- Joined
- Sep 25, 2007
- Messages
- 6,430
- City
- Hermosa Beach
- Country
- United States
The discussion about why Meghan and Harry declined other properties is going around in circles. Please move on.
From Wiki
‘In 2020, Frogmore Cottage was described as a 5,089 sq ft (472.8 m2), four bedroom and nursery, four bathroom single-residence Grade-II listed house.[5] Before renovation, it had 10 bedrooms.’ End quote.
Never heard of a four bedroom house being described as a sprawling mansion.
As for the somewhat mythical Herefordshire estate, not too many details on it, but neither Prince wanted it. They were both single at the time, it was miles away from London, their friends, any polo club (they were both playing then) and neither had any fancy to be a squire on some run-down estate in a county where they had no links.
Curryong, we are getting off-topic so I will end my participation in this debate about Frogmore and agree to disagree. Doesn't matter.
As I said anyway, Frogmore is a moot point. Its not theirs anymore. Actions have consequences as The Sussex's are finding out.
Their footprint, relevance in the UK has evaporated and is diminishing in my Country, America.
Suztav, definitely agree ! Or places like Villanova or Devon. Some beauties there !
I was not referring to the original story - he wrote a subsequent commentary piece where he alludes very strongly to this representing an exile of sorts for Harry and Meghan. He's not the only reporter who has taken that view - Rebecca English's original piece specifically says there is little doubt it was an act of retribution (she uses the word specifically).
I see things differently. Quite simply the Lease was not renewed by the Crown Estate office in consultation with the King. It makes sense that Prince Andrew reside there temporarily while Royal Lodge is repaired - Roof, mould etc.
It appears Harry knew 2 days after his book launch on January 10 that the decision was made about the NON renewel of the lease. Harry chose to make it public when William and Kate went to Wales.
That is how I see the situation. The rest is Media hype. For instance you cannot be Evicted if you don't reside in a dwelling.
In terms of timing, the story was published right after King Charles received criticism for his meeting with the President of European Union, Ursula von der Leyen. This is a serious topic about Monarch and politics. Recently, King Charles has been getting very good press leading up to his coronation.
How to deflect the conversation from serious political topics? Why the Sussex is always good for a headline!
l.
I firmly believe that The Crown Estates, in agreement with Charles, request for The Sussex's "to vacant Frogmore" was twofold in nature.
First, a response to Harry and Meghan for their never-ending AND increasingly malicious attacks against The Royal Family. With their attempts to demean The Institution of The Monarchy. Its relevance in * modern times* and importance.
The removal of their admittedly hardly ever used home IS an attempt IMHO, to contain or sideline them in The UK. Game, set, match.
No more opportunities to FEATURE A Royal "Crown Property" in a upcoming Netflix Series ....."Sundays with the Sussex's at Frogmore Cottage" type thing. With Harry romping around with the kids and dogs.
Which I think is VERY wise. *If* in future, Harry and Family are visiting with Charles at Windsor, Buckingham, or Balmoral he won't be able to document it with videographers and photographers. To show up in a Sussex's Venture or Social Media.
Or they can stay at The Goring or The Ritz. BUT a "Crown Property Home", where they can showcase and push Brand Sussex.....is GONE.
Second, with the economic downturn hurting so many Families I think it just made sense to open up a highly desirable property for use. A smart PR move. Plays very well with the Public at large for both reasons mentioned.
Especially if Charles and Co want to get Andrew to downsize and get him and Fergie to move in there. Ummm, Good Luck with that !
I think if Andrew was smart he'll try to negotiate a deal for his daughters -- I'll move if you make my daughters working royals or something like that. Perhaps give Beatrice the Duchess of York title since, at this time, titles only pass through the male line and not the female line. JMHO
I firmly believe that The Crown Estates, in agreement with Charles, request for The Sussex's "to vacant Frogmore" was twofold in nature.
First, a response to Harry and Meghan for their never-ending AND increasingly malicious attacks against The Royal Family. With their attempts to demean The Institution of The Monarchy. Question Its relevance in * modern times* and importance.....WITHOUT CHANGE.
