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

[Osipi]

I was being facetious, but someone asked me what the difference is between what H and M propose to do (read the Guardian article) and what William, Kate and Charles are already doing. Harry and Meghan plan on branding their titles in several commercial venture (clothing, etc..)...I don’t know to what extend the Cambridges and PoW promote their “brand”

Actually, if you really look into it, Harry and Meghan are trademarking the name of their foundation. Sussex Royal. That is *not* their titles.

 

[texankitcat]

She does. I do, too. But I can also assure you that if my only child was at the center of global chaos and clearly struggling I'd be there to support her. Job or no job, sometimes your kids, even as adults, have to come first. I've said it before and I'll say it again, it's only my opinion. But I'm allowed to have an opinion and to post it here. Doesn't mean others have to agree with it, doesn't mean I'm 100% right. Doesn't mean I'm 100% wrong, either, though. To me this just simply seems like one of those times that a bit of support and her mother's presence might be beneficial and appreciated. She might even be a good person to speak to all of this about when decisions are needing to be made or feelings are overflowing. I'm 100% positive that her mother wouldn't leak anything to the press and might be a voice of reason and experience. Yes, she doesn't have the type of global experience and worldwide public presence that the BRF does but she does have the benefit of years of experience and cooler heads being that she has no financial stake in any of this.

You absolutely have the right to state your opinion. I’m all about stating mine! Yes, you are right that as a mother she would want to comfort and support her daughter, but she doesn’t have to be in the same Country to provide that comfort and support and Meghan may be just fine with that.

 

[Betsypaige]

Well... lets see here. The Royal Collection Trust as a collection is owned by Elizabeth II and overseen by the Royal Collection Trust. The Queen owns some of the collection in right of the Crown and some as a private individual. This is the entity that has well stocked "trademarked" gift shops and even an online website store. The profits help to maintain this collection. Notice too that the website says "Official Royal Gift Shop".

https://www.royalcollectionshop.co.uk

Waitrose Duchy Organics are also sold at an online store and as stated earlier, it was founded in 1990 by The Prince of Wales to not only promote his passion of sustainability but this "marketing" also puts profits into his Prince's Trust endeavors which helps so many different people.

https://www.waitrose.com/ecom/shop/browse/groceries/organic_shop

Both the Queen and The Prince of Wales have not let these ventures detract from the job they're to do. Should Harry and Meghan go this route, its possible then that with it being tied to their foundation, they wish to take more time to work with it, establish it and lessen the "Firm" side of things and be "junior" rather than "senior". I don't know. None of us know. What this all does tell me is that "marketing" and "branding" isn't something new to the people that are trying to work all of this out with the Sussexes.

To quote Alice, things are really getting "curiouser and curiouser" ?

Thanks for this - very interesting ! So, are H and M intending for any profits they make to be directed towards their foundations, etc...?

 

[Osipi]

Thanks for this - very interesting ! So, are H and M intending for any profits they make to be directed towards their foundations, etc...?

*That* is the big question and the fly in the ointment at this time. We just don't know. There's a whole lot of assuming and supposing and theories coming from left field in a galaxy far, far away and the truth still remains that *no one knows*. ?

 

[Mbruno]

Well... lets see here. The Royal Collection Trust as a collection is owned by Elizabeth II and overseen by the Royal Collection Trust. The Queen owns some of the collection in right of the Crown and some as a private individual. This is the entity that has well stocked "trademarked" gift shops and even an online website store. The profits help to maintain this collection. Notice too that the website says "Official Royal Gift Shop".

https://www.royalcollectionshop.co.uk

Waitrose Duchy Organics also has an online store and as stated earlier, it was founded in 1990 by The Prince of Wales to not only promote his passion of sustainability but this "marketing" also puts profits into his Prince's Trust endeavors which helps so many different people.

https://www.waitrose.com/ecom/shop/browse/groceries/organic_shop

Both the Queen and The Prince of Wales have not let these ventures detract from the job they're to do. Should Harry and Meghan go this route, its possible then that with it being tied to their foundation, they wish to take more time to work with it, establish it and lessen the "Firm" side of things and be "junior" rather than "senior". I don't know. None of us know. What this all does tell me is that "marketing" and "branding" isn't something new to the people that are trying to work all of this out with the Sussexes.

