Gransnet forums


THAT dress.

(218 Posts)
chicken Fri 22-Dec-17 14:10:01

I saw in the newspaper that Megan Markel's dress cost £56,000. To me, this an obscene amount to spend on a dress and very poor public relations when there are so many homeless, and thousands struggling to make ends meet on inadequate pay. Surely Kate has got the right idea when she buys "normal" clothes and looks lovely in them.

paddyann Fri 22-Dec-17 14:21:17

I dont think "Kate" does buy normal clothes she may buy high end High street or minor designers SOMETIMES ,but she wears some very pricey stuff too.This is the US and Them thing the royals are so good at.They will NEVER understand how most people in this country survive...not live ..survive and they care even less.

sunseeker Fri 22-Dec-17 14:24:41

I think it most likely Megan bought her dress with HER money which she had earned. She does not need to justify how she spends her money. Personally I have little interest in the royal family, although I do wish Harry and Megan well as I would any other couple starting out on life together.

Jalima1108 Fri 22-Dec-17 14:28:49

which dress? shock
She wore one to the 'big lunch' which cost £300 (apparently) and was then reduced .....
how annoying, could have saved a bit on that one!

Jalima1108 Fri 22-Dec-17 14:30:04

but she's not a royal yet paddyann and was very highly paid as an actress; I doubt tht Harry bought the dress for her.

Still wondering which dress cost that much?

ninathenana Fri 22-Dec-17 14:30:24

'obscene' is the word I used too when discussing it with H earlier. I honestly don't see what it is about the dress that makes it cost that much. She's paying out to advertise the designer.

paddyann sorry but I don't understand your post. "This is the US and them thing the royals are so good at" ???

Day6 Fri 22-Dec-17 14:31:00

Yes, what a strange choice of dress for the occasion. It was not only unsuitable but wacky too with it's see through top and skirt a mess of tight flounces. The price was obscene. I didn't like the photographs either. They looked like loved-up celebrities doing a shoot for Hello, not royalty. I only tolerate the royal family because they are different from us, distant and regal. Those photographs were a departure from the norm. She sat between his legs in one. I hate to say it, but I have gone right off her. Oh and she also wore a £700 jumper (how can that be justified?) from that former girl band person who decided one day she'd call herself a designer. I think Beckham is talentless and Markle has just boosted her undeserved career and given her royal patronage. MM needs guidance. Harry is too besotted to care. I suspect she will fall foul of the British public sooner rather than later. That show of wealth was rather distasteful I thought and the lovey-dovey photos made me cringe.

Jalima1108 Fri 22-Dec-17 14:31:00

ps I bet it was borrowed from the designer and then returned.

ninathenana Fri 22-Dec-17 14:31:42

Jalima it's the one she wore for the official engagement pics

Jalima1108 Fri 22-Dec-17 14:32:18

I think because she worked as an actress in the US and was very highly paid and used to the Hollywood bling thing ninathenana

Jalima1108 Fri 22-Dec-17 14:33:18

if she paid for it I would be very surprised.

All those gowns worn by celebs on the red carpet etc etc are just borrowed to showcase the designers' work and then returned.
No-one actually buys them!

Nannylovesshopping Fri 22-Dec-17 14:35:25

I loved the photos and the dress smile

willsmadnan Fri 22-Dec-17 14:38:01

Apparently the dress was 'loaned' from the overpriced designers. So really Ms Markle is no different from any other A to Z list celeb on the catwalk. Let's not forget she is an 'actress' (sorry, 'actaw' for the Gender Neutral Police)

Jalima1108 Fri 22-Dec-17 14:41:03

I just had a look, thanks ninathenana smile
It was from last year's collection so probably reduced right down to a few pounds in the designer outlet.

It's all media hype again

Jalima1108 Fri 22-Dec-17 14:45:36

The manufacture of that dress probably kept several people in work for quite a long time.

Look for the positives.

Anniebach Fri 22-Dec-17 14:54:11

I couldn't care less what she spends in her clothes, can't be bothered with the them and us view.

The photographs were nauseating

Jalima1108 Fri 22-Dec-17 14:58:18

I wished them well on the other thread, as I would any other young couple, but I have one of my 'feelings' about it all hmm

Anniebach Fri 22-Dec-17 15:09:31

At least we will be spared the wedding kiss on the balcony, she could do a Meg Ryan in the cafe 😀

kittylester Fri 22-Dec-17 15:18:16

I'm trying to ignore my 'feeling', jalima. I don't want Harry hurt!

ninathenana Fri 22-Dec-17 15:34:32

Lots of people voicing the same "feelings" on various pages on FB.

I'm on the fence but I certainly wouldn't want to see Harry hurt either kitty

Jane10 Fri 22-Dec-17 15:52:20

How can any dress be worth £56,000?

Baggs Fri 22-Dec-17 16:32:34

I liked the top half of That Dress. The skirt part... meh.

Do you suppose MM bought it, or was she just modelling it for the maker?

BlueBelle Fri 22-Dec-17 16:36:49

Nothing’s worth that silly money blooming ridiculous but she looks really beautiful in the photo and the dress looks lovely too
Oh stop worrying about Harry he’s big enough and ugly enough to look,after himself he hardly looks like he’s been dragged into the relationship If he wasn’t a prince he’d be well out of her league she’s a very beautiful woman, but they look blissfully happy just let them get on with it and stop looking ( or hoping) for trouble

BlueBelle Fri 22-Dec-17 16:38:10

Why such bitter remarks Annie ‘nauseating’ really I thought they looked great together

Jane10 Fri 22-Dec-17 17:15:36

I don't think she's beautiful at all. Quite ordinary looking really. Not bothered about either of them. Won't be watching the wedding.