King Charles ‘rejected the idea’ of a budget coronation, he wants a ‘global’ event

King Charles’s coronation is scheduled for May 6th, his grandson Archie’s fourth birthday. Since QEII died, obviously the plans for the coronation have been underway, and Buckingham Palace has been briefing the royal rota throughout the process. For years, we were told that Charles’s coronation would be much different than his mother’s, that it would be shorter, breezier, less stuffy and, most importantly, it would be cheaper. Britain isn’t a global leader in anything other than shenanigans, so why burn millions of pounds on some fusty old coronation? Well, that’s exactly what they’re going to do.

The King has rejected the idea of a cut-price coronation and wishes to use the event to showcase “UK plc”, The Telegraph understands. The event will be a once-in-a-lifetime spectacle of “glorious” pomp and pageantry after Buckingham Palace and government aides took heed of the enormous international coverage generated in the aftermath of Queen Elizabeth II’s death.

One of the “key learnings” from Operation London Bridge and Spring Tide – the period of mourning between the late Queen’s death and her funeral, along with the new monarch’s tour of the UK – was that it proved to be a great advertisement for Britain. While it was always expected to be an event of great national significance, the global effect had not been fully considered.

As such, organisers are determined to invest in the coronation, which will take place at Westminster Abbey on May 6, recognising that the rewards will be unrivalled.

The coronation is expected to be shorter than the late Queen’s, with fewer attendees, better reflecting the modern monarchy. Reports of a shorter, simpler service prompted fears of a “cut-price” ceremony that would send the wrong message to the world. However, aides insisted that the only elements to be removed from the ceremony would be those now considered outdated and cumbersome.

Palace insiders and politicians are said to agree that any attempt to reduce the occasion would be a missed opportunity to showcase “UK plc” on the global stage.

The King is deeply conscious of the cost of living crisis and there is clear acknowledgment that the ceremony will take place at a time of economic hardship, meaning that every penny must be accounted for and justified. However, through recent events, organisers have learnt that a grand royal spectacle is the most powerful way to promote Britain’s international standing.

[From The Telegraph]

I remember talking about the “budget coronation” with CB a few months ago, and pointing out that it’s actually cost-neutral for Charles to simply dust off all of the royal family’s gold carriages, stolen jewels, velvet robes and diamond-encrusted orbs. Like, that sh-t already exists and it’s just sitting there in storage. So yes, the coronation is the perfect excuse to get all of that out in public view. If the Queen’s funeral showed us anything, it’s that the only thing the Brits do well is fussy pomp, so sure, do the big parades and whatever else too. But also admit that throwing this big coronation party is a huge waste of everyone’s time and money. They’re going to blow tens of millions of pounds on an hour-long coronation, all for clout and status… and literally everything else in the UK is in crisis.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar.

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

143 Responses to “King Charles ‘rejected the idea’ of a budget coronation, he wants a ‘global’ event”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Ginny says:

    What a crass way for “government aides” to talk about the Queen’s death/funeral/mourning period. A great advertisement that made a bunch of money!

    • ML says:

      Tbf, almost every English person I know seems to believe this as if it were gospel. The BRF brings in about £19 billion per year. I’m pretty sure that the British media earn a lot of their fortune via the royals as well.

      • C says:

        It does not bring in that much, and what the family does bring in they often sit on (admission revenues etc) and do not inject back into the British economy.

      • Becks1 says:

        I know, I think people in England have really been brainwashed to accept this.

        Do I believe the big events like weddings bring in a lot? Of course. But on a daily basis? I just don’t think so.

        I think the royal historical SITES probably bring in a lot, but they would do that regardless. No one is visiting the Tower of London bc they are expecting to see a royal milling about, besides maybe Anne Boleyn’s ghost. Mayyyybe something like Trooping or the Changing of the Guards brings in tourists, but my take on it is that its probably more of a “while we’re there anyway let’s do this.” No one is planning a trip to London to see if they can spy Kate in another coatdress.

      • Steph says:

        How do they bring in money? I’m pretty sure tourists aren’t expecting to run into the royals as they are out exploring. Would tourism really change of they got rid of the monarchy?

      • Lola09 says:

        Well, I’m English so know kind of a lot of English people – obviously I choose who I hang out with but of those 90%+ are staunch republicans who think the amount of money spent on the royal family for any purpose is obscene. Now during such an awful cost of living crisis but before as well. We aren’t all Daily Hell reading right wing morons!

      • Swaz says:

        I thought it was Harry and Meghan alone that was money conscious , there’s always an excuse for the others 🤢

      • Lucy says:

        All the buildings and jewels etc that “bring in tourists” will still continue to do so if the monarchy is abolished. It could possibly even bring in more because more things could be opened up to public without those freeloaders living in all their palaces.

      • AlpineWitch says:

        I live in N. England and the Daily-Mail-reading crowd is usually uneducated, racist, and… guess what, royalist as well!

        Weirdly enough, those people are the poorest in the area too, so I do wonder what got through their heads, perhaps they were really brainwashed to just doff their caps at the BRF from the cradle. It beggars belief.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        A former monarchy brings in more money than a current monarchy. “Former” means ALL the royal palaces, residences, jewels, art, etc., could be opened up for visitors. The royal family costs money, it doesn’t bring it in. What little money it does bring in goes to *them* (like the bags of cash russian oligarchs give to Charles, or the £12million of earthsh!t money William spent on himself).

        @AlpineWitch — it’s the same in the USA. A lot of Trump supporters are uneducated and poor, which you would think makes them favor a government that is fair and helps those in need? But no, they support Trump, probably because racism over-rides their own self-interests. And conservatives here don’t like education, because it benefits *them* to keep their voters uneducated.

