The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 10: August 2024 -

[Noble Consort Ming]

Because of this visit and the fact that I read articles about the Sussexes, I have learned more about Colombia in the past week than I have in the last ... well, since I learned to read. If the aim of this visit was to promote awareness and interest in Colombia, they have succeeded wonderfully.

Randos reading about Colombia helps the country how?

 

[Elenath]

Randos reading about Colombia helps the country how?

They will be more likely to visit, donate money to Colombian charities or invest money there. Soft power is a thing you know. It is the only thing that's keeping many royal families relevant.

 

[Toledo]

Randos reading about Colombia helps the country how?

To avoid guided tours on streets that are mine fields.

Kidding aside, what I learned from their visit is that even after a democratic election the country is very unstable. Mainly because of three competing factions: the legitimated elected government, the opposition and the powerful drug cartels. Add in the military and ambitious leaders and anything can happen in the next year or, the next month after Meghan and Harry's visit.

If the vice president wants Archwell involved in her future plans the focus should be not on placing band aids with celebrity photo ops and promises, but to get to the root of the problem which is poverty and lack of resources to get a better education.

Harry and Meghan have some access to all those billionaires from the other award party for celebrity pilots like Jeff Bezos. If they wanted, they could develop a fund to help Colombian schools and provide scholarships to higher education for students in the towns they visited. In one generation, change is possible.

Will they, do it? Let's check back in a year on the anniversary of their visit to Colombia. See you in August 2025 for the follow up!

 

[Maryrose]

I think their visit has definitely shined a light on Columbia. I think their visit was to see and learn first hand what they could do through Archewell to help in small ways. Archewell is not as flush with funds as the Gates foundation or Bezos but they also didn't start their foundations til they were millionaires many times over. I think we will see what initiatives they will become involved in.

 

[Erin9]

They will be more likely to visit, donate money to Colombian charities or invest money there. Soft power is a thing you know. It is the only thing that's keeping many royal families relevant.

Not necessarily. I knew about Columbia before this visit. And what I know means I have no intention of visiting. No visit from the Sussexes- or anyone else for that matter- could possibly change my mind on that.

I personally don’t think additional knowledge on Columbia is even remotely helpful to Columbia. It just gives people reasons to stay away imo.

 

[Toledo]

I think their visit has definitely shined a light on Columbia. I think their visit was to see and learn first hand what they could do through Archewell to help in small ways. Archewell is not as flush with funds as the Gates foundation or Bezos but they also didn't start their foundations til they were millionaires many times over. I think we will see what initiatives they will become involved in.

These big fund donors like Bezos and Gates often partner with smaller established non-profits to help with the administration of a project. The smaller non-profit, like for example Archwell, provides the structure, eyes and ears on how the funds received by a larger donor are allocated in the specific project.

Let's say in this case imagine if Archwell requested from Bezos and or Gates a 1-million-dollar fund each. Then have Archwell get the Vice-president Francia use it to rebuild one school with technology and equipment where students can have higher education classes far away from major cities. It creates jobs.

example 2, Archwell requests funds from Bezos and pals to assist Colombian farmers and other businesses with modern equipment, and local markets a way to obtain what is produced afterwards. It creates jobs.

Easy solutions helping one community at a time and change will happens within a generation. But that's the key factor, is not about the wait but the present time for H&M on their career goal to become celebrity influencers in California. I feel is about the here and now for Montecito and not much in sight for long-term plans.

And for Harry, how can you concentrate in the present if you are in a non-stop state of litigation in the UK courts? As we say in the USA, you only had one job. In this case, since he retired from royal life the job was to become a presence in the non-profit arena to make change in people's lives.
All I see for change is his court appointment dates.

 

[Maryrose]

I understand what you are saying Toledo. I just think also it takes time to build relationships with other foundations
I know they partnered with WCK but it is a slow process and I am sure they are still feeling their way thru all the procedures and vetting of organizations

 

[Lady Daly]

Let's not forget about all the professionals that have left Archewell.

