Skip to main content

Meg and Harry's new foundation: "Let's pick a name that no one can pronounce."

One of the challenges I find about living outside my country of origin is pronouncing people's names. I meet people from all over Northern Europe as part of my business life, and it's never a good start to a business conversation to say, "And how do you say your name?"

Meg and Harry - or Meg, let's face it, this was her decision - have put all of their future business contacts into that situation by naming their new foundation "Archewell".

Arche, the Greek word Meg says is at the root of her foundation name, is pronounced ar-khay', with the emphasis on the second syllable.

That would properly make the foundation "Ar-KAY-well".

Or perhaps the foundation should be pronounced like "architect" - in other words "AR-ka-well" in US English or "AR-ki-well" in UK English.

Alternately, it could be pronounced with a silent "e," a bit like Madewell, the successful woman's clothing brand it's probably subliminally inspired by - "ARCH-well"

Or, for our forth and final contender, it could be pronounced to match the name of Meg and Harry's never-seen child: "ARCHIE-well."

That's an awkward pronunciation that sounds like a camel going over a speed bump, but knowing the Sussexes, that's probably what they will use.


The announcement of the name

For non-Telegraph subscribers, here's the text of the article announcing the name:

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are working on plans to run emotional support groups, a multi-media educational empire, and even launch a wellbeing website under a new non-profit organisation named Archewell. 
The Sussexes, who are setting up home in Los Angeles, have drawn up proposals for a vast and ambitious array of projects under the name Archewell, derived from the Greek word for “source of action” and the inspiration behind the name of their baby son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
The couple told the Telegraph they wanted the organisation “to do something of meaning, to do something that matters”.
According to paperwork filed in the United States last month, the couple are considering how to create their own charity and volunteering services, wide-ranging website, and sharing “education and training materials” via films, podcasts and books.
Plans, which so far include trademark requests for everything from motion picture films to paperclips, are far more extensive than those originally intended under Sussex Royal in the UK.
The new American venture could even see the Duchess build on the success of her old Goop-style website The Tig, with a “website featuring information in the field of nutrition, general health and mental health”, along with entertainment.
The couple had not planned to launch details of the “non-profit” just yet, emphasising that they and the world were rightly focusing on the threat posed by coronavirus.
But after paperwork including the name was filed in the public domain in the US, and seen by this newspaper, they confirmed they will be launching under the name Archewell.
The Duke and Duchess told the Telegraph: "Like you, our focus is on supporting efforts to tackle the global Covid-19 pandemic but faced with this information coming to light, we felt compelled to share the story of how this came to be.
“Before SussexRoyal, came the idea of ‘Arche’ - the Greek word meaning ‘source of action’.
“We connected to this concept for the charitable organisation we hoped to build one day, and it became the inspiration for our son’s name. To do something of meaning, to do something that matters.
“Archewell is a name that combines an ancient word for strength and action, and another that evokes the deep resources we each must draw upon. We look forward to launching Archewell when the time is right." 

Arche and what it really means 


It's a measure of the Sussexes' usual bluster that they chose a name based on a Greek concept when neither one of them appears to speak Greek.

My guess is that Meg (or perhaps Harry) found the concept of arche in one of their self-help books or websites.

Like any word translated from one language into another, "Arche" (really arkhē) can mean many things in English.

It can mean "the ultimate" - arch-enemy, arch-angel, archetype.

It can mean "the first, and now left behind" - archive, archaic

It can mean "chief" - ie archbishop, like poor Desmond Tutu. (This actually comes from a similar Greek word, arkhos, meaning chief.)

(One thing it doesn't mean is "arch" like an arch in a building, ie the Golden Arches. That type of arch comes from the Latin arcus for bow. But you can bet a million dollars that there will be an arch somewhere in the Archewell logo.)

"Source of action" is actually pretty far down on the list of potential translations for arche.


Archie's name

Finally, I'm not buying that the concept of arche was behind the naming of the persistantly-unseen Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.

It sounds like revisionism. Didn't Meg have a cat or dog named Archie as a child?