That the Sussex's claim, only they can champion. And lead conversations on.
The removal of their admittedly hardly ever used home IS an attempt IMHO, to contain or sideline them in The UK. Game, set, match.
No more opportunities to FEATURE A Royal "Crown Property" in a upcoming Netflix Series ....."Sundays with the Sussex's at Frogmore Cottage" type thing. With Harry romping around with the kids and dogs.
Which I think is VERY wise. *If* in future, Harry and Family are visiting with Charles at Windsor, Buckingham, or Balmoral he won't be able to document it with videographers and photographers. To show up in a Sussex's Venture or Social Media.
Or they can stay at The Goring or The Ritz. BUT a "Crown Property Home", where they can showcase and push Brand Sussex.....is GONE.
Second, with the economic downturn hurting so many Families I think it just made sense to open up a highly desirable property for use. A smart PR move. Plays very well with the Public at large for both reasons mentioned.
Especially if Charles and Co want to get Andrew to downsize and get him and Fergie to move in there. Ummm, Good Luck with that !
I had not thought of this! Nothing like trashing your family, exposing their private spaces, then complaining about your own need for privacy. Even if family members didn’t personally watch the Netflix documentary , they certainly had staff whom they trusted to summarize. And would have found out about places being filmed without permission .I wonder if the inclusion of The Welsh Cottage in the Royal lodge grounds, the footage from inside Frogmore and BP seen in the netflix documentary from December may have played a part in the decision, on the RF side at least, not to renew the lease as well. The RF having to watch themselves get slated in a documentary filmed in part in royal residences but be hard for them to take. Setting everything in place days after Spare was released seems a bit far fetched IMO - not that Charles may be upset over it but to get it all done for theday after the book was released, quite a quick turn around.
Well he’s not a working royal and more importantly doesn’t live in the U.K and is not entitled to anything just because he’s a son of a King (second son of a king). Blood isn’t always thicker than water and I’ll just leave it that.He is still Charles’s son and William’s brother. And the King is probably hoping for a much better relationship in the future and to see his two grandchildren on a regular basis.
What does it matter. They don’t live there. Relations are not good with the family, so it wasn’t even to be used as a holiday home. It would probably never be used again after the coronation.
Harry has nothing to do with the business of family royalty anymore. He doesn’t see them, spend occasions with them. Basically he is just a blood relative. Who cares about the house. I hope it finds a deserving owner. Like I said, having seen it, it is beautiful.
Omid Scobie was probably upset on the Sussexes’ behalf but the couple themselves are happy in California and aren’t and weren’t upset over the decision at all, unlike Andrew over the possibility of losing Royal Lodge.
The Mirror and other tabloids are now following The Times article with Valentine Low quoting contacts over in California stating that the couple recognise the reasoning behind it. [.....]
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/harry-meghan-ok-frogmore-eviction-29369107
He is still Charles’s son and William’s brother. And the King is probably hoping for a much better relationship in the future and to see his two grandchildren on a regular basis.
The house does not need to find an owner. It has an owner: the Crown Estate. It gives a lessee a right to occupy the property based on agreed payments during an agreed period.
By the way, in some media is said that the lessees themselves have not extended the lease of Frogmore Cottage. That the Sussexes were reportedly "stunned" by the lessor requesting them to leave the property speaks volumes about their unability to understand consequences of their own actions.
In January 2024 the Crown Estate will publish the annual year review 2023 and then we can deduct what did happen with Frogmore Cottage. If the lease actually was not extended by the Sussexes themselves, this would painfully bring them close to their alter egos in South Park.
I think you are correct, IMO the lease was due to be renewed this Summer , there was a conversation approx 6 months before that date. For all we know the conversations could have been going on for some time and the January date is the final legal point. Who instigated the conversation it doesn't really matter, but a decision was reached. I personally believe if they were really angry about the decision they would have made a clear statement to that effect but it has been sources all round.
If they are entitled to any form of reimbursement I would like to think that would happen.
PS I know I used conversations but they are not speaking, it is a turn of phrase which could mean correspondence/ contact or third party but I am sure everybody will get my gist.