PR disasters continued. Thread 6

[AtIusvue]

For all PR disasters of Meg and Papa Sussex

Well, I'm finding it very hard to be surprised that a party business folded during Covid.

It's really just the same as a Netflix series folding during this era, when nobody is legally allowed to watch TV any more. Or a jam business struggling, now that we're in the middle of the Great Jam Eaters' Strike of 2026. I can see the parallels.

It is a bit reverse practice. Start small at the kitchen table, build a business, enjoy the fruits of your labor, don't over extend. Continue to enjoy a good life when disaster strikes.

Start with a fortune, spend it trying to start BIG rather than building up, struggle to maintain the life you bought on credit assuming a successful future.

'A grifter is a person who obtains money or property through dishonest means, specifically by swindling, scamming, or using deception rather than force. Originating from US slang, it is widely used in the UK to describe a con artist, fraudster, or someone who tricks people to make easy money'

You are not using the word correctly - unless you can prove the above?

Bella Bajaria in the Hollywood Reporter

https://archive.is/liIU0

The definition of grifting is “petty or small scale swindling” can you demonstrate, as you clearly are in the know as to the financial dealings between the Middletons and William, how they have swindled William into buying them a house?

A house they already owned!

Look in the mirror! Or are you saying that Meghan and Harry aren’t royal any longer?
as someone who can be guaranteed upon to pop up to defend them , you clearly are a super fan!

The use of grifter came from the Spotify exec who used it to describe H&M when they dropped them. I thought that was quite widely known.

I took it to mean that Spotify felt they got scammed, which you could also argue is their own fault for paying too much for them in the first place, and not doing due diligence.

Well Spotify exec, Bill Simmons called them fucking grifters. Presumably because Spotify entered a contractual arrangement for Harry to provide podcasts for them (he being the main prize) with Meghan as a side kick. But nothing happened, Harry didn't come in to do a podcast or provide any decent ideas. So Spotify built them a state of the art studio at Montecito. And all they got was 12 episodes of dirge from Meghan and diddly squat from Harry.

Her jam is cheap white label jam in a fancy jar. It is the very definition of a scam!

We know about Harry and Meghans finances because they tell us about them as do the people who have been in business with them. The information is out there. On the other hand I can’t recall the POW ever discussing his personal finances at all let alone say he contributed towards a house purchase. I’m all eyes though and look forward to you proving he did.

Then tell that to Bill Simmons. Who worked directly with them.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jun/19/spotify-executive-calls-harry-and-meghan-grifters-after-podcast-deal-ends

You said 'they are all grifters'....?

As politely as I can say, please could you sort out your typos , and slow down when putting a sentence together, it’s extremely difficult to read your posts at times.🙏

Why don’t you ask Bill Simmons?

@GoldBthehypo

Talk to Bill Simmons so, he’s offered to spill all over a nice beer. You can come back and share with us all. I’ll even chip in a dollar

But unless they assured William that he was going to receive something in return for his money, such as repayment or some other service, and then intentionally reneged on it, they weren't grifting? And even if they did do that, grifting tends to refer to people doing similar repeatedly - so going to several different people/companies and promising them things they couldn't or wouldn't deliver. I don't believe there's any suggestion of ongoing behaviour like this from the Middletons, is there? Just accepting gifts from friends or family members (or indeed perfect strangers) doesn't make you a grifter. Obviously.

If it was “ widely reported “ you should be able to provide links to reputable sources ?
Given how discrete the Middletons are and how much William protects his family and privacy I really can’t see him discussing this matter.

It would be terribly lazy reporting too. The Middletons moved to their current house in 2012. At that stage William was the heir to the heir and had no income of his own. So any funds to help purchase the property could only have come from Charles, not William. Charles of courses was funded by the Duchy of Cornwall at the time.

The Duchy of Cornwall’s accounts for 2012 were scrutinised by the Public Accounts Committee. They made no mention of a transaction that would amount to around 20% of the Duchy’s net profits for the year being paid away for the benefit of third parties. I expect the Committee would have mentioned it if that had happened.

The business didn't go bankrupt. Bankruptcy is a term used for individuals. Companies (which Party Pieces was) go into liquidation. And in any event, Party Pieces never went into liquidation. It went into administration, which is a statutory vehicle designed to save businesses/sell them as a going concern, which is better all round for creditors, employees and commerce in general (thank Tony Blair). And, for the record, when this happened, Carole Middleton was not in control of the company and was not running it. She'd sold off a 50% stake and retired, after 36 years of successful and profitable management. It was the new management that abandoned some of the old, tried and tested business model and decided to expand into the US, which ultimately spelled its downfall, not helped by covid. Once in administration, the business owners have no control over what happens to it - it's entirely in the control of the appointed insolvency practitioner. The business was sold as a going concern to an entrepreneur, who blamed the new management team and the direction they took the company in entirely.

I remember reports at the time with source claiming William had contributed to the deposit using funds from his inheritance from Diana but it was all very speculative.

He wouldn’t have needed to give them the whole amount as they were selling a property in the same village worth over a million pounds.

It was speculated that the move was to provide better security etc. It’s very possible that William felt responsible for all the baggage that came with having him as a son in law so wanted to help.

However the Middleton’s were clearly doing very well - they spent quite a lot of their own money for the wedding - nothing compared to Charles of course but a significant amount for an ordinary middle class family.