Royal George

[IC1967]

All you royalists need to get a grip. You are all being duped by the royal family propaganda machine. You need to stop and think for a change about the incredible damage perpetuating their existence does to society. While ever you mugs fall for it there will always be serious class division and most of the land will be owned by a very tiny minority. All the best jobs will continue to be taken by 'posh' people. They'll continue to have the best education money can buy. They'll continue to live in the lap of luxury etc. and the people on the bottom rung of society will continue to struggle.

It's a no brainer. I often wonder why some people have brains if they refuse to use them. If this carries on then in the future there will be royal sycophants born with brains that don't allow rational thinking as evolution will take over.

[IC1967]

Right, let's get this tourism baloney debunked.

The claim that the royal family is good for tourism is untrue. Our national tourist agency, VisitBritain can't find any evidence for this claim.

Chester Zoo, Stonehenge and the Roman Baths are all more successful tourist attractions than Windsor Castle, which is the only occupied royal residence to attract visitors in large numbers. If Windsor Castle was included in the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions (ALVA) list of top attractions it would come in at number 24.

Research shows that tourists come here for our world class museums, beautiful scenery, fantastic shopping and captivating history - not because they might catch a glimpse of Prince Andrew. In a republic, royal properties such as Buckingham Palace would be open all year round, so visitors that do want to explore our royal heritage would have even more opportunity to do so.

http://www.alva.org.uk/details.cfm?p=423

[wilts rover]

Right, let's get this tourism baloney debunked.

The claim that the royal family is good for tourism is untrue. Our national tourist agency, VisitBritain can't find any evidence for this claim.

Chester Zoo, Stonehenge and the Roman Baths are all more successful tourist attractions than Windsor Castle, which is the only occupied royal residence to attract visitors in large numbers. If Windsor Castle was included in the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions (ALVA) list of top attractions it would come in at number 24.

Research shows that tourists come here for our world class museums, beautiful scenery, fantastic shopping and captivating history - not because they might catch a glimpse of Prince Andrew. In a republic, royal properties such as Buckingham Palace would be open all year round, so visitors that do want to explore our royal heritage would have even more opportunity to do so.

http://www.alva.org.uk/details.cfm?p=423

Your link is to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions(ALVA) - not VisitBritain. These are two entirely seperate organisations.

ALVA promotes the 'big' tourist attractions to government under their President.........Prince Andrew. So join them and you might get a cup of tea with him.

Where on VistBritain does it say that? On the page that promotes Royal Britain?
http://www.visitbritainshop.com/world/articles-and-features/royal-britain.html

How suprising that attractions that are not open to the public are not high on visitor numbers - and ones that are free are. What is the most popular attraction that charges by the way? What is it's connection to royalty?

Without a Royal in residence Buckingham Palace is just another big house - and a not very interesting one at that. It is only this Royal connection that makes it interesting.

[IC1967]

Y

Your link is to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions(ALVA) - not VisitBritain. These are two entirely seperate organisations.

I know. ALVA produce figures, VisitBritain don't. Hence why I used the ALVA league table.

[Filo]

Y

Your link is to the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions(ALVA) - not VisitBritain. These are two entirely seperate organisations.

I know. ALVA produce figures, VisitBritain don't. Hence why I used the ALVA league table.

Why quote VisitBritain at the beginning of your post then?

[IC1967]

ALVA promotes the 'big' tourist attractions to government under their President.........Prince Andrew. So join them and you might get a cup of tea with him.

Don't know what you are on about. The league table shows large attractions all the way down to small. They don't just show 'big' ones.

[IC1967]

Why quote VisitBritain at the beginning of your post then?

Because they are a reputable organisation that can't find any evidence to substantiate the often trotted out claim by royalists that the royal family are useful because they bring in loads of tourists. It is possible to use more than one source to make a point you know.

[Filo]

Why quote VisitBritain at the beginning of your post then?

Because they are a reputable organisation that can't find any evidence to substantiate the often trotted out claim by royalists that the royal family are useful because they bring in loads of tourists. It is possible to use more than one source to make a point you know.

Where does it say they can't find any evidence?

[IC1967]

I'm sure I read it somewhere recently in this report -

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/people-places/people/tourism

[IC1967]

Where on VistBritain does it say that? On the page that promotes Royal Britain?
http://www.visitbritainshop.com/world/articles-and-features/royal-britain.html

I refer you to my previous post.

[IC1967]

How suprising that attractions that are not open to the public are not high on visitor numbers - and ones that are free are. What is the most popular attraction that charges by the way? What is it's connection to royalty?

Again I don't know what you are on about. The league table shows which ones are free, which ones charge and which ones use a combination. It also answers your last question. Have you bothered looking at it?

[Filo]

I'm sure I read it somewhere recently in this report -

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/people-places/people/tourism

Nope, nothing there from VisitBritain that. Says they can't find any evidence

[IC1967]

Without a Royal in residence Buckingham Palace is just another big house - and a not very interesting one at that. It is only this Royal connection that makes it interesting.

Whether Buck house is interesting or not is hardly going to have a major impact on tourist numbers. The powers that be want it open to the public more but the royals don't. Guess who got their way.

[IC1967]

Nope, nothing there from VisitBritain that. Says they can't find any evidence

 You've not looked hard enough. I'm sure it's there. I spent many hours looking at this report before I made my claim. I pride myself on producing fact based statements.

If you don't think my claim is correct then why don't you point us all to a statement by VisitBritain that says the royals do bring in a lot of tourists and are therefore great value for money?

[Filo]

Nope, nothing there from VisitBritain that. Says they can't find any evidence

 You've not looked hard enough. I'm sure it's there. I spent many hours looking at this report before I made my claim. I pride myself on producing fact based statements.

If you don't think my claim is correct then why don't you point us all to a statement by VisitBritain that says the royals do bring in a lot of tourists and are therefore great value for money?

If you're that sure it's there point us in the direction of it.

As for your other point, I never made any claim, so have no reason to point you towards anything. You prove your point without waffling or trying to say others have said something they haven't

[IC1967]

I've given you the report. What more do you want? I haven't got time to wade through it all again just to prove a point. Don't believe me if you don't want to. I don't mind.

[Filo]

I've given you the report. What more do you want? I haven't got time to wade through it all again just to prove a point. Don't believe me if you don't want to. I don't mind.

Until such time as you provide direct evidence, I'll take it as a no you can't find any evidence


Game set and match!

[IC1967]

Haha.

[Wild Rover]

Could you please explain then why 0.6% of the population own 69% of the land? These people are known as the aristocratic elite.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/johann-hari/britains-land-is-still-owned-by-an-aristocratic-elite--but-it-doesnt-have-to-be-this-way-483131.html

Wrong Mick. Land owners of the class you infer own less than 12% of UK land. In order of holding the land top 10 owners are as follows.
Forestry Commission    2'571'270 acres
Nat Trust                        630'000 acres
MOD                               592'000 acres
Pension Funds                  550'000
Utilities                             500'000
Crown                               358'000
RSPB                                321'000
Duke 1                              240'000
Scottish Nat Trust               192'000
Duke 2                               145'700

Oh ....And the Anglican Church (alone) owns more than 120'000 acres of land in just Rural areas. Huge tracts of land are owned in Cathederal Cities by Anglican Church.

[wilts rover]

ALVA promotes the 'big' tourist attractions to government under their President.........Prince Andrew. So join them and you might get a cup of tea with him.

Don't know what you are on about. The league table shows large attractions all the way down to small. They don't just show 'big' ones.

How suprising that attractions that are not open to the public are not high on visitor numbers - and ones that are free are. What is the most popular attraction that charges by the way? What is it's connection to royalty?

Again I don't know what you are on about. The league table shows which ones are free, which ones charge and which ones use a combination. It also answers your last question. Have you bothered looking at it?

No it doesn't. And you either havent bothered looking at it properly or are too thick tounderstand it. The 'league table' only shows the vists made to attractions who are membrs of ALVA. From their website:

ALVA's 55 members are the UK's most popular, iconic and important museums, galleries, palaces, castles, cathedrals, zoos, historic houses, heritage sites, gardens and leisure attractions.
The President of ALVA is Prince Andrew - so therefore they are connected to royalty - and use the royalty to promote themselves and bring money in.

Visit Briatin also use the royalty to promote Briatin to foreign tourists - as I put in my previous link. Have you bothered to look at it?

[IC1967]

Wrong. Land owners of the class you infer own less than 12% of UK land. In order of holding the land top 10 owners are as follows.
Forestry Commission    2'571'270 acres
Nat Trust                        630'000 acres
MOD                               592'000 acres
Pension Funds                  550'000
Utilities                             500'000
Crown                               358'000
RSPB                                321'000
Duke 1                              240'000
Scottish Nat Trust               192'000
Duke 2                               145'700

Oh ....And the Anglican Church (alone) owns more than 120'000 acres of land in just Rural areas. Huge tracts of land are owned in Cathederal Cities by Anglican Church.

We are both right. You are talking about the total land mass of the UK. I am talking about (and I accept that I should have made it clearer) the land that we live on. For example no-one is going to want to live on Ben Nevis or in the middle of a forest.

[Wild Rover]

Well....Better ask crofters of Ben Nevis, and Robin Hood about that.

[IC1967]

Ben Nevis, at 1,344 meters, is Britain’s highest mountain with an impressive presence that towers over Fort William. Every year around 400,000 people visit Glen Nevis and around 110,000 people walk to the summit of Ben Nevis. The Ben Nevis area has no resident population.

http://uk.ask.com/question/do-people-live-on-ben-nevis

[idler]

Wrong. Land owners of the class you infer own less than 12% of UK land. In order of holding the land top 10 owners are as follows.
Forestry Commission    2'571'270 acres
Nat Trust                        630'000 acres
MOD                               592'000 acres
Pension Funds                  550'000
Utilities                             500'000
Crown                               358'000
RSPB                                321'000
Duke 1                              240'000
Scottish Nat Trust               192'000
Duke 2                               145'700

Oh ....And the Anglican Church (alone) owns more than 120'000 acres of land in just Rural areas. Huge tracts of land are owned in Cathederal Cities by Anglican Church.

We are both right. You are talking about the total land mass of the UK. I am talking about (and I accept that I should have made it clearer) the land that we live on. For example no-one is going to want to live on Ben Nevis or in the middle of a forest.

My daughter has a house in the New Forest.

[IC1967]

OK. For the pedants out there let me be clear. I'm talking about land that could reasonably be classified as having residential potential.

[Wild Rover]

All land, Hill, Dale, Swamp, Mountain, has POTENTIAL to be residential.

[idler]

OK. For the pedants out there let me be clear. I'm talking about land that could reasonably be classified as having residential potential.

Flood plains now fit that criteria apparently.

[RedJ]

Changing the goal posts again are we?

[IC1967]

Yes they are. Unbelievably pedantic.

[RedJ]

Aren't you just.