The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 6: Aug. 2021- Oct. 2022

[TLLK]

The Sussexes recently announced that they're now Impact Officers with investment company Ethic.


https://markets.businessinsider.com...s-fintech-asset-manager-ethic-finance-2021-10

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are getting into the investment business by joining a US asset manager as "impact partners," The New York Times' DealBook first reported Tuesday.
The couple are to join Ethic, which has $1.3 billion under management in the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) space, per DealBook.
The couple were introduced to Ethic by friends, Meghan told DealBook in a joint interview with Harry. They became investors in the asset manager earlier this year, and also have investments managed by Ethic, the company said in a press release.

 

[Claire]

Personally - I think this is the biggest mistake they could ever make.
Ethics invests into a number of companies - including Netflix, Google, Twitter and Facebook. Harry's positions with Google via Travelyst and in the Fake News committee might provide him with information that might affect the stock price. Regardless of where the Sussex's have their portfolio -they are employed by they company and they are linked to over 6 companies where they can get insider information. There is a blatant conflict of interest here. I am very surprised that they were not warned against this.

The same can be said to their position as ambassador for Global Citizens for the Vaccine programme - this company invests in all of the top 5 pharmaceutical companies. They also invest in several companies with interesting Tax histories in their native countries.

 

[A-Bik]

Looks like they succeeded in getting international attention by approaching Harry and making him co-author.

And Leo DiCaprio as well!

So Meghan wrote for the NY Times. Harry for the Washington Post.
Just the WSJ left, and the trifecta is complete!??

 

[UglyAmerican]

Personally - I think this is the biggest mistake they could ever make.
Ethics invests into a number of companies - including Netflix, Google, Twitter and Facebook. Harry's positions with Google via Travelyst and in the Fake News committee might provide him with information that might affect the stock price. Regardless of where the Sussex's have their portfolio -they are employed by they company and they are linked to over 6 companies where they can get insider information. There is a blatant conflict of interest here. I am very surprised that they were not warned against this.

The same can be said to their position as ambassador for Global Citizens for the Vaccine programme - this company invests in all of the top 5 pharmaceutical companies. They also invest in several companies with interesting Tax histories in their native countries.

In a practical sense, Harry's conflicts of interest won't be a problem unless a party to one of those conflicts gives him real authority over something important. I doubt that will happen for a long list of reasons, with potential conflicts being the least of them. Those who are actually in charge of these companies aren't dummies, and no matter what job title they've given Harry, they aren't going to take investment or management advice from him. They're not going to throw more money at Netflix or Google because Harry says to, regardless of Harry's motives for saying that, because they know Harry doesn't know what he's talking about. And I doubt anyone at Netflix or Google is giving Harry any sensitive information, either, because we all know how good he isn't at keeping his mouth shut. He's a figurehead who's good for PR and who might occasionally have some interesting ideas, nothing more, and I'm sure that's how the real management sees him.

You're right, though, that this isn't a good look for him. As with so many things, they've either not sought qualified professional advice, or they've chosen to ignore qualified professional advice because they didn't like it and think they know best. One of these days, that's going to blow up in their faces.

 

[A-Bik]

Whether you like the Sussexes or not, I think it goes without saying that neither Beatrice, Madeleine nor Amedeo can match H&M's notoriety, so frankly these forced comparisons are just redundant.

I think you'll find this school curriculum article as interesting as I did.

This is something I would expect from the States.

https://archive.is/sxYUa#selection-895.0-989.303

It'll be fascinating how the next generation will view this BRF era.

 

[Osipi]

Well folks. That's the ticket. Companies and businesses and those with deep pockets are being asked to put their trust in how they invest their hard earned green dollars with a man that up until recently never had to carry money, had "people" to settle things for him and until recently, had people to "handle" him and tell him his itinerary for the day. Yeps. That's the ticket alright.

I'm glad I'm a self made nillionaire. I don't need to worry about investing anything. Good luck to Harry on this though. Maybe he'll actually do some good. Time will tell. ?

 

[muriel]

Personally - I think this is the biggest mistake they could ever make.
Ethics invests into a number of companies - including Netflix, Google, Twitter and Facebook. Harry's positions with Google via Travelyst and in the Fake News committee might provide him with information that might affect the stock price. Regardless of where the Sussex's have their portfolio -they are employed by they company and they are linked to over 6 companies where they can get insider information. There is a blatant conflict of interest here. I am very surprised that they were not warned against this.

The same can be said to their position as ambassador for Global Citizens for the Vaccine programme - this company invests in all of the top 5 pharmaceutical companies. They also invest in several companies with interesting Tax histories in their native countries.

