Patrick Jephson doesn’t think the Sussexes’ ‘brand’ will succeed without the Windsors

Young Leaders Awards Ceremony

The royal commentary people thought that they would have three full months of “one year review” drama to dissect and discuss. They thought they would be filling column inches with endless diatribes about how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are failures and of course they couldn’t survive without the monarchy. How sad all of it is, but here are all the ways the Queen will punish them for their transgressions. The thing is, Harry and Meghan are thriving, even in a pandemic. Their “one year review” was cancelled because there’s nothing really to review and there are no punishments the Queen could justifiably hand down. So we’re left with this: vague bitchery from people who should know better.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s brand will ‘fail’ unless they move too far from the royal model of ‘personal sacrifice and public service’, Princess Diana’s former chief of staff has warned. The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, are currently residing in their $14million mansion in Santa Barbara with eighteen-month-old son Archie, having stepped back from duty in March last year.

According to the Express, royal expert Patrick Jephson has said the couple face an ‘evolving brand issue’ with their new foundation Archewell.

Speaking during a virtual conference promoting and protecting personal brands, which was organised by a US-based public affairs agency, he said: ‘If it departs very much from that great tradition of personal sacrifice and public service that defines the monarchy brand then I don’t believe it will succeed. One could argue that, at it’s best, membership of the Royal Family gives you access to the most extraordinary and powerful brand in the world. To voluntarily divest yourselves of all those advantages in pursuit of something else is very daring – and we don’t even know what that something else is.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Am I mistaken or did these same royal commentators snidely dismiss Meghan’s effort to brand-ize “Sussex Royal” as somehow gauche and un-royal? And now here’s Patrick Jephson, arguing that WELL ACTUALLY the royal brand is much more powerful than anything Meghan can come up with. How the turntables! Honestly, the “Windsor” brand is in the dumps, and if the Queen has a personal brand, it’s Petty. What’s crazy is that the Windsors *could* have a powerful brand, if only they had foresight and the intelligence to actually figure it out. Instead, they’re left on the sidelines, bitterly complaining about what two former working royals are doing with their lives. Also: I don’t think any royal commentator should sniff about personal sacrifice and public service when the Queen literally refused to allow Harry, a veteran, to have someone lay his wreath at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Day. I’m not f–king joking when I say the royal brand is Petty.

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex attend Trooping the Colour for the official birthday of Queen Elizabeth II

Centenary celebrations of the Royal Air Force

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, WENN.

Related stories

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

99 Responses to “Patrick Jephson doesn’t think the Sussexes’ ‘brand’ will succeed without the Windsors”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. kelleybelle says:

    Umm, hasn’t the Sussexes’ brand been succeeding for months without the Windsors? Have we missed something?

    • Charlie says:

      Sorry, Patrick who? Evolving brand issues? lol

      • Myra says:

        My first thought was exactly “Who, now?”

        I don’t think anyone should take branding advice from an Express “royal expert”. It’s the kind of advice that will have you stuck in 1953.

      • Elizabeth Regina says:

        Exactly! Patrick who? indeed. Just another pathetic mouth piece being lobbed at the Sussexes. The Windsors are just a joke now. Absolutely useless the lot of them. Even the elderly who would normally be fans of the RF are fed up to the back teeth of them. People, particularly the press, are just waiting for the Queen to die before they descend and rip them apart.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        Brand… issues?

        “H&M will ‘fail’ if they move too far from the royal model of ‘personal sacrifice and public service’”. Huh. Well Patrick, that is a thing, and you said that.

        I’ll say this: Peter Phillips, and Chinese Milk. And his sister doing who knows how many promos and getting free stuff for it.

        Where does “Petty Betty & the fam being paid by the public taxpayers to pimp Range Rovers” fit into all of this, I wonder?

        The Windsors are petty, deeply dysfunctional, colonialist, racist, and cruel. THAT is their brand. It’s a pretty crappy brand, Patrick.

        H&M could have fixed that in the space of a generation but y’all helped royally eff that up.
        Pat yourself on the back, Jephson… and keep H&M’s names out of your mouth.

    • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

      “…..that great tradition of personal sacrifice and public service that defines the monarchy brand…” Uhm… WHAT is the House of Petty “sacrificing” in their multiple castles, private jet getaways, Black Amex purchases, and BARELY working more than a few hours a week? BULLCRAP.

      • fluffy_bunny says:

        I doubt they have a black Amex. Unless there’s a British version. They wouldn’t use an American based credit card.

