As ever and PR disasters continued

[AtIusvue]

So Meghan lost her fathers number but is ringing round hospitals and will send a handwritten note, as per Sussex sources speaking through the Sun, the Telegraph and the Times.

I mean I have no idea, how it works with PR for very famous people, but surely there are scenarios they prep for?

Her dad is in his 80s, severely obese and has suffered ill health for years. You would think, there would be protocol in what to do should the worst happen.

That would include having up to date contact info. This isn’t something Meg would need to have/get involved with if she’s estranged, but surely ‘The Office of the DDOS’ would. Then engage in their set plan- whether that’s a public statement that this is a private affair or that contact has been made through the proper channels.

Whatever this is, it isn’t professional-it’s complete chaos.

I got my currencies mixed up re the heritage railway and the Sussexes. GBP v USD and all that. The North York Moors railway is 4 or 5 times bigger than the Sussexes.

Converting the last known tax return for the Sussex thing, 3 million USD after admin, convert to GB, gives a smidgin over 2 million quid.

A quick google, and that is about the same as a single cancer charity bike ride by Sir Chris Hoy.

And when we think of the news we see about fundraisers in general, there are charities being run from a kitchen table bigger than the Sussex fund. Although I am not applying that to Sir Chris here of course.

I am just trying to put things into perspective in my own mind here. Perception and vague claims v reality.

Sir Chris Hoy ‘overwhelmed’ as fundraising cycle ride raises over £2m | STV News

Looks like Archewell Foundation is another failure in a long list. Staff being made redundant, financial issues, seems like the ‘name change ‘ may actually be a shuttering of Archewell F, rather than a rebrand or name change. It looks like it is not an easy process.

“Closing a charitable foundation isn't easy; it's a formal, regulated process involving trustee decisions, settling all debts, distributing remaining assets to other charities, and filing specific forms with state and federal regulators (like the IRS in the U.S. or Charity Commission in the UK) to ensure all assets go to charitable purposes, often taking several months and requiring legal guidance. It's complex because it's about protecting public trust, not just closing a business”

I do trust that the money Chris Hoy raised will go to cancer charities whereas Archewell, I'd guess that only 5% does, maybe a bit over but the vast majority goes to H&M. And even when they do make charitable contributions it's pretty obvious that they are burnishing their own images and reputations.

Charities in the UK (Including Scotland and NI although their legislation is different) are under much stricter scrutiny than in the US. Winding up a charity Is a formal process with legal obligations.

i suspect that the use of the word “Foundation” in the US defines it as a charity under their legislation whereas “Philanthropies” doesn’t. So this may be a way of avoiding what little US regulation and restrictions apply.

I read on the internet - can't remember where - that the change of name might be because Archewell no longer fulfils US charity rules to be a 501-c. I don't know what fundraising they do these days but Archewell seems reliant on a couple of very wealthy but anonymous donors.

I haven't seen a financial report for 2024 - which seems a bit late. I am unsure of the accuracy of these sources but there are reports that Archewell donations collapsed in 2025 to just £1.5 million, although they spent £3.8 million - thereby creating a loss of £1.8. This resulted in staff being sacked and restructuring as a "philanthropies" organisation
https://www.geo.tv/latest/640673-prince-harry-meghan-markle-face-severe-crisis-after-major-announcement

Also, in the past- where they have got most of their donations from- there will be regulations about who you give money to.

A foundation has to have a board, legal framework, publish accounts etc

The legal structure is completely changing. Philanthropy doesn’t require any legal framework. It’s just rich peoole giving out money.

Therefore they will struggle to get certain donors who have to give to places that are clearly above board.

This will be why the are now selling dinners, because the charity that gave to them before I doubt will give over money when there’s zero accountability on Megs and Harry

Looking at the farce that was made of even registering a company name, I doubt H&M will be over-concerned with tthe complexities of closing down a foundation, @Thedom

I'm with others who suspect the real appeal of "Philanthropies" is the lesser oversight, and they can always blame others for anything that's not done properly

I bet the North York Moors railway isn't paying its president £250K either as Harry pays his old friend James Holt to run Archewell. I remember from the 2023 accounts that there were several senior staff earning £140k+

That seems the obvious explanation to me too.

