The Sussexes want to ‘broker an extension’ on their Sussexit one-year review?

Duke and Duchess of Sussex

Over Christmas, People Magazine had a story on their front page about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “celebrating their first Christmas in America.” There was no real story to it, just one new quote, from an “insider”: “It’s Harry’s second Christmas away from England, and Meghan wants to make sure it’s special for everyone. They are creating their own traditions at their new home.” This is perhaps for all of the unhinged people claiming that Harry is dreadfully homesick and that he misses spending Christmas at Sandringham, getting drunk on Christmas cocktails and changing outfits ten times a day. Personally, I do believe Harry was probably homesick… months ago, when they were locked down in Tyler Perry’s mansion. I think after Harry and Meghan bought their place in Montecito, really put down roots and got some privacy, Harry felt a lot better about the new life they’re building.

Speaking of, get ready for twenty million stories about the “one year review” between the Sussexes and the Windsors. The press has been obsessed with the one-year review ever since it was announced as part of the Sussexit deal. In Finding Freedom, sources said that the review wasn’t even something Harry and Meghan wanted – it was something the Queen’s people came up with, as a sort of clause where Harry could be welcomed back in a year if sh-t didn’t work out. They were giving Harry an escape route, in case he wanted to dump his wife and child in America and come crawling back to the Windsors. That’s all it was. And the British media has latched on to the idea that the Queen will be handing down massive “punishments” when the review happens, because never underestimate how sadistic these people are. Anyway, the Sun had a big exclusive about what will happen in March:

Harry and Meghan are brokering an extension to the 12-month Megxit deal – and the prince plans to return here in the New Year to seal it. They want a more permanent agreement to continue as non-working royals in California despite big-money deals with Netflix and Spotify. They will make friendly video calls to senior royals next month before Harry heads here for face-to-face talks, possibly accompanied by Meghan. Their deal with Buckingham Palace expires on March 31.

Talks are said to be “less confrontational” than at January’s Sandringham summit. But royal aides will pore over the Netflix and Spotify deals, reportedly worth £100million and £30million respectively, to ensure they meet “the values of Her Majesty”.

Harry and Meghan are said to be keen to hang on to their royal patronages, despite taking on more commercial commitments in the US. Sources say those roles remain on the negotiating table. And Harry’s military roles — stripped in the bitter Megxit deal — remain vacant and will not be filled until next summer at the earliest, The Sun understands. A thawing of hostilities is under way.

And royal biographer Andrew Morton said the couple want to return – Covid restrictions willing – for the Queen’s 95th birthday on April 21, the Duke of Edinburgh’s 100th in June and the unveiling of a statue of Princess Diana on July 1 — what would have been her 60th birthday. He said: “Although they will do some of it by Zoom, Harry wants to meet face to face to tie it all up. Things seem to have calmed down. Harry has been in contact with the Queen more often than you would think. But certain things you need to be there in person to sort. They will need a few weeks. That could be done after April, depending on Covid.”

While William did not speak with Harry for “many months” after that deal, the “Mextension” will be hammered out by senior royals. But a top aide warned: “Expect things to drag past March 31. The Sussexes have laid their stall out very clearly.” As for Harry’s military posts, an insider said: “Harry regrets losing those titles and keeping them open for as long as possible keeps that olive branch out. Don’t be surprised if they are not filled even after March 31.”

There were calls, too, for them to be replaced as president and vice-president of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust. But a spokesman for the charity said Harry and Meghan remain “as committed as ever.”

Morton added: “If Harry had a real regret, it was how he handled the announcement of stepping back. He pushed the Queen and his father into a corner and it made the whole thing far more dramatic. There was a period when Harry was uncertain, but not any more. He is loving life in the sunshine, the pace of life and lack of formality. This is what he has dreamed of for a long time. The rift between the two brothers is healing. It has been a good year and a bad year — court cases, paparazzi and, most difficult, Meghan having a miscarriage. But Covid has brought the family back together and forced Meghan and Harry to slow down and think. They have proved their point. Any conversation will be far more amicable. There are no plans to kick them out or get rid of their titles. Harry regrets the hasty statement last January that blindsided everyone.”

[From The Sun]

LOL at courtiers “poring over” the Netflix and Spotify deals. The courtiers will not get any kind of say in those business deals. The only thing happening, at this point during the review, is whether Harry and Meghan will remain with their royal patronages in any capacity, and of course the business with their royal titles and Sussex titles. Their HRHs can be removed, and I expect the Queen to formalize that, but I also expect Harry to keep his ducal title (the Sussex title). I think it’s incredibly smart of Meghan and Harry to make their patronages the centerpiece of the “review” as well – the Queen has to know that she’ll look stupidly petty if she forces them to give up all of their patronages now, right?

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle visit Reprezent 107.3FM in Brixton

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

160 Responses to “The Sussexes want to ‘broker an extension’ on their Sussexit one-year review?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Eleonor says:

    I think queen Elizabeth doesn’t care about looking petty.

    • GRUEY says:

      Seriously. This reeks of jealous-ex-bragging-she-begged-to-come-back energy. Sure dude. They just want their charity work. That’s clear. They don’t give a shit about being back in the RF.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      Andrew Morton and the courtiers are spouting nonsense to save face. Poring over the deals to see if they meet the ‘values’ of HM? Really? She is a purveyor of gin for heaven’s sake. Plus those deals are signed and sealed. They just can’t get over the fact that the Sussexes are not destitute and will not be crawling back with their tails between their legs like many others in the RF who tried and failed to break away.

      • Kalana says:

        Andrew wants to restart his startup pitch program. They should be looking at that to see if he represents the Queen’s values especially considering he still uses his HRH and his titles and has taxpayer funded security.

    • Tessa says:

      I expect with his becoming a Grandfather, there will be Spin about the “lovable” Grandfather posing with photos of his grandchild, Fergie by his side and his daughters and sons in law. It will be horrible to watch and I wonder if HM will have a Big Christening for the child.

      • Becks1 says:

        A big christening for the baby would not go over well, IMO. Eugenie would do well to follow Zara’s example and have a low key event with no official pictures released etc.

        The Queen did not attend Louis’s christening nor Archie’s, so it will be interesting to see if she attends the christening of baby brooksbank.

    • Where'sMyTiara says:

      The UK tabloid media are soooo desperate for this circus to continue, they’re now concocting stories about extensions? My gods. Anyone else seeing parallels between them and Trump saying “screw the electoral college I won the election” in multiple rage tweets from the crapper?

      The Sussexes said what they said.

      They were told they should have paid back money they shouldn’t have had to, for Frogmore renovations that were due to be done on The Crown’s dime anyway. (The really crappy bit: Her Maj took this up, knowing it was supposed to come out of her funds, and made them pay it.) They did all that. Then Media had a tantrum.

      They were told to “stop being a burden on the public purse” and become financially independent. They did that. Media had a tantrum.

      Media went off saying “These two are mistaken if they think they’ll be welcome in the UK after they broke HM’s heart” (what heart?) So they bought a damn house. Putting down roots. It’s pretty clear what choice they made. Media had another tantrum.

      Harry has been clear for most of his adult life that he would be happy to walk away from the Royal Life. He said what he said. It’s on tape, multiple times, multiple places. One particular interview from when he was in the military that has always stuck with me: “Do you ever wish that you weren’t a Prince?” Harry chuckles and replies candidly, “I wish that quite a lot, actually”.