      • 809Matriarch says:

        Personal sacrifice? I don’t see any personal sacrifice. Charles refused to go the same route Princess Margaret the Miserable did when she decided not to marry Townsend. Instead Charles told the world that Camilla was non-negotiable. He gave that woman – who was still someone else’s wife, higher priority than he gave the mother of his two sons. Andrew has never been an example of personal sacrifice. Anne didn’t let her marriage vows keep her devoted to duty and sacrifice as she carried on with the help while still married. Harry & Meghan are the epitome of public service and sacrifice. They chose to leave their working royal roles and tax payer funding to take a leap of faith and become financially free of the UK tax payer. The Express needs to stop gaslighting. No one outside the vermin of the royal rota litter box papers will be fooled.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        They sacrificed Diana and Harry with a quickness…

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      History will not remember Charles or William, unless one of them is the final monarch then they will be remembered by default as a footnote. They will probably remember Elizabeth II simply because of her long reign, even though she didn’t “accomplish” anything in life. But Harry and Meghan’s memories will live on after their death, through their foundation which will be very successful. That’s what upsets the haters.

      • StartupSpouse says:

        Actually think that QE2 showed some leadership during WW2, so that probably counts as an accomplishment, but it will be overshadowed by all of her BS after that.

  2. Snuffles says:


    One thing I am sure of is that Harry and Meghan are better at being royal than all of the other royals combined time a million. They’re adaptable and able to read the room with the vastly changing times.

    The rest are stuck and will continue to fade into obscurity as ancient relics.

    • Mac says:

      The departure of H+M throws a spotlight on how antiquated the BRF is. I hope Charles realizes the firm needs a major overhaul when he becomes king.

      • Snuffles says:

        Maybe that’s why he parted ways with his old PR guy. While Charles definitely respects tradition, he’s always been open minded to new ideas and concepts. A good marketing expert would be able to merge the two.

        And, yes, the entire operation needs a purge and a top to bottom vetting.

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        For all of that, Charles is just as petty, vain, and jealous as the rest of them. Once he is King, he won’t be any less of any of any of these traits, maybe even more so, to “protect” his “legacy” of a short reign.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Agree with OG
        All the heirs seem to be petty and jealous. They are given power at birth and it grows steadily no matter what. It never has to be earned. So while some are waiting for their turn at the top they play petty games.
        Charles has never been above this.

        Charles will be like his mother.

  3. Case says:

    They fail to realize that a lot of people who love H&M aren’t necessarily royal watchers. Or if they are/were, they probably don’t care much for the rest of the family at this point after how they treated H&M. I can’t help but compare Harry and Meghan to the Obamas. Not only are they a classy, cute couple, but they’re also very personable, highly invested in their projects and causes, big-picture thinkers who want to shed light on the things that matter to them through mixed media — podcasts, documentaries, etc. — and quite beloved by their fans. I do not have a single doubt in my mind that H&M will continue to be much more popular than the rest of the RF, in America at least. They’re both so likable.

    • Ann says:

      I’ve never been a royal watcher. When Prince George was born, my father was staying with me while recuperating from surgery and he insisted on having the news on all the time. They covered the George story ad nauseam, every little dumb detail, for two days, and it drove me bonkers. Never cared about Kate and William.

      But when Harry and Meghan got engaged, I got interested. I’ve always had a soft spot for Harry, even if I didn’t keep up with him. I was aware of his military service and the Invictus Games. I didn’t know who Meghan was, never watched Suits, and didn’t know they had been dating. But I knew I liked this couple. I watched the wedding coverage, and yes even watched the “Royal Romance” movie, lol.

      It’s not about being Windsors. Harry WILL always be “Prince Harry” to me, or just Harry, but they are their own entity.

    • equality says:

      I was never a royal watcher previously, not even with Diana. I heard things, of course, but didn’t pay much attention. I wasn’t a Meghan fan either and had never heard of Suits. I started seeing all the nasty headlines and started researching things about them and was horrified at how racist, xenophobic and misogynistic the BM still is in this day and age. What was more horrifying were the people commenting and believing anything they said.

  4. Charfromdarock says:

    The RRers are as delusional as the Magas.

    • MyOpinion says:

      @ Charfromdarock, yes. Yes they are very much!! Harry and Meghan don’t NEED the family name, The Firm or any other bit from the petty people!! They have shown already that they will blossom to incredible heights without any of them and the RR’s, PWT and Petty Betty are pissed!!

  5. DS9 says:

    I see some Brits don’t understand American celebrity or international charity work….

  6. Becks1 says:

    Why is the British press still consumed with the idea of whether or not Meghan and Harry will succeed outside the royal family? They ARE succeeding, and in the midst of a pandemic no less. they got major names for their first podcast. They are aligned with significant charities and organizations. Oprah is firmly team Sussex. They signed huge deals with Netflix and Spotify. What else do they need to do to succeed?