      • Annalise says:

        ML- lol, that is an absolute LIE. And it doesn’t take a genius to figure out WHY it’s so important to the monarchy to keep pushing that lie. The fact is, anytime anyone visits a place or attends an event that only has the most tenuous of connections to the royal family, the royal family is credited. Even if the royals themselves were nowhere NEAR the event. THAT is why one constantly hears royalists, Tories, and the like screeching “But something something TOURISM!!!!”
        So not only are the royals credited for bringing tourism they had nothing to do with, Buckingham Palace is only the 69th most popular tourism attraction, with Windsor Castle coming in at #18. Apparently the Chester Zoo is WAY more popular than both Palaces. Although to be fair, the zoo maybe DOES have a royal connection, because $20 says that Camilla is part donkey. Her facial features, in particular, have always struck me as rather equine. Her and Sara Jessica Parker.

      • Remy says:

        It’s been debunked many times, most recently by John Oliver. Give it a watch if you haven’t yet

      • Emily_C says:

        Look at France’s tourism numbers compared to Britain’s. Now look at Britain’s internal tourism numbers, at which sites bring the most tourists.

        The royals hurt tourism, they do not help it. They help the country, they do not help it. They hurt the world — they’re harboring a man who raped an American citizen, they take bags of cash from misogynistic theocracies, etc. If anyone in Britain thinks the royals make their country look better to the rest of the world, they could not be more wrong.

    • Chloe says:

      It’s also simply a gross miscalculation. Charles is not the queen. The Queen was widely and globally respected, and because she was there for so long became some sort of an icon. People watched the funeral because they thought it was an historic event. People traveled to pay their respects because they respected the queen. Charles is disliked. So i don’t think Brits will take this well.

      • Eurydice says:

        There will be grumbling by the British, but I think there’ll also be pride that they can stage something that will be watched by the whole planet. It’s like they’re producing their own version of The Crown – the international audience won’t care how it’s made or what it cost, they just want the entertainment.

      • DK says:

        Such a miscalculation.

        Sure, it’s a “once in a lifetime” experience for Charles and other folks of a certain age since it hasn’t been done in 70 years.

        But the rest of the world is going to get another coronation in about 20 years, when it’s Will’s turn (and that’s maximum. It’s reasonable that C3 won’t make it into his 90s; so many don’t).

        And since Will will be about 60-70ish when that happens, it’s another 20 or so years until it’s George’s turn.

        So every 20 or so years, they’re going to throw billions of pounds around just to have the new king bring out all the old stolen goodies they already own?

        How is that justifiable?

        (And don’t say the tourism piece. Research has debunked that. The royals don’t bring in even close to the amount of tourism necessary to make them break even with what the taxpayers pay for them, let alone turn a profit.
        As pointed out above, the biggest tourist stuff related to royals are the major events – (and it’s just coronations and funerals now until George et al are old enough to marry – and most of the Queen’s funeral attendees were British citizens coming in from other parts of the UK, not international visitors specifically booking tickets bc the Queen died. Plus you’re not spending a lot of tourist money when you’re in a queue for days on end) – and the major historical buildings like the Tower, which not only get tourists despite not having any active living royals present but probably can process exponentially more visitors a day BECAUSE it’s not a current royal household.)

      • Dee says:

        I may be wrong because of my loathing for the RF, but do I detect massive desperation here? Look, people have been shitting all over Camilla, and often Charles along with her, for DAYS on social media, and it is clear that people still blame the two for their treatment of Diana. It seems like that resentment will never go away. People call Camilla a mistress or a whore or a home wrecker. And however unfair it is, her personal unattractiveness is not winning her any fans. In an age of celebrity, C and C just don’t have what it takes.

        So Charles thinks he can shine in the light of his mother with this big expensive event. I suspect it will indeed backfire.

        But he has one thing going for him. The UK gutter press will provide a narrative of unalloyed greatness and patriotism. To the rest of the world, not so much. W and C can’t even go to a Celtics game without being booed, ffs.

        The only thing that would really help Charles is if the Sussexes attend. I hope they do not. If they do, I seriously have to ask, wtf is the matter with them? Are they masochists? Do they enjoy being shit on? Do they want to give Charles the attention and adulation he doesn’t deserve? I get mad just thinking about them going. It would lend credence to the accusations that they are attention hos.

        Cannot wait to see how this shit show turns out.

      • AlpineWitch says:

        There’s already a lot of grumbling about this as staging a ‘less pompous’ coronation would provide the money to stop the endemic strikes in the UK, almost all categories of workers have been striking since November.

        It is, indeed, a gross miscalculation that will turn people against Charles, not in favour. Our global reputation went already in the gutter with Brexit and we’re now in free fall towards the bottom.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        I agree, who really cares about Charles getting his crown? It will be all about whether Meghan does or does not attend. I also think their view of Elizabeth’s funeral is off-base. I’m sure it was a big deal in England, but not so sure it was a “global” event. When Elizabeth died, I told a friend who said they thought she was already dead.

    • Colby says:

      Crass yes, but let’s remember that the BRF basically justifies its existence and taxpayer funding by saying “we bring in more tourist dollars than we spend!!!!!” So really it’s right in line.

    • B says:

      It’s good advertisement for the MONARCHY not Britain and honestly anytime they’ve done anything on a global stage lately they’ve blown it. They allowed the press to make the Queen’s funeral and Jubbly all about abusing Meghan.

      Charles’s coronation will be the same. The press will make it all about Meghan whether she’s there or not and the monarchy will look callous for not defending her AGAIN. If he had kept it low key and used the cost of living crisis as an excuse he could at least pretend solidarity with the struggling Brits.

      But a budget coronation probably wouldn’t attract global press attention. Especially if they are still bitter about the low viewership from the QE2 funeral. And most importantly of all to that petty competitive utterly dysfunctional family is the fact that the Sussexes just had a global event with blockbuster numbers. C3 has to compete! His viewing numbers must beat the Sussexes!

      • Reborn Rich says:

        I did not know the viewership numbers for Q’s funeral was low. C mentions his mother to garner nostalgic feelings for HER which redound onto him.

    • Dee says:

      OMFD I just realized something.

      Charles must believe that the only reason H & M get worldwide attention is precisely and ONLY because they are part of the royal family.

      This has to be a big part of his reasoning for a beefed-up coronation.

      God how effing delusional. But the RF paid bots use this reasoning day in and day out.

