King Charles didn’t appoint Prince William to the chair of the Royal Collection

It’s a near constant thing, where 41-year-old Prince William is treated like he’s still a kid or a young man, where he’s not expected to step up into doing real royal work. William has enjoyed an extended adolescence for two decades now, fake-working at random jobs and putting off royal duties indefinitely. When QEII passed away a year ago, the reality dawned on many within and outside of the institution: William has always been a lightweight and he is utterly unprepared to be Prince of Wales, much less king. The heir is a lazy, immature idiot. That’s it. That’s the big secret, that’s the sum total of all of the keenery, all of the promises, all of the “king-in-waiting” PR. They all know it, just like they all know what William did and said to his brother. King Charles also knows that William is a lazy, immature idiot, so big surprise, Charles has not appointed his heir as the chairman of the Royal Collection. From the Mail’s Hardcastle column: “King Charles breaks with tradition as he fails to appoint Prince William as chair of the Royal Collection.”

Have Royal Collection trustees been spared a potential vandal at the helm? King Charles, who has succeeded his mother as patron, has broken with tradition and failed to appoint his son William as its chairman.

If Wills had taken up the number two role, then his stance on ridding the collection of dozens of items of ivory would have placed him on a potential collision course with the trustees.

Primatologist Jane Goodall, a close friend of William, divulged that he would like to see all of them destroyed as part of his campaign to save the elephant.

However, the trustees shouldn’t be lured into a false sense of security. As soon as William does become king, his word will prevail.

[From The Daily Mail]

It has nothing to do with the ivory and everything to do with William being lazy and dumb, just my opinion. Why would William get this appointment when Charles had to spend years Peg-proofing the Duchy of Cornwall so William didn’t run that into the ground and use the Duchy as his personal piggy bank? Plus, Charles is basically Scrooge McDuck at this point – he wants all of the loot, all of the jewels, all of the palaces, all of the STUFF for himself and Camilla. He doesn’t want William anywhere near the Royal Collection because Charles sees all of it as his.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

36 Responses to “King Charles didn’t appoint Prince William to the chair of the Royal Collection”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Exactly he wants that all to himself but also never but a fox in charge of the hen house.

  2. Amy Bee says:

    I agree with Kaiser here. This is more about Charles wanting to keep certain positions for himself. Same with making himself Captain General of the Royal Marines.

  3. MSTJ says:

    There are also some unaccounted pieces from the collection based on Guardian’s reporting earlier this year.

    Edward Young (The Bee?) was the RCT Director from October 2017 to December 2022. Edward was paid handsomely upon his separation from Buckingham Palace after the coronation. 🧐 I think Charles and the trustees are covering up some things there that he doesn’t want William to know about. 😏

    The toxic royal mafia institution 🤷‍♀️

    • Nanea says:

      The most famous piece of the RCT that is missing is the Nizam of Hyderabad necklace, made by Cartier, worth more than £ 65 million, last worn by the keen Princess of Wails, Mumblina Guffaw McButtons.

      All things considered, jewels worth more than £ 80 million are missing, according to The Guardian, plus innumerable paintings that the RF say are private property 🙄, plus gifts that QE II received in her role as the head of state, e.g. valuable horses she said were gifted *to her*.

      There’s so much wrong at the RCT, and no one working at the palaces seems competent enough to be able to take over, do an inventory, a probe into missing pieces and report back to the public.

      Too bad The Guardian has given up pressuring the RF.

      • MinorityReport says:

        Actually, it’s not clear that the Nizam necklace is actually part of the Royal Collection. It was given to QEII before the legislation saying gifts to the family in official capacity are automatically part of the collection was passed. That legislation was not retroactive. Yes, Kate was the last one seen wearing it, but that doesn’t mean it is actually missing, it’s just not in the collection.

        An argument could be made that it should be part of the collection, but whether it is or not is murky.

      • Well Wisher says:

        Looking at images of the late Queen and Kate, side by side, one cannot help but notice how much better the Queen wore expensive jewelry, even if they are on the large side…..
        It is an acquired taste – not to be confused with …….

      • BQM says:

        @minority report EXACTLY! Plus, don’t look at Kate, look at Camilla. If the nizam and other pieces aren’t part of the RCT, then they were inherited directly by Charles. As in Charles can gift them to whomever he wants. That goes for any of the Queen’s personal jewelry including wedding gifts and gifts from her father such as the sapphire set we’ve seen on Camilla.

      • Moxylady says:

        Holy shit

        Did wills give it to a mistress – the potential Russian honey pot perhaps?

        If they knew where the necklace was and it was safe and within the family – they would say that.

        So……

  4. Nic919 says:

    It probably has to do with the fact that if William is appointed to monitor the Royal Collection, it provides access to Kate and Carole and Camilla does not want that.

  5. Steph says:

    William is lazy. Could it be he just didn’t want it?

  6. Renae says:

    These people are so dull. Even their “scandals” are boring.

  7. Margot says:

    Holy crap, this photo!!

