Carole and Mike Chat

[Curryong]

The DM speaks to some of the Middletons? creditors after Party Pieces collapse.

Creditors hit out at Carole Middleton after her party business collapsed with debts of ?2.6million | Daily Mail Online

?What no one ever really knew, however, was the exact amount of money the family business was making. Run for years as a privately owned partnership, it never had to file full accounts at Companies House.?

Take, for example, Sultani Gas, a Kent-based company that supplied Party Pieces with helium for its balloons. It?s currently owed ?20,430, according to the administrator?s report.

A spokesman said this week that they felt ?betrayed? by Mrs Middleton. ?What hurt me the most was that I trusted her as the mother-in-law of the future King and she just betrayed me,? the representative said. ?It is absolutely unacceptable.?

Take also the firm?s landlord, Lord Iliffe, on whose Yattendon estate the company has been based for many years.

The estate is out of pocket to the tune of ?57,480 and James Hole, the agent for Iliffe, said it now faces ?severe financial consequences?, adding: ?They have been long-term tenants. We were astonished about the amount of money owed to others.?

[HistoryGirl2]

A lot of businesses went under after COVID, despite the government?s help. It?s not exactly a unique story, but I get the picture. Daughter is a royal, so the story has to be blown up. That line about the future mother-in-law of a king cracked me up a little though. What would that have to do with anything?

More than 1,400 firms went bust last month in England and Wales, figures show | Business | The Guardian

[wannable]

All small socialization related businesses busted with almost zero sales.

This year and next year we will see a lot of mid and big companies merging and with heavy personnel reduction.

[Curryong]

A lot of businesses went under after COVID, despite the government?s help. It?s not exactly a unique story, but I get the picture. Daughter is a royal, so the story has to be blown up. That line about the future mother-in-law of a king cracked me up a little though. What would that have to do with anything?

It means that the helium business owner was struggling with exactly the same conditions through Covid etc that Party Pieces was, thought that PP would never go down because of royal connections, offered credit when Carole asked for it and at the end was stuck with an over 20 thousand pound bill that her business can ill afford to carry. The same as all the other suppliers left with debts they have to cope with. That?s what it means.

And for once in a DM story these were real, named people speaking. And hurting. Or are all these business owners supposed to laugh and wave off the large debts they now carry because the persons leaving them in a hole happen to be Kate?s parents? Don?t think so!

[HistoryGirl2]

^I?m able to comprehend; it is, after all, written in plain English. As I?m also able to comprehend that they are not the only people that lost money during this time. A whole lot of other businesses went under. The reason this is news isn?t because it?s unique. It?s because it?s a Middleton involved. Fair play. The game is what the game is. However, her being the future King?s mother-in-law has nothing to do with her business. William doesn?t cover her debts. It?s a stupid comment to make, but it got the headline, so good on them.

If she?s done something illegal, then charge her. But a party supply business going under after COVID isn?t exactly newsworthy but for the fact that Carole Middleton is involved.

[Curryong]

Everybody knew and knows who Carole Middleton was. If she didn?t overtly trade off her royal connections she certainly got a lot of business from it in the good times. And has left people in the lurch because of it.

It also became known that one of James Middleton?s many business ventures was assisted with a large loan from his very wealthy businessman brother in law James Matthews at one stage. How do we know that he didn?t help the Middletons out at any time? And if William had his hands on the Duchy money before the business crashed he might well have done the same.

However PP did crash and it left a lot of suppliers and a landlord in trouble. I don?t see why Carole and Mike should get a pass for their behaviour, but that?s just me.

[HistoryGirl2]

^I?m unsure what you mean by ?getting a pass.? I ask again, have they done something illegal? This literally happens all the time. All the time. Businesses go under and yes, people are left in the lurch because of it. But how do you suggest they ?be held accountable?? I don?t see that anything that?s been done is illegal. It?s also not great to lose your business, but that happened to the Middletons.

If you claim that William did loan her money, I?d like to see sources for that, please. If your only evidence for that is that William is related to them, I?d like to throw in that not everyone has a habit of taking advantage of their famous relatives to make a quick buck.

