Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates

[Anonymous]

The Harry Walker Agency exclusively represents the Secretary-General of the U.N., the Obamas, Governors (multiple), the CEOs of Pepsi + McDonalds + Twitter, The World Bank President, U.S. Vice Presidents (multiple), Gloria Steinem, the Queen of Jordan, Stephen Colbert etc

But the insane Meghan-haters really desperately want to believe that the Sussexs are pulling in a single dollar for speeches headlining the Time 100. Okay peeps - whatever helps you sleep at night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-host-time100-talks-alexis-ohanian/

How do these two keep getting jobs despite their terrible performances at every appearance?

Sunshine Sachs.

Terrible performances? They bring in views and they're excellent public speakers on the hottest topics of the 'woke' crowd year-after-year.

Meghan and Harry are pulling in $500K - $1 million for each of these big virtual appearances while the rest of you sit around and bemoan them.

Newsflash - talking about them and keeping their name circulating just makes them richer and their speeches more valuable.

surely you are dim enough to really believe this?

Surely you're tired of believing a couple that is represented by the same speaking agencies as Presidents, Oscar winners, and Royalty is bringing in pennies?

Having relatives in Hollywood I know lawyers for D-listers who won't even bother looking at a contract unless the client has them on a 5-figure annual retainer.

They don't represent anything less because they need their clients to maintain their luxury lifestyles.

So get over it.

You just said a whole bunch of nothing. Meghan has had to reach out to be included in all of their engagements because their brand is toxic. They ain’t getting paid like that honey.

[Anonymous]

Also, how are Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in the same league as the Obamas?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Harry Walker Agency exclusively represents the Secretary-General of the U.N., the Obamas, Governors (multiple), the CEOs of Pepsi + McDonalds + Twitter, The World Bank President, U.S. Vice Presidents (multiple), Gloria Steinem, the Queen of Jordan, Stephen Colbert etc

But the insane Meghan-haters really desperately want to believe that the Sussexs are pulling in a single dollar for speeches headlining the Time 100. Okay peeps - whatever helps you sleep at night.

Lol, you are falling for the status by association game that the “Duke” and “Duchess” continue to play. Lame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-host-time100-talks-alexis-ohanian/

How do these two keep getting jobs despite their terrible performances at every appearance?

Sunshine Sachs.

Terrible performances? They bring in views and they're excellent public speakers on the hottest topics of the 'woke' crowd year-after-year.

Meghan and Harry are pulling in $500K - $1 million for each of these big virtual appearances while the rest of you sit around and bemoan them.

Newsflash - talking about them and keeping their name circulating just makes them richer and their speeches more valuable.

surely you are dim enough to really believe this?

Surely you're tired of believing a couple that is represented by the same speaking agencies as Presidents, Oscar winners, and Royalty is bringing in pennies?

Having relatives in Hollywood I know lawyers for D-listers who won't even bother looking at a contract unless the client has them on a 5-figure annual retainer.

They don't represent anything less because they need their clients to maintain their luxury lifestyles.

So get over it.

Do companies really shell out millions of dollars to hear a D lister and a former prince complain about their uber privilege? This can't be real.

No, they do not. There are reports that Harry and Meg had to reduce their ridiculous asking prices because no one was biting. They are deluded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Harry Walker Agency exclusively represents the Secretary-General of the U.N., the Obamas, Governors (multiple), the CEOs of Pepsi + McDonalds + Twitter, The World Bank President, U.S. Vice Presidents (multiple), Gloria Steinem, the Queen of Jordan, Stephen Colbert etc

But the insane Meghan-haters really desperately want to believe that the Sussexs are pulling in a single dollar for speeches headlining the Time 100. Okay peeps - whatever helps you sleep at night.

Lol, you are falling for the status by association game that the “Duke” and “Duchess” continue to play. Lame.

+100

It is insane that any reasonable person would pay any attention to these two freeloading grifters. One is a former party-boy prince with mental health issues and the other is a social climber who attained her status by marrying well. How on earth can these two be put in the same category as Michelle and Barak Obama and the Secretary-General of the U.N? It is mind boggling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-host-time100-talks-alexis-ohanian/

How do these two keep getting jobs despite their terrible performances at every appearance?

Sunshine Sachs.

Terrible performances? They bring in views and they're excellent public speakers on the hottest topics of the 'woke' crowd year-after-year.

Meghan and Harry are pulling in $500K - $1 million for each of these big virtual appearances while the rest of you sit around and bemoan them.

Newsflash - talking about them and keeping their name circulating just makes them richer and their speeches more valuable.

surely you are dim enough to really believe this?

Surely you're tired of believing a couple that is represented by the same speaking agencies as Presidents, Oscar winners, and Royalty is bringing in pennies?

Having relatives in Hollywood I know lawyers for D-listers who won't even bother looking at a contract unless the client has them on a 5-figure annual retainer.

They don't represent anything less because they need their clients to maintain their luxury lifestyles.

So get over it.

Do companies really shell out millions of dollars to hear a D lister and a former prince complain about their uber privilege? This can't be real.

They do when they're charging $1,000s/per seat for individuals to participate if its open to the public. For companies like Goldman Sachs or big events - this is nothing.