    And that’s not even getting into the laughable parts of this – the british royal family is the most powerful brand in the world? Really? I would argue that the Queen is very symbolic across the globe, but thats mainly just due to longevity and how her ascension to the throne has almost been romanticized – the young woman who had to become queen before her time because her uncle walked away from his duty – its not really about HER as a person. But Charles and William dont share in that. It’s just sort of mind-boggling to me how narcissistic the royal family is and how they think the whole world is just dying to meet them. And I say that as an American, we know something about narcissism as a country, lol.

    • Brit says:

      Harry and Meghan weren’t supposed to succeed and were to come back home and grovel for forgiveness from the media and family. They want them miserable and broke but the problem is that the same people complaining have only elevated their brand because they won’t stop talking about them. These people are traumatized because nothing they’ve done has worked and hasn’t gotten them the results they want. They know the money train is over and they’re stuck with boring and bland royals again. The charisma and interest left with the Sussexes and no amount of delusion from the media will change that. All these people got working again because of Harry and especially Meghan and they want that back and they have no idea how to reverse the damage they’ve caused.

    • Lemons says:

      They’re concerned because the secrets out: The Royal Family and largely all royal families serve no real purpose. They are glorified soft diplomats (if that), and mostly tabloid celebrities with stolen jewels and wealth.

      If that’s it, this means that Harry & Meghan can easily set up “court” elsewhere and become bigger, more successful, and more sought-after than the BRF themselves. While we may see state dinners with the Queen or the less-desired Charles/William, the real decision-makers will be dining with the Sussexes. We’ll be more interested in hearing podcasts from them and seeing them at award shows and galas.

      Sure, we’ll miss out on country tours and bread & butter engagements, but this isn’t really a concern for us. It’s a concern for the RRs who are trying desperately to build interest to the people they have attached their careers and livelihoods to. Bad bet.

      • Brit says:

        Trying to build interest around those that no one cares about and be cut off from the people who have interest and charisma in spades must be frustrating. If they couldn’t make the Cambridge’s interesting for the last 10 years, why try now? It won’t work and deep down they know. Meghan, Harry and Archie were supposed to be their meal tickets until the Cambridge children got older and even then I doubt interest would hold them because Archie is rarely seem and his background makes him more interesting.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yup, exactly. We know that was the problem with the half-in, half-out proposal – it wasnt about not being able to fully vet the Sussexes commercial ventures or whatever. It was about the Sussexes setting a bad precedent (well a good precedent for the british taxpayer, a bad one for the royals) – if they could work and reject SG money, then why cant the other royals?

        And we are seeing that again now – if the Sussexes can be successful and make an impact without being taxpayer-funded royals, then what really is the point of the royal family? the monarch has a role, but the others dont. So if public service is the goal, why are they going around in diamond tiaras and designer clothes when Meghan can show up in shorts and sneakers and make an impact? It’s not a good look for the royals and they know it.

      • Nyro says:

        Brit, you are right. Archie and any future siblings are going to overshadow the Cambridge kids. It’s happening already. Archive’s three little words and giggle made more news than all the Cambridge kids’ covid quarantine appearances combined have. The Sussex kids will be typically confident American kids, multiracial, have interests outside of the usual royal pastimes of horses and polo and hunting, etc. Who’s going to care about George shooting a dear at Balmoral like all the other Windsor men before him when Archie’s been seen surfing? Nobody.

      • SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

        Does anybody care that much about country tours? The lack of interest in royal tours in NZ has been remarkable over the past few years. H and M drew the crowds, but when Charles and Camilla toured a couple of years ago, I don’t think anybody noticed. Never saw anything in local media and had no idea they were even in the country until I happened to see something in British media. On a previous Charles tour, they put up the crowd barriers, but the only attendees were a few protesters objecting to the breast cancer screening truck having been moved from the site. If W and K have toured, somehow I missed the whole thing.

        UK should also sit down and have a think to themselves as to why they’re the only ones celebrating Commonwealth Day. The rest of the Commonwealth does not.

  7. Mignionette says:

    I am literally falling off my chair laughing.

    I think I saw something to this effect over the weekend where H&M were being advised that to succeed they must be more like W&C.

    It really made me question the BM once and for all. BM are no longer journalists they are paid PR and crisis creators or cuntsultants depending on who you are. And hence the build them up then smear them modus of operandii.

    • Noodle says:

      I would really like for this writer (and all the others who sycophantically espouse the same ideas) to define success. I think my definition and his definition are vastly different.

  8. Wiglet Watcher says:

    These royal commentators are the only ones reminding people of the Royal links these days. It’s not coming from h and m…

    They must miss the Sussex so terribly. The one that got away…

    • Brit says:

      Basically. They’re realizing they’ve lost because they all backed the wrong horse. Backing those back in England is not cutting it. They had a goldmine and because of racism, jealously, ego, hubris etc, they’ve lost in the end. They don’t know what to do.

  9. BayTampaBay says:

    “Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s brand will ‘fail’ unless they move too far from the royal model of ‘personal sacrifice and public service’, Princess Diana’s former chief of staff has warned.”

