unbelievable: that the NOTW expects anyone to buy that or that perhaps their regular readers are actually that gullible.

Considering her measly divorce settlement and that she has no real work skills or income to fall back on I don't see how she could possibly support herself; I think this is a common element with many divorced women in her age group because they were part of the last generation where it was a semi-acceptable idea that a girl could go through life and never worry about money if she married well.

She will continue to cause scandal in her attempts to make money and in by doing so bring shame on the royal family. This of course isn't fair to the RF because she isn't a royal anymore, it's not right that they should be tainted by the antics of the ex-wife of the man fourth in line to the throne, but I think some people salivate over royal scandals to such an extent that they'll latch onto any dubious actions committed by anyone connected to the royal family regardless of whether they’re royalty or not. Once someone loses that HRH or if they never had it in the first place than in my opinion the royal family shouldn’t be tainted by association. Diana may have been charismatic, beautiful, caring, etc. but I shudder to think what she might be getting up to now if she were alive….this is why William & Harry need to be certain who they marry will put the monarchy first every time and themselves second, even after a divorce.

The only way for the RF to stop this would be to pay off her debts and give her a stipend, but afterwards if she still insisted on living above her means she will again find herself in the same situation. I think not only her, but several members of the RF feel for some reason that they need to project an image of wealth in order to save face so they may perhaps spend more than they can afford. I don’t understand this philosophy because I think most people recognize (at least in the UK, perhaps not in America) that there is a difference between class and wealth. Fergie could live a more simple life (all of them could) with only the most petty of people sneering at them for it.

 

[COUNTESS]

Sarah's problems have been made by Sarah, mostly. That being said, the idea the the RF is above all this is silly. They are "celebrities". Most of them serve no other function. Other than the queen, the rest are paid for ceremonial jobs and a good bit of pay at that. They inherited land that a strong sworded ancestor stole from someone else. They amassed a fortune by not paying taxes, when others did. Even now, the queen inherited her mother's treasure trove, as it is not taxed, and can then quietly pass on what she wants to others. Sarah, has been thrown in a world where she thinks she has to make a full spash and that's gotten her into trouble. Yes, she was acting like a lobbyist. She was trying to make a buck. And, while Andrew isn't "ricj", I don't think he need lose sleep over his worth. He will always have a good roof over his head. Let him decide how he will deal with this situation. Who knows, he might have been part of it to help Sarah, and now this mess is here.

 

[Vasillisos Markos]

This is in response to October's post:

I don't know what the laws are in England, but it is not always illegal to secretly record a conversation or videotape a person in the States. It depends on the individual state's law but essentially, the litmus test is whether the recording accurately sets forth the conversation between the two people and here it appears that Sarah engaged in a conversation where she "sold" access to her ex-husband to someone she believed was a businessman. If you are implying that Sarah is emotionally unstable and should not be held accountable for her actions, then perhaps her family should institute guardianship proceedings.

 

[Tarlita]

Sarah just isn't savy enough to act as a clandestine lobbyist. Rupert Murdoch's press are always looking for ways to discredit royals or anyone else for that matter.
But I can't believe that the Windsor Royal house hasn't learnt from the past. Go back a bit to King George III's sons, who were always in debt, lived beyond their means (except for Adolphus) always asking for more money and were savaged in the press. Scandal after scandal with those sons. Then came along Qu Victoria's son Bertie/Edward, no job but ended up being the best foreign affairs man the uk ever had. Yet lived beyond his means, always asking for more money. And endured many scandals in the press. Then the Duke of Windsor, always asking for money especialy during the second world war. So having embarrassing relatives who are always broke is not new to them.
Surely by now they would have worked out a better way to pay off these relatives to keep them quite and scandal free.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I quoted your entire post because it's brilliant. There simply is no comparison between the two women's proceedings.

I agree there is no comparison.

One woman deliberately lied to the Queen - 'Oh no I had nothing to do with the Morton Book' - deliberately lied to the public - 'there were three of us in this marriage' conveniently forgetting the three or four that she added to the marriage and I could go on. She made repeated public announcements through the press and in interviews to discredit her husband and the monarchy in general by association - it was deliberate and calculated to harm the monarchy in general and Charles in particular in their public roles.


She deliberately run down the father of her children in public and to the public.

The other, while indiscreet, was entitled to think that a private place was just that - a private place where the press would respect that privacy. She hurt people yes but it was deliberately in public designed to hurt them and discredit them in the eyes of the public.