As I understand it, a 'Foundation' has to abide by certain regulations, though said regulations are fairly loose. By contrast, 'Philanthropies' means basically nothing. It has no legal status, and therefore no legal obligations.

I can't see it being a great success whatever it's called. With so many reputable charities and foundations competing for donors, who is going to reach into their pocket for 'Archewell Philanthropies'?

Agree. I think the 501(c) thing comes into play as well, because the donor needs that for the donation to be tax deductible. Without it, the donation really is coming out of a pocket, and not being used against tax ?

Now.... lets speculate :-)

Does H know anyone, a rich relative perhaps, who wants to bung him a few quid without being named ?

I could be wrong but I think in the US donations to charities are tax deductible so I don't see how a vague "philanthropies" could attract donors 🤷

Sorry cross post RedTag

I mentioned that in the post right above.

And I have put my aluminium foil hat on to wonder... does he have any rich friends or a relative who would prefer to remain anonymous.

:-)

Are aluminium foil hats allowed on this thread lol.

Archewell Philanthropies doesn’t exactly trip off the tongue does it ?

My point was clear , a fan deliberately used the informal picture from Meghans instagram and presented that as the only official card without the other one deliberately to get comments about the children to obscure her previous thread where she encouraged comments about George, and it clearly worked!

I have put my aluminium foil hat on to wonder... does he have any rich friends or a relative who would prefer to remain anonymous

You don't need a tinfoil hat for that, @RedTagAlan - just to notice that someone's obviously doing the paying, that they have no clear income stream of their own, and that Harry's words about daddy having cut him off are no more to be relied on than anything else he says

I ca only assume Daddy is still
quietly bankrolling Harold.

And even when they do make charitable contributions it's pretty obvious that they are burnishing their own images and reputations.

Agreed. They are front and centre of every initiative. Like the poor grieving parents and families they have hijacked at every “coffin chasing” opportunity - Uvalde, Cali fires, children died by sui@ide…. Probs more - to push their ‘compassionate’ brand image so she can flog more of her pancake mix and PH gets more par bookings for estate agents to be enthralled by his unique insights and superior wisdom.

Grubby, grasping, grifters

If I am to be honest I am not sure KCIII would be donating to Archewell when he has charities of his own. They have a few very very rich friends who I could see giving those few large donations. Now whether KCIII is giving H personal money - a different matter. I suspect not , or maybe he is paying a few bills for him , but that is pure speculation on my part.

Yup. Uvalde was terrible.

Compare them with the King. It was in the news just a few days ago that he had a reception at Buck House for the survivors and heroes of the Huntingdon Train attack. A respectful wait so as not to get in the way, and it was the people front and center.

Yes Michelle Obama has previously commented on H&M performance / behaviours in the past to say that one’s role is to intentionally shine a light on the cause/victims and deliberately move it away from yourself in these sorts of endeavours.

Yes, Jaffyyy, and not for the first time Michelle Obama was right

I doubt the thought will impinge on H&M though; their utter self obsession seems too entrenched for that

The point about where certain donors will give was becoming an issue for Sentebale as well, if I remember correctly - it became part of the argument about clarity and governance.

I mean what on earth have the spent 5 million in expenses, in one year on?

Staff members were on a salary of about 150k

They only gave out 1.25 million in grants.

I can’t even think of any projects Archewell is associated with….never mind it then costing 5 million to carry out!!!!

Sounds so dodgy.

I don't really get the foundation for the foundation, so to speak.

The Sussexes are nowhere near rich enough to be major philanthropists in their own right.

Nor do they have the platform and prestige of royal life anymore.

Nor do either of them have any real expertise in any specific area in which the foundation could specialise.

To me it's like they're playing at being 'philanthropists', but with none of the credentials needed to make a success of it. No wonder the 'foundation' has now been downgraded to some vague 'do good' organisation.