THE MONARCH & HER MONEY - LAND - JEWELS - ART WORK

View previous topic View next topic Go down

THE MONARCH & HER MONEY - LAND - JEWELS - ART WORK

Post by Guest on Tue May 31, 2016 2:46 pm

I found this fascinating and as I was reading the 'what she owns - what she has access too - what she governs' it made me wonder; what's more important '?' keeping the structures secure and well maintained or keeping the precious furs/jewels/artwork hidden away in storage that has to be protected and climately controlled too?
The monarch and her money
It's a mystery how much the Queen is really worth. What she actually owns - the jewels, the cars, the castles, the furs, the forests, the paintings, the postage stamps - and what she doesn't... well, it's a bit of of a grey area. And is even her household finding times tough?
By Keith Dovkants 28th January 2014
This article was published in Tatler's Diamond Jubilee collector's edition in June 2012 
Cost-cutting is the Royal Household's new orthodoxy. After 60 years in a top job, a hard-working person might reasonably expect to be relaxed about money. Not so the Queen. For most of her long reign, Her Majesty has been plagued by financial concerns and now, as the nation celebrates her Diamond Jubilee, she is faced with yet another government move to trim royal spending. In fact, she's taking a pay cut. How, it might be asked, does a monarch often thought of as among the richest women in the world find herself with money worries? Perversely, the answer lies in the nature and size of the Queen's fabulous fortune. It resides in a complex labyrinth, full of dark recesses brimming with treasures amassed over the centuries. There is wealth beyond measure, and the problem is not how much - or little - she has; rather, it is the way in which she owns it.
As sovereign, the Queen 'owns' the land, palaces and treasures accumulated by
the reigning families for the best part of a millennium. It is probably impossible to accurately value such riches, although estimates tend towards £20 billion. That much money would put the Queen near the top of Forbes' list of the world's richest royals, currently headed by King Bhumibol of Thailand, who is said to be worth more than £20 billion. Unlike her Thai counterpart, however, the Queen has a fortune with strings attached. In 1760, George III handed over the surplus revenue from the Crown Estate to the government in return for an annual stipend known as the Civil List.

Over the centuries, subsequent sovereigns did deals that saw royal possessions like Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace pass to the nation, although the Royal Family retains exclusive use of them. The various arrangements relating to royal property are enmeshed in a complicated and obscure web of trusts and covenants, and it has become customary for the Queen's wealth to be gauged by what she is thought to own as an individual and in her own right. Forbes puts the figure at around £300 million. Contrast this tidy sum with the scene at Windsor Castle each Christmas, when gardeners cut poinsettias grown in the grounds to be sent out and sold. And at Sandringham, where every puppy born to a royal gun dog is cannily priced for eager buyers. These, and other microeconomic measures, bring in a few thousand pounds
a year, money the Queen clearly believes she needs.

