Royal Gossip
November 21, 2018, 06:38:17 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

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

Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 [58] 59 60   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Princess Sparkles: The fashion files 2018  (Read 62564 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
lesken
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1092


Live, Love, Laugh


« Reply #1140 on: November 06, 2018, 03:12:28 pm »

If the British taxpayer allows this  truly tacky, classless Yankette to spend 130,000K or pounds on clothes, to do a tour of a few countries for a couple of weeks without protesting this and demanding Harry pay them back with his millions of pounds, then they deserve their economic plight. It is atrocious, never mind her outfits weren't all that great for the money. She heralds the fall of that society if she is allowed to continue. But if that is what the Brits want and the Commonwealth goes along with them, I have nothing to say. It is so outrageous, but the States has it's own outrageous things so who am I to say anything to them.  I can't read anymore of it without cringing.
Logged

The only constant is change.
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 9435


« Reply #1141 on: November 06, 2018, 05:07:28 pm »

Supposedly Charles is giving her the money. And if a royal is giving her the money why does not said royal put limits on it. This is the part that has never been explained.
Logged
lesken
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1092


Live, Love, Laugh


« Reply #1142 on: November 06, 2018, 08:18:00 pm »

^ The taxpayers paid for the tour wardrobe
Logged

The only constant is change.
Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4198


« Reply #1143 on: November 06, 2018, 09:05:35 pm »

^ Not necessarily. We don't know. The FO and Commonwealth Office provide a certain budget which covers 'expenses' if a Royal or royals goes on a tour at their request. There's more money available if it's a couple than a single of course, but it is a budget and not necessarily for clothing. (For instance if a Royal couple have to bring a nanny it could be used for that.) I really doubt that it is in the high thousands though for individual items of clothing, and that's where Charles comes in. If he is paying for Meghan's clothing on engagements as he has been for Kate's since 2011, then the money for the more expensive outfits would come from the expenses allotted to his sons and daughters in law from his Duchy income.
Logged
lesken
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1092


Live, Love, Laugh


« Reply #1144 on: November 06, 2018, 09:09:27 pm »

^ I don't know which post but one of them said it was the Commonwealth budget that paid for her clothes. I don't know where that person got that information.
Logged

The only constant is change.
Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4198


« Reply #1145 on: November 06, 2018, 09:24:21 pm »

It was probably quoting the Fail, which did say so. The Fail says a lot of things, though. Every Royal is given a basic budget for any expenses they are put to that they wouldn't have if they weren't on tour on request of the FO/CO.

However, none of that is detailed for public consumption until Govt accounts are audited at year's end presumably, so I don't know how their journalists would know. What's happened in the past with Kate is that it's presumed that Charles pays for her big budget items when she is 'on duty' in Britain and abroad. We don't know whether Charles is doing the same for Meghan, but you'd  have to presume so. (Through the yearly allowance he gives his sons from Duchy money.)
Logged
lesken
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1092


Live, Love, Laugh


« Reply #1146 on: November 06, 2018, 09:32:07 pm »

I had been looking at the photos from the dating period before M quit Suits and she dressed down and quite casual. I think he liked that. Now that she hooked him, she has totally changed in wardrobe 180 degrees. I understand she has to dress for engagements.
Logged

The only constant is change.
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11200


Harryite #21


« Reply #1147 on: November 07, 2018, 06:05:18 pm »

Why we'll NEVER see Meghan in a Victoria Beckham dress: Duchess shuns frocks from her pal's label because her torso 'isn't long enough' - according to an unearthed interview
* In a resurfaced interview the Duchess said she loved the ex-singer's dresses
* Talked about her style in the interview carried out before she became a royal
* Said her torso 'isn't long enough' to wear VB's dresses, loved by the A-list
Speaking in a past interview with Glamour, Meghan, who is 5ft6ins, admitted she feels her torso isn't long enough to wear certain dresses.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6363419/Meghan-Markles-unlikely-body-hang-revealed-doesnt-wear-Victoria-Beckham-dress.html
Both a attention seeking woman who’ve no problem using each other for pr. VB does have nice designs but they’re just way over priced to make a profit, IMO. David’s money has to keep bailing her out of debt.
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 37799



WWW
« Reply #1148 on: November 07, 2018, 06:38:27 pm »

Quote
Said her torso 'isn't long enough' to wear VB's dresses, loved by the A-list

Cripes; her fashions are NOT loved by the A-list and her husband (who looks increasingly checked out) is the only reason she even HAS any kind of fame, much less a fashion house of her own.
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.
Ariel
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3329



« Reply #1149 on: November 07, 2018, 10:12:31 pm »

Didn't she wear VB on her engagement photos.

