The Cambridges News and Updates ( Prince William, Kate Middleton, George, Charlotte and Louis)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs to see his ugly horseface. Bring back someone hot. Sheeet.

It’s just fascinating how much his hair changed his whole appearance. Like his teeth are terrible but somehow they weren’t as noticeable when he had a head full of hair.

Hair loss exposed his very tall forehead. As his face appears longer, his teeth appear narrower. That's the optics of it.

It’s so true. He was objectively good looking as a teen.

I love the Cambridges but William has never looked good. I think a lot of white people just think blonde and rich equals attractive. It certainly worked for Diana, who was...blonde and rich.
Thank goodness for Kate, those kids have a fighting chance at being decent looking.

You don't think his order in the line of succession had something to do with it?

Uh, no? His order in the line of succession might make him appealing to some, but it doesn't make him attractive. Charles is next in line. Am I supposed to think he's hot?

Nobody gives a damn who you think is hot or not.

[Anonymous]

The video is a bit ott. It's like a Ralph Lauren ad, and that's not a compliment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs to see his ugly horseface. Bring back someone hot. Sheeet.

It’s just fascinating how much his hair changed his whole appearance. Like his teeth are terrible but somehow they weren’t as noticeable when he had a head full of hair.

Hair loss exposed his very tall forehead. As his face appears longer, his teeth appear narrower. That's the optics of it.

It’s so true. He was objectively good looking as a teen.

I love the Cambridges but William has never looked good. I think a lot of white people just think blonde and rich equals attractive. It certainly worked for Diana, who was...blonde and rich.
Thank goodness for Kate, those kids have a fighting chance at being decent looking.

I think you’re forgetting. He may not be your cup of tea but he looked like a Ralph Lauren model in college. Now he looks like a neighborhood dad where you’d say “hmm. That bald dad is actually a little bit cute.” He still has nice eyes and nice facial structure through the cheekbones and jaw.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/amp28233764/prince-william-rejected-by-texas-heiress-in-college/

I'm not forgetting. I don't think he was ever attractive.

Agreed? A Ralph Lauren model? No. Just no. Harry was attractive, not William. Bald horsey face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs to see his ugly horseface. Bring back someone hot. Sheeet.

It’s just fascinating how much his hair changed his whole appearance. Like his teeth are terrible but somehow they weren’t as noticeable when he had a head full of hair.

Hair loss exposed his very tall forehead. As his face appears longer, his teeth appear narrower. That's the optics of it.

It’s so true. He was objectively good looking as a teen.

I love the Cambridges but William has never looked good. I think a lot of white people just think blonde and rich equals attractive. It certainly worked for Diana, who was...blonde and rich.
Thank goodness for Kate, those kids have a fighting chance at being decent looking.

You don't think his order in the line of succession had something to do with it?

Uh, no? His order in the line of succession might make him appealing to some, but it doesn't make him attractive. Charles is next in line. Am I supposed to think he's hot?

Nobody gives a damn who you think is hot or not.

Nobody gives a damn who anyone here thinks is hot or not, and yet everyone is sharing their opinion. Is there some reason why you chose to be rude in response to mine?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with PP. She is lovely and looks fantastic. She does not look like a woman troubled with issues of her husband's affairs.

I remember watching their wedding 10 years ago today. And now I wish them many more years of happiness together!

she's the mother of a future king. She may or may not care about William even existing or not

That’s ridiculous. All of her status and wealth is tied to William. If they divorce, William’s wealth is protected because it’s all inherited. She would get a pittance much like Fergie and even Diana. She is the mother of George so if the monarchy survives she’d be invited to his coronation obviously. However, she would be locked out of every other privilege she currently enjoys — unless William decided to follow Andrew’s lead and allow her to live in one of his houses. Kate is especially vulnerable because her parents also live in one of William’s houses. Though Pippa is pretty wealthy, so they’d be okay.

Anyone saying she doesn’t care about her attachment to William is delusional.

Kate's parents don't "live in one of William's houses." He gave them some of the money for the down payment as a gift, possibly because they were upgrading to a bigger and more remote house due to privacy and security concerns after Kate joined the BRF.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/kate-middleton-and-prince-william-buy-house-for-middletons-2012266/

Property rights don't attach when someone gives money as a gift to buy a home. Kate's parents are successful business owners and are wealthy (at least by normal standards) in their own right. Your suggestion that the Middletons are somehow financially dependent on William is ridiculous.

Not PP. I agree that he might not have an ownership interest in their home (although we don’t really know how it was structured). But you are seriously delusional if you think her parents are wealthy. If they were they would not need financial assistance to purchase a bigger/more remote house for security concerns or not. Rich people don’t take money from their kids. Slash they would have already had sufficient security in place if they were really that wealthy.

I'm the PP you're responding to. Obviously, none of us know what the Middletons' net worth is, but it has been estimated to be quite high (up to $67M). The high estimates are likely too high, and likely a significant portion of that wealth is non-liquid, as it's derived from the ownership of their business (which is apparently valued at about ~$40M). But the Middletons have been UMC/wealthy for years. They put Kate and her siblings through exclusive boarding schools and bought Kate and Pippa ~$2M apartment in a fancy part of London before they were married. So they aren't in the "wealth league" of the BRF or billionaires, like Pippa's husband's family, but they certainly aren't dependent on being in William's good graces to finance their lifestyle.
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a20166559/kate-middleton-parents-carole-michael-net-worth/

Yawn.

And Diana was from an aristocratic family. She still died within a year of her divorce.

There’s wealthy. Then there’s wealthy enough to afford security.

They won’t leave George without security

The Middleton’s are not weslthy - never have been.

Uncle Gary the drug addict is wealthy and paid for Kate/Pippa’s schooling through various means. William paid for their house. Recently they were also trying to sell Party Pieces pre-pandemic because business was bad - Covid undoubtedly made it worse.

Where are you getting this information? Nothing that’s publicly available backs up the claims you’re making here.

You're welcome to read up on wife-beating drug addict Uncle Gary here

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/duchess-cambridge-kate-uncle-fine-assaulting-wife-drugs-row-gary-goldsmith-julie-ann-london-a8081561.html
https://www.thedailybeast.com/kates-naughty-coke-sniffing-uncle-gary-lifts-lid-on-kate-pippa-and-william

Kate's uncle's wife-beating is a red herring in the discussion about Kate's parents' wealth (or lack thereof) that's been going on. I asked for any publicly available reports supporting your assertions that (1) her uncle paid for her schooling, (2) William "paid for [the Middletons'] house," and (3) that the Middletons were recently trying to sell Party Pieces, because I didn't find any evidence of these things when I searched.

Lots of people have extended relatives who do unsavory things. I'm not going to hold it against Kate or anyone else.

House-https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/kate-middleton-and-prince-william-buy-house-for-middletons-2012266/amp/

Carole herself on the layoffs in the daily mail: “ Yes, a couple of people are leaving but this is our much-loved family business which is far from failing. All of the changes we are making are to help protect the business for the future.”. There are ~20 ish employees so a few is a lot

I personally think they paid for boarding school because I think that the business was more profitable in the past like many other now defunct catalogue based businesses.

Except Meghan Markle of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs to see his ugly horseface. Bring back someone hot. Sheeet.

It’s just fascinating how much his hair changed his whole appearance. Like his teeth are terrible but somehow they weren’t as noticeable when he had a head full of hair.

Hair loss exposed his very tall forehead. As his face appears longer, his teeth appear narrower. That's the optics of it.

It’s so true. He was objectively good looking as a teen.

I love the Cambridges but William has never looked good. I think a lot of white people just think blonde and rich equals attractive. It certainly worked for Diana, who was...blonde and rich.
Thank goodness for Kate, those kids have a fighting chance at being decent looking.

You don't think his order in the line of succession had something to do with it?

Uh, no? His order in the line of succession might make him appealing to some, but it doesn't make him attractive. Charles is next in line. Am I supposed to think he's hot?

Nobody gives a damn who you think is hot or not.

Nobody gives a damn who anyone here thinks is hot or not, and yet everyone is sharing their opinion. Is there some reason why you chose to be rude in response to mine?

Oh, you were being polite? Didn't seem like it. William had his moment, and now it's over. But his looks were only part of his appeal to Kate, I'm sure. So acting surprised that people make a big deal over him even if you don't think he's hot is odd. Jeff Bezos, and Elon Musk are both unattractive and not blonde, yet people make a big deal over them too. Women are a lot more forgiving in the looks department if a man has other attributes, attractiveness seems to be a low priority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with PP. She is lovely and looks fantastic. She does not look like a woman troubled with issues of her husband's affairs.

I remember watching their wedding 10 years ago today. And now I wish them many more years of happiness together!

she's the mother of a future king. She may or may not care about William even existing or not

That’s ridiculous. All of her status and wealth is tied to William. If they divorce, William’s wealth is protected because it’s all inherited. She would get a pittance much like Fergie and even Diana. She is the mother of George so if the monarchy survives she’d be invited to his coronation obviously. However, she would be locked out of every other privilege she currently enjoys — unless William decided to follow Andrew’s lead and allow her to live in one of his houses. Kate is especially vulnerable because her parents also live in one of William’s houses. Though Pippa is pretty wealthy, so they’d be okay.

Anyone saying she doesn’t care about her attachment to William is delusional.

Kate's parents don't "live in one of William's houses." He gave them some of the money for the down payment as a gift, possibly because they were upgrading to a bigger and more remote house due to privacy and security concerns after Kate joined the BRF.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/kate-middleton-and-prince-william-buy-house-for-middletons-2012266/

Property rights don't attach when someone gives money as a gift to buy a home. Kate's parents are successful business owners and are wealthy (at least by normal standards) in their own right. Your suggestion that the Middletons are somehow financially dependent on William is ridiculous.

Not PP. I agree that he might not have an ownership interest in their home (although we don’t really know how it was structured). But you are seriously delusional if you think her parents are wealthy. If they were they would not need financial assistance to purchase a bigger/more remote house for security concerns or not. Rich people don’t take money from their kids. Slash they would have already had sufficient security in place if they were really that wealthy.

I'm the PP you're responding to. Obviously, none of us know what the Middletons' net worth is, but it has been estimated to be quite high (up to $67M). The high estimates are likely too high, and likely a significant portion of that wealth is non-liquid, as it's derived from the ownership of their business (which is apparently valued at about ~$40M). But the Middletons have been UMC/wealthy for years. They put Kate and her siblings through exclusive boarding schools and bought Kate and Pippa ~$2M apartment in a fancy part of London before they were married. So they aren't in the "wealth league" of the BRF or billionaires, like Pippa's husband's family, but they certainly aren't dependent on being in William's good graces to finance their lifestyle.
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a20166559/kate-middleton-parents-carole-michael-net-worth/

Yawn.

And Diana was from an aristocratic family. She still died within a year of her divorce.

There’s wealthy. Then there’s wealthy enough to afford security.

They won’t leave George without security

The Middleton’s are not weslthy - never have been.

Uncle Gary the drug addict is wealthy and paid for Kate/Pippa’s schooling through various means. William paid for their house. Recently they were also trying to sell Party Pieces pre-pandemic because business was bad - Covid undoubtedly made it worse.

Where are you getting this information? Nothing that’s publicly available backs up the claims you’re making here.

You're welcome to read up on wife-beating drug addict Uncle Gary here

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/duchess-cambridge-kate-uncle-fine-assaulting-wife-drugs-row-gary-goldsmith-julie-ann-london-a8081561.html
https://www.thedailybeast.com/kates-naughty-coke-sniffing-uncle-gary-lifts-lid-on-kate-pippa-and-william

Kate's uncle's wife-beating is a red herring in the discussion about Kate's parents' wealth (or lack thereof) that's been going on. I asked for any publicly available reports supporting your assertions that (1) her uncle paid for her schooling, (2) William "paid for [the Middletons'] house," and (3) that the Middletons were recently trying to sell Party Pieces, because I didn't find any evidence of these things when I searched.

Lots of people have extended relatives who do unsavory things. I'm not going to hold it against Kate or anyone else.

House-https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/kate-middleton-and-prince-william-buy-house-for-middletons-2012266/amp/

Carole herself on the layoffs in the daily mail: “ Yes, a couple of people are leaving but this is our much-loved family business which is far from failing. All of the changes we are making are to help protect the business for the future.”. There are ~20 ish employees so a few is a lot

I personally think they paid for boarding school because I think that the business was more profitable in the past like many other now defunct catalogue based businesses.

Except Meghan Markle of course.

I'm the "unsavory relatives" PP you're responding to. I purposely did not mention Meghan Markle because, while I don't care for her at all, it's because of her behavior, not her relatives. I said earlier that don't think it's fair to hold the actions of other people against someone, and I stand by it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs to see his ugly horseface. Bring back someone hot. Sheeet.

It’s just fascinating how much his hair changed his whole appearance. Like his teeth are terrible but somehow they weren’t as noticeable when he had a head full of hair.

Hair loss exposed his very tall forehead. As his face appears longer, his teeth appear narrower. That's the optics of it.

It’s so true. He was objectively good looking as a teen.

I love the Cambridges but William has never looked good. I think a lot of white people just think blonde and rich equals attractive. It certainly worked for Diana, who was...blonde and rich.
Thank goodness for Kate, those kids have a fighting chance at being decent looking.

