WeX Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 No, people come to see the buildings not the inbred hicks in tweed. If you don't agree bare this in mind: Paris - Annual visitor numbers 15.2 million London - Annual visitor numbers 14.7 million Now which one has a royal monarch in residence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 No, people come to see the buildings not the inbred hicks in tweed. If you don't agree bare this in mind: Paris - Annual visitor numbers 15.2 million London - Annual visitor numbers 14.7 million Now which one has a royal monarch in residence? But it could be argued that Paris has more attractions than London, hence the larger figure - Da Vinci paintings, Eiffel Tower, Notre Dame to name but three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottf Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 No, people come to see the buildings not the inbred hicks in tweed. If you don't agree bare this in mind: Paris - Annual visitor numbers 15.2 million London - Annual visitor numbers 14.7 million Now which one has a royal monarch in residence? So using your own figures just think how far they would drop if we got rid of the royal family? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 So using your own figures just think how far they would drop if we got rid of the royal family? Or alternatively: How much would they rise when we can open up all of the castles and palaces completely to the public as museums? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Well if it disgusts you that much there are plenty of flights over to the USA available How would that help? It would still disgust me from over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 So using your own figures just think how far they would drop if we got rid of the royal family? how many tourists see the royal family? I'm British and I have never seen a royal. I don't believe they come to the UK to see the royals, they come to see everything that surrounds the royals and the vast majority come to see the palaces etc. If the royals no longer occupied these state owned buildings, they could become even larger tourist attractions as people could actually go inside them rather then standing outside in the rain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 But it could be argued that Paris has more attractions than London, hence the larger figure - Da Vinci paintings, Eiffel Tower, Notre Dame to name but three. That would be wrong. Lets take the London Eye for example. Back in 2008 it had reached its 30 millionth visitor and records 3.8 million visitors a year.That's the same number as the Empire State Building on terms of visitors. The Eiffel tower is the most-visited paid monument in the world, with a yearly average of 6.5 million visitors. Then we have Buckingham Palace, The Tower of London, Hampton Court, Kensington Palace, The London Museum, Westminster Abbey, Windsor Castle, St Paul's Cathedral, Westminster Cathedral, Shakespeare's Globe Theatre, Churchill War Rooms etc etc. London has more attractions than Paris and this is why London has more visitors. Paris has a good selection of places to visit (I was there last year), but you can do the majority of the large stuff in a long weekend. London on the other hand you cannot, there is simply too much to see and this is why London is more popular. This is why I feel if we opened up the royal occupied palaces to tourists, we would see more visitors not less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vwkittie Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 I used to be anti-monarchy but then I grew up and got over myself to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 People come HOPING to catch a glimpse of a royal. Not much chance of it happening but try and tell that to a tourist on his/her first visit to London. They will stand outside a palace just on the off chance that the improbalbe will happen then go back home and tell their friends that they "actually saw (fill in the name)" Thousands of tourists take the "Homes of the Stars" tours in Hollywood/Beverly Hills every summer for the same reason. Stop at a home and tell them that so and so lives there and they'll take photos and want to hang around just on the off chance. It's not the homes that are the main attraction but who actually lives there. A tour guide could point out a home that once belonged to Theda Barra and it would hardly get more than a passing glance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 People come HOPING to catch a glimpse of a royal. Not much chance of it happening but try and tell that to a tourist on his/her first visit to London. They will stand outside a palace just on the off chance that the improbalbe will happen then go back home and tell their friends that they "actually saw (fill in the name)" I disagree with this for one reason. Buckingham Palace is anarchy at the time of the changing of the guard. Any other time its pretty quiet with only a few tourists wondering past having their pictures taken. The ceremonial parts such as the changing of the guard etc could easily stay, just like in places such as Greece etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.