Harry's Chief of Staff has become their latest senior employee to quit - just three months after starting the job. The Duke of Sussex handed Josh Kettler the prestigious title earlier this year as it was believed he would be the ideal candidate to “guide” the couple through their “next phase”.
However, Mr Kettler has now parted ways with the couple.
Mr Kettler, who was previously chief of staff at communication platform Cognixion, and prior to that a decade at Patagonia. He began his role the week before the couple’s visit to Nigeria in May and also accompanied Harry to London for the 10th anniversary of the Invictus Games. He left a couple days before they set out for Colombia.

It is not the first time Harry and Meghan have had to navigate the loss of staff, with the couple having seen 18 senior figures leave since they married in 2018.

Nine or more have left since they moved to California in 2020, including key staff from Archewell Productions.

The manager of the company that makes TV programmes and films, Bennet Levine, quit in January after two years at the firm. He worked on the couple’s Netflix documentary before making his exit.

Another big loss came when Oscar-nominated producer Ben Browning left as the couple’s head of internal content in January 2023 - a month after Rebecca Sananes, who was hired to produce Meghan’s Spotify podcast Archetypes, quit in December 2022 as head of audio at Archewell. That same month, the president of the couple’s charitable foundation, Mandana Dayani, stepped down after a year and a half at Archewell. The list goes on especially if you count prior to them leaving the BRF.

I'm beginning to think the Sussexes aren't as functional as they may portray or attempt to portray. Are their intentions to make money for themselves while seemingly appearing to be philanthropists? What are their real goals?

Harry and Meghan’s chief of staff ‘quits’ after just three months

Josh Kettler’s departure comes days before Harry and Meghan begin ‘tour’ of Colombia

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Queen Claude]

Columbia, with all its issues, has democratic elections. Later this year Colombia is hosting the first Ministerial Conference on Ending Violence Against Children and Francia Márquez is a key player in that conference. I think the next election is in 2026, if the people of Columbia do not think that Francia Márquez has properly served them, then they will oust her party - my understanding is that it is a coalition party, or she may get booted and someone else will get put in the VP spot.

 

[Durham]

They will be more likely to visit, donate money to Colombian charities or invest money there. Soft power is a thing you know. It is the only thing that's keeping many royal families relevant.

If I might say so I think this is to misunderstand the role of the rf.

It's relevant beacuse it helps The King in his role as head of the nation. The rf has no other purpose.

 

[Queen Claude]

If I might say so I think this is to misunderstand the role of the rf.

It's relevant beacuse it helps The King in his role as head of the nation. The rf has no other purpose.

So tours are a make work scheme for Charles and his family.

And I suppose for Harry and Meghan tours are to build their brand and fill their "itch" for royal trappings.

 

[Durham]

So tours are a make work scheme for Charles and his family.

And I suppose for Harry and Meghan tours are to build their brand and fill their "itch" for royal trappings.

Make work? I don't follow. Tours are political & done at the request of the government. So that's their purpose.

I have no idea what the purpose of H&M's foreign visits are.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

These big fund donors like Bezos and Gates often partner with smaller established non-profits to help with the administration of a project. The smaller non-profit, like for example Archwell, provides the structure, eyes and ears on how the funds received by a larger donor are allocated in the specific project.

Let's say in this case imagine if Archwell requested from Bezos and or Gates a 1-million-dollar fund each. Then have Archwell get the Vice-president Francia use it to rebuild one school with technology and equipment where students can have higher education classes far away from major cities. It creates jobs.

example 2, Archwell requests funds from Bezos and pals to assist Colombian farmers and other businesses with modern equipment, and local markets a way to obtain what is produced afterwards. It creates jobs.

Easy solutions helping one community at a time and change will happens within a generation. But that's the key factor, is not about the wait but the present time for H&M on their career goal to become celebrity influencers in California. I feel is about the here and now for Montecito and not much in sight for long-term plans.

And for Harry, how can you concentrate in the present if you are in a non-stop state of litigation in the UK courts? As we say in the USA, you only had one job. In this case, since he retired from royal life the job was to become a presence in the non-profit arena to make change in people's lives.
All I see for change is his court appointment dates.

In my experience, organizations such as the Gates Foundation do not give grants to charities like Archewell. Archewell does not offer direct services but it is in and of itself, a grant foundation. For example, the Prince's Trust (currently the King's Trust), helped local economies through direct funding of business incubators and microloans. It doesn't give grants to other organizations that give grants.

