The Royals
Comments
-
Yes, she's underestimated still amazingly. Didn't quite go how LA hoped, I'd suggest.0
-
-
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
I agree they are just keeping themselves relevant and will try and coin in as much as ossible as soon as possible. Covid wiped out their biggest earning yearDeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?0 -
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?0 -
has anyone mentioned that morgan is a lizard yet?Pross said:
Ironically Piers Morgan did very similar with his Life Stories thing. He would ask the "tough questions" but it was obviously always planned for the guest to get it off their chests in a way where they controlled the narrative (and they seemed to always get an easy ride from Morgan after doing the show).pblakeney said:
"Come to me, cry on my shoulder and share your woes."surrey_commuter said:
Haven't seen the interview, the Crown and don't read tabloidskingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
1- Oprah very much acted as a safe harbour. Even where there were discrepancies in the accounts H & M gave she didn’t pick up on them.
2- It struck me that H should really have known the implications of choosing to step down from public life, but either he was ignorant of these, or chose not to ask, or didn’t absorb the information when he was told. The cost of security is a case in point - he seemed ignorant of the reality that the cost of security is taxpayer funded, but appeared to expect that funding to continue irrespective of whether he was a serving royal or not.
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
Isn't the whole point of Oprah to be a safe harbour as that is how she lands the big names? LA and Tiger spring to mind
Basically..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
Who says she stopped? 😈Pross said:
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.3 -
It is for a practical purpose, she's very short.kingstongraham said:I didn't realise they all did that curtseying and bowing sh1te behind closed doors too - I assumed that was just for show.
Imagine having to bow to your grandmother when you pop round for a cuppa.
0 -
I don't think she's a former actress if the last few days are anything to go onDeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?
1 -
Talent? Is she any good or would it be on name only?Pross said:
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?0 -
She was making decent money before meeting Harry. $50k an episode of Suits apparently, plus still getting residuals.ballysmate said:
Talent? Is she any good or would it be on name only?Pross said:
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?0 -
Does that make her any good? Look at the wedge the likes of Corden made for Cats for instance.kingstongraham said:
She was making decent money before meeting Harry. $50k an episode of Suits apparently, plus still getting residuals.ballysmate said:
Talent? Is she any good or would it be on name only?Pross said:
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?0 -
Does she need to be good? I've not heard anyone say they were enthralled by Corden's performance in Cats.ballysmate said:
Does that make her any good? Look at the wedge the likes of Corden made for Cats for instance.kingstongraham said:
She was making decent money before meeting Harry. $50k an episode of Suits apparently, plus still getting residuals.ballysmate said:
Talent? Is she any good or would it be on name only?Pross said:
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?0 -
This Meghan seems to be a decent judge of character anyway.0
-
That's what I mean. He got good money without being good.kingstongraham said:
Does she need to be good? I've not heard anyone say they were enthralled by Corden's performance in Cats.ballysmate said:
Does that make her any good? Look at the wedge the likes of Corden made for Cats for instance.kingstongraham said:
She was making decent money before meeting Harry. $50k an episode of Suits apparently, plus still getting residuals.ballysmate said:
Talent? Is she any good or would it be on name only?Pross said:
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?
Saw estimate of I think 4m a year for security so would need more than her previous 50k an episode.
Unless of course Harry gets a job.0 -
$4m a year? Surely they could get Corden to do it for less than that.ballysmate said:
That's what I mean. He got good money without being good.kingstongraham said:
Does she need to be good? I've not heard anyone say they were enthralled by Corden's performance in Cats.ballysmate said:
Does that make her any good? Look at the wedge the likes of Corden made for Cats for instance.kingstongraham said:
She was making decent money before meeting Harry. $50k an episode of Suits apparently, plus still getting residuals.ballysmate said:
Talent? Is she any good or would it be on name only?Pross said:
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?
Saw estimate of I think 4m a year for security so would need more than her previous 50k an episode.
Unless of course Harry gets a job.
Anyway, Harry's handy with a rifle isn't he? He could do some of it himself.0 -
ballysmate said:
That's what I mean. He got good money without being good.kingstongraham said:
Does she need to be good? I've not heard anyone say they were enthralled by Corden's performance in Cats.ballysmate said:
Does that make her any good? Look at the wedge the likes of Corden made for Cats for instance.kingstongraham said:
She was making decent money before meeting Harry. $50k an episode of Suits apparently, plus still getting residuals.ballysmate said:
Talent? Is she any good or would it be on name only?Pross said:
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?
Saw estimate of I think 4m a year for security so would need more than her previous 50k an episode.
Unless of course Harry gets a job.
Blimey, that sounds a lot. But tbf I know very little what’s really involved in setting up the appropriate security.
Edit - The Times are saying the cost is “more than £1m a year”, so if they are right I suspect the true cost is in the £1m to £1.5m range0 -
I'll get it all sorted for $3.5m per year. Deal?0
-
Good news Piers isn't changing his mind. Good on him.
All this woke victimhood is tedious. She was an actress. its one of the ways they get ahead. The other is nobbing princes https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56343768
1 -
It's got absolutely nothing to do with woke. He called her a liar and has no evidence for that. It's about him sulking because she cut him off and his ego not being able to take it.david37 said:Good news Piers isn't changing his mind. Good on him.
