Duchess Meghan spent about $500K on clothes in just 7 months of duchessing

The Duchess Of Sussex Visits The Hubb Community Kitchen

One of the big headlines at the end of last week was about the Duchess of Sussex and how much she’s spent on clothes during her first year (not even) of duchessing. This is one of the big reasons why the Duchess of Cambridge did a flurry of repeats in November and December – because Kate smartly latched onto the British papers’ accounting of how much Meghan has spent since she married Prince Harry. Meghan and Kate’s work clothes are all bought by the Prince of Wales, through his Duchy of Cornwall income. It’s all a work expense. For years, Kate has gotten bad headlines about how much of Charles’ money she’s spent on her work clothes, whether it’s her two dozen blue dresses, her 300 buttony coatdresses, or her endless “bespoke” pieces. Well, Meghan’s the same – she’s spent a fortune on clothes so far, and these figures exclude her Givenchy wedding gown.

From a wedding watched by millions to her first royal tour, the Duchess of Sussex has had quite a year. And it seems Meghan has invested in a wardrobe to match, with her clothing bill for 2018 totalling almost half a million pounds. The eye-watering sum – £406,915.43 ($515,879.65) – is revealed in new research published this week by royal fashion experts UFO No More, who have totted up the amount spent by British royals and their European neighbours on clothing and accessories over the past 12 months.

Researchers from the fashion blog – which stands for Unidentified Fashion Objects – calculated the cost of some 1,661 new pieces debuted in 2018 by royals in Britain, Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Norway and the Netherlands. Their findings put Prince Harry’s wife some £300,000 ($380,334.30) ahead of her closest contender, Denmark’s Crown Princess Mary – and that’s not including the cost of Meghan’s show-stopping bespoke Givenchy bridal gown.

And she splashed out almost six times times as much in 2019 as her sister-in-law Kate, who wore less new clothing this year as she spent several months away from the public eye following the birth of Prince Louis in April. In October, MailOnline exclusively revealed how Meghan had worn clothing worth a staggering £117,934.62 ($149,515.27) during her 16-day Pacific tour with Prince Harry – almost the same amount that Kate spent on clothing for the whole of 2017. The Prince of Wales is understood to cover the costs of Kate and Meghan’s wardrobes for ‘work-related’ engagements through his official household budget, funded by the Duchy of Cornwall.

[From The Daily Mail]

By now, everyone knows I’m a Meg Defender, but I can’t really defend this. This is WAY too much money for about seven months of duchessing. How many trench coats does she really need? And Meghan should know by now – she won’t be given the same grace period or goodwill that Kate has gotten for how much she spends. I will say a few things as mitigating factors about Meghan though. One, I’m pretty sure these numbers include her jewelry, some of which she might have owned beforehand, some of which might have been gifted to her, and all of which will totally be reworn for years to come. Jewelry = investments. Same with purses and shoes, honestly. Secondly, Meghan smartly invested in some separates and good-quality classic pieces which will hold up for years. Thirdly, she’s pregnant and her figure is changing so of course she’s going to need new clothes for that too. Still… she’ll learn that she can’t spend like this in the future.

The Duke & Duchess Of Sussex Visit Sussex


The Duchess Of Sussex Visits The Hubb Community Kitchen

Photos courtesy of WENN, Backgrid and Avalon Red.

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

164 Responses to “Duchess Meghan spent about $500K on clothes in just 7 months of duchessing”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Soulsister says:

    There was a really great thread on Twitter which showed that most of the clothes and accessories that Meghan wore in the last couple of months, she actually purchased and wore before she met and married Harry.

    It’s no secret, especially to those who followed her before she became a duchess that she liked to wear expensive clothes however the point is that she purchased her clothes with her own hard earned money rather than relying on her parents and then her husbands family to pay for things for her.

    This is just another attempt by the British media to try to bully and harass Meghan while trying to elevate their very white and virginal Kate.

    • Emily says:

      Oooooh! Do you know where I can find this thread? As somebody on #TeamMeg I’m curious. 🤣

    • OCE says:

      @Soulsister: Precisely! DM is such a joke.

    • Himmiefan says:

      Exactly, she purchased them with money she earned. Also, she’s still building her duchess wardrobe. I’d do the same.

    • Huh says:

      This sounds like rubbish to me.

    • PrincessK says:

      Yes, I saw something like that on Twitter. Apparently about eight handbags listed by the Daily Mail as new purchases were bags that Meghan had before she was married and there was photographic proof to show for it. Some people on Team Meghan are doing a great job. Poor Meghan can’t speak out for herself and so we must do it for her.

      The hounding and vilification of poor Meghan continues into 2019.

    • annna says:

      Do you really think she was earning enough on Suits to afford all that? And I doubt she was getting a lot of free stuff considering her low profile pre-Harry.

  2. Cerceau says:

    The data and methodology that were used are here: http://ufonomore.com/blog/costs-2018 They did include Cartier jewellery worth about $233k, but that would still leave her with total of about $270k, compared to Kate and Sophie who spent in the region of $80k for the whole year. This is not good however you look at it.

    • Pearlime says:

      I had a look at the list too. They included jewellery but left out pieces that they couldn’t get a reliable figure on, like Megs’ wedding dress as well as some bespoke stuff (of which both Megs and Kate had quite a few). However, they did that for everyone, so I’d say the scale of the figures mentioned are probably right.

      As for Kate’s reapeats – if after 3 pregnancies my old stuff fit like that again, I’d rewear them too.

      • Natalie S says:

        They included her Stella McCartney dress and her Cartier wedding jewelry according to that site and I don’t think that should count. That was clearly privately paid for and not an engagement work cost.

        I think it would be interesting if they had the price per person of all engagement clothing and accessories whether new or a rewear -which then makes it a fair comparison, and then the number for new items.

      • Roux says:

        I think you’re right. It’s probably fairly accurate when all is taken into account. It’s not really fair to compare Meghan’s expenditure to Kate’s when she’s been on maternity leave but even so, the figures here are crazy. Even allowing for some degree of error in totalling that up, it’s crazy! They’re market themselves as being on the side of the people, with projects like the community kitchen and yet she’s spent as much on clothes & jewellery alone as roughly 20 British families of 4 would have to live on for a year.

        Then they have the expensive and ridiculous refurbishment of Frogmore cottage for the taxpayers to fund. This isn’t the way to boost your popularity in a country which has a growing issue of homelessness and poverty.

