American Riviera Orchard and Meghan Markle

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The name doesn't make sense at all.

I also don't really see them as home/ lifestyle influencers.

I guess we'll see

She makes a good fashion influencer, not sure about home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of all things, what we really need is another luxury lifestyle brand? This is silly. They talk about service and charity, and do this? She is very desperate for attention and status.

Can you explain the connection you're trying to make here?

Yes sure - it is hypocritical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of all things, what we really need is another luxury lifestyle brand? This is silly. They talk about service and charity, and do this? She is very desperate for attention and status.

Can you explain the connection you're trying to make here?

Yes sure - it is hypocritical.

Because…..this new venture negates all of their philanthropy??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is timing bad because Kate is missing? Because the rest of the working royals are carrying on, it seems. A bunch of them went to a F1 race last weekend, and Camilla went on vacation.

When would it be ok for a non-working royal to do non-royal work?

Preferably when your sister-in-law isn’t dominating the headlines as missing and your father-in-law hasn’t just announced his cancer diagnosis? Seriously?

So, is Kate’s sister wrong as well? Camilla?

Should everyone be in pre-mourning….or just Meghan?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“American Riviera Orchard”?

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot???

That is actually a better name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of all things, what we really need is another luxury lifestyle brand? This is silly. They talk about service and charity, and do this? She is very desperate for attention and status.

Can you explain the connection you're trying to make here?

Yes sure - it is hypocritical.

Because…..this new venture negates all of their philanthropy??

Because they made a huge stink during their departure from the BFR about "service is universal" and their foundation, and their unique position to contribute to positive change. They are "philanthropists" and "activists" oh but also luxury lifestyle tastemakers and hucksters? It is inconsistent garbage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guarantee that actual professional branding people advised against “American Riviera Orchard” as a name.

Yes. Or, they were afraid to tell the emperor they didn't like his new clothes.

[Anonymous]

I think a lifestyle brand makes perfect sense for them. The name is awful, I hate it.

I actually get the thinking here, though I can see why many don't. I do think Meghan has sought to position herself as a wife and mother since they moved to Montecito, with a focus on the kids and family life. The whole thing with her raising chickens, the photos of the family on the lawn -- she is trying to position herself as having an enviable family-focused lifestyle. Like GOOP, but more focused on being a mom and having young kids (GOOP has always been focused more on fashion and working out, with some food mixed in).

So I get this as a progression of that, but I am not sure she has successfully positioned herself for most people to get it (even I'm stretching).

But then all the branding is very "I'm a Duchess married to a Prince." I have no idea how much of that is Meghan and how much is the branding team trying to emphasize what they view as the most marketable thing about her.

In any case, I'm actually a sucker for this kind of thing, so I will 100% look at the products when they come out and would not be embarrassed to own something form "American Riviera Orchard" if it was actually cute and functional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of all things, what we really need is another luxury lifestyle brand? This is silly. They talk about service and charity, and do this? She is very desperate for attention and status.

Can you explain the connection you're trying to make here?

Yes sure - it is hypocritical.

Because…..this new venture negates all of their philanthropy??

Because they made a huge stink during their departure from the BFR about "service is universal" and their foundation, and their unique position to contribute to positive change. They are "philanthropists" and "activists" oh but also luxury lifestyle tastemakers and hucksters? It is inconsistent garbage.

I don't view these things as inconsistent. They do in fact need an income stream of some kind, and there's nothing anti-charity or suspect about a lifestyle brand. We'll see what the actual products are and how they are made and distributed (very easy for them to make missteps here if it turns out their wares are made in factories with underpaid workers in poor conditions, for instance). But I could see an avenue where the company is "mission-focused" -- say partnering with businesses owned by women and POC, who have good records on how they treat employees. I could also see them creating a charity focus with a certain percent of revenue, or all revenue from specific products, going to Archewell or Invictus or some of the other charities they've worked with. It would be an easy way to raise money for those organizations if it's successful.

It's definitely not hypocritical in terms of their desire to effect positive change. At least not yet. If it's a bunch of overpriced garbage stamped with "Made in Thailand," I reserve the right to change my mind.

[Anonymous]

Super dumb name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of all things, what we really need is another luxury lifestyle brand? This is silly. They talk about service and charity, and do this? She is very desperate for attention and status.

Can you explain the connection you're trying to make here?

Yes sure - it is hypocritical.

Because…..this new venture negates all of their philanthropy??

I see what the PP is saying. It's not that it "negates" her philanthropy. It's just that they were trying to position themselves as champions of social justice and spent a lot of time and energy highlighting their foundation and charitable work. Trying to sell the posh Montecito lifestyle, which is out of reach for anyone except a rarified few, seems antithetical to that.

In other words, I'm sure people like Martha Stewart and Ina Garten do chartiable work. But they don't brand themselves as "philanthropists."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They've just uploaded 2 pics in the last minute: https://www.instagram.com/shopamericanriviera...gsh=bzNuMzhjMnA1d2Ru

The people commenting there sound like brainless trolls. Can't they screen out the rude comments?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of all things, what we really need is another luxury lifestyle brand? This is silly. They talk about service and charity, and do this? She is very desperate for attention and status.

Can you explain the connection you're trying to make here?

Yes sure - it is hypocritical.

Because…..this new venture negates all of their philanthropy??

Because they made a huge stink during their departure from the BFR about "service is universal" and their foundation, and their unique position to contribute to positive change. They are "philanthropists" and "activists" oh but also luxury lifestyle tastemakers and hucksters? It is inconsistent garbage.

Most of us are — and do — multiple things. Sometimes even simultaneously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think a lifestyle brand makes perfect sense for them. The name is awful, I hate it.

I actually get the thinking here, though I can see why many don't. I do think Meghan has sought to position herself as a wife and mother since they moved to Montecito, with a focus on the kids and family life. The whole thing with her raising chickens, the photos of the family on the lawn -- she is trying to position herself as having an enviable family-focused lifestyle. Like GOOP, but more focused on being a mom and having young kids (GOOP has always been focused more on fashion and working out, with some food mixed in).

So I get this as a progression of that, but I am not sure she has successfully positioned herself for most people to get it (even I'm stretching).

But then all the branding is very "I'm a Duchess married to a Prince." I have no idea how much of that is Meghan and how much is the branding team trying to emphasize what they view as the most marketable thing about her.

In any case, I'm actually a sucker for this kind of thing, so I will 100% look at the products when they come out and would not be embarrassed to own something form "American Riviera Orchard" if it was actually cute and functional.

Do you think that image has landed better in California, perhaps? I don’t see her as anything but Rachel from Suits and a royal dropout (no shade, I’m not a fan of the royals).

[Anonymous]

I work in the trademark / branding space. She filed the trademark application in early February, and I guarantee her attorney did a trademark clearance analysis beforehand. Those can take several weeks for an attorney to complete. This brand idea has been in the works for months - at least.

It’s possible they pushed up the release date to coincide with all the royal drama, but also totally possible they’ve had this date in mind for months.