      Oh I will be so happy to see it all come crashing down. #Eggthemonarchy

      • Jean says:

        But that’s the initial reason, if Harry was an actor on Eastenders who would care, he is famous because he is a prince and Diana’s son. I hope he and Meghan don’t attend the coronation so the British tabloids don’t keep harassing them.

      • aftershocks says:

        Yes, at this point, I really hope the Sussexes turn their backs on this. I get the feeling that Harry still wants to honor the traditions. But now that his grandmother, the Queen, is gone, there’s not much for him and Meg to honor. They are not being respected! They continue to be copied and competed against by Harry’s brother, father and stepmother, while the rota and BM continue with Sussex-trashing 24/ 7.😣

        After the horrific Clarkson attack, with absolutely nothing said against it by anyone in the royal family, M&H attending the coronation would look like them condoning the abuse they consistently receive. I understand that Harry probably feels stuck between a rock and a hard place, because I don’t think he wants to turn his back completely on his family or his country. Maybe Harry will go briefly? I’m not sure.

        If Harry decides to attend, I would imagine he will only make a perfunctory appearance and not stay for the entire dog and pony show. The whole thing might be triggering for him though because of memories of his own mother, who should never have died, who should have become Queen! Camilla taking Diana’s place is a huge Fail! Fail! Fail! of exponential proportions. 🤮 But as Diana predicted, Charles is NOT a good king either. The saddest part is that Will’s weak lack of character is even worse than his father’s! 😳

  2. Dulcinea says:

    I think this is all gonna back fire on them. Specially with the cost of living crisis and if the people have a really rough winter, the optics are so bad. The monarchy is so clueless

    • Anners says:

      Yes to this ^^ Once again the royals proving that they are inept at reading the room. It’s baffling how with their money and access they are still unable to get competent PR people.

      • TigerMcQueen says:

        As someone with PR experience, you can be the best PR person imaginable and give the best advice possible, but you can’t make your client listen to you and take your advice.

        Same thing for advertising, design of any kind, marketing, etc. The clients/boss make the decisions in the end, and many of them make poor ones. And King Snarles is ruled by his sense of entitltement (with a healthy dose of ‘chip on his shoulderitis’), and the royals in general are not very smart people.

      • Booboocita says:

        Competent PR professionals aren’t yes-men. They’ll tell you hard truths about your image and your standing with others, and what you need to do to improve them. You can’t be a good PR pro and a snivelling toady at the same time. And the BRF wants only the latter on their inner circle.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @TigerMcQueen..exactly. You can give, present and explain all the logical reasons to a client to NOT do something. The client’s arrogance makes them blinded to reasoning. I get that people see May 6th (Archie’s bday) as an issue/choice.

        I will say it now. The BM & affiliates will lie about the numbers of viewership for a crown plopped on Charles head. The first Saturday in May (May 6th) is and for decades has been, Kentucky Derby Day-a ‘global event’. Maybe Charles is trying to tie himself and his coronation to that big day. May 6th was a choice. Maybe giving the excuse, whoops people didn’t tune in because they were watching Derby coverage. Which, btw, starts quite early in the states and elsewhere.

    • ThatsNotOkay says:

      And the fact that no one likes Charles. Are people really going to watch or appreciate the expense?

    • DouchesOfCambridge says:

      They are testing the public opinion. Of course Charles want a global event! There’s no way the coronation of the waity king be a small affair (it cannot be smaller than H&M’s wedding and have less viewers than that!?) and the coronation of a King cannot be a smaller affair that the funerals of a queen!!!! That would be a SLAP IN THE FACE! I hope the public is going to rebuke this strongly. In the end, Charles will make it a huge event anyway, he thinks he deserves the extra becuase she just wouldnt die or give up the crown to him! The event will only be made less grand because he will be HIDING THE STOLEN JEWELRY!!!!

      • Green girl says:

        I hope this event is like trumps inauguration and there is just a smattering of crowds and no one bothers to watch on tv.

      • Carrot says:

        Imagine if instead of a spectacle, Charles has a quiet coronation at church and then gives all the money he would have spent to people in need?

      • Lucy says:

        Lol! That would certainly be the kind of thing that could be his legacy, but no! He has waited 70+ years for this job and he WILL be the prettiest girl at the prom or ELSE no pen is safe!

    • Reborn Rich says:

      The older English love this. It makes them–the porest in Western Europe–feel important. It could cost a billion pounds and the people may be freezing but. . . look at the pageantry!

  3. ML says:

    British Empire 2.0 on display, coming right up.
    Archie’s birthday. Cost-of-living crisis. Stolen jewels. Class differences. Family infighting. Initially saying you want a smaller, modest coronation and then rethinking that. Charles is about to rediscover that he is not and never will be his mother.

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ Yep! Also, the Clarkson attack, which Camilla has been associated with, due to the leaked luncheon party she hosted! I really hope Harry & Meghan simply send their ‘best regards’ and note that the coronation date conflicts with their son’s birthday and special plans they have to celebrate that milestone with him.

      If security issues are worked out, and perhaps a private familial detente occurs, perhaps the Sussexes can later make a ritual of returning annually for Trooping the Colour, sans any BP balcony appearance. Plus, M&H could make another side trip to see close friends and relatives in the U.K., before or after September 2023 Invictus, in Dusseldorf.

  4. Andy Dufresne says:

    “Let them eat cake” 🤦‍♀️

    Seriously Charles? Better spend that taxpayer money on a carriage that this egg-throwing proof lol.

    • Ktae says:

      That was exactly what I thought when I saw the headline. Tone deaf and unsympathetic to the masses that are struggling.

      Truly a “let them eat cake” moment. I wonder what the response will look like after that god awful display of wealth is trotted out.

    • ML says:

      As I mentioned above, just about every English person (and many British people) I know believe this. The RR earns well on the royals, and they will be “advertising” the benefits of a splashy coronation as well. Traditionally, the queen and her family have functioned as a symbol of GB, so it will be interesting to see what happens here. Charles is not his mum.