Comments

Miggy said…
@abbyh,

It was with your help, (back in January) that I learned how to master bold and italic - so in case I forgot my manners - many thanks! :-)
KCM1212 said…
Even at a young age, Harry was considering his exit opportunities.
ROYALS BEHAVING BADLY
Beached Wales
Harry and Meghan, having left Britain with a stopover in Canada, go house hunting in celebrityville, U.S.A.
Stuart Heritage

Pt 1

On Wednesday morning, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle woke up defunct. As agreed with Buckingham Palace, their status as senior royals ended this week, taking their long-cherished dream of global Sussex Royal–brand domination down with it. This is the start of their new nonroyal life, and they’ve chosen to start it in Los Angeles. On April 1.

Like Britain before it, Canada is no longer their home. In a scramble that sounded more like the fall of Saigon than anything else, the panic-stricken pair fled southward with moments to spare before Trump shut up shop two weeks ago. A source breathlessly recounted to The Sun that “the borders were closing and flights were stopping. They had to get out.” There is some suggestion that the haste stemmed from Meghan’s unwillingness to pay taxes in two countries.

Ex-Royals on the Loose
Their exact whereabouts are unknown. Malibu was thought to be an option, except the public beaches would turn them into an automatic TMZ magnet. A more likely possibility is Beverly Park, which, given that Harry grew up surrounded by very rich old people, seems fitting. Beverly Park is a gated community where knots of unmarked, sidewalk-free streets are dotted with giant, individually gated houses. Photography is prohibited. Google Street View is banned. The communal park is barely used. Residents include Sumner Redstone, Sylvester Stallone, and the guy who introduced the Power Rangers to Americans. It sounds like somewhere billionaires go to seek isolation while they await death—a giant hospice clinic with nicer lawns.

But that’s the sort of confinement that Harry and Meghan need, now that they have to fund their own security. Their hopes of having protection assigned to them from the Secret Service and the State Department were dashed on Sunday when Trump—possibly still stung by their past criticism of him—tweeted that “they must pay!” It’s been reported that Prince Charles has agreed to dig deep and help out with their security costs, to the tune of up to $5 million a year. Charles, of course, is about to conclude a period of self-isolation after contracting the coronavirus. You’d hope that Harry at least FaceTimed him to say thank you.
KCM1212 said…
Pt 2

And that’s helpful, because Sussex Royal isn’t going to provide for them anymore. On Monday, in their brand’s farewell Instagram post, Harry and Meghan touched upon the coronavirus, mentioning that “we are focusing this new chapter to understand how we can best contribute.” Well, yes, about that. Obviously you could argue that packing up and moving countries—on a private jet, no less—while the entire population of the world is being urged to stay at home isn’t exactly the most sensible contribution. Nor, for that matter, is leaving Canada (101 coronavirus deaths at the time of this writing) for America (4,056 deaths, and rising fast). But to each their own.

You could argue that moving countries while the entire world is being urged to stay home isn’t the most sensible contribution to the coronavirus cause.
So what’s next? Harry had hoped to launch into this new chapter by throwing himself into Travalyst, his tourism nonprofit. But, again, it doesn’t seem entirely sensible to cheerlead for the travel industry at a time when all the airlines and most hotel chains are in free fall. Short of their releasing a P.S.A. about the health benefits of licking subway handrails, it’s hard to imagine how this move could have gone any worse for them. Perhaps their new P.R. firm, Sunshine Sachs, will fix things. After all, their clients have included Harvey Weinstein and the Michael Jackson estate, so they must be quite good in a tight spot. Perhaps more will be clear when Catherine St-Laurent, the new chief of staff, formerly of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, settles into her new role.

On the plus side, however, lockdown means that more people are likely to watch Meghan’s first post-royal gig, as the narrator of the new Disney+ documentary Elephant. Reviews have been decidedly mixed so far, with her narration being described as “over-eager” and full of “spectacular torrents of schmaltz.” This, you’ll remember, is the job that Meghan reportedly got after Harry cornered Bob Iger at the Lion King premiere to praise her voice-over work.

But these are early days. Now that they’re free of the rigors of royal life, and with the world on pause, Harry and Meghan have plenty of time to exhale and figure out where they go from here. Maybe it’s time for Harry to sit on his throne as the ex-prince of Bel Air.
FreezeFrame said…
Nutty Also, re: isolation for the Sussexes, I've read that the drug supply to the area has been cut off by the lockdown. Might be pertinent.

