The Royal Wedding

JJLehto wrote: seventhsojourn wrote: CCVP wrote: suggestion: All i know is that I would do Kate Middleton if the thing between Prince Charming and her don't work out.   suggestion:       Suggestion: Learn to not take things so seriously with Caio. Well, he's suspended because no one can grapple with that very fact! oh hai the wedding is on the news here. Apparently one of them is marrying a commoner or something? GASP! HOW SCANDALOUS!

It is impossible not to watch this without getting flashbacks from the pictures of a young man following his mother out the door of the Westminister Abbey and to her final resting place. There is no doubts who was guest of honour at this wedding...... and it was not Elizabeth II.   

Slept through it. And i'm happy

How many flags are being waved! - unbelievable footage being shown now of the surging crowds. Watching on BBC channel.

Australia is getting live feed, minus 2/100 seconds due to geographic  distances. Well, it beats this 6 weeks long mail sail ship with..... ehh..... 6 weeks.

The rest of the comments just confirms my observations of you Brits all along. You pretend not to care and you pretend that you are all against this monarchy and the wedding. But deep down; you are all pro this. One of the sixty millions around the castle are. The streets are empty, I am told. People even refuses to die now, according to my hospital. 

........ anyway, I have a good time at this garden party. White wine (my first drop of alcohol for many many weeks...), chicken and fish, fruits, desireable women which I would like some wedding nights rehearsals with, a big TV, my laptop and a  fast internet line. You all know this wedding was Great Britain at it's best. It beats the birthers by miles.

...... And William is the real deal and a fantastic asset to any organisation. His daytime job is life saver in a helicopter and that says a lot.  

As I said; give me royalities any day instead of birthers and underage girls humping old men, you grumpy sods. 

 

Edited by toroddfuglesteg - April 29 2011 at 07:24

yeah! they kissed twice....

Edited by AtomicCrimsonRush - April 29 2011 at 08:08

Well, supposedly the wedding cost about 40 million GBP to pay for so far, and counting. Was it worth it to see two people walk into a church?

progkidjoel wrote: Well, supposedly the wedding cost about 40 million GBP to pay for so far, and counting. Was it worth it to see two people walk into a church?

When you want to set up an enterprise and make money, you first have to put in money in manufacturing and other costs. As you rightly said, the manufacturing costs here are 40 GBP. The business also have an income side in the accounts too over the next 20-25 years which is far greater than the manufacturing costs. Great Britain is still getting money from the Diana/Charles product back in 1981. But off course; as you say; don't produce any goods/services whatsover because it cost money. Don't do anything. Starve. Starve to death.    

Edit: Any idea why tourists would visit Great Britain, Progkidjoel ? Is it because of the weather ? The farmfields ? Exotic cows ? Sex ? Hint, hint, hint........ We have just had a big advert on the TV watched by two billion people. The rule of thumb is 10 x income of the advert expenses..... Over 20-25 years, that is a 40 GBP advert budget any marketing director would sign off with big glee and joy. 

Edited by toroddfuglesteg - April 29 2011 at 09:09

toroddfuglesteg wrote: progkidjoel wrote: Well, supposedly the wedding cost about 40 million GBP to pay for so far, and counting. Was it worth it to see two people walk into a church? When you want to set up an enterprise and make money, you first have to put in money in manufacturing and other costs. As you rightly said, the manufacturing costs here are 40 GBP. The business also have an income side in the accounts too over the next 20-25 years which is far greater than the manufacturing costs. Great Britain is still getting money from the Diana/Charles product back in 1981. But off course; as you say; don't produce any goods/services whatsover because it cost money. Don't do anything. Starve. Starve to death.

seventhsojourn wrote: toroddfuglesteg wrote: progkidjoel wrote: Well, supposedly the wedding cost about 40 million GBP to pay for so far, and counting. Was it worth it to see two people walk into a church? When you want to set up an enterprise and make money, you first have to put in money in manufacturing and other costs. As you rightly said, the manufacturing costs here are 40 GBP. The business also have an income side in the accounts too over the next 20-25 years which is far greater than the manufacturing costs. Great Britain is still getting money from the Diana/Charles product back in 1981. But off course; as you say; don't produce any goods/services whatsover because it cost money. Don't do anything. Starve. Starve to death.       Plus, if the figures are correct, one third of the world's population watched the wedding.

Yes, you can divide this 40 GBP marketing cost over 25 years or more. A rule of thumb is that you get 10 x back the advert cost if the advert, which in business speak this wedding was, is being broadcasted by all the major broadcasters in the USA........ alone. Add the other states too and this enterprise gets a type of financial return any business leaders would sacrifice their right arms for.