Quite want Megan to start The Tig up again, anyone else?

[Embelline]

Ignoring everything that's been said about them, on a completely shallow surface level I quite want her to restart this and do the influencer type thing that's being bandied about. The pictures were all very pretty and I would definitely give it a visit as I love her make up and fashion choices, not that any of it would be within budget!

Sounds like she is ditching Harry and I think her best move would be to try and get into politics as I don't think she has the talent or experience to work behind the scenes in Hollywood and is unlikely to top Suits in her acting career.

Running a dating agency might work perhaps.

I just cannot imagine her as a politician. She’s too thin skinned and too focused on herself. Also does she actually have any skills or knowledge in that field? I know US politicians don’t generally have Politics degrees but what qualities would fit her for that role?

OP, I would love The Tig 2.0 and I'm sure, so would a lot of people. Think about it, she had over 2M followers on her own.

But currently it would give the likes of Sarah Vine and GBNews crew something to tear apart on Meghan. Still, she cannot stop living her life because of them.

A v/blog like that does require a lot of dedication though. Between Archewell, Netflix, Podcasting (in the last episode she seemed to allude to an extended platform, presumably visual like Hilary Clinton?) and the small dc (they seem rather hands on parents), I don't see her dedicating that much time on something like this (though she does enjoy it and is full of energy).

Though I can see her having an ethically sourced lifestyle goop thing, linked with her own products to sell. I don't think her casual style is that expensive tbh. What she wears, gets sold out pdq, so I can see that being very successful indeed, but she would need a team to run it, with everything they have going on.
In terms of scope, she could sell anything from clothes (she has experience in this), make-up line, etc. Hell, she could even do food and kiddies things too, to incorporate her parenting role.

Isn't selling products what catapulted the Kardashians into billions and keeps Gwyneth well into millions despite no longer acting. Could be quite lucrative.

Didn't she say she devotes an hour a week to Archewell? Or that's what the tax returns showed. And I don't think there's any new Netflix or podcasting content turning up. So this notion that she's too busy to start up The Tig seems a little far fetched. I'm sure she could 'sell' many things- whether she wants to follow the Kardashians is a fascinating question.

Also on the question of Goop, Gwyneth Paltrow is a much much much bigger star than MM is/was. At least in the US where I live she's predominantly known as an actress rather than Goop- that's nice lucrative side project.

For MM she needs a 'main' project first before there can be side projects. Even my American friends who rightly thought the UK/Royal Family/Press had treated her badly are now quite eye roll-y about her. And plenty of people have little to no idea who she is. She's not a household name like the Kardashians. For the Kardashians their willingness to merch everything and anything has led to their success. It has come with a great loss of privacy and dare I say, a loss of respect. I'm not sure that would be a wise move.

She made 80K a year in USD from the Tig so it was successful but it wasn't groundbreaking. Of course NOW as a Duchess and with all the publicity (good and bad) she has had, she could make more. But 80K in Hollywood/commercial terms is modest. (For reference, I'm a mid career academic and I earn considerably more than that figure in the US!)
Quite interested to see where the 2 million Tig specific followers figure came from. Sussex Royal's Instagram had about 9 million when it was effectively shut down. Tig was shut down in 2017 wasn't it...

I believe the 1hr a week are the general staff meetings. Nothing unusual about that. But they do a lot of background work with raising funds and charity organisations etc. (it's on their website).

As for Gwyneth, she has not had a blockbuster proper lead since around 2011. Most of the younger generation don't even know who she is. She has had a splattering of side roles in big films like Iron Man and Avengers, but I'm not sure she is any longer big worldwide. I do like Gwyneth, but I'm just making a realistic point here.
H&M are known worldwide, hence Spare was such a big seller and so was Netflix and Archetypes.

My point being, if Gwyn is successful, so can MM.

Also the point about 80K for Tig, is that the tig was not selling products, just content based that is all. But Goop does link to their own shop. So that is a lot
of money.

It was 2M as was shown on the followers tag just like other sites and Insta as well.
SR was over 10M, btw.

I think. Being the face of a make up range or having her own line in make up would be ideal.

Yy but she should pivot it to become an entire lifestyle brand like Goop rather than just a blog. With a section for charity collections too eg Smart Works, etc.

Tbh one of the benefits of her restarting it, is that it would stop all the speculation about 'when is she going to restart it' 😄 Her 'fans' and the gossip columns seem to go on about it all the time!