    • Mae says:

      But Meghan is basically creating her royal wardrobe so she gets a pass from me this year and next year. But the rest of the royal ladies, Kate and Sophie especially should be spending significantly less imo. They have had 7 years (Kate) and over a decade (Sophie and Camilla) to stock up and build their wardrobes. IMO they should all now be mostly recycling all their clothes.

      • Mae says:

        I just want to quote meghansmirror.com because I think they pretty much sums up what I think about this. They also did a count of Meghan’s wardrobe and they chose not to include the Cartier wedding jewels.

        “For her first year as a royal, Meghan spent approximately $290,000 on her outfits, from hats to shoes and everything in between. She debuted over 300 new fashion pieces, including suiting coordinates, outerwear, dresses, shoes, evening wear, handbags, accessories, jewels, and hats. Most of the financial total – nearly half – comes from her stunning, sparkling jewelry collection, which is befitting of a Duchess. She has worn these items many times, and we expect to see them many more times in the future. Meghan also debuted new dresses, dozens of shoes, and dozens of new handbags. As Meghan builds her royal wardrobe, we hope to see her repeat some of the favorite items we mentioned earlier in this piece. ”

        I think it’s interesting that according to them nearly half of that $290,000 USD Total comes from her jewelry and not her actual clothes. IMO jewelry prices should not even be included in any royal tally because we just can’t know if it’s a gift or not. I would also be interested to know if Kate/Sophie/Camillas total included their jewelry or if it’s only done to Meghan.

      • Megan says:

        If the U.K. had a rip roaring economy, I’d say go for it, but she is trying to ingratiate herself into a society where many are facing hardship. A bit more thriftiness is probably in order.

      • mint says:

        Yes, she is building her wardrobe but this is an insane and obscene amount of money. Period. She can also build a wardrobe on 100k or 50k- which to me as a normal human being is still a crazy amount of money. She is only married to the 6th in line of the throne- Queens from other european royal families spent less. I think there should be a limit to royal women clothing budget. I think its not comprehendable for a lot of people who just try making ends meet

      • Nancito says:

        @Mae – this is exactly what I was going to say. She does need to build up her wardrobe. She should get a pass for a few years. And then what if she can’t fit into her present clothes after the birth of the baby – her clothes are quite form-fitting, so that’s a real possibility.

      • liriel says:

        Mint, I totally agree.

    • In addition says:

      It also included all the jewellry from Maison Birks that she was wearing before May 19, 2018. One pair of earrings cost at a whooping $58,000 with an additional of at least 8 other expensive pieces ( approximately $70,0000).
      There were shoes and handbags that were also repeats.
      She incurred at most likely $100,000 + for items of clothing and accessories that will be used on several future occasions.
      In some instances some items of clothing will be altered to worn again.
      All items that were worn on special engagements will be cleaned appropriately and labelled (to include the date and engagement when it last worn) to prevent the duchess to re-wearing the same item at the same venue in the future.
      In other words her wardrobe of clothing can been easily seen as work clothes and or operating expense in accounting terms.

    • kacy says:

      At least 200k is wedding expenses. They also estimated everything she wore, when she used existing pieces. This is not a fair comparison at all.

  3. LaraK says:

    Kate also rewore a bunch of stuff she already had.
    Plus Meg is under the microscope.

    I’d be curious what her spending next year is. Until then, I’m reserving judgment.

    • Thirsty Hirsty says:

      I’m giving her next year as well…body changes after baby, 7 months is not a long time to build a royal wardrobe…etc. HOWEVER, by 2020 she’d better have her poop in a group and stop spending so much. Also, I believe she re-wore stuff that was already in her wardrobe….was that counted (unfair)?

    • ichsi says:

      Yeah, I hardly ever comment on royal stuff since I’m very much against that antiquated idea, but even I’ve seen the uproar articles when she once wore something you could get at M&S. She’s been the most photographed woman on this planet this year, she has a ridiculous machinery following her every step, it’s EXPECTED of her to wear super chic clothes every damn time she sets her foot out of the door, so I will not judge her if she gives in to the pressure and spends way too much money in her first year.

  4. Eleonor says:

    Same treatement given to Diana, Kate and now Meghan, so nothing new to me. But girl stop with Givenchy stuff, UK is in the middle of political crazyness that will lead I don’t know where, but people will be even less tolerant towards this kind of stuff.

  5. Trillian says:

    Maybe I am being naive, but I assume she has a budget of some sort. So if that’s okay with whoever signs off the expenses, so what? And if not, I suppose they will do something about it.

  6. CharliePenn says:

    What?! A royal, spending money like it grows on trees?! I am SHOCKED.

    For real though what can anyone expect? The entire concept of royalty is an outdated mess of excess.

    • Marce says:

      Yes! So true. They all need to go away into the annals of history. Just a relic of a feudal past.

  7. AprilMay says:

    The numbers are unfair as it includes the prices of stuff she’s owned for years and therefore bought herself and the cartier jewels which are said to have been a gift from Charles. The emerald set that Kate is said to have gotten from him are never included in Kate’s tally when she wears them, that nearly halfs the figure already. Also including her wedding dress which she paid for herself.
    Also Kate’s figures don’t include anything that was bespoke because they didn’t want to guess the price, so only a fraction of what she wore is even included. So her actual figure is much much higher.

    • Tzu says:

      Meghan had bespoke pieces too. Honestly, I’m pretty unbothered by the money they spend on clothes. When you compare that sum to what the royals spend on everyday living i.e. upkeep of mansions, staff, security etc… clothing is probably just a drop in the bucket.

    • arsesds73 says:

      The thing is this blog also included her clothing from Jan 1, 2018 to May 18, 2018 because she did many engagements then. The clothing + accessories she wore during this period was paid privately by Meghan and this was actually confirmed by KP, so yeah the amount that they have reported is inflated for sure. The daily beast also said that this is weird because Charles would never approve this large amount for clothing for a royal. I will only take this seriously if they include a complete breakdown of every piece and how they reached that price. I wonder if they ever decided to include the 1 milion pound jewellery Kate wore to the BAFTAs in 2016 in their tally for 2016?

      • Elisabeth says:

        In the Daily Beast article, Tom Sykes was not saying he found the total weird because the accounting of UFONo More was off. He said he took it as proof that Meghan gets clothes for free or a discount, as there was no way he could imagine Charles okaying half a million pounds. And then he said it opened Meghan up to additional criticism because she’s *supposed* to pay for all her clothes like TQ and Kate. (Though who knows if they do, either).

