Royal Gossip
April 21, 2019, 09:52:53 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Royal wedding to hurt Britain’s economy  (Read 6147 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #20 on: July 27, 2011, 09:55:34 am »

Hello Mada. The answer is not really. There was a spike in profits for shops and supermarkets selling food and drink but it is impossible to say how much of that was down to the long series of bank holidays and really good weather. I guess the only definitive way of knowing is by studying sales of bunting and Royal related items and also what impact it had on London in terms of hotels and restaurants and inbound tourism specifically for the wedding.

Then it has to be balanced against the huge security bill and smaller ones at local councils where events were held as these too would involve security and such things as crowd insurance and a bill for cleaning up afterwards.

I will try and see if I can find any figures supporting this specifically but I think it's nigh on impossible for an amateur. The Bank of England committe meeting mentioned the RW as being a negative on the economy about six times in its most recent report.
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Mada
Baroness
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 725



« Reply #21 on: July 27, 2011, 10:17:24 am »

 thankyou True Brit !

Quote
I will try and see if I can find any figures supporting this specifically but I think it's nigh on impossible for an amateur. The Bank of England committe meeting mentioned the RW as being a negative on the economy about six times in its most recent report.

So we have our answer.  sigh
Logged



Even if you are in a minority of one. The truth is still the truth. An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody will see it. Mahatma Gandi
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #22 on: July 27, 2011, 03:01:28 pm »

Well spe of the devil and all that..I have just seen this in the Telegraph and it is so misleading it's hard to know where to start but even twisting and being disingenuous with the facts they can only claim £41 million.

However the cost to the economy is now accepted as being £5billion in lost GDP and they have not included the security costs and hidden costs such as local councils costs for events in their locale.

I would also dispute the Royal Wedding had anything to do with the following quote as they are referring to last summer before we even knew there was going to be a wedding:

Quote
A total of 413,000 people visited Buckingham Palace last summer, only surpassed by the 420,000 in 1994.

And more nonsense here as these figures include visitors from April 2010 and, as the engagement was not until November 2010 it's hard to see how they can support this. BP wasn't even open to the public at the time of the engagement so this is very dubious. They also increased entrance fees which has boosted takings. It all is. Such as 2.1 million to occupied Royal Palaces. They need to be careful they don't shoot themselves in both feet here as people haven't gone there just because they are occupied but because they want to see inside the palaces.

Shooting in feet time comes with the question if these palaces were opne to the public all the time then perhaps that income could be doubled or tripled. This is the Press Office spinning as only it knows how.
 
Quote
The visits raised £6.6 million from ticket sales alone, figures from the latest annual report showed.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/royal-wedding/8663531/Royal-wedding-boosts-revenues-to-41m.html
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15304



« Reply #23 on: July 27, 2011, 08:51:52 pm »

Meagre growth puts pressure on Osborne

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e7feb50a-b79c-11e0-8523-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1TKxPY9in

Nice graph in the article
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #24 on: July 27, 2011, 10:16:38 pm »

Did you notice this other link within that page to this story:


Quote
However, some would argue that the mere existence of the aristocracy, by constraining movement between the classes, carries its own costs. A study by Boston Consulting Group last year concluded that if social mobility in Britain rose to Finnish levels, gross domestic product would be £56bn higher
.

First I had heard of this group and this study so I'll go hunting but the article is quite critical and even sort of throws doubt on the reasons for the wedding by pointing out the amazing coincidence between economic conditions when Chas & Di married and the recent wedding.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c2949e34-6d0e-11e0-83fe-00144feab49a.html#axzz1TLHiIboB
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15304



« Reply #25 on: July 27, 2011, 10:22:45 pm »

I don't know why it let me read the article before but not now.

That study seems interesting though so if you find it please share.
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Magnolia
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3929


« Reply #26 on: July 28, 2011, 02:05:56 am »

^^^^ The RF and the goverment's justification for the wedding being so expensive was that it would bring in billions so the country would get the "money back".So basically from the figures it brought crumbs.
Logged


THIS IS YOU:NET- FXCKER A PERSON WHO SPENDS DAYS ON THE INTERNET AT A TIME USUALLY LATE AT NIGHT OR VERY EARLY IN THE MORNING HE OR SHE IS A RECLUSE AND A NET-FXCKER! THIS IS YOU:NET-JUNKIES TEND TO NOT HAVE LIVES ALTHOUGH ON RARE OCCASIONS ONE OF THEM UNWITTINGLY DOWNLOADS IT FROM THE INTERNET
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 38563



WWW
« Reply #27 on: August 07, 2011, 02:57:51 am »

Certainly there was a huge economic letdown. There were so many factors working against them, mainly that the economy is so bad taht few could afford tickets to go to London and pay fees for hotels and secondly, London shops were closed and so were restaurants and pubs that could have had a lot of customers drinking and eating their food and drinks. No one made any money because no one was open for business. It's not like there was too much of an effort to make things inexpensive; hotels charged so much that it was irrational and London merchants charged way too much. There has been a huge problem with the fact that London is used to money coming in effortlessly when royal events happen that London is out of touch with the recent realities. If hotels were willing to lower prices and the shops had been open, I am more than sure that there would have been money coming into registers and coffers and then money would have been made. But since it was turned into a holiday event and the shops shut their doors, well, go figure, they lost money.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!