What does a gold digger do when she (or he) worries that the money train may soon be coming to a stop?
A smart gold digger thinks about the assets she (or he) will be able to take along when headed out the door. Like jewelry.
Meghan has been spending a great deal of money on jewelry recently; she just redesigned her 18-month-old engagement ring, adding pavé diamonds plus a new, thinner band.
She also showed up at the Trooping of the Color in early June in a new eternity ring, supposedly from Prince Harry.
The Daily Mail, never adverse to an inflated figure, estimates that Meghan has worn 600,000 pounds worth of jewelry in the past 6 months, more than Kate has worn in the 8 years she has been married to Prince William.
Kate is not heading for a divorce. But Meghan probably is.
"Apparently she is spending money right and left - like crazy," Enty says. "And not spending her own. And is buying really expensive things. But, to her credit, I guess - say she buys a piece of jewelry, she's making the jewelers bid. Hey, I'm going to wear this, who's going to give it to me for the best price?"
Enty continues: "It's still an expensive price. It's like someone who has just found, Hey, I can just charge everything, and there's not going to be a bill in my mailbox, and the government's going to have to pay for it."
"I've told you about the clothes, which she's getting kickbacks on, but the jewelry she's not getting kickbacks on. She's just buying that stuff up left and right."
But who is paying for the jewelry right now? Fed-up looking Harry and his personal wealth? I'm-not-getting-involved Charles? The sovereign grant - in other words, British taxpayers?
Or is Meghan putting it all on credit and counting on having her debts covered as part of a divorce settlement?
This is less true now, when industrial diamond production (and the invention of cubic zirconia) means almost every middle-class woman can afford a sparkler.
What does make a piece of jewelry more valuable is its provenance - jewels worn by icons like Jackie O, Princess Diana, or Audrey Hepburn fetch high prices at auction. (Catherine the Great's jewelry is up for auction right now, for example.)
It looks to me like Meg is trying to put together a jewelry collection she can take with her in a divorce and later sell at auction, benefiting from her name value.
A smart gold digger thinks about the assets she (or he) will be able to take along when headed out the door. Like jewelry.
Meghan has been spending a great deal of money on jewelry recently; she just redesigned her 18-month-old engagement ring, adding pavé diamonds plus a new, thinner band.
She also showed up at the Trooping of the Color in early June in a new eternity ring, supposedly from Prince Harry.
The Daily Mail, never adverse to an inflated figure, estimates that Meghan has worn 600,000 pounds worth of jewelry in the past 6 months, more than Kate has worn in the 8 years she has been married to Prince William.
Kate is not heading for a divorce. But Meghan probably is.
Making the jewelers bid
Enty mentioned Meghan's jewelry habit in his June 24 "Gossip Galore" podcast, available on Patreon."Apparently she is spending money right and left - like crazy," Enty says. "And not spending her own. And is buying really expensive things. But, to her credit, I guess - say she buys a piece of jewelry, she's making the jewelers bid. Hey, I'm going to wear this, who's going to give it to me for the best price?"
Enty continues: "It's still an expensive price. It's like someone who has just found, Hey, I can just charge everything, and there's not going to be a bill in my mailbox, and the government's going to have to pay for it."
"I've told you about the clothes, which she's getting kickbacks on, but the jewelry she's not getting kickbacks on. She's just buying that stuff up left and right."
Who is paying?
These sound to me like the actions of a woman who knows that in a divorce settlement, most people are allowed to keep their personal effects, such as jewelry.But who is paying for the jewelry right now? Fed-up looking Harry and his personal wealth? I'm-not-getting-involved Charles? The sovereign grant - in other words, British taxpayers?
Or is Meghan putting it all on credit and counting on having her debts covered as part of a divorce settlement?
A liquid form of wealth
Diamonds and other jewelry may not be the liquid form of wealth they were in Marilyn Monroe's day, when she sang Diamonds are a Girl's Best Friend in the 1953 movie "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes."
At the time, diamonds were seen as easy to pawn or otherwise convert to cash, and valued as a way to preserve wealth for old age:
Men grow cold as girls grow old
And we all lose our charms in the end
But square cut or pear shaped
These rocks don't lose their shape
Diamonds are a girl's best friend
This is less true now, when industrial diamond production (and the invention of cubic zirconia) means almost every middle-class woman can afford a sparkler.