All this woke victimhood is tedious. She was an actress. its one of the ways they get ahead. The other is nobbing princes https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-563437681 -
He said he didn't believe a word of what she said. What evidence does he need for that?elbowloh said:
It's got absolutely nothing to do with woke. He called her a liar and has no evidence for that. It's about him sulking because she cut him off and his ego not being able to take it.david37 said:Good news Piers isn't changing his mind. Good on him.
All this woke victimhood is tedious. She was an actress. its one of the ways they get ahead. The other is nobbing princes https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56343768
I think she's a calculating untrustworthy manipulative trout. there's plenty of evidence for that.3 -
Exactly, he can go into the security business then hire himself. There's probably a tax scam in there somewhere too.kingstongraham said:
$4m a year? Surely they could get Corden to do it for less than that.ballysmate said:
That's what I mean. He got good money without being good.kingstongraham said:
Does she need to be good? I've not heard anyone say they were enthralled by Corden's performance in Cats.ballysmate said:
Does that make her any good? Look at the wedge the likes of Corden made for Cats for instance.kingstongraham said:
She was making decent money before meeting Harry. $50k an episode of Suits apparently, plus still getting residuals.ballysmate said:
Talent? Is she any good or would it be on name only?Pross said:
Presumably there is nothing stopping Meghan going back into acting.DeVlaeminck said:
Yes the song and dance is just to keep their profile and earning power high isn't it. Whilst they weren't paid for the Oprah interview I'd be interested to know whether either of their Spotify or Netflix contracts specified that they had to do some high profile expose interview in order to generate interest.kingstonian said:I saw the majority of the interview last night. Main thoughts after watching it were ....
-----
I don’t think anyone has an issue with H & M choosing to step away from a royal role - in fact, pretty much everyone I know doesn’t blame him for wanting to do it. But why make such a big song and dance about it?
Final point - he mentions how he was “cut off” financially by his family, and security wasn’t funded, so he had no option but to sign huge contracts with Netflix and Spotify to enable him to pay for security. It really doesn’t require a $100m contract to fund security. Absolutely no issue with you going it alone H, but we aren’t stupid.
It'll also be interesting to see how their future pans out. Both of them are used to being in the public eye - do they want to cash the cheques and gradually slip from public consciousness in a few years, if not what do a former royal and a former actress do with the rest of their lives ?
Saw estimate of I think 4m a year for security so would need more than her previous 50k an episode.
Unless of course Harry gets a job.
Anyway, Harry's handy with a rifle isn't he? He could do some of it himself.0 -
You can take that paragraph, swap the "she" for "he" and there's a lot more evidence for that. Remember what he got sacked from the Mirror for?david37 said:
He said he didn't believe a word of what she said. What evidence does he need for that?elbowloh said:
It's got absolutely nothing to do with woke. He called her a liar and has no evidence for that. It's about him sulking because she cut him off and his ego not being able to take it.david37 said:Good news Piers isn't changing his mind. Good on him.
All this woke victimhood is tedious. She was an actress. its one of the ways they get ahead. The other is nobbing princes https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56343768
I think she's a calculating untrustworthy manipulative trout. there's plenty of evidence for that.
Should never have been allowed to work in the media again after that.0 -
This all reminds me of one reason I liked The Independent in its early days.0
-
It would be amusing to see the reaction if Meghan successfully sued Morgan for defamation. I don't see how he could mount a defence although I believe with slander you have to prove it caused you damage.
Out of interest, can a statement made on TV be libel rather than slander? Traditionally libel would be in written word as it is more permanent but arguably anything said on live TV in this day and age will be as permanent as something written in a newspaper.0 -
Morgan has proven himself to be a bedwetting snowflake.ddraver said:Cancelling yourself is "woke" now...
0 -
As opposed to her calling people whatever she wants without any proof but we have to believe her?elbowloh said:
It's got absolutely nothing to do with woke. He called her a liar and has no evidence for that. It's about him sulking because she cut him off and his ego not being able to take it.david37 said:Good news Piers isn't changing his mind. Good on him.
All this woke victimhood is tedious. She was an actress. its one of the ways they get ahead. The other is nobbing princes https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-563437682 -
These people on here that throw the 'woke' accusations around. Do they actually know what it means?0
-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/09/harry-and-meghan-interview-this-is-not-just-a-crisis-for-the-royal-family-but-for-britain-itselfshortfall said:
As opposed to her calling people whatever she wants without any proof but we have to believe her?elbowloh said:
It's got absolutely nothing to do with woke. He called her a liar and has no evidence for that. It's about him sulking because she cut him off and his ego not being able to take it.david37 said:Good news Piers isn't changing his mind. Good on him.
All this woke victimhood is tedious. She was an actress. its one of the ways they get ahead. The other is nobbing princes https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56343768
I'm reminded of the line David Olusoga (of House Through Time fame) in this article.. Most black people who have worked in one of our big institutions, or stepped into the public eye, are well aware of the fundamental law of racial physics that operates in modern Britain. The terms of this law are simple and universal: they state that a white person or institution accused of racism has suffered far more than a black person who has been the victim of racism.
Within hours of the royal interview, and in accordance with that fundamental law, Piers Morgan accused Meghan and Harry of speaking untruths and suggesting that “everybody in the royal family is a white supremacist” – an ugly tabloid exaggeration appended to a culture-war dog-whistle0