To quote Alice, things are really getting "curiouser and curiouser" ?

Sorry, but you are comparing apples and oranges. The Royal Collection Trust is a National Heritage foundation. It sells gifts just like the Louvre or the Vatican Museums. And Elizabeth II does not own it or even run it. She holds it in trust for the benefit of the nation , and not for whatever project she may personally consider “ progressive “ or worth supporting .

As for the Duchy of Cornwall, it is run not unlike the Queen’s private estates or most estates of old landed families of the British nobiity. In other words, they are basically property management companies that lease land and are also involved in commercial farming/agriculture. That is what their social class has been doing in Britain long before the industrial revolution.

Sussex Royal is an attempt , on the other hand, to turn the royal brand into a multinational, 21st century North American celebrity style business, complete even with self-help courses. The mindset behind it is very clear to me and completely different from all the examples you gave.

 

[Pranter]

I’ll look into the Prince Charles/Duchy and Cambridge’s branding - I’m now curious about that.

The problem about being part timers is less an issue than it is how they’ve gone about this. We know that the Queen and Charles were very happy to accommodate Harry and Meghan - they just wanted the process to quietly play out. The public isn’t against the two needing separation if that’s what makes them happy. I think if these two hadn’t jumped the gun, treating their family with such disrespect, that the public might not even care if Charles partially financed them or if they got some sort of security. You make excellent points...

Links were posted in a thread on the previous page about the Duchy and The Queen's brands. I think by Osipi.


Charles is going to do what most parents do and try to help their kids be successful. He of course has some things he has to work around the average parent doesn't. He's going to ensure they both are taken care of financially when he's no longer around.

 

[Betsypaige]

Actually, if you really look into it, Harry and Meghan are trademarking the name of their foundation. Sussex Royal. That is *not* their titles.

True..oops !

 

[Pranter]

........

Sussex Royal is an attempt , on the other hand, to turn the royal brand into a 21st century North American celebrity style business, complete even with self-help courses. The mindset behind it is very clear to me and completely different from all the examples you gave.

Clear to you based on what? I don't recall any of that stated on their website.



LaRae

 

[Betsypaige]

*That* is the big question and the fly in the ointment at this time. We just don't know. There's a whole lot of assuming and supposing and theories coming from left field in a galaxy far, far away and the truth still remains that *no one knows*. ?

Well we may find out soon because I’m sure everyone will be laying all their cards on the table tomorrow.....a nice game of War, lol

 

[Betsypaige]

Links were posted in a thread on the previous page about the Duchy and The Queen's brands. I think by Osipi.


Charles is going to do what most parents do and try to help their kids be successful. He of course has some things he has to work around the average parent doesn't. He's going to ensure they both are taken care of financially when he's no longer around.

Of course, I know Charles will do what’s best for them. I hope that if it turns out that he gives more than the public would like, that they will understand his motivations

 

[Pranter]

Of course, I know Charles will do what’s best for them. I hope that if it turns out that he gives more than the public would like, that they will understand his motivations

It will be interesting to see what the outcome is, maybe we will get a official statement from BP this week.


LaRae

 

[texankitcat]

Sorry, but you are comparing apples and oranges. The Royal Collection Trust is a National Heritage foundation. It sells gifts just like the Louvre or the Vatican Museums. And Elizabeth II does not own it or even run it. She holds it in trust for the benefit of the nation , and not for whatever project she may personally consider “ progressive “ or worth supporting .

As for the Duchy of Cornwall, it is run not unlike the Queen’s private estates or most estates of old landed families of the British nobiity. In other words, they are basically property management companies that lease land and are also involved in commercial farming/agriculture. That is what their social class has been doing in Britain long before the industrial revolution.

Sussex Royal is an attempt , on the other hand, to turn the royal brand into a multinational, 21st century North American celebrity style business, complete even with self-help courses. The mindset behind it is very clear to me and completely different from all the examples you gave.

Exactly! Which is why there is so much criticism and why this is going to look very bad for the BRF if they are allowed to go this route.

 

[_Heather_]

Or the will do what they say. Not sure where all "Meghan will never return" nonsense is coming from. As pointed her BFF Lindsay lives there. She has organizations there she is close to. This narrative doesn't even make sense. Seems more like a wish list to me.