      • arsesds73 says:

        @Elisabeth, the accounting for that blog is inflated because they did include her clothing from before she got married as well (the engagements before May 19, 2018). Is it too much for me to ask them to give them a total breakdown of all her outfits from May 19 and onwards with where they got that cost from? This same site that they collaborated with allowed the tabloids to jack up the total price of her outfit to the Queen’s Christmas lunch by including the price of her wedding bracelet that she wasn’t even wearing!

      • aaa says:

        Charles is generous, laissez-faire and an aesthete, so to me it is entirely possible that Charles does not have a problem with Meghan’s spending and won’t have a problem unless it affect his or the monarchy’s popularity.

      • Wasabi says:

        Wasn’t there a recent article that stated how much of a fashion enthusiast Charles is? Maybe he is okay with Maghan being into couture?

  8. onerous says:

    And also – isn’t she building her working wardrobe? I would assume that Meghan didn’t come with a fully stocked Working Royal Wardrobe™️ and that she would need to build that up.

    Given the accounting methods – they included clothes she already owned but didn’t include Kate’s bespoke items? – this seems like a non-issue.

  9. Eyfalia says:

    First of all, they named Dollar, Pound and Euro mishmashed together. And the article said, that her wardrobe is VALUED being worth that amount and NOT that she actually PAID this amount. Many of the clothes she had indeed before she got married. Some of the prices are exaggerated. You can get a better view, if you look at the meghan fashion blog. You have to dig a little bit, but that blog is more transparent about Meghans alleged spending. Whereas the money Kate spends is kept in the dark.

    Meghan was on the brink of collapsing in the first week of the Australiasia tour, due to jet lag and her pregnancy and all this semi-p*rn daily hail can do is drag her through the mud.

  10. Eliza says:

    The 500k does not include any bespoke pieces. So it is a much higher figure.

    Even if some jewelry was gifted, given this tally didn’t include any bespoke pieces, its a safe bet she’s spent well over $500k.

    I don’t think much of her new wardrobe is very versatile and will be used repeatedly. Her maternity clothes aside, I hope moving forward she’ll move back towards those basic well made separates that she started with. They flatter the most, and allow more versatility of use.

  11. TeamAwesome says:

    So much money for so many ill-fitting clothes.

    • Beth says:

      I agree. If I was spending so much on clothes, I’d make sure they fit perfectly. Meghans clothes are also kind of boring style and blah colored. She’s a royal now, and they spend a fortune on clothes, but she needs a new stylist

    • mint says:


    • minx says:

      That gray/beige dress with the extra fabric on the skirt…I forgot how badly that fitted on top. You could see her entire bra. If she was already pregnant someone should have suggested that the dress be put aside for after the birth. Don’t they have mirrors? Eyes? No excuse for that. You’re spending lots of money, it means nothing if the clothes don’t fit.

      • PrincessK says:

        Oh and I just loved that dress, I thought she looked incredibly sexy in it. I would love to wear it, one of my favourite Meghan dresses.

      • Betsy says:

        @PrinckessK – if it had just been a bit less snug in the bust, it would have been gorgeous. But no one wants to see stick on bra outlines!

  12. Erica says:

    I think these stories are crazy when their is evidence of meghan wearing a lot of the clothes and jewelry before marriage .Why didn’t they list all of those ill fitting bespoke Mcqueen clothes that kate has which are expensive.I remember in 2012 kate was spending like crazy and bought a Cartier necklace for 49k and tons of designer clothes and she was barely working with no kids then.

    • Milla says:

      But she wore mostly pieces from 2018 even cruise 2019. So it was not from her old life. I like her but she really is cluless about the prices.

  13. OCE says:

    Daily Mail? Thank you, Next!

    • claire says:


    • Katie Keen says:

      “… is revealed in new research published this week by royal fashion experts UFO No More, who have totted up the amount spent by British royals and their European neighbours on clothing and accessories over the past 12 months.”

    • Olenna says:

      Thank you, OCE. Still, people will believe what suits their narrative, regardless if the facts and figures are wrong and don’t add up. I highly doubt anyone who comments here or elsewhere knows exactly what MM or the other royals actually pay for their clothes, jewelry and accessories .

  14. Louise177 says:

    Over-reaction since a lot was from before marrying Harry. Also I think most Royals spend a lot the first year. I don’t know what Kate spent but she was criticized for her spending the first couple of years. Also I’m assuming there is a budget. I doubt they can buy whatever they want for however much they want.

    • rukidding says:

      I dont the the exact number but I do know she spent less than 100k her first year. I think Meghan’s costs are obscene. Kate has never spent this much in a year. Meghan needs to tone it down A LOT.

  15. aquarius64 says:

    If taxpayer money was used to buy the clothes that’s a legitimate gripe. But if Meghan bought some of her clothes and the Duchy of Cornwall is footing the bill what is the issue?

    • Chrome says:

      It is taxpayer money in a convoluted way. The Duchy of Cornwall is not Charles’ private property though I bet he’d like it to be as it’s worth billions. He simply derives an income from the profits while he is Prince of Wales. Charles gets a tax write-off for all the clothing, so it is subsidised. That Duchy income is not meant to be spent on his kids either, just on Prince of Wales duties. If the monarchy ended tomorrow, the profits of the Duchy would go back into the Treasury.

      Meghan’s spending is too much for seven months and there are an additional 70-odd outfits that could not be costed because they were bespoke. She’s like a kid in a candy shop but it’s not a good look.

  16. Josie says:

    Charles gets to spend the income from the Duchy of Cornwall largely without oversight. He’s not giving the funds to the Exchequer or Oxfam (or even his own Trust, beyond what I assume are his regular contributions) if Meghan, Kate, and Camilla start spending peanuts tomorrow. And in fact, he’s a notably fancy dresser himself, with expensive taste and a reputation for spending a lot on his wife.

    I’m a Republican: I think the whole system should be abolished. But within the confines of a monarchical system led by some very, very wealthy people, what the women of the family spend on their clothes seems like a distraction from the real issues.

    Parliament should take control of the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall and give the senior members of the family — including the Queen — allowances based on regular audits of their real expenses. Then each family could decide how much to spend on housing, gardens, staff, and living expenses — including clothing. Right now, Charles’s fabulous wealth means everyone can do as they please.