^ Exactly. M thinks she's A-lister now hence the no spending cap on the ill fitted or inappropriate outfits
Logged
HRHOlya
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4525



« Reply #1150 on: November 10, 2018, 09:01:44 pm »

^ Yeah so she certainly wears VB, but that was a pullover not a dress, so the article is half right.
Logged
Fly on the wall
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 13358


Lady of Threads


« Reply #1151 on: November 12, 2018, 02:10:37 am »

Remembrance Sunday
Coat: TBC, believes to be bespoke Stella McCartney
Earrings: Vanesssa Tugenthaft “Precious” Earrings
http://meghansmirror.com/royal-style/meghan-commemorates-remembrance-sunday-2018/

Festival of Remembrance
Coat: Stella McCartney Tie-Detail Coat
Dress: Black Off-Shoulder Sheath Dress
Purse: Stella McCartney Shaggy Deer Faux Leather Crossbody
Heels: Manolo Blahnik Black Suede BB Pumps
http://meghansmirror.com/royal-style/meghan-and-harry-attend-the-festival-of-remembrance-2018/
Logged

NEVER *despise* correction,for those who correct you ,truly LOVE you .They are willing to displease you and possibly lose your friendship ,rather than see you destroyed. Those who *despise* you ,on the other hand ,will allow you to FAIL...because what do they care ?

Every praise is not good and every criticism is not evil..!
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11200


Harryite #21


« Reply #1152 on: November 12, 2018, 03:12:31 pm »

How Meghan returned to her showbiz roots with high-voltage 'Hollywood' make-up for her first Cenotaph appearance – while sophisticated Kate opted for a more 'grown up' look for the solemn occasion
Former actress Meghan, 37, returned to her showbiz roots with a Hollywood-inspired palette as she observed the moving centenary service from a balcony overlooking the war memorial in London.

The mother-to-be, who is expecting her first child with Prince Harry, 34, next spring, opted for fresh shades of lilac and brown - and added highlighter on her cheekbones to ensure she looked great from 'every camera angle', according to a professional make-up artist.

It stood in contrast to her sister-in-law the Duchess of Cambridge, 36, who opted for a more 'classic' and 'grown-up' look for the appearance.

Speaking to FEMAIL, Laura Kay, Professional Makeup Artist of Laura Kay London, explained Kate had opted for a 'serious' look while Meghan's was 'youthful and fresh'.  tehe

Award-winning makeup artist Stacey Whittaker noted Meghan's look was more 'sultry' than her sister-in-law.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6379623/Meghan-Markle-Kate-Middleton-Remembrance-Sunday-make-looks.html

Comments:
Etolie, Derby, United Kingdom, 3 minutes ago
Never left her "showbiz roots" , she's acting all the time.

Emilyk , Surrey, United Kingdom, moments ago
She stuck out like a sore thumb with the heavy make up and constant smirking and looking about. Last night at Westminster when people had heads bowed saying prayers she was talking to Harry and looking about. What on earth is wrong with her? My 5 year old niece has better manners than her.

Miriam, Zero Tolerance For Narcissists, United Kingdom, moments ago
She needs to go.

SOAngel, Planet earth, United Kingdom, moments ago
I feel so sorry for Meghan, all the press seem to do is tear her down constantly!!  bored3  Meghan & Kate both looked lovely yesterday at both ceremonies
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14827



« Reply #1153 on: November 12, 2018, 03:37:32 pm »

^Sooooo, the only defense they could come up with for her Halloween makeup was that it was geared toward the cameras and oh-so-Hollywood?  Funny how not every actor in the world does that in public. 
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Miss Hathaway
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1922



« Reply #1154 on: November 12, 2018, 03:52:29 pm »

Quote
Meghan's was 'youthful and fresh'.

Thick eyeliner, false eyelashes, round spots of bronzer on her checks, and lips so stiff and puffy from botox [thought botox was a no-no for pregnant women], and this is called 'youthful and fresh'huh?    dontknow
Logged
buflesse
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3503



« Reply #1155 on: November 12, 2018, 04:38:54 pm »

She is definitely Botoxed to the max.
Logged
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 9435


« Reply #1156 on: November 12, 2018, 05:05:51 pm »

I don't think any of them are Grace Kellys by any stretch of the imagination.
Logged
Ariel
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3329



« Reply #1157 on: November 12, 2018, 05:22:17 pm »

^ True, but only one of them turned up with a Halloween makeup.

^^^^^ I don't pity her, not even one iota. One very solemn occasion and she's acting unhinged - chatting up with a little girl act the german woman, chatting up Harry as if she's not present and is on a circus... I'm sorry but which part of her appearance didn't down on her that it is important to comport herself. At least someone told her that it is really, really not ok to keep showing off her bump on that day.
Logged
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 9435


« Reply #1158 on: November 12, 2018, 05:24:48 pm »

I do not pity her. NOr any super privileged people.

I did not notice her showing off any bumps.
Logged
SouthernBelle
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #1159 on: November 14, 2018, 01:47:12 am »

Her face looks dirty.  Waaaaaay too much bronzer going on!  
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 [58] 59 60   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!