  5. HeyKay says:

    Oh of course he wants a global event, The Tool!
    He lives in and adores the past, it’s tradition, it’s history, blah, blah, blah.
    It is a waste of a huge amount of money for a traditional coronation.
    I can’t imagine anyone watching long televised coronation ceremony in this era, other than the over 68+ group. I’m 61 and I have zero interest in it.

    This refusal of his to change despite all the “Slimmed down monarchy” makes me angry.
    98% of the humans on planet earth are struggling in so many ways, but BRF carries on as usual.
    Down with the Monarchy.

    • Happyoften says:

      He has been waiting a lifetime for this. Like a bridezilla plans her wedding, he has been dreaming up how his coronation would go down.

      They would have had to pry it out of his cold dead hands if they wanted to slim it down.

      • blue says:


      • Julia K says:

        Charles knows this will be Englands last coronation and he wants it global and memorable for historical reference. Maybe he can sense the end of the monarchy as he knows it is near, with Wm showing no sign of being capable to follow him.

    • CourtneyB says:

      I could see people, at least in the uk, watching. There are so many ways. People here in the us, of various ages, watch the Presidential inaugurations and they are way more common and far less glamorous in terms of optics.

  6. Laura D says:

    Well if he really wants it to be a “global” event he better make sure his younger son attends. The best way to do that is to issue a statement condemning the disgusting article by Jeremy Clarkson.

    • Kingston says:

      It is my post fervent hope and dream that H&M DO. NOT. attend that fiasco.

      • Reborn Rich says:

        We’ll see. Meghan said she liked the big family and events. She named her daughter after the Q. She wanted it to work and she’s an optimist. I wouldn’t be surprised if they attended for many reasons, the historical record being the most understandable.

  7. CrazyHeCallsMe says:

    And the unspoken elephant in the room in all this is the need and desire to tamp down global Sussex power. Those Netflix documentary viewing numbers, the global reach of Meghan’s podcast and Harry’s book has the Monarchy shook. The goal is to do whatever it takes to get the world’s attention away from the Sussexes and back on the British Monarchy.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      They’re worried that H&M won’t come. Maybe they should be more worried that W&K won’t come. (See earlier post.) I think everyone should just stay home. All this pomp & circumstance is past it’s sell by date.

    • Jais says:

      This is why I think Charles will very much want the Sussexes at his coronation. Personally, he might not want them there, but for the global attention they’ll bring, he will. He wants to use Harry as usual.

      • Dee Kay says:

        @Jais: What you said, 100%. It will be sooooooo super frustrating to see Harry and Meghan return for the coronation to support Harry’s father, only to be embarrassed and “dressed-down” and thrown to the tabloid vultures yet again. Today, I think Harry *will* go back at his dad’s request. But it is painful to watch a grown person return to their abusive parent for more and more abuse, until they finally realize that no-contact is the best and only way.

    • WiththeAmerican says:

      For sure they need H and M there because at the very least it brings in huge views for car crash drama addicts, then add in the enormous fan base of the Sussexes.

      Not sure how they could go knowing what they now know about the “queen consort”

      • Duch says:

        @With- Yeah, guilty. No, I will watch for sure if H and M are there, and I’d get up early too. Not for drama but to see them. if they’re not there, I’m not sure I’d watch.

      • BlueToile says:

        Ooooh, I think H&M should go abroad on a humanitarian trip with the kids, maybe with WCK, and then quietly post some pictures on Archewell the day before the coronation. The media would completely melt down. Lol! It would kill the RF and emphasize how wasteful all that pomp really is. They won’t, but I am petty like that.

      • Embee says:

        Would love the Sussexes to stay home and quietly post a single, artful photo of the birthday party. It would derail so much of the coronation with little to no effort

  8. Emma123 says:

    Let’s wait and see if coronations actually happen on may 2023. China is having covid surge and they already cancelled their lunar year celebration which means shit is real. But keep dreaming chuck.

    • Nic919 says:

      The UK doesn’t care anymore if people get Covid. Like most of the western countries they are pretending it’s over.

      • Emma123 says:

        Recently indian government has announced mask up and cancelled new yeark celebration too. Same for hong kong cancelled lunar new year celebration. As usual here moron will ignore and this is mutated one. Buckle up it’s going to be crazy.

    • hangonamin says:

      hard to say what’s going on with covid in china. low rates of immunity/vaccination makes it hard to compare to UK and US. will have to see how the winter goes…may is still far away and don’t think it’s close enough to say it needs to be cancelled with majority of UK population vaccinated and the subvariant of omicron already circulating in UK without driving the surge we see in china.

      • AlpineWitch says:

        Majority of UK isn’t vaccinated as last booster was only given to the over 50s and many of those eligible didn’t go to a vaccination walk in centre anyway.

        And without boosters, you can get Covid like you didn’t have any vaccination at all, heck my husband and I got the Omicron B2 with 2 vaccine doses and 1 booster and it kept us in bed for 2 weeks!

  9. Jan90067 says:

    All of these people have ZERO ability to read the room, and ALL of the hubris to think this will be a “once in a lifetime” event. Just the mere fact there is one per generation blows that out of the water. And considering the King of Tampons is in his 70s assures there will another one in 20-30 yrs from now (IF the monarch(y) hasn’t blown itself up by then). ‘

    Another other than the old guard racists, who wants to see Cowmilla, Queen of the Rottweilers, sclump down an aisle to get a crown?

    What a waste of money.

    • ML says:

      Or perhaps the Tories are in panic mode right now? That might also have something to do with this announcement.

  10. Amy Bee says:

    I think this coronation is going to come off as tone deaf.

    • Ann says:

      A man wearing a jeweled crown and velvet fur cape is going to look silly.

      • AnneL says:

        I read this and immediate thought of the Disney cartoon version of Prince John in “Robin Hood,” lol. King Richard (the “Lion Heart”) had a magnificent mane but John didn’t, he was sort of snively looking and had a purple fur cape or something.

        That’s who Charles is. Disney Prince John.