    • minx says:

      I agree.

    • Sharon Lea says:

      Really good post Josie. You’re right, Charles inherited mass amounts of property, and so he can afford whatever he and his family needs outside of prying eyes. Isn’t that how Camilla has her home that she basically lives in year round, and only visits Charles for dinner M-Thu, then goes back to Raymill House to sleep. I like your idea that Parliament take control of the land/money and provide an allowance, maybe based on appearances to keep them “working” for their income.

    • Tina says:

      I don’t disagree about the principle, but let’s bear in mind the figures. The Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster bring in about £20m each annually in income. Of that, Charles spent £5m on William, Kate and Harry last year. That will, of course, go up now that Meghan is on board and due to the wedding. The Crown Estates dwarf both the Duchies, with income of £329m last year. The Queen takes in much more from her 25% of income from the Crown Estates than either of the Duchies. And let’s remember, Parliament rubber-stamped the increase in her percentage from 15% to 25%, in a debate of less than 45 minutes last year.

    • Chrome says:

      Great post, Josie. The problem is the endless playing with the truth when it comes to royal finances. The royals don’t own the Crown Estates or the two Duchies. These are income streams for the Windsors, plus there are a few more. But there is no oversight of their spending and no transparency because the Windsors have organized it that way and argued to be exempt from FOI.

      So yes, the cost of clothing is a distraction but it reveals how rotten the system is and that it needs major overhaul. The comparison across a dozen European royal women over a year is legitimate and puts the British women (not only Meghan) into perspective. Sophie and Kate are big spenders too, comparatively. The biggest takeaway is that even those at the top of the tree (Queens) mix it up with modest and high-end clothes as the European women do have a budget to work to. The British Royal Family is out of control overall with spending taxpayers’ funds and Meg’s costs are showing it up.

  17. Linda says:

    How can she spend this much on such ill fitting clothes and basic ass wardrobe?

  18. Emma says:

    I’m also a Meg fan, but I still find this pretty shocking. And “building a royal wardrobe”..? Come on. If that was the plan, she would have already reworn her expensive Givenchy pieces etc. She doesn’t, she wears something new for almost every event even though her closet is full. I bet a lot of her clothes will only be worn once, or brought out again once in five years.

    I think it’s time to realize that no one, including Meghan, marries into the royal family just for love or to do something good for the world. The endless luxury and access to top designers, celebrity circles, holidays etc. is a big part of the appeal. She could easily have done the “Audrey Hepburn thing” clothes wise – buying few, but tailored and classic pieces that can be reworn and combined a hundred ways. A tailored pencil skirt can work for three engagements in one month, just with different tops and accessories. Professional women do that all the time, and I bet the Queen would approve. It would have been perfectly royal and representable, and still shown some touch with reality.

    • sunshine poolside says:

      The Audrey Hepburn thing clothes wise requires a lot of fashion style and know-how.

    • liriel says:

      Great comment! I totally agree. All these women marry into the lifestyle and all got criticism for it. Meghan totally doesn’t core and comes off as ignorant and not media-savvy. Like, Givenchy.. It’s way too much.

  19. Sara Martin says:

    This is the kind of thing you end up doing, when you get a new job.

    • OriginalLala says:

      sure, when you’re spending your own money…but when it’s money off the backs of taxpayers in a country that is struggling, it’s just tone deaf. The BRF are leeches….

  20. Millennial says:

    I see a lot of folks here defending this spending. I’m a Meghan stan but even I can see this is an absurd amount (even if we subtract the amount of the jewelry it’s an absurd amount).

    I’d love to see her do some repeats after the baby comes in 2019.

    I’d also love to see her wear some actual maternity line stuff.

    • sunshine poolside says:

      Concerning maternity stuff: Meghan likely will do the same as Kate and try to stay as slim as possible in order to not wear maternity style clothes. Remember that Diana was lauded as a rule-breaker for being a royal who wore maternity clothes? !!!

  21. enike says:

    I remember Kate wearing quite cheap non-designer (or not fashion-house type designer) clothes a lot and repeated them, she did this all the time, not only this november and december :)

    Meghan will have to stop the spending, but it seems she has an expensive taste, if most of her clothes are from before Harry and bought by herself. So it will be quite hard for her maybe to quit the spending

    Also, its not really equal maybe to compare Kate and Meghan, as their hierarchy in the family is different, I think? I mean, Meghan is not a princess, not a wife of an heir
    Edit: but she is popular, so she does lot for the RF

    • V says:

      “if most of her clothes are from before Harry and bought by herself”
      It’s not true because these alleged clothes that she owned before and have been reworn in these 7 months are very few items that aren’t nearly as expensive as her new designer clothes. I saw another very detailed list that excludes bespoke dresses,accessories she has repeated, those few things she already had,including the jewelry,and the amount is eye-watering. She almost spent for their tour in Ireland what Kate spent for their India tour. And if Kate is rightly criticized for buying identical bespoke coatdresses in different colours,Meghan should be criticized for her almost identical dresses and even accessories in slightly different neutral colours.
      Why does she need a new expensive nude clutch when the previous day she had an almost identical Prada £2,000 nude clutch?

      • mint says:

        Or why does she need bags that expenisve at all, when they are only an acessoire? She does not need to carry anything with her. Usually an Assistant does that for her. So its just excess! Also its rather impractical when your job is to shake hands.
        I think one cant deny the fact that Meghan likes expensive things and is using her new position to buy a lot of stuff, that she does not need to this extent.
        Her net worth is estimated at 4 Million dollars. I doubt she spent this amount before the marriage. But now that she does not need to pay for it with her own money, she can buy all the things she couldnt have before.

      • Chrome says:

        I think the net worth is a bit of a fantasy. She would not have earned any more that 10K per episode for the first season and probably the last two seasons saw her get c.70K per episode, as she wa way down the call sheet. Deduct the tax, agents, stylists and PR fees and it’s relatively modest. The Reitmans contract was 50K and the blog would have brought in some money but not mega amounts. Megs borrowed clothes for certain events and wasn’t as gung ho with designer labels as she is now that someone else is paying. The first few meet and greets after the engagement struck the right tone: stylish separates that could worn in a number of ways, and not too out of touch. She looked fresh and not dowdy as Kate does. Access to unlimited funds seems to have gone to her head.

