As a veteran, this entire charity operation is completely suspicious and hiding behind a veteran as a means to shame those asking questions re: financials is diabolical.
I'd look into the governance issues at Sentebale and overlay that onto Invictus Games to see if there are similarities.
There is a number sitting in the final report on the 2025 Invictus Games, it has to do with costs, and that number is $118,000.
PER COMPETITOR.
500-something wounded veterans would mean $63,000,000 in total spend, and if you do the arithmetic (which I'm sure no one was supposed to do) you arrive at a per-veteran cost roughly equal to the median home price in 26 American states. Which is a lot of money, unless the competitors are being awarded actual pieces of real estate.
...which they are not. They are getting medals.
The United States Warrior Games, which exists to do the same thing for veterans of the same wars, runs on $2,000,000, for a full year.
The German equivalent runs on $200,000, which means the Germans are basically running their entire operation on what the Vancouver guys spend on high-end cheese platters.
So, either Vancouver is uniquely expensive (fine, sure, maybe a cup of coffee there costs... 5,000 dollars?) or something else is happening here, and the thing happening here is a total scam that works because we have collectively agreed "charity for wounded veterans" is a phrase you cannot question without looking like a complete piece of trash.
This is the trick that worked so well with things like USAID, by the way. Every charity-industrial apparatus, everywhere, runs on it. Itās a brilliant psychological hack. You attach a noble cause to a budget -> the budget becomes the noble cause. Ask why a wheelchair-curling tournament needed a $60,000,000 production line, and you are no longer asking about a tournament. You are asking about the veterans. And the veterans, as a rhetorical category, are not available for cross-examination, you monster!
Veterans end up becoming a very, very lucrative human shield for a giant pile of cash.
Meanwhile, a royal commentator is on the record asking whether the 'founder' is using the whole machinery as a personal tax write-off. There is no evidence he is, but... there is also no evidence he isn't. But "show us the ledger" is, somehow, the rudest question anyone is allowed to ask out loud.
Oddly enough, the defense isn't "here are the books, look at them all you want." Nope, their defense is just pointing a finger at you and screaming that you're a bad person for wanting to see them.
Or maybe systemic racism. Or unconscious bias. Or something else.