This is fascinating. I’m a little confused, can you help? I still don’t quite get it… Did the crowd-fund donors help an individual to buy a castle with the understanding that the new owner would renovate it? At auction it was sold for 853K euros… So the crowd-fund folks who chipped in the 50 euros each, helped pay for the castle at auction, right? And now there’s a new, private owner?
If so, then would it be safe to presume whoever owns this castle is now required to renovate it (as opposed to, say, razing the whole thing and building something else)?
It’s great to give a historic monument that would otherwise have eventually crumbled to nothing but rocks again, new life; but is that new life that’s being given to the castle, controllled by just the one private individual? If so, then I guess maybe I’d prefer to help a nonprofit buy up a castle and renovate it so that it becomes a national historic monument.