There was some speculation that a drug supply cutoff might have been behind their quickie departure from Canada. Pure speculation without evidence.


I think that the Sussexes have been in California a lot longer than they have let on. My guess is that they transitioned to Cali right after their departure from the UK visit in January. I totally could see Meghan flying from London to Vancouver to pack up their belongings and Archie and fleeing to California to begin plotting their new money-making projects (leaving Harry to deal with the fall out over Megxit). Why weren't they spotted in LA? Maybe because no one was looking for them there... all eyes were on Vancouver. Also, any evidence of Meghan's drop-ins at the local Vancouver charities could have been done beforehand and she just waited to release the photos.


@Elle I think you may have just written Rache's script for her! When I skimmed it earlier, I was otherwise occupied/distracted, but now that it's 3 am. and I have plenty of time, I have to say that you did a splendid job on predicting the probable story line for the Malibu Dumbartons.

Thank you! My whole point in writing that silly script of possible PR ploys is to emphasize that the Dumbartons are FAR from over-- the only way she has a chance at making the massive amount of $$$ she believes she is entitled to is if her wagon is securely hitched to Harry's star. She hasn't even begun to drag Harry out and about in LA and lord knows where else (each time they are photographed = a new merching opportunity for her). Speaking of merching... now that the Duchess of Malibu has shed the shackles of the BRF, she might just thumb her nose and brazenly ignore the "outdated" BRF etiquette and openly tag her clothes, shoes, accessories, jewelry in her copyrighted photos she posts on Instagram.

As for Archie, poor Archie. It hate to think that Harry and Meghan have kept him "under wraps" for so long--only to play that ace card if they get desperate (meaning they are strapped for cash--to reveal him in a photoshoot/US morning tv spot "Archie's Life in Sunny California" if the price is exorbitantly high.

Whatever happens next, Meghan will continue to push the boundaries of their agreement with the BRF-- no matter the consequences, because in her mind HMTQ and the family are not giving them a fair deal.
London Gent said…
Commenter seen on TMZ website under story about Gruesome Twosome's website(s) getting hacked:


D-mented • a day ago • edited
For only 19.95 per month you can have access to the Royal Baby Archie, see Archie walk, see Archie's first words, for a few dollars extra you can get a hand signed letter from Archie, please include 9.95 for shipping and handling, operators are standing by, call now.

Hahahahaha!
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
Barbara from Montreal said...

In one of its earlier posts, the Crowns of Britain blog references an incident which happened last year when the dastardly duo were still staying in Canada. They tries to make reservations a a local, award-winning restaurant, but they were refused because the owner said he "couldn't fulfill their security requirements", which is a bit odd since a lot of celebrities dine out at restaurants without any problems.

According to Foxella, this is what really went down: Meghan wanted all of the other customers to sign non-disclosure agreements AND hand over their cellphones to the Sussex bodyguards. It was never about security; it was about a paranoid control freak not wanting people to take unauthorized photographs of them or talking about them to the media. Not surprisingly, the restaurant owner said no.


If I were a patron (especially a regular) & a restaurant made me now down to a "celebrity" like that (sign an NDA for being at the wrong place at the wrong time) and hand over my mobile phone like a misbehaving middle school pupil, I'd tell the restaurant owners "eff you" and leave.

There's something off-putting about businesses who would give in to those kind of Sleb demands.

This isn't about my dislike of HRH Just Harry or his American Psycho bride, if I were treated like that for a celebrity in Indonesia, I'd be the same way.

I like my UN officials & chefs dignified, not starstruck.

Speaking of Indonesia, it's 01:30AM in the morning & I can't sleep.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
I'm fine with signing NDAs in general, by the way (signed a few in my lifetime myself, although it wasn't necessary and I don't kiss & tell like that).

Just not like that, not for the reasons stated ☝🏼above.

How annoying are these court jesters if that restaurant rumour is true.
Sandie said…
@Alice, Surrey James:
Has anyone seen the new Royal family insta post. They are sharing an Easter Cookie recipe. And a video showing how to. I think this might be Burberry guy's doing! Any thoughts Nutties?

