Meghan now flogging clothes for commission.

[AtIusvue]

Commissionable links- means when a potential customer clicks on the link, it's attributed to the affiliate, allowing the brand to record the source of the traffic. If someone buys a product using an affiliate link, the brand will pay the affiliate marketer commission on the sale

But she’s not an influencer?

This is really sad actually.

Why do people buy things from such sites? First time I’ve heard of this and it makes no sense to me. Why click on a link and buy knowing the commissions being made? I’m not in the market for such high price items but I’d I was I’d go to an actual shop and try it all on.

Loads of people buy stuff online. Any commission to the influencer isnt going to make the item any more costly to you. I think its important that they declare they will ge commisiion otherwise it appears as an endorsement.

I think we must have very different ideas of 'productivity'!

Covid would actually have been the perfect time for her to set up her 'lifestyle brand' as nobody had anything better to do than potter about, but she seemed focussed on pretending to be an 'American royal'. As for 'raising toddlers' she and her husband barely work and I'm sure they have household staff. Lots of women manage to hold down demanding full time jobs while 'raising toddlers' alongside husbands who are doing the same, all without any home help.

What exactly has she 'produced' other than a 'documentary' pretending to be chased by 'paps', a single series podcast and a silly lifestyle show? She has failed twice to get her brand up and running and as you've said, affiliate merching doesn't require any actual work. I would acknowledge her hard work if I saw it but I really don't see how you can say she's been admirably 'productive' over the past 5 years.

I also don't agree that it's 'classic' to go from the market leaders first, and then make do with lesser players. Shouldn't it be the other way round? If they're having to do this, then surely their 'productivity' isn't up to much, or the big players would keep them on?

The problem is as always with this pair is that they don’t take on board professional advice.

Meghan wants AList status and seems to enjoy the status that her bestowed title affords her. But getting commission in a very obvious way from clicks and links to clothing websites is a bit tacky and doesn’t actually fit well with the glittery stardust of perceived royalty.

In my view it just demonstrates even more than before how much their “star status” has fallen. The problem being that if it falls much more it’s literally worthless. Though sadly I think the fall has already been so great that many ships have sailed as to decent revenue streams. But the American market is different and they may buy into this stuff but those with money aren’t going to be influenced by her and presumably her audience has lesser funds.

All this hatred for Meghan must be exhausting, and it’s pretty pathetic actually. It’s fine not to like her, but why not just move on? Nothing to see here. Gal’s got to earn a living.

I kind of admire her 'don't give a f$ck' attitude - earning $$$'s no matter what - she has a 13 bedroom mansion to have the upkeep of BUT using her 'royal' status and 'children' (hers or not ??) is just a no no IMO

It's not really "nothing to see" though (no brand in the world wants people to say "nothing to see" about their brand, btw).

They publicly declared their pursuit of financial independence five years ago, when they arguably had more than enough money to be financially independent.

They then accepted several high value financial deals, and committed themselves to an expensive lifestyle. Their choice.

THEN they have launched themselves as philanthropists/charities/quasi-royals who are NOW launching products and doing commission links.

It's absolutely fine to want a billionaire lifestyle, to work to achieve it, and to do anything legal and ethical to achieve it.

What everyone is commenting on is whether they're doing things that are a) in keeping with their past statements about the environment, mental health etc and b) whether or not they're likely to succeed at the level they need to (because financial independence means living within your means, even if the means are relatively spectacular).

I think they'd have much smaller problems if they didn't need as much maintenance money. Then they could do similar activities without "the stink".

In this case, "the stink" is desperation to make the money they need. All her actions reek of it, which is not a very good look.

By contrast, VB has built up her fashion brand without worrying about the obvious Roland Mouret dress copycats and the lack of profit for years. Because she committed to it and didn't have "the stink" of desperation, and they could afford to wait it out. Incidentally, she also paid her staff really well as I recall.

VB is a 'Vanity Project' - in excess of £66million in losses over 17 years and with tens of millions pumped in from family investors - just turned her first profit at the end of 2024.

I don’t mind the this - I agree with previous posters who point out that it’s better she finds a way to make money without relying only on tell all documentaries and books.

And Fergie has used her title and association with the royal family for decades to flog stuff from books to weight watchers.

Meghan is basically the new Fergie.

But my point is that they can afford to! She took out her implants, started dressing in a totally different way, and they can afford for her to do it in a leisurely way.

Because a brand is about more than going "here's my stuff", which is what Meghan is doing.

The main point is that, unlike before, they are now engaging with press on their terms, and that’s obviously important to them and fair enough in the circumstances imho.

Sure, they're entitled to engage with the press on their terms, but it's hard to see how their current engagement sits with their stated aims above.