In my opinion, people should bypass organizations like Archewell. Donating to charities that provide direct services saves on administrative costs and more money goes to the actual services.

 

[TLLK]

Make work? I don't follow. Tours are political & done at the request of the government. So that's their purpose.

I have no idea what the purpose of H&M's foreign visits are.

Thank you for the reminder that the overseas visits undertaken by the various reigning royal families are at the requests of their respective governments.

 

[Toledo]

In my experience, organizations such as the Gates Foundation do not give grants to charities like Archewell. Archewell does not offer direct services but it is in and of itself, a grant foundation. For example, the Prince's Trust (currently the King's Trust), helped local economies through direct funding of business incubators and microloans. It doesn't give grants to other organizations that give grants.

In my opinion, people should bypass organizations like Archewell. Donating to charities that provide direct services saves on administrative costs and more money goes to the actual services.

That's bad news for Archwell since it seems they need more than family funds to pay for all those litigations in court Harry is embroiled in. His lawyers are not going pro-bono free on his case for sure.

I don't recall mentioned anywhere here in RFs if Archwell has done any campaign or fund raiser party event to increase their funds that, as you mentioned, are to provide direct services themselves. We know they donate but where did that donated money came from to start with? Between lawyers at the UK and the bank holding the mortgage of Montecito Palace there won't be much left to donate directly to a future project in Colombia.

As I stated before, this trip should have been more productive if it was to explore a coffee business for Meghan's brand of home good jams, dog cookies, goat soaps and giftwrap paper business in the making. Speaking of coffee, it's 7:25 AM and I need my java. Bye!

 

[Queen Claude]

Make work? I don't follow. Tours are political & done at the request of the government. So that's their purpose.

I have no idea what the purpose of H&M's foreign visits are.

I was responding to the comment (emphasis mine)

If I might say so I think this is to misunderstand the role of the rf.​

It's relevant beacuse it helps The King in his role as head of the nation. The rf has no other purpose.​

​

And that comment was in response to a post about the use of soft power and relevancy of the rf.

I think that royal tours involved multiple players and each has their own agenda.

One is the UK Foreign Office and in those cases the BRF is being used for soft power IMO. An illustration of this is the spate of tours to European countries after the Brexit vote.

A second player is the BRF itself. As the HOS it makes sense that the monarch or their representative has visibility in the realm nations, but it would be naive to think that the BRF also does not have the agenda of preserving the monarch as the HOS, or if the country wants to become a republic that it is done on good terms and the former realm member joins the Commonwealth of Nations.

A third player is the country itself. Do we really know when a country approaches the Foreign Office or the BRF regarding a royal tour that there is not a political or self-serving agenda at play?

As I stated before, Harry and Meghan are IMO appropriating royal tour to be visible and scratch their royal itch, although I don't know if they initiated these invites or the host countries did, it seems like the host countries. I don't feel that these tours are without risk, and I hope the countries and the leaders are being properly vetted, but if this is part of their brand building, it seems like one of their more successful schemes. It seems like they are leveraging their royal ties, which many believe is the only thing that they have going for them that generates significant and sustainable interests, but at the same time they are not exploiting the BRF / the institution.

​

 

[OwlBranch]

The Royal Foundation 2023 annual report has been published. Meghan Markle's first royal project from 2018, the Together Cookbook, continue to generate income and funding for the Grenfell Tower community.

In 2023, sales income from the cookbook was £84,540, which is more than double the income from 2022. I don't think Meghan did anything to promote the cookbook directly, I'm curious as to what is driving the increase in sale. This is reported on page 42 of the annual report.

https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-search?p_p_id=uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet&p_p_lifecycle=2&p_p_state=maximized&p_p_mode=view&p_p_resource_id=%2Faccounts-resource&p_p_cacheability=cacheLevelPage&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_objectiveId=A15586708&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_mvcRenderCommandName=%2Faccounts-and-annual-returns&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_organisationNumber=5006298

 

[kalnel]

The Royal Foundation 2023 annual report has been published. Meghan Markle's first royal project from 2018, the Together Cookbook, continue to generate income and funding for the Grenfell Tower community.

