The Duke and Duchess of Sussex: Transition & Future

[Osipi]

I'll be honest here and say that *if* (and its a big *IF*) either Harry or Meghan, in the future, do speak out on mental health, I wouldn't be one bit surprised if their "soontobenamed" foundation works in collaboration with the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge on the "Heads Together" incentive.

This was reported to be something that even though Harry and Meghan split from the Royal Foundation last year, they still planned on working and supporting the Heads Together campaign. It may also be within the realm of possibility that Harry will still remain as an ambassador for William's "United for Wildlife". He doesn't need to be a royal to be an ambassador. David Beckham is one.

What I'm basically stating here is that I hope to see continued collaboration in some ways with the BRF's non-Firm related incentives and interactions.

 

[Denville]

Invictus, Sentebale - interesting subjects with widespread appeal ?

Are organisations really going to pay Harry large sums of money to hear about his charities? I don't think so. He may have had a good offer for talking about his mental health, and did so at the Morgan event.. because that's personal and something no one else could really tell them about a Prince who has given up his royal life.. (bit of a draw there). BUt I am not sure people will want to hear that particular story for long..and I don't think that anyone is going to pay him a million to talk about his work with veterans..

 

[soapstar]

A large number of posts discussing the Markles, Prince Andrew, the media and the Sussex marriage have been deleted. Let’s not speculate about divorce, please.

And once again, the discussion about the media and tabloids is off-topic. When an article is posted, talk about the content of the article and not the outlet/journalist that wrote about it.

Please remember to be civil and respectful to one another. I’ve had to delete a number of snarky posts lately.

 

[ACO]

So it would appear that we do now have confirmation from Harry and Meghan's spokesperson that they will no longer use the word "Royal" in their brand and have withdrawn their trademark applications.

I must say that I find it a bit eyeroll-inducing that they felt the need to include in their statement that they filed those trademark applications because The Royal Foundation told them to. It just sort of smacked of some parting snide remark. But whatever, I can't really say I expected anything differently.

Why not speak the truth when people were claiming they filed for all kinds of reasons? Facts matter.

 

[Osipi]

Are organisations really going to pay Harry large sums of money to hear about his charities? I don't think so. He may have had a good offer for talking about his mental health, and did so at the Morgan event.. because that's personal and something no one else could really tell them about a Prince who has given up his royal life.. (bit of a draw there). BUt I am not sure people will want to hear that particular story for long..and I don't think that anyone is going to pay him a million to talk about his work with veterans..

Aren't we kind of jumping the gun here assuming that either Harry or Meghan will be bought and sold for speaking engagements? I would think that most likely the networking (if any) being done is to garner sponsors and a support system for their own incentives that will be put into place after April 1st.

For some reason, putting themselves on the market as a commodity for cash just doesn't sit right with me at all and clashes with what we've seen them do over time. I would imagine that if they do give speeches, it will be to enhance and garner support for incentives that they, themselves, are backing. To get people and corporations on board to support things like the Invictus Games, Sentebale and other projects unique to Harry and Meghan.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The charity would not be named after the county. It’s named for the couple. It’s basically their last name. It’s like Obama foundation.

Err no.. their last name is Mountbatten-Windsor

Conventionally, British peers and British royalty save the usage of their legal last name for legal proceedings or papers where last names are required. In all other circumstances (such as professional activities), it is socially expected that they use their territorial designation as their "last name", if one is needed.

For instance, the York princesses are billed as Beatrice York and Eugenie York by their employers, and the Earl of Snowdon, formerly known as Viscount Linley (whose legal last name is Armstrong-Jones) has been professionally billed as David Linley and later David Snowdon.

 

[ACO]

Nothing about the JP Morgan event has been verified other than they were there and NDAs were signed.

 

[Somebody]

Books and speaking about what though? They are almost certainly barred from talking about the RF, and what else have they got to talk about? How are they going to make money from lending themselves to causes? Surely "causes" are what they hope/intend to raise money for?