This is the IG for The Queen and The Royal Family (run by the Queen's staff). They often share recipes for special occasions (also posted on The Royal Family website) and have even produced a recipe book.

https://www.instagram.com/theroyalfamily/?hl=en

The Burberry guy is David Watkins. He used to work for the Sussexes but since 1 April has been employed by the Cambridges (and their IG is kensingtonroyal).
Anonymous said…
Talk about Archewell and how to pronounce it and more:

https://www.mailplus.co.uk/tv/palace-confidential
Sandie said…
The trolling just does not stop ...

http://archewellcharity.com/

This is what it says:

We will surrender this domain upon the immediate and safe return of Prince Henry Charles Albert David, Duke of Sussex to Her Majesty's United Kingdom:

Buckingham Palace
Westminster
London
SW1A 1AA
United Kingdom

Yours faithfully
Sandie said…
People are in lockdown ... they need a distraction ... the Sussexes have the worst timing ever!

https://www.instagram.com/archewellfoundationglobal/

Sandie said…
I wonder if the Sussexes leaked Archewell themselves (I think they registered one domain name) as a distraction (telling lies is a prime strategy for them).

1. It keeps them in the news and gives them headlines at the time of coronavirus. (Even bad press coverage is press coverage and with the lockdown they are not even getting pap walks.)

2. It draws attention away from what they are really doing (perhaps nothing?).

3. They seem to enjoy the feeling of being in control and 'sticking it' to the press, the public ... whoever they feel has offended them in any way.

It is just astonishing that a couple who have hired so much expertise and who have had so much time would mess up so badly in such a basic way!
luckygirl said…
Arch Evil.the gold digger vid was epic shade. trolling hall of fame!
xxxxx said…
Whenever I see Archewell I think of arachnids ...spiders and scorpions

Repeating - best genius referral was to Gold Digger/ Let a thousand fake H/M website referrals to YT video bloom!
Tea Cup said…
Saw today on the NYT that Claire Waight Kelly is out at Givenchy--Hah, markled. Even if you happen to be a fan of the duchess of Malibu, it should give one pause that any association with meghan markle is BAAAAAAADDDDD julu.
Tea Cup said…
I mis-typed "juju"
Henrietta said…
Blogger Tea Cup said...
Saw today on the NYT that Claire Waight Kelly is out at Givenchy...


Does anyone really think her leaving has anything to do with MM? Givenchy got a lot of exposure through MM, but you really couldn't describe it all as positive.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Tea Cup

I am sorry to be so uncharitable but looks Givanchy finally realized the dress design had been shoplifted from Princess Angela of Liechtenstein's own creation.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a20887634/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-princess-angela-liechtenstein-comparison/

For something of Givanchy fame this is a huge faux pas.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@xxxx

Very funny! I am from the medical family, so spelling vs pronunciation in archewell (a: ki well) immediately made me think of menarche (me na: ki). Markles certainly didn't have any professional input choosing the name.

They must be permanently high.
Henrietta said…
Wow, Fairy Crocodile, those dresses are virtually identical except for the fabric, and I think Princess Angela's dress was prettier and the fabric more suitable for a summer wedding. I guess we should have expected this; MM is such a plagiarist.
Sandie said…
Just had a thought ... you do not have to buy out every domain name to prevent fraud and confusion.

If you are high profile enough, this is what you do:

Establish your website, IG and twitter accounts and so on, with a common name for all, a common trademark, a common mission statement, a common font and styling. (Get your branding right and on point ... preparation!)

In your press release, state that any other website, IG or twitter account and so on is NOT you. Get maximum press coverage for your launch using various ways to ensure that the genuine addresses/domain names will be remembered. (Don't leak if you are not prepared to launch!)

Have a staff member check for fake online sites using a variation of your name and put out a press release ... remind people that anything other than your three or so accounts is NOT you.

Why are Harry and Meghan getting it so wrong and leaving themselves open to such ridicule (it is what people do and have done for centuries with royalty and quasi royalty so the Sussexes must just get over themselves!)?