In a practical sense, Harry's conflicts of interest won't be a problem unless a party to one of those conflicts gives him real authority over something important. I doubt that will happen for a long list of reasons, with potential conflicts being the least of them. Those who are actually in charge of these companies aren't dummies, and no matter what job title they've given Harry, they aren't going to take investment or management advice from him. They're not going to throw more money at Netflix or Google because Harry says to, regardless of Harry's motives for saying that, because they know Harry doesn't know what he's talking about. And I doubt anyone at Netflix or Google is giving Harry any sensitive information, either, because we all know how good he isn't at keeping his mouth shut. He's a figurehead who's good for PR and who might occasionally have some interesting ideas, nothing more, and I'm sure that's how the real management sees him.

You're right, though, that this isn't a good look for him. As with so many things, they've either not sought qualified professional advice, or they've chosen to ignore qualified professional advice because they didn't like it and think they know best. One of these days, that's going to blow up in their faces.

In my mind, the issue of potential conflicts of interest will arise if Harry and or his wife had an executive role in any of these organisations that would give them any knowledge of the underlying businesses, their future plans and prospects, and implications of those prospects on the financial results of the companies.

Further, I would be surprised if Harry and his wife going to be involved in investment decisions at the fund manager. If they were to be involved in investment decisions, I would take a very negative view and certainly nit trust the organisation with my money as neither H nor M have any background or experience in financial markets. My sense is that they will be there to help attract investors, and little else.

 

[Alison H]

Would it even be legal for Harry to make the decisions? I don't know what the situation in the US is, but fund managers in the UK would generally be registered under the Financial Services Authority. There's nothing to stop you from taking financial advice from Joe Bloggs down the pub, and plenty of people do, but someone actually setting themselves up as a fund manager would need to be properly regulated.

 

[Kaye1850]

Well folks….with a man that up until recently never had to carry money, had "people" to settle things for him and until recently, had people to "handle" him and tell him his itinerary for the day.

You might be describing his current life, we don’t really know.

 

[An Ard Ri]

Has the Baptism of Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor taken place yet or was in postponed due to Covid?

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

We haven't heard that she is baptized, but I would not be at all surprised to learn at a later date that she was baptized privately without an announcement. I can very much imagine a situation, even, like Beatrice's wedding with an announcement afterward, or even an announcement much later.

It would be lovely for the family if that is their wish and they are able to hold the baptism in private.

 

[Heavs]

Has the Baptism of Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor taken place yet or was in postponed due to Covid?

She hasn't been baptised yet. There seems to be some debate about when and where. With "royal sources" telling The Telegraph it won't be Windsor and a spokesperson for the Sussexes saying nothing has been finalised yet.

https://archive.ph/vvzAy

Unless it's at Windsor we probably won't hear about it.

 

[iceflower]

The Duchess of Sussex has written an open letter to US Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer and US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi in support of the national campaign Paid Leave for All. It was published yesterday:


** paidleaveforall: Letter from Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex **

 

[acdc1]

The Duchess of Sussex has written an open letter to US Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer and US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi in support of the national campaign Paid Leave for All. It was published yesterday:


** paidleaveforall: Letter from Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex **

Totally agree with her position on this, but I don’t think it was appropriate to use the “Duke and Duchess of Sussex” title when doing so. It definitely muddles the waters between the role that members of a royal family can play in politics. It makes it seem like she was doing it in her official capacity as a member of the British Royal Family rather than as a private American citizen. I think this is one of the reason the issue with the titles REALLY needs to be sorted firmly. The BRF needs to put a foot down and say “If you want to get involved in US politics, you need to do it as Meghan Markle or Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor or Meghan Sussex, not as the Duchess of Sussex.”

 

[JR76]

I think this is one of the reason the issue with the titles REALLY needs to be sorted firmly. The BRF needs to put a foot down and say “If you want to get involved in US politics, you need to do it as Meghan Markle or Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor or Meghan Sussex, not as the Duchess of Sussex.”

Even if they wanted to there's not much that the Royal family can do. The Sussex dukedom is a peerage title, not a royal title.

 

[TLLK]

Totally agree with her position on this, but I don’t think it was appropriate to use the “Duke and Duchess of Sussex” title when doing so. It definitely muddles the waters between the role that members of a royal family can play in politics. It makes it seem like she was doing it in her official capacity as a member of the British Royal Family rather than as a private American citizen. I think this is one of the reason the issue with the titles REALLY needs to be sorted firmly. The BRF needs to put a foot down and say “If you want to get involved in US politics, you need to do it as Meghan Markle or Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor or Meghan Sussex, not as the Duchess of Sussex.”