In 2023, sales income from the cookbook was £84,540, which is more than double the income from 2022. I don't think Meghan did anything to promote the cookbook directly, I'm curious as to what is driving the increase in sale. This is reported on page 42 of the annual report.

https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-search?p_p_id=uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet&p_p_lifecycle=2&p_p_state=maximized&p_p_mode=view&p_p_resource_id=%2Faccounts-resource&p_p_cacheability=cacheLevelPage&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_objectiveId=A15586708&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_mvcRenderCommandName=%2Faccounts-and-annual-returns&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_organisationNumber=5006298

That figure isn’t necessarily all direct retail book sales or even sales from 2023. For instance, if the books weren’t selling well, the foundation may have “remaindered” them, selling them to a discount bookseller for a fraction of the original cost. That gets the inventory (and associated costs, like storage) off the foundation’s back, and it would bring in some immediate revenue.

Or maybe Archewell bought them (or Meghan herself) so she could use them in some future enterprise.

 

[Maryrose]

I am surprised that proceeds from the cookbook are still under the Royal Foundation. Whatever foundation it falls under glad to see people are getting the assistance they need.

 

[OwlBranch]

That figure isn’t necessarily all direct retail book sales or even sales from 2023. For instance, if the books weren’t selling well, the foundation may have “remaindered” them, selling them to a discount bookseller for a fraction of the original cost. That gets the inventory (and associated costs, like storage) off the foundation’s back, and it would bring in some immediate revenue.

Or maybe Archewell bought them (or Meghan herself) so she could use them in some future enterprise.

- Please provide evidence that the figures are not from direct book sales. The Foundation annual report does not go into that level of detail on what kind of sale generated that amount of money.

-The second statement implies that the Royal Foundation has a stack of the Together Cookbook in some warehouse. That is very unlikely. The Foundation is not selling the books, they do not have the staff, expertise, IT systems to manage book sales.

 

[GondorHasNoPants]

Prince Harry's biography, Spare will apparently be released in paperback on October 22nd (US and world) or 24th (UK).

Prince Harry's Spare to be published in paperback this autumn

The Bookseller is the incisive and independent source of news and analysis for the book trade and publishing industry. Get breaking news, in-depth features, author interviews and book charts. The Bookseller provides you with the intelligence you need to sell more books.

www.thebookseller.com

The paperback version will apparently have the same cover image as the hardback edition, and will not contain any new material.

 

[kalnel]

According to articles in Harper's Bazaar, the proceeds from the book did go to charities, but not necessarily the Grenfell Tower community. In 2020, Meghan donated the proceeds to Migrateful, a charity that provides cooking classes for migrants and refuguees. In 2021, she sent the proceeds to Himmah, a Muslim-Jewish community kitchen. I couldn't find info on where or whether she distributed the funds in other years.

Duchess Meghan Donates $10,000 to Cookery Charity Supporting Refugees & Asylum Seekers

UK-based Migrateful "runs cookery classes led by refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants struggling to integrate and access employment."

www.harpersbazaar.com

Duchess Meghan Donates More than $13,000 to U.K. Grassroots Organization Himmah

The Duchess of Sussex utilized proceeds from her 2018 community cookbook to support the organization, which tackles poverty, racism, and social exclusion.

www.harpersbazaar.com

 

[kalnel]

- Please provide evidence that the figures are not from direct book sales. The Foundation annual report does not go into that level of detail on what kind of sale generated that amount of money.

-The second statement implies that the Royal Foundation has a stack of the Together Cookbook in some warehouse. That is very unlikely. The Foundation is not selling the books, they do not have the staff, expertise, IT systems to manage book sales.

I don't have "evidence" about the book sales. I'm just suggesting that is what many companies do when they have books sitting around five years after publication -- that's a long time for book inventory. Discounting them as "remainders" provides at least some revenue.

The Royal Foundation probably does not have them sitting around their offices, but they're paying someone to store them. This cookbook isn't "publish on demand."

Edited: One sign that the book has been remaindered is that you can get it for about $12 now, down from the original cover price of $25. Through most of 2022 and 2023, Amazon was selling it for $10, per CamelCamelCamel. It's going for $1.94 as a good used book. Not a bestseller!

