I commend NPR for not having a Harry and Meghan thread!!

Where goats go to escape
User avatar
Torquemada 1420
Posts: 11910
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
Location: Hut 8

Mahoney wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 4:05 pm Is she not going to return to acting?
When did she quit? Isn't the whole royalty thing a masquerade?
tc27
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:18 pm

Well...reading up on the Netflix and Spotify deals they have enough dosh even by LA's standards. Still I wonder what on earth Neftflix expect them to produce?
GogLais
Posts: 2472
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 7:06 pm
Location: Wirral/Cilgwri

JM2K6 wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:03 pm
GogLais wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 4:40 pm
JM2K6 wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 4:07 pm The Netflix stuff is megabucks so money isn't going to be a problem. They'll probably end up doing a lot of charity / foundation work, by the sounds of things.
I dare say they'll coin it for a while but all they've got to sell is being ex-Royals. No doubt there'll be a book but they can only tell their story so many times before interest wanes.
Not really sure what that has to do with my reply tbh - the money's sorted, the work'll still be valid for years if that's the route they do go down.
I've no idea what's in their deal with Netflix or anyone else. They're in their mid 30s and they'll need enough to keep them in the manner to which they're accustomed for maybe the next fifty plus years and to leave a nice trust fund for the kids. I'm not bothered either way but I suspect that the income stream will dry up in the next few years.
User avatar
Ymx
Posts: 8557
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:03 pm

GogLais wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 4:40 pm
JM2K6 wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 4:07 pm The Netflix stuff is megabucks so money isn't going to be a problem. They'll probably end up doing a lot of charity / foundation work, by the sounds of things.
I dare say they'll coin it for a while but all they've got to sell is being ex-Royals. No doubt there'll be a book but they can only tell their story so many times before interest wanes.
They’ve got to pay for expensive security for their lives
tc27
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:18 pm

Yeah I wonder if the Netflix/Spotify cash is all coming at once or conditional? Unless they turn out to be amazing content producers then their fame will be the hook.
Earlier in the year, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced that they had created a production company and signed a deal with Netflix.

As part of the agreement, the couple are expect to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children’s programming.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said their new endeavour would be focused on “creating content that informs but also gives hope”.

It all sounds a bit vague?
User avatar
JM2K6
Posts: 10127
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:43 am

GogLais wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:44 pm
JM2K6 wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:03 pm
GogLais wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 4:40 pm

I dare say they'll coin it for a while but all they've got to sell is being ex-Royals. No doubt there'll be a book but they can only tell their story so many times before interest wanes.
Not really sure what that has to do with my reply tbh - the money's sorted, the work'll still be valid for years if that's the route they do go down.
I've no idea what's in their deal with Netflix or anyone else. They're in their mid 30s and they'll need enough to keep them in the manner to which they're accustomed for maybe the next fifty plus years and to leave a nice trust fund for the kids. I'm not bothered either way but I suspect that the income stream will dry up in the next few years.
They'll be earning north of £100m from the Netflix and Spotify deals. They were independently wealthy before this. The money really isn't a problem (and indeed there's no way they could have gotten to this point if they weren't already fabulously wealthy).

edit: All reports have the Netflix deal at >$100m, and Spotify at $25-35m.
User avatar
Sandstorm
Posts: 11667
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:05 pm
Location: England

Dunno why you all think they need to “work” until their late 60s like the rest of us. They’re both already loaded. Do some occasional publicity work, a Netflix show and raise your kids in the sun.

Why would they want or need to have serious careers? :problem:
User avatar
Lobby
Posts: 1871
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2020 7:34 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 6:01 pm
GogLais wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:44 pm
JM2K6 wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:03 pm

Not really sure what that has to do with my reply tbh - the money's sorted, the work'll still be valid for years if that's the route they do go down.
I've no idea what's in their deal with Netflix or anyone else. They're in their mid 30s and they'll need enough to keep them in the manner to which they're accustomed for maybe the next fifty plus years and to leave a nice trust fund for the kids. I'm not bothered either way but I suspect that the income stream will dry up in the next few years.
They'll be earning north of £100m from the Netflix and Spotify deals. They were independently wealthy before this. The money really isn't a problem (and indeed there's no way they could have gotten to this point if they weren't already fabulously wealthy).

edit: All reports have the Netflix deal at >$100m, and Spotify at $25-35m.
Image
troglodiet
Posts: 401
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:12 pm
Location: South Africa

Lobby wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 7:16 pm

Image

Pretty much sums up my feeling about this.