I'm personally not too worried that they won't find something to talk about that people are willing to listen too (not because they are the experts on the theme but because they are who they are and are passionate about it - and hopefully will become more and more knowledgeable about the subject as a result of that).

Meghan will keep talking about all things 'women empowerment'-related (although the recent announcements also mentioned education) and Harry can focus on (wounded) veterans, conservation, his new travelyst initiative and how important the environment is/how worrisome climate change is (that their lifestyle has a disproportionately negative impact will surely continue to raise criticism but not (that much) for their intended audiences I suppose).

Aren't we kind of jumping the gun here assuming that either Harry or Meghan will be bought and sold for speaking engagements? I would think that most likely the networking (if any) being done is to garner sponsors and a support system for their own incentives that will be put into place after April 1st.

For some reason, putting themselves on the market as a commodity for cash just doesn't sit right with me at all and clashes with what we've seen them do over time. I would imagine that if they do give speeches, it will be to enhance and garner support for incentives that they, themselves, are backing. To get people and corporations on board to support things like the Invictus Games, Sentebale and other projects unique to Harry and Meghan.

So, how do you think they are planning to go about 'earning a professional income'? Which they stated as one of the main reasons for breaking with the BRF...

 

[Denville]

Aren't we kind of jumping the gun here assuming that either Harry or Meghan will be bought and sold for speaking engagements? I would think that most likely the networking (if any) being done is to garner sponsors and a support system for their own incentives that will be put into place after April 1st.

For some reason, putting themselves on the market as a commodity for cash just doesn't sit right with me at all and clashes with what we've seen them do over time. I would imagine that if they do give speeches, it will be to enhance and garner support for incentives that they, themselves, are backing. To get people and corporations on board to support things like the Invictus Games, Sentebale and other projects unique to Harry and Meghan.

Er what are they going to live on then If they do not "put themselves on the market" for something. Either speaking engagements or seling some kind of merchandising. THEY said that they wanted financial independence and to earn a professional income. So clearly they hope to earn a good living somehow, now that they are away from being full time royals which made it impossible for them to engage in commerce. I don't know if they sill intend to take money from Charles but either way, they are going to have to earn money....
Of course they havent' been "sellgn speeches" up to now, because - they could not do so... they were full time royals and convention forbade that they try to make money in such a way.

I'm personally not too worried that they won't find something to talk about that people are willing to listen too (not because they are the experts on the theme but because they are who they are and are passionate about it - and hopefully will become more and more knowledgeable about the subject as a result of that).

Meghan will keep talking about all things 'women empowerment'-related (although the recent announcements also mentioned education) and Harry can focus on (wounded) veterans, conservation, his new travelyst initiative and how important the environment is/how worrisome climate change is (that their lifestyle has a disproportionately negative impact will surely continue to raise criticism but not (that much) for their intended audiences I suppose).

please tell me Harry is not going to speak about "how worrisome climate change is?" He'll be laughed off the stage...and while "being passionate about a subject" may take them so far, its not going to make them interesting speakers.. All they have to offer is who Harry is.. and IMO all he will really get offers for (big offers) is his own life/problems/
and that will only take him so far. I don't think In a year's time he's going to get an offer for a speech about his mental health, the subject will be all talked out..

 

[Lady Daly]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...s-of-sussex-to-ditch-word-royal-from-branding

We knew it was coming! Also being reported on the Sussex transition thread.

 

[LadyGlendower]

American wealth has been funding museums, universities, hospitals, medical research and so much more for two hundred plus years now. A family or individual amasses a a fortune, spends a ton of money, donates a ton of money. Wealthy corporations support all kinds of things that may or may not dovetail with their corporate profiles.

The Sussexes plan is not quite fully formed to say the least. They managed this like junior members of a wealthy family business that walk out with intentions of starting their own business but don't pause to put together a real world business plan and financing before making their move.