    This sentence makes absolutely no sense as it is so poorly written. Cannot the Daily Fail afford to hire people who know how to construct a sentence?

    • Merricat says:


    • Amy Too says:

      And it literally says the opposite of what the man was trying to convey. He said they needed to stick close to the royal charity brand. The Fail is claiming they won’t succeed unless they distance themselves from the royal charity brand.

    • Reece says:

      Seriously! I read like three times because it didn’t make sense.

  10. Vanessa says:

    The Sussex’s created a global charity’s signs two high profile deals with Netflix and Spotify and every things they do is headlines news for days . Are The Royals and their Royal Lackeys so insecure that they have to constantly convince themselves that the Sussex’s popularity will fade away it’s been the other way around now the royals need the Sussex’s the royal brand depends on the Sussex’s. How many times have the British tabloids tried to attach Meghan success with Kate some how trying to convince the British public that Kate is the reason for Meghan successes. The Royal reporters and Tabloids were so excited about the one year reviews their knife were out ready to write countless articles about what happen and now their left with nothing . How Long until those same Royal reporters turn on the William and Kate for lack of leaks about the Sussex’s they were promise huge news those Reporters were left with nothing .

  11. Amelie says:

    In 10 years, the courtiers will still be loudly insisting that Harry and Meghan are irrelevant and that whatever they are doing is worthless because their Sussex brand is nothing without the monarchy. And in 10 years, people will still be interested in whatever they are doing. Also by that point George will be 17 so the media will be less interested in Kate and William anyways lol.

  12. Lizzie says:

    Well, it all depends on you define failure. A beautiful home in Monticito CA, contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, a foundation set up to continue your life long charity work, millions of regular folks who see the awful treatment from your family and continually wish you well, loving couple with adorable toddler. Is this Patrick Jephson’s definition of failure? Another gold standard advisor at work.

  13. Oatmeal says:

    The delusion is strong with these folks and they literally learned nothing from Diana

    People initially were fascinated with her vis her royal status , but they eventually oved her FOR HER because of who she was and the work she did and had she lived she would have remained a mega star without The Firm

    These people are ridiculous and are bitter that M&H are succeeding without them

    • Becks1 says:

      And part of Diana’s “appeal” even now is the sympathy people feel for her and how she was treated by the royal family. That’s what made the Crown so problematic – it brought back that sympathy to a whole new generation. So seeing similar treatment of Meghan isnt going to win the royals any fans, and its going to turn off a lot of people.

  14. ABritGuest says:

    Well least they admit that royals are treated as a brand. I saw that BP is selling hot water bottles& socks at ridiculous prices to plug shortfall in tourism income. Now I see main fuss over SussexRoyal trademarks applications & faux concern about them selling merch was because they didn’t want a rival for royal merch 🤣

    Harry has Sentabale & Invictus so think he’s already got impactful initiatives. Given that one of their first projects with their charitable org will be building community relief centres I think they will be just fine in terms of service to others.

    • Ann says:

      I have a coffee mug from Harry and Meghan’s wedding that my friend brought me. She was in England when they got married. I drink from it all the time, it’s the only piece of “royal memorabilia” I own or ever will. I’m sure they profited from that (the Windsors I mean), but ok. I’ll make an exception this time.

    • booboocita says:

      Y’know, I’d probably buy an Invictus water bottle or t-shirt if one were available, just because I’d be pretty sure that veterans’ groups would get some of the profit from it. I’m not buying a pair of socks to keep Petty Betty in stockings and gin, that’s for sure.

    • Lady D says:

      Those royal “bed socks” are $120.00 Canadian. I think Liz has been over sampling the gin she’s now hawking.

  15. Lizzie says:

    Wouldn’t it be refreshing if just once one of these people, royals or advisors, said ‘they seem to be doing well and we are happy for them’? I guess it’s like expecting the trumps to invite the Bidens to the WH or welcome them on inauguration day.

    • Nyro says:

      This is what has struck me. There has not been one kind word from these people for Harry and Meghan. No congratulations, no “we wish them the best”, no nothing. They couldn’t even muster up sympathies when Meghan wrote about the miscarriage. They truly are some bitter hateful people.

  16. Snuffles says:

    I’m very curious to see what changes (if any) will be made once the Queen and Philip die. I think a lot of the intractable mindset comes from her. She’s an old biddy set in her ways, incapable of reading the room or adapting to changing times unless she is absolutely forced to. Usually begrudgingly and immediately reverting back to her old ways once she thinks the coast is clear.

    I had a boss like that. Let’s just say I was working for an institution that heavily involved new technologies and my boss was retirement age, not familiar or comfortable enough with the new technology coming down the pipeline. Everyone else around him wanted to move in that direction but he kept digging his heels in refusing and making everyone else’s job difficult. He was eventually “strongly encouraged” to “retire” before he got fired.