  22. Eyfalia says:

    Something interesting from Queen Rania about the prices being paid for the clothes:

    “Queen Rania posted an official statement reg. the cost for her wardrobe on her facebook page!! It says that most of her clothes are actually either borrowed or offered as gifts or bought at a reduced price.”



    I read before that Meghan asked several designers for a draft of a wedding dress. Oscar de la Renta choose then to make a complete royal collection and they gave Meghan 1 or 2 dresses as gift for the wedding. That did not hinder the DM to include these dresses into their list.

    • Sharon Lea says:

      Thanks for posting, it really explains how Queen Rania, and most likely other royal ladies get their clothing. We had heard that the UK royals routinely were offered discounts. The pictures in the People magazine were great, shows how fantastic clothes look when properly tailored, the striped dress looked amazing! Meghan needs to make tailoring a priority going forward.

      • Eyfalia says:

        Oh, you are absolutely right. Clare Waight Keller and all those others working in Haute Couture know nothing of fabrics, cuts and tailoring. I hardly ever see any illfitting clothes on Meghan but what do I know about dressmaking, although I am a trained dressmaker, Exam by Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

        We should also neglect the fact that Meghan was pregnant for most of 2018.

  23. Other Renee says:

    After the engagement dress fiasco, you would think she’d have realized that the cost of her new clothes would be closely monitored and criticized if excessive.

  24. sunshine poolside says:

    The Royal Ladies get some money for their clothes but not for their jewelry. They wear their own jewelry or the Queen lends them some pieces for official engagements.

    I am surprised at these numbers, too. I remember that Kate’s clothes’ bills were around Pounds 300.000 in the first year and Meghan apparently did nearly double that in less than a year. That is really not a good start. And I really don’t get on what she spent that kind of money. She never wore bespoke custom-tailored artsy haute couture dresses except for that engagement pic dress.

    Where did the money go? Did Meghan’s confidante Jessica Mulroney have to leave because of the quantity of money spent too quickly? In matters of timing this looks like they got rid of Mulroney first and then admitted that quantity of money.

  25. minx says:

    Whatever her budget she needs to spend more on tailoring and fitting. With a few exceptions I’m generally underwhelmed with her clothes.

  26. Librakitty says:

    Out of curiosity, are the clothes + jewelry ever “gifted” to royals? It’s truly the best advertising out there, and many of their pieces sell out immediately upon being worn publicly. Seems as though the designers would be happy to give their clothes to them.

    • arsesds73 says:

      Apparently they are not allowed to accept gifts, but I think they may be getting huge discounts though – I don’t think any of the royal women are paying full retail price for their clothing. Which is why I think all the Givenchy Meghan wore after the wedding came as a package with her wedding dress rather than her buying each single item separately.

      • Librakitty says:

        That makes sense. I have no doubt they’re getting a huge discount! Which would mean these numbers are inflated. I can’t help but think the royals sit around and laugh at all of these ridiculous articles about them.

      • PrincessK says:

        Exactly, that is why these figures are inflated. Top designers charge different people different prices, so I would guess that both Meghan and Kate would pay a fraction of what any of us would pay if we dared to ask.

      • sunshine poolside says:

        Nope, those figures INCLUDE the discounts.
        Royals have to do book accounting as well and they have to say how much they actually paid.

        Btw. I doubt they get that many discounts. Because giving discounts to Royals is the same as giving them gifts or bribing them. Of course they like it to be known that they get discounts. And perhaps the Royals just pay the price it costs to manufacture the item and not the final retail price. But I don’t think they get stuff really cheap because it would be the same as receiving a gift under pretense of paying for it.

  27. Jessica says:

    This has already been debunked I believe. They included outfits she already owned.

  28. lucy2 says:

    It’s a lot of money, but I’d imagine it includes stuff she purchased herself, she’s had to build a wardrobe for all the events she’s doing now, and I doubt whoever bought what paid 100% retail price.

  29. Becks1 says:

    So, all the excuses or reasons aside – this figure counts clothes she purchased herself, or includes things she already owns, etc – its just a bad headline. “Meghan spent 500k on clothes in a year!!!!” If that figure includes jewelry for Meghan but not the other royals then shame on the UFO site but if it does include jewelry for all then its a wash in my opinion.

    But even if she only spent 100k of Charles’s money on clothes this year and that other 400k is just blown up……it’s just bad optics. She should be aware of that.

    Now, Meghan does wear some bespoke (I’m thinking Prada and Givenchy) but I feel like in more than half of Kate’s appearances since Louis she was wearing something bespoke, all from McQueen, Catherine Walker, etc – so its not like she is holding back and I imagine her clothing costs are probably underestimated. But, its a smart move on Kate’s part.

    Many of us on here have said over the past few months that it was kind of weird Kate was doing SO MANY repeats, that has never been her habit (she does repeat clothes, but not every outfit at every engagement for a month in a row is a repeat.) But it appears again that it was a smart move on her part.

    • arsesds73 says:

      I definitely knew cost was going to be an issue, especially considering that she was going on a 16 day Australia tour with multiple engagements on the same day, so I knew this was going to come up. That being said, this number is inflated because they included clothing from Jan 1, 2018 to May 18, 2018 as well and that stuff was paid for privately.

      • aaa says:

        Whether tagged “paid for privately” or something else, I think that it all goes back to the same source, Prince Charles.

      • PrincessK says:

        Exactly she did a 16 day tour, of course she was going to have to have a wardrobe for that. Anyway we still have to look forward to seeing Kate wear full evening wear for a State occasion.

      • PrincessK says:

        Sorry I meant that we still have to look forward to seeing Meghan wearing full evening wear for a State occasion.

      • Chrome says:

        aaa, that is my theory too. Charles was the benefactor from the engagement announcement onward but because it’s a sensitive issue with the public, is kept quiet. Security also starts then too, just not advertised.

    • sunshine poolside says:

      I think that Kate looks like she spend some 300.000-400.000 on her clothes. But Meghan doesn’t though she spends more.

  30. knowitall says:

    That is too much, especially when your main job is philanthropy.

    • Bobbalou says:

      +1. Not a good look perception-wise for any royal in these times, especially a self-proclaimed humanitarian who is married to the 6th in line. It comes across as very tone-deaf. Meghan receives so much unfair criticism, but I think this one is fair game (even though her numbers are likely elevated). Might be very wise of her to revisit and rethink her wardrobe etc. expenditures going forward.