Let's say I establish an online business called 'Seeds of Africa' that sells indigenous seeds, plus related products such as gardening books and field guides, gardening gloves and tools ... Someone copies the look of my website, calls themselves 'Seeds for Africa' (the ignorant do not notice that they are not all indigenous seeds) and starts stealing my business. What do I do? 1. A press release. 2. A banner on my website. 3. Maximum press coverage ... interviews, profile pieces, in-depth look at indigenous/non-indigenous ... (great for marketing!). Maybe, once differentiated, both business can flourish (and if you had bought up all possible addresses, the business 'Seeds for Africa' could never have established itself and become a success and you would not have got the extra press coverage).
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Henrietta

Interesting to note that Angela of Liechtenstein married her prince (who is fifth in line!) in New York, in the year 2000. I bet my socks that Megsy was glued to magazines consuming every tiny detail.

I think this is where her obsession with marrying a royal seriously started (if she could I can too, I am PRRRETTIER!) and that is why she consciously or unconsciously stolen her dress design.
abbyh said…

Henrietta - Princess Angela's dress seems just a tad more high church look. Less skin popped into my mind when I was looking at the photos.

Miggy - someone had show me so I was just passing the how to along. I'm sure you did.

FreezeFrame - they were in California early? that's an intriguing thought.

London Gent - all that for such a low price. Wow. I'm waiting for the But wait, there's more. You can also get .... I notice you get a letter signed, not a photo signed.


I can't remember who posted something about how the BRF had offered them a chance not to do the whole royal service, give you some money. Boy, if that were true, I can bet that many were amping up the slow burn when things started falling apart/they wanted to do the parts they thought fun and skip the rest. Interesting.


This comment has been removed by the author.
The Times has been a bit slow to react to the Archewell.com fiasco, but here is their take on it:

Gold-diggers hijack Prince Harry’s Archewell charity website:

When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced that they were creating a charity for their new life in America, royal watchers around the world waited eagerly for developments.

Also waiting, however, were people with more sinister intent. And money appeared to be their motive. When what seemed to be the new website for the “Archewell Foundation” emerged yesterday, the couple’s supporters found themselves confronted with a surprise.

Instead of discovering information about Harry and Meghan’s charitable aims, they were diverted to a YouTube video for the song Gold Digger by the American rapper Kanye West.

The royal couple, it appeared, were the latest to fall victim to hackers known as “cybersquatters”, who, after learning about their plans, had quickly bought up the website www.archewellfoundation.com.

Cybersquatter is a term for those who register web addresses before a business or charity has done it for themselves, just as a squatter occupies an empty space or building that they do not own or have permission to use.

The owner of the desired domain name will then charge lucrative amounts for the company to buy it back from them. At the same time, cybersquatters can also use the web address to tarnish the reputation of a business or simply to mock them.

Kanye West was the target of a similar prank himself in 2015, when an internet troll made www.loser.com redirect to the rapper’s Wikipedia entry.

Other victims include Sting, who lost a claim to have the internet domain name www.sting.com transferred to him in 2000, after judges ruled his name was in common usage. The name had been registered by a man named Michael Urvan in the US who was offering it to the singer for $25,000.

A source close to the Sussexes pointed out that the new Archewell venture is “not a foundation” and subsequently, will not be called the “Archewell Foundation”. They added that the couple could not buy “every formation” of possible websites. It means that the couple may have fallen victim to another scam that involves the registration of slightly different domain names that rely on people entering a typo or getting the website name slightly wrong.

Jake Moore, a cybersecurity specialist at ESET, an internet security company, said: “A typical trait of cybercriminals is to purchase similar domains to well-known brands so when victims quickly check the sender’s address, it may look legitimate if only viewed quickly.

“Scammers can take advantage of their victim, tricking them into believing false validation from the sender so they start clicking on dodgy links and attachments.

“The difficulty here is that to cover all bases thousands of similar alternatives would need to be acquired to fully protect the genuine site. Most companies purchase a number of similar domains but naturally some are forgotten about and slip through the net.”

Yesterday the link to the site appeared to be invalid, though the cached page could still be viewed and returned the Kanye West video. It is understood that the removal was not related to requests by the duke and duchess or members of their team.

