The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Current Events Archive
Click Here to Login

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2181  
Old 12-18-2020, 09:03 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Like the York girls Harry and Meghan do use their names for business. They can't use their titles.
As pointed out previously, the official announcement of their most recent business venture did use their titles, including Prince.

https://newsroom.spotify.com/2020-12...-will-inspire/

Quote:
Spotify’s New Multiyear Partnership with The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Archewell Audio Promises Podcasts That Will Inspire

December 15, 2020

Telling and listening to uplifting and entertaining stories have been a vital part of many of our lives this past year. Today, Archewell Audio, the newly-formed audio-first production company created by Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex and Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, has announced a multi-year partnership with Spotify to produce podcasts and shows that tell these stories—and inspire even more.

[...]
__________________

  #2182  
Old 12-18-2020, 09:12 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
As pointed out previously, the official announcement of their most recent business venture did use their titles, including Prince.

https://newsroom.spotify.com/2020-12...-will-inspire/
They are forbidden form using the HRH for business things, so they have to use Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
__________________

  #2183  
Old 12-18-2020, 09:17 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
the point being.. She was not well known. Until she started dating Harry, if you'd asked an American "who is Meghan Markle", they probably would not know unless they were Suits fans.
But who is claiming she was some world famous actress? People are pointing out she was an actress on a popular cable show. She had a career and due to that career when she was linked to Harry it was very easy to learn a lot about her. That was due to having a somewhat public life.

As for Harry and Meghan's titles. Yes they are linked to it but honestly they are mostly known as "Harry and Meghan." The average person likely don't even know their title. That is the case for most the royals. They know Prince William -- not Duke of Cambridge. They say Kate Middleton because that is what majority recognize.

It is a bit silly to say no one would know what is being spoken about if they said "Harry and Meghan" because they absolutely would.

But time will tell come March. Hopefully whatever is decided will end the nonstop debate.
  #2184  
Old 12-18-2020, 10:08 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
But who is claiming she was some world famous actress? People are pointing out she was an actress on a popular cable show. She had a career and due to that career when she was linked to Harry it was very easy to learn a lot about her. That was due to having a somewhat public life.

As for Harry and Meghan's titles. Yes they are linked to it but honestly they are mostly known as "Harry and Meghan." The average person likely don't even know their title. That is the case for most the royals. They know Prince William -- not Duke of Cambridge. They say Kate Middleton because that is what majority recognize.

It is a bit silly to say no one would know what is being spoken about if they said "Harry and Meghan" because they absolutely would.

But time will tell come March. Hopefully whatever is decided will end the nonstop debate.
People claim that Meghan was "well known before she met Harry".. as opposed to others who state that she only gets things like the Netflix deal because she IS married to a prince..... People also state that Meghan is very rich in her own right... which again I doubt if she is...
As for the titles, they may be known on the tabloids as Harry and Meghan but in business deals you have to have a formal name and surname.. and H and Meg have chosne to be known as Duke and Duchess of Sussex....
  #2185  
Old 12-18-2020, 10:45 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,395
There are plenty who are on here acting like Meghan didn't have a whole life before Harry walked into hers. That is just not true. Of course meeting him raised her profile. It raises ALL their profiles.

As for her lifestyle? I think Meghan had a comfortable life. A very comfortable life. She clearly was member of exclusive clubs. Hobnobbed with celebrities. Travelled. Ambassador for organizations. She was an actress. She worked on a show for 7 years. She had side deals as well. She was just able to do it in peace.

Is it really that shocking to think she had a million or 2 in the bank, if she invested correctly? I have never seen her bank account so I can't claim it one way or another. She was no mega star but there are actors lesser known than than Meghan's status on Suits who are plenty wealthy from all the work they do. You would shocked.

Of course Netflix and Spotify are interested in them because of who they are. You only look twice at any of the royals due to who they are. Harry was born a royal. No matter what happens in his life -- that is not changing. He is still Charles' son. He is still Williams brother. That is not changing.
  #2186  
Old 12-18-2020, 10:51 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,694
she may have had a comfortable life.. but she was not likely IMO to have made millions from her acting (as others have pointed out) nor was she well known. If she'd made millions it seems very odd that she didn't buy herself a house.. most people like ot have that security of a roof that they own...
As for the titles, that is the whole point. THey have only gotten these deals because they have titles and are related to the queen of England. As an ex army officer and a C list actress they certianly would not have these deals. Yet harry and Meghan walked out of royal life and form many of the things they've siad, they seem to be claiming that they didn't like England, didn't like royal life, didn't really want to be titled.. etc etc.....
  #2187  
Old 12-18-2020, 01:02 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,801
If it was me and I had a recurring role in a show filmed in Canada or even had a job in Toronto that I knew didn't have permanency, I would have rented a place to live rather than buy. I rented for years after my divorce in different places until the time came I knew I wanted to put down roots once again. Now I can't be budged from my home. Money doesn't mean you prefer to buy over renting. Situations do.