One thing's for sure, if I were MM I'd stay the fuck away from any tunnel for the foreseeable future.
User avatar
Openside
Posts: 1718
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:27 pm

The first big test of how this has panned out for M&H is when Harry lands back in the U.K. for Prince Philip’s funeral.(sadly suspect reasonable soon). I do not think there is a cat in hells chance that Meghan will accompany him.
GogLais
Posts: 2472
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 7:06 pm
Location: Wirral/Cilgwri

Openside wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 8:48 am The first big test of how this has panned out for M&H is when Harry lands back in the U.K. for Prince Philip’s funeral.(sadly suspect reasonable soon). I do not think there is a cat in hells chance that Meghan will accompany him.
What's the Covid limit - fifteen? That'll be a good excuse.
Not_Couch
Posts: 289
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2020 5:32 pm

All I know is I'd rather be boning Meghan than Kate
User avatar
Calculon
Posts: 1820
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:25 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 4:05 pm
Lobby wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 3:33 pm Although I realise that Meghan's main aim in this interview was to relaunch herself in the US, I'm guessing they were hoping for a slightly better response than this in the UK

Image

At the same time, the Queen’s net approval rating has gone up slightly since the interview

Positive: 80% (-)
Negative: 14% (-1)
You can't divorce public opinion of the interview from the UK media coverage of the interview and issues raised. It's been an avalanche of anti-M&H / pro-Royalty pieces. Particularly as most people in the UK woke up to the coverage and opinion pieces, rather than watching it live.
For people who are sympathetic to M & H, the result of that opinion poll will quite possibly serve to support Harry's accusation that British society is prejudiced/racist/bigoted.
Slick
Posts: 13217
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:58 pm

Not_Couch wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 9:53 am All I know is I'd rather be boning Meghan than Kate
Oh I don’t know. I actually spent an evening with Kate once and there is definitely something about her
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
User avatar
notfatcat
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:42 pm

They're both fine looking women although one of them is now firmly in the whiny, self-entitled, victim camp; which is decidedly unattractive.
Chris Jack, 67 test All Black - "I was voted most useless and laziest cunt in the English Premiership two years on the trot"
User avatar
Paddington Bear
Posts: 6649
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:29 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Is this 'who would you shag' or 'who would you want to have a conversation with'? Sort it out.
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember with advantages, What feats he did that day
User avatar
notfatcat
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:42 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:15 pm Is this 'who would you shag' or 'who would you want to have a conversation with'? Sort it out.
I'm a lover not a shagger. When I get intimate with a woman I want everything to be centred on her enjoyment and I would find that difficult if I didn't respect her as a person. I guess what I'm saying is that if I was Yeeb and I had to spurt on her back while she slept, albeit in pyjamas, I would choose Meghan.
Chris Jack, 67 test All Black - "I was voted most useless and laziest cunt in the English Premiership two years on the trot"
User avatar
Sandstorm
Posts: 11667
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:05 pm
Location: England

notfatcat wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:40 pm I would choose Camilla
Fixed
User avatar
Muttonbird
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:09 am

Openside wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 11:11 pm
Muttonbird wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 10:03 pm
Openside wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 1:37 pm

Tbf I don’t think anyone has forgotten about him. Shagging a 17 year old isn’t illegal it’s just creepy. We won’t find out whether this young lady was trafficked (and whether he knew) until Ghislaine goes on trial I suspect...
As if you couldn't stoop any lower. :yawn:
Which bit of that is incorrect?
That you have to ask. :roll:
User avatar
Muttonbird
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:09 am

YouGov has the latest approval ratings in the UK for the Royal Family. They are:

The Queen +66%
Prince William +60%
Catherine +57%
Princess Anne +49%
Prince Edward +15%
Prince Charles +7%
Prince Harry -3%
Camilla -7%
Meghan -27%
Prince Andrew -75%
Amazed they have included Meghan at all. But notice where she, the brown one, is in the eyes of the British public?

Just one spot above the pedophile...
User avatar
Openside
Posts: 1718
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:27 pm

Muttonbird wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 11:05 pm
Openside wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 11:11 pm
Muttonbird wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 10:03 pm As if you couldn't stoop any lower. :yawn:
Which bit of that is incorrect?
That you have to ask. :roll:
So indulge my stupidity and point it out!! :think:
User avatar
Chrysoprase
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:59 am

Muttonbird wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 7:46 am
YouGov has the latest approval ratings in the UK for the Royal Family. They are:

The Queen +66%
Prince William +60%
Catherine +57%
Princess Anne +49%
Prince Edward +15%
Prince Charles +7%
Prince Harry -3%
Camilla -7%
Meghan -27%
Prince Andrew -75%
Amazed they have included Meghan at all. But notice where she, the brown one, is in the eyes of the British public?