Sarah has made mistakes certainly.

As for the divorce settlements - Diana was rewarded for his vicious attack on Charles and there is no question about that. Sarah wasn't rewarded for having an affair and being found out.

The difference was that throughout their married lives the press made Sarah out to be the bad one and Diana the saint and a lot of people have bought into that myth because of her lies and deliberate contortions of the truth for which she was rewarded.

Sure she should have received a decent settlement as the mother of a future King but Sarah is also the mother of princesses and should have received a decent settlement as well rather than the pittance.

As for their respective wealth - the Queen and the Queen Mother were both reported as having to help pay Diana's settlement as Charles couldn't affort to and has been reported a number of times as having been almost wiped out financially by the settlement (over the top to have the husband in that situation when the wife already has a substantial fortune of her own which wasn't also divided and half given to Charles). Sarah got a house, a small annuity, which isn't much even today for a woman whose daughters are princesses, and a paltry 1,000,000 pounds or so in comparison.

She had to earn a living and had to use her association with the RF to do so and that is all she has to use for the future. That she has to rely on handouts from her daughter's trust funds says a lot about how deep she has been affected by the GFC which has wiped out many many people with investments etc.

I don't see her as greedy but as desperate to get out from a hole and fully empathise with her and her situation.

She has been a great mum and a loving friend to Andrew but she has also been the butt of a vicious press campaign since day 1 and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if she did something awful and tried to commit suicide and maybe even succeeds over this. Thankfully it seems as if Andrew had already decided to stand by the mother of his children if the reports I have seen this morning are right and that he 'forgives' her.

 

[Russophile]

For those who insist that Sarah should have been given a better settlement, here is just a list of books she authored or co-authored during her marriage and since the divorce to let you know the income was there and beyond what she would have made in support payments:
(These are not in order)

Little Red's Christmas Story
Sarah Ferguson: My story
Dining with the Duchess
Dieting with the Duchess
What I know now
Energy Breakthrough
Budgie the Little Helicopter
Budgie goes to sea
Budgie at Bendict's point
Little Red
Tea for Ruby
The Royal Switch
Budgie and the Blizzard
Little Red's Autumn Adventure
Little Red's Summer Adventure
Hartmoor
Little Red to the Rescue
Every Mother's Heart (to be published in December of 2010)
Sleep and Dream of Happy Things
Travels with Queen Victoria
Win the Weight Game
Reinventing yourself with the Duchess
Victoria and Albert: Life at Osbourne House
The Palace of Westminster
Bright Lights


Have I missed any?

 

[rominet09]

Did these books sell well ?

 

[Mermaid1962]

I believe that she took what was called "a business course." She could upgrade her early-80s office skills and work that way. She would have to learn to manage her money, but she'd have self-respect.

She has no real work skills, no real work experience, is 50 years old and needs an income.

 

[COUNTESS]

Yes, yes. Poor Charles. He would have to live in a hovel. He would have to borrow to buy his mistress a gift. He would have to rent himself out as a tampon. Oh, stop it. This family is worth billions. Charles and Andrew are the benefactors of this. Their wives put up with a lot of crap. Sarah is still alive and dealing with it. And, yes, Sarah is desparate. It is sad. People do desparate things when they are desparate. It is easy to be good with a budget, when you don't have to really have one. The queen is frugal, but lives like a "queen".

 

[Mermaid1962]

I'm on record as saying that Sarah should be given a modest place to live and a living income in exchange for not doing any more interviews or dubious deals. That said, I don't believe that Sarah lives in "the real world." A person who lived in the real world would realize that she can't live comfortably by spending more money than she earns. A person who lives in the real world doesn't blame her own bad behaviour on her ex-in-laws. I think that Prince Andrew has been more than kind to his ex-wife. How could working harder provide more for Sarah? He receives his income from his mother. His training is entirely military; even if he could, how could he go out and get a civilian job that made the kind of money that Sarah could want? People don't like their HRHs having everyday jobs.

And as for those Christians here who advocate the Duke of York cutting her adrift and evicting her from her home, please do remember she is the mother of his children, and if he worked harder and provided for her then perhaps she would be as compliant in public as many of the other royal spouses are. Three cheers for someone near the royals who lives in the real world.

 

[Mermaid1962]

But don't lobbyists work for organizations, and not for themselves? And lobbyists, I believe, have codes of conduct.

Yes, she was acting like a lobbyist.