The name of the Sussexes’ venture originates from the Greek word arche, meaning sources of action, which also inspired the name of their son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
Glowworm said…
It is understood that the removal was not related to requests by the duke and duchess or members of their team.

Sure it wasn’t....now pull the other one.
@Glowworm

Yes, I rolled my eyes when I read that too. As if.
Sandie said…
@Rebecca B:

Thanks for posting The Times article here. Basically, the author of the article says that the Sussexes will be held to ransom to buy those domains?

No, people are just having fun trolling the Sussexes.

All the sites I have seen are clearly making fun of them, but maybe those are the only ones getting attention. Certainly the only problem with those is that if your are thin-skinned you are going to be upset about people mocking you.

As for other sites pretending to be legitimate to try to make money fraudulently, I posted ideas on how easily that problem can be overcome above.

A thought: this is giving the Sussexes a LOT of publicity at a time when it is very difficult for them to get stories in the media about them.
InnerLooper said…
I feel like I’m putting a tin hat on but what if this is the reason two Sussex staffers moved over to the Cambridge’s and Latham to Buckingham (I am American and know nothing of U.K. employment laws). Markle told them to buy the domains and park them but the instead redirected to gold digger and all of this should have been the beginning of the tabloid end but COVID. It’s crazy but what if?!
brown-eyed said…
Glad to see bold. Just a note: I am using a 4 yr old iPhone with Safari. No problem using the html tags. So don’t give up.

Trying emojis:���������� (face with halo, 3 toilet paper rolls, laughing face.

Stay healthy, everyone.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Magatha Mistie said…
Yeha!!! Using my iPhone
FreezeFrame said…
@Fairy Crocodile

@Tea Cup

I am sorry to be so uncharitable but looks Givanchy finally realized the dress design had been shoplifted from Princess Angela of Liechtenstein's own creation.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a20887634/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-princess-angela-liechtenstein-comparison/

For something of Givanchy fame this is a huge faux pas.

Thank you for that link that shows the side-by-side of the Meghan's Givenchy wedding dress and wedding dress Angela of Liechtenstein wore in 2000.

Wow! Check out the photo of Angela and look at her wedding tiara!! The height and circular discs of her tiara- it made me think of the Queen's Grand Duchess Vladimir Tiara- remember the rumors that Meghan pitched a fit because the Queen would not loan her the GDVT (with the emerald drops) to wear with her wedding dress and veil? Her tantrum allegedly prompted Harry to intercede on his bride-to-be's behalf and insist, "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!" to which HMTQ replied, "She gets what tiara she's given by me"

Maybe Meghan was copying Angela's wedding dress and overall vibe (whether consciously or unconsciously) it seems like Meghan just took Angela's look and tried to "kick things up a notch" by enlarging the bateau neckline, changing the dress fabric and color, including embroidery of Commonwealth flowers on her veil, allowing tiny woodland creatures to frolic in her wedding hairstyle to create the "messy" updo look and wanting to wear a similar looking tiara but adding the emeralds because why not? She is marrying into the British Royal Family, dammit- billions of people (in her mind) will be watching her say her nuptials to the 6th in line!

Here is a link to HMTQ wearing the GDVT with emeralds
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/style/jewelry-and-watches/g14504829/queen-elizabeth-jewels-crowns-tiaras/?slide=1
brown-eyed said…
OFF TOPIC

Thanks, @Elle

I haven’t had much luck using emojis except when sending messages through Apple’s native messenger program.

The only problem I’ve ever had with Safari was trying to complete the 2020 US Census. Got more than half way through it, and the site kicked me out and told me to use a different browser. I don’t think so.
CookieShark said…
Per Celt News I think on YouTube the veil was a surprise for HMTQ and not in a good way. She was under the impression MM would not be wearing a veil.
Magatha Mistie said…
@CookieShark
I read somewhere??? That she had been told not to wear the veil.
The Queen was shocked, hence the less than happy face during the ceremony?
MustySyphone said…
I just read that MeGain didn't actually write The Tig. She hired people to do it. No wonder she was broke
Sandie said…
@MustySyphone:
I just read that MeGain didn't actually write The Tig. She hired people to do it. No wonder she was broke