But it sure is entertaining to watch this. The rumor about house hunting in Malibu is my favorite unfounded rumor so far---the irony of a British prince itching to live in a place also known as "the Colony" is delicious fun if you are a history nerd.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I personally find the transition announcement on the SussexRoyal website rather patronising towards the royal house;

https://sussexroyal.com/spring-2020-transition/

The likes of the following comments in particular;

“While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.” - that “precedent” links to their own previous announcement last year.

“which has understandably been a saddening for The Duke and Duchess and their loyal staff, given the closeness of Their Royal Highnesses and their dedicated team.” - the dedicated team they made redundant, and didn’t take anyone abroad with them.

Plus the patronising use of the words “as per the agreement” continually.

 

[ACO]

So all this was decided back in January. I had a feeling. So why couldn’t they just announce it then or with the more recent ones? Why was it dragged out? Anyways I’m glad this is settled for everyone’s sake.

 

[Mbruno]

I personally find the transition announcement on the SussexRoyal website rather patronising towards the royal house;

https://sussexroyal.com/spring-2020-transition/

The likes of the following comments in particular;

“While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.” - that “precedent” links to their own previous announcement last year.

“which has understandably been a saddening for The Duke and Duchess and their loyal staff, given the closeness of Their Royal Highnesses and their dedicated team.” - the dedicated team they made redundant, and didn’t take anyone abroad with them.

Plus the patronising use of the words “as per the agreement” continually.

Why do they keep using the style “ Their Royal Highnesses” ?

 

[Lumutqueen]

Why do they keep using the style “ Their Royal Highnesses” ?

Because they still can..

 

[ACO]

So they not opening a foundation either. They doing a non profit to support initiatives close to their heart.

 

[Somebody]

Er what are they going to live on then If they do not "put themselves on the market" for something. Either speaking engagements or seling some kind of merchandising. THEY said that they wanted financial independence and to earn a professional income. So clearly they hope to earn a good living somehow, now that they are away from being full time royals which made it impossible for them to engage in commerce. I don't know if they sill intend to take money from Charles but either way, they are going to have to earn money....
Of course they havent' been "sellgn speeches" up to now, because - they could not do so... they were full time royals and convention forbade that they try to make money in such a way.

Meghan was quite successful with the TIG and now she has a much wider audience, so she knows how to make money by promotions, raising awareness and sharing her thoughts. There are quite a few 'influencer' who have far less to say and still are famous for being famous and make good money out of it. Meghan is business-smart, so I wouldn't be surprised if it works out for them (although it is not having the best of both worlds as they envisioned it to be).

please tell me Harry is not going to speak about "how worrisome climate change is?" He'll be laughed off the stage...and while "being passionate about a subject" may take them so far, its not going to make them interesting speakers.. All they have to offer is who Harry is.. and IMO all he will really get offers for (big offers) is his own life/problems/
and that will only take him so far. I don't think In a year's time he's going to get an offer for a speech about his mental health, the subject will be all talked out..

People won't necessarily come 'because he is such an interesting speaker'. They come for the name. I don't think Tessy is such an 'interesting speaker' either but her being able to use 'princess Tessy of Luxembourg' did get her quite some invites and that's small fish compared to the fame of Harry and Meghan (even after they are no longer allowed to be known as TRH).

So all this was decided back in January. I had a feeling. So why couldn’t they just announce it then or with the more recent ones? Why was it dragged out? Anyways I’m glad this is settled for everyone’s sake.

I guess not all details were set in stone yet in January - although clearly the outline had to be agreed upon before Harry could return to Canada.

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

I wonder if this means the gentleman who originally had the SussexRoyal domain name will now be allowed it back?!

 

[Lady Daly]

When I read the newest headlines today regarding the confirmation of no more Sussex Royal, I headed for their website, still using Sussex Royal.
https://sussexroyal.com/spring-2020-transition/

"As shared in early January on this website, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not plan to start a ‘foundation’, but rather intend to develop a new way to effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations". Ok no foundation.

I've kinda reached a Sussex saturation point. Seriously, 12 more months of this, I can't take it.Yikes! As much as I've been for team Meghan and Harry, enough already. I can't believe I'm saying it but these two need to get a royal grip. The world is a bit bigger than the two of you. Good luck, I'll check back next year. Time for a nap Zzzzz.

 

[ACO]

I wonder if this means the gentleman who originally had the SussexRoyal domain name will now be allowed it back?!

I doubt it as he can no profit from it. He already changed all his accounts from all things Sussex and Royal. I’m sure for that reason. What’s likely to happen now is the BRF will Own the trademark to prevent others from using it cause they will.

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

I doubt it as he can no profit from it. He already changed all his accounts from all things Sussex and Royal. I’m sure for that reason. What’s likely to happen now is the BRF will Own the trademark to prevent others from using it cause they will.

Ah, I see. I didn't realise he had changed his account's content. Makes sense.

 

[Somebody]

I personally find the transition announcement on the SussexRoyal website rather patronising towards the royal house;

https://sussexroyal.com/spring-2020-transition/

The likes of the following comments in particular;

“While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.” - that “precedent” links to their own previous announcement last year.

Yes, they claimed that precedent before but never provided the appropriate precedent: which other royal members expect to regularly undertake foreign tours while earning a private income?

“which has understandably been a saddening for The Duke and Duchess and their loyal staff, given the closeness of Their Royal Highnesses and their dedicated team.” - the dedicated team they made redundant, and didn’t take anyone abroad with them.

Plus the patronising use of the words “as per the agreement” continually.

It's very much self-promotional.

They even thought it necessary to reference the queen's statement about 'remaining a valued part of Her Majesty's (the queen wrote 'my' - specifically not royal) family.

The facts can be presented in different ways and clearly (which they can do as it is their own website): they prefer to stress how important and royal they remain. For example, stressing that they remain HRH - even though they won't use it - that Harry remains 6th in line AND that the order of precedence doesn't change (formally he comes AFTER the earl of Wessex and the duke of Cambridge). The duke of Cambridge clearly has been promoted ahead of his uncles but it would make sense to not apply that 'promotion' to a non-working member of the family.

Another interesting note is the one about Security: it sounds as if the British tax payers might be footing the bill (which is understandable for the first trial period). The wording about the 'the Duchess' own independent profile' would suggest that the British have little to do with it (so why foot the bill? - IF they do) - anything related to Harry being the queen's grandson/prince of Wales's son makes sense - and given the threats they have received, security is a must. However, at one point I would think that them continuing to SEEK that international profile should lead to them at least contributing to the additional costs that come with that self-chosen profile (any basic security that would be awarded to other members of the royal family of course should be given to them as long as needed).

This part is also an interesting deviation from their stated wish. So, their office was largely supported by the Prince of Wales and he is not willing to continu paying for their office in their new capacity (that they euphemistically describe as 'reduced role'):

it was decided in January that their Institutional Office would have to be closed, given the primary funding mechanism for this official office at Buckingham Palace is from HRH The Prince of Wales.

I don't know what the main differences are between a Foundation and a non-profit? Would most Foundation not also be non-profits? Apparently, they still intend to have an 'entity' but not with the name and status of a 'Foundation' - they indeed stated that they were looking for 'innovative ways' to promote their causes (although this new ngo is 'in addition to their cause driven work' - so, what is it for; any thoughts?

 

[Gawin]

I personally find the transition announcement on the SussexRoyal website rather patronising towards the royal house

I agree with you on this. I'm bothered by this statement: "we had hoped to be allowed to share these details with you sooner."

While I understand their reason for wishing to release the information earlier they need to respect the fact that someone above thought otherwise.

So all this was decided back in January. I had a feeling. So why couldn’t they just announce it then or with the more recent ones? Why was it dragged out? Anyways I’m glad this is settled for everyone’s sake.

I suppose it's possible the decision regarding the use of "Sussex Royal" wasn't made in January.