A - Chelsea Clinton was paid $65,000 to speak for 10 minutes. She's had no notable accomplishments other than working for her parents. https://www.bustle.com/articles/95370-how-much-does-chelsea-clinton-get-paid-in-speaking-fees-its-less-than-her-parents-but

B - You also need to remember that all the IN-PERSON conferences and events are cancelled this year. Having worked in event management, I know a small inconsequential conference (think a topic that nobody outside of wonks knows about like - coral reef die-outs - have budgets of at least $100,000). Events like the Time 100 would have had budgets of $2 million or more for catering, rentals, speakers, A/V, guest rooms, meeting rooms, etc. Now all that money is diverted to simply paying speaker fees through online events.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-host-time100-talks-alexis-ohanian/

How do these two keep getting jobs despite their terrible performances at every appearance?

Sunshine Sachs.

Terrible performances? They bring in views and they're excellent public speakers on the hottest topics of the 'woke' crowd year-after-year.

Meghan and Harry are pulling in $500K - $1 million for each of these big virtual appearances while the rest of you sit around and bemoan them.

Newsflash - talking about them and keeping their name circulating just makes them richer and their speeches more valuable.

surely you are dim enough to really believe this?

Surely you're tired of believing a couple that is represented by the same speaking agencies as Presidents, Oscar winners, and Royalty is bringing in pennies?

Having relatives in Hollywood I know lawyers for D-listers who won't even bother looking at a contract unless the client has them on a 5-figure annual retainer.

They don't represent anything less because they need their clients to maintain their luxury lifestyles.

So get over it.

You just said a whole bunch of nothing. Meghan has had to reach out to be included in all of their engagements because their brand is toxic. They ain’t getting paid like that honey.

Yeah, this excitement from the head of Time definitely speaks of desperation on the part of the Sussexs. Also do you know what that little blue logo stands for in the top center? The single sponsor? I mean maybe its an ice cream shop. Since they could only get one.

Nope. It's Procter & Gamble.

That little tiny American company that's worth $230 billion dollars.

[Anonymous]

They are feeling more and more Edward and Wallis with every passing day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we please stay in topic? Francis Drake? FFS this is the entertainment forum.

And... some of us entertain ourselves by talking about Sir Francis Drake. And the evil of the British Empire.

Then start your own thread.

Why? All in the family, no?

[Anonymous]

They are a novelty right now, but the shine is quickly wearing off since every appearance turns into either a dig at the RF (which gave them the status they so enjoy right now) or a platform to talk about themselves. Soon people will tire of hearing about how aggrieved these two are all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are a novelty right now, but the shine is quickly wearing off since every appearance turns into either a dig at the RF (which gave them the status they so enjoy right now) or a platform to talk about themselves. Soon people will tire of hearing about how aggrieved these two are all the time.

This is basically what this board was saying on their wedding date 2.5 years ago. Has the novelty worn off yet? How long does it take?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-host-time100-talks-alexis-ohanian/

How do these two keep getting jobs despite their terrible performances at every appearance?

Sunshine Sachs.

Terrible performances? They bring in views and they're excellent public speakers on the hottest topics of the 'woke' crowd year-after-year.

Meghan and Harry are pulling in $500K - $1 million for each of these big virtual appearances while the rest of you sit around and bemoan them.

Newsflash - talking about them and keeping their name circulating just makes them richer and their speeches more valuable.

surely you are dim enough to really believe this?

Surely you're tired of believing a couple that is represented by the same speaking agencies as Presidents, Oscar winners, and Royalty is bringing in pennies?

Having relatives in Hollywood I know lawyers for D-listers who won't even bother looking at a contract unless the client has them on a 5-figure annual retainer.

They don't represent anything less because they need their clients to maintain their luxury lifestyles.

So get over it.

Do companies really shell out millions of dollars to hear a D lister and a former prince complain about their uber privilege? This can't be real.

No, they do not. There are reports that Harry and Meg had to reduce their ridiculous asking prices because no one was biting. They are deluded.

DP. I would imagine that is the case for anyone during covid. A zoom call shouldn’t cost the same as an in person speech in front of a large audience...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are a novelty right now, but the shine is quickly wearing off since every appearance turns into either a dig at the RF (which gave them the status they so enjoy right now) or a platform to talk about themselves. Soon people will tire of hearing about how aggrieved these two are all the time.

This is basically what this board was saying on their wedding date 2.5 years ago. Has the novelty worn off yet? How long does it take?

Well it depends on how long they continue with the ridiculous publicity stunts and accompanying self-promotion over it--public wedding, baby, breaking up with the RF, moving to Canada, oh wait no, moving to LA, couch surfing at Tyler Perry's, no wait, now we're buying a house, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are a novelty right now, but the shine is quickly wearing off since every appearance turns into either a dig at the RF (which gave them the status they so enjoy right now) or a platform to talk about themselves. Soon people will tire of hearing about how aggrieved these two are all the time.

This is basically what this board was saying on their wedding date 2.5 years ago. Has the novelty worn off yet? How long does it take?

I wouldn't be surprised if MM is pregnant. Not only is it natural and common age gap for siblings, but it keeps them in the headlines for at least the next 9+ months.

She can play her cards a lot of ways. Keep it secret and let the photogs/public speculate at her bloated stomach (she's never pictured standing up), make an announcement at the birth ("surprise!"), or post an enigmatic message on IG about expanding their family ("I have big dreams for our growing family..." - type post).