  11. Becks1 says:


    The Queen’s death as an advertisement for Great Britain? It really really wasn’t. I don’t know anyone who thought “oh look at that military unit marching, I want to visit England now.”

    It got international coverage bc the Queen had been Queen for over 70 years and most people in the world had only known her as the british monarch.

    No one cares that much about the coronation. they just don’t. He’s already king, what is the point of this ceremony?

    And then to have the big Trooping a month later…..Charles, read the room.

    • Nic919 says:

      The funeral was a recognition of the long life of the queen as one of the few global celebrities. And even with her the issues of empire and colonization came up.

      A coronation is simply an exercise in narcissism because no one really believes that god anointed anyone to rule over others. (Many Christians would say that there is only one king and he is not of this earth).

      The protests against Elizabeth were essentially quiet because she had died and most people don’t want to protest when someone has died, but this coronation won’t play out the same way.

      This may bring tourists, but it will also bring protestors.

  12. Elizabeth says:

    I’m actually ok with this. Let them continue to show how out of touch they are.

  13. A says:

    ‘promote Britain’s standing’ but like 2/3 of the island hate the choices their monarch’s making and the other nation involved, Northern Ireland, doesn’t even get a mention. So that’s cool.

    They can’t justify a coronation during this or any other time because it is fundamentally an unjustifiable system. To blow millions of pounds anointing a 70-whatever year old man with oil while the country’s breakfast cereal companies are running contests to pay for people’s heating just makes the entire production sad and infuriating.

  14. Vanessa says:

    I wonder if the people who kept insisting how Meghan and Harry were ungrateful for just laughing about nott cottage . How it’s was so disrespectful because the cost of living crisis in England will the concern troll have the same energy for Charles would lives in England know that his people are suffering but is insisting on throwing a huge party for himself .

    • C says:

      Well that’s different. He’s white, so his theft and pomposity is totally fine. The biracial Duchess who laughed about a cottage is the tone-deaf cruel one obviously.

    • hangonamin says:

      agreed. this is super tone deaf and really poor form to throw so much money when there’s a lot of things the money can be used for. BUT i will say as both H&M are rich people…bringing up the nott cottage was a little insensitive. i get they were trying to showcase this facade of glamor is not real but the poor timing with the docu coming out when strikes are going on everywhere and they’re poking fun at a 1000 sq feet+ cottage as being shabby didn’t read well with people. in no way are the two comparable (what king chucky is doing), but it definitely had flavors of rich people lamenting about things normal people would be happy to have. i can see both sides.

      • C says:

        Anyone who is still saying it’s tasteless is at this point wilfully completely misreading what was a lighthearted scene. If you’re saying you understand what they were saying there, then you have no reason to say it was “tone-deaf” because that is something you are projecting. And the “people” it didn’t read well with are the usual suspects, so that doesn’t prove a thing.

      • Jaded says:

        So you’re saying a light-hearted reveal about the shabby state of the very small Nott Cott is in poor form and insensitive? It’s the Wails living in 4 lavish homes, 2 in ginormous castles, that is the height of insensitivity, especially since they’re doing it on the taxpayers’ dime while barely working.

      • Kingston says:

        This take is such a crock of shidt.
        Knott cott was a dump compared to what M was used to. Jealous hateful racists with their usual double standard were the ones trying to say M was dissing the cottage. M, as usual, was her gracious self and uttered not a word of criticism.

        People who are so concerned about the state of britain and the strikes and the food banks and the crumbling health service and your teeming poor, should take it up with your welfare royals, your benefit scroungers who live high on the hog and dont give a shidt about the poor.

        Take your grudgeful jealous eyes off the self-made millionaire biracial woman with the high life she built for herself, long before she met her prince of a husband.

      • Dee Kay says:

        It seemed to me that even though Harry and Meghan laughed about the small size of Nottingham Cottage, they were both really happy to live there. It was the first place they lived in together, and it was dear to them. All of their photos from that time, they were smiling and laughing, looking radiant and joyful. I can see how it was a lovely pre-wedding and honeymoon home for them. Just too small to live in for very long after Archie came along!

  15. SussexWatcher says:

    More evidence that the slimmed down monarchy doesn’t mean less money, just the same amount of money going to fewer people. Got it. When will the British people wake up and abolish this clown show?

    This man really is so out of touch with reality that he’s gonna burn his own reign down to the ground. He and his nasty wife have been screwing up since day 1 with the multiple public rages at fountain pens…all the way until this week with Camzilla’s ciggie BFF telling the world what the family think of Meghan and them refusing on any level to speak up for her. Complete crickets from that family of idiots.

    And now they’re gonna spend millions upon millions when half the country is on strike, mail is sitting in warehouses, and the NHS is crumbling? They are just. So. Stupid. And I actually love it because it will just hasten their own demise.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      “The same amount of money going to fewer people” is a key point that’s not made often enough.

      • SomeChick says:

        hear, hear. and this coronation mishegas is the same way – it’s not a budget coronation! it’s going to be the same amount of money for less spectacle. we’ll still see the horse parades and at least some of the stolen jewels. this whole thing is going to be such a nothingburger. no one believes they’re annointed by god. they are so out of touch.

  16. HeyKay says:

    Amy Bee is correct. I too think this coronation is going to come back to bite them.
    They are so out of touch and tone deaf it is unreal.

    Charles and Camilla presenting themselves as K&Q, turns my stomach.
    Many of us in Dianas’ generation, myself included, who know how cruelly she was treated will never accept Camilla as Q or QC. She is awful in a million ways.

  17. Plums says:

    Oh boy. If they try it, I suspect it will completely backfire. Charles and Camilla are not popular like QE2 was. And they’re not imbued with the same kind of historical, national significance that the queen had either, which allowed people who were not royalists or monarchists to at least respect her enough not to kick up a fuss about government spending on her funeral. And even so, after the initial interest from all the pomp and ceremony surrounding the funeral plateaued, I think there was some incredulity when it just. kept. going. It was too much. And that was for a relatively uncontroversial figure (in comparison to Charles).

    He’s not going to receive the same fascination, imo. Especially if the family and the government keep getting embroiled in scandal and the economy is broken.