 

[Alison H]

It's quite possible. For example, Waterstones, which is the biggest chain of bookshops in the UK, has a "clearance" section on its website. New hardback books usually cost £20 to £25, which is a lot of money for most people. Cut the price of something, and more copies will sell. I have a long "wishlist" of books on Amazon, which I check regularly to see if the price has fallen.

 

[OwlBranch]

I don't have "evidence" about the book sales. I'm just suggesting that is what many companies do when they have books sitting around five years after publication -- that's a long time for book inventory. Discounting them as "remainders" provides at least some revenue.

The Royal Foundation probably does not have them sitting around their offices, but they're paying someone to store them. This cookbook isn't "publish on demand."

Edited: One sign that the book has been remaindered is that you can get it for about $12 now, down from the original cover price of $25. Through most of 2022 and 2023, Amazon was selling it for $10, per CamelCamelCamel. It's going for $1.94 as a good used book. Not a bestseller!

The Together Cookbook was a best seller the year it was published. No book can stay on the bestseller list for 4 years, especially with zero publicity and promotion. (Maybe Harry Potter is an exception?)

The charities listed are probably happy to have received this fund. What's the point of disparaging and minimizing the positive and concrete impact that the cookbook has made?

 

[kalnel]

The Together Cookbook was a best seller the year it was published. No book can stay on the bestseller list for 4 years, especially with zero publicity and promotion. (Maybe Harry Potter is an exception?)

The charities listed are probably happy to have received this fund. What's the point of disparaging and minimizing the positive and concrete impact that the cookbook has made?

[.....] I haven't minimized or disparaged anything. I pointed out the likely reason revenue is showing up for an old book that is heavily discounted. That's not taking anything away from the book; it's just a fact of life with old books.

As to the charities, I'm citing sources about where the money went, since several posters seemed to think it all went to Grenfell Towers.

 

[Hallo girl]

[.....] I haven't minimized or disparaged anything. I pointed out the likely reason revenue is showing up for an old book that is heavily discounted. That's not taking anything away from the book; it's just a fact of life with old books.

As to the charities, I'm citing sources about where the money went, since several posters seemed to think it all went to Grenfell Towers.

I think people did assume it was a fundraiser solely for the work of the community affected by the Grenfell fire, especially with the launch being specifically linked to the Grenfell community kitchens.
All very good causes in their own right.

 

[Elenath]

Whether the book was on sale or not doesn't really matter. Even bestsellers go on sale and popularity of books, films or anything tends to go up and down. The only that does matter is that apparently the still sold reasonably well and charities will benefit from it.
The only thing I don't understand (or at least it makes no sense to me) is apparently the book sale is higher than the year before. So regardless the price of the book, she sold more books in 1023 than in 2022. And IF the book was on sale and the price of the book therefor lower, that means she sold even more books. So great... right? I mean, if I publish a book that would normally cost 10 and I sold 50 in 2022, so that's a sales income of 500, if the next year the price of my book goes down to 8 and my sales income is 600, than despite the lower price, I have sold a lot more books.

 

[tommy100]

Prince Harry's biography, Spare will apparently be released in paperback on October 22nd (US and world) or 24th (UK).

Prince Harry's Spare to be published in paperback this autumn

The Bookseller is the incisive and independent source of news and analysis for the book trade and publishing industry. Get breaking news, in-depth features, author interviews and book charts. The Bookseller provides you with the intelligence you need to sell more books.

www.thebookseller.com

The paperback version will apparently have the same cover image as the hardback edition, and will not contain any new material.

Thank goodness they aren't updating it is all I can say.

TBH Im not surprised they have waited this long to release a paperback - they've kept it hardback as long as possible to maximise profit, but it was the most left behind of the year according to one hotel chain and I've seen many many copies in charity shops, ebay, second hand book shops etc so I think most people who want to read it already have. After all, all the key points were leaked in the press before it went on sale after all. I don't suspect it will fly off the shelves in paperback any more than it already has - there have been plenty of cheap copies around for a long time already.

 

[HRHHermione]

Thank goodness they aren't updating it is all I can say.

This is a good decision on Harry’s part.