Meghan Markle and Gwyneth are only 9 years apart in age. This idea that Gwyneth is less well known and appeals to an older demographic I'm not sure is correct. Meghan and Gwyneth are both (like me!!) middle aged American mums of kids (with a lifestyle that doesn't really compare to mine). Also as someone who lives in the US I don't think there is any comparison between the star power of the two. Also I grew up in India and watched Gwyneth Paltrow as a teenager and all the boys in my class were in love with her...so don't underestimate the global appeal she did have. Moreover, as I said, she started Goop when she began to wind down her main HUGELY successful acting career where she won an Oscar. Also Paltrow comes from Hollywood royalty herself and has many connections in the industry.

MM hasn't had a main career of the same star quality (that is indepdendent of her having married a foreign prince).

So while I'm sure she can be hugely successful and she clearly has more American fans than British ones, the two ideas that a) she is too busy to start up Tig b) that it's guaranteed to be a huge success is not a given unless as you said she goes down the Kardashian route which is not an edifying way to make a living necessarily. She would either have to relentlessly endorse products or tap into a brand that would be niche. "I'm Meghan, and see what I'm wearing" is not going to be enough in the long term unless there is something else accompanying it. The reason Goop is the hit it is, is because Paltrow has hitched her wagon to a particular wellness trend and did so long before it became mainstream (she was vegan before I properly knew what it meant to be vegan). A lot of her tie ups etc are tied to that particular theme. So if you want to cleanse your vagina then she's your go to. Or drink broth at breakfast.

And this is really Meghan (and by association Harry's) problem. There isn't a brand as such. Are they global philanthropists? Maybe but they are not in the league of the Angelina Jolies or the Obamas/Gates/Clintons. And again ALL of these people had incredible MAIN careers before they embarked on their philanthropy. Are they influencers? Who will they influence and what will that be based on? And building a brand takes time- Goop's been around for a decade. And there are lots of celebrity beauty brands around including Jennifer Aniston and her hair care brand, I think Jessica Alba has one. The celebrity beauty market is quite saturated with some truly globally big names:
https://www.allure.com/gallery/celebrity-beauty-brands. And finally if Tig is going to do charity stuff, then what is its link to Archewell? I mean given that Archewell itself hasn't found a niche or a philanthropic voice it's known for....

In a way being a Royal is straightforward right? I am a Royal because of my birth and privilege. I have to appear looking polished, meet the public/the peasants at a distance, shake hands, cut ribbons, do a few important looking things while wielding no meaningful power, and then sit on a pile of inherited wealth. I'm sure H&M will be entirely comfortable for the rest of their life but their path to living a life that is hugely well funded etc is not that straightforward.

@MangshorJhol
I am not sure what the point of most of your post is.

Firstly, Gwyneth almost being a decade older than MM , has nothing to do with anything. It's a bit like me comparing other older women like Heather Locklear, Meg Ryan etc. All were big in their prime.

The main thing is that Gwyneth was at her prime fame around 2001, and Meghan's prime fame is NOW. This is the important fact. This means people between 25 and 45 are most likely within the same vibes of her makeup/lifestyle etc. They are also prominent users of SM and these kind of blogs. The younger for fashion probably (think Grazia), the older for family lifestyle (with kids most likely at home still).
Perhaps the problem is for you is that you, specifically, are simply not her market.

She does not have to have cameras following her all around. She could do slots showing her making food (she did this on Tig /tutorials on make up and decorations etc.). Martha Steward/ Jo Malone / Lulu Guinness/ Jo Malone and everyone actually, did not have to show us anything about their personal lives to have successful brands. It's all about marketing.

For the list you gave, I only knew less than a handful had brands, tbh. So all boils down to who your market is, I guess. Evidently, MM does have a market.

I don't know if Angelina Jolie was doing charity and ambassador work when she was up and coming (well, as a nepo baby, she probably was never 'up and coming'), but I only heard about her work later in her career. As for the Obamas/Clintons, they were Lawyers/Potus/Producers, they didn't start off their careers as producers or in the field like Spielberg . MM was Actress/Royal/Producer.

I'm not the one who suggested a charity link for the Tig, but I think that is a splendid idea. To be linked with Archewell, just as Production/Audio are. Some Capsule/Food/Bakery etc. could easily be linked to the Foundation section.

Heather locklear 61 ( not a huge film star)
Meg Ryan 61 ( a film star)
Gwyneth paltrow 50 ( a film star )
Angelina jolie 48 ( a film star )
Meghan markle 41 ( not a huge film star )

Not sure what the point is of calling Angelina Jolie a nepo baby. I don’t think it’s a nice term. Do you have a definition that doesn’t include all children from the industry whose parents had successful, award winning careers?

I also don’t think “hearing about” one’s philanthropy is key to anything. Many decent people give and do without needing accolades.

Indeed @AliceOlive , it can be argued that Angelina has now eclipsed her fathers fame !
And I'm unsure how heather locklear ( as great as she was ) measures up to the others mentioned? She was famous as mostly a tv actress, unless this is to compare to Meghan who is also famous for tv rather than films?