  18. Eurydice says:

    It’ll be like the Super Bowl!

  19. Woke says:

    Read this comment from a royalist and it’s really is a good point “Good. Those who want a simple coronation don’t really want a coronation at all. When monarchs or churches scale things down, all they are really doing is telling the world they don’t have the confidence to declare their importance”
    That’s their whole problem right there they missed out on an opportunity to be able to withstand these kind of times where they have to do pomp and pageantry by engaging in the culture wars. Now they’re a divisive entity rather than am unifying one.

    • Becks1 says:

      Interesting point. Someone who is a royalist is going to want the pomp and pageantry and all that. And I think a lot of in between people do as well, maybe? Like if you’re going to do it, go all out.

      I read an article years ago from an old guard type of aristocrat….I can’t remember the name to save my life, but he was someone who had been a royal commentator or advisor or something like that for decades (not a RR) and was a HUGE snob. Like it might have been the first line of the article, “I am a huge snob” kind of thing lol. Anyway it was about Will and Kate and about their push to seem “normal” and to seem like they were just ordinary people. He was against that because he said if they were just normal and ordinary, then what was the point? People want to imagine the royals living this life of wealth and privilege and glamor because it can be fun to imagine and they want to think that they are “different” from the rest of us. His big point was because if they aren’t “different” from us, then what is the point of them and why are british people paying for them??

      It was an interesting take that has stood with me because he was pretty anti Will and Kate but not for the reasons most of us are, lol. This might have even been before they had kids, I can’t remember.

      • Lara (the other) says:

        Interesting point. I kind of agree, I do it right and don’t pretent to be normal, or accept, that the monarcy is outdated and abolish the whole thing.
        The problem is, they lost the plot in the Diana days and never got back on track to be above pettiness and politics, be inclusive to represent All of the commonwealth (or at least UK) and beeing a unifying symbol.

  20. Snuffles says:

    I’m predicting an egg shortage in England. 🙄

    • Angelica+Schuyler says:

      But there’s no shortage of ‘excrement’.

      Perhaps the people will throw it at Chuckles and the Rottweiler while screaming “shame” since they don’t seem to think there’s anything wrong with that type of behavior happening to other members of the family.

      As head of the church Charles should lean into the Golden Rule- Do unto others as you would have them do unto you…

  21. Vanessa says:

    So many people were concerned about Meghan and Harry just joking about their cottage on Kensington. Calling them ungrateful talking about the living crisis in England even though Meghan and Harry haven’t lived there In three years. Yet Charles the King decides its a good idea to have a huge expensive party to show off all of their stolen wealth while his country is a living crisis and people are starving .

  22. Bad Janet says:

    Their audacity is almost too stupid to be believed. H&M handed the Crown a silver platter with everything they needed to rehabilitate their image, but instead, they think the best optics are to declare their wealth when people are suffering, stolen from and made off of the backs of the people they claim to be connecting to.

    Is everyone in their PR office a hundred years old?

    • Bananarama says:

      Lol did you see the queen’s private secretary? He’s like a billion. That honorary guard that passed out at the funeral? Dinosaur.

      They’re surrounded by old grace and favor people, many of whom are also hereditary appointments, who are all enormously out of touch and don’t particularly care.

      We’re watching the class system, which underpins every single thing including the government, in the UK fight for survival. Remember how everyone was commentating on how that absurd line through London for the queen was done intentionally for optics? This is the same thing, all of this made up pomp is meant to impress people and insist upon the monarchy’s importance.

      This coronation will come at the end of am extremely difficult winter and spring for the UK. energy bill price freezes expire in April, the (Tory) government is refusing to even speak with the striking unions because they’re counting on the public turning on the strikers, every day a new scandal about how some connected Tory got millions fraudulently funneled to them during the pandemic money shower.

      All of this is converging at once, and into the whole thing blasts a torpedo from Harry and Meghan )who couldn’t really have predicted any of this timing, it should be noted).

      I would expect it to get much worse before it gets better, the government is already working on ways to make it illegal to protest or strike, as well as make it harder to vote. We’ve already seen how they treat dissent against the monarchy, remember the guy arrested for holding up a blank piece of paper?

  23. kelleybelle says:

    Great … not. I hope Griphook and the Crypt Keeper – well let’s put it this way. I hope there are raw eggs involved. But then that’s a waste of good food and many in UK are hungry right now.

  24. Athena says:

    What people go to England to see are the buildings, the beautiful countryside, the stolen jewels and artifacts, not the royal family. The tourists would still show up if England got rid of the house of Windsor.

  25. My opinion says:

    Imagine the entire British Monarchy brought down by a man who wants to be a tampon? The history books didn’t see that one coming.

  26. Angie H says:

    The $10M tho pays many ppl. Same thought behind our ugly political campaign spectacles. A lot of non partisan people like printers, videographers, media buyers etc all benefit from the enormous cash spent. What’s absurdly outdated is the idea of keeping the UK relevant as a political power w a ceremony for a monarch w little of a real job even constitutionally.

  27. Mslove says:

    Lol, if Chuck has a budget coronation, he’ll look foolish. If Chuck has an extravagant coronation, he’ll look foolish. I love this for him. No matter what, the RF will look foolish & out of touch. The people are not okay with the stolen jewels & racism anymore.

  28. Julia K says:

    Anyone notice the smirk on Charles face while walking behind David, Roses’ husband?

  29. Monlette says:

    It would be funny if H&M not only didn’t go, but also put on a birthday concert for Archie with ten times the star power at a tenth of the cost, and caused the coronation ratings to tank. H&M aren’t that petty, but I can dream.

    • Chrissy says:

      I like your thinking: Wouldn’t it be great if H&M and their friends held a charity concert/ telethon in honour of Archie’s birthday, in hopes of raising funds for various struggling homeless shelters and food banks ? The BRF’s and BM’s heads would explode!!!

  30. sparrow says:

    As long as we get that bank holiday. What an utter waste of (our) money this lot are.

