The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Step Back as Senior Royals: January 2020 - Page 97

Osipi · #**1921** 01-13-2020, 02:10 AM

Actually, there's some good in all this going on right now with the Sussexes. It gives a forum to express what we think, what we think we see and how things may go and it is an intelligent discussion. Its also been a good venue to learn more in depth about how things work with the BRF, the "Firm", their charities and patronages and just how they get their monies and how it is used. Its how I've learned a *lot* over the years and I knew practically nothing at all when I first logged on here as Iluvbertie can attest to. All things are connected.

The biggest shock to me, personally, is that with all this going on and avidly keeping track of it all, I've noticed a difference in myself. Finally I jump into the 21st century and actually purchase a refurbished laptop and by habit, I'm the type that would be like a little kid with a new toy. its been severely neglected as I'm not overly familiar yet with the keyboard. Go figure.

Keep calm and carry on!

Lilyflo · #**1922** 01-13-2020, 02:12 AM

Interesting point made above about Princess Anne making money out of breeding horses. I think she has a farm, which is a commercial business. So if some working royals are also earning money outside of their income from the Queen, could that be the precedent referred to by H&M in their statement? Anne doesn't use her royal status to generate the private income though, which would be the sticking point for H&M I think.

I suppose H&M could generate a private income from something that didn't trade off their status eg investments, property etc. If their royal foundation was wholly for charity & they took no personal income from it, perhaps that would be acceptable.

Just another thought - the Queen Mother left money in her will. Where did that come from? Presumably there was an investment portfolio generating a private income. The Queen herself makes money from her horse stud & Sandringham is a commercial enterprise isn't it? Perhaps there are many ways H&M could generate a private income without cashing in on their titles and use them solely for charity fundraising.

Betsypaige · #**1923** 01-13-2020, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Heather_

I suspect that might be a big if. It appears that much of the general public is of the opinion that if they want independence then they should have their independence but they shouldn't expect someone else to continue funding them. Much of the mood I see appears to be of the "good riddance and don't let the door hit you on the way out" type of feeling. I doubt very much that the general public would understand or even would care to understand Charles' motivations should he pander to Harry and Meghan. I'm personally torn between believing that we'll see them pandered to and all but worshipped or believing that they'll be dealt with fairly harshly given the manner that this happened in and their behavior over the past couple of years. I'm torn between believing that they won't be rewarded for bad behavior and believing that they'll reap more reward than they dared hope for just to keep them from being the loose cannons that they appear to be and in an effort to reign them in and keep them under control. Though, if even half the stories we've seen in the last few days have any basis in truth, then I suspect those would be futile hopes as they've shown that they're masters of deceit, plotting, and blackmail.

Considering that the public doesn’t particularly care for Charles, I admit that I’m nervous for him if it comes out that he’s funding Harry and Meghan in part. Still, he’s been through far worse - and his son’s welfare is more important than his personal popularity. I’m sure whatever he does will be supported by the Queen.

Kataryn · #**1924** 01-13-2020, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Heather_

They might. If they're allowed by the Queen and the other relevant players to do so. And frankly, that's a big if. Just as if I waltzed into the office one day and told my boss that I didn't like my job, didn't like the oversight, didn't like how the company was run but wanted to keep all of my perks and benefits and dictate to them how and when I was going to perform some aspects of my job. And I expect them to fall in line posthaste. That just simply wouldn't fly and I'd be out the door on my behind so fast it could give me whiplash. Harry and Meghan are already being given quite a bit of leeway in that those higher than them in the hierarchy are agreeing to hear them out and negotiate with them. So maybe they'll do what they have decided they'll do and maybe they won't, that would be up to the bosses and despite what they might think, they aren't the bosses.

If your granny and your dad were running the company that employed you, maybe then it would fly, don't you think??

Betsypaige · #**1925** 01-13-2020, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erin9

That’s a good point.

There’s the damage that’s been done within the BRF on personal and professional levels. However things end up, none of that will be magically repaired after this debacle.

Then there’s how the public will feel about them, and how they’ve treated the family. For instance, while we naturally have no way of knowing exactly how Philip reacted or feels- reading sentences from a source stating he was “spitting blood” at the news makes for some pretty bad reading. That may or may not be true, but there’s no doubt he was shocked and upset just like everyone else in the family. Blindsiding your elderly grandparents so publicly is a really bad look.

