"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 03/05/2015 12:50, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 03/05/2015 12:08, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 03/05/2015 10:20, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 02/05/2015 22:31, alan_m wrote:
On 02/05/2015 13:45, Bod wrote:

Yup and it's a fact that our Royal family generate far more
money for
the UK than it costs each person in the UK.
62p per person per year to fund our Royal family. A bargain.

Is it 62p? Have you seen the amount security that accompanies a
Royal
when they turn up anywhere?

The same number of tourists would visit if we didn't have a Royal
Family. Chinese tourists appear to be bussed out on mass to
out-of-town
retail outlets on trading estates.

Hmm!
"A new report today reveals that Buckingham Palace is the "dream"
activity for people in 15 out of 19 countries surveyed by tourist
chiefs at Visit Britain, including Australians, Americans, the
Chinese, Italians and the Mexicans."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-tourists.html




Only because there isn't much else worth looking at for most.

That has to be a joke. We have some the best museums in the world,

Yes, but most tourists don’t go to Britain for those.

plus a plethora of stately homes, Kew gardens etc. The list goes on
and on.

What matters is what the tourists bother with.

I've just pointed them out for you.

No you didn’t. What matters is how many of them
bother to go to Britain for those, as opposed to
visiting them when they are there already.


You obviously missed this bit:

No I didn’t, I commented on it explicitly.

"A new report today reveals that Buckingham Palace is the "dream"
activity for people in 15 out of 19 countries surveyed by tourist
chiefs at Visit Britain, including Australians, Americans, the
Chinese, Italians and the Mexicans."

I'd moved on to comment on that other stuff you waved around.