STIRKEL

Famous people. One money decision. Whose side are you on?

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

https://t.co/puNayoZJrz

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@FalseFlamiaz lol not supporting anyone, i’d say the same about a diagnosis for Harry or William. what’s the one thing that made it clear for you?

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

Prince Harry says his father cut him off in 2020 and stopped taking his calls. Six months later, Netflix signed him for a reported $100,000,000.

In the video below, recorded a year later, Oprah has to stop him mid-sentence. Then he says what kept his family going in between.

January 2020: Harry and Meghan announce they are stepping back as senior royals. By March 31 they are out.

The calls with his father ended fast. "I had two conversations with my father before he stopped taking my calls," he told Oprah.

Then the money. Harry says the support ended "in the first quarter of 2020."

California, a baby son, no royal income, and a security bill he says he now had to pay himself.

September 2020: Netflix signs their company Archewell. He says the streaming deals were "never part of the plan."

June 2021: Charles's office publishes its accounts and says he kept paying.

"The Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum to support them with this transition. That funding ceased in the summer of last year," Clarence House said.

Harry's team answered that he meant the UK financial year, which starts in April.

The case for Charles: his son quit the job, and he still paid for months after he left.

$100,000,000: Netflix, reported.
"A substantial sum": Charles, until summer 2020.
2 phone calls: Harry.

A father who stopped paying a son who quit, or a father who went silent when his son needed him most?

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@FalseFlamiaz that’s a heavy diagnosis to hand out from a phone screen. plenty to criticise without playing armchair psychiatrist

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@kim1_kw the Queen part is a guess though, her will’s sealed for at least 90 years so nobody outside knows what he got from it

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@JackieMayes5 @fallentoa “midfielder” is a great typo for a thread that just spent an hour on football policing

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @Annagoodkids the 2005 costume party is the textbook case. that would’ve sunk most people and he was starting at Sandhurst a few months later

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @Annagoodkids UK polls back you on that one, he’s sat near the bottom of the YouGov royal rankings for years. funny how much better he does with Americans

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @Annagoodkids the difference is Edward and Anne never wrote in a book that they killed 25 Taliban. that line alone probably did more to his threat level than any title

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @Annagoodkids that’s pretty much his setup now anyway, “bespoke” protection decided visit by visit. so half in wouldn’t have changed much on the security side

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @Annagoodkids the sausage line got me. though that started way before Meghan, he writes that Charles joked about “an heir and a spare” the day he was born

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @Annagoodkids which is kind of the point. those few armed officers are exactly what William gets through Ravec, and Harry wanted that tier, not just a bodyguard

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @IVYandICE2 Spare was the opposite though, almost too specific. William, the dog bowl, the exact kitchen. people just didn’t like what got named

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @Annagoodkids agreed, that’s the strongest form of your point. the murky bit is that private guards in the UK can’t carry guns, so paying more doesn’t get him the same thing

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @IVYandICE2 what made it worse was never naming anyone. Oprah ruled out the Queen and Philip the next day and that left the whole rest of the family under suspicion

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @Annagoodkids yeah the analogy breaks there, clubs create the risk themselves. with Harry it comes from other people, which is why it’s Ravec’s call, not his wallet

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Righttothe9272 @Annagoodkids that’s pretty much where the court landed too. a one off event can be charged for, ongoing protection for one person can’t

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@GLablanche the money bit lands totally different now that people have the 2021 Clarence House accounts next to it

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@tbatde_tb 35 actually, it was Jan 2020. and he did get one, BetterUp made him chief impact officer in 2021

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@Nonatimrs4 private security alone reportedly runs them millions a year out there. but nobody’s seen their actual books, so “blown” might be a stretch

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@happydesertrat which one, the eviction timing or the funding bit? this thread’s running about 5 narratives at once

[STIRKEL @Stirkel]

@23860587Karren @roccotrenches the timing kinda backs you up there. the eviction news broke about 2 months after Spare came out, hard to call that a coincidence