Visit_Thailand - 4:31 am on Apr 21, 2011 (gmt 0)
Often repeated by the pro-royals this is in fact wrong. Check this link which gives the latest visitor figures for top tourist attractions. None of the current palaces are in the top 20, the tower of London scrapes in at no. 8, but this is mainly an historical attraction.
As far as I can tell that interesting link does not say how, or even if (as far as I can see), they differentiate between domestic tourism and overseas tourism.
Plus it is hardly surprising that museums rank at the top as well, as I am sure the visitor numbers include schools etc. But ALSO a lot of the stuff in the museums do have Royal links, which of course make them more interesting to visit.
But regardless of that, the museums protect history (although granted a lot of the pieces may actually belong to other countries - again an empirical Royal link), and that is what the Royal Wedding is all about, history and the institution.
So I think if you analyse the data carefully, you will find Royal links to a lot of the places in that list.
I do not think it can be argued that the Royal family, and British history, do not contribute significantly to the entire British economy through enormous increases in tourism.