What does make a piece of jewelry more valuable is its provenance - jewels worn by icons like Jackie O, Princess Diana, or Audrey Hepburn fetch high prices at auction. (Catherine the Great's jewelry is up for auction right now, for example.)
It looks to me like Meg is trying to put together a jewelry collection she can take with her in a divorce and later sell at auction, benefiting from her name value.
Perhaps the proceeds will go to the Royal Sussex Foundation - or through the Royal Sussex Foundation, to end up in Meg's pocket in the end.
Time rolls on and youth is gone
And you can't straighten up when you bend
But stiff back or stiff knees
You stand straight at Tiffany's
Diamonds are a girl's best friend.
Comments
I wonder how Harry is feeling right about now, to have the hand-designed ring he gave her only 18 months ago be 'upgraded' to her standards? I know lots of women get 'upgraded' rings as anniversary gifts, usually . . and deeper into the marriage than 11 months. But MM has to count her anniversaries in months, doesn't she, as it's increasingly likely that she's not going to see even a second anniversary with Harry. Maybe she will stretch to three years, and only if she produces another baby in the next year . . . magically, like she did with the first one.
I am assuming that the figure of 600,000 pounds does not represent the actual value of the jewelry that has been purchased by MM for her to keep. I think, as she has done with much of her clothes that were either samples or gifted to her, the value of those items is being counted, even though she didn't actually pay full retail value for them. I'm sure she has purchased some things--firl loves to spend, and will keep doing so until she's cut off.
Which is my next rhetorical question, because no one seems to be able to answer it, least of all the Royal Family that's footing her bills . . but in short, . . HOW is she able to have access to funds for any high-end jewelry?! WHY are they letting her still buy lavish items at her own discretion? I guess that's two questions, but they are interrelated. As we all saw so evidently at the TOTC, this woman is in the doghouse with the Family. Her lavish spending as well as every other behavioral faux pas is coming under intense scrutiny and the MSM is finally starting to chime in . . .and she STILL has the personal freedom to arrange bidding wars with jewelers over her patronage, and flash new baubles at the Queen's birthday parade all while she's 'on maternity leave' and out of the public eye so she can bond with her newborn? It's not exactly like she's on the couch in a sweatshirt covered in spit-up, surfing the Home Shopping Network on TV like an ordinary new mum might do . . .but irregardless of the cost of what she's buying . . .why does she have access to any amount of money at all? There's no way she's dipping into her personal account, which has been wildly over-inflated. And shouldn't a new mother getting ready to christen her firstborn (let's play along with that story for now) have other things on her mind than hoarding jewelry?
If Harry bought her these rings as gifts, then he's entitled. And he's also an idiot, but I think we knew that. For either of the Sussexes to splash out on any large luxurious items right now is the the height of tone-deafness. I already live in a republic, but if I were a British subject, I'd be seething right now that Meghantoinette and her dim prince expect me to 'eat cake' in the form of admiring her shiny new diamonds while I struggle to feed my kids.
What the hell.
A British citizen told he can't have this or that on the NHS because of budget cuts is not going to be pleased to see Meghan buying thousands of pounds worth of jewelry with his tax money.
I hate to sound like a broken record, but Charles needs to fix this. The Queen is mostly retired and only makes appearances, and William seems unable to make an end-around around his father. All he can do is cut his own family off from the Sussexes.
Elsewhere I read that the tiara she wore was likely a copy as one could see colors glint in ways that don't happen from real ones.
Given the financial troubles of the family, her own difficulties at independence, I don't think anyone around her has had the means to teach her quality over quantity.
As for resale, provenance is everything but will she really be able to get that much more than used by average owner (which is less than purchase price)? Maybe? Maybe not? And if she is trying to sell to pay bills (like legal bills), collectors may bargain hard. I can't see selling this on ebay or Etsy. Would a big name auction house be all that willing? But they all charge for a handling fee. And if you are looking for this as an arbitrage move, you probably aren't factoring that cost but without it, you really run the risk of being taken by a con. Or with it, coming out flat or under water.