    • Nyro says:

      They can make all the changes they want to. The fact is, they don’t have the talent to pull off what it would take to make them modern and relevant for a new generation. That sad and pathetic “Magnificent Seven” post-Covid Express photo told the tale. They’re old, boring, pale, and stale. Not an ounce of charisma or magic to be found. Even if they actually knew intellectually what it would take to win, they simply don’t have the line-up for a winning team.

      • tcbc says:

        I don’t think they need to be charismatic to be successful. They just need to hire a forward thinking manager or executive and then do whatever that person tells them to do.

        Unfortunately, they are not willing to pay the salary someone of that talent and experience would demand and they’re too arrogant to do what that person would tell them anyway.

      • L84Tea says:

        They lack charisma, brains, and empathy. A little of those would go a long way for the RF, but they are utterly incapable. Souless robots.

  17. TheOriginalMia says:

    What personal sacrifices have the Windsors made in the last fifty years? That family hasn’t sacrificed since WW2. Giving their time to visit their patronages is not considered sacrificial. Sounds like working for your enormous and expensive keep.

    Harry & Meghan have proven they don’t need the Windsors for their brand to be successful. They just need each other and the very real view that it’s “them vs the Firm/British tabloids”. That’s what keeps them in the spotlight. That’s why people want to see them succeed. Nice people being bullied by big media.

    • Amy Bee says:

      They give up their personal life for the sake of the country. That’s all I can come with because living in castles, having maids, bodyguards and other people at your beck and call doesn’t really seem like they’re sacrificing anything.

    • Oh-Dear says:

      this was my wonder too – what in the world has a member of the British Monarchy had to sacrifice beyond the ability to choose their career path?

  18. STRIPE says:


    Well they’re succeeding already so…..?

    I don’t think people care that they’re not in with the Windsors anymore in America, so I guess I will direct this question towards British people here – do Brits care less about them (or will they care less and less and time goes by) because they have removed themselves?

  19. Nons says:

    Love the link to the Office clip

  20. Alexandria says:

    Not succeeding but you’re still writing about them, you useless fools. Obsessed!

    • Nyro says:

      It’s like they think if they keep saying up is down and black is white, then we’ll all eventually believe it. It’s pathetic and hilarious all at once. Harry and Meghan are winning and they’re winning big.

  21. Cecilia says:

    Its already succeeding

  22. S808 says:

    They got the windsors fuming with deals they could only dream of and I’m supposed to believe their brand is nothing without them LOL. I know Diana was getting bum advice from this guy.

    • Nyro says:

      Imagine if she could have actually made it to the USA and got with some actual creative out the box thinkers. I’m trying to remember what the big thing business-wise was in the late 90s. Something more elevated than celebrity fragrances and jewelry lines. I remember lots and lots of new magazines popping up in the late 90s, very early 00s. I feel like Diana could have easily started her own magazine. And she could have then been on the cutting edge for a lifestyle website by the early 00s. Like Harry and Meghan, she would have been unstoppable. There’s so much she could have done had she lived and been able to remove herself from England. I know the BRF breathed a sigh of relief on Aug 31, 1997. And I mean that.

      • lanne says:

        I agree. And while I don’t believe the RF will send assassins, truth be told, I think they would feel relieved if something happened to Harry and Meghan

  23. Merricat says:

    What the RR don’t seem to get is that in the U.S., we like people who work hard. We admire that. H & M are interesting because they have interests, and because they actually accomplish things, unlike the Cambridge brand of rattling on about what they want to be interested in, and accomplishing nothing.

    • molly says:

      We also like people who seem like real people, instead of some antiquated protocol robots. The Queen mentions Philip fondly in a speech once and people lose their minds at the intimacy. W&K only hold hands at Christmas and Kate just started public speaking in the last three years.
      So yeah, a couple who shows affection, speaks comfortably, and closes their own car door (THE HORROR!) is likeable, relatable, and appealing to American audiences.

      • L84Tea says:

        Don’t forget about that one time Kate put her hand on William’s knee during Eugenie’s wedding. Ooh la la! Somebody put out the fire!

  24. Amy Bee says:

    It seems that Harry and Meghan are succeeding without the royal brand so I’m not sure what Jephson is getting at. Harry and Meghan were supposed to making their way back to Frogmore Cottage at this stage, at least that is what the commentators and the Royal Family believed.

  25. Nyro says:

    These people need to make up their minds. Are the Sussexes “insufferable virtue signaling wokesters”, Harry a “traitor” to his family? Or are they riding on and emulating the British Royal Familybrand? Which is it cuz it can’t be both? Because saying “Black Lives Matter” is about as far from the BRF brand as you can get. Championing black women’s mental health and interviewing Gloria Steinem? The royals would never. Forming genuine working relationships with local charities and organizations that actually benefits communities? Never! Working to hold Big Tech accountable for the cesspool that social media has become? Royals never challenge authority like that. They’re brand has nothing to do with the royal family. They don’t even move like the BRF. They’re moving like the Obamas, an a dual powerful gold star brand.