      Harry & Meghan care about the Patronages b/c they care about the people they support. Dassit. The pomp can go hang, as far as Harry’s concerned. And it’s really that, that The Firm is all “HOW DARE” about, and it’s the “we removed all the reasons for you Rota Rats to be following us around and writing sh*te, so go pound sand and leave us alone” that has the tabloid media completely salty.

      At this point, the media is panicking about their circulation, which relies on the Royal Dramas that they create as much as they report, with the help of the slimy courtiers. That’s why they’re pulling this “extension” nonsense. Because the Dullards don’t sell, unless they’re placed in contrast with the Sussexes. And The Firm knows this, which is why their courtiers absolutely cannot keep Hazza and Meg’s names out of their mouths.

      Brexit is Brexit, and Sussexit is Sussexit. Both are nearly done and dusted. For the Sussexes, it was done & dusted when they walked away, *together*. There’s no splitting that duo up, they’re battle tested. And The Firm, the Media, and the Government of the UK have no one to blame but themselves if they don’t like these deals they forced others into.

      The Firm, the courtiers, and the Media now just sound like that crappy ex, of the type you often see on AITA on Reddit, who abuses their victim repeatedly, and then acts surprised and gets outraged when their victim has had enough and has walked out on them. “How dare you leave me, I’m not done abusing you for my own personal gain yet” – the whole dynamic between Royals, the courtiers, and the media is sick, and dysfunctional as heck. To anyone who is a survivor of abuse, it’s stomach churning – so of course folks are cheering for Hazza & Megs.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Where’sMyTiara, I agree with what you said. I also thought after I read the above excerpt that there’s a perspective that’s being formed here. All Harry has to do is apologize for the way he announced this in January (thereby taking responsibility for how it played out) and all is forgiven. They’ll keep the titles and pratonages and all is well. I don’t pretend to understand the Firm, but is this their way of saving face? Just a thought.

      • EllenOlenska says:

        Where’s my tiara I think you nailed it. An “ extension” extends the RR story timeline. I noticed that this weekend the Fail had a Meghan Markle header where they usually have a Royals header. She, who is so unimportant and beneath mention, merited replacing the royals section. Of course it was filled w crap about Megxit in addition to the charitable donation she made buying hats but still…

      • PrincessK says:

        @WheresMyTiara….absolutely excellent post! Spot on.

        Also the dullards only sell if they are wheeling out their children, despite saying that wanted to keep them out of the limelight their handlers have persuaded them to push the kids out for headlines.

  2. Snuffles says:

    There is no talk of an extension. They are just trying to spin a story proclaiming that there are still things Harry and Meghan want that they can still lose (patronages, HRHs, military), then after March 31st they can act like the Queen punished them and took them away.

    They don’t need to be officially royal to continue to support their charities, they haven’t used their HRHs all year, and they can’t take away the military ranks Harry earned, only the ceremonial ones.

    And there ain’t no way in HELL will those vultures be allowed to pour over their Netflix and Spotify deals. I doubt that would be legally allowed even if they wanted to.

    Also, no way in hell they will physically step foot in the UK with the pandemic raging even worse than before with a new more contagious mutation making its way through the UK and countries severely restricting and some out right banning travel to and from there.

    This whole “exclusive” is just desperate spin and I’m sure the desperation will get increasingly worse the closer we get to the deadline.

    • VS says:

      clap clap clap………… these trashy tabloids create lies, the weird thing is “their readers believe those lies” then when the date comes and those lies don’t materialize, they get offended at H&M…..something is seriously wrong with the “press” over there. It seems there is no journalistic integrity. The press in the UK is akin to fox news evening shows or OAN or all the other maga websites/channels

      • Mac says:

        The Sun is a tabloid on par with the National Inquirer.

      • Yvette says:

        @Mac … “The Sun is a tabloid on par with the National Inquirer.” And isn’t it also William’s choice of leaks to his good friend, Dan Wootton?

      • MyOpinion says:

        @ VS, you are absolutely right! This is OAN all in one package! There is NO extension, no contract reviews, no ongoing talks. Petty Betty has made her bed, and she can lay in it for eternity! There are no conversations between Harry and PWT 🤣. As hell has not frozen over yet! It must have been a dull week for the scheming scumbags to come up with this load of crap, because that is what it is!

    • equality says:

      If contracts are already signed, they could only be altered with the consent of both parties. Do these RR’s think before speaking?

      • Oh-Dear says:

        I don’t think it has anything to do with altering a contract, it is just virtue signalling – the ‘we approve/don’t approve’ is being used as a basis for allowing H & M to continue as part time Royals or representing the Crown.
        The narrative is meant to show that the Queen and maybe Charles are the ones who will do the breaking up, not Harry and Megan. Of course, it is false, but that doesn’t seem to matter to the anti- Harry and Megan crowd.

      • Lorelei says:

        @OhDear and the audacity of all of this virtue signaling about “upholding the Queen’s values” while Andrew still retains his HRH and lives on royal property.

    • VS says:

      @equality — you just made a big assumption here “you assume royal gossiper rats (copied from Twitter) can THINK”
      The coverage of the Netflix and Spotify deals in the uk proves to me that their gossipers don’t understand how business works…….how can people read and believe their BS, I will never understand. It is as if someone read TMZ in the US and went quoting it on CNN…… the horror!!!!

      • ElleE says:

        @VS I have more than a passing acquaintance with contracts and yet I struggle to understand the terms and conditions of entertainment and sponsor agreements (they are seldom just one contract; more likely it is a series of related agreements that incorporate certain terms from each other) so good luck to, one assumes, the in-house barristers for the BRF.
        I do think that there is a partial truth here: the details of these contracts are worth millions to the Rota. Let’s not be surprised if there is some request for and then a good faith provision of synopses of these deals, which will immediately be fodder for Piers Morgan.
        God, I would love to see some red herrings thrown into those agreement synopsis like a “no nudity”clause for Harry, and other crazy things that actually don’t even exist, just to see how the information is flowing from the family to the press.

      • Pink says:

        No one in their right mind believes a word that’s printed in the Sun…..

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      The irony is that many charities are willing to break away from the royal family’s umbrella to retain the Sussexes’ patronage. We know many charities are really struggling and they would rather have engaged patrons who can actually help them survive than be associated with royal patrons who bring nothing to the table.

    • TheOriginalMia says:

      Snuffles, you summed everything up quite nicely. The RRs/Morton are dreaming if they think the Sussexes will allow them access to those contracts. It’s not any of their business. They don’t care about the HRH. Take them away, but be prepared to take the Yorks/Glouchesters/Kents as well. And we know that ain’t happening. So…there will be no extension because the Sussexes aren’t coming back and don’t need the Crown for anything.

    • Louise177 says:

      The stripping of the patronages confuses me. I would think Meghan and Harry can work with any charity that they want and accepts them. I guess the “stripping” is supposed to mean no official association with the Royal family. Which doesn’t mean much to anybody.