My other thought is that things like eternity rings are nice but this close to the wedding date makes me reminds me of the very public renewing our vows by high profile couples. I think it comes off as more to convince them there is still is a future together. And, often they then start the divorce soon after the service.
Given her taste in jewelry, I shudder to think of what art she might buy.
And I don't think she has enough money for real estate. Also, art and real estate wouldn't almost automatically follow her in a divorce, the way jewelry would.
I wonder whether she discussed the change with him, or whether she just had the ring redone on her own. I recall that she was no longer wearing it towards the end of her "pregnancy", allegedly because of "weight gain", although most of us recall that she didn't seem to put on any weight during the pregnancy.
Whether she discussed this with him or whether she did it on her own, this is just so insulting to Harry. But then, it is easier to control a person by diminishing their opinion.
No insightful comments from me other than this chick is is very silly and her husband is quite dim. What a match.
People trying to be icons, like Madonna for example, can come across forced and heavy-handed.
thanks for your thoughts and the blog
I love CDAN, but every other comment on Meghan items is "You're insane" or "You're delusional" or something along those lines. It really adds nothing to the conversation by this point.
You get one per day, they're about an hour long, and they are very useful to have in the background while doing housework or working out in the gym.
But i would think an icon would instinctively buy 'iconic' pieces
If you are clever and going for the money, then at the very least buy a FL grade
flawless rock...go big & perfect!
Instead she has bands with diamonds and a sizable rock, really nothing exciting or original that can't be purchased from any jeweller, already made
Unfortunately for her, overestimating her own market value is the flaw in the plan
MM is so delusional that she is bordering on frightening & i think the more MM is being pushed out, the more she will unravel & become unhinged
It's already starting to play out
She won't be that easy to get rid of either...and if i were the RF I'd be hiding the all the bunnies ; )
Now even the BBC are doing an unflattering parody of her....she has become fair game
That's the problem when playing with the press in England....they play a different game than she is used to with the American press
I actually won a pair of antique bracelets at a Christie's auction that are "property of a Lord & Lady," and am always on Sotheby's as well. But I always go for antique, nothing new (has to be 1920 or before), because I am very aware (even took classes) on antique jewelry as an investment. You have to understand things like hallmarks/maker's marks, its province, and yes, who owned or has owned/worn the piece is also important. Something tells me she doesn't.
They also had to throw someone off Twitter the other day that was fantasizing about what might happen to the Cambridges that would make Meghan the Queen.
No evidence that it was her, but it could be a deranged fan.
I've often said it would have been a great idea for her to seek out some young British female designers and wear their pieces for public appearances. This would help Meg create her own individual style and fulfill her stated mission to help women and girls.
It might also reinforce the image of London as a fashion capital, promoting Britain in a way that is also a part of her job.
It doesn't seem that she has the imagination, however. It's more "Audrey Hepburn wore Givenchy, now I'm wearing Givenchy!" or "Diana wore a forest green dress, now I'm wearing a forest green dress!"
A good stylist could help - Angela Kelly has been so fabulous for the Queen, and I think Camilla is also a good style example for women in her age bracket. But, as we've discussed so many times, Meg doesn't want to listen to anybody else.
Your jewelry hobby sounds fun!
Granted, she is short waisted, which makes off the rack clothing difficult to wear. However, with the means available to her, she could easily have dresses made to measure and I wonder why she does not avail herself of this opportunity.... Are the dresses only on loan?
She has no real grasp on the power of the RF .... which makes her look all the more foolish and very naive
I seriously don't understand why (her) or her fans can't be happy with being a Duchess
After all she came from a fairly modest background, (she) they could be happy to have achieved so much in a short span of time.
But i think a true narcissist is never truly happy...it is divide and destroy mentality
I have a feeling she is upping the ante...and is in destroy stage...watch out Will and Kate!
Especially after the *snickers* TTC balcony indecent 'TURN AROUND' *giggles* ....which in all fairness if she wasn't 41 years old (no one can convince me she is otherwise....lol ) and so 'worldly' it would have been hilarious instead of most people having second hand embarrassment for her.
Although she will be remembered
'Queenie MM reigned ( in her own head )...albeit it was a short reign'
They might be too big (the notorious Oscar de La Renta dress worn to a wedding) or too small (the summer dress worn to visit the old folks home in December.)