I will attest to the fact that if someone had asked me about "Meghan Markle" before she hooked up with Harry, it wouldn't have rung a bell. But... if you had asked me about "Rachel Zane" on Suits or the name of her characters in the Hallmark movies she's starred in, that I'd know as I was familiar with Suits and her movies. Suits wasn't high on my "must watch" list but I'd seen it. It's basically the same thing too with Chandra Wilson. (I even had to look up her name). I love her character "Miranda Bailey" on Grey's Anatomy and avidly watch the show but ask me what the actors/actresses real names are and I'd be at a loss in a trivia quiz on the show.

As for Duke and Duchess of Sussex. At this time, they can honestly and legally use those titles for whatever in life they want to. They're not breaking any rules. Public perception is that some see them using "royal" titles in business deals but they're actually not. They, themselves, are not using "HRH" or "Prince". The media could call Meghan "Her Majesty" but it would be *them* making a mistake. Some media recently mistakenly called the Queen "Her Royal Highness" too and we *know* that's a grand mistake.

I don't care about a person's bank account either. The size of a bank account does not define a person or denote their worth. Most people prefer that their bank accounts remain private business and not for public perusal and that holds true for Meghan, Harry, their protection officers and the guy that cuts their lawn and their neighbor 5 houses down the lane from them. Now, if there were any instances of the British taxpayer doling out the green dollars (converted from the British pound) to the Sussexes, that'd be a horse of a completely different color but they get absolutely zilch from the British taxpayer these days.

Just my two cents. Sometimes I feel like my opinion feels like a penny waiting for change but what the heck..
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #2188  
Old 12-18-2020, 01:25 PM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
As for Duke and Duchess of Sussex. At this time, they can honestly and legally use those titles for whatever in life they want to. They're not breaking any rules. Public perception is that some see them using "royal" titles in business deals but they're actually not. They, themselves, are not using "HRH" or "Prince". The media could call Meghan "Her Majesty" but it would be *them* making a mistake. Some media recently mistakenly called the Queen "Her Royal Highness" too and we *know* that's a grand mistake.
It is all about perception. Whilst they are not using HRH The Duke & Duchess of Sussex, they can very specifically ask the companies they work with to stop referring to them as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. This will, at one stroke, take away any suggestions that they are trading on their royal status. They will still remain Duke and Duchess, but will just not use the name for work purposes. Not sure what is wrong with being Harry Sussex. Beatrice used Beatrice York as her work name.
  #2189  
Old 12-18-2020, 01:28 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
If it was me and I had a recurring role in a show filmed in Canada or even had a job in Toronto that I knew didn't have permanency, I would have rented a place to live rather than buy. I rented for years after my divorce in different places until the time came I knew I wanted to put down roots once again. Now I can't be budged from my home. Money doesn't mean you prefer to buy over renting. Situations do.

I will attest to the fact that if someone had asked me about "Meghan Markle" before she hooked up with Harry, it wouldn't have rung a bell. But... if you had asked me about "Rachel Zane" on Suits or the name of her characters in the Hallmark movies she's starred in, that I'd know as I was familiar with Suits and her movies. Suits wasn't high on my "must watch" list but I'd seen it. It's basically the same thing too with Chandra Wilson. (I even had to look up her name). I love her character "Miranda Bailey" on Grey's Anatomy and avidly watch the show but ask me what the actors/actresses real names are and I'd be at a loss in a trivia quiz on the show.

As for Duke and Duchess of Sussex. At this time, they can honestly and legally use those titles for whatever in life they want to. They're not breaking any rules. Public perception is that some see them using "royal" titles in business deals but they're actually not. They, themselves, are not using "HRH" or "Prince". The media could call Meghan "Her Majesty" but it would be *them* making a mistake. Some media recently mistakenly called the Queen "Her Royal Highness" too and we *know* that's a grand mistake.