    • PrincessK says:

      Oh dear!! Wearing fabulous clothing gives a boost to the fashion industry, do you have any idea of how many designers and shops have brought out copy cat versions of what these two Duchesses wear. If you read DM you will see that they show the original dress and then cheaper versions that are available, and believe you me people DO follow what these women wear.

      I really don’t know why philanthropy and the need to be austere is being brought into this. These women are doing a service. They would probably be happier lounging at home in an old pair of jeans and top but they have to go on parade and know that the eyes of the whole world are on them.

      • sunshine poolside says:

        Most people won’t buy what Meghan and Kate buy because
        a) too expensive
        b) impractical (sky-high stiletto heels)
        c) ridiculous (buttons, baby!)
        d) doesn’t fit the dress codes in real life employment

        A boost for the fashion industry won’t do anything good. The clothes and fabrics are produced on the cheap in some poor country with few worker’s rights and few environmental protection laws. The retail doesn’t benefit anybody either because shop assistants don’t make much either. The profits go to some rich people who own the fashion empires.

        Those sky-high stiletto heels which both Kate and Meghan wear are particularly ridiculous. Kate always looks uncomfortable walking stairs and Meghan requires Harry’s arm each time she has to walk stairs.

      • PrincessK says:

        @sunshine …what alternative employment would you suggest for all the millions of low paid garment factory workers and low paid shop assistants since you say their jobs benefit nobody.

  31. Susannej says:

    As far as I know – members of the british Royal family can not accept gifts.
    They MUST buy their clothes.
    (Something about Government and Corruption …
    … correct me it I am wrong)

    Does anyone remember
    when Kim Kardashian tried to gift Kate with baby clothes from Kims own Kollection?
    Kate could not accept them and this had nothing to do with liking the spender or not. ..

    • Musiclover says:

      I wonder how much Melania Trump spent in comparison

      • Susannej says:

        Me too. …

      • sunshine poolside says:

        She is legitimately democratically elected. And she and the Blob will be voted out or impeached one day.
        Meghan isn’t democratically elected nor will she ever be ousted by vote.
        Also the US President and his wife have to be way more honest about their income and wealth and such than the Royal Family.

      • hot says:

        what is the comparison? Her husband is rich and she’s dressing like she did before they entered politics??

    • PrincessK says:

      Nothing to stop them being given huge discounts though.

  32. Maria says:

    Agree with Kaiser. Way too much money.

  33. Really says:

    This one is completely over rated.

  34. tori says:

    Her friend is saying $691,000.00 not including jewellery or the engagement and wedding gowns.

  35. Musiclover says:

    I wonder how much Melania Trump spent in comparison

    • Janet says:

      Doesn’t matter as the people don’t pay taxes for her clothes. Same as being concerned with how much Muchelle Obama spent. Doesn’t matter. Meghan is living off hard earned taxpayers money that’s why what she spends matters. She is an immigrant to the country. Never paid taxes and now she’s living off the taxes that millions of British citizens have paid for years.

      • Tina says:

        Royals’ clothing isn’t paid for out of taxpayers’ money. Money belonging to the British people, yes, but it’s not money that has been contributed by taxpayers. (I see little difference since money is fungible, but you all seem to care about taxes a lot). (And I’m hoping that your misspelling of Mrs Obama’s first name was a typo rather than what I think you were saying).

      • sunshine poolside says:

        Prince Charles finances both his sons. Prince Charles’ income is from the Duchy of Cornwall which belongs to the taxpayer. The taxpayer is entitled to the whole income from the Duchy of Cornwall but the taxpayer does graciously allow Prince Charles to draw an income from the Duchy. No joke here.
        So yes, the taxpayer is paying for the young Royals’ clothes.

      • sunshine poolside says:

        Michelle Obama’s clothes during her White House time were paid for by the US taxpayer, of course they were. Who else paid for them? Some rich donor? Some industry boss who expected to get a return? That would have been criminal, btw.

        Same for Melania Trump. The US taxpayer pays for her clothes.

        Same for the Royals. The British taxpayer pays for their clothes.

        The spending on clothes by US Presidents and their wives is actually way better documented than what the Royals spend. Remember the Queen received some million Pounds to repair Buckingham Palace. That money just vanished and nobody knows where it went. aka corruption. And apparently nobody goes to jail for that.

    • minx says:

      At some point (hopefully sooner than later) Melania will be gone, unlike the BRF.

  36. Zan says:

    Someone might have already mentioned—but she not only had to buy hats (most Americans aren’t really expected to have many of those) and maternity clothes. It’s a lot of money, but it makes more sense when you consider those two huge expenses added in. Hats of that caliber (heck, any) must be expensive.

  37. vava says:

    Let’s look at the cost of the male royal wardrobes, shall we??

  38. Call_me_al says:

    Are they taking into account the spending to working ratio?

  39. Origins says:

    The royals are awful on the whole – nothing personal. Memo to the Brits who resort to “cultural and tourism” value whenever they’re pressed to find some reason to justify these loafers’ existence: Why not preserve the roles but strip away 99.90% the wealth (leave enough for royal duties) and power? Direct the money, starting with the £369m to upgrade Buck’g P, to helping out your troubled healthcare system, the homeless, and starving kids. Problem solved!

  40. liriel says:

    QUEENS from other European royal families spent less!
    I get that Meghan threw “no more zara” party and that’s what she likes but is she that vain, stubborn and not savvy that she gave a valid reason for critique? She outdid Kate, she knew that Kate got bad reputation because of it and that’s why Kate tried to be seen as thrifty. Meghan chose an expensive engagement dress, got grilled about its cost, and still she changed nothing with her spending habits.
    She loves Givenchy. Brexitis going on, economy collapsing and now I see how much royals spent. Meghan knew that it’s a smart move to remind everyone she’s a feminist, humanitarian yet spent $ like crazy!
    I seriously don’t get it. Wear expensive looking-alike clothes, bags, enjoy being a duchess but.. can you at least be more discreet?

    • Anitas says:

      Even if she spent her own money, it’s tacky as hell given the optics and her public role. And in the context of sayonara Zara… how shallow and sad.

    • sunshine poolside says:

      Her baggy oversize coats are essentially bags, too.

      Quite frankly so far I don’t think that Meghan is doing any better than Kate. Kate just faced the problem that she was the first to marry one of the Royal Darlings aka one of Prince Charles’ sons.

