Trying to understand Nicola Peltz Beckham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think all celebs have their names (and probably kids names) trademarked. It it to protect them.

I don't know enough about branding or contracts related to name trademarks to have any idea what really happened but given how overdramatized and exaggerated the 'first dance' and ' 11th hour wedding dress' stories are I don't doubt this is more of the same.

I am sure David and Victoria were controlling - they are major public figures. But he didn't exactly strike out on his own. He just jumped into a different rich and famous family with controlling people who have a well documented history of treating others poorly.

Yes, when they were children. Brooklyn wasn’t a child when he married so there was no need to continue to own the trademark for his name.

As many others have said, he’s never really done anything. All of his attempts have petered out.

It sounds like from the article, it wasn't specifically about who owned the trademark. It was about contracts and Brooklyn refused to sign on. Sounds like he already had control. According to the article, the trademark was for ten years and expires in Dec 2026.

Oh even better. He doesn’t need to be part of the family contracts if he doesn’t want to.

No he doesn't and he chose not to. This according to Brooklyn upset D and V as it would have been a better, more lucrative contract if all the kids signed on. Which is fine. They can be disappointed. But to still be moaning about it...let it go. He is 27. He has been an adult for 9 years. Time to grow up.

Its really the lost of control they're mad about. Having a family brand is fine only if you realize your kids are not extensions of you.

That's the thing. Enmeshed families can get pretty peeved if one member decides they need some space.

David and Victoria were both top-notch at the height of their careers. They have spent their life carefully building a brand and supporting causes to make the world a better place. Brooklyn married into a family that seeks to burn this country and the most vulnerable people here and abroad to the ground. I can see why they are concerned for their son AND their brand/legacy.

Okay, but their son didn't choose his family. He may need to strike out on his own. He's not actually required to care one whit about their brand (which is actually his family).

Seems like Victoria and David are controlling. But you can’t control an adult (let alone one with an equally wealthy wife.)

But he does care about the brand because he wants to use it to make money for himself. I guess he’ll be hearing from their lawyers in the future.

If his brand is the actual name his parents gave him, then yes, that’s fair he uses it. Do you want him to call himself Brooklyn Smith?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think all celebs have their names (and probably kids names) trademarked. It it to protect them.

I don't know enough about branding or contracts related to name trademarks to have any idea what really happened but given how overdramatized and exaggerated the 'first dance' and ' 11th hour wedding dress' stories are I don't doubt this is more of the same.

I am sure David and Victoria were controlling - they are major public figures. But he didn't exactly strike out on his own. He just jumped into a different rich and famous family with controlling people who have a well documented history of treating others poorly.

Yes, when they were children. Brooklyn wasn’t a child when he married so there was no need to continue to own the trademark for his name.

As many others have said, he’s never really done anything. All of his attempts have petered out.

It sounds like from the article, it wasn't specifically about who owned the trademark. It was about contracts and Brooklyn refused to sign on. Sounds like he already had control. According to the article, the trademark was for ten years and expires in Dec 2026.

Oh even better. He doesn’t need to be part of the family contracts if he doesn’t want to.

No he doesn't and he chose not to. This according to Brooklyn upset D and V as it would have been a better, more lucrative contract if all the kids signed on. Which is fine. They can be disappointed. But to still be moaning about it...let it go. He is 27. He has been an adult for 9 years. Time to grow up.

Its really the lost of control they're mad about. Having a family brand is fine only if you realize your kids are not extensions of you.

That's the thing. Enmeshed families can get pretty peeved if one member decides they need some space.

David and Victoria were both top-notch at the height of their careers. They have spent their life carefully building a brand and supporting causes to make the world a better place. Brooklyn married into a family that seeks to burn this country and the most vulnerable people here and abroad to the ground. I can see why they are concerned for their son AND their brand/legacy.

Okay, but their son didn't choose his family. He may need to strike out on his own. He's not actually required to care one whit about their brand (which is actually his family).

Seems like Victoria and David are controlling. But you can’t control an adult (let alone one with an equally wealthy wife.)

But he does care about the brand because he wants to use it to make money for himself. I guess he’ll be hearing from their lawyers in the future.

If his brand is the actual name his parents gave him, then yes, that’s fair he uses it. Do you want him to call himself Brooklyn Smith?

This isn’t about what he calls himself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think all celebs have their names (and probably kids names) trademarked. It it to protect them.

I don't know enough about branding or contracts related to name trademarks to have any idea what really happened but given how overdramatized and exaggerated the 'first dance' and ' 11th hour wedding dress' stories are I don't doubt this is more of the same.

I am sure David and Victoria were controlling - they are major public figures. But he didn't exactly strike out on his own. He just jumped into a different rich and famous family with controlling people who have a well documented history of treating others poorly.

Yes, when they were children. Brooklyn wasn’t a child when he married so there was no need to continue to own the trademark for his name.

As many others have said, he’s never really done anything. All of his attempts have petered out.

It sounds like from the article, it wasn't specifically about who owned the trademark. It was about contracts and Brooklyn refused to sign on. Sounds like he already had control. According to the article, the trademark was for ten years and expires in Dec 2026.

Oh even better. He doesn’t need to be part of the family contracts if he doesn’t want to.

No he doesn't and he chose not to. This according to Brooklyn upset D and V as it would have been a better, more lucrative contract if all the kids signed on. Which is fine. They can be disappointed. But to still be moaning about it...let it go. He is 27. He has been an adult for 9 years. Time to grow up.

Its really the lost of control they're mad about. Having a family brand is fine only if you realize your kids are not extensions of you.

That's the thing. Enmeshed families can get pretty peeved if one member decides they need some space.

David and Victoria were both top-notch at the height of their careers. They have spent their life carefully building a brand and supporting causes to make the world a better place. Brooklyn married into a family that seeks to burn this country and the most vulnerable people here and abroad to the ground. I can see why they are concerned for their son AND their brand/legacy.

Okay, but their son didn't choose his family. He may need to strike out on his own. He's not actually required to care one whit about their brand (which is actually his family).

Seems like Victoria and David are controlling. But you can’t control an adult (let alone one with an equally wealthy wife.)

But he does care about the brand because he wants to use it to make money for himself. I guess he’ll be hearing from their lawyers in the future.

If his brand is the actual name his parents gave him, then yes, that’s fair he uses it. Do you want him to call himself Brooklyn Smith?

This isn’t about what he calls himself.

Isn’t it? That seems to be a lot of what Brooklyn’s post was about. The kid has a right to his own name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These posts he made certainly won’t bring privacy, and they might hurt his wife’s image. Everyone who’s ever met them or his parents are coming out of the woodwork to choose a side. It’s a PR mess.

Yep she’s being compared to Meghan Markle who seems to have the opposite of the Midas touch. Everything she touches flops. Most people have never heard of Nicola and now will think she’s an insufferable bridezilla.

[Anonymous]

Has Brooklyn had any business ventures since he tried to launch a luxe hot sauce using his father’s Real Madrid #23? That was a year or two ago afaik.

[Anonymous]

Lil bro Cruz Beckham seems to be amused.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15481383/Cruz-Beckham-LIKES-meme-Victoria-dance-Brooklyn.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think all celebs have their names (and probably kids names) trademarked. It it to protect them.

I don't know enough about branding or contracts related to name trademarks to have any idea what really happened but given how overdramatized and exaggerated the 'first dance' and ' 11th hour wedding dress' stories are I don't doubt this is more of the same.

I am sure David and Victoria were controlling - they are major public figures. But he didn't exactly strike out on his own. He just jumped into a different rich and famous family with controlling people who have a well documented history of treating others poorly.

Yes, when they were children. Brooklyn wasn’t a child when he married so there was no need to continue to own the trademark for his name.

As many others have said, he’s never really done anything. All of his attempts have petered out.

It sounds like from the article, it wasn't specifically about who owned the trademark. It was about contracts and Brooklyn refused to sign on. Sounds like he already had control. According to the article, the trademark was for ten years and expires in Dec 2026.

Oh even better. He doesn’t need to be part of the family contracts if he doesn’t want to.

No he doesn't and he chose not to. This according to Brooklyn upset D and V as it would have been a better, more lucrative contract if all the kids signed on. Which is fine. They can be disappointed. But to still be moaning about it...let it go. He is 27. He has been an adult for 9 years. Time to grow up.

Its really the lost of control they're mad about. Having a family brand is fine only if you realize your kids are not extensions of you.

That's the thing. Enmeshed families can get pretty peeved if one member decides they need some space.

David and Victoria were both top-notch at the height of their careers. They have spent their life carefully building a brand and supporting causes to make the world a better place. Brooklyn married into a family that seeks to burn this country and the most vulnerable people here and abroad to the ground. I can see why they are concerned for their son AND their brand/legacy.