I'm not sure if they're on loan or not, but I doubt she'll be wearing either dress again.
There are some very knowledgeable and interesting people on here with
great perspectives
I also lurk at Cdan and that's where i saw 'Nutty's blog' mentioned..so i scooted over and lurked for a few weeks
And to date, I like many of the comments that i have read.
Mischi, the difference between Meghan and the Duchess of Windsor's jewels - Wallis had fabulous jewels, not little bitty ones like Meghan has. Granted she's got a set of Cartier's - earrings and bracelet that she wore on her wedding day. Diana's aquamarine ring (although I've heard that is really wasn't Diana's, just a copy from another jeweler). Diana's butterfly earrings, necklace and bracelet. If she's shopping for serious pieces of jewelry I'd like know who's paying for it. And if she doesn't wear it in public, she can't really say it was owned/worn by her. Overall, I can't recall any stunning pieces that she owns to date. Fashion icon she's not and definitely has no manners.
I know we have Diana lovers on here, and I liked her as well, but I think that if Meghan brings down the monarchy, it is only because it is on very shaky ground already. This quote from Peter Hitchens has been banging around my head recently:
"We are already living in a republic. We just don’t know it yet. Diana Spencer, perhaps the most brilliant politician of our age, destroyed the British monarchy 20 years ago.
The current Queen continues to occupy the throne solely because she has been transformed by skilled public relations into the nation’s favourite grandmother. Her survival is personal, not political. She goes through the motions of being the Sovereign, but is well aware that one false step could bring the weeping mobs out again, not weeping but snarling, and who knows how that would end?"
I think MM will be remembered as the false step that Hitchens predicted back in 2017.
Anyway, I don’t think this is a good investment for Markel smarkel.
Me Me Megain is so blatantly obvious? Style icon along the lines of Wallis, Audrey, Grace and Diana? Please. No one is going to pay the kind of decent price for her hastily purchased modern claptrap that they would for any of Wallis's pieces or even Diana's jewels.
This is all such a mess. I don't know what any of them are even thinking letting this go on. I know she probably wears Harry's balls in a pocket around her neck, and the Queen is probably just tired out at this point, but whither the rest? Charles may be dithering but Camilla never struck me as being unable to state the blunt truth. William? Anne? Andrew? Somebody? Anybody? Bueller?
She also has no fashion style of her own. She is the creation of her BFF and stylist, Jessica Mulroney and Ms. Mulroney and MM have shamelessly “borrowed” (copied) the style of the late Carolyn Bessette Kennedy.
i’ve been reading she has a shopping addiction and thats what she’s been doing while out of the public eye. but i think think 600,000 it’s kind of high for that jewelry shes been wearing. it looks very cheap and xtremely delicate, like it wouldn’t last more than a year or two. gold is very soft and bends very easily, while she is cold blooded , a thinner gold ring wouldn’t hold up
Revealed: How Harry and Meghan splashed out £2.4m of YOUR cash on Frogmore Cottage as they turned FIVE small homes into one with all new bathrooms, bedrooms and 'floating' kitchen floor
And three more articles since I last checked:
RICHARD KAY: Harry and Meghan's home move has racked up a huge bill - but with their reluctance to share traditional photos of their son and efforts to keep details of his birth secret, are they doing their part of deal?
Prince Archie of Riverdale! Harry and Meghan's son is transformed into a COMIC BOOK character by Archie Comics, as the iconic series debuts its own take on the royal baby's birth
MEGHAN MARKLE, DUCHESS OF SUSSEX NEWS AND ROYAL BABY UPDATES
Two footballers, a pop star and a seven-year-old girl... but no sign of Harry and Meghan: Are these really Tatler's ten most 'powerful' Britons?
Is this normal for the DM or could this be a way to help rid the BRF of the scourge that is mm?
I have to agree whole heartedly with the other commentors that her altering her engagement ring that Harry put a lot of thought into must have felt like a slap in the face to him. I know I would be insulted. I do not think her jewellery will command the kind of prices that she has in her head, even if she is photographed wearing them. Maybe that's why she is in the habit of wearing half a dozen rings on each hand.