You don't think his order in the line of succession had something to do with it?

Uh, no? His order in the line of succession might make him appealing to some, but it doesn't make him attractive. Charles is next in line. Am I supposed to think he's hot?

Nobody gives a damn who you think is hot or not.

Nobody gives a damn who anyone here thinks is hot or not, and yet everyone is sharing their opinion. Is there some reason why you chose to be rude in response to mine?

Oh, you were being polite? Didn't seem like it. William had his moment, and now it's over. But his looks were only part of his appeal to Kate, I'm sure. So acting surprised that people make a big deal over him even if you don't think he's hot is odd. Jeff Bezos, and Elon Musk are both unattractive and not blonde, yet people make a big deal over them too. Women are a lot more forgiving in the looks department if a man has other attributes, attractiveness seems to be a low priority.

Like I said, I love the Cambridges. I simply do not find William attractive and don't think he ever was. I'm sure Kate does, and that she's very happy with him. And no, I'm not surprised that some people think he's a big deal. He seems like a decent guy and he's second in line to the throne. That makes him appealing to some, which I said.

[Anonymous]

Kate looks amazing in the 10th wedding anniversary photos! Williams looks shockingly bad - like the Windsor horse features suddenly showed up HARD - unrecognizable!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs to see his ugly horseface. Bring back someone hot. Sheeet.

It’s just fascinating how much his hair changed his whole appearance. Like his teeth are terrible but somehow they weren’t as noticeable when he had a head full of hair.

Hair loss exposed his very tall forehead. As his face appears longer, his teeth appear narrower. That's the optics of it.

It’s so true. He was objectively good looking as a teen.

I love the Cambridges but William has never looked good. I think a lot of white people just think blonde and rich equals attractive. It certainly worked for Diana, who was...blonde and rich.
Thank goodness for Kate, those kids have a fighting chance at being decent looking.

You don't think his order in the line of succession had something to do with it?

Uh, no? His order in the line of succession might make him appealing to some, but it doesn't make him attractive. Charles is next in line. Am I supposed to think he's hot?

Nobody gives a damn who you think is hot or not.

DP. Clearly someone does because we are supposed to believe that William is the sexiest bald man alive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kate looks amazing in the 10th wedding anniversary photos! Williams looks shockingly bad - like the Windsor horse features suddenly showed up HARD - unrecognizable!

The retouched her face some and I wish they had done that times 100 for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs to see his ugly horseface. Bring back someone hot. Sheeet.

It’s just fascinating how much his hair changed his whole appearance. Like his teeth are terrible but somehow they weren’t as noticeable when he had a head full of hair.

Hair loss exposed his very tall forehead. As his face appears longer, his teeth appear narrower. That's the optics of it.

It’s so true. He was objectively good looking as a teen.

I love the Cambridges but William has never looked good. I think a lot of white people just think blonde and rich equals attractive. It certainly worked for Diana, who was...blonde and rich.
Thank goodness for Kate, those kids have a fighting chance at being decent looking.

You don't think his order in the line of succession had something to do with it?

Uh, no? His order in the line of succession might make him appealing to some, but it doesn't make him attractive. Charles is next in line. Am I supposed to think he's hot?

Nobody gives a damn who you think is hot or not.

DP. Clearly someone does because we are supposed to believe that William is the sexiest bald man alive.

Who said that?

[Anonymous]

That video was sooooooooo cute.

[Anonymous]

I liked the glimpse of their back door, super elegant color schemes. I'm sure her home is luxe neutrals to the nth degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one needs to see his ugly horseface. Bring back someone hot. Sheeet.

It’s just fascinating how much his hair changed his whole appearance. Like his teeth are terrible but somehow they weren’t as noticeable when he had a head full of hair.

Hair loss exposed his very tall forehead. As his face appears longer, his teeth appear narrower. That's the optics of it.

It’s so true. He was objectively good looking as a teen.

I love the Cambridges but William has never looked good. I think a lot of white people just think blonde and rich equals attractive. It certainly worked for Diana, who was...blonde and rich.
Thank goodness for Kate, those kids have a fighting chance at being decent looking.

You don't think his order in the line of succession had something to do with it?

Uh, no? His order in the line of succession might make him appealing to some, but it doesn't make him attractive. Charles is next in line. Am I supposed to think he's hot?

Nobody gives a damn who you think is hot or not.

DP. Clearly someone does because we are supposed to believe that William is the sexiest bald man alive.

Who said that?

Royal Rota

It was a very selective poll, like if you exclude every other bald man alive...