  41. Busyann says:

    It’s never bothered me how much she spends on clothes. I get the argument, but I’ve never really understood why people get so fussy about it. Just as Kaiser said, Meghan is doing the smart thing in investing in high quality separates that will last her a long time. In the end, she is spending less. How many times do we Kate splash out an obscene amount of money on something that is printed or trendy? That’s a waste in my opinion because prints are not timeless and often times you can only wear them once, put them away, and then hope and wait for it to become fashionable again.

    Plus it makes no sense to compare what Kate spent this year, when she’s going on 7 years in the Royal family and only worked 2 months out of the year. Someone go back to compare how much Kate spent in her first year to what Meghan spent in her first year and then you can compare. You also have to tally how many engagements Kate worked her first year, compared to Meghan….I’m not going to bother, but I think calculating the figures that way may paint a different picture.

    Also, I read somewhere that Meghan is the first self-made millionaire to join the Royal Family. That’s an automatic pass for a lot in my opinion.

    • liriel says:

      Uhm seriously, I don’t buy the argument that Kate splashes out because her items are trendy. She’s opposite of the trendy! Classic pieces bought by Meghan – uhm like an engagement dress or other givenchy, yeah, she’ll re-wear them all the time. excuses.

    • Anitas says:

      High quality pieces? Most of her clothes recently has been obviously badly fitted, including the wedding dress. How is it even possible to spend so much money on such badly tailored pieces? Kate is guilty of that as well, make no mistake. Both of them could write a book on how to spend tons of money on clothes that still looks like it came from a Mango outlet.

    • sunshine poolside says:

      I don’t think Meghan will be able to recycle her wardrobe. Because oversize-coats and dresses too tight around the chest won’t be an item in the next years.
      I get what fashion effect Meghan tries to create: oversize coat to point out her petite figure. Tight dresses to point out her curves. Though I always get a shock when I see her bony tiny stick-insect lower legs when she is wearing something knee-length.

  42. Whew. She must really love him to want to put up with this s**t.

    • Mia says:

      @Highland Fashionista, I know right? If I was her, I wouldn’t renounce my American citizen. I would drop the title but stay married. Then do my humanitarian duties with the organizations I choose wearing free clothes gifted by designers, M&S, H&M, thrift store etc. Don’t know if that would be possible. I couldn’t handle being in a gilded cage.

    • LoveMusic says:

      Well, she gets a 1/2 million dollars of clothes from the British public, and a big house renovated for free.

  43. PrincessK says:

    I really cannot understand the intense scrutiny of how much royal women spend on clothing. Should the word ‘royal’ not be a clue? Why should the ordinary public determine how much the Queen or anybody else in her family spends on clothing. They are supposed to look good and provide a wow factor. I find it all unnecessarily intrusive, you either have a monarchy or you don’t.

    I would much rather see how much revenue they bring in terms of rise in sales within the fashion industry and the ripple effect that it creates. Not to talk of sales of magazines and other things that depend on interest in the royals . Hello magazine must be rubbing its hands with glee, I would love to see their sales figures since Meghan came along. There are thousands and thousands of jobs, across different industry sectors, that benefit from the royal fashion parade to the tune of many many millions of pounds, and here we are quibbling over a very much disputed $500,000.

    • rukidding says:

      Because they live off the taxpayers. Actual programs like education and the NHS are suffering but MM spends an insane amount on clothing, most of which isnt even british/english so sits not going back into their economy. She is horribly, horribly tone deaf when it comes to clothing and I’ve lost some respect for her because of these. Kate was bashed on here for spending 175k in a whole year. Yet MM triples that in half a year and gets defended? What on earth?!?!

    • Chrome says:

      Because the ‘royal’ family exists courtesy of the British taxpayer who pays for every part of their existence. That’s why. ‘Royal’ is just an ancient construct from ignorant times. There is no such thing as royal. Their blood is not special, they are not better than anyone else.

      Unless you can quantify the jobs and money allegedly generated by the royals, it’s all conjecture. Do the British people need or want their royal family just parading new clothes? Not really. The focus of engagements should be the charity or whatever, not what a woman is wearing.

    • ex-Mel says:

      “Should the word ‘royal’ not be a clue? ”

      Should the quote marks around “royal” not be a clue? It’s a word devoid of any real meaning. It only points to the increasingly ridiculous status afforded to a group of perfectly ordinary people – more ordinary than many, I daresay – who are being pampered at other people’s expenses for no other reason that their distant ancestors were better at killing and plundering than other people’s.

    • Anitas says:

      Helping out tabloid sales and fashion knock-offs, two largely unethical industries, how admirable. Just what the nation needs. This ripple effect you talk about (but have little to back it up with – you just assume there is one) is just a byproduct of their thirst for a lavish lifestyle at someone else’s expense anyway, not a part of conscious effort.

      You have to have some cheek to nod sympathetically at impoverished and disadvantaged people, whilst sticking your badly fitted £4000 dress you’re only going to wear once or twice and paid for by the public, in their faces.

    • geekychick says:

      I somehow doubt Givenchy would suffer just because MM wore one less dress made by them.
      An d how much of the brands she wears are British? If we’re gonna compare, when I think of the other one, I always remember McQueen, because she wears hem so often.

    • PrincessK says:

      As usual the clothing worn by the Royal women brings out the Republican sentiments. I am not a Republican, and those plotting for the downfall of the British monarchy will have to look for more than this, and wait considerably longer.

      @rukidding…..I think you must be kidding if you are blaming Meghan’s wardrobe for failings in the British NHS and education. The failings of the NHS are less to do with half a million quid supposedly spent on clothes and jewels and more to do with the fact that the function and purpose of the NHS has completely changed from when it was founded and there has been no serious discussion about the type of NHS system British people want. A similar discussion could be had on the education system too.

      @Anitas….I am amazed that you say in a blanket statement that magazines and the fashion industry are unethical. You obviously know less about the fashion industry than even I do. It is obviously not apparent to you that what people wear everyday around the world has been heavily influenced by top designers. People like Vivienne Westwood and McQueen are given awards not because of the clothing they sell out of their shops but because of the ripple effect and influence they have on society, which inspires and creates many jobs within the fashion industry chain and beyond.