I think Harry will have a lot to make up for with his grandparents - if he even ends up spending any real time with them. His father ? Probably less issues, though I think they will have to have a real man to man talk. Meghan is likely to be an issue that will have to be dealt with, especially if HM and Charles believe she’s pressured Harry in any way. They care for her, however, so there’s that.

I’m not sure what it will take for Harry to win back the public he’s so disappointed....probably hard work and evidence that he regrets his behavior and actions.

Kataryn · #**1926** 01-13-2020, 02:21 AM

I can not help but laugh a bit that Charles was so lambasted by the "public" (aka the media) when it turned out he didn't love Diana as the "public" thought he should and now that his son loves his wife so much that he wants her to have all she dreams of, he is lambasted as well - by the "public/media" again. And Charles does not throw that son out on his ear but helps him - as if he loved him. LOL. So yes, don't explain, don't talk, just do as you please. Discussions with the family, behind closed doors! Only way this can work.

UglyAmerican · #**1927** 01-13-2020, 03:54 AM

From the Guardian article (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-royal-brand):

Quote:

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are seeking to register the “Sussex Royal” brand as a global trademark for a range of items and activities including clothing, stationery and the running of “emotional support groups”, international filings suggest.

I'm pretty sure the Cambridges never did that.

wbenson · #**1928** 01-13-2020, 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duchessrachel

Isn't the Queen really the one who has true custody of the Royal children? I heard something like that one time. Can someone clairify?

This was the case in the 18th century, I think, but I'm extremely skeptical that it's still true today. English family law has been completely rebuilt since then, and I don't know of any exceptions in the modern family law legislation for the royal family.

Helen.CH · #**1929** 01-13-2020, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wbenson

This was the case in the 18th century, I think, but I'm extremely skeptical that it's still true today. English family law has been completely rebuilt since then, and I don't know of any exceptions in the modern family law legislation for the royal family.

It is like is was said, just use google to find out.

Mbruno · #**1930** 01-13-2020, 05:39 AM

After filing to trademark their global brand in Australia, Canada , the EU and the US, more threats from the Duke and the Duchess if they don’t get what they want.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-fa...g-accusations/

UglyAmerican · #**1931** 01-13-2020, 05:44 AM

At this point, HM really should just allow them to do whatever interview they're threatening to do. There's nothing to stop them from doing it anyway, so all the palace is accomplishing by temporarily preventing it is to kick the can down the road. The British public isn't on H&M's side here, and they're the only ones HM answers to. Meghan publicly going nuclear at some point looks like a virtual certainty, and there's not likely to be a better time than now to let it happen.

Osipi · #**1932** 01-13-2020, 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mbruno

After filing to trademark their global brand in Australia, Canada , the EU and the US, more threats from the Duke and the Duchess if they don’t get what they want.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-fa...g-accusations/

My question is that is there actually a *credible* source the Telegraph can provide that can *prove* that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex may go ballistic and spew all in a tell all interview? Or... is this just making the rounds from various other sources that are drumming up suppositions and maybes and off the wall theories that are abounding right now?

I know the Telegraph is highly esteemed for its journalism but I'm a bit surprised that they'd blast this headline with no real *facts* to back it up.

There's nothing wrong with filing for the global trademarks as stated. Its legal protection for their "brand" and their Sussex Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

suztav · #**1933** 01-13-2020, 06:16 AM

Threatening the Queen and the Crown won't get them anything.

Please God, just let this all be over! The past five days have seemed like an eternity!

Betsypaige · #**1934** 01-13-2020, 06:26 AM

I can’t read the entire article, but I firmly believe it’s Meghan who is dangling the threat of blackmail in front of the BRF - maybe not explicitly, but through mouthpiece Bradby. Harry continues to support her, but I just can’t believe he would be ok with something so ugly.

Here’s a link to a bunch of DM articles, the Sandringham one being the most interesting. I’m just so saddened at the strains that this has placed on so many relationships...

https://twitter.com/re_dailymail/sta...555445765?s=21

Osipi · #**1935** 01-13-2020, 06:29 AM

Lets think this all out logically and rationally. The report said "Buckingham Palace fears.... ". Logic tells me that no one involved really in all this (the big players in the BRF and the Sussexes) are anywhere near BP and are all elsewhere and congregating at Sandringham supposedly for a big powwow.

So... who is there at Buckingham Palace that is fearful? The guy who sets all the clocks? Office staff on duty in the BP offices? C'mon...

Mbruno · #**1936** 01-13-2020, 06:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi

Lets think this all out logically and rationally. The report said "Buckingham Palace fears.... ". Logic tells me that no one involved really in all this (the big players in the BRF and the Sussexes) are anywhere near BP and are all elsewhere and congregating at Sandringham supposedly for a big powwow.

So... who is there at Buckingham Palace that is fearful? The guy who sets all the clocks? Office staff on duty in the BP offices? C'mon...

Thanks Kataryn for the synopsis of what the Telegraph is like now. I didn't know that.

Buckingham Palace is used here as a synonym for the Royal Court organization or the Queen’s Household. It is a figure of speech rather than a reference to the physical building known as Buckingham Palace.

LadyGlendower · #**1937** 01-13-2020, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mbruno

Let’s put it this way: Meghan and her North American advisers probably see the Duchy as the family business on the corner. Sussex Royal ,the global brand, can be so much more .

Again, it’s cuitural misunderstanding and lack of awareness that royalty is a pre-capitalist institution.

The average lay person not picking up on the distinction because it's not information they really need is a lack of awareness. Professional advisers and Meghan herself? willful ignorance leading to stupid, counterproductive moves.

Betsypaige · #**1938** 01-13-2020, 06:50 AM

The thing is, Harry doesn’t HAVE to sever any links that he doesn’t want to. If Meghan wants to split, let her, but he should not allow her to persuade him to do something he doesn’t want to do, something so devastating to him and his family.

Quote:

The Duchess of Sussex is determined to step away from the royal family but Prince Harry would be “heartbroken” if he had to sever links altogether, a source close to the couple has said.

The Queen is holding urgent talks at Sandringham today to decide the couple’s future after they announced a desire to step back from their roles as senior royals.

An insider has told The Times that the pair both feel “tethered” by their responsibilities. The source added that the couple regarded themselves as having been pushed away by what they saw as a bullying attitude from the Duke of Cambridge. These claims have been strongly contested by sources close to the Cambridges, as well as some close to Prince Harry.

“She wants to leave,” the source said of the duchess. “She thinks, ‘It’s not working for me.’

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...inks-vwq60qsx9

LadyGlendower · #**1939** 01-13-2020, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lilyflo

Interesting point made above about Princess Anne making money out of breeding horses. I think she has a farm, which is a commercial business. So if some working royals are also earning money outside of their income from the Queen, could that be the precedent referred to by H&M in their statement? Anne doesn't use her royal status to generate the private income though, which would be the sticking point for H&M I think.

I suppose H&M could generate a private income from something that didn't trade off their status eg investments, property etc. If their royal foundation was wholly for charity & they took no personal income from it, perhaps that would be acceptable.

Just another thought - the Queen Mother left money in her will. Where did that come from? Presumably there was an investment portfolio generating a private income. The Queen herself makes money from her horse stud & Sandringham is a commercial enterprise isn't it? Perhaps there are many ways H&M could generate a private income without cashing in on their titles and use them solely for charity fundraising.

Agreed. There are many ways. And Harry could have his quiet semi-normal life. And yet here we are on Madison Avenue flogging the Sussex Royal brand. Hey, its a grand brand that includes the Queen as a "collaborator"!

Osipi · #**1940** 01-13-2020, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mbruno

Buckingham Palace is used here as a synonym for the Royal Court organization or the Queen’s Household. It is a figure of speech rather than a reference to the physical building known as Buckingham Palace.

I know that. But... would anyone at Buckingham Palace or her staff anywhere, even at Sandringham, in the court of Her Majesty, The Queen have it from the horse's mouth (no slur intended to HM) that she or any other members of the family are actually fearful of a sensational, no holds barred interview being threatened by the Sussexes if they don't get their way? If anyone knew her fears or Charles' fears and William's fears or the Corgi's fears, wouldn't they have to be close and trusted advisers that are trusted not to "leak" stuff like this?

This just doesn't fit into a logical pattern for me and no.... I'm not a Vulcan.