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.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

She does. I do, too. But I can also assure you that if my only child was at the center of global chaos and clearly struggling I'd be there to support her. Job or no job, sometimes your kids, even as adults, have to come first. I've said it before and I'll say it again, it's only my opinion. But I'm allowed to have an opinion and to post it here. Doesn't mean others have to agree with it, doesn't mean I'm 100% right. Doesn't mean I'm 100% wrong, either, though. To me this just simply seems like one of those times that a bit of support and her mother's presence might be beneficial and appreciated. She might even be a good person to speak to all of this about when decisions are needing to be made or feelings are overflowing. I'm 100% positive that her mother wouldn't leak anything to the press and might be a voice of reason and experience. Yes, she doesn't have the type of global experience and worldwide public presence that the BRF does but she does have the benefit of years of experience and cooler heads being that she has no financial stake in any of this.

Why are you even concerned about where Meghan's mother is enough to search out and notice there are photos of Doria back home in L.A.???

It's obvious that Doria spent holiday time with the Sussexes in Vancouver, but we don't have photos and it's none of our business. Doria is not a member of the British royal family and her privacy should be respected.

I'm respectful of and admiring of how well the security keeps Doria's travel and visits to her daughter kept under-the-radar. I don't click on the DM, so I am not knowledgeable about Doria's current whereabouts supposedly being back in L.A. As other posters have noted, Doria has a life and a career of her own, which she obviously needs to attend to. Her current whereabouts is no indication of how close and supportive she is to her daughter.

 

[Osipi]

Sussex Royal is an attempt , on the other hand, to turn the royal brand into a multinational, 21st century North American celebrity style business, complete even with self-help courses. The mindset behind it is very clear to me and completely different from all the examples you gave.

It was progressive for the Royal Collection Trust to open an online website that does business globally. It was progressive for the now Waitrose Duchy Organics to have a global market online. I can order from any of those and have them delivered to my door.

How would this be different with something similar being done with the Sussex Royal Foundation? With separating itself from the Sovereign Grant, and trademarking and "branding" the Foundation as a private, non profit organization, imagine the scope of something offered and how it would greatly increase the work the Foundation does? We saw just recently how Archie's knit hat from Make, Give, Live immensely increased that organizations request for the same hat. Its philanthropy at its very best if it does remain altruistic and doesn't have a self serving, ego stroking, cash in the pocket and "I'm a celebrity" tinge to it. Perhaps this is Harry and Meghan's goal. Once again, I'll state that we just don't know at this time. Its all assumption and supposition and what it *seems* to be clouded by our own opinions.

Even with fashions that the younger royal women wear, they wear it and the demand for it skyrockets. What's wrong with containing it and having profits actually benefit the work and causes and the incentives and the people that actually benefit from these royals are able to have sustainable financing? To me, that is a win-win situation for all involved.

 

[_Heather_]

Of course, I know Charles will do what’s best for them. I hope that if it turns out that he gives more than the public would like, that they will understand his motivations

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.

 

[katiebird]

I think some may be missing that trademarking a name is a standard legal procedure to *prevent others* from profiting from your name. Without a trademark, anyone could sell merchandise bearing the name.

 

[_Heather_]

Why are you even concerned about where Meghan's mother is enough to search out and notice there are photos of Doria back home in L.A.???

It's obvious that Doria spent holiday time with the Sussexes in Vancouver, but we don't have photos and it's none of our business. Doria is not a member of the British royal family and her privacy should be respected.

I'm respectful of and admiring of how well the security keeps Doria's travel and visits to her daughter kept under-the-radar. I don't click on the DM, so I am not knowledgeable about Doria's current whereabouts supposedly being back in L.A. As other posters have noted, Doria has a life and a career of her own, which she obviously needs to attend to. Her current whereabouts is no indication of how close and supportive she is to her daughter.

I didn't have to search them out. They're quite plentiful on many news and social media sites. It would seem that given all of the hubbub the press decided they wanted to know if she was in Canada with her daughter and it wasn't difficult to learn that she was in LA. The fact that I checked out social media and happened to see them and comment on them is hardly being "oh so worried" about where her mother is. Her mother is really of no consequence in any of this chaos but I do think it's telling that the one person in the whole world who supposedly is uber-close to her isn't there with her right now.