 

[sthreats]

I'm personally far more disgusted with the NOTW than I am Fergie. They secretly recorded, what to me appears to be an emotionally unstable drunk person, with-out said person’s knowledge or consent in a deliberate attempt to create a scandal for their own use. Yes, she's an adult and what she did was unethical, but I still put what Considering her measly divorce settlement and that she has no real work skills or income to fall back on I don't see how she could possibly support herself; I think this is a common element with many divorced women in her age group because they were part of the last generation where it was a semi-acceptable idea that a girl could go through life and never worry about money if she married well.

But.. Her divorce was about 12 years ago. She is well aware of how much money she gets per month. I admire how she pulled herself out of debt and how she re-invented her self as a positive living guru. I don't understand how she has managed to become this much in debt again. And if she has limited means, why does she keep spending so excessively.

 

[Jaya]

I agree there is no comparison. One woman deliberately lied to the Queen...

Beautifully put...........
Diana was contemptuously favoured. The more harm she inflicted on the royal Family - the more they rewarded her..... Sarah should have received a better settlement as she was caught "once " in her 'dalliance" but Diana had a string of these affairs with a system and a method;.really weird initiatives like hanging up telephones and making indiscreet calls.Haznat Khan,[flying to Pakistan to meet his family?} Captain james; Dodi;Hoare the art dealer; Gulu Lalavani; a list of men;

I think Diana's nose would have been out of joint had Sarah gotten a better settlement because

 

[Duchessmary]

As I've said before, Andrew was and is madly in love with Sarah and I think it's mutual. She messed up~royally~on this one. But as biographer Robert Lacey pointed out~what human being would walk away from a pile of $40,000 in cash on a table? Especially if you are in dire straights.
I also wonder how many glasses of wine TNOW plied her with. 2? 3? 5? I'm not arguing that she had a serious lack of judgement, but let's cut the woman some slack, shall we?

 

[Vasillisos Markos]

Cut her some slack? Why? Because she should have obtained a better divorce judgment, or Diana should have received a lesser one? Is it relevant that Diana may have lied more, cheated more, aired more dirty laundry and this now explains Sarah's behavior, or justifies it? I say no. She is pathetic but what she did is unforgivable people and cutting her slack simply because she is a former member of the royal family is not warranted. Indeed, if the press has been hounding her through the years, one would think she would behave better or at least be a little wiser in her financial dealings.

 

[rmay286]

Sure she should have received a decent settlement as the mother of a future King but Sarah is also the mother of princesses and should have received a decent settlement as well rather than the pittance.

Can someone explain to me just why Diana got such a huge divorce settlement compared to Sarah (other than "she was rewarded"?). The difference is really striking. I was too young when Charles and Diana were divorcing to pay any attention to news about the financial settlement. Is it because Diana was the mother of the future king and therefore wasn't expected to go out to work?

Because Beatrice and Eugenie have trust funds, and Sarah and Andrew have joint custody over their daughters, I don't think Sarah was expected to pay for all their expenses out of her divorce settlement. In fact, years ago I read that Andrew and Sarah split the cost of all expenses for the girls right down to a haircut. I don't agree in any case with people who claim that Sarah was driven to desperation by her a stingy royal family. Since her divorce, Sarah must have earned millions from Weight Watchers.

I'm personally far more disgusted with the NOTW than I am Fergie. They secretly recorded, what to me appears to be an emotionally unstable drunk person, with-out said person’s knowledge or consent in a deliberate attempt to create a scandal for their own use. Yes, she's an adult and what she did was unethical, but I still put what Considering her measly divorce settlement and that she has no real work skills or income to fall back on I don't see how she could possibly support herself; I think this is a common element with many divorced women in her age group because they were part of the last generation where it was a semi-acceptable idea that a girl could go through life and never worry about money if she married well.

If there can be levels of disgust, then I'm also more disgusted with NoTW than Sarah. That being said, I'm not at all impressed by Sarah either. I really thought she had done a lot of worthwhile work in the last few years and hadn't run into any major scandals, so I thought she had matured. Also, in the last little while I've paid more attention to British newspapers, and it's become very obvious to me that Sarah has reason to believe they have it in for her. But in this case, although she was set up by the malicious press, there's still no excuse for what she did. She calls Andrew her best friend, and yet she betrays him by agreeing to accept these ridiculous amounts of money for access to him. It really seemed not only dishonest but delusional.

I don't think Sarah is going to commit suicide or something like that because she looked quite happy in the photos from today. That says to me that Andrew, Beatrice and Eugenie are all being supportive of her. I wouldn't be surprised if they think Sarah was taken advantage of and are blaming the News of the World more than her.

 

[Russophile]

Did these books sell well ?

The ones released only in England not so much. Sarah's "My Story" was enough to get her out of debt in no time at all.

 

[Idriel]

Sarah should have received a better settlement as she was caught "once " in her 'dalliance"

Sarah had more than one dalliance.
This one particular affair (with the 'toe sucker') was just the one that could not be ignored.

Diana had a string of these affairs with a system and a method;.really weird initiatives like hanging up telephones and making indiscreet calls.Haznat Khan,[flying to Pakistan to meet his family?} Captain james; Dodi;Hoare the art dealer; Gulu Lalavani; a list of men;

What are Haznat, Lalvani and Dodi doing on this list?
System and a method? Okayyy...

It was fun comparing Diana's and Sarah's settlements for a while but I really fail how a dead woman's behavior, perceived morality and financial affairs or events more than a decade old are in any way relevant to this thread.

Sarah has proven time and time again her financial incompetence, so all this settlement talk is derivative at best. She the kind of person who, if given $1 billion, would find a way to spend $2 billions.

I was at first willing to give her some slack because of the desperation factor but I'm not willing to do that anymore. Her arrogance and lack of shame in the aftermath of this debacle is really glaring ('Woe is me! Grown ups are mean!').
As a point of comparison, Koo Stark is destitute and homeless and yet has show more loyalty and discretion towards a former boyfriend than Sarah has towards the father of her children.

Iluvbertie, let's agree to disagree.
I will note however that I find amusing that you are always so vigilant amount where tax-payer money is going in William's and Harry's thread (two active Royals who actually serve their country), but you seem to have a much more generous position towards a woman who was hardly ever an asset of any king either to her country or to the Royal family.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Iluvbertie, let's agree to disagree.
I will note however that I find amusing that you are always so vigilant amount where tax-payer money is going in William's and Harry's thread (two active Royals who actually serve their country), but you seem to have a much more generous position towards a woman who was hardly ever an asset of any king either to her country or to the Royal family.

I see a difference between what an extremely wealthy family was prepared to reach into their coffers to pay for two ex-wives - i.e. that is their private money compared to what the British people are expected to pay for two young men.

One is private wealth compared to the public purse.

I would have no problem with them using some of that private wealth to pay for their own protection when on private time (and that goes for every member of the family).

 

[Idriel]

^the only reason why Charles needed help to pay the settlement is that, at the time and like many landed aristocrats, he was land rich but cash poor. It was a cash flow issue, not a net worth issue. We all know Charles a bit of a drama queen so his cries of poverty should be really taken with a grain of salt. He's an extremely wealthy man. Andrew was not (I would say he's affluent these days, but still not in Charles' league).

So the fact that the Queen is privately wealthy doesn't change the fact that settlements are based on the spouse worth, not the family's worth, and so that they were proportionate in both cases.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Can someone explain to me just why Diana got such a huge divorce settlement compared to Sarah...?

Most likely it was to shut her up. So she wouldn't go to the press and tell them everything else.

Sarah knows newspapers she had to live with them for so many years, she should realise how decieving they are. This mistake is her fault.
I don't think she is going to commit suicide, because she likes herself too much, and the smell of money.

 

[Dierna23]

.However if it's not illegal for a tabloid to secretly record someone for financial gain than it ought to be.

I wonder if it could be considered as "under false pretenses"? I mean, as we all know the guy who talked with her wasn't a business man, he was a reporter. So, this man lied to her to get his big scandal. Hm...

I'm not defending Sarah's behavior (and why should I?), but I still think that this kind of journalism is disgusting. It's like playing Candid Camera with the BRF. After the incidents concerning the Countess of Wessex and Princess Michael of Kent, she could have known it better, but even those stories I found rather unfair. Of course they will go blabbing if they feel secure etc.

 

[sirhon11234]

It was fun comparing Diana's and Sarah's settlements for a while but I really fail how a dead woman's behavior, perceived morality and financial affairs or events more than a decade old are in any way relevant to this thread.

That is what I've been trying to figure out myself.
The fact remains is that Sarah and Sarah alone got herself into this predicament. Not Diana, The Queen, or Andrew. So bringing Diana into this discussion to prove some point is not cutting it. I have always liked Fergie but she got herself into this mess.