Meghan's back in the movies

[AtIusvue]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15262991/Meghan-Markle-return-acting-Hollywood-new-film.html

Ignoring derailment. Back to the topic.

Meghan was expressing regret in one of her many confusing podcast interviews about not having enough stock, and that was why she didn’t want to put another batch up for sale of her basic range of pancake mix, etc, because she didn’t want to disappoint the clientele after another sell out. This made no sense, because surely you want to keep stocking and restocking, and people will repeat order and people will finally get their first order if they’ve failed before - everyone happy.

Why then was she selling a small batch of this same stuff (along with the candles) at Godmothers? What’s the marketing strategy there?

If she’s trying to launch a new line before Xmas, why not tie it in with some publicity for the Christmas special, and do it somewhere less obscure than Godmothers? I don’t see the marketing strategy of someone who wants to take her brand global.

Your posting style is rather familiar🤔
But let’s not derail any further.

I have always admired your optimism @Puzzledandpissedoff! And that you still hold on to hope here , I too am normally optimistic but frankly the continuing cock ups , one after another have turned me into a pessimist where these two are concerned 🙁

@Petitchat thank you. I was wrong and you are correct.
Hopefully adding image from talk guidelines.

Then report me. I posted a post yesterday too early, added the remaining sentences so it actually made sense and explained what happened in the post before I posted the final time. Can't remember which thread but I'm sure you'll find it using advanced search.

Do you have the phrase " beat a dead horse to death" in the UK? Just wondering...

This is completely wrong, mn rules about editing states, you are not supposed to use it to completely change the body or narrative of your post, nowhere does it say you can’t add extra context or forgotten lines, that are in the main body of a post.

Yes my comment wasn’t aimed at just Soectre8, the constant toing and froing is so bloody tedious

We use the phrase, "grasping at straws".

I shouldn't worry. The operative words need to be looked at in any set of rules or laws, and in this context, "Changing the context of your post...." are the operative words. The point of the rule is to prevent a poster posting their position as 'Fish" in their post, and then completely changing it to position "Chicken", but confusing posters who have only seen position "Fish" and respond to the fish position. If you have clearly missed out a sentence, and you've edited the post to make it make sense/add clarity, and you've stated you have done so, then that's going to be fine. I doubt the mods will be bothered by a de minimis change that makes no material difference to the overall context or meaning of the original post.

👍

You were not wrong, read it carefully, adding forgotten lines, is not changing the context.

👍

Thank you @NewAgeNewMe for quoting the exact rule. Clarifying a post by adding a sentence or so is not 'changing the context'.

For anyone who didn't realise it, clicking the 'Edited' button on a post will bring up all previous iterations of that post.

@BemusedAmerican - We certainly have the phrase "flogging a dead horse"

Anyway back to the point. I have no real idea of H&M' finances. I wouldn't think a cameo performance is going to stick that much in the coffers , so maybe a toe back in water for her . It would appear ( but I don't know) their commercial ventures haven't stayed the course. But I do think she will not give up and "pivot" & That's OK ( NOT that she needs my approbation.) I think much of this might stem from them thinking they were more popular than they when they married. Of course the docuseries was a massive hit. But , some of that disproven and not sure what else they have in that line. My impression is , in the popular press (UK) unless a slow news day they are falling down the pages. But that's a purely subjective opinion.

Gosh there's some desperation on here with Meghan supporters! Why not write about how utterly fab she will be and how you can't wait to see this cameo. 🤷‍♀️

Cross posted with you, Jeff, you put it more succinctly than me! Another example would be if you got your facts completely arse about face on an issue, and were subsequently told you had got it wrong. You then use the edit function to change your position so you don't look stupid. That's the sort of thing the mods want to prevent, as it stops the free flow of conversation.

And as @bluegreygreen has pointed out, people can see what has been edited anyway, so it's going to be obvious that a contextual change has been made or a minimal/immaterial one.

Well, adding something short is fine but I have known posters completely change the whole tone of a post that I have replied to, by adding extra. And making my answer ridiculous!
Personally I use it for punctuation and spellings and when I try and bold something and miss off the * !!

I don’t see the marketing strategy of someone who wants to take her brand global.

@Indianrollerbird This has been my difficulty with the whole As Ever scenario. Much as I dislike Meghan's behaviours, I don't actually want her to fail. I just don't understand how, with so much to start off with, and so much advice readily available, she can be getting the marketing so wrong (witness the website metrics quoted upthread).

👍 as with life “ context “ is key mn is no different! , some people hold an opinion and read things with a view to support their argument instead of actually reading and understanding what is actually there.🤷‍♀️

Isn't that what you've been doing?

The info has been good thanks. Not as boring as I first thought.

I think much of this might stem from them thinking they were more popular than they when they married.

@BasiliskStare I think you're right - I think they mistook the general outpouring of goodwill for them at the time of their wedding (in contrast to the alleged nastiness!) as personal popularity rather than more general.

I actually think Netflix have let her down in a big way. They were/are either her backers/partners or they weren't/aren't. Allowing her to keep saying she has their backing gives the impression that she has the might of the Netflix merch department behind her - in which case, why the continued failure in stocks, and reliance on white label goods rather than quality products? It just looks incompetent.

Very true. And so it goes on...

Netflix are not her nanny. They were paid huge sums of money to deliver and looks like they fell short. Bad judgement on the part of Netflix. The Sussex's are a bit toxic IMHO.

I know, but they were either backing her in a partnership or they weren't. If they were, the partnership value has been next to shit, with reflects badly on Netflix. If they weren't, they should have told her to STFU about holding them out as partly responsible for her dismal marketing strategy. I agree they have been an overall disaster for Netflix, despite the success of the (heavily embellished with untruths) docuseries. But Netflix will hold on in case there's another desperate tell all series or a reality show in the offing.

It’s interesting that you say that Netflix should have corrected the narrative!
because this has been a theme running through every endeavour committed by this pair , they have been allowed to spout completely false information and narratives and absolutely no one ever contradicts them!
the question should be why? 🤔