This is the what the website states [bold facing mine]:
"As The Duke and Duchess will no longer be considered full-time working Members of The Royal Family, it was agreed that use of the word ‘Royal’ would need to be reviewed as it pertains to organisations associated with them in this new regard. More details on this below."

This could mean a decision was made in January only to review the use of Sussex Royal. On January 21 Thomas Woodcock Garter King of Arms was quoted in The Times as stating "it would not be “satisfactory” if the couple were able to use the Sussex Royal title for their website."

Based on this I wonder if the final decision & the reasons behind it, hadn't been made, or presented to the Sussexes, during the January meeting.

 

[Alison H]

Any time I've seen adverts for things with after-dinner speeches - not that I can afford things organised by the likes of J P Morgan! - they've just said that the guest speaker will be whoever, not what they're going to be talking about. People come for the name, initially ... but then someone gets a reputation as a good or a bad speaker, and things can change.


That stuff on the website about there being precedent for others to seek employment and it being disappointing is definitely snarky. What's the sense of continuing to wash their dirty linen in public like this? They didn't get exactly what they wanted. That's life. You can't just make demands and expect everybody else to give into them without any sort of compromise. It looks rather childish and stroppy to word it like that.


"Foundation" suggests, although doesn't necessarily mean, a charity, which - in the UK, not sure about elsewhere - would have to be registered with the Charities Commission and meet a lot of rules. A non-profit organisation would more typically be something like a community centre or a golf club, which exists for the benefit of the people involved rather than for the benefit of others.

 

[Somebody]

I doubt it as he can no profit from it. He already changed all his accounts from all things Sussex and Royal. I’m sure for that reason. What’s likely to happen now is the BRF will Own the trademark to prevent others from using it cause they will.

If I understood the Sussexes' message correctly, the trademark has been 'given up'.

For the above reason, the trademark applications that had been filed as protective measures and that reflected the same standard trademarking requests as done for The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, have been removed.

 

[ACO]

They are giving it up. The family can and likely will take it or they risk anyone getting it and doing the very thing they claim they didn’t want especially in this review period.

 

[Somebody]

They mention the '12-month review' period 4 times. I wonder whether they are secretly hoping to get more out of it after the 12-month review period. They still seem to rather reluctantly accept the main decision that was made: which is that they can no longer be working member of the family.

Per the agreement The Duke and Duchess of Sussex understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties and not undertake representative duties on behalf of Her Majesty The Queen.

"Foundation" suggests, although doesn't necessarily mean, a charity, which - in the UK, not sure about elsewhere - would have to be registered with the Charities Commission and meet a lot of rules. A non-profit organisation would more typically be something like a community centre or a golf club, which exists for the benefit of the people involved rather than for the benefit of others.

Thanks, so they have more control over their NGO and less accountability.

 

[Betsypaige]

I personally find the transition announcement on the SussexRoyal website rather patronising towards the royal house;

https://sussexroyal.com/spring-2020-transition/

The likes of the following comments in particular;

“While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.” - that “precedent” links to their own previous announcement last year.

“which has understandably been a saddening for The Duke and Duchess and their loyal staff, given the closeness of Their Royal Highnesses and their dedicated team.” - the dedicated team they made redundant, and didn’t take anyone abroad with them.

Plus the patronising use of the words “as per the agreement” continually.

That first comment does seem a bit passive-aggressive.... I feel like Harry and Meghan sometimes say or write things that come off badly, that they didn't necessarily mean to convey.

 

[Somebody]

But if the BRF took it over it would not have been removed, I'd say. But I agree, it would be wise to protect it, at least for the near future to prevent misuse.

 

[ACO]

They mention the '12-month review' period 4 times. I wonder whether they are secretly hoping to get more out of it after the 12-month review period. They still seem to rather reluctantly accept the main decision that was made: which is that they can no longer be working member of the family.

I feel the opposite. I think they want out of the year long trial period but know it’s part of the agreement. But it reads to me they rather not.

Who knows though.

It all kicks off soon as Harry has an engagement on Wednesday. So the countdown begins.