    These people are nuts. The BRF brand is weak and it’s trash. They’re known as pedophile protectors, racists who punished the own family member for marrying a woman of color, and jealous miserable abusers who made Diana’s short life he’ll. That’s their brand. I mean, even the Kardashian brand is not only more impactful, but much less messy and even classier. They’re tacky but they sure as he’ll aren’t sheltering a pedo! HM are celebrated and supported for not only escaping that family but for being the exact opposite of them.

    • Amy Bee says:

      If the Royal brand was so strong, the British press and commentators would not be reporting/talking about Harry and Meghan every minute.

      • Brit says:

        Exactly. Why are people these always close to practically begging the Sussexes to return? Why do they want them back in England so badly? Why does shows like Lorraine and GMB constantly interview people they’ve interacted with to get information? Why do they stalk Sussex squad accounts? Why is it break news everytime they release something? 🤔

  26. OriginalLala says:

    I hate the BRF and the whole concept of royalty, but I like H&M and I personally think their brand will only strengthen as they cut more and more ties to the monarchy.
    Why? Because the royal “brand” is colonialism, racism, white supremacy and classism and frankly who the eff supports that?

  27. Ceej says:

    Lol. Truly made me giggle. Because we’ll never know if that’s true because the (next-gen train travelling) WINDSOR brand will not survive without the sussex brand so not a month shall pass without them being linked in the press by either wills or royal reporters. But sure, let’s talk about how they won’t survive without you because all they have is millions of dollars and public goodwill.

  28. Nic919 says:

    How can anyone say with a straight face that royals are about public service and personal sacrifice when they live in multiple homes, which includes literal castles, wear stolen jewels and have multiple holidays with servants at their beck and call? They don’t even pay proper income tax or estates tax. They don’t sacrifice their privacy anymore than a regular celebrity and in fact are even more protected by the media so Billy can call a media blackout in an entire country over an affair.

    This year has really shown how little they do and how little they are needed. When you need to start a super spreader train tour for attention, you aren’t that important to the national psyche.

    • Kalana says:

      The same way the Queen can call her Christmas at Sandringham austere.

      They expect other people to pay for them to live lives of obscene wealth and privilege and call that sacrifice. They must be completely maddening to be around.

  29. Belle says:

    They can and have been succeeding on their own but the media outlets and blogs can’t stop the comparison EVEN when it’s not warranted so I kind of get what is being said here. Even if Kate does something on her own, here comes MEGHAN can do it better or if Meghan does something, the comparison to KATE must be mentioned and same for the guys. Even if its actually tiring to read the same thing over and over again, it drives interest in both homes not just one side.

    Did Angelina and Jennifer story line ever die? One did build a whole brand out it if I am not mistaken and the Windsors may be the one getting the most benefit from this rivalry or it could be the Sussex. It’s not so far fetch to believe it is happening but not because Meghan and Harry are explotiing because the media is. Doubtful these two houses will be able to escape each other even if that’s what they want initially.

  30. L84Tea says:

    All I hear is BLAH BLAH BLAH…We are so jealous we can’t see straight…how ever did we screw the pooch so badly…we are so outdated and unimportant even though we thought we were so so special…how dare they do better than the royals…BLAH BLAH BLAH. Stay mad, Brits. Stay mad.

  31. Over it says:

    How can a monarchy built on slavery, colonialism and the biggest world wide crimes ever continue to be so delusional as to what they really Stan for in this day and age . People no longer see the Disney version of them , they see the real them after all the dirty , racist, petty ugliest behavior that Meghan and Harry their own flesh and blood was put through. They will probably go on because the British monarchist are way to stupid to see how terrible these leeches on society and especially the British taxpayers are . People would come to visit the uk to tour these palaces without the windsors because of history, so why not get rid of them

  32. Annie says:

    they have contracts and work not because they are meghan and harry but because they are ROYAL meghan and harry. There’s unfortunately no disassociating from that and they will continue to get work because of being royals.
    The royal family can take away their titles and honestly harry and meghan should drop the duke and duchess title because they go on to speak about oppression and equality yet use those antiquated titles, but it will make NO DIFFERENCE. They are who they are now and any change made will only be symbolic.

    No meanness or pettiness about it, just stating a fact.

    • What’s eating you says:

      I disagree, they should keep there titles. They will always move the goal post. Before it was paying for frogmore then it’s the titles, next it will be Harry removing himself from the line of succession. Why should they have to remove there titles when non working royals like the York’s get to keep there’s? Andrew is deviant and yet there are no calls for him to pay for his own security, pay back money for the royal lodge, or to stop using his HRH.