  8. Harper says:

    I think CRex didn’t even consider Burger King for the role. Burger King continues to duck any real work connected with the trappings of the monarchy, despite enjoying all the free money and houses and cars and helicopters. Harry was going to have to do all the boring things like that.

  9. Cessily says:

    How many countries did this family literally raid, steal and devastate to amass all their wealth and it still isn’t enough for this family to share with each other. Truly makes me wonder if greed heredity.

  10. Brassy Rebel says:

    Wait. What? Jane Goodall is friends with William? Say it isn’t so, Jane!

  11. notasugarhere says:

    ‘William has always been a lightweight and he is utterly unprepared to be Prince of Wales, much less king. The heir is a lazy, immature idiot. That’s it. That’s the big secret, that’s the sum total of all of the keenery, all of the promises, all of the “king-in-waiting” PR.’

    Kaiser I don’t think that’s all there is. Recall the journalist who posted ‘the truth about William would make your eyes bleed’. And that was after the facts of William’s lifelong abuses of Harry were outed. Whatever secrets they’re covering up about William, it is much darker than immaturity and laziness.

    • Tara says:

      I once saw a documentary that theorized that it was very likely that Jack the Ripper had been a member of the royal family. That makes me wonder what’s up with William. I mean, how dark can it get?
      Speaking of conspiracies – there is also still this mysterious story out there that Charles and Camilla had a son at a very young age who is now trying to sue them for a DNA test.

      • BQM says:

        The rumor that the Duke of Clarence, elder brother of George V, was jack has been completely discredited. His whereabouts on days of the murders were well documented in the press and he was often nowhere near London.

      • Tara says:

        Oh well, that I didn’t know… sorry but thankyou

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Tara, don’t apologize. The rumors have not been completely discredited. His whereabouts were not well documented. The documents came from the palaces, not the press. Look what’s been happening in the last few decades. The palaces and press are willing to hide things to protect the “need” and “importance” of a monarchy(unless you are a prince who married a WOC). These people were not anointed by God. (must have missed that chapter in the Bible)

        The royal in question is Prince Albert Victor. Queen Victoria’s grandson. The Ripper murders ended in Feb. 1891. A pandemic was going on. PAV fell ill and died Jan. 1892. There are also rumors that he contracted syphilis from a prostitute in the West Indies and caused him to go nuts/revenge.
        Google pictures of PAV! Slap that moustache on WillIck and I’m seeing the genes.I I’ll always laugh at Will trying to cosplay Philip with the sunglasses schtick and chilled pose. Philip, when he took off his sunglasses, was still good looking. Like Harry. Will, not so much.

      • BQM says:

        @agreatreckoning yes they have been discredited. His whereabouts were covered in the newspapers of the day. Including the day of. One of them he was in Scotland. The reports didn’t come from the royal court. And they weren’t planted later on. They were contemporaneous reports. Also, the last confirmed ripper kill was in the fall of 1888.
        You are correct that he apparently had syphllis. This was apparently confirmed to a royal biographer and not revealed for decades. But he hadn’t gone mad. He was seen in public, gave speeches, was engaged to be married in a few weeks. I’ve read letters of his from the 1891 period. He was quite lucid. And had very good handwriting.

    • PrincessK says:

      I wish Kaiser would review some of the German magazine articles. I saw a headline recently citing friction between William and Kate, and something about ‘nerves’ and how they argue. There were also pictures l had never seen which clearly showed them having a disagreement in public, pictures that no British publication would print.

  12. SarahCS says:

    I still cannot get over the absolute amateur hour of the header photo. Do they not employ anyone with an ounce of competence??

    I think a number of things overlap here. Sure Charles knows William is incompetent and lazy and he also wants to keep everything for himself. He’s spent his whole adult life waiting and now he won’t part with anything he doesn’t absolutely have to.

  13. Well Wisher says:

    There is the Fail whinging on William’s behalf…..
    Tiresome and boring…

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Well Wisher, is this Cant whining because she doesn’t have access. It’s possible she expected Wont to get this ‘honor’ so that she would have access.

  14. BQM says:

    The DM is so ridiculous. Not exactly breaking news but still. William isn’t doing squat with the ivory. First, it’d be a waste. Second, much of it belongs to the nation. William couldn’t touch it.

  15. jferber says:

    I still think it’s about keeping Khate away from the jewels, which Charles wants all for Camilla.

  16. Sunnyville says:

    This and them delaying/forgoing of the PrinceOfWales ceremony makes me wonder if Willy is planning on slowly distancing from keen. I mean it’s too much a coincidence that both things would be a disadvantage for keen who’s all about “showing off” the looted jewels & her royal rank **through marriage**, I’m sensing Willy talked with chuck about this and they don’t want the Middleton clan near RCT & it’s looted riches

  17. jferber says:

    Sunnyville, I admire your optimistic, “sunny” take (sorry!), but Kate will in no way in heaven, Earth, or Hell, be pried from her marital union with the balding and cheating William. Not even with crow bars!