    • MargaritasForBreakfast says:

      Totally Agree. British posters on social media platforms are endlessly carping at the ROYALS for how much they spend yet usually don’t want to give up the Monarchy. Don’t they realize KINGS/QUEENS and Dukes and Duchesses are inherently grande expensive institutions? I wish they would just dissolve the Monarchy and let the royals go on about their business doing whatever royals do. I have no doubt that Harry and Meghan could get jobs as Executive Directors of international charities. If they don’t want all the trappings of a monarchy, end it! Just stop with the constant “my tax dollars blah blah blah blah blah” EVERY day.

  44. Valiantly Varnished says:

    Half of this is stuff she paid for herself, part of it is her wedding attire (which shouldn’t count). A lot of it is jewelry. And she’s been doing this for less than a year. Give her a chance to build a wardrobe. If she is spending insane amounts of money 2-3 yers from now then it’s an actual issue.

    • sunshine poolside says:

      Charles pays for Meghan’s clothes via the Duchy of Cornwall. He doesn’t pay for her jewelry.

      I remember that Kate Middleton rarely wore jewelry in her first year(s) and especially not for everyday events but only for red carpet gala dinner stuff events. That looks like a smart move now.

  45. MIMI says:

    Whaaaaaat? yeah its fine and dandy for an American to be okay with a mortal woman to spend 1/2 a million pounds on clothes that she didn’t pay for???? Of course, because you are not paying for it but the hard working Brits are.

    Would any of you hypocrites be okay paying for Complicit Barbie’s wardrobe’s for simply waving and smiling as a “job” expense??????? What those these royals do other than sponge off from the British people for a lavish life style of doing nothing? This is disgusting. Pay for your own SHIT!!!

    • MargaritasForBreakfast says:

      This is why you shouldn’t have a Monarchy. Just return all those crowns, jewels and treasures to the countries that the Monarchy stole it from and everything will be fine. Return all the natural resources and labor that the British Monarchy took from India, Africa and Asia, dissolve the commonwealth and let the royals become regular folks who aren’t hounded by the press and commoners yapping at them about expenditures as if they are a puppet show.

  46. Helen Smith says:

    If a garment is worn for an official engagement Charles writes it off the Duchy’s taxes as a business expense. That is why the UK public has a fit over the cost if they think it is too much money. That tax revenue has to be made up elsewhere for the government to provide services to the public.

    Not to mention if the monarchy is abolished Duchy revenues revert to the government so in a backdoor kind of way Charles’ money is the government’s money sine he wouldn’t be able to keep drawing from it if he became regular old citizen Charles Windsor.

  47. Katebush says:

    I think it’s a really bad look for her to be exceeding the clothing budget of the other royals by this much.

    It’s a lame excuse to say she’s building a royal wardrobe, investing in high end separates etc. what a load of nonsense! We won’t see the majority of the clothes she wore this year ever again I bet.
    What a waste of money!

    Even if You make the argument that Charles paid for it, she got a hefty discount, or she got gifted them (none of which we know for sure is true) the fact remains that’s there’s too much money being spent on her clothes.
    If she really wants to shake up the royals she could stray recycling some of her outfits and maybe buy a capsule business wardrobe she could rewear.

    The things she has worn this year are trendy and will look horribly dated in a years time so we wont see any of them again.

    I think both Kate and Meghan should have a clothing allowance. They don’t need high end designers for every appearance. This would win them a lot more respect with the public.

  48. Rosie says:

    Agree. I expect a bit of investment in her wardrobe but so much of it isn’t classic and will date or doesn’t suit her. It makes the money seem like a real waste. it’s not so much how much she’s spent but how badly she’s spent it. It’s a waste.

  49. A says:

    I’d like to think that Meghan is a smart enough person that she’s keeping track of these types of optics. I can’t imagine that someone like her, who’s been a working gal for so long, who tried her hand at being a lifestyle entrepreneur for women like that, wouldn’t know the value of building a multipurpose wardrobe that can be reused for many years going forward. So many of her clothes are things that I can totally see her wearing again and again, so I hope that she does, and that this is just a one-time thing.

    But yeah, it doesn’t look good. Even if she’s getting these clothes through steep discounts and at reduced prices, it doesn’t matter. The optics are what count. And while I’m not expecting her to recycle her clothes at the level Princess Anne does, which often veers too much into “cheapskate” territory for me, she should be much more savvy with what she’s buying, even if she’s not necessarily going to be rewearing those pieces.

  50. Janey says:

    I would be interested to know what Princess Anne spent, probably not much. I know she’s not photographed near as much but she does most of the “work” of the RF. I think with the economic and political climate in the UK at the moment MM needs to be wearing more of the high street such as the M&S jumper she wore whilst engaged. It’s really not going to do her any favours with people to hear she spends this kind of money on clothes, regardless of whose budget they come from. She’s got the face and figure where high street, less expensive clothes still look amazing and she’d be giving our economy a boost, as well as using her fashion savvy to demonstrate to those of us with less confidence how to look awesome in clothes we can actually afford.

  51. xo says:

    I finally got around to watching the first season of Suits & man, she’s essentially just eye candy on that show. They must have developed the character as they went on (right?), but, the early focus is almost entirely on her body. . .

    • Princessk says:

      I am on series four now, and yes her character does develop and her acting skills get better.

  52. Sass says:

    I love that candid headshot of her in the dark green button up. It’s so strange, I can see her becoming a true style icon, but she’s had as many misses as she’s had hits since her wedding. Her wedding gown, which was met with mixed feelings, ended up being a trendsetter – we are seeing the structured but soft look everywhere now, and in lots of white (see: Sandra Oh, 2019 Golden Globes, for most recent example). But the other two photos listed below that headshot were not winning looks. I liked the grey dress but it was a bit tight, and the green dress is also not photographing in motion well. I really love Megan, I think she is a good human being, beautiful as well, and when she nails a look, damn. But I can’t wait until the Mulroney days are totally over.

  53. LoveMusic says:

    What grills the Brits is that she just moved to Britain, never paid taxes in Britain, touted how humanitarian she is, and has spent way more than their future Queen, Kate.
    I think I’m most surprised that Meghan didn’t learn from the outrage of the engagement dress cost. I think she is just like a kid in a candy shop with access to designers who would never have dressed her before, other actors and A list people fawning over her, people who would have never given her the time of day before, and all of the attention she is getting. But she should beware – the Duchy doesn’t have to pay for her clothes and if she brings enough bad PR to the royals and Charles, he will cut her and Harry off faster than you can say “Prince Andrew.”