Some one else above mentioned how she is so delusional she is dangerous and I am actually starting to become quite concerned with the safety of the cambridges. Her fans have this cult like adoration of her and some of the things they say regarding the safety of W&K are grotesque to say the least.
There was a video recently on YouTube (celt news I think) it was all the cold and creepy stares that she gives the Duchess of Cambridge. When I watched that I thought we are dealing with an obsessive lunatic. The clip that really got me was a line up of royals talking and meghan was speaking to someone infront of her with her rictus grin but she was blatantly searching out doc the minute she saw her that fake smile dropped from her lips and the look on her face was pure evil.
My gut just feels very off about her and her state of mind at present she is about to implode and I don't think it is going to be pretty.
Apartment 1 got a new roof recently, supposedly to prepare it for Harry and Meghan to live in. However, when they were sent to Frogmore Cottage, the PR explanation was that the Gloucesters did not want to move.
Apparently they did indeed want to move. And somebody did not want Harry and Meghan in Apartment 1.
At any rate, I wonder who will get it now? There's been a lot of pre-engagement publicity for Beatrice and Edo. Eugenie and Jack will be starting a family soon too.
Also, the DM knows that anger makes for clicks, and clicks is what they sell. I see the piece about the spending on Frogmore now has more than 7500 comments.
But I also think at time when British politicians command so little respect (Boris Johnson? Jeremy Corbyn? Nigel Farage?) a respected monarch has a role to play.
Whether that respected monarch will be Charles or William is an interesting question.
Also, I wish that only MM's rings could shown. That wonky finger of hers is weird and off-putting.
The brand's owner LVMH must be thrilled. I wonder what their market research is telling them.
It will be interesting to see if Meg is still wearing Givenchy when she comes out of hibernation.
Sort of reminds me of "Anne of 1000 Days." Queen Anne knew from the moment she gave birth to Elizabeth that her days were shortened as queen if she failed again to produce a son and heir. Markle knows her days are numbered as Harry's wife, so she is using all means necessary to stockpile wealth by what ever means necessary. Jackie O did it by buying tons of items, then returning them for cash as Onassis had her on an allowance she blew through in no time.
Meg's counting her anniversaries in months is well put. Imagine being so needy and insecure. It's like she's already entertaining the idea of having a vow renewal at year 2 if they make it that long. Sounds very crazy to a normal person, but for her it's not abnormal at all. Let's not forget: Narcissists are incapable of giving or receiving true, real love. They are experts at mirroring or acting it out, but rudderless to the real thing. It's because of this major deficit in her that if she is a real narcissist I feel so very sorry for the baby.
She has a few very high end pieces... engagement ring, earrings that were a gift from Harry, Diana's $75K aquamarine ring... All gifted to her. But as for most everything else, when she wears it, the description will be, "Megs wore X to Y event," and may include the jeweler. Does she own the $300K Cartier bracelet she wore on her wedding day or was it lent to her? She also wore a $20K Cartier bracelet to Chuck's birthday. No mention it is hers though. Diamond studs worn at TOTC 2019... can't find anything about those. Can we assume that if she wears it, it belongs to her? Everything else she's pictured in is cheap rubbish.
Nutty... when's the last time it's confirmed she wore a piece from the Queen's collection? She may have been cut off and is scrambling to find something, anything to wear to events.
Since she was given several pieces of jewelry - I'm wondering how that would play out for her being allowed to keep because it was a gift, return it because it was a gift contingent on marriage into the BRF or allowed to keep but not allowed to sell (estate to return upon death)?
I seem to remember that PH was to receive his mother's engagement ring and PW her watch but when PW became engaged, he gave it to his brother to use for Kate. Oh, if he hadn't - things would be really really messier than they are now.
In April, the Sun published a piece suggesting that the Queen had banned Meghan from wearing any more items from the Royal Collection that Diana had worn, noting that in the past she had worn a pair of butterfly earrings and a gold bracelet that had once belonged to Diana. (Again, the cynics say these were replicas. I haven't really looked into it and have no opinion.)
After the Sun piece, there was an immediate clapback from Katie Nicholl, a Meg-friendly journalist at Vanity Fair, who insisted that Meg was welcome to wear jewels from the Royal Collection after all. Since then, Meg has only had two public appearances - Archie's debut and ToC - neither of which featured the Queen's jewelry.