  31. susan says:

    “this will all end in tears”

    If I could talk to them, I would beseech H & M: Do NOT go to this event. There is nothing for you there. Don’t endure the cold shoulders, the rudeness, and the outright racism of your family of origin. Don’t subject yourself to the awfulness of the British gutter press who have abused you so terribly, deeply enabled by your dreadful family of origin.

    Instead, have a party for your son, and let Misan Harriman “leak” a few images on his IG a few days after the fact.

    Living well truly is the best revenge.

  32. blue says:

    “…the only elements to be removed from the ceremony would be those now considered outdated and cumbersome.”
    So, all of them? Grown men in giant capes & big hats, horse parades, etc, are all quite outdated.
    Archie has playmates & has probably been to at least a couple of birthday parties. H&M might prefer to stay home & give him a party? I would.
    I don’t travel to England to see royals. I’ve gone for museums, architecture, history, the countryside – just as I’ve gone to Scotland & Ireland. I prefer & more often visit Italy & France – no live royals there, so obviously the BRF is no attraction for this Californian.
    Chuck’s dreaming if he thinks his coronation has any global consequence outside of the Commonwealth.

    • Chrissy says:

      As I write this from a commonwealth country, no one here is clambering for the pomp and circumstance of a Coronation unless they are the over -80 crowd of British descent. Charles and his flunkies are delusional if they think ANY coronation would be a great idea given his, Camilla’s and the BRF’s unpopularity as well as the financial crisis the world is experiencing. He is no QEII!

  33. Jay says:

    It’s a tricky maneuver – you want the power associated with the golden carriage and the tiaras etc, but you don’t want people to wonder how you amassed all of that wealth in the first place. It would be smart to try to involve the commonwealth and make it more of a “people’s” event, but I’m not sure I trust the palace to execute that.

  34. AmelieOriginal says:

    Is it really a once in a lifetime spectacle? They’ve done several Jubilees for late QEII, the annual Trooping the Colour, all the royal weddings, QEII’s funeral… I understand a coronation is a different kind of event and I might be more excited if Charles was a woman but it just seems more of the same. The BRF do pageantry on a pretty frequent basis IMO.

    • Lizzie says:

      Let’s just say that for the majority it won’t be a once in a lifetime event. Unless it’s the last one.

    • Lucky Charm says:

      I think they meant the coronation is a once in a lifetime event? But really it’s not, because KC3 is already 74 and more than likely they’ll do this again within 20 years. Most people living today will probably still be around by then.

  35. art maven says:

    FWIW, apparently the date Charles has picked for his coronation is astrologically disastrous and includes a short unfortunate reign.

    As a marketing event planner, I’ve long subscribed to the idea that the monarchy exists as an international tourism lure and has done so quite successfully in the past. However, tying this kind of initiative to any of the current incumbents is a very, very bad idea.

    • Jaded says:

      Isn’t that funny — numerous astrologers and psychics are predicting a short, tumultuous reign for old Upchuck, and it seems they’re making a hash of it already. Clearly he and Camzilla have started the ball rolling towards the monarchy crumbling, and when #1 son takes over he and Stick (if they’re still together) will ensure its demise.

      • art maven says:

        Honestly, he’s thought to have picked the WORST possible day. I believe that any transition to William is also unfavorable, astrologically. Personally, let me say my bias is that the monarchy is long dead except as a historical artifact and that it has no future anyway.

      • Jennifer says:

        To be fair, you don’t have to be psychic/an astrologer to deduce he will have a short and drama-filled reign.

    • Krity says:

      Good for everyone, then, that astrology is 100% hokum. I swear I get so angry when I think of Diana consulting astrologers and psychics rather than getting real, evidence-based psychological help.

  36. Beana says:

    If KC3 were smart (which he is not), he’d turn Buckingham Palace exclusively into a museum and diplomatic events space. He should take all that fancy stuff that only gets trotted out for coronations and funerals and put it on display. He could charge admission, with UK citizens getting a steep discount, to raise funds for palace upkeep. The QEII Buckingham Museum could even have a special exhibit around coronations that could run from May through the summer – encouraging excitement around the coronation and trooping while giving a veneer of sharing “heritage with the people.” Can you imagine how many scandals he could cover with that??

  37. Diamond Rottweiler says:

    Yeah, it’s really saving money on the coronation that’ll send a terrible image of the RF to the world. Lolol. I’m really starting to think it’s inbreeding at work here, not just in the RF, but the whole gentry class who run everything in Britain. Too many Lady Binkys and Celerys marrying their first cousin Farquhars. Brain surgeons, these people are not.

    • Chrissy says:

      LOL! Well said, Diamond Rottweiler. ( I love your name BTW!)

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Diamond Rottweiler, I was watching a rerun of the tv series “Bones” recently. It had Ryan Cartwright (British) as a lab tech. The Hodges character said something like, “that’s why I’m the king of the lab.” Cartwright’s character (who always had a tidbit of knowledge about everything) then immediately says, “it’s well known that most members of the royal family have mental deficits because of inbreeding.” Not specifically a direct quote, but I thought it was very timely to hear. I tend to believe this. THIS is why they’re so bad at PR and the gaffs they make in public.

  38. teecee says:

    This is another reason they’re kicking the can down the road on the Sussex title thing as well. They want the Sussexes there. Sussexes=more coverage, and a shot with Charles, Harry, and Meghan in it would be run on front pages all over the world.

    Whereas if they don’t go, half the commentators will be talking only about that. And if they decide to walk their dog during the same time, news stations in the US at least would go split screen. Imagine how humiliating that would be for Charles.

    • Well Wisher says:

      The time difference will play in the Sussexes favour, the UK is eight hours ahead of California.
      Timed correctedly, they can walk their dog and have a small party for Archie, if they are so inclined.
      The spiteful UK tabloid wants the Sussexes punished, but sees it as an affronts that they have set boundaries and moral compassed.
      Another important factor, they did not wait for everything to be perfect, in order to be happy.
      They have reclaimed ownership in all the important areas of their lives; whereas the media craves their acceptance.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      teecee, I believe QE2 could have ask them to denounce titles at the 1 year review (since they offered them up initially in 2020). The fact that didn’t happen makes me believe that she wanted them to keep the titles.