    • Amy Too says:

      I think they’re attempting to cover their bases in case Harry and Meghan don’t travel to the UK before the end of March 2021 because of Covid. They can’t claim they had the big review and got yelled at and had their contracts pored over by the courtiers if H and M haven’t actually been in the UK. They’re assuming Harry and Meghan will come back at some point once it’s safe (they’re suggesting birthdays or the Diana statue) and they’re trying to pretend that the reason they’re coming back is for the review but while they’re there they might as well schedule it to coincide with some other event. And they’re twisting the fact that H and M aren’t likely coming back until later into 2021 as Harry and Meghan begging for an extension on the review because they’re desperate to still be royals, or they think they can’t succeed on their own, or they really want to keep their HRH longer, or they’re so worried that their new deals will be vetoed by the family or something.

      There is no real, in person review. It’s not real. It’s not happening. There will be no sit down where the family gets to go over the contracts. There will be no list of grievances and punishments. If H and M go back it will be to visit and to do some events they want to do, not because they HAVE TO go to some kind of royal summit to learn their fate. But the press is desperate to keep this review story going because they think it’s humiliating for H and M and they think it shows the RF as powerful and in charge.

      • 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 ➕💯 —- AMY TOO. I think this is a complete and utter BS story. PEOPLE picking it up only shows how far PEOPLE, like Vanity Fair, has sunk into tabloid reporting. As Kaiser said, these stories are only going to get more bizarre as March draws near. The Royal 🐀 Rota are desperate for clicks and money. I simply will not believe that the Sussexes are stupid enough and masacistic enough to step into a REVIEW. Every sentence in the above article is slanted to indicate that the only fault in any part of the Sussexes’ exit is down to the Sussexes’ selfish behavior. The royal family side is slanted to make it sound as if they are the helpless victims and the Sussexes must —- once again —- come crawling to the Crown (and the Royal 🐀 Rota) and open every aspect of their lives and adult decisions up to endless, constant scrutiny as if they are 3 year olds. I’ll believe this when and if the Sussexes release an official announcement. Until then, I call BullS***.

        What always amazes me, is the R🐀R have endless royal choo choo train wreck stories they could follow and focus on, about any number of Keen Royals —- from the Queen, Charles, Andrew (🤯), Fergie, William, Kate and I’m sure other marginal behavior any number of the endless other British royal family members get up to, but the reporters can’t type one sentence without dragging the Sussexes —- whom supposedly are persona non-grata. Bizarro World Lives.

      • VS says:

        @Lowcountry Lady —– “……but the reporters can’t type one sentence without dragging the Sussexes —- whom supposedly are persona non-grata…… ”

        let’s be honest, there aren’t that many people who will click if H&M aren’t mentioned. I check Omid TL and you can tell the difference in engagement when he tweets or retweets anything H&M related vs the others; it is like night and day

      • Keen Kate says:

        Bravo Amy Too 👏

      • Lorelei says:

        @Amy Too I laughed out loud at the part about “learning their fate at the royal summit” because that is exactly how the press/family is spinning this (maybe some actually believe it??) and it’s such a joke. The family has zero control over anything they do anymore but they can’t quite face that fact or admit it yet, so we’re getting this farce of a “review” story dragged out for two years.

    • CC2 says:

      My guess, if it was even a little bit true, is that they want to postpone the actual meeting for personal reasons-perhaps for the same reason they wanted the trial postponed.

    • HeyJude says:

      Exactly. I don’t believe this for a second unless it actually happens and don’t believe Harry will be coming back for any review.

      That’s pure lunacy. He’s a grown man and this isn’t a trip to the headmaster’s office.

      There’s COVID, they have a small child they aren’t going to risk exposing themselves to the virus just to deal with this trifling nonsense. Plus these people are so unhinged I wouldn’t go near them by myself just to jump through their hoops.

      Anybody with a lick of sense knows this is BS.

    • what's inside says:

      You are so correct in your assessment.

  3. PEARL GREY says:

    Everything Harry and Meghan have been doing since they left the Windsor ghetto tells you there won’t be any oNe yEaR rEviEw. The press are just squeezing everything they can out of the Sussexit saga because they know they fumbled the bag big time. They overplayed their hand with the palace sanctioned smear campaign and chased the only two royals that kept their bills paid out of the country. Now they are left with the “New (Old) Firm” and they are regretting their choices. The review is their last hope to get their golden gooses back but that’s not going to happen. Harry and Meghan are putting down roots in America and making deals to secure their future away from the welfare royals. The rota will just have to deal with getting scraps from the US media exclusives. Hopefully the Real Regal Royals™️ and their pandemic shenanigans will be enough to keep them in jobs at this difficult time.

  4. Nanea says:

    The Torygraph has refuted the part of the Scum’s extension story, citing a source close to the Sussexes. They do seem to confirm though they’d plan to eventually spend some time in the UK, as soon as it’s safe again to do so.

    I wonder why the Sun came up with this in the first place – who fed them this, and who inside the RF wants to throw the Sussexes under the bus again to distract from something…

    • Ripley says:

      I think it leads back to what Caroline Yates, CEO of Mayhew, wrote:

      “ We have been honoured to have the Duchess as our Patron since the beginning of 2019. She has a long background of championing animal welfare and we are very grateful to her for her ongoing support… The Patronage has put more of a spotlight on these animal welfare issues and increased public awareness and understanding; and we are looking forward to continuing to work with the Duchess to help even more animals and people.”

      Their patronages are making it clear they want M👑 and H👑 to remain their Patrons…

      • GRUEY says:

        @ripley this is a really good point. And even if MH were “stripped” of their patronages (which would look so awful for the RF) I’m sure they would continue to publicly support and promote them. Honestly what would even be the difference? One post from Meghan and Harry brings in thousands in donations. Again, the RF isn’t the important brand here, Meghan and Harry are.

      • Ripley says:

        @GRUEY, exactly – they are totally the brand here. And what would stop them if they were, in fact, “stripped” of their patronages from simply partnering with those patronages through Archewell like they’ve begun with WCK?

      • Elizabeth Regina says:

        Exactly. Charities are all in survival mode now and don’t want to be lumbered with ineffectual patrons.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        As we’ve found with Kate her few patronage’s ended up spending too much to have her visit for 30 minutes and received almost no boost in donations or awareness. It’s costly to have a RF member as a patron. Not the same with M 👑 and H 👑

    • Ginger says:

      Yeah, this story was shot down by a source close to Harry and Meghan. They said they will be back for Philip’s 100th birthday and the Diana statue but only if it is safe to travel.
      This doesn’t surprise me that the RF are trying to spin it as H&M want an extension. Why would they? They are doing great and don’t need them. The RF are desperate to have an extension because they are nothing without them.

    • Jegede says:

      I don’t think it’s to distract from anything.
      The Sun has been running with ‘Harry coming home’ stories EVERY QUARTER this year it seems.🙄

      They’re clearly desperate for their cash cows, esp as the pandemic has seen RRs take a hit.

      Quite a few end of year Royal 2020 stories have hinted about regret with the Sussex situation.
      While the Times Royal Review smacked down on them, the Telegraph review stressed that the Sussexes were NOT in exile and were still family.

      I think seeing how well the Sussexes are doing, some members are hoping for a reset.

      Not ALL, just a few.😐😐

    • Amy Bee says:

      My guess is that KP is behind these extension stories. That will keep the press off William and Kate’s back for the first three months of 2021.