[Curryong]

I stated in my last post

?It also became known that one of James Middleton?s many business ventures was assisted with a large loan from his very wealthy businessman brother in law James Matthews at one stage. How do we know that he didn?t help the Middletons out at any time? And if William had his hands on the Duchy money before the business crashed he might well have done the same?. End quote.

I didn?t suggest that William did lend or give the Middletons money, simply that if he had had Duchy money when their business was on its last legs he could have done so. However he wasn?t POW before last Sept so all those many millions weren?t at his disposal at the time the PP business was going under.

And James Matthews did give a substantial loan to his brother in law James for his marshmallow business which was sold quite soon afterwards, and he is related by marriage to him is he not. And the loan in the form of shares in the business ocertainly wasn?t given because of James Middleton?s business acumen because he hasn?t shown much of that so far.

[Curryong]

Just in case you think I?m making things up in any harsh way about James Middleton and his business affairs this is what we know (from Wiki)



In April 2011, James Middleton registered three businesses: Nice Cakes, Nice Wine, and Nice Group London and planned to expand the Cake Kit Company.[20][23] The Cake Kit Company dissolved in 2015.[25]

In 2013, Middleton founded Boomf, a company that makes personalised marshmallows and greeting cards.[26][27] In 2015, the company raised ?700 in funding, and was valued at ?10m.[28] Boomf made a loss of ?3 million between 2015 and 2018.[29] Middleton's brother-in-law, hedge fund manager James Matthews paid Middleton ?110,000 for 12,800 Boomf shares.[30] In 2019, Middleton announced that the company had reached profitability with an income of ?176,000 in the previous year.[31] Boomf raised $1m of funding in 2021, with plans to expand its product range.[32] The company was sold later that year. In May 2020, Middleton launched Ella & Co, a mail order dog food company that offers freeze-dried, raw, organic dog food.[33]

As regards Boomf it was reported at the time that ?a group of friends? (who we don?t know) were helping Boomf out with cash. It was sold shortly afterwards.

James Middleton gets ?800k to save Boomf writes SEBASTIAN SHAKESPEARE | Daily Mail Online

?Many feared James Middleton had bitten off more than he could chew when his marshmallow business racked up a ?250k loss.

Luckily, the Duchess of Cambridge?s younger brother has pals with deep pockets and an appetite for risk.

The serial cake entrepreneur has raised ?800,000 from ?friends of friends? to bail out his Boomf enterprise, despite having two cake companies and one wine company struck off the Companies House register earlier this year.?

Quote from above DM article.

[HistoryGirl2]

^I still don?t see how that relates to William?the future king?? Neither of that relates to this topic, which is about Carole Middleton and her company, not James Middleton or his business ventures. But if you?d like to discuss that, I do believe Matthews? job was in investing, which is what he did then?invest. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn?t. But that is his literal job, unlike William.

[Curryong]

^I still don?t see how that relates to William?the future king?? Neither of that relates to this topic, which is about Carole Middleton and her company.

No doubt she thought in an obviously naive fashion that the Middletons are related to royalty so their business will be all right. It won?t go under. Well she was wrong and paid for it with an over 20,000 pound debt.

And apparently this one sentence quoted  is going to be held against this person, while with the Middletons it?s ?Oh yes well lots of businesses went under in the last two years?. Yes many have. And most, I would suggest, did not go under with an over 2 million pound debt owed to creditors, including to the Govt.

[HistoryGirl2]

Plenty of businesses went under even though they received COVID loans have been on the news consistently. I posted an article about it a few posts up.

You can continue to say what you?d like about the Middletons and pretend this is unique. I?m simply pointing out reality and the fact that this is not the case. 

I actually commend them for not mooching off their daughter. Their business has absolutely nothing to do with the RF and it would be beyond inappropriate if it did. *That* I would personally balk at. But ?company takes out COVID loan and still goes under? isn?t really unique to me, but maybe I?ve just been following it closer.

[Curryong]

So all their creditors, most of them probably hanging on desperately themselves, can go hang and just absorb the Middleton debts they?ve been left with. I see! How remarkably forgiving so long as you?re not the one responsible now for a 20,000 millstone round your neck you got through trusting people. .

And I stated in my post that I know that a lot of businesses have gone under in the past couple of years. Not all however have gone under with debts of over two million pounds. 

[HistoryGirl2]

^Could you please provide the data for this? Is there data for the amount of debt each business that went under during COVID had? If so, I?d actually be quite interested.

And I don?t think I?m suggesting that it?s honky dory to lose money. I?m stating that this is something that?s happened to quite a number of people after COVID?the difference is those people?s stories aren?t in the papers. Why? Because the owners weren?t related to royalty. I feel as bad for them as I do for everyone else that was in that exact same situation.

Beyond that, I fail to see what should be done. Again, I state if there are illegalities, then they should be charged. Otherwise, I see nothing unique.

[Curryong]

It?s probably out there though I haven?t found much.

Impacts of the Covid-19 crisis: evidence from 2 million UK SMEs | Bank of England

I have anecdotal evidence of several small to medium sized businesses going under in 2022, and they were mostly in hospitality. They went under with totals of around the 100,000 pound mark, some less.

[PrincessOfPeace]

There's absolutely nothing illegal. Party Pieces is a limited liability company, meaning Carole and Mike aren't personally libel for loses. Most companies are structured this way.

They made a go of it for what, 30 years? Paid taxes and employed local people. They have nothing to be ashamed of. It's the old story of some people thinking Carole got too uppity and above her 'station'. If she had only stayed as an airline hostess or lived off of government welfare things would have been okay.

[HistoryGirl2]

There's absolutely nothing illegal. Party Pieces is a limited liability company, meaning Carole and Mike aren't personally libel for loses. Most companies are structured this way.

I would have thought this was common knowledge, but I guess anything to blow things out of proportion.

Until evidence is provided that this is outside of the norm, I?ll stick with my conclusion that this falls in line with what?s sadly become commonplace post-COVID. Mother-in-law of the future king being the clickbait. It obviously worked 😂 Them?s the rules when you?re tangentially connected to the royals. Oh, well.

[Curryong]

There's absolutely nothing illegal. Party Pieces is a limited liability company, meaning Carole and Mike aren't personally libel for loses. Most companies are structured this way.

They made a go of it for what, 30 years? Paid taxes and employed local people. They have nothing to be ashamed of. It's the old story of some people thinking Carole got too uppity and above her 'station'. If she had only stayed as an airline hostess or lived off of government welfare things would have been okay.

Nobody is saying that there was anything illegal done. Whether it?s discreditable or indeed immoral to continue trading when you know your company is on the brink of insolvency is another matter. Especially when it means asking for credit and longer time to pay when you know there is no possibility that you can pay.

And doing it to other medium firms that are supplying you with items in good faith and are under strain themselves, is, imo, absolutely nothing to be proud of. Especially when, at the end, Carole was refusing to take calls from people PP owed money to for services rendered.

[HistoryGirl2]

^She was replying to my comment about illegalities. I?m curious, are you implying that the Middletons purposely drove their business into the ground to screw these people over? I think the overwhelming majority of people put money into businesses in good faith. I wasn?t aware that this somehow means that it?ll work out in your favor. And if they do believe that, I?d brush up on my rules of capitalism.

Also, you state that they knew they?d not be able to pay. Where exactly did you find this information? How do you know they knew it would fail? If you have no evidence of this, I?d like to throw out my own idea of what might have happened: they asked for a loan thinking it would get them by and they?d be able to turn things around?and then they couldn?t?like millions of others businesses throughout time.

Additionally, that article stated that Carole no longer did the day to day running of the business?for years, actually. So, I?d imagine the calls needed to be forwarded to the current management.

[PrincessOfPeace]

It wasn't Carole's hand on the tiller. There was basically a board of directors in place. You can call the Middleton's immoral if you like but I see nothing but a hard working family. If they were out to do shady dealings, it would have been discovered long ago.

[Curryong]

No, I?m not implying that they deliberately drove their business into the ground. However, I do believe that the business was in trouble for quite a long time (Amazon etc) in serious trouble for some time before Covid really bit (but they continued trading) and were on the brink of insolvency for some time as they tried to find buyers to take the business on (and during this time they were asking for credit and slow in paying bills etc.) It was at this point that I believe they should have stopped trading, months before they did, in fact.

Kate Middleton's parents Carole and Michael Middleton sell Party Pieces business | Daily Mail Online

Sources said that the sale had been carried out through what is known as a pre-pack administration, meaning that the firm had appointed insolvency practitioners before it was sold without some of its liabilities. End quote.

Interpath Advisory was reportedly appointed as administrator in court this morning.

The firm's sales are said to have been heavily impacted by the pandemic, leading to losses in the last financial year for which accounts have been filed. 

The Middletons  appointed ??advisers?. And Carole went over to the US to spruik her goods over there while at the same time PPs were fending off people they owed money to.

[HistoryGirl2]

^So, you?re saying they should have just given up just because it might have ended badly. Yeah?from a business standpoint, that?s terrible advice. Unless, a crystal ball was at their disposal. Hindsight is always 20/20, but I guess everyone?s a business savant *after* the fact.

And you might think she was trying to defraud people while going over to the US to ?hock? her good. And another perspective on that is that she was trying to find another source of income to expand her business and help save it.

[Curryong]

^So, you?re saying they should have just given up just because it might have ended badly. Yeah?from a business standpoint, that?s terrible  advice. Unless, a crystal ball was at their disposal.

They knew what position they were in and knew months before.

This is a piece from the Times of late May this year I posted here.

Copy from The Times, (which is behind a paywall.)

The Princess of Wales?s parents took out a coronavirus loan for a children?s party business that will leave the taxpayer facing a loss after the business collapsed this month. Carole and Michael Middleton received a taxpayer-backed loan from NatWest to support the company when lockdowns prevented family gatherings.

Party Pieces, which they established in 1987, has now entered an insolvency process. The bank is owed a balance of ?220,000, according to documents seen by The Times. The taxpayer is liable to pay 80 per cent of any amount owed to NatWest under the terms of the government?s coronavirus business interruption loan scheme.

Party Pieces has now been sold through a so-called pre-pack administration deal to the entrepreneur James Sinclair for ?180,000. The sale proceeds will therefore not be sufficient to pay off the loan in full. The lending is unsecured and will not be given priority over other unsecured creditors such as trade suppliers.

It is understood that Carole Middleton stepped back from the day-to-day running of Party Pieces in 2019. She became a brand ambassador for the business and a new management team was put in place. She remained a director and returned to help run the company?s operations this year to help secure its future. The pandemic led to a decline in sales for Party Pieces that ultimately prompted the owners to call in advisers from the restructuring firm Interpath. Revenues fell from ?4.5 million to ?3.2 million in 2022, and the company made a net loss before tax of ?900,000.

In a report for creditors, the administrators said: ?Management attributed this to the Covid-19 pandemic resulting in reduced social gatherings and a reduction in discretionary spend due to the cost-of-living crisis. This caused constraints on the company?s cash flows. The company was both loss-making and under creditor pressure. In the absence of new funding or a solvent sale, the company was insolvent on a balance sheet and cash flow basis. The existing investors of the company had injected ad hoc funds to meet critical payments and no further funds were available from this source.?

Sinclair?s company Teddy Tastic Bear bought Party Pieces after Interpath approached 175 possible buyers. Interpath received one potentially solvent offer for Party Pieces but found it could not be delivered ?after significant effort?.

Party Pieces held discussions with creditors over its ?tightening liquidity position? but found that there would be no support available to ?defer or deal with the highest-pressure creditors?.

[HistoryGirl2]

^So, you?re saying that if they?d done it a few months before, they wouldn?t have owed anything? Because based on that article you posted, I fail to see how that would be the case.

[Curryong]

No I?m not saying that. But if they had folded six months before they did then all the debts they accrued in the last six months of when they were trading knowing they were virtually insolvent would have been absent.

A quote from the above

In a report for creditors, the administrators said: ?Management attributed this to the Covid-19 pandemic resulting in reduced social gatherings and a reduction in discretionary spend due to the cost-of-living crisis. This caused constraints on the company?s cash flows. The company was both loss-making and under creditor pressure.

In the absence of new funding or a solvent sale, the company was insolvent on a balance sheet and cash flow basis.

The existing investors of the company had injected ad hoc funds to meet critical payments and no further funds were available from this source.?

In other words Carole and Mike were still trading and more importantly asking for credit/time to pay at a time when they knew they were insolvent and unlikely to be able to pay creditors/suppliers. But I guess that doesn?t matter!