*****
'If she ignored the outrage, cast aside concerns about heritage and simply liquidated everything, she could probably walk away with something like £300 million to £400 million,' Philip Beresford, the veteran wealth watcher and compiler of the Sunday Times Rich List, told Tatler.
*****
This is at the heart of any scrutiny of the Queen's fortune. Who really owns the Crown Jewels? To whom do the priceless masterpieces in the Royal Collection belong? What could the Queen sell if she really wanted to?
*****
What she actually 'OWNS' >
BALMORAL > Well, Balmoral for a start. The Queen's Scottish retreat, with its 50,000 acres of grouse moor, forest and farmland, is owned entirely by her. It was purchased by Queen Victoria and Prince Albert in 1848 and has been a royal holiday home since 1852. An ancient castle on the site in Royal Deeside was considered too small for Victoria and her consort and, after buying it for £32,000, they demolished it and commissioned the house that stands there today. Prince Albert took a hand in the design, which, although considered Scottish Baronial, has been described as Germanic by some experts. The Queen loves it. She has a cinema in the main house where she watches her beloved Ealing comedies. Another holiday treat at Balmoral is Scottish dancing at her Gillies' Balls.
SANDRINGHAM > The same applies to Sandringham. This too is the Queen's property. As with Balmoral, she inherited Sandringham, which was acquired by Queen Victoria in 1862 for the future Edward VII and his wife Alexandra. The Queen owns these properties in her own right and maintains them from her own funds. Sandringham quickly became established as a favourite royal bolthole. Its location, on 20,000 acres near the Norfolk coast, is in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and its shooting parties are legendary. The Queen's father, George VI, was born at York Cottage on the estate and died at Sandringham on 6 February 1952. The Queen makes a private visit to the house at that time each year. The estate and its homes are woven into the fabric of the Royal Family and for Sandringham to pass out of their ownership seems unthinkable. Value? Its unique history, like Balmoral's, makes it priceless.  Sandringham is home to a fabulous collection of cars.  The 12 cars in the collection have been valued at estimated £7.1 million.
She owns about 30 horses - stallions and brood mares - at any one time and her horse Carlton House was briefly 5-2 favorite to win last year's Epsom Derby. It is reckoned that the Queen spends around £600,000 a year on her racing interests, with less than half of that coming back in winnings. She earns money from stud fees but, if there are losses, they are paid for out of her own pocket because her racehorses are very much her own private property.
STAMPS - MEDALS - Smaller Homes  > The Queen also owns, as her personal property, the stamp collection started by her grandfather, George V. Experts say it contains some of the world's rarest stamps, including a Mauritian Two Pence, valued in 2002 at £2 million. The entire collection is reportedly worth £100 million. And the Queen has an inherited collection of medals, including the first Victoria Cross (which was never awarded). She also has at her disposal some 300 properties used as grace-and-favour homes.
The Queen has no property outside Britain.
REAL FURS > She owns at least 30 furs, which, with the exception of the ermine used on state
occasions, have not been worn for years. The minks, sables, chinchillas and fox furs are worth a reported £1 million. Indeed, the refrigerated fur store at Buckingham Palace is a microcosm of the Queen's wealth, in that ownership of its contents is blurred. The ermine is part of the Robes of State and not her personal property, although other garments were purchased from her own funds. But what about the magnificent full-length mink coat presented to her by the people of Canada? Does she own that as Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor? Or does it belong to the Crown? That coat alone was once valued at £50,000.

Much of the Queen's wealth falls into this grey area where ownership has never been officially stated because there has simply been no need. 
No such insights are allowed into the workings of the Privy Purse, which is mostly funded by revenues from the Duchy of Lancaster. According to the official website of the British monarchy, the Privy Purse 'is used to meet both official and private expenditure by the Queen'. But no one will say how the numbers break down or how the money is spent. Accounts are not published and a Palace spokeswoman said that with regard to matters of personal finance, the Queen is entitled to the same privacy as anyone else. Most of the money that goes into this private account comes from the Duchy of Lancaster - the Queen's big earner. It is run by Paul Clarke, a chartered surveyor  who cut his professional teeth at the Duke of Westminster's Grosvenor Estate. As CEO, Clarke has the job of making sure that the Keeper of the Privy Purse, currently Sir Alan Reid, is provided with a steady stream of income. In the financial year 2010-11, this amounted to £13.28 million, paid monthly with a balancing bonus at the end of the year. Thus, whatever the Queen makes on her private investments, she is assured of a monthly pay cheque of around £1 million.
WHAT THE DUCHY OWNS > Clarke works from an office near the Strand, where the Duchy owns a number of buildings around the Savoy hotel. These are just some of its commercial properties. The portfolio includes offices in Birmingham and an industrial park in Manchester. But as Clarke explains, the Duchy is principally a private landed estate with 45,000 acres, mainly in the North West, and 75 farms under tenancy. It also owns eight castles, including Lancaster, Pontefract and Tutbury. Goathland, the Yorkshire Moors village where ITV's Heartbeat was filmed, is owned by the Duchy. Under the ancient law of Bona Vacantia, the Queen is entitled to the property of those who die without heirs within the Duchy's realm, the County Palatine. The Queen still receives money from Bona Vacantia; Clarke says she gives it to charity.

What about the rest? How does she spend that £1 million a month? 'As soon as the
money leaves here we don't know what happens to it,' Clarke told Tatler. 'That is not our concern.' The Duchy's net assets were valued at £383 million last year but, Clarke explained, the Queen cannot cash in any of this or touch the capital because it has to provide for her heirs. 'The charter of 1399, since amended by statutes, is clear,' he said. 'We are a private estate providing income to the sovereign. We balance the needs of the Queen against those who may succeed her. It is like a perpetual trust.' The Queen pays tax on her private earnings, including money received from the Duchy. 


Keeping the façade of the Buckingham Palace in perfect working order; 
From this year, a new system applies. The Government's funding is to be wrapped up
into a single payment, the Sovereign Grant, set at £31 million for 2012-13. This is to
pay for the Queen's official duties, travel and administration expenses. Crucially, it also includes repairs and maintenance for the occupied royal palaces. In 2010-11, the Queen spent £32.1 million in her official role, so she is taking a pay cut. In the past five years, royal expenditure has fallen by nearly 20 per cent, made possible, in part, by freezing the salaries of better-paid royal employees. Indeed, money is so tight that important work at the royal palaces is being put off for years because the funds are not available to pay for it.

The Frogmore Royal Mausoleum at Windsor, where Queen Victoria and Prince Albert are buried, is currently on English Heritage's Buildings at Risk register because it needs urgent repair. The Royal Household's latest accounts reveal that the crumbling mausoleum will have to stay 'at risk' and that the work may not be done for eight years. Similarly, heating and electrical systems at Buckingham Palace, some of which were in place when the Queen came to the throne, may not be replaced for 20 years. A disintegrating wall at the back of the palace, where chunks of masonry have fallen into the courtyard below, will be fixed, however. Sir Alan Reid noted in his accounts that the reduction of government funding would mean 'challenges' for the Royal Household.

The royal palaces are held in trust by the Queen for the nation and she could not, for example, sell Kensington Palace to fund repairs to the rest. Even estimating the royal properties' worth is considered pointless. No values appear on the Royal Household's balance sheet because the official view is that the 'incomparable nature' of the properties renders valuation virtually impossible.
The same could be said of the Royal Collection. This veritable treasure house of art, furniture and jewels is considered beyond price. 'We never discuss value,' a spokesperson for the Collection told Tatler.
CROWN JEWELS - etc., >
Quite. The Crown Jewels alone are worth many, many millions, simply as gems and
without taking into account their history. The Queen Mother's crown, on display
with the rest of the royal regalia at the Tower of London, holds the giant Koh-i-Noor diamond, the size of a pigeon's egg. The Sovereign's Sceptre has at its head the world's largest cut diamond, the First Star of Africa, which weighs 530 carats. The Crown Jewels are regarded as 'inalienable', a legal term that means they cannot be sold. It is usually assumed that this applies to other treasures in the collection, including works by Vermeer, Rubens and Rembrandt (the Leonardo da Vinci drawings alone were once valued at £3.2 billion), as well as Fabergé eggs and countless other items of huge worth.

The official line is that the Queen holds the riches in the Royal Collection in trust for the nation and her successors. But the reality is that ownership has never been fully established. The collection is considered inalienable, but only by custom. The Guardian reported in 2002 that the Duke of Edinburgh had said that the Queen was 'technically, perfectly at liberty to sell' masterpieces from the royal hoard. No explanation of this alleged quote was forthcoming when Tatler asked a Palace spokesperson about it.
http://www.tatler.com/news/articles/january-2014/the-monarch-and-her-money
Would you consider her a prudent monarch if she auctioned off some of those rare items to museums around the world to help keep the buildings that are in dire need of immediate repair on the 'TO DO LIST' now?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: THE MONARCH & HER MONEY - LAND - JEWELS - ART WORK

Post by WhoseYourWolfie on Tue May 31, 2016 3:32 pm

queen          king

I RECKON,  that if the Royals attempted to claim outright ownership of and title to the Royal jewels, Buckingham Palace or the art collection, and such like -- that 80-odd percent that is usually considered part of Britain's national estate --  then in very short order, Britain might find that they no longer had a Royal family  !?!

IT WOULD probably be like the Danish, Spanish or Japanese Royals claiming clear title to some of their Royal/Crown estates, as well  ?      jocolor

_________________
It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see.
Our life is frittered away by details. Simplify, simplify.
The mass of men lead lives of quite desperation.
Henry David Thoreau
avatar
WhoseYourWolfie

Posts : 4139
Join date : 2016-02-24
Age : 59
Location : Lake Macquarie, NSW, Australia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: THE MONARCH & HER MONEY - LAND - JEWELS - ART WORK

Post by Guest on Tue May 31, 2016 3:50 pm

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:queen          king

I RECKON,  that if the Royals attempted to claim outright ownership of and title to the Royal jewels, Buckingham Palace or the art collection, and such like -- that 80-odd percent that is usually considered part of Britain's national estate --  then in very short order, Britain might find that they no longer had a Royal family  !?!

IT WOULD probably be like the Danish, Spanish or Japanese Royals claiming clear title to some of their Royal/Crown estates, as well  ?      jocolor
No, not ownership of those structures ...those are without a doubt ENGLANDS properties!
But if the neglect due to financial constraints means delayed repairs ...why shouldn't the monarchy liquidate some archival items kept locked up confused   To me, that seems what a responsible tenant/ Queen would want to do ...those repairs only become larger construction problems if left to later generations.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: THE MONARCH & HER MONEY - LAND - JEWELS - ART WORK

Post by Guest on Tue May 31, 2016 3:51 pm

Brand Finance said that at the time of Queen Elizabeth’s Diamond Jubilee in 2012, the Monarchy’s value at that point to be in excess of £44 billion ($67 billion). Three years on, its value now rests around £57 billion ($87 billion).

However, Brand Finance estimated that the Royal Family's net contribution to the UK economy is around £1.155 billion ($1.8 billion) for this year.

Basically, a bulk of the upside the Royal Family provides in tourism and sales is cancelled out when you take into account how much it costs to look after them.

Costs such as the Sovereign Grant, security and maintenance of palaces, are netted off against sources of income including the uplift to the tourism, the price premium commanded by brands with Royal Warrants, and the surplus generated by the Crown Estate.

Here's Brand Finance's break down of the figures:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/the-queen-and-the-uk-royal-family-contribution-to-the-uk-economy-2015-9

Enough said..It makes money

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: THE MONARCH & HER MONEY - LAND - JEWELS - ART WORK

Post by Lord Foul on Tue May 31, 2016 4:20 pm

besides which, such "royal treasure" is BETTER OFF, in the hands of the monarchy than in the hands of the govt or any other group....where it would be sold for the profit of whoever happened to be in charge at the time and at a discount to their "mates" then being lost forever to the country.....


_________________
If at any time in 2016 I have annoyed you, pissed you off or said the wrong thing....Suck it up buttercup, cause 2017 AINT gonna be any different

There are those who's opinion I value, there are those who's opinion I neither value or scorn, and then there are those who's opinion I just ignore as insignificant...I can assure you the latter outnumber the first two combined by a whole order of magnitude


Difficile est meminisse officium paludes siccare , cum de nocte surrexeritis et asinus tuus alligators ....(It's hard to remember that the task is to drain the swamp, when you are up to your arse in alligators)
avatar
Lord Foul
INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR

Posts : 8766
Join date : 2015-11-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: THE MONARCH & HER MONEY - LAND - JEWELS - ART WORK

Post by Guest on Tue May 31, 2016 4:48 pm

Lord Foul wrote:besides which, such "royal treasure" is BETTER OFF, in the hands of the monarchy than in the hands of the govt or any other group....where it would be sold for the profit of whoever happened to be in charge at the time and at a discount to their "mates" then being lost forever to the country.....
I did edit quite a bit out of that original article but the places that were of utmost important to my reason for placing the topic out here were intact >
The Frogmore Royal Mausoleum at Windsor, where Queen Victoria and Prince Albert are buried, is currently on English Heritage's Buildings at Risk register because it needs urgent repair. The Royal Household's latest accounts reveal that the crumbling mausoleum will have to stay 'at risk' and that the work may not be done for eight years. Similarly, heating and electrical systems at Buckingham Palace, some of which were in place when the Queen came to the throne, may not be replaced for 20 years. A disintegrating wall at the back of the palace, where chunks of masonry have fallen into the courtyard below, will be fixed, however. Sir Alan Reid noted in his accounts that the reduction of government funding would mean 'challenges' for the Royal Household.
The royal palaces are held in trust by the Queen for the nation and she could not, for example, sell Kensington Palace to fund repairs to the rest. Even estimating the royal properties' worth is considered pointless. No values appear on the Royal Household's balance sheet because the official view is that the 'incomparable nature' of the properties renders valuation virtually impossible.
The same could be said of the Royal Collection. This veritable treasure house of art, furniture and jewels is considered beyond price.
Surely my suggestion of allowing her majesty to auction off some of those antiques kept hidden from public view: old gowns/jewels/furs/art work, etc., etc., etc. would be better served in some museum some where the entire world could view them then being housed in an expensive vault that cost to upkeep the item?
You've got royal Households that are needing immediate repairs that are being put aside due to "COSTS" and they have been put aside due to budget constraints? 
Do you English not care?  

Where did I say to just have a 'open auction' for any 'john q public' to bid on such rare items?  Good Grief Suspect

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum