Duchess Kate spent $34,000 on clothes for the 5-day Germany-Poland trip

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge attend the Queen's Birthday Garden Party

It’s said by all of the royal courtiers that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge make their own schedules and determine what they will and will not do on royal tours. Historically, that’s been the biggest reason why the Cambridges’ tours have always been light on substance: both Will and Kate only really care about the image they’re creating, so they’ve always put a heavy emphasis on photo-ops and organized events where they can appear photogenic and happy. There’s always been a steep cost, of course. These tours cost a lot, with the tabs being picked up mostly by the host country, for everything from flowers to food to security.

Now that William and Kate are “Brexit ambassadors” – mostly a self-styled designation that has little to do with what’s really happening with Brexit – I do wonder if the British government is picking up the tab for most of what happened on the Cambridges’ Poland-and-Germany trip. Usually, Prince Charles pays for all of Kate’s clothes, if she’s wearing them for an official event, but if this was all about Brexit, will the government pick up the tab? If so, the taxpayers should find this interesting: Kate’s five-day wardrobe cost £26,352.20, or roughly $34,000. For five days.

While the Duchess has won style plaudits for her show-stopping outfit choices, they have also come with a hefty price tag. The MailOnline can exclusively reveal that Kate’s outfits this week are worth a staggering £26,352.20 – more than £5,270 a day.

Some pieces have been recycled – such as her Kiki McDonough amethyst earrings, and a bracelet that once belonged to Diana – but others have been custom made, like her show-stopping lavender Emilia Wickstead dress worn on her final day in Berlin. And while some of the Duchess’ looks are on sale – like her sweeping crimson Alexander McQueen gown – her stylist Natasha Archer is believed to have snapped them up at full price as she began painstakingly curating Kate’s tour wardrobe around four weeks ago.

While £26,000 is not far off the average Brit’s salary, this sum will come as no surprise to avid royal-watchers who will remember that her India wardrobe last year totted up to £35,000. Her 2016 Canada tour, meanwhile, was her most expensive yet at £62,000.

[From The Daily Mail]

As someone who enjoys talking about fashion and arguing about fashion, I would not have a problem if Kate spent this kind of money on truly show-stopping pieces. I also wouldn’t have a problem if she was buying classic, timeless, quality-made pieces which would last her for years of re-wears. But Kate doesn’t do any of that. She picks bland, unimaginative styles or trendy pieces that will look dated and tragic in three years’ time. If she can’t find the bland style she wants, she gets it made, “bespoke,” at exorbitant cost. She never even considers the idea that she might want to invest in some classic, versatile looks which would age well. She never even considers that she could find inexpensive versions of what she likes as well – I’m thinking about the red, boho-looking McQueen number. There’s no reason to spend $2000 or more on that dress. There’s no reason for her to buy yet another white coatdress. She just spends money endlessly, because she’s bored. And because she and Natasha Archer have no f–king clue what they’re actually doing. Hire a real stylist, Kate!

Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in Poland

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge attend a party in the Queen's honour

William Kate Gdansk Shipyard

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

141 Responses to “Duchess Kate spent $34,000 on clothes for the 5-day Germany-Poland trip”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. itsmealisonryan says:

    I’m so confused! How can one person spend so much yet look so bland? The only look that was really special is the white evening gown and pearls. And if I had access like she has my shoe game would be legendary! 😂

  2. Originaltessa says:

    She’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t it seems. People complain she’s unfashionable, while in the same breath complaining that she spends too much on clothes. How can she possibly win?
    And how are we certain she buys every single thing she wears? Do designers not loan her clothes the same way they would to a movie star on a press tour?

    • Karen says:

      It’s a no-no for royals to take freebies, because of their political connections it would be seen as favoritism, or worse paying it forward for a favor.

      You can have bespoke pieces that aren’t bland, or not spend a fortune on simple items. The other royal houses do this without effort. Timeless, intricate peices are custom/ designer brands, and daytime wear or trendy items are from high street designers.

    • LAK says:

      You don’t have to spend a fortune to look fashionable.Expensive rarely means fashionable.

      Further, The Queen of Spain spent £9,000 in total on her wardrobe for the 4day state visit to the UK and that included 2 ballgowns.

      Kate needs a good stylist who can wean her off the idea that she has to spend lots of money to look good.

      • Seraphina says:

        LAK- EXACTLY. Preach.

      • Yup, Me says:

        I was just thinking of how beautiful Queen L looked for her visit.

        Also- she was wearing some recycled pieces – that’s the benefit of buying classic, timeless pieces. You can wear them for future events and they will still look fresh.

      • ABC says:

        And Leti looked jaw droppingly awesome in everything, with the maybe exception of the yellow outfit which she still rocked but it wasn’t her. My favourite – the Top Shop skirt ensemble at Westminster Abbey. Just wow.

      • Royalsparkle says:

        Truth!

        And thats a Queen of style .

      • LA Elle says:

        THIS. Thank you, LAK.

        This headline honestly made me sick to my stomach. I’m not opposed to fashion or buying new stuff, but 34K is obscene.

      • Bellagio DuPont says:

        @ Lak: agree 100%. You can look 5 times nicer than Kate does for 20% of her budget. The only thing you need is IMAGINATION.

    • Singtress says:

      I came here to post the same thing.
      If she wears a $500 dress people think it is weird or tacky or such.
      If she wears a $5000 dress people complain about the money spent.
      So what is the right answer?

      • LAK says:

        A bad dress is always a bad dress whether you spend £500 or £5000 on it.

        Style or fashion are rarely about the sums of money spent. Letitzia of Spain has a spending budget that is a quarter, at conservative estimate, of Kate’s budget, frequently wears Zara and Mango and very rarely looks bad.

        On the flipside, you have the Swedish princesses in a procession of Valentino and Dolce and Gabbana who manage to look amazing every time.

      • EOA says:

        But these aren’t “bad dresses.” I don’t even find them to be “boring.” I like most of what she wore on this trip, particularly the white dress with the black piping. So yeah, it often seems like she can’t win with her critics on this issue.

      • minx says:

        The right answer might be to hire a stylist. That would be money well spent. As others have said, expensive doesn’t necessarily mean stylish or flattering.

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        @Minx – she has s stylist, Natasha Archer a former PA in her office. Archer is not a professional stylist but was co-opted. Waity needs a pro to dress her.

        Individually the pieces are lovely but its the way that they are put together on Waity that makes them look bad – her ‘stylist’ can’t put an outfit together on her, either that or Waity inputs.

      • Mel says:

        “So what is the right answer? ”

        None, because her name is all wrong. If she were called Celine Dion, she could spend 100 000 $ on a single outfit (nothing to write home about) and she could still do no wrong.
        Mind you, I am not even a fan of Kate’s.

      • minx says:

        Digital Unicorn–thanks. Yes, she needs a pro, or she needs to listen better lol.

      • nic919 says:

        Celine Dion spends her own money and can spend whatever she wants. Kate gets money from the taxpayers to dress up. She has multiples of the same kind of dress over and over again and continually shows that she is a wasteful person. The only other people I know who had multiples of the same looking outfits and filled closet and closet with them are my great aunts who had OCD.

        If Kate had her own money she could wear a garbage bag with diamonds that cost 1 million dollars. But Kate never worked for any serious amount of time in her life and has no idea just how much it takes to earn the income that pays for her ridiculous wardrobe. Unless the taxpayers stop paying for her clothes, she should be criticized. That’s the price you pay to be a princess.

      • Royalsparkle says:

        Follow royal protocol – the pro stylist and royals dress pofessionals – not co.mon carol pips advice to look regular witb entitlements.

      • bluhare says:

        Common? You’re breaking that out?

    • Enough Already says:

      To be fair we would also have to criticize the costly jewels, homes and cars Charles spends on Camilla. In addition, Anbe, Edward and Andrew also spoil their families as well. Royal engagements notwithstanding, all of these people spend quite freely whether we are given tallies or not.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It is noted on here frequently that Charles lives like an Edwardian gentleman. And he does 500+ engagements a year, Prince’s Trust, Dumfries House, plus has taken over many of his mother’s and father’s work.

        Duchess of Gloucester, Princess Alexandra, Princess Anne, Sophie – all spend far less on clothing and do far more engagements. Duchess of Gloucester was even seen repeating an outfit 2-3 times in a single week.

      • Royalsparkle says:

        ‘Common’ meaning look like most others – while reaping millions to fund being ‘Royal’ – Km is in another status. And us ‘commoners’look a great deal better.

      • LA Elle says:

        notasugar: Thank you for pointing this out. I think that’s something people overlook: much harder working royals somehow make do with repeat outfits. No, they’re not in the spotlight the way Kate is, but if anything, Kate’s higher visibility should make her more aware of smarter shopping and repeats.

    • Harrierjet says:

      ^ similarly I would be curious to see how much other royals spend. If you look at the royal fashion blogs – Such as the Royal Order of Sartorial Splendour for comparison, all the royals are wearing very expensive things right off the runway and some of it isn’t that great either.

      I like some of the things she wears, I don’t think she’s doing a bad job at all actually. I also don’t get people’s judgement of hem lengths and appropriateness – as if Kate wears shorts bordering a wedgie, a potato sack to a state dinner, or a ball gown to a memorial.

    • Wren says:

      Give me $34,000 for 5 days worth of clothes and I guarantee I will look much better than Kate does.

      • Royalsparkle says:

        Most of us do with a great lot less!

      • CynicalAnn says:

        This! It’s so ridiculous. And no outfit ever looks 100%-it’s always missing the right shoes/accessories. If she had an actual stylist she could pull it together-and for much less money.

      • magnoliarose says:

        That right there is the issue. 34,000 should dazzle. There are things to defend but that isn’t one of them.

      • LA Elle says:

        Thank you, Wren!

        A few years ago, I got a black dress on clearance at H&M for $10 (down for $60). It’s not cut as well as a more expensive piece, but it looks fabulous on me, and I always get a ton of compliments when I wear it (it helps that it’s a knockoff from a much more expensive brand – and people can never tell the difference).

        I’m not saying Kate should go that route, but she seems to pay more attention to price than style or how something flatters her or reflects on an event.

      • G says:

        Yes, this exactly. She doesn’t look BAD, of course, but for almost $7,000 a day she should look downright spectacular. And she could have achieved much the same look as she did for thousands and thousands less.

      • Bellagio DuPont says:

        And isn’t it interesting how people didn’t really gripe about the cost of Diana’s wardrobe as they do for Kate, despite having a significantly more flamboyant sense of style. I wonder why that is?

        Ps: apparently on wrong! Ignore pls

    • Enough Already says:

      Just give me one Hermes Kelly bag, one Dior sheath dress, one Chanel twin sweater set, one strand of Mikimoto pearls, one Cartier tank watch and one pair of Ferragamo pumps and I could die happy lol. I’ve never understood trendy clothing choices that come with hefty price tags.

    • bluhare says:

      I don’t think it’s about winning.

    • The Original Mia says:

      Oh, please. Kate’s wardrobe costs versus the amount of time she actually works is so lopsided as to be comical. She would “win” if she actually got more than 1 wear out of those bespoke pieces. She would “win” if people saw her putting as much effort into her duties as she does in her shopping.

    • perplexed says:

      People complained that Diana spent too much on clothes. It happens.

      I don’t think this criticism is odd since Diana went through the same thing. This, despite the fact that people were actually wowed by her clothes anyway. I think Diana did retort, however, that “the clothes were for the job.”

      All of the royals go through tons of criticism. It’s not like Kate can be an exception, unless she was truly extraordinary in her commitment to duty like the Queen, which, well, she isn’t.

      • Too Curious says:

        She did have a huge auction of her gowns at William’s suggestion..She raised 4 million pounds.

      • perplexed says:

        That’s true. My point is that the criticism of Kate isn’t singling her out, and people need not feel that she’s bearing the brunt of a lot of it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The 1980s was a very different time, both for the economy and for the monarchy in the UK. When 1 in 4 people cannot pay their heating bills, you do not spent 200,000 a year on clothing for roughly 60 days of work a year.

    • Llamas says:

      I mean, I wouldn’t have an issue if princess Anne spent this kind of money because she works a ton. I wouldn’t have cared about Diana’s spending because she was also a work horse. Kate doesn’t do jacksh*t and then spends this kind of money on clothing. Its insulting. She basically takes and takes from the British public and gives the bare minimum in return. She should spend as much as she is willing to give. End of.

    • Too Curious says:

      I did read, however, that they sell off their clothes at a local consignment shop. That is what the queen does. One person even saw her clothes possibly being sold on ebay. Perhaps, she buys the clothes and then sells them off for charity (we hope!). That’s maybe why we don’t see her clothes being re-worn again…

      • notasugarhere says:

        It is not Kate Middleton selling clothes on eBay. There are several obsessed KM fangirls who buy what they can of less expensive stuff she buys, then sell it on eBay for personal profit.

    • No Dignity in that says:

      The problem of her fashion game is the person who is in her fashion pieces. Kate is so bland she kills every fashion idea.

    • Royalsparkle says:

      Bland and boring if she do – bland and boring when she doesnt- tbats waity game.

    • teehee says:

      I think she could spend a lot if she WAS fashionable as a ressult. But here shes not despite the sums, so …. its a lose lose situation for the public. Diana didnt skimp but she wowed everytime so it was totally ok.

  3. SpareRib says:

    Thats more than a nurses yearly wage. Yet, we apparently cant afford anymore nurses? But Kate can have whatever she wants because she is already rich and that automatically makes her superior, right?

    • AnnaKist says:

      That’s what I came on to say, SpareRib. So many people earn that much in a year. They pay rent/mortgage, feed and clothe their families, pay their bills… I find it obscene that this lazy wastrel spends $34k on clothes for five fecking days – clothes that she likely won’t even wear again. She needs to be put on a strict budget as well as a short leash, and start earning her keep.

    • No Dignity in that says:

      Yep, remember British Prime Minister Theresa May tell a nurse that the NHS (national health service, aka British health system) can’t pay a nurse a living wage because there were “no magic money tree.

      But apparently Britain can “afford” to spend several nurses annual incomes on Kate Middleton’s wardrobe although Kate produces virtually no benefit to Britain. Her “diplomatic” Brexit tour was a joke and the newspapers do let that shine through in their reports.

  4. Twinkle says:

    She’s generally a boring dresser with zero personality to her style, but this trip was particularly sad. Everything looked like she bought it all from Talbots or Macy’s. Ick!

  5. Kimma1216 says:

    Taxpayer Money in Use..frustrating.

    • bluhare says:

      I think the British Foreign Office pays for overseas tours, so the taxpayers will be paying for this one. Generally Charles does out of Duchy of Cornwall money. I’m almost positive he takes a tax deduction for business expenses so these would be considered business wardrobe I think if he did pay for them.

      • burnsie says:

        I thought the host country pays?

        ETA: oh, do you mean the “pre-tour prep” is paid for by the British Foreign Office? Sorry, I definitely need more coffee today

      • Joannie says:

        Nope! They are not like steel toed boots.

      • bluhare says:

        No I remember reading something about Diana’s clothes and a comment about the bill that was going to be sent to the foreign office for tour clothes. Unless things have changed?

        People in the public eye — news anchors and such — can get deductions for business attire if they aren’t reimbursed. So don’t know 100% here, but I’m sure nas will be along to tell us! She and I disagree frequently on this one.

      • No Dignity in that says:

        The Duchy of Cornwall is owned by the taxpayer and the taxpayer is entitled to the money, too. Except that the taxpayer allows Prince Charles to draw an income from the Duchy of Cornwall. So essentially Prince Charles is paid by the taxpayer via the Duchy.

      • bluhare says:

        Actually, the taxpayer isn’t entitled to Duchy of Cornwall income. That’s for the exclusive use of the Prince of Wales.

  6. Luca76 says:

    Why can’t she get discount pieces like celebrities do? You’d think designers would be tripping over themselves to dress her. Is it against royal protocols?

  7. Pansy says:

    I’ll remember that as I struggle to pay my electric bill in Georgia on my teacher’s salary.
    Also, my daughter has a dress very similar to that red one. Super cute, but came from Target for like $12.99.

  8. abby says:

    I know I will be the odd voice here but frankly Kate is doing what she is allowed to get away with. She has no style I agree but much of this wastefulness is just that, waste.
    Yes, she is an adult and a parent and she should be more responsible and more engaged in her duties but as we have all observed she was seemingly raised with a single goal in life – to marry wealthy. She has accomplished that and more.
    And she married a man maybe even worse than herself who is not insisting she do much work or be more responsible with the $$. William sets the example and Kate follows his lead.
    And Kate is not the type of woman to follow her own mind in this. From the clothes to the endless, mindless renovations to the non-stop vacations, etc..
    Is anyone going to call the Cambridges to the carpet?
    Whether it’s the public purse or Charles’ private funds I feel the Kate and William would buckle up if the funds dried up and only took care of the essentials – and I do mean the essentials, like keeping the water and electricity on and food in the fridge and cupboard. A strict clothing allowance for official functions only – administered by parliament or some other office, not one that can be manipulated.
    Beyond that William and his family should have to live on whatever income William provides or whatever private money William may have.
    But the Royal Family would never be so bold.

    And I am not excusing Kate, she is responsible for her decisions. I am just saying that she is being enabled.
    Both she and William.

    • Karen says:

      I think the press hold back a lot due to loyalty to the Queen. When it’s King Charles they will really show their cards.

      • bluhare says:

        I think you might be right there.

      • No Dignity in that says:

        It looks kind of foolish that the press won’t criticise William and Kate because of William’s grandmother. That is so nepotistic.

      • magnoliarose says:

        I think all of the pent up frustration will come pouring out. It is ridiculous how they behave.

    • Nic919 says:

      This is true. She won’t stop until she has to. Even Charles could cut funding to the outfits and say she has to make do with nothing new for the rest of the year. He won’t though. If he feels the pressure because the monarchy is on the line, then he will.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If he put his foot down, they would remove his bare-minimum access to the grandkids.

      • Lady D says:

        When King, why can’t he order the children brought to him? They technically belong to the Crown, don’t they?

    • CynicalCeleste says:

      Well said @abby. Supporting a monarchy means supporting the act of lavishing one extended family with a lifetime of palaces, jewels, servants, designer clothes and every possible luxury. Canada just gifted the queen yet another diamond and sapphire brooch, because, obviously, queens need more diamonds, right?

    • Addie says:

      You’re exactly right Abby. The BRF sees no need to show transparency in how they spend public money, has no sense of restraint so why should Kate? The opportunity to spend is there; she takes it. I do think she really hasn’t got anything much to do and shopping fulls the void. I don’t she wants to do much either, except enjoy herself.

      The problem comes with the palace/media fantasies built around her, that people for some weird reason need to buy into. Kate seems so dulled by life. I can’t recall coming across anyone so disinterested in others.

    • CynicalAnn says:

      The Queen is NEVER going to alienate William and Kate. She doesn’t like confrontation and she feels guilty that Charles and Diana divorced and the boys had a broken home and then their mother died. She will do whatever she can to try and make William happy. Charles is also in a precarious position-it’s obvious that William and Charles are not close. As someone said upthread, George and Charlotte spend very little time with Charles much to his dismay. Anything he would say to try and reign in William and Kate would not be received favorably.

  9. Maria says:

    What I don’t get is why she doesn’t wear things twice. She has so many versions of every single one of those outfits she wore, why buy new all the time?

    • LAK says:

      I see it as her version of doggy treats. If she is to work, she has to buy something new to wear. If not, she won’t work.

      • AnnaKist says:

        I love that analogy, LAK! 🐶 👗👠 She needs to be given a modest annual budget, and only on condition that she fulfils a certain number of appearances/duties/obligations. There’s absolutely no reason why she cannot start repeating her outfits. No work, no budget.

      • MinnFinn says:

        I Agree with the doggy treats as a bribe to work . And I think her exhorbitant spending is her giving the finger to mean British subjects who force her to work. Her contemptuous sneer she chose for her portrait at NPG is a permanent reminder of what she thinks of plebs of the realm.

    • Giddy says:

      I wish there would be a photo spread of all the similar things side-by-side. Then a total of what was spent on ten white coat dresses etc. What a waste of money and also of an opportunity to represent her country with style and glamour.

      • Maria says:

        Can you imagine all the storage space that she needs. Probably enough to house an entire family.
        I have a rule that every time I buy a new dress,blazer etc. I get rid of one, give it to charity. She should discard one thing every time she buys something and then auction it off and give the proceeds to charity. She has to my knowledge never worn a single outfit more than twice so after that get rid of it. It would make more sense and people would benefit from it. As it is now, it’s no use to anyone if it isn’t being worn.

      • Cee says:

        @Maria – I always look into my closets to see which hangers have been untouched for a year. I donate those items and make room for future purchases or just for a more streamlined wardrobe. At present I’m more partial to purchase fewer items per year, but these are more expensive ones that will last longer and have better fit.

    • Becks says:

      She does repeat some outfits but I find it kind of weird what she chooses to repeat and what she doesn’t.

      As far as the cost for this trip goes….if she had gotten some legitimately amazing outfits, that would be one thing. but instead we saw another boring Emilia Wickstead, another Catherine Walker coat dress, a very expensive McQueen dress that I would be shocked if she ever wears again, outside of vacations, etc. The two designer dresses for the cocktail parties (the white one for Poland and the print for Germany) make sense in my mind bc they were local designers, and they were actually edgy looks (for Kate.)

      There’s being classic and knowing what you feel comfortable in and then there’s being boring.

      • Deedee says:

        I agree with you Becks. She’s no good with accessories, esp. shoes, and then she buys so many things the same. A good stylist would find a way to change up the same white dress into a brand new look. Her jewelry, though expensive, is usually lost in the hair curtains (the red McQueen) or blending into the fabric (at the concentration camp), and since she seems obsessed with buying as much Kiki as she can, they don’t make much of a statement for the price.

      • ABC says:

        Let’s all pause here and reflect that Kate’s ‘job’ for Jigsaw was Accessories Buyer.
        .
        .
        .
        Continue. 😂

      • msthang says:

        That’s why she has to have big houses, all those room have her clothes!

  10. Nancy says:

    I’m sick of her. Don’t know why her every move is on this site on a regular. Diana’s face has been everywhere lately in light of the anniversary of her passing. How can this woman with the “That Girl” flip compare to Diana who looked amazing in slacks and a blouse. She was a woman of accomplishment even with the Queen looking on with disdain after the divorce. Not fair to compare, because there is no comparison. Kate did her job and had her son, but the endless stories may appeal to some, I just can’t imagine who.

    • martina says:

      But you are here.

      • Nancy says:

        Yeah, I expected that one. To be honest, I saw her face AGAIN and just came on to blow off steam. Not that big of a deal, I’m American, she’s nothing to me.

  11. Redgrl says:

    The only partial win was the white with black detail cocktail dress with the huge pearl necklace- and I say partial because it had those hideous boob dart things – like her wedding dress did…

    • Shirleygail says:

      Boob dart things LOL – you’re right though, that’s certainly what killed the look for me

  12. Enough Already says:

    To be fair we would also have to criticize the costly jewels, homes and cars Charles spends on Camilla. In addition, Anbe, Edward and Andrew also spoil their families as well. Royal engagements notwithstanding, all of these people spend quite freely whether we are given tallies or not.

    • notasugarhere says:

      It is noted on here frequently that Charles lives like an Edwardian gentleman. And he does 500+ engagements a year, Prince’s Trust, Dumfries House, plus has taken over many of his mother’s and father’s work.

      She has spent over $100,000 on new clothing and accessories this year, for less than 40 days of “work”.

  13. OhDear says:

    Sheeeet, $34,000 is a lot. It’s a lot more than some people make in a year!

    • Maria says:

      $62,000 for the Canadian tour last year? That’s at 10k more than the average Canadian salary.
      All I remember about that tour is that she wore skinny jeans a lot.

      • Keeks says:

        Her style sucks, and since Canadians had to pay for her tour last year, please do us a favour and stay away.

  14. Clare says:

    May I just point out that that is close to the average ANNUAL wage in the UK.
    In many instances more than what teachers and junior doctors make.
    Certainly more than what a junior nurse makes.

    My point? People can save the ‘she’s damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t narrative. If she had any style – or respect for the people she ‘represents’, she could very easily furnish a classy and fashionable wardrobe from shops like Jaeger, Whistles, Hobbs etc, with some more stylish high street pieces thrown in.

  15. Cee says:

    I’m not surprised by this figure or her overspending.
    I’ll be surprised IF and when she manages to spend less than 5000 pounds and actually repeats the clothes she has hoarded somewhere in her palace apartment.

  16. Avamae says:

    So Much Money, such a boring Style and so few of Sences.

  17. Tyrant Destroyed says:

    The red dress’ fabric looks beyond cheap, like synthetic cheap. Do we have the receipts that she actually paid that much for her wardrobe? I know the politicians love to divert the reality so I trust nobody.
    I she really paid that much, it would be appreciated if her stylish would advise her in doing a smarter shopping, her wardrobe choices look beyond ordinary and she could use her budget in a more efficient way.

  18. Starryfish says:

    For Kate “work” is just excuse to go shopping. This is what you get when you take someone with no style, and desire to work, and give them an unlimited credit card,. She shops, and then schedules do nothing events to treat as her own personal runway to display her purchases. The expenditures would be less notable if they actually did any substantive work, but she’s comfortable with keeping the headlines about what she wears rather than what she does ( or rather doesn’t do). Other European royals spend money freely as well but they repeat outfits a lot more, and have much busier work schedules, so it doesn’t seem as egregious.

  19. Margaret says:

    In what universe could that plain and boring lavender Emilia Wickstead dress she wore on her final day in Berlin – once again with beige shoes – be considered to be ‘show-stopping’? The dress looks like something my late mother would have whipped up for me at home as a work dress in my early 20s.

    • Harla Jodet says:

      I so agree Margaret!!! The dress itself isn’t bad but the lack of styling reduces almost everything she wears to dull and boring. If I were to design a dress or outfit for her, I would include the jewelry, shoes, purse, scarf, etc, all the things that could be used to properly accessorize the dress. Take this lavender coat dress, which by the way is all wrong for summer, but add a great brooch, a colorful scarf tucked into the neckline or a great pair of red pumps and you’d have a half way decent outfit.

      Also, and this is just my opinion, Kate just doesn’t have “it”, at least not the way the Queen Leti or CP Victoria has “it”. Now there’s nothing wrong with not having “it”, I certainly don’t have “it”, but there are things one can do to improve one’s presence. For instance, standing up straight, no hunched shoulders, no crotch clutching (which Kate is improving on), no playing with one’s hair, all these little tweaks could really go a long way in improving Kate’s presence.

    • bluhare says:

      It’s not show stopping, but I liked it.

    • notasugarhere says:

      The top was also skin tight and showed off the lines of her lingerie from the back. All that money for bland and poorly-fitted clothing.

      • Harla Jodet says:

        Was it just me or did that bra seem ill-fitting?

      • burnsie says:

        I think when she gets her dresses made, the measurements don’t account for the shapewear she wears underneath. That purple dress she wore on the last day, you could clearly see her corset underneath

      • bluhare says:

        Perhaps Kate likes that bland clothing, nas.

      • ABC says:

        Someone wrote somewhere that Kate needs to ditch the ‘headlights look’. I can’t look at that now without seeing, ahem, headlights. Sorry everyone..

  20. Maiden says:

    She spends like someone who has no idea where her money comes from and does not care. She spends money for the sake of spending it, not because she’s interested in presenting a good image of herself or that she understands what role she represents. So she buys 3 more red/pink/lace dresses when she already has 5 of the same. As long as it’s bespoke and cost a ton of money, Kate is happy. Never mind that the bespoke clothes often look cheap and “unfinished” on her.

    She doesn’t dress for herself: she has no idea who she is to know what kind of image she wants to project. She rarely looks smart or serious in her outfits. She often looks like she’s playing dress up. Sometimes her dresses are not even properly sewn and tailored. Her clothes wear her, not the other way around. It’s a waste to spend this much money and still look so bland and unimpressive.

  21. littlemissnaughty says:

    It’s not the clothes, it’s her. She manages to somehow make them look off or boring because she’s not a fashion girl and if she is, this is not her style. She looks right at home and comfortable in her skinny jeans and Breton shirts and so much younger too. So whatever she spends, that’s not going to change.

    Having said that, I think the issue with her wardrobe is also that she has the opportunity to promote designers who could use the publicity and who are MUCH more interesting and possibly cheaper than McQueen. Sorry, but I don’t know why she’s such a fan, the coat dresses etc. don’t impress me at all. The more casual dresses – like the red/white one she wore in Canada – are usually very pretty but so damn expensive. That dress could pay my rent for six months and my rent is expensive, unfortunately.

    I’ve said it before. She’s a Boden girl. They make the same dresses for € 150 or less. Skirts as well.

    • FuefinaWG says:

      Definitely a Boden girl …

      • CynicalAnn says:

        I love Boden. They also accessorize their outfits with cute shoes and bags. She doesn’t even do that.

    • IsThisReal? says:

      Kate DOES look best in her jeans and Breton shirts. That is the only time she seems herself and comfortable.

      I have NO fashion sense whatsoever. And even when my girl chooses my clothing for me I manage to mess it up. Perhaps Kate is fashion dysfunctional as well. It is not her fault. However, the money spent….that buck stops at her door for sure.

  22. BeamMeUpScottie says:

    Perhaps there is a method somewhere in what seems like madness to most of us?

    I am saying this because her hubby said something very interesting last night in the ITV tribute to his mom.

    He said that his mom loved clothes and fashion a lot and he once went into her closets and saw that she had rows and rows of gowns. He said he mentioned to her that since she had so much clothes why didn’t she auction them for charity. Soon after that, Diana did a clearout and got Christie’s to do an auction which was a massive success and raised a ton of money for various charities.

    Cut to the narrator, who says at that point, Diana realised she no longer wanted people to talk about her only for her clothes. She realised she could use the media’s interest in her to bring attention to the causes (like Landmines etc ) that needed attention.

    Wills then said he was very pleased that his mom took up his suggestion. He hadnt expected her to do so.

    So perhaps Kate has a plan to do something similar in the future …..?

    • Maria says:

      Kate is no Diana.
      But seriously, at the end of the day, how much was really accomplished on this tour. Is it really going make any difference with regard to the Brexit negotiations? Can you imagine the talks, ” oh well, Kate wore that nice expensive dress, so let’s go easy on the Brits.”

    • Too Curious says:

      I was saying above that all royals sell off their clothes they don’t wear to consignment stores. I also mentioned the auction. I think it would be fabulous if Kate did an auction for charity, but perhaps she is already selling off her clothes (some people have seen her clothes or think they have on ebay) for charity..

    • Liberty says:

      This is Kate’s future. That’s the problem.

  23. KBeth says:

    34k for nothing special? Lovely.

  24. Adele Dazeem says:

    For me, this is about the optics of it all. Diana, in her day, probably spent more money on her working wardrobe (inflation adjusted) than Kate, but not only did she work tirelessly, she recycled a lot and mixed things up when she did. I would also argue she relied a bit upon her jewelry and hats to give outfits flair, change up their look and create interest.

    If Kate had more of that ability to connect with and charm people, I think it would go a long way. I know sometimes you’re just born with that, so if I were her I’d be trotting out the kids and the dog more often. 😉

    • Jessica says:

      Worked tirelessly? Let’s not go overboard; I saw a chart of engagements of Catherine vs Diana and it’s only a few engagements less a year. Also Diana was Princess of Wales, married to the heir; Catherine is married to the heir of the heir. She’s technically not even a Princess.

      • perplexed says:

        After the 5 year mark, Diana was doing over 200 engagements a year. I don’t think Kate’s engagements match that number.

        Diana also picked unpopular causes like leprosy. She touched patients at a time most were unwilling to do so.

        It was only after the divorce when she was stripped of her title that she cut down on her engagements, and even then she was walking through landmines.

        Do I think Diana was the greatest lady who ever lived? No. She certainly had her weaknesses. But I do think she did more work than Kate.

      • bluhare says:

        Diana technically wasn’t a princess either. She was Diana, Princess of Wales, not Princess Diana although we all called her that anyway.

      • notasugarhere says:

        There have been several articles debunking the idea that Diana worked less especially in earlier years. Also comparing the minimum time they spend at engagements is interesting, as W&K are 15-45 minutes and out the door in most cases.

        It is the fans that insist otherwise, but they also believe HM lived in Malta for two years straight and do not want that fiction debunked.

        When the elderly royals who are much further down the list of succession keep outworking W&K? No excuse.

  25. Jessica says:

    Why do people care how much she spends on her clothes? She has an allowance from her father-in-law and it covers everything from George and Charlotte’s clothes, accessories, etc. This is just like people complaining about Michelle (Sasha and Malia) Obama and her clothes and vacations when her husband received a salary.

    • Jen says:

      No, actually it’s not the same as complaining about the Obamas. Obama was an elected official and he paid for his family’s clothes or they were gifted. Kate is an unelected official who is in her position because of whom she sleeps with and the money for her clothing comes from the taxpayers (via the Duchy). As a taxpayer I am incensed that I have to pay for this worthless woman’s bad outfits. And frankly, I am disturbed that the British public fawn over this woman and ignore her outrageous spending while public sector workers face a pay freeze.

      • Joannie says:

        They are both representatives of your country regardless of how they got there or who they married.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Enormous difference being a president can be voted out after 4 years.

  26. Sylark says:

    it’s offensively ridiculous expenditure for what was a wholly pointless and totally unnecessary trip by a pair of wholly pointless and totally unnecessary people.

  27. perplexed says:

    I don’t think these clothes, except for the maxi dress, will age badly. I think most of these choices are nice. The problem is that SHE is bland.

    • Joannie says:

      I dont know how you can say that not knowing her personally. We only see pics.

      • perplexed says:

        Of course, I can say that without knowing her personally, when we have so many public figures who I didn’t know personally either, past and present, to compare her to.

        She is one of the least charismatic figures on the public stage. That carries over into how she wears clothes, unfortunately.

        Jacqueline Kennedy never uttered a word in public and none of us knew her, but clearly when you look at her in a picture you have a response to whatever she’s wearing. Ditto for Diana.

        Maybe Kate is one of the most interesting women you’ll ever meet behind closed doors as her friend (I’m sure people in her inner circle like her), but as a public figure in a public role, she IS bland. It just is what it is. I certainly don’t think she has to be beheaded for that, but to say she’s as fascinating as Princess Diana, Michelle Obama, Jackie Kennedy or, heck, even Hillary Clinton ( who everybody likes to claim is boring in comparison to charismatic male figures, like Barack Obama or her own husband, who she’s pitted against) — all of whom bring something different to the table as public figures — would be a lie. But, like I said, it is what it is. Maybe Kate has other strengths. But being a charismatic person who sets the world on fire isn’t one of them.

      • Royalsparkle says:

        Pictures tell a thousand words…and we have other royals marryin to compare her- lazy useless snobbish selfish upbringing – snobbish entitled unclassy she is …

      • Deedee says:

        People reveal their character with what they say, what they do, and how they spend their money. Add to that clues from their body language and their clothing. Where does this person spend their most precious commodity (their time)?
        Photo ops are designed to sell a story. I’ve seen enough of celebs behind the scenes to know that pics and short appearances are just that.
        Kate isn’t keen about her charities at all. When was the last time she went to the Scouts? Who dropped a 115 year’s tradition with the Irish Guards because she “shouldn’t be expected to be there.” Kate was not even meeting the amount of work done by minor royals before she had kids, so that is not an excuse. Based on the amount of money spent in a year for Kate’s clothing for about a month’s work for an average person (if that), Brits are not getting much in return.

  28. Starlight says:

    It’s a tight little ship after watching the documentary on Wills and Harry s feelngs about their mother loss. Wills guards his privacy like a Rottweiler which is understandable and has no time for the media also understandable. I think he going from manchild to man it’s going to be an interesting future watching him.

  29. Heidi says:

    Brigitte Macron (Nobel Peace Prize for NOT strangling Trump!) is twice her age and dresses more modern. Where Diana was daring, Kate is a coward. Every other major European royal lady buys more attuned to real life.

    They are complaining about being royals, but obviously prefer to spend their time as far removed from us as the Queen. No matter what happens to the rest of the world, their life always stays the same. If they dream of a “normal” life, they mean those of their rich titled friends with country estates.

    I don’t think that their workload will EVER increase dramatically, not even once they have the top job. Let us hope Charles lives to be a hundred – he may be controversial sometimes, but he stands for something and tries to contribute.

    • Penelope says:

      Charles, though he’s stumbled at times, always manages to project dignity. For some reason, Wills and Kate just…don’t. It’s hard to take them seriously.

  30. SammySushi says:

    I’m not a stylist, but I did stat at a Holiday Inn last night.

    White suit, do something Diana like and wear a starburst red brooch on the belt and wear red pumps.

    The boho garden outfit should have had a cute boho hairstyle that pulled back her hair (not in a chignon) and revealed some fun earnings. Shoes were all wrong.

    Fire your stylist and hair stylist Kate. Diana was bold. You need people who can infuse some creativity and fun into your style.