  5. Sofia says:

    I honestly think this “one year review” will be more anti-climatic than people think. People are expecting a massive showdown and a list of “punishments” and at the end all that will be left to show for it will be an official statement from the palace about how things are remaining the same (unless patronages are being taken away, which I doubt and HRH being legally taken away, which again, I doubt). The media will obviously do 194599893 different articles on who said what and what happened but again, I don’t think it’s the big event people are thinking it’s going to be.

    • Myra says:

      Same. I think they realise that Harry and Meghan have called out their bluff so this is just the media basically grasping at the last straw. They have made the one-year review into this big deal so they know there will not be any pay-off come 31st March 2021. Instead of letting go, they are trying to throw out a non-existent extension which they can use to hold the Sussexes to as they move on with their lives. Anything to drag out this narrative for the next five years.

      • Yes, Myra. The 🐀 reporting stories after the official 3/31/21 date will slant it as how disrespectful the Sussexes are to have blown off the review. Before that date, as they are beginning to report, it will all be about how Harry is desperate to reconnect and apologize for their horrific treatment of his family. The one thing we — as readers — can count on, is that the R🐀R will spin Sussex BS reporting out for years with a different unmet goalpost. The Sussexes will just go on living their best lives. Sometimes they will be in Britain, sometimes not, but for the R🐀R every Sussex movement or sighting will be spun to try and make the Sussexes look bad.

    • equality says:

      If she takes M&H’s HRH then she won’t be able to justify B&E or Andy having an HRH as “non-working” royals.

      • Christine says:

        Honestly, as long as Andrew still has any sort of status in the HRH realm, the entire institution is corrupt (yes, I know, it is, but they don’t). I DARE them to take it from Harry and Meghan, while that stain on humanity is trotting around anywhere but prison.

    • February-Pisces says:

      Part of me thinks that Willie is desperate for some action to happen at this “one year review” cos he’s running dry on leaks and he’s trying to keep the likes of Desperate dan wootton fed. It might even be him who is trying to tell them about this extension as a way to buy himself some time to stop them from turning on him.

      • Becks1 says:

        I do think this Sun article was encouraged by KP because it seems to bring up all the anti-Sussex talking points – Netflix!!!! Spotify!!! their titles!!!!!! California! It feels like KP wants to remind people how problematic the Sussexes are.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        Speaking of Willie. Hasn’t it been one year since he first uttered the words Earthshot? Isn’t this the first year of 10 awards of one million each. He should be occupying his time with that rather than being obsessed with his brother and sister-in-law.

      • what's inside says:

        Billy Basher and Katie Keen are due for their beach vacation and need a distraction to cover them while they travel. Here it is.

      • Lorelei says:

        @RoyalBlue that’s an excellent point about Earthshot. I totally forgot it even existed, and isn’t is supposed to be Bill’s big “signature,” “legacy” initiative? LOL

      • RoyalBlue says:

        Lorelei, I was waiting to see what Walmart will do as he tried to drag along Shakira and whoever else will have him, but seems like they are still hammering out details. I won’t hold my breath. once again, promising to deliver and failing miserably.

    • Becks1 says:

      Agreed. I know the RRs need to write something to fill the pages, but the one-year review isn’t really going to be anything. Maybe they’ll discuss the military titles, but I don’t think she’ll take the patronages (I mean, can she really? Mayhew doesn’t have to have a “royal patron.” They can just have Meghan.) and I also don’t think she’ll take HRH – they have stuck to their word and have not used HRH since March, and I think the Queen probably appreciates that. She’s not touching their HRHs unless she completely rewrites the rules, which I guess she could (only the direct heirs are HRH or something, so Andrew, Anne, B&E, Edward would all lose them. She’s not going to do that.)

      The royal family has no say over the Netflix or Spotify deals.

      All this talk that implies the discussion is going to be about whether H&M can “remain” non-working royals is just ludicrous. They don’t want to be working royals anymore.

      The only thing I wonder about though – and it would explain why this is still being talked about like this – is if the “one year review” is more about the royals than H&M. Like, maybe Charles wants them back as part-time royals (like they originally suggested) or something. So the review isn’t as much about reviewing H&M as it will be about the BRF backtracking a bit. But I doubt it.

      • Lorelei says:

        All of the talk about this big “review” is, as you said, because they need something to write about. They were counting on the trial for so long, and now they’re left scrambling. The review itself, if it even happens, is a formality and won’t affect Harry and Meghan in the least. I guess it gives the BRF the sense that they still have some amount of control over the Sussexes, but they do not. It’s so funny that the courtiers even think they have a say in the Netflix/Spotify contracts.

        As for the patronages, I think a lot of them would still choose to keep Harry and Meghan even if they were technically “stripped” of those patronages by the Queen. They wouldn’t be royal patrons anymore, but the organizations they support seem happy with them, and they bring attention to their causes, so even that threat isn’t the leverage the family seems to think it is, imo.

        I mean, Kate is a “royal patron” and does so little that two of her patronages had to shutter in the past year or two, and as far as we know, she didn’t so much as lift a finger to try and help them. So the “royal” distinction doesn’t mean much.

      • VS says:

        @Lorelei — not just Kate, what has W ever done concretely for his patronages? except Charles, TQ has how many exactly? is she really impactful for those patronages? I think recently someone proved and demonstrated that the answer is NO

    • anotherlily says:

      Harry’s HRH status cannot be removed. Neither can his peerage. The Queen has no power to remove such titles from a born Prince. The only precedent for such action is the 1917 legislation which removed British hereditary titles from foreign princes and peers who supported Germany in the First World War. This required both Houses of Parliament to agree that these men had committed treason by supporting Britain’s enemies. Harry has not committed treason.

      The Sussexes are in a similar position to Prince Michael of Kent and his wife. Prince and Princess Michael have no public royal role and they make full use of use their titles in their commercial activities. The website of HRH Princess Michael of Kent is adorned with royal insignia and promotes her books and commercial activities along with her charities. It is known that the Queen is not happy with some of the Kent’s commercial activities but there is nothing she can do about it beyond writing a letter.

      Harry and Meghan are far more significant and far more newsworthy than the Kents but their legal position is similar. And they know it. So do their lawyers.

      The Palace’s only real negotiating power involves the official royal patronages, honorary military appointments and the Commonwealth appointment. These do not include the Invictus Games or Sentebale or numerous charities privately supported by Harry and Meghan.

      I recommend the Guardian article: ”Does Megxit mean Megxit? Have the Sussexes really escaped the royal family?” (Gaby Hinsliff 18th Dec. 2020) which quotes Victoria Murphy, royal correspondent for Town and Country; “Harry’s relationship to the crown is not going to lessen over time; if anything it will be closer when he is the son, rather than grandson of the monarch,” says Murphy. “So everything they do publicly will always be discussed in the context of the royal family.” And there have been awkward moments; the palace’s refusal to let Harry send a wreath for laying at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day looked petty, given he has served in combat.”

      It is nonsense to pretend that the Sussexes’ future depends on titles. Lack of a title has made no difference to the public profile and commercial success of ‘Mrs Michael Tindall’ as she is listed in the order of succession to the throne. Zara Tindall, along with her affable husband and their lively daughters, enjoys many of the benefits of the royal family with none of the restraints applied to those with official duties.

      The Queen and her advisors will have to come to some civilised agreement with the Sussexes.