As I recall, she wore some earrings in Fiji that she coyly referred to as "borrowed," and many people assumed they were borrowed from the Queen. It turns out they were on loan from a Hong Kong jeweler.
Or the US, as Meghan would seem to prefer.
Also, are there any schools around Frogmore Cottage for Archie to attend? I mean Royal-type high end school. I don't see him going to state school with the plebs.
I think the valuations ($600k to $700k) are inflated and include pieces that may not be owned by Megs. If she is squirreling away jewelry due to a pending divorce, she's going about it all wrong. The delicate bracelets won't be valued at more than their weight in gold. Perhaps she is planning a fire sale. The only piece likely to fetch anything substantial, is Diana's aquamarine ring, and that's because of Diana's name, not Megs.
Not only did the redesign lower the future value, but IMO it made clear how she values Harry's thoughtfulness and feelings. The design of the original ring was just fine, and maybe not as inspired as mm wanted, but it was definitely classic, and (much more importantly) it was designed by PH. It was a gift. It's not like it was a figural of donkeys having sex or something - it was just three nice diamonds on a plain gold band. There was no need for a redesign. IMO it's passive-aggressive merde.
Now, I know that some people receive gifts from their loved ones that are never quite what they wanted or good enough, but I believe the value of the gift is in the thoughtfulness and love behind it. Manners and protocol are part of my upbringing and the giving and accepting of gifts meant that all the best manners were on display. Anything less than gratitude and delight were going to result in a lecture series, so I may be overly conscious of how one should behave re gifts, but it's hard for me to imagine that PHs feelings weren't hurt. My guess is that this public sign of not good enough/not what I wanted has been on display at home. It really tears up a relationship.
Still, she's been out of the public eye for quite some time, and apparently doing some shopping.
The one bit of news Enty had that no one else has mentioned is that she was negotiating with jewelers for the best prices on - what?
Possibly something we haven't seen yet?
Something to consider. Is she negotiating for the jewelry itself or an agreement to represent a brand/brands? She would be smarter getting a paycheck and putting it away than purchasing jewelry.
From my extensive research (pre-MM) the queen does loan out her personal jewelry to other female royals for certain events. For example, the tiara that Camilla almost always wears is the Greville tiara, that was inherited by the Queen Mother and left to the Queen. The Cambridge Lovers Knot, worn by the Queen, Diana and Kate, was from the collection left to her by her grandmother, Queen Mary. (BTW Queen Mary was the ultimate jewelry buyer and changer) There are many more examples, but they are not part of the Royal or Crown collection, but the personal collection of the Queen. Also, I'm not sure I've ever seen any minor royal ladies or wives, borrowing more than tiara's for weddings.
Also, she and Prince Phillip have given jewelry as wedding presents, see Fergie's tiara and diamond parure for example. Diana was gifted all sorts of jewelry for her wedding, from kings, queens, and other leaders of all sorts of countries.
Just to be fair, when Princess Margaret died, her children were forced to sell some of her jewelry to pay estate taxes. (Including the amazing Poltimore tiara, that she bought herself) So it won't be the first time, if MM heads to Christie's with jewels obtained by a royal....
Obviously, not that incredible, if you have it redesigned less than two years later.
Also, how does Harry feel about the ring upgrade? He designed it with love and thought, which she was gushing about how incredible the ring was during the engagement interview. 2 years after, she felt it wasn't as fabulous?
With everything she's doing, it looks like she wants to bring the monarchy down. Maybe she has political ambitions in America and she plans to gain support by being the one who took the monarchy down.
Swishy, my guess is that when the get a divorce, she'll be mailing them to Sotheby's to try and make a pound or two.
My only guess for why it's not all dumped is because they can't. Too soon, a new mother, a $43 million wedding... IDK. But the articles have been increasing in number and intensity. There is no sugar-coating that headline above.
Everything I've been reading is that no one is there.
I've been playing around with this and haven't come up with anything. I started thinking about this with the recent uptick of articles showing bad optic decisions. Any ideas?
I heard they were looking at the American International School, in Cobham. Misha Nonoo went there. It's exclusive and expensive - not very traditional.