This is my concern as well. I don't mind if Meghan chooses to write to her elected representatives, but personally I don't care to see her doing so reference to her British titles.

 

[Osipi]

As a US citizen, Meghan has the right to voice her thoughts in a letter to her representatives on any matter. Most US citizens contact the representatives that are elected from their area though. I do agree that using a British peerage title seems awfully strange to see when it concerns American politics and policy.

As much as I think the letter was well written and brings up some great points of why paid leave for all is a grand idea, I don't see it happening on a federal level. Right now, places are finding it hard to find employees. I don't see places like McDonald's or Burger King hiring in people and giving them paid leave for maternity/paternity. Not on hourly paid wages anyways. A salaried employee for a corporation may be different and include this in their employment package (some already do). Many employers already honor maternity leaves but paternity leaves for the father isn't something that is generally something included in employment packages.

I believe, honestly, that the US government would be best to leave this up to the individual employers to add or not as they choose. Let's get this country's employment rate to a better level before we start debating how much paid leave for new parents is included.

Nice try, Meghan, though. Not every job in the US is equipped to offer paid leave for an extended time for new parents though. ?

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

What Meghan has done is the equivalent as if you or I (assuming we worked for a white-collar, high-powered, name-brand corporation) took our corporate letterhead and began a letter to our representatives: "I am reaching out not as an executive, not as a member of the white-collar corporate community, but as a community member and mom."

Indeed, the words might come from the heart of a simple community member, but the intent is clearly to use the accouterments to what can at best be described as to "influence" the message and at worst can be described in far less flattering terms. And employee who did the above would be fired.

If this important letter was meant to come from a concerned citizen, it should have been sent on a piece of wide-ruled composition paper.

I fear this is precisely the image that many feared would come to pass: the words "the office of the Duke of Duchess..." along with letter to US politicians. We can go back and forth all day about how it is their private office, their personal names, etc. It is not a good look.

 

[Curryong]

Meghan wasn’t using the styling HRH. And she doesn’t have a peerage. How she signed the letter is precisely who she is as Harry’s wife, the Duchess of Sussex. She isn’t Meghan Mountbatten Windsor or any other concoction. Meghan is, technically however, Princess Harry. Is that preferable?

I think it’s a fantastic cause for Meghan to back. The vast majority of the First World and some of the Second have paid parental leave in place as a matter of course. Only the US lags behind.

 

[Prinsara]

It's also incredibly pretentious and convoluted while virtue-signaling, which is right about on-brand for these two.

There's a man named David Thomson (of Thomson Reuters fame); the richest guy in Canada. He also happens to be the 3rd Lord Thomson of Fleet due to his grandfather acquiring a title. And he also has two sets of stationery and says: "When I'm in Canada, I'm just David Thomson."

Of course, his title isn't the sole thing he has to trade on.

I think she could easily have written to Congress as Meghan Markle, given she's an American citizen and self-proclaimed feminist, people certainly know who that is thanks to the Internet, and titles are completely (and legally!) meaningless in the US. Or at least Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor, if she wants to tout her marriage. But no, she thinks there's more prestige in doing it as the Duchess, an appendage of an institution and country she left and dislikes.

 

[Osipi]

What Meghan has done is the equivalent as if you or I (assuming we worked for a white-collar, high-powered, name-brand corporation) took our corporate letterhead and began a letter to our representatives: "I am reaching out not as an executive, not as a member of the white-collar corporate community, but as a community member and mom."

Indeed, the words might come from the heart of a simple community member, but the intent is clearly to use the accouterments to what can at best be described as to "influence" the message and at worst can be described in far less flattering terms. And employee who did the above would be fired.

If this important letter was meant to come from a concerned citizen, it should have been sent on a piece of wide-ruled composition paper.

I fear this is precisely the image that many feared would come to pass: the words "the office of the Duke of Duchess..." along with letter to US politicians. We can go back and forth all day about how it is their private office, their personal names, etc. It is not a good look.

Once again, in the words of Uhtred of Bebbanberg from "The Last Kingdom", "Reputation is everything".

One thing was guaranteed through Meghan's letter and the use of the British peerage titles was that it has garnered attention. The many times we've contacted our representative by phone or letter, it never made news headlines. The use of the title guaranteed that. It's at its meant to be pointed out that Meghan's words were noted as from someone "important" rather than the voice of a constituent asking her representative to considered what the people that representative works for think.