I think some may be missing that trademarking a name is a standard legal procedure to *prevent others* from profiting from your name. Without a trademark, anyone could sell merchandise bearing the name.

That's entirely true and a very good point. I do see, though, where people might be getting this from when you consider that they trademarked all of this which is pretty normal but then wrote out clearly in black and white for the whole world to see that they wanted to be financially independent and earn income. I can completely see how one could lead directly to the other. If these trademarked products did indeed send funds directly toward a charitable organization then that's one thing and really not much different than any other royally backed organization such as the Duchy or the Royal Collection Trust. If, however, those trademarked items send funds directly into Harry and Meghan's pockets then there's a big, big problem there.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

Doria's whereabouts make no difference to anything that's currently happening at Buckingham Palace. We are not privy to Meghan's communications with her Mom (nor should we be), regardless of where her Mom happens to be at the moment...

 

[ACO]

I think some may be missing that trademarking a name is a standard legal procedure to *prevent others* from profiting from your name. Without a trademark, anyone could sell merchandise bearing the name.

No, I think some are purposely ignoring it. I said it a few posts back. Most people do it to protect intellectual property. Similar to how business would buy up domain space whether they used it or not to protect their name/brand. It is a common practice.

 

[_Heather_]

Doria's whereabouts make no difference to anything that's currently happening at Buckingham Palace. We are not privy to Meghan's communications with her Mom (nor should we be), regardless of where her Mom happens to be at the moment...

Nope, we're not. Neither are we privy to any of the communications happening between anyone directly or indirectly involved in all this drama. That doesn't stop anyone here, either fans or critics, from drawing conclusions from what they observe. This is no different. There's much talk about the fact that Meghan has no relationship with her family apart from her mother. I've even seen several posters wonder what her mother thinks of all this. I admit that I, too, wonder what her mother is making of all this. I personally think it's telling that she isn't there with her. Is it? Maybe. Maybe not. We simply don't know. But just as with everything else on this forum and even on this thread, it's simply opinion and observation and we're all welcome to our own opinions and observations.

 

[Gawin]

No, I think some are purposely ignoring it. I said it a few posts back. Most people do it to protect intellectual property. Similar to how business would buy up domain space whether they used it or not to protect their name/brand. It is a common practice.

Yes, good point. The linked article from The Guardian even states someone outside the UK has already attempted to use the Sussex Royal trademark.

 

[ACO]

Doria's whereabouts make no difference to anything that's currently happening at Buckingham Palace. We are not privy to Meghan's communications with her Mom (nor should we be), regardless of where her Mom happens to be at the moment...

He mother is in LA but she was out of town for a while because a photo agency snapped quite a few pictures of her dog walker in recent weeks. Now she is back in home trying to mind her own business, as usual.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

I personally think it's telling that she isn't there with her. Is it? Maybe. Maybe not. We simply don't know. But just as with everything else on this forum and even on this thread, it's simply opinion and observation and we're all welcome to our own opinions and observations.

I appreciate your point but I don't think it is telling. I am sure they are in communication but I would not rush to my daughter's side if she were in Meghan's position. Meghan is in her 30s and has her husband's support. She's also been coping with British media for more than a year without Doria being by her side every minute. I don't think that it is always necessary for a mother to disrupt her life every time an adult child is going through a difficult time and, frankly, not everyone has the luxury of being able to do so anyway.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

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?

That was my understanding as well. At least for Royal children in the line of succession...which of course A.H. is.

I very clearly remember reading after the Wales separation and divorce that Diana was required to seek written permission from HMQ every time she took her sons out of England.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Sorry, but you are comparing apples and oranges. The Royal Collection Trust is a National Heritage foundation. It sells gifts just like the Louvre or the Vatican Museums. And Elizabeth II does not own it or even run it. She holds it in trust for the benefit of the nation , and not for whatever project she may personally consider “ progressive “ or worth supporting .

As for the Duchy of Cornwall, it is run not unlike the Queen’s private estates or most estates of old landed families of the British nobiity. In other words, they are basically property management companies that lease land and are also involved in commercial farming/agriculture. That is what their social class has been doing in Britain long before the industrial revolution.

Sussex Royal is an attempt , on the other hand, to turn the royal brand into a multinational, 21st century North American celebrity style business, complete even with self-help courses. The mindset behind it is very clear to me and completely different from all the examples you gave.

I agree that there is a huge difference between the commercial ventures associated with the Royal Collection and the Duchy of Cornwall to whatever Harry and Meghan want to do because neither the Queen nor Prince Charles personally profits from them.

However, how is this different from what Lord Snowdon did? I could be wrong but I always assumed he kept the profits from his books and photographs, even though he used his title. He was a very talented artist but I think it is fair to assume that his royal connections were at least partially responsible for his success. He was a professional before the wedding but so was Meghan.

 

[_Heather_]

That was my understanding as well. At least for Royal children in the line of succession...which of course A.H. is.

I very clearly remember reading after the Wales separation and divorce that Diana was required to seek written permission from HMQ every time she took her sons out of England.

I recall something of the sort but I'm not sure of the actual details. I know it's been discussed previously somewhere on the forum, probably a lot more than once, actually. But I think the gist of the matter was that it was something the monarch does legally have but in practice hasn't actually ever been used and was only there as a safeguard in case of some spat, divorce, or something of the sort that resorted in one parent attempting to remove heirs to the throne from the UK with no intention to return. I think it's kind of one of those things that's on the books but never really enforced or put into practice and is there only to make sure that heirs to the throne are raised primarily in the UK and within the monarchy so that they don't at some point come to the throne completely and totally unfamiliar and unprepared, unless, of course, they have the permission of the monarch to do otherwise.

 

[Erin9]

Agreed. I think he public will have long memories when it comes to how H and M have treated the Queen, Charles, and by extension Philip and William....It’s naive to think that, once this is settled, everyone will be happy and life will go on as if none of this happened. How will the public react if and when the Sussexes return ? I doubt it will be with unfettered joy.

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.

 

[hel]

I agree that there is a huge difference between the commercial ventures associated with the Royal Collection and the Duchy of Cornwall to whatever Harry and Meghan want to do because neither the Queen nor Prince Charles personally profits from them.

However, how is this different from what Lord Snowdon did? I could be wrong but I always assumed he kept the profits from his books and photographs, even though he used his title. He was a very talented artist but I think it is fair to assume that his royal connections were at least partially responsible for his success. He was a professional before the wedding but so was Meghan.

First, I believe he was not an HRH and didn't seem to have much of an independent "royal career", other than squiring Margaret around (and I have the distinct impression that more of the squiring was to glitterati parties than royal events). He did have four patronages, but they seem to be more related to his artistic work than his royal role.

Second, I'm pretty sure he's rolling over in his grave at the suggestion that his royal connections were even partially responsible for his success. Also, we're talking about someone who, as a child, had sickbed visits from Noel Coward and Marlene Dietrich and was an Eton boy; he didn't need Margaret to open doors to him the artistic world.

Basically, he was a *much* edgier Jack Brooksbank.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

First, I believe he was not an HRH and didn't seem to have much of an independent "royal career", other than squiring Margaret around (and I have the distinct impression that more of the squiring was to glitterati parties than royal events). He did have four patronages, but they seem to be more related to his artistic work than his royal role.

Second, I'm pretty sure he's rolling over in his grave at the suggestion that his royal connections were even partially responsible for his success. Also, we're talking about someone who, as a child, had sickbed visits from Noel Coward and Marlene Dietrich and was an Eton boy; he didn't need Margaret to open doors to him the artistic world.

Basically, he was a *much* edgier Jack Brooksbank.

I understand your argument. Lord Snowdon would certainly be very offended by suggestions that his royal connections helped his career, but he published under the name "Lord Snowdon" rather than his given name (which escapes me right now). Regardless of how well connected he was before, his connections improved immensely after his marriage. No one will ever know if he would have had the same success if he hadn't married Princess Margert, but I don't think anyone can say that his marriage hurt his career.

I also understand that he was not a HRH, it was a different time and men didn't take their wives' titles. But my point is that he and Margaret received money from the Queen, did some royal duties, and had a profit making business.

We don't know what Harry and Meghan are planning to do yet. I suspect wants to design clothes and accessories, but it could be something else. Meghan had an interest in fashion before she married Harry, so I don't think it would be out of left field. Princess Anne makes money breeding horses and many people believe that she never would have made the Olympic team if she hadn't been the Queen's daughter.