    • JT says:

      So what about eugenie and bea’s success. Or Peter? Or Edward. There are so many royal hangers on that haven’t accomplished as much as H&M with less restrictions. Eugenie is being shuffled between royal homes because she can’t or won’t get her own property. Andrew was making money of his charities and other illegal activities. H&M may benefit from being royal, but being royal does not equal success on their level, otherwise all of them would. William couldn’t even get Netflix to air his doc; not even the BBC would air it. What other royal has a $100 million dollar contract on deck?

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah if their work was all about them being ROYAL harry and Meghan – then we would see similar deals with the other royals. But we dont.

        I will say that being royal obviously made Harry famous, but William is royal too and Harry has always been the favorite. Even with the glaring mistakes of his youth( Nazi costumes are never a good idea Harry), he has still been preferred over William. Factor in his military work, and his concrete charitable endeavors – yes, being royal has made him famous, but he has used his fame for good, and people recognize that.

        I will ALSO say that walking away from the royal family definitely added some allure to Harry and Meghan – “they had everything, but walked away for love” – it adds a large dose or romanticism to their story that William and Kate just dont have. (sorry, “she waited for almost a decade until he proposed” is just not the same thing.) I mentioned in my post above that the Queen has been romanticized and I think that plays a part in her global popularity. So in that aspect, being royal did help Harry and Meghan.

        Would Oprah be their friend if Harry wasnt the grandson of the monarch? That’s kind of a pointless exercise because he IS the grandson of the monarch and the son of the next monarch. But the bigger question, to me, is – if this is just about them being royal – why dont we see these kinds of connections with other royals? Eugenie and Beatrice arent hanging out with Oprah, they’re not getting people like Stacy Abrams on their podcast, they’re not signing multimillion dollar production deals. Netflix and Spotify are, above all, businesses. They arent giving Harry and Meghan millions of dollars because they’re royal.

        Again, it can be a circular argument because would Netflix even care about Harry Windsor if he wasnt HRH Prince Harry of the United Kingdom – but he is, so now its more about what he does with that.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Everyone who says this about the Sussexes and their benefiting from their titles act like this is a one way street. It’s not. I paid little to no attention to the royal family, not even Harry, before Meghan came along. I think the last time I noticed them was Will and Kates wedding ( thought K was basic back then) and when George’s birth announced. Other than that, no interest, and this applies to a lot of people out there. It has also brought a different perspective and set of eyes to Royal watching, not always to their liking or benefit, because we’ve seen how some of the sausage is made, how the UK press manipulates and spins, and it’s not pretty. All the international press, the increased media attention, the amount of newly minted royal experts, royal podcasts, etc. was because of the marriage of Ms. Rachel Meghan Markle to Prince Harry. The biggest boost of the profile of the British Royal Family internationally, in the past 5 years, is a direct result of Netflix’s the Crown and the dyanamics Meghan brought to the royal family. Harry was already charismatic and popular in royal circles, eligible bachelor, etc, but the chemistry of her with him, the way they work, is just unmatched. The jealousy and backstabbing and messy internal dynamics brought further attention because the Royals could not handle it. Even the scrutiny and the accountability demanded of Andrew now, in the wake of Epstein, is also a result of increased international attention to the royals. We see how the Rota try to sweep it away, but international press and social media keeps it out there. The thing is the dimming of interest in the rest of the royals, with slightly more criticism, is just going back to the way things were before Meghan came on the scene, and they don’t like it and it frustrates them. All this is to say that the royals benefit as much from the Sussexes, as the Sussexes benefitting from the royals. It’s just disingenuous and frankly, deliberately ignorant, to pretend that they can be easily disentangled because we don’t like the fact that Meghan, HRH the Duchess of Sussex, is one of the most famous women in the world because of who she married. This would have applied to any woman who married Harry, but what she brought of herself and how they as a couple approached that role, is what elevated them to where they are now.

      • L84Tea says:

        My God, this is so well said. You are right, Harry could have married any woman and she would have been famous. But Meghan specifically–what she is about and what she brought to that family–is not something just any old Agatha VanCutsemStubenzeeChumleyPercy could have brought. Meghan herself was special, and the combination of her WITH Harry is something spectacular. They have an IT factor the rest of the RF cannot currently match.

      • belle says:

        Ok this comment changed my entire perspective. I would have never in a million years clicked on ANYTHING related to the royal family before Meghan. The narrative is that she would be nothing without them, and yes the royal association obviously raised her profile but god damnit, she made them relevant. They used that new found interest in them to be well horrible and now that’s the light they are seen in. They have moved on and the old school ways have not. She did a tremendous job get yours, move forward and change the world.

      • Nic919 says:

        Being a spouse of a senior royal amplifies the characteristics that the woman has prior to marriage. Diana might have been shy but she was also a caring person and she managed to expand her platform with the notoriety she received as princess of Wales. Meghan was already charismatic and an activist prior to marrying Harry and the increased platform only help her expand the reach of what she was working on before. She also has excellent speech skills and networking ability which helped her in her acting career.

        As for Kate well she likes to shop and go on vacation and she has continued that in her new role. She was a vain and superficial woman by age 29 and will never change. She is a person who would not matter in the least but for the person of high stature she married but that is what she was waiting a decade for after all.

        What really bothers most royalists and general white supremacy supporters is that no one would ever give a shit about Eugenie, Beatrice, Kate, edward, Fergie, etc, if not for being born or marrying a royal. That does not apply to meghan because she was known and had a track record of activism prior to meeting Harry. She wasn’t an empty mannequin like Kate trying to pretend to care about charity. She had done many things and while she may not have had a global reach to the same degree, she still had something to offer. And it kills so many that basically the only other person who had that kind of global reach in that family before her was Diana, with Harry building in her legacy.

  33. fluffy_bunny says:

    I would love for them to drop the use of Sussex. They are well known enough to go by just their first names. They don’t need any titles. Just H&M.

  34. CC2 says:

    I kind of agree (don’t attack me). The Sussexes appeal IS their royalty/royal adjacent identity on top of genuine love for them. However, where the palace and royalists go wrong is that they think it’s because of their titles. Wrong. It’s because they’re seen as the *better royals*. Same goes for Diana. People loved seeing a Princess, but more importantly, they loved seeing a Princess who was better than the other Royals. The royalists keep forgetting this when they try to make the royals follow her charity model. It doesn’t work that way. People love the rebels and their charisma.

    Like Diana, the Sussexes are appealing because they’re seen as the opposite of a stuffy family. That won’t go away anytime soon unless they drastically change their image, and as producers and charity co founders, it seems hard to do so. Maybe that’s why the media enjoys pushing silly reality show rumours.

    Their global appeal, especially for people who aren’t on social media that much, is definitely tied to the RF and the pomp of it all. There are people who dumped Meghan ever since she stepped down because they just wanted a black princess, rather then them being genuine fans. Fine I’ll give the media that. But that’s not the Sussexes target anyway. They won’t be doing ‘tours’ or meaningless ribbon cutting and their work is going to be more intentional.

    Their deals show that they still have more relevance than anyone else.

  35. Nimbolicious says:

    Am I the only person who really hates the word “brand” as applied to human beings and their endeavors? It just sounds so soulless and sad, as if we’re all just a bunch of consumer products vying for shelf space and market share.

  36. L4frimaire says:

    No one had ever heard of this guy before. The irony of him saying that when he is clearly using the Sussex name to get attention to his platform, whatever that is, is laughable.

    • Jephson worked for Princess Diana for years.

      From 1988 to 1996, Patrick Jephson worked first as Princess Diana’s equerry and then her private secretary, witnessing first hand the breakdown of her marriage to Prince Charles and the couple’s divorce. In the aftermath of the Princess’s revelatory interview with Martin Bashir on Panorama in November 1995 many of her staff quit their roles, including press secretary, Geoffrey Crawford. Mr Jephson was among the last to go, leaving his role abruptly in January 1996, shortly after the infamous interview aired.

  37. JanetDR says:

    Totally off topic, but I love the pale peachy pink look on Meghan. I also think that might be the best hat!

    • Gobo says:

      First thought: that hat = totally on point hat game. And the sorbet peach-pink colour is perfect on her.

  38. HK9 says:

    I read this and just laughed.

  39. Laugh or Cry says:

    Serious question, isn’t he one of the “journalists” Diana used to contact, like he used to sing her praises?
    They may want something larger for their foundation, I’m thinking like The Pew Charitable Trust, on that level. Capitalize on the “royals “ what like shaking down rapists/traffickers???? Ummm I don’t know these people, but I do believe that is a hard pass.😑

  40. Laugh or Cry says:

    Serious question, isn’t he one of the “journalists” Diana used to contact, like he used to sing her praises?
    They may want something larger for their foundation, I’m thinking like The Pew Charitable Trust, on that level. Capitalize on the “royals “ what like shaking down rapists/traffickers???? Ummm I don’t know these people, but I do believe that is a hard pass.😑

  41. EllenOlenska says:

    Really? After all Patrick Jephsons been milking his connection to Diana for over two decades now…and she’s been dead longer than that! He’s living proof they can succeed without a current connection. ( never mind that they actually seem to be eager to work hard an do all the things royals are usually given credit for when done in the most minor ways.)

  42. Freddy says:

    That the cost of their mansion is mentioned each time a British tabloid writes about them drives me nuts—are they supposed to be living in a $49K flip?