[News] The official thread: I am bored of the news coverage of...

[Icy Gull]

Hunker down, it’s going to get much worse.

 

[Spicy]

What's the odds on MM being in next year's Celebrity Jungle, as the Royal wild card

Well Camilla is likely to feature in the Strictly Christmas special

 

[OzMike]

They showed a TV special of it here, lost a whole evenings viewing to it.
Used to be important back in the dark ages, but not many people care now.

 

[Clive Walker]

... apart from the millions of £s they bring into the country through tourism!

which is not true!

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

which is not true!

A VisitLondon spokesperson said: “Across the UK it’s estimated that tourism linked to Royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle generates more than £500 million a year and attracts more than 2.7 million visitors.”

Russell Imrie, managing director of Edinburgh-based Queensferry Hotels and president of Best Western Great Britain, told The Independent: “Past experience gives evidence that royal events in UK do indeed have a positive impact on UK inbound tourism.

“In my own hotels in Edinburgh and Dunfermline we noticed a positive impact on UK inbound following previous royal weddings.

“This was replicated in Best Western Hotels in major UK inbound locations such as London, Bath, Stratford Upon Avon and York."

Eurostar, the cross-Channel train operator, said that the 2011 royal wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge saw a 28 per cent surge in inbound bookings.

“Bookings were up from across Europe, including France, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands,” said a spokesperson. In addition, Eurostar carried 21 per cent more American travellers.

VisitBritain says that more than 600,000 people reportedly passed through Buckingham Palace’s gates to see the Duchess of Cambridge's wedding dress in 2011, an increase of almost 50 per cent on 2010 visitor numbers.

But Russell Imrie believes the benefits to British tourism will be longer lasting: “I don’t believe that this increase is overseas visitors following any royal trail or specifically visiting for royal reasons. I believe that it as a result of the global media coverage that such events generate and the subsequent increase in awareness that the UK enjoys. Nothing beats free publicity.”

----
When these tangible assets are stripped out, the total value of the monarchy to the UK’s economy is an estimated £1.155 billion for 2015, according to their research.

 

[nicko31]

Its a nice story and best of luck to them

But 16 minutes on the BBC 10 o'clock news last night. We want news not infotainment...

 

[Murray 17]

A VisitLondon spokesperson said: “Across the UK it’s estimated that tourism linked to Royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle generates more than £500 million a year and attracts more than 2.7 million visitors.”

Russell Imrie, managing director of Edinburgh-based Queensferry Hotels and president of Best Western Great Britain, told The Independent: “Past experience gives evidence that royal events in UK do indeed have a positive impact on UK inbound tourism.

“In my own hotels in Edinburgh and Dunfermline we noticed a positive impact on UK inbound following previous royal weddings.

“This was replicated in Best Western Hotels in major UK inbound locations such as London, Bath, Stratford Upon Avon and York."

Eurostar, the cross-Channel train operator, said that the 2011 royal wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge saw a 28 per cent surge in inbound bookings.

“Bookings were up from across Europe, including France, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands,” said a spokesperson. In addition, Eurostar carried 21 per cent more American travellers.

VisitBritain says that more than 600,000 people reportedly passed through Buckingham Palace’s gates to see the Duchess of Cambridge's wedding dress in 2011, an increase of almost 50 per cent on 2010 visitor numbers.

But Russell Imrie believes the benefits to British tourism will be longer lasting: “I don’t believe that this increase is overseas visitors following any royal trail or specifically visiting for royal reasons. I believe that it as a result of the global media coverage that such events generate and the subsequent increase in awareness that the UK enjoys. Nothing beats free publicity.”

----
When these tangible assets are stripped out, the total value of the monarchy to the UK’s economy is an estimated £1.155 billion for 2015, according to their research.

Which is true!

 

[Clive Walker]

Which is true!

This was challenged and VisitBritain then withdrew it as it is based on a dubious bit of maths in which they calculated a percentage of all heritage tourism that had some vague connection with royalty.

This is true

 

[Murray 17]

This was challenged and VisitBritain then withdrew it as it is based on a dubious bit of maths in which they calculated a percentage of all heritage tourism that had some vague connection with royalty.

This is true

If you're 'anti-royal' that's fine.

Of course it's difficult to quantify how much money comes into the country as a direct result of the Royal Family, but I would imagine that it's a big reason for tourism. Yes, there is other heritage, but I would imagine it's doesn't have quite the pull.

Thrley certainly don't come for the weather!

 

[Clive Walker]

If you're 'anti-royal' that's fine.

Of course it's difficult to quantify how much money comes into the country as a direct result of the Royal Family, but I would imagine that it's a big reason for tourism. Yes, there is other heritage, but I would imagine it's doesn't have quite the pull.

Thrley certainly don't come for the weather!

Have a think about Paris for a moment. The city with the most tourists in Europe year on year. People go to see the Palaces, not because Kings and Queens spend the odd day there, but because they are part of HISTORY. The bonus is that you can now go inside them and view very nice art!

 

[Murray 17]

Have a think about Paris for a moment. The city with the most tourists in Europe year on year. People go to see the Palaces, not because Kings and Queens spend the odd day there, but because they are part of HISTORY. The bonus is that you can now go inside them and view very nice art!

You put forward a very convincing argument, Sir.

From my fading memory of visiting Paris, aren't some of their buildings linked to their royal families pre revolution?

The only main royal historical site that i can think of that you can't access in entirety is Buckingham Palace, for obvious reasons.

If the royal family was dispanded, we would have fewer visitors though, don't you think?

 

[Diablo]

The royals really hold no real significance, importance or relevance in modern day britain...../QUOTE]

You may be anti Royals but to say they have no significance or importance in modern Britain is bollocks!

 

[Clive Walker]

You put forward a very convincing argument, Sir.

From my fading memory of visiting Paris, aren't some of their buildings linked to their royal families pre revolution?

The only main royal historical site that i can think of that you can't access in entirety is Buckingham Palace, for obvious reasons.

If the royal family was dispanded, we would have fewer visitors though, don't you think?

we'll just have to disagree.

 

[Clive Walker]

The royals really hold no real significance, importance or relevance in modern day britain...../QUOTE]

You may be anti Royals but to say they have no significance or importance in modern Britain is bollocks!

go on then, explain their significance and importance to Modern Britain? Be specific though...

 

[Diablo]

You must be blinkered....How about Commander in Chief of "British Armed Forces".

Although you probably believe our armed forces are irrelevant and unimportant.

Suggest you look at what the Queen and Prince Philip have done for this country and indeed the world over the last 70 years.

 

[Goldstone1976]

The only main royal historical site that i can think of that you can't access in entirety is Buckingham Palace, for obvious reasons.

Windsor - less than 50% public access
Sandringham - less than 5% public access
Balmoral - less than 5% public access
Holyrood - less than 20% public access
Clarence House - less than 5% public access
St James’ Palace - less than 5% public access
Kensington Palace - less than 20% public access.

 

[Murray 17]

Windsor - less than 50% public access
Sandringham - less than 5% public access
Balmoral - less than 5% public access
Holyrood - less than 20% public access
Clarence House - less than 5% public access
St James’ Palace - less than 5% public access
Kensington Palace - less than 20% public access.

Interesting!

 

[Pavilionaire]

"As the new Duke of Sussex I feel compelled to tell you all in this hall that I sincerely hope the Albion give Palace a damn good thrashing tonight!"

 

[rippleman]

Germans? In our royal family? Are you MAD?

Marginally preferable to a bloody yank!

Hope she is going to learn to speak English.

 

[rippleman]

Have a think about Paris for a moment. The city with the most tourists in Europe year on year. People go to see the Palaces, not because Kings and Queens spend the odd day there, but because they are part of HISTORY. The bonus is that you can now go inside them and view very nice art!

Is the correct answer!