  39. Catherine says:

    Tone deaf to the last. There are many Brits now who cannot both eat and heat their homes. At a similar time in 1981, people put up with his wedding to Diana because the world was in love with DIANA. Nobody loves or likes these two, and this will not go down well.

  40. Well Wisher says:

    The time difference will play in the Sussexes favour, the UK is eight hours ahead of California.
    Timed correctedly, they can walk their dog and have a small party for Archie, if they are so inclined.
    The spiteful UK tabloid wants the Sussexes punished, but see it as an affront that they have set boundaries and moral compasses.
    Another important factor, they did not wait for everything to be perfect, in order to be happy.
    They have reclaimed ownership in all the important areas of their lives; whereas the media craves their acceptance.

  41. Cali says:

    I think that there will be protesters at this event. “Queen W***e” and “Not my King” signs would not make for great optics.
    Queen Elizabeth was revered. Charles is not liked and Camilla’s support is paper thin. This will be a flop.

  42. tamsin says:

    Queen Elizabeth was young and she and Philip were a young and glamorous couple at the time. People were still recovering from WWII and longing for hope and optimism. Nothing like youth to engender that. Charles is not that popular to start with, and neither is Camilla. Not to be ageist, but they are not a young couple, and don’t seem to appeal much to anyone except die-hard royalists, and Tories. True, nobody does pageantry as well as the Brits, but if that is all that they have, then it really is a case of the Emperor has not clothes. Furthermore, this is a new century, the Divine Right of Kings should be abolished. If they really wanted to be a part of the modern world, they should acknowledge that the sovereign has a specific job, and instead of a coronation, have an investiture. A “royal family” is not needed.

    • Chrissy says:

      Good idea, @tamsin. Televise the investiture, without all the robes, sceptres and other obscene displays of wealth especially the parading of toffs kissing Charles’ ring or whatever, and leave it at that. But of course they won’t. Charles’s ego couldn’t stand it for himself or Camilla.

    • ChattyCath says:


  43. QuiteContrary says:

    This second sentence completely contradicts the first:
    “The King is deeply conscious of the cost of living crisis and there is clear acknowledgment that the ceremony will take place at a time of economic hardship, meaning that every penny must be accounted for and justified. However, through recent events, organisers have learnt that a grand royal spectacle is the most powerful way to promote Britain’s international standing.”

    “However” is doing A LOT of work there. They should sell some of their stolen jewels to buy themselves a clue.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      QuiteContrary, let’s see, how many articles were written about it wasn’t about race it’s because Meghan is an American! Then the articles would list all of things wrong with being American. Let’s be clear that I don’t believe that American’s are the only ones who work hard and expect support staff to work hard, too. Now take those countries and add them to the Commonwealth countries (at the least) and just how is their international standing going to improve? When you throw in the Jeremy Clarkson article, I don’t see how a pomp and circumstance event will help.

      I think the security risks to the Sussexes may well keep them out of the UK–they will be advised not to attend. If that happens, I hope that’s what the Sussexes announce and don’t attend. Obviously, they’ll do what they decide to do. I’m just more than tired of watching them both being treated soooooo poorly anytime they step foot around the brf.

  44. Annalise says:

    I do NOT think that the British public is going to be at all happy about Charles blowing billions on his own coronation. Sure both the UK and international audience responded positively to all the pomp and ceremony of QE’s funeral, but most people LOVED Queen Elizabeth, and felt that she deserved a funeral like that. I am NOT one of those people, but I digress. Billions spent on Queen Elizabeth is one thing, billions spent on Charles is something entirely different. I do not think a big ridiculous coronation will get him points with anyone other than fellow aristo Tories

  45. Escape says:

    This is a mistake. But,
    That family is so completely out of touch with reality that it isn’t a surprise. He should also ditch throwing a birtday party for himself. Being he’s over the age of 10 and all.

  46. AnneL says:

    It’s interesting that they think pomp and circumstance is what the public and the world wants from the Brits in this day and age.

    Do they do it well? Yes. But they do other things wells do. Humor, for example. History. I think most tourists visiting England want to see Royal-adjacent sites (and sights) for their history, not for the Royals themselves. Sure, everyone loves a Royal wedding, but that’s at least in part due to the fairy tale aspect. A coronation doesn’t have that magic. Certainly not with Charles.

    To me, the best thing that the country did recently, when the world was watching, was the Olympics. They didn’t try to match the sheer spectacle and magnificence of the prior Opening Ceremonies, which I think were held in Beijing. They did their own quirky, heartfelt, cheeky thing and it was great.

    They had a tribute to the NHS with cute young people dancing, Mr. Bean being silly at the piano, Timothy Spall (I think) doing an inspiring Churchill speech, etc. It was fun. It was uplifting. It was unique. It was very British, but not in a stuffy way. It was modern.

    I know that’s not what people expect from a coronation, but something more up to date and less nakedly expensive would be welcome.

    • Emily_C says:

      I don’t think they do pomp and circumstance well either. Except when the camera was on Harry, that funeral march was super dull and slow. And their hats are silly. I sat there looking for any women or anyone who wasn’t white in the procession and finding none. Though I could only stomach so much — it being so boring, my mind wandered to why they have huge processions like that in the first place, and the history of showing off their might and grandeur ain’t pretty.

  47. Roo says:

    The idea of a lavish coronation is terrible, but if he insists on going through with it, he needs to listen to smart and experienced PR/crisis professionals.

    I am not one of them, but even I can see that he would go a long way to engendering good will if he took out just some of his personal, overseas account billions to pay to do the following starting NOW: increase the size and offering of food banks, subsidize heating costs for elderly and children, expand youth centers so that there are warm, dry places for children that also offer meals. Just these actions would engender good will from many, and then he might have a chance of supportive crowds for his coronation.

  48. Rea says:

    The recession is going strong and this will be a slap in the face for taxpayers. Why not do donation instead with that money to stock up food banks and shelters.