Why was this letter even released to the public in the first place? Who authorized it? Sunshine Sachs? If it was released as PR, then the meaning of why the letter was written in the first place loses it's meaning and blatantly points to trying to influence the public opinion more so than making an opinion known to those that make and enact the laws.

JMO of course.

 

[muriel]

What Meghan has done is the equivalent as if you or I (assuming we worked for a white-collar, high-powered, name-brand corporation) took our corporate letterhead and began a letter to our representatives: "I am reaching out not as an executive, not as a member of the white-collar corporate community, but as a community member and mom."

The only difference from your analogy is that Meghan no longer works for or represents the corporation!

 

[duchessrachel]

What Meghan has done is the equivalent as if you or I (assuming we worked for a white-collar, high-powered, name-brand corporation) took our corporate letterhead and began a letter to our representatives: "I am reaching out not as an executive, not as a member of the white-collar corporate community, but as a community member and mom."

Indeed, the words might come from the heart of a simple community member, but the intent is clearly to use the accouterments to what can at best be described as to "influence" the message and at worst can be described in far less flattering terms. And employee who did the above would be fired.

If this important letter was meant to come from a concerned citizen, it should have been sent on a piece of wide-ruled composition paper.

I fear this is precisely the image that many feared would come to pass: the words "the office of the Duke of Duchess..." along with letter to US politicians. We can go back and forth all day about how it is their private office, their personal names, etc. It is not a good look.

I agree that it is not a good look, particularly, as you mentioned, the letterhead "The Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex." Even though Meghan wrote the letter, the letterhead brings Harry into it, which is even worse since he is not even a US citizen.

 

[Curryong]

This is where I first read the letter from Meghan. It appears on the Marshall Plan for Moms website, not from Sunshine Sachs or any other PR firm.

https://marshallplanformoms.com/news/theduchessofsussex/

 

[acdc1]

Once again, in the words of Uhtred of Bebbanberg from "The Last Kingdom", "Reputation is everything".

One thing was guaranteed through Meghan's letter and the use of the British peerage titles was that it has garnered attention. The many times we've contacted our representative by phone or letter, it never made news headlines. The use of the title guaranteed that. It's at its meant to be pointed out that Meghan's words were noted as from someone "important" rather than the voice of a constituent asking her representative to considered what the people that representative works for think.

Why was this letter even released to the public in the first place? Who authorized it? Sunshine Sachs? If it was released as PR, then the meaning of why the letter was written in the first place loses it's meaning and blatantly points to trying to influence the public opinion more so than making an opinion known to those that make and enact the laws.

JMO of course.

Meghan is a well-known figure by her own right and that of marriage, it would have garnered attention without her using the titles. Like I said, I wholeheartedly agree with her position on this and she has every right to write to her representatives as an American citizen, and every right to publicize that’s she’s done so. She just shouldn’t do it using her British titles.

 

[stunking]

The titles are what make her important and carry weight. They ran away from royalty and what it stands for but use the royal titles to make them important. Who released the letter well we probably know that.

 

[Curryong]

I’ve previously posted that it appeared on the Marshall Plan for Moms website. It was also released on the Paid Leave For All’s website, as below, so no doubt all of the many organisations fighting for this measure and for others for years decided to print it at the same time for maximum impact.

https://paidleaveforall.org/

 

[TLLK]

I agree that it is not a good look, particularly, as you mentioned, the letterhead "The Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex." Even though Meghan wrote the letter, the letterhead brings Harry into it, which is even worse since he is not even a US citizen.

Yes I am surprised that particular letterhead was selected as it now brings a foreign citizen into it. No doubt he supports his wife, but this is awkward IMO.

 

[Osipi]

I am sure that the organizations that are behind this campaign for paid leave for all are very pleased to have Meghan speak out for their cause but I seriously doubt that it will have any kind of impact on the legislation itself. But that´s the American way. Citizens have the right to express their opinions at any time.

Nothing really majorly inappropriate was actually done although Iḿ sure a lot of people will be scratching their heads at British peerage titles being used but it´s not uncommon for a person to use their professional letterheads to write letters to anyone.

Give it 3 days and the world will move on to something else if they already haven´t. This is not a big deal by any means. ?

 

[UglyAmerican]

In most real jobs, high-level officers don't have free rein to email their congressmen about whatever issue strikes their fancy, and then issue a press release informing the world that they've done so. That's because it's too easy for people to think that their personal opinion is the official position of their employer. If I did that, I'd expect to be fired. Maybe they'd let it slide for paid leave, since my firm offers it anyway. But I think this is just more proof that they don't really live in the real world.