Okay, but their son didn't choose his family. He may need to strike out on his own. He's not actually required to care one whit about their brand (which is actually his family).

Seems like Victoria and David are controlling. But you can’t control an adult (let alone one with an equally wealthy wife.)

But he does care about the brand because he wants to use it to make money for himself. I guess he’ll be hearing from their lawyers in the future.

If his brand is the actual name his parents gave him, then yes, that’s fair he uses it. Do you want him to call himself Brooklyn Smith?

This isn’t about what he calls himself.

Isn’t it? That seems to be a lot of what Brooklyn’s post was about. The kid has a right to his own name.

I think it's is pretty clear that we need to take Brooklyn's POV with a large grain of salt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These posts he made certainly won’t bring privacy, and they might hurt his wife’s image. Everyone who’s ever met them or his parents are coming out of the woodwork to choose a side. It’s a PR mess.

Yep she’s being compared to Meghan Markle who seems to have the opposite of the Midas touch. Everything she touches flops. Most people have never heard of Nicola and now will think she’s an insufferable bridezilla.

Well to be fair she went through 3 wedding planners and her dad even sued one of them claiming they couldn't handle the wedding of his daughter, a "world famous actress." According to the wedding planner (in actual legal filings) the Beckham family was organized and the Peltz family was a mess. The wedding planner was also told she wasn't allowed to tell Victoria anything negative about how the wedding plans were going.

I think Nicola may have been a bridezilla...

[Anonymous]

I mean, can we stop pretending that David and Victoria Beckham are some paragon of class and propriety?

Really?

They're tacky, grasping weirdos. Second only to the Kardashians in their fakeness. Valuable brand my ass. Maybe across the pond, but not in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These posts he made certainly won’t bring privacy, and they might hurt his wife’s image. Everyone who’s ever met them or his parents are coming out of the woodwork to choose a side. It’s a PR mess.

Yep she’s being compared to Meghan Markle who seems to have the opposite of the Midas touch. Everything she touches flops. Most people have never heard of Nicola and now will think she’s an insufferable bridezilla.

Well to be fair she went through 3 wedding planners and her dad even sued one of them claiming they couldn't handle the wedding of his daughter, a "world famous actress." According to the wedding planner (in actual legal filings) the Beckham family was organized and the Peltz family was a mess. The wedding planner was also told she wasn't allowed to tell Victoria anything negative about how the wedding plans were going.

I think Nicola may have been a bridezilla...

And...It's a difficult time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean, can we stop pretending that David and Victoria Beckham are some paragon of class and propriety?

Really?

They're tacky, grasping weirdos. Second only to the Kardashians in their fakeness. Valuable brand my ass. Maybe across the pond, but not in the US.

You can say what you want by they are worth $600 million dollars. That seems valuable to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think the essential mistake the young couple is making is thinking the Beckham parents are guilty of heinous crimes. Brooklyn was certainly controlled in an unpleasant way by his parents, who understand that celebrity status means reputation is everything, and who therefore tightly manage their children's lives. I had a very controlling mother whom I am not close to anymore, so I sympathize!

But none of this is grounds for publicly explaining anything, because there isn't that much to explain, and it all seems so petty to the majority of people who are just trying to survive and pay for food and shelter. That is a failure in reading the room by Brooklyn, who is far removed from the trials and tribulations of the average Briton or American.

There is value to dignified silence, even when people make the wrong assumptions about you on social media. I hope one day Brooklyn understands this.

I wish all of them well.

Did his parents control him that much though? He's so young and he's already been a chef, a photographer, a hot sauce entrepreneur, a model...it seems like he's bouncing from "job" to "job" at "job" at random. If David and Victoria were steering his ship, it seems like he would have a more stable path...

He is an unserious dilettante who has never had a real job.

+1

It seems like they indulged his every whim in an effort to find his passion in life. And he was mildly successful at each ONLY because he is a Beckham. He really doesn’t seem to understand the only reason he is not an art school dropout working minimum wage is because of his parents.

+1 he seems like such a dud despite immense resources and connections

His parents turned a sports career into a huge net worth. That doesn't happen on its own. Everyone knows VB is rigid with eating the same meals everyday, never smiling, etc. BB doesn't seem to realize he's been the beneficiary of these efforts when all he's contributed is smiling for some photo ops.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think all celebs have their names (and probably kids names) trademarked. It it to protect them.

I don't know enough about branding or contracts related to name trademarks to have any idea what really happened but given how overdramatized and exaggerated the 'first dance' and ' 11th hour wedding dress' stories are I don't doubt this is more of the same.

I am sure David and Victoria were controlling - they are major public figures. But he didn't exactly strike out on his own. He just jumped into a different rich and famous family with controlling people who have a well documented history of treating others poorly.

Yes, when they were children. Brooklyn wasn’t a child when he married so there was no need to continue to own the trademark for his name.

As many others have said, he’s never really done anything. All of his attempts have petered out.

It sounds like from the article, it wasn't specifically about who owned the trademark. It was about contracts and Brooklyn refused to sign on. Sounds like he already had control. According to the article, the trademark was for ten years and expires in Dec 2026.

Oh even better. He doesn’t need to be part of the family contracts if he doesn’t want to.

No he doesn't and he chose not to. This according to Brooklyn upset D and V as it would have been a better, more lucrative contract if all the kids signed on. Which is fine. They can be disappointed. But to still be moaning about it...let it go. He is 27. He has been an adult for 9 years. Time to grow up.

Its really the lost of control they're mad about. Having a family brand is fine only if you realize your kids are not extensions of you.

That's the thing. Enmeshed families can get pretty peeved if one member decides they need some space.

David and Victoria were both top-notch at the height of their careers. They have spent their life carefully building a brand and supporting causes to make the world a better place. Brooklyn married into a family that seeks to burn this country and the most vulnerable people here and abroad to the ground. I can see why they are concerned for their son AND their brand/legacy.

Okay, but their son didn't choose his family. He may need to strike out on his own. He's not actually required to care one whit about their brand (which is actually his family).

Seems like Victoria and David are controlling. But you can’t control an adult (let alone one with an equally wealthy wife.)

But he does care about the brand because he wants to use it to make money for himself. I guess he’ll be hearing from their lawyers in the future.

If his brand is the actual name his parents gave him, then yes, that’s fair he uses it. Do you want him to call himself Brooklyn Smith?

This isn’t about what he calls himself.

Isn’t it? That seems to be a lot of what Brooklyn’s post was about. The kid has a right to his own name.

I think it's is pretty clear that we need to take Brooklyn's POV with a large grain of salt.

Why? It does seem pretty obvious that his parents are a bit nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think the essential mistake the young couple is making is thinking the Beckham parents are guilty of heinous crimes. Brooklyn was certainly controlled in an unpleasant way by his parents, who understand that celebrity status means reputation is everything, and who therefore tightly manage their children's lives. I had a very controlling mother whom I am not close to anymore, so I sympathize!

But none of this is grounds for publicly explaining anything, because there isn't that much to explain, and it all seems so petty to the majority of people who are just trying to survive and pay for food and shelter. That is a failure in reading the room by Brooklyn, who is far removed from the trials and tribulations of the average Briton or American.

There is value to dignified silence, even when people make the wrong assumptions about you on social media. I hope one day Brooklyn understands this.

I wish all of them well.

Did his parents control him that much though? He's so young and he's already been a chef, a photographer, a hot sauce entrepreneur, a model...it seems like he's bouncing from "job" to "job" at "job" at random. If David and Victoria were steering his ship, it seems like he would have a more stable path...

He is an unserious dilettante who has never had a real job.

+1

It seems like they indulged his every whim in an effort to find his passion in life. And he was mildly successful at each ONLY because he is a Beckham. He really doesn’t seem to understand the only reason he is not an art school dropout working minimum wage is because of his parents.

+1 he seems like such a dud despite immense resources and connections

His parents turned a sports career into a huge net worth. That doesn't happen on its own. Everyone knows VB is rigid with eating the same meals everyday, never smiling, etc. BB doesn't seem to realize he's been the beneficiary of these efforts when all he's contributed is smiling for some photo ops.

Yes congrats to victoria Beckham for remaining rail thing after 4 kids by eating the same meal daily. What an accomplishment. We are all grateful to her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, can we stop pretending that David and Victoria Beckham are some paragon of class and propriety?

Really?

They're tacky, grasping weirdos. Second only to the Kardashians in their fakeness. Valuable brand my ass. Maybe across the pond, but not in the US.

You can say what you want by they are worth $600 million dollars. That seems valuable to me.

Right? If it was worthless Brooklyn wouldn’t be so mad.