Part of the problem is that they went gung-ho on explaining what they were going to do, with some high-minded yet impractical ideas of how they were going to operate - and then had to follow up.

If they'd said in plain English "we'll do some commercial works around our interests and support charities too, and we'll engage with the press as appropriate outside of the Royal Rota" then there would be no argument.

The problem with that statement is that they’d always been able to work with grass roots media.

It seems as though Harry and then Meghan never really understood the function or workings of the Royal rota system.

Blimey, you’d think Meghan was peddling crack cocaine the way some people carry on!

There’s nothing offensive about it,

And she remains the wife of the son of the King ; so the royal connection is there whether she promotes it or not.

Seriously, so what if she sells some white and cream clothing? I don’t understand why that is anything to be embarrassed about?

Surely it’s more embarrassing to already be in possession of a €610 million fortune like Prince Charles, most of it acquired through inheritance, and still take money from the public purse and even seek preferential tax advantages not available to ordinary citizens?
Now that is really something to be embarrassed about imho!

I think they have been pretty consistent about their aims though and it was pretty clear from the offset. Not just saying this to be contrary btw, I think it’s fairly evident.

They wanted to have a family, support themselves financially, and continue to support the causes that are important to them. And that’s what they are doing.

I think the problem was though that they felt that some key figures within the RF commanded a certain bubble of protection within the boundaries of communication with the Royal rota; and other less key figures like themselves served to an extent as collateral damage.

'Gal'? How incredibly patronising. She's a 43 year old woman.

As I mentioned Fergie has been using her title front and center for years in commercial ventures.

Harry and Meghan were told they couldn’t do half in half out, they were to stop using the HRH, and were not to use the Sussex Royal branding which was already established as their working royal ‘brand’ - so to prevent the possibility of confusion between what had been official royal business vs new commercial business.

The royal family have never taken a position on using their titles in general. Just like they didn’t with Fergie.

The difference is that Fergie, although divorced from Andrew, never gave tell alls and slagged off the U.K. or the RF for monetary gain. The use of titles is up to the monarch. Fergie was close with the queen and discreet.

And she never signed an agreement not to monetise her titles.

There is a huge difference between someone who is your friend benefiting from your fame for money (with your permission) and someone who is your openly sworn enemy merching your fame for their own benefit and to throw shade at you.

Nothing about Meghan makes her special enough to stick two fingers up at an entire country and not feel the consequences. She did this to herself.

I think for the royals the crucial thing is the HRH styling. That's why Letters Patent were issued after the York divorce saying that henceforth divorcees would not be entitled to the styling, and why the Sussexes, while technically still HRH, are no longer allowed to use it.

The HRH kind of marks you out as officially 'royal', but a Duke or Duchess title really doesn't mean very much. I still don't think Meghan should be using the Duchess title in her merching business, just as Fergie shouldn't have used hers, but I don't think Charles will be overly concerned by it.

More than anything I think the use of a British peerage title on an American webpage merching clothes for commission makes her sound a bit ridiculous, which I doubt is the impression she's going for. But I guess that's up to her.

I think Harry meant the sofa issue as a criticism of the RF, but in my opinion, it reflects badly on him.

And if Nott Cott was good enough for two future kings, William and George, (and Catherine, of course), then it was fine as a first home for H&M.

The difference is that Fergie, although divorced from Andrew, never gave tell alls and slagged off the U.K. or the RF for monetary gain

Two books about the Institution and how awful it all was, and an Oprah interview

Most influencers do the opposite - they get you discounts.

No, because he's the Head of State.

But that’s not how the rota works at all.

Some members of the press may have had or continue to have an inside track with Royal individuals or staff of certain individuals but that’s got nothing to do with the Royal rota.

I don’t actually believe Harry’s claim that some were sacrificed to protect others. The press doesn’t move as one uniformed body - you might be able to suppress or delay the occasional exclusive but not consistently.

The rota is simply a system of organizing the chaotic gaggle of media interest - a way to reduce the numbers to a manageable crowd that best serves the engagement at hand. It changes on a case by case basis.

Some people are regulars - those named as royal correspondents by their respective organizations. Some get one off rota passes for a specific engagement - for example local press, or specialized press for example military or farming etc.

The rota comprises reporters, photographers, camera operators. It covers print media, radio, online and TV.

Sometimes the situation is sensitive so only one reporter and camera are allowed and they must operate under a pool system and release their content to the other media.

The Queen’s very last engagement with Liz Truss for example.

It’s not some nefarious organization like the Illuminati!

I am one of several people I’ve seen on MN that have actually had rota passes and it’s like being herded like cattle most of the time around the engagement.