I don't care about a person's bank account either. The size of a bank account does not define a person or denote their worth. Most people prefer that their bank accounts remain private business and not for public perusal and that holds true for Meghan, Harry, their protection officers and the guy that cuts their lawn and their neighbor 5 houses down the lane from them. Now, if there were any instances of the British taxpayer doling out the green dollars (converted from the British pound) to the Sussexes, that'd be a horse of a completely different color but they get absolutely zilch from the British taxpayer these days.

Just my two cents. Sometimes I feel like my opinion feels like a penny waiting for change but what the heck..
Regarding the buying vs. renting thing in relation to Meghan wealth: for me personally when I talk about her not owning property it's not about owning one in Toronto but in LA.
  #2190  
Old 12-18-2020, 01:37 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
It is all about perception. Whilst they are not using HRH The Duke & Duchess of Sussex, they can very specifically ask the companies they work with to stop referring to them as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. This will, at one stroke, take away any suggestions that they are trading on their royal status. They will still remain Duke and Duchess, but will just not use the name for work purposes. Not sure what is wrong with being Harry Sussex. Beatrice used Beatrice York as her work name.
Perhaps this will be a biggie that is discussed at the year end review? Maybe these changes will be made to further emphasize that Harry and Meghan are not hinging their successes (or failures) on their peerage titles. Harry and Meghan Sussex would work for me very well. Mountbatten-Windsor is a mouthful. Windsor would be out for me as it is the name of the House of Windsor which encompasses the royal family of the UK.

The companies will probably go along with not using Duke and Duchess of Sussex but the media is a totally different beast. Their stories hinge on "royals behaving badly" and it garners them a lot of green dollars in the pockets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
Regarding the buying vs. renting thing in relation to Meghan wealth: for me personally when I talk about her not owning property it's not about owning one in Toronto but in LA.
The purchase of the home in California sent a clear message to me. It tells me that they're putting down permanent roots in the US. A place to keep and raise a family. That purchase, in and of itself, tells me there is no intention of going back to the UK with their tails between their legs stating "we've made a mistake".
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #2191  
Old 12-18-2020, 02:07 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Perhaps this will be a biggie that is discussed at the year end review? Maybe these changes will be made to further emphasize that Harry and Meghan are not hinging their successes (or failures) on their peerage titles. Harry and Meghan Sussex would work for me very well. Mountbatten-Windsor is a mouthful. Windsor would be out for me as it is the name of the House of Windsor which encompasses the royal family of the UK.

The companies will probably go along with not using Duke and Duchess of Sussex but the media is a totally different beast. Their stories hinge on "royals behaving badly" and it garners them a lot of green dollars in the pockets.



The purchase of the home in California sent a clear message to me. It tells me that they're putting down permanent roots in the US. A place to keep and raise a family. That purchase, in and of itself, tells me there is no intention of going back to the UK with their tails between their legs stating "we've made a mistake".
What? we're talking about Meghan not owning a place pre-Harry and how it relates to her supposed wealth.
  #2192  
Old 12-18-2020, 02:30 PM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
Honestly, I doubt this recent investment in Clevr Blends by Meghan is necessarily going to be a source of huge income for her. The exact terms of the investment have not been revealed. Plus, this might be only one of the investments Meghan has been involved with, as per the wording in articles implies there may be other women-owned businesses she has financially supported. In any case, there's nothing wrong with making money, spreading wealth with others, and enjoying the fruits of your labor.

FWIW, the ethical part of the Clevr Blends brand has to do with the company's focus on actively participating in community wellbeing and advocacy for food justice. One of the organizations the company is collaborating with is El Centro SB, a group that supports regional aid and community resilience. These details are provided on the company's website and in some of the articles reporting on Meghan's investment.
https://www.clevrblends.com/pages/ourstory
I agree. I you want to make money, a startup would be very risky. There are better ways to do it.
  #2193  
Old 12-18-2020, 02:35 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
What? we're talking about Meghan not owning a place pre-Harry and how it relates to her supposed wealth.
And.... I stated my opinion on that angle in a previous post. See post #2189.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #2194  
Old 12-18-2020, 02:53 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,395
Yeah I’m not understanding what Meghan not owning her home meant. She was in that place in Toronto for about 6 years. It was her base as she worked in Canada. When she wasn’t working she was mostly traveling. Why would she own a home elsewhere?

When she settled she did buy a home.
  #2195  
Old 12-18-2020, 03:03 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 5,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Like the York girls Harry and Meghan do use their names for business. They can't use their titles.