  6. HeatherC says:

    I doubt Harry is in contact with Petty Betty. This is the woman he tried and failed to make an appointment with before everything went down last year. There’s little to no chance shes suddenly more available now. The courtiers can pour over the Spotify and Netflix deals all they want, if they can. Its up to the Sussexes to make them available and I hope they don’t. Let the courtiers simmer in their own hate jealous stew, they’ve earned it.

    • Noki says:

      Dont her own family need to make an appoinment to see her? Save maybe her husband and future heirs.

      • PrincessK says:

        They all need to make appointments, even to speak to her over the phone. But l am sure that Harry is in contact with her. Remember The Queen and Charles are afraid of upsetting William and don’t publicly want to be seen giving support to Harry.

  7. Lemons says:

    This sounds like the courtiers would like to extend the one-year review since the Sussexes are doing just fine without them. One more thing to hold over them to try and gain some ounce of control of this situation that never needed controlling in the first place.

    Of course, no one in the family has any negotiating power over them since this couple seems to be the only one who has managed to broker multi-million dollar deals while still contributing to their patronages and keeping their private life out of the press. No other couple seems to have managed that and using the crown as an excuse doesn’t pass muster in this day and age.

    • Ainsley7 says:

      H&M didn’t get those deals while they were working royals. They only got them after they stepped down. They never would have even attempted it as working Royals. The rules for what a the working Royals are and aren’t allowed to do was decided by Parliament. So, the Crown is 100% an excuse. The rules surrounding making money is part of why H&M left. They wanted financial independence. As long as the Royals are government representatives, their finances will be controlled by Parliament. They aren’t allowed to make money outside of the Crown Estates and the two Royal Duchies.

      • Lemons says:

        Considering the business dealings of the other royals, I don’t believe that this is a real impediment to them making money or making a bigger impact with their work. They are just too lazy to try and find a new way of working and grifting is a career choice in that family.

      • GuestWho says:

        Do HRH Princess Michael’s trashy books fall under the Crown Estates or do they fall under one of the two Royal Duchies?

      • Lizzie says:

        Andrew’s Pitch@Palace??

      • RoyalBlue says:

        Ainsley7 you forget. When H&M left they said there was precedence set by others who made their own money.

      • anotherlily says:

        Prince Edward and Sophie combined official royal duties with private business enterprises. Sophie was a PR consultant and Edward ran a theatre and film company. This worked well enough for a few years but a combination of Sophie’s ‘fake sheik’ gaffe and Edward’s lack of business acumen meant they had to give up private work. However they proved there is no legal barrier to combining public duties and private work.

        Prince and Princess Michael of Kent can be used to disprove any supposed rule about not using HRH status and royal insignia in pursuing private commercial work since they have been doing this for over 30 years.

    • Jegede says:

      “This sounds like the courtiers would like to extend the one-year review since the Sussexes are doing just fine without them.”

      Exactly.👍👍👍

      Although, Harry & Meghan sources have already denied it to publications they do engage with; I think this story is the BRF prepping for ‘nothing will change’ narrative, come the 1 year review.

      I also now believe it was Charles/William who told Eugenie to leave Frogmore.

      There seems to be a narrative, from some quarters, who want to stress that the Sussexes are STILL a part of the family. *Looking at you Chuck*😏😏😏

      • February-Pisces says:

        I never thought of Charles and William telling eugenie to get out of frogmore. Technically they would have no rights and it has been paid by harry and Meghan, but I guess they could have threatened to take away their KP house which made they move back.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Harry and Meghan were expected fail during the one year review. Now that they have been successful and are financial independent, the courtiers have concocted this story about Harry and Meghan wanting a one year extension which makes absolutely no sense. Why would Harry and Meghan want to continue with a review that they didn’t want in the first place?

    • GRUEY says:

      @lemons not to mention a fair amount of wishful thinking from the RRs themselves. They will always have an excuse to write about them, because they will always be royal, whatever their titles are. But I feel like it’s better for sales if it seems like MH still give a shit about what the RF think. Which…they obviously dont

      • Lemons says:

        I could see Harry feeling bittersweet and wanting to be there for his grandmother and father in some way, but it’s also pretty obvious that they’ve managed to find a way and the “New Firm” will just have to be okay with that.

  8. Soupie says:

    Well that’s very interesting Harry’s “been in touch with the Queen more often than we would think” as opposed to him being kept away a year ago after repeated requests. Perhaps the Queen finally put her foot down with respect to her favorite grandson? I do hope she did. She probably still views him as a breath of fresh air, as well she should.

    • Ginger says:

      No. I don’t think Harry has been in touch with most of his family at all. One way we can tell is that there are no leaks. He probably has only spoken with the Queen for her birthday and that’s it. Same for Charles. He probably speaks to a few of his cousins. And not at all to Will and Kate.

      • VS says:

        I 100% agree……. you can tell whom Harry is not speaking to and as you said “no leaks”
        As soon as they left KP, the amount of leaks significantly decreased and since they left for the US, it is now at almost no leaks except the remembrance one which tells us everything. As soon as the rf is involved, everything H&M do will end up in a trashy tabloid

    • BayTampaBay says:

      I thought Peter Phillips was QEII’s favorite grandson.

  9. Oh_Hey says:

    Yeah. No. That completely tortured Mextension word…thing…shows their increasingly desperate and thirsty hand. I believe the Queen will take their patronage’s because this is the same lady that preached duty and austerity in front of a gold piano. H&M do not care. The Queen might try to take the actual Sussex title. H&M don’t care. People know who they are without some stupid title. The royals might try to ice them out. Again. Despite it having it both not worked and backfiring last time. H&M don’t care.

    Their goals are probably what they have been all year. Support charities for causes they like. Get good, socially conscious content for their money making platforms. Get legal judgements off anyone stupid enough to keep papping and writing provably false garbage. Raise Archie and maybe another kid if they’re lucky enough to have one. That’s it. The crown’s agenda is punishment. H&M’s agenda is minding their own dang business and flourishing at it.

    • Harper says:

      I think William will push for some kind of stripping of charities, just for the optics. He will love some more Bad Harry headlines so he and Kate can go on an extended vacay end of March/beginning of April.

      • Becks1 says:

        I do think William is pushing for it (for them to lose their patronages) and I think H&M know that and it was part of the reason for the very direct Mayhew post.

      • February-Pisces says:

        I think Willie will definitely try and then he can swoop in and steal them and the press and hail him a hero. But the thing is you don’t actually need to be royal to be a patron of a charity, many celebrities are patrons for charities so I would assume that it’s up to the charities themselves and the public figures. There is no way any charity is going to want them to leave, they have proved how much they are dedicated to them. I heard before harry and Meghan left that harry was always the most requested royal in terms of visits and representations. He was always in high demand above the Keens even before Meghan.

      • Lady D says:

        William and Kate didn’t need an excuse to take a myriad of expensive overseas vacations on a private jet, year in and year out for the past two decades now. Those two are past masters at both sneaking and sneaking in and out of their country.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      I think the courtiers will go full court press and shut the door to appear as if they are in charge and for spite, to continue the petty and excite the rabid fans. This means stripping of royal patronages, formal stripping of HRH and removal of ceremonial military titles. I am sure Sophie and Edward are up for grabbing the scraps left behind.

      • PrincessK says:

        I don’t think so. So much damage has been done to the monarchy and l am sure that they will want to put on a united front. They also need to keep the Sussexes close to them for obvious reasons. I also think many people have told William that it is not in his interest to try and destroy the Sussexes.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        true. that’s another way of looking at it. so in that case, the palace will release a memo stating, all is well, the Susssexes are now granted another 10 patronages from Philip and her Maj. carry on.

  10. lanne says:

    So…the sun is basically saying they don’t know anything. What’s to “extend” in terms of the review? Harry and Meghan aren’t coming back. This is one of many speculative stories that will appear that seem like news but aren’t. The tabloids lost the story and they will never get it back. The royals have no leverage. Sure they can remove their patronage’s, but how will that look when Harry and Meghan are doing charity in the US? And who would they give the patronage’s to? Kate, who didn’t visit her charity for 8 years? There are a lot of nasty Cambridge articles that are waiting to be written regarding patronage’s. This article is much ado about nothing.

  11. ABritGuest says:

    It’s silly to think courtiers will pour over already signed& announced deals that certainly have confidentiality clauses. I think that’s wishful thinking for the press to find out the details of the deals.

    I also think someone in the firm floated this to the Sun. Doesn’t really make sense given all the Sussexes moves to pretend they want an extension to NOT be working royals and especially given that Harry didn’t want the review. maybe the RF is thinking of a way to continue control over Harry by eg allowing him to keep military honours. Then the Queen will be seen as benevolent if it’s seen as the Sussexes pushing for an extension to this so called review period.

    • Well — as we all know — William is a grand master at PR….. 👑🤡. I attribute this to another clumsy KP PR attempt to deflect from House Cambridge to House Sussex. I think William stopped living in the real world years ago. He lives and makes decisions in this rarified Royal bubble of privilege and sycophants who constantly kiss his ring as if he is God’s great gift.

  12. Cecilia says:

    Harry’s HRH can’t be removed unless he steps out of the line of succession. So can we please stop peddeling this lie already? No titles will be removed.

    Also, courtiers who couldn’t even handle 5 AM emails slaving over multi million dollar deals that have already been signed? Let. Me. Laugh.

    That 1 year review is going to be a quick “we aren’t coming back” through zoom.

    • VS says:

      “Also, courtiers who couldn’t even handle 5 AM emails slaving over multi million dollar deals that have already been signed? Let. Me. Laugh.” ———BRAVO BRAVO BRAVO

      • Keen Kate says:

        Woah, woah, woah. That’s gold standard advisors that you are making fun of.

      • Kalana says:

        Obviously they’re going to give it to Top CEO Kate and she’ll break it all down for them.

      • VS says:

        @Keen Kate — LOL; the same gold standard advisors
        1) who thought Andrew’s interview went well,
        2) who thought doing a train tour in the middle of a pandemic is a brilliant idea;
        3) who thought a dummy 5 questions survey who could have be written in 5 min is something to promote as work someone has been doing for 9 years
        4) who thought Charles should marry Diana while continuing his “department of international affairs” with Camilla will be ok
        5) who thought emails sent a 5am is too much
        6) who thought they should spew to the press that the “Fture Fture” cried over tights
        7) etc….

        Gold standard idiots for sure…… LOL

    • Royalwatcher says:

      This. Harry is an HRH through birth and because of Letters Patent that declare that children in the male line are HRH. What, is Bitter Betty going to write new Letters Patent that somehow only strip Harry of his HRH but not William’s second and third child? And how would she justify taking Harry’s but not Andrew’s? A man who is literally wanted for questioning by the FBI and French authorities!!!!

      The Sun is so stupid and grasping at straws for something to make it look like The Queen Is In Control. It’s clear that Harry is never coming back. Their charities and the military have made it clear they value Meghan and Harry and will continue to work with them whether or not they are in the UK and whether or not they are part of the British Welfare Royals.

    • S808 says:

      If I were H&M I wouldn’t even show up. My lawyers/spokesperson can speak with the courtiers.

    • mytwocents says:

      Cecilia, I’m still shocked to this day that they made an issue of 5am emails, that being hard-working would be a reason to criticize her! It makes no sense at all.

      • Cecilia says:

        It’s all part of the narrative to make her seem difficult and demanding. Don’t forget that that story was followed up by stories of her staff “quitting”. The things they hailed her for in the lead up to the wedding (hard working, self made, modern) all of a sudden became sticks to beat her with.she was demanding, too american too different and “she shouldn’t try to change the monarchy”. Funny that the people who credited her as the one that would modernize the monarchy later slagged her off for it (tho meghan technically never modernized the monarchy nor has she ever expressed wishes to do so)

      • Meghan was and always will be just TOO BLACK as far as they’re concerned. I don’t care how they spin it.

    • BnLurkN4eva says:

      Just had to jump in to say you gave me my giggle of the day with “let me laugh”. So apt and I am laughing along with you and no doubt H/M. These people must really think the public are made up of complete dullards. Well, we know there are some, but come on this should even beneath the trashloids.

  13. Naomi says:

    The one year review was BS when it was initially announced and is BS now, a couple who have bought a house with a mortgage and signed what is probably multi year contracts with media organisations are not a couple sitting around waiting for a one year review. The Sussexes can’t lose their title nor the HRH style, without setting a precedent and from a parliament which has a lot more things to concern itself (fallout of Brexit deal, Covid 19, crashing economy, although a discussion in the commons about the Sussexes is a great distraction tool!).

    Harry doesn’t use his former honorary military titles, they don’t use their HRH style and whilst they can stop using their titles, to strip them of it, will require a bit work from the firm.

    So all in all, there is no review, they’re gone, they’re not coming back, British media, you’ve beaten your cash cow to death, the firm, it’s lost all plausibility to blame the Sussexes for you’re own misdeeds. It’s over, OVER!

  14. Cee says:

    If the Queen takes away their HRHs I hope Andrew’s is next.
    I’m sure Charles will not like it one bit that his son loses his Style while his pedo brother keeps living it up in full regalia.

    • Cecilia says:

      None of the titles will be removed. End of story

    • Tessa says:

      Charles sat back and did little to help Harry. HE seems to let William run the show.

      • Oh says:

        There is no difference between Charles and William. They are both trash

      • PrincessK says:

        Both Prince Charles and the Queen are afraid of upsetting William. The number one goal for monarchs is to ensure that they don’t drop the ball and keep the succession going.

      • PrincessK says:

        Both Prince Charles and the Queen want to keep William happy at all costs. The number one goal of any monarch is not to drop the ball and secure the line of succession.

  15. Harla says:

    Why on earth would Meghan and Harry want an extension on a review that they didn’t want in the first place and pointed out on their SussexRoyal page as being unfair?!

  16. Keen Kate says:

    🤣😂😅😆
    Oh do eff off British media and British royals, sadly many Brits will believe this!
    Honestly, these people!!

  17. tee says:

    It’s been wild watching the UK press spin all of M&H’s achievements over the last year as failures or blunders. Particularly as they do the inverse for the rest of the RF. They were not prepared at all for the Sussexes to be doing well.

    If they’re really looking to punish, I think Meghan loses the National Theater and ACU patronages. And I already know who’d be first in line for both of them.

    • Keen Kate says:

      But I’m terribly busy watching makeup tutorials, shopping, my hair/beauty appointments and the gym… Sorry, I mean with my patronages, early years and the kiddos.

    • Tatler had an absolutely nasty story about Meghan’s latte firm investment. They reviewed each and every flavor offered as to why it would be unfit to drink for anyone of true class, and capped it off with the nastiest comments about Meghan. I mean the viciousness of the article was unbelievable. Kate must have been so pleased her editor friend came through for her.

      • GuestwithCat says:

        I don’t think anyone who ties latte flavors in with “true class” understands what true class really is. Snobbery on the other hand…yes, that rag is a proper arbiter of snobbery.

      • Kalana says:

        I guess true class is investing in Boomf.

        They could do an article on pumpkin spice lattes and how basic b they are. Doesn’t mean Starbucks will discontinue them or affect the company raking in money hand over fist.

        I bet they’re all secretly scrambling to jump on the bandwagon and find their own companies in which to invest.

      • Sofia says:

        What article are you talking about? Because the one I read wasn’t particularly nasty. They just listed info about ClevrBlends, Oprah’s caption, info from the owner and that’s it. The last line just said something like “Meghan’s stake in the brand has not been revealed”

      • Lorelei says:

        “True class is investing in Boomf.”

        LMFAOOOOO

  18. Aurora says:

    What would be the basis for removing their titles? I’m curious what specific actions by the Sussexes could be used to justify title removals?

    • Royalwatcher says:

      None. Nothing. Nada. They’ve done nothing to justify it but the Sun can just say whatever crap they want because their readers are too stupid for critical thinking or to do their own research into the way HRH are assigned and removed, Letters Patent, etc.

  19. Amy Bee says:

    “Get ready for twenty million stories about the “one year review” between the Sussexes and the Windsors” You’re sure right. This is why I want Harry to pre-empt all this media talk and announce in early January their plans to remain outside of the Royal Family, that they will give up the royal patronages traditionally held by working Royals and Frogmore Cottage.

    Harry and Meghan have already denied the Sun article which rings false given that they didn’t want the one year review in the first place. Yes, this was mentioned in Finding Freedom but, as pointed out by some people on twitter yesterday, it was stated on the Sussex Royal website that they were didn’t agree with the one year review imposed on them.

    • Nyro says:

      ITA. I’d love for them to put out a statement on the one year anniversary of their announcement and just end all this nonsense talk from the tabloids and the royal family. Burst their bubble once and for all.

  20. Snuffles says:

    I wonder if Betty is Petty enough to take away their patronages, will Harry and Meghan simply announce that THEIR foundation Archewell has formed partnerships with them instead? 🤔🤔

    • ABritGuest says:

      On the patronage’s I would think the ones handed down by the Queen eg National Theatre, ACU would be more at risk if the firm was in punishment mode. But practically with an aging firm with less publicly funded members to do the work, what would be the point of that?

      As for charities themselves wonder if they have any sway on this. Currently Harry& Meghan bring more attention to their causes& many of them have benefited from fans fundraising initiatives this year. And an ACU rep said that Meghan really gets it and brings more focus then just fashion. So it will be interesting

      • Harla says:

        I recall the Andrew’s patronages were negotiating with BP as they didn’t want him as patron anymore but BP was pushing back against that, so yes I do believe that the organizations have say in who they want as their patron.

  21. S808 says:

    “Extend” a permanent split? H&M have a home, a production company and a non profit. None of that is temporary. And it’s laughable that the courtiers would even get a glance at airtight multimillion dollar contracts that have ALREADY been signed. This story is purely for the megxits that want to keep hope alive that there’ll be some sort of embarrassing punishment cause I’m sure they’ve been sick with all the wins H&M have had lately. RF does not want Meghan and Archie and that means Harry isn’t coming back either. The press and the antis need to move on.

  22. Lauren says:

    This is stupid. Harry and Meghan made it clear they didn’t want the review, I cannot see them asking for an extension. They only have to clear the bit about the patronages and the titles then the Sussexes will be telling them ttyn.

  23. Gail says:

    I smell Willyleaks all over this . He told me them that H and M want to discuss their patronage’s and Harry military titles . H and M signed big deals this year, that are legally binding contracts that pay . Why the heck would they give any of that up to return to the kkk monarchy and be put back under someone racist as heck thumb ? The monarchy definitely needs Hand M more than Meghan or Harry need them . They have already taken away almost everything. So what’s left to loose ? The media, the monarchy can all go suck on lemons. Harry and his beloved wife and son are happy.

  24. Andrew’s Nemesis says:

    Are courtiers legally permitted to pore over the details of multimillion dollar contracts that will have been arbitrated by the top lawyers in the world? What precisely do they think they can do about various clauses?
    If the Queen listens to the alt-right who support her punish-punish-punish mindset and strips H&M of their Commonwealth positions, she’ll lose the Commonwealth. Full stop. Those countries will not tolerate such blatant racism. She’s on a knife-edge re the Commonwealth anyway, due to the shocking, appalling, libellous and cruel treatment of Meghan.
    Why must the truly good always suffer?

    • Izzy says:

      Of course they can, if someone provides them with a copy AND there isn’t a nondisclosure clause. If both of those things are true, courtiers can read those contracts until their eyes bleed.

      What they CAN’T do is change the contracts. They have zero standing to do that.

    • Nic919 says:

      There is no privity of contract between anyone but Netflix / Spotify and Harry and Meghan so there is not a damn thing the queen or her courtiers can do to alter the signed legal contracts. Especially in the US where a British monarch doesn’t control their judicial system.

    • Lizzie says:

      I’m guessing there is confidential information contained in the contracts and if so then no, the courtiers cannot read them.

  25. Coco says:

    I’m sure people have made this point before, but lately all I want to do when I read something like this is sit these deranged pro-Harry, anti-Meghan commenters down and say, “Even if he and Meghan split up today, Harry is not going to **** you.”

  26. Izzy says:

    So this is either wild make-believe by The Sun, or someone from inside the Palace leaked to them (which would absolutely torpedo any reconciliation attempt). Given that another paper has already refuted this story citing a Sussex source, I’ll go with option one.

    And here are the big tipoffs for me: courtiers can literally sit and sound out every single word of those contracts, but they have zero standing to change them. Also, Harry doesn’t regret how their exit was announced, he had no choice. If anyone should be regretting it, it should be Willieleaks but I think we all know that’s not gonna happen.

  27. Nic919 says:

    This is just fodder for the royal stenographers and the derangers to use to find more reasons why they don’t like Harry and Meghan. This review is complete nonsense. They aren’t in an employment relationship with the crown and discussing what else needs to be removed from them for daring to get contracts is like an abusive partner who has to keep gaslighting the partner who left. No discussion about removing HRHs or patronages can seriously take place without the same being done to Andrew and with respect to the HRHs, his daughters and Edward’s kids. But they pretend that somehow moving to the US and not living off taxpayers money is a bigger sin than being a rapist of underaged girls.

    • Nyro says:

      Exactly. Imagine quitting a horrible job, moving to a new country, starting a business which becomes quite lucrative in a matter of months, and then having your old boss demand that you come back for another exit review so they can “officially fire” you even though you quit a year ago. Do these people not realize how crazy they look in the real world. Reminds me of how crazy Sussexit looked normal folks who couldn’t understand all the anger about a 35 year old man quitting the family business and moving out of town with his family. This “review” is going to backfire on them.

  28. Izzy says:

    I swear this family is like the ex who won’t accept that you broke up and keeps telling people about your non-existent wedding plans.

  29. Vanessa says:

    I don’t believe they will losses their titles or anything I think the most will be their organizations that they work with it . And that would be punishing the charity’s who need help with donations let’s face Meghan and Harry have done more for their charities than any other royals they have fans who organizes and donated real money that actually helps this causes . Unlike kate and William who do nothing but promise to show up kate has one of her charities closed because of her laziness to show up and help . But a couple who actually works with their charities help with donations and promoting and donations their own money to the causes will probably lose their charity.

    • lanne says:

      I think not, because it would then set the stage for unfavorable comparisons. And it would obligate will and Kate to show up to work, which they don’t want to do. The best thing for the royals is to maintain status quo. Or, if they get desperate, humbly beg the Sussexes to come back, but it would have to be on the Sussexes terms. They can’t stop Meghan and Harry from supporting any charity, and if they try, they look like the villains,

  30. Sunnyvale says:

    lol I sensed alot of insecurity in that pathetic piece😂the sc*m inadvertently gave us a lot more than their typical nasty articles. I LOVE knowing how scared the RF+courtiers and UK press is dredging the review. They have NOTTING. This new line of intimidating them with threats of losing their patronages is a new low for RF. Imagine thinking of that during a global pandemic,the incoming recession+repercussions of brexit..etc that will not go well with the public and the tories won’t be able to help them out of that disaster like w&k’s pandemic express tour.

    As for the charities I checked and the Queen has no control over QCT(Queen’s commonwealth trust) and they are funded trough donations. As for Meghan she only got national theatre from Queen and knowing how RF likes to hide & release info at later time i feel like she agreed to let it go during negotiations (hence why she never publicly made any work or zoom events with them) this will backfire on RF as theatres and cinemas are struggling because of covid. I hope am wrong so we’ll see.

  31. Lunasf17 says:

    The royal family is so out of touch to think that anyone cares about them at all. Once Betty dies I think they royals will shrink away even more. I don’t see taxpayers continuing to support this pointless charade much longer. Anyone who thinks they deserve to rule over others because of who their parents are need to f right off. Meg and Harry saw this and got out.

  32. Merricat says:

    I think that even if the royal patronages are stripped from them, they will continue as private citizen patrons, so very little will change, except the royals will no longer be able to claim their work. Bit short-sighted on the Firm’s part.

  33. Likeyoucare says:

    I hate thomas Markle and i didnt think anyone can top his despicable behavior.
    I was wrong, Betty is even worse than thomas. Who would have thought, money can’t buy class just look at the royals.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      Agreed. I said it when they got married, that Harry’s family was no better than Meghan’s, just wealthier. Harry needs to cut these toxic people out of his (and his son’s) life. Either permanently or until they change (which, face it, will never happen).

    • Kalana says:

      Meghan is a unicorn. Independent, very intelligent, hardworking, genuinely interested in charity work and has been since childhood, great with people, comfortable in the spotlight, beautiful, and had experience coping with narcissistic control freaks, And she and Harry were compatible and had tons of chemistry. No wonder he pursued her as strongly as he did.

  34. Tessa says:

    I doubt the rift between William and Harry is any better. William is so self righteous IMO he would never concede or apologize.

    • Becks1 says:

      I don’t think its better either but it was interesting that the article admitted they didn’t speak for months after Harry left the UK. So much for all those articles insisting there was no rift.

      • Kalana says:

        Am I right that incandescent Will didn’t even show up to the Sussexit meeting? Or was that a different lunch?

      • Becks1 says:

        @Kalana no you are right – well half-right. Before the now-infamous “Sandringham Summit” Charles, the Queen, and Harry had lunch together – I think the idea was “we are family first, and the Firm second” (lol, we all know how that actually works though.) And William refused to come to the lunch but showed up for the meeting afterwards.

      • Kalana says:

        @Thanks Beck1,

        I wonder if that family will ever tell William to get over himself.

        Back when Harry and Meghan got engaged, Lainey phrased it as Harry using the capital he’d built up with his family to get them to accept a nontraditional choice. William has used up a lot of capital with his affair and fight with his brother and the support he must have needed for Earthshot.

  35. Feebee says:

    I have a loose understanding of the patronage system. Just wondering if they lose a patronage, surely that’s just a formal royal thing and doesn’t stop them for working with the same charity as a private person, even as a board member?

    • Ania says:

      Exactly. Can RF forbid them to continue working with participate charities? Imagine that a charity got Kate as royal patron and still works with Meghan…. that comparisons will write themselves!

  36. Liz version 700 says:

    The Sussexes don’t care about brokering anything. They have moved on and will support their patronage’s whether or not they are official Royal ambassadors. Harry has no interest in leaving his family to go back and the British press could have had a real princess, but you attacked her and tried to destroy her instead. So now they are living the dream in their beautiful garden lol. Enjoy those second hand stories. You earned that afterthought status.

  37. GuestwithCat says:

    One thing that annoys me about these articles is that they keep insisting Harry has regrets over how he blindsided the RF with his announcement. If anything, his asshole brother blindsided Harry and Meghan with the leaks and subsequent threats to have their next move splashed all over the papers. They only announced what they did when they did so that they could have their intentions out there in their own words before the courtiers could twist everything around.

    Petty Betty has only herself to blame for not giving her own grandson some way to contact her directly. If she’s just a puppet to the courtiers, and I don’t buy that narrative at all anymore, that’s on her. I think the real situation with Betty and her courtiers is that they have a mutually parasitic relationship and throw each other under the bus to create the least damaging narrative to explain their blunders. It’s all about The Crown.

  38. RoyalBlue says:

    Whether Harry shows up for the review or whether he sends his lawyers to the meeting, or whether he zooms it, is not important. We know he is not interested in returning and they have already been told there is no half in half out.

    But Buckingham Palace said there will be a review, so at the very least, the Palace will release a statement in April. They put the spotlight on themselves to do this, and the speculation is all about what will the BP statement say, how will they phrase it to save royal face and can they take the high road and allow the Sussexes to go and live their lives in peace without further punishing them.

  39. Nyro says:

    The bogus one-year review and now this supposed “extension” is nothing but the royal family and the British tabloids needing the storyline to continue. These people are nothing but a reality show. The Windsors are nothing but the Kardashians without the family loyalty, multiculturalism, and business sense. They’re far beneath the Kardashians. And now they’re scared to death because the two biggest stars left the show and they know they’ve got maybe two or three seasons before their show gets canceled.

    I wish HM could put out a statement saying they aren’t coming back and won’t be participating in any “one year review”.

    • Dee Kay says:

      @Nyro I like your take on this and I agree with you. It would be really great if H&M could just *not* do the review, or at least not show up, let the RF say whatever they’re going to say about it, and then issue a terse acknowledgement.

  40. Lady D says:

    She really can’t take a bad picture, can she?

  41. Julia K says:

    If the extension story is even partly true, it may be at Charles request, to give William time to finally understand that Harry no longer needs the U.K. or RF. It is the opposite; they need him. William and his ego need to adjust to a new normal. (Kate as well)