It’s a pretty sad time to even bring up Heather Locklear, too.

It seem one wants to compare MM’s acting career to an Academy award winning actress, her marrying a prince to Obama being elected POTUS, her producing 15 podcasts to the Obama’s current activities while disparaging others who she deems not as accomplished or to have had a “leg up”.

I don’t think the comparisons are apt and I don’t think it’s fair to MM nor to any of the others, no matter their level of success in life.

I did think it was a nasty post too. Why drag down people (mainly women) so you can raise Meghan up.

I don’t know why Heather locklear has been dragged into this. She has been battling drug and alcohol issues for many years and is quite unwell

Surely if Angelina is a Nepo baby then Meghan must be too ?

I do think MM will find her way at some point. But let’s don’t call Gwyneth anything in hopes of making Meghan seem more something. Goop was the inspiration for so many of these lifestyle Blogs, more than likely including The Tig.

I don’t know why Heather locklear has been dragged into this. She has been battling drug and alcohol issues for many years and is quite unwell

Surely that was the point, right?

I am sure you got the 'point' of most my post.

1. If Meghan's time is now then what is it based on? A blockbuster movie? A series of high profile deals with companies? No, it's based on marrying a foreign prince and the fallout of that. You can see how that doesn't compare with the achievements of Meg Ryan, Gwyneth Paltrow or Meg Ryan at the height of their careers. Being the self exiled wife of the sixth in line to the British throne is not a job.
2. Barack Obama was POTUS at 45. You can't seriously compare Jolie/Obama etc to Meghan Markle and her achievements in her mid 40s.
3. Back to my 'point'- which is that to have the kind of influence she wants/needs, you have to have done something meaty and meaningful that goes beyond a medium time career as an actress (with no blockbuster movies) and a producer. . You are comparing MM to people with multi million dollar global brands based on something specific- Jo Malone grew up on a council estate, had a multimillion pound business that she sold to Estee Lauder and has an MBE and a CBE. I'd be willing to listen to her talk about the beauty industry because she spent years in it. Not just wearing products. Martha Stewart ran her own catering business, then became a chef, wrote cookbooks, had two syndicated shows and a magazine. If Martha Stewart wants to talk about food or business she had DECADES of experience. Lulu Guinness was born into aristocracy, and was hugely independently wealthy before launching her own company. Her stuff is displayed in the V&A.
4. I never said MM doesn't have a market. I'm sure she does. My son watches some random YouTube dudes who talk about chess. There are people who have made money from unboxing videos. There is a market for everyone. How substantial and how meaningful that market is, especially if it's not on the back of an already successful career is the moot question. Which then goes back to the fairly simple point I was making was that she didn't and doesn't have a niche brand.

Gwyneth was part of the avengers franchise which ran until 2020, watched by billions.

I know you think that can’t compare to ‘suits’ 🤣🤣

To be honest I'm more amused at Gwyneths roles in the blockbuster marvel films being brushed aside as not being in her prime! 🤣🤣🤣

@jeffgoldblum

Its too funny.

It's not a point of measuring up, it's about the age difference and time of height of their fame. No one sees Meg or (shall we now replace Heather with Michelle Pfeiffer , Emma Thomson, Kristin Scott Thomas, whoever). No one thinks they are the same age as Gwyneth, because almost a decade stands between them.

BTW, Heather was big time in her time, dating the best rock start etc. But, yes, she was on tv series rather than blockbusters, so I said her name.

As for Angelina, I clearly stated, she never had to graft her way up like others who had no parents in the industry.

Meghan’s father won an academy award.

I'm not sure what age has to do with anything, all the above mentioned actresses were more famous and more successful than Meghan, at earlier ages and later !
Thier careers are not comparable in any sense and makes your whole argument null and void!

The bottom line is that all of these people were famous for their achievements BEFORE they had a side hustle in wellness, beauty, philanthropy. And their achievements were in a totally different league to Meghan's. So before she can make money off this side hustle, she needs to work out what her USP is. It's interesting that it's been three years since they left or something and this is still not clear. There have been a few speaking gigs, one podcast, a few charitable associations, but that's not a brand. If you say Meghan Markle people will currently think 'wife of Harry who left the UK' which as I said earlier is not a brand in itself unless that explicitly choose to monetise their Royal connections more permanently.

Meanwhile being Royal is a brand in itself no matter how politically problematic. Kate is the wife of the future King. She hasn't pretended to be anything else. The feminist in me raises an eyebrow or two but what you see is what you get- a wealthy white woman born into privilege, who has married into even greater privilege, who barring a revolution will be Queen one day. As a 'brand' its fairly easy.