People don't have amnesia. They aren't going to forget who Harry is if he goes by Harry Mountbatten. Meghan was a known actress and charity spokeswoman before she ever married him. They could change their name to smith and it would be no different.

As for the Yorks, when they were working? They still do.
They do use their titles 'The Duke and Duchess of Sussex' or (Prince) Harry, the Duke of Sussex and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex all the time. So, what exactly do you mean by they do not use their titles? How would you call their use of their ducal titles in that case?
  #2196  
Old 12-18-2020, 03:08 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
They do use their titles 'The Duke and Duchess of Sussex' or (Prince) Harry, the Duke of Sussex and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex all the time. So, what do you mean by they do not use their titles? How would you call their use of their ducal titles in that case?
To me, they're using their *peerage* titles and not *royal* titles. One can be a peer of the UK and not be royal. Where has Harry actually referred to himself as "Prince Harry". That usage is at the fault of others and not Harry that I've seen.

It's my understanding that they are prohibited from using their "HRH" not their peerage titles. Have I read the conditions wrong perhaps?
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #2197  
Old 12-18-2020, 03:11 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 5,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
To me, they're using their *peerage* titles and not *royal* titles. One can be a peer of the UK and not be royal. Where has Harry actually referred to himself as "Prince Harry". That usage is at the fault of others and not Harry that I've seen.

It's my understanding that they are prohibited from using their "HRH" not their peerage titles. Have I read the conditions wrong perhaps?
The claim was that they were using their names instead of their titles. You are addressing a different issue

I put the 'Prince' between brackets because it has been used in official communication about him; but not necessarily by him personally (but I would expect both of them to make sure that press releases etc about their business endeavors would be reviewed before publishing - and the Spotify one did use 'prince' as was pointed out before).
  #2198  
Old 12-18-2020, 04:03 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
Yeah I’m not understanding what Meghan not owning her home meant. She was in that place in Toronto for about 6 years. It was her base as she worked in Canada. When she wasn’t working she was mostly traveling. Why would she own a home elsewhere?

When she settled she did buy a home.
Why would she onw a home?? Why not? Most people want to have a home and not waste money on rent... And people keep saying that she was a millionare in her own right before she married Harry... Im sure that most millionaires own at least one home.
  #2199  
Old 12-18-2020, 04:22 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Why would she onw a home?? Why not? Most people want to have a home and not waste money on rent... And people keep saying that she was a millionare in her own right before she married Harry... Im sure that most millionaires own at least one home.
Even looking at the British Royal Family and the perks they have and the trust funds and will never be known as being "poor folk', very few of them actually *own* their own residences. Good case of 'millionaires that don't own one home" in my book.

I'll state it again. Having a lot of money doesn't necessitate the want and need to buy and own homes. Situations do. Meghan as a single, divorced actress working in Canada for years probably never felt the *need* to buy and own a home no matter how hefty her bank account was at the time.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #2200  
Old 12-18-2020, 04:44 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
And.... I stated my opinion on that angle in a previous post. See post #2189.
I was responding to this part of your comment:
"If it was me and I had a recurring role in a show filmed in Canada or even had a job in Toronto that I knew didn't have permanency, I would have rented a place to live rather than buy. I rented for years after my divorce in different places until the time came I knew I wanted to put down roots once again. Now I can't be budged from my home. Money doesn't mean you prefer to buy over renting. Situations do."

So you were talking about not owning a house while temporary living in a city or country,
To which I responded:
"Regarding the buying vs. renting thing in relation to Meghan wealth: for me personally when I talk about her not owning property it's not about owning one in Toronto but in LA"

Than you veered off and responded by talking about their CA house, when the topic was about Meghan in her pre-Harry days.
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 2: December 2020- JessRulz The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 437 Today 02:39 AM




Popular Tags
abu dhabi america american history anastasia anastasia once upon a time ancestry background story baptism biography british royal family brownbitcoinqueen buckingham palace china commonwealth countries daisy doge of venice doll duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex earl of snowdon elizabeth ii family life family tree fashion and style games general news thread george vi imperial household interesting intro jack brooksbank jacobite japan jewellery jewelry kids movie książ castle list of rulers luxembourg maxima mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal family plantinum jubilee prince constantijn prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn walailak princess elizabeth princess of orange princess ribha queen louise royal ancestry royal balls royal events royal family royal jewels royal wedding serbian royal family snowdon spain speech suthida taiwan united states of america videos wedding gown wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:41 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×