Just one spot above the pedophile...
Are you suggesting her approval rating is based on her colour rather than her behaviour?
Glaston
Posts: 484
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:35 am

Image
User avatar
notfatcat
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:42 pm

Chrysoprase wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 12:14 pm
Muttonbird wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 7:46 am
YouGov has the latest approval ratings in the UK for the Royal Family. They are:

The Queen +66%
Prince William +60%
Catherine +57%
Princess Anne +49%
Prince Edward +15%
Prince Charles +7%
Prince Harry -3%
Camilla -7%
Meghan -27%
Prince Andrew -75%
Amazed they have included Meghan at all. But notice where she, the brown one, is in the eyes of the British public?

Just one spot above the pedophile...
Are you suggesting her approval rating is based on her colour rather than her behaviour?
There seems to be an increasingly large number of people who think that way. Skin colour/ethnicity, genitalia, sexual preference and a few other things can be tremendously important when it comes to stuff like credibility and approval ratings.
Chris Jack, 67 test All Black - "I was voted most useless and laziest cunt in the English Premiership two years on the trot"
User avatar
Muttonbird
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:09 am

Image

Ultra-gammon and workplace bully, Jeremy Clarkson, underlines his own and his followers' fading relevancy by revving up in The Sun about Meghan Markle.

So fragile are they, the belief is she is trying to take down the monarchy. This mirrors the complaints from the alt-right the world over. That any challenge to white patriarchal dominance, no matter how mild, is to be mercilessly crushed. And that being a bully is a birthright.

I think she just wants to shine a light on the arcane structure of monarchistic Britain in the hope it will sometime get with the 21st Century.

In claiming Markle will soon be on a Playboy's yacht, Clarkson has Diana-ised her. Perhaps he wishes her dead in a high speed car crash too…

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertai ... -soon.html
Not_Couch
Posts: 289
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2020 5:32 pm

Slick wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 11:54 am
Not_Couch wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 9:53 am All I know is I'd rather be boning Meghan than Kate
Oh I don’t know. I actually spent an evening with Kate once and there is definitely something about her
An Adam's Apple?
User avatar
fishfoodie
Posts: 8727
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:25 pm

Does anyone actually believe this pond scum ?

If ever there was a non-denial denial, this is it.
Piers Morgan says he was not aware of phone hacking at Daily Mirror

Piers Morgan says he is not aware of phone hacking taking place while he was editor of the Daily Mirror.

A High Court case against its owners, Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), brought by Prince Harry and several other high-profile figures, began on Wednesday.

Lawyers argue that executives at the publisher knew about widespread phone hacking, but failed to act.

Speaking before the trial, Mr Morgan said: "I've never hacked a phone. I've never told anybody to hack a phone."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-65531864
User avatar
Insane_Homer
Posts: 5505
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:14 pm
Location: Leafy Surrey

Wouldn't it be wonderful if someone hacked Morgan's phone and found evidence that proves he was lying about ordering the phone hacking.
“Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.”
User avatar
fishfoodie
Posts: 8727
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:25 pm

EnergiseR2 wrote: Tue Jun 06, 2023 4:50 pm So I knew about the hacking, encouraged it, laughed about it at meetings but let me be clear I never did it myself as it seemed complicated and did not tell anyone to do it or not to do it
Turns out that having less morals than a sewer rat makes you really valuable to other billionaire sewer rats
User avatar
fishfoodie
Posts: 8727
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:25 pm

I think this story is one where it strains the credibility of the stories only coming from, "sources".

Image

It was a phone conversation between two brothers, both of whom hated the press, & weren't likely to leak their side of it for a drink from some parasite journo.

The only credible way they get that quote was by hacking the comms.
User avatar
Gav
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:12 pm

Who gives a shit?
User avatar
Mahoney
Posts: 640
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am

Gav wrote: Wed Jun 07, 2023 8:10 pmWho gives a shit?
Anybody who clicks on this thread. Otherwise they wouldn’t have clicked on this thread.
Wha daur meddle wi' me?
Post Reply