Is that the people or the property in which they live rent free?
If you do a tour of Windsor castle you don’t go to see the king do you?
2 Likes
The brand.
Do people who go to Disneyland expect to see Walt?
This argument is often used to defend the Monarchy, and it’s obviously horseshit.
We would still have a thriving tourist industry, because the buildings, history and pageantry aren’t going anywhere. Deciding to grow up and rid ourselves of these malingering freeloaders is not going to change any of that.
3 Likes
Fair enough, that’s your opinion.
And as usual, it’s the only one that’s correct.
Well, I’ve spent twenty years of my life working for one, so I reckon my ledger is perfectly fine thanks.
To be fair, Prince Andrew has raised loads of money for sexually abused young women. And when I say women, I mean a woman. And when I say raised, I mean got his mum to give it to her.
2 Likes
Can’t argue with that.
Where is this figure from?
15 million people visit Versailles every year.
I wonder how much money the UK could eke out of tourists if they could actually go inside all of these castles the royals need??
Quite a lot, I reckon.
5 Likes
Removing the people doesn’t change the brand.
Just to add the UK is dotted full of manor houses, castles, follies and the like open to the public and people visit in their droves.
Visited one local to me earlier this year. Disgusting opulence designed purely to show off in that particular example.
1 Like
Show your working!
I think it’s forgotten that many royals do carry out official functions on behalf of the government. I’m not sure how effective it is but sending the Duke of xxx or Prince yyy into an official function does appear to impress some people.
I do wonder whether it would have the same effect sending a non-royal representative would be as effective. Say a Nobel winner or celebrated artist as an ambassador for whichever state function.
How do republics get on in this respect?
1 Like
Google it.
“how much does the royal brand contribute to the uk economy”
I’m not entirely convinced by their workings. Certainly there are people attracted by historical buildings but, as was pointed out earlier, the same could be said of Paris or Berlin without the associated families.
However, I do think there is added value from the work that actual royals do in government. But would republics do the same?
For example, one of the departments I worked for had the Duke of Kent as an ambassador. I know he definitely influenced inward investment in a good way.
However, one of my colleagues met the US equivalent. It was Neil Armstrong.
3 Likes
That ‘brand valuation’ methodology is dodgy as hell though.
1 Like
I had which is why i asked.
The figures i came across from Brand Finance gave cost per person in UK of £5.50 and a return of £8.50.
That’s not 3 times, and it comes with a bunch of assumptions baked in which may not be accurate.
3 Likes
The internet will always come up with something different to suit any argument.
I’m sticking with mine 
I think that having a Royal Family does contribute to tourism and helps the economy. Remove the Royal Family and I suspect the impact to the economy will be negligible. People will still want to come and see Big Ben, the Houses of Parliament, Westminster Abbey, Buckingham Palace, etc.
Even aside from the cost argument, the higher argument for me is whether or not we should have a Royal Family. I’ve nothing against any of them in particular, but it seems so anachronistic.
Why should one family have so much power and privilege vested in them, not through merit, but through accident of birth?
It all seems rather ridiculous.
2 Likes
I genuinely don’t understand how the monarchy benefits the UK beyond the infrastructure that would still remain. It’s not like tourists get to meet the king.
People still go to France to see the palaces etc, hundreds of years since they’ve had royal families
3 Likes
Yes, it’s a completely discredited argument and it’s surprising to see it still being trotted out.
The UK proudly declares itself a democracy, but still perpetuates this archaic institution which proclaims one family to be in some way superior to everyone else.
As long as we are taught that some are better than others there can be no democracy in Britain.
2 Likes
It’s sad to see people bow and scrape like it’s true
2 Likes