Yep, I was also under the illusion that The Tig was her great success. However, once it was set up, it would have taken at the very most half a day a week to maintain and perhaps an extra day a month to arrange longer posts such as an interview or profile. Whoever wrote and managed it for her would have taken a percentage of the income from merching and other advertising income. Neither Megsy nor the agency who wrote and managed the blog for her became millionaires from the earnings but, for the agency, she was not their only client, and for Megsy, it was always a vehicle to open doors ... anything she earned she saved anyway because she was always so good at getting freebies and had a grudge against those who refused to give her such freebies (e.g. not one British fashion house would give her freebies to wear so she wore British fashion with great reluctance when she got access to BRF money to spend).
Sandie said…
Re. Wedding veil ... the BRF have a very British way of communicating (e.g. this is the hat Her Maj will be wearing for your engagement next week, rather than you will be required to wear a hat). She would not have been told to NOT wear a wedding veil in such a straightforward way, but perhaps when she was choosing a tiara she was told that 'perhaps this will look best as you will not be wearing a veil' and then when she kicked up a fuss about it (i.e. did not understand other than she was not getting what she wanted) and lied about wearing a veil (of course not ... simple, classic ...), Harry threw a tantrum, Her Maj told him off and put her foot down and Meghan ended up with the bandeau but left Her Maj with the mistaken impression that there would be no veil.

Meghan never understood, because she never tried to learn, the British way of communicating, and she always intended to do exactly as she pleased (i.e. there was no respect).
Magatha Mistie said…
&Sandie
From what I recall reading the Queen has final say on all wedding dresses.
She disapproved the veil ? Megs agreed to not wear it.
When the Queen arrived at church, in the antechamber, she was shown a photo of Megs wearing said veil.
HM was not amused!!
As you said, no respect.

As for not wearing a hat, apparently HM sent Megs a note saying she would be wearing a hat, meaning Meg should also.
Even if Megs didn’t understand, doubt it, she had Samantha Cohen etc to interpret said note.
Most people would understand what was meant, if not she could ask.
She’s just plain rude & bloody wilful.
MustySyphone said…
@Magatha Mistie

Agreed. I think MeGain willfully didn't wear a hat in a "I'll show her, I'll do what I want" moment
Nutty Flavor said…
New post: "Open Post: What is Meg and Harry's daily life like now?"
I hope the Cybersquatter continue! The dubious duo will hopeful learn a very painful and public lesson (wishful thinking). Perhaps then the Youtube redirection will take us to Money’s too tight by Simply Red

Lol
Scandi Sanskrit said…
I love Simply Red 😂😂

Im so triggered right now ⭐❤
SirStinxAlot said…
About the tiara, there has been a lot of speculation as to which emerald tiara she asked for. No on has brought up Queen Victoria emerald tiara which is splendid!! Nor the Duchess of Angoulême's Emerald Tiara which made its way from France to Britain. I am sure there are other less known to chose from as well. Both of the tiaras listed above were worn by former Queens. Queen Victoria and Marie Antoinette if I am not mistaken.
Jane Morrison said…
Hi everyone, I saw comments from people who had already got their loan from
Anderson Loan Finance. Honestly I thought it was a scam, and then I decided
to make a request based on their recommendations. A few days ago, I
confirmed in my personal bank account amounting to 12,000 $ , which I
requested for business. This is really good news and I am so happy that I
advise all those who need a real loan and who are sure to reimburse to
apply through their email (text or call) +1 315-329-6320 There are sincere
loan lenders!

They are able to lend you a loan.
Contact Mr Anderson
E-mail: andersonraymondloanfinance@gmail.com
Telephone: +1 315-329-6320
Visit the office address @ (68 Fremont Ave Penrose CO, 81240) .
Oldest Older 401 – 449 of 449

Popular posts from this blog

Is This the REAL THING THIS TIME? or is this just stringing people along?

Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce.  And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before?  which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know.  I'm not a lawyer.  One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away".  That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice.  But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance.  Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

Christmas is Coming

 The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking. It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids. Interesting thought, isn't it? Would they show?  What would we see?  Would there now be photos from the rota?   We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers.  It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation.  Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter.  There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind).  If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action?  Service. They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids