Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Netflix deal reportedly hinges on producing content, which seems normal
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have struggled to get their entertainment careers off the ground, imperiling Netflix deal
Aux News Netflix
There’s a lot of scrutiny on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle lately, partly because there’s always scrutiny on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. But there’s also scrutiny over their faltering foray into the entertainment industry, which the Wall Street Journal has outright declared a “flop.” A recent Sun report spurred headlines that Netflix had issued the ex-royals an ultimatum over their streaming deal. Yet, truthfully, the inside source makes the situation sound quite run-of-the-mill.
“There’s no question of a headline-grabbing, public parting of the way,” this insider told The Sun, referencing the couple’s recent split with Spotify. “Netflix was pleased to sign Harry and Meghan, and is looking for some great ideas going forward. But the remainder of the deal relies on them producing those good ideas. The deal’s continually under review which is normal for ones of this magnitude.”
Actually having to produce content to get cash seems like a pretty normal way to do business, actually. But The Sun claims the couple have only received half of their reported $100 million contract and will only get the second half by producing “content of real interest.” That’s the tricky part, because although the Harry & Meghan docuseries did quite well for the streamer, the Sussexes have struggled with the follow-up (much like they did at Spotify). Per The Wall Street Journal, several of the couple’s ideas got shot down at Netflix, and their deal is unlikely to be renewed when it’s up in 2025.
Of course, that’s all the unofficial word from anonymous insiders. The official party line is that Harry & Meghan was Netflix’s biggest documentary debut, and “We’ll continue to work together on a number of projects,” a spokesperson for the streamer told WSJ.
The chatter beyond that scope has been less kind. Spotify exec and podcaster Bill Simmons called the duo “fucking grifters” upon their exodus from the audio platform. (As an aside: Markle apparently wrote a personal letter to Taylor Swift to have her on her Archetypes podcast, but Swift declined through a representative, per WSJ.) “Turns out Meghan Markle was not a great audio talent, or necessarily any kind of talent,” UTA CEO Jeremy Zimmer snarked to Semafor.
Say what you will about streamers, but it’s probably a good precedent to set that people who get paid to create things create the things they’re getting paid for. In fact, we highly recommend that Netflix pay people fairly for things they create!
55 Comments
Didn’t they get a dumb amount of money for making those 12 podcasts for Spotify? That’s partially on Spotify, of course, but it does have the feel of a grift.
$20 million IIRC. And they got HALF of $100 upfront from Netflix? Harry and Meghan, tell us again how hard your separation from the Royal Family has been??Anyway, if I were a Netflix exec I’d be coming up will all sorts of ideas on their behalf to try to salvage this fiasco. I’m not surprised they haven’t generated anything especially interesting.
Yeah for 12 podcasts. I know people who did that many podcasts just for the shit of it.Everyone involved with Harry and Meghan wildly overestimates how much interest people have in their lives and thoughts.
100%. How many people are thinking: oh I’m interested what a C-list actress spouse of a former junior member of another country’s royal family thinks about this topic! Let me tune in for her unique insights!
Judging from the number of comments you strung together about this, apparently more people care than you think, including… you!
You misunderstand – I deeply do not care about her or her podcast. I very much care about making snide comments about celebrity culture while I’m supposed to be working.
Right, but the snide comment to which I responded asked a question that wasn’t about you: “How many people are thinking: oh I’m interested what a C-list actress spouse of a former junior member of another country’s royal family thinks about this topic,” so you were fucking off during work… and didn’t care so much that you clicked through… and didn’t care so much that you commented… and you did this in a thread with lots and lots of people who are also just snidely commenting about celebrity culture because they’re cool as the rule. And we’re all commenting about a couple who got paid millions of dollars by a company that invests mucho dinero in cultivating an audience… So somebody cares. Just… not you, *wink, wink*. Totally.
I’m sorry buddy, but no matter how long your comment response is you’re never going to convince me to listen to this podcast.
They don’t care if you listen; they know you subscribed.
“Everyone involved with Harry and Meghan wildly overestimates how much interest people have in their lives and thoughts.”
You know that it’s Spotify paying them, right? So it’s Spotify that wildly overestimated their popularity.
They allegedly didn’t get the full $20 million. Probably half because the rest hinged on more c9ntent
I blame Harry’s mother for not wearing a seatbelt. No one would give a damn about these two if “dead mom” wasn’t the go-to angle. Granted, a Diana with access to social media and streaming services could be its own unique blend of the banal and terrifying.
Are you unaware how many copies of his book Spare (Wah) have sold?
Yeah I am, but book sales don’t mean anything in this era of publishers buying up loads of books to make sales look good.
Anyway, if I were a Netflix exec I’d be coming up will all sorts of ideas on their behalf to try to salvage this fiasco.Based on the article, I could come up with about 50 million reasons not to do this.
Fair point. No need to fall victim to the sunk cost fallacy. Write it off, Disney-style.
It’s not a sunken cost. It’s the opposite. It’s a saved cost. That’s the point. They don’t have to pay the other $50 million because no content is being created.You are suggesting Netflix come up with ideas for them. But they would have to pay out the back half of the deal if that happened. It is better for Netflix to shoot down ideas and save the remainder of the $100 million deal by withholding payment.
Right, and thus my point. The instinct in some cases is to try to salvage the project since so much has already been put into it (the “sunk” part). The right way to look at it is to assume what’s invested so far is worth $0, and determine if there’s $50 million of value to be created by having them produce content from this point (hint: almost assuredly NOT). So this contract is more valuable as a $50 million tax writeoff based upon what’s already spent.
One can argue what is or isn’t interesting, but Harry and Meghan have been generating content that should hardly surprise Netflix – Documentary about their separation from the Royal Family (probably the real reason Netflix wanted them), a series of interviews with inspiring people including the last interviews with Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and an upcoming series on Harry’s Invictus Games.If Netflix was expecting something other than these types of docs that’s on Netflix.
This is pretty typical in book publishing, though — when a celebrity is willing to “write” something that their face will go on the front-cover of, a massive amount of money gets shoveled their way.And it’s not a grift; it’s what happens when you try to lure a celebrity into a business arrangement.
This seems like the same thing to me, with pretty typical quantities of money being slid around.
Stopped reading at “The Sun”.
So… fucking grifters was right
What part of “Royal Family” did you not understand?
So, you’re gonna elect him president?
Not me but if he could run I’m sure idiots would vote for him. The fact is the natural born citizen clause is the only reason we have ended up with neither Schwarzenegger or Musk at least trying to run.
You know who is a natural-born citizen?
Did someone call for a natural born citizen?
This being in tandem with Spotify is definitely not a good look (though I’m not exactly outraged that someone ripped off a company which desperately wanted to get in and stay in the Joe Rogan business). But…you do know many, many similar deals are made which don’t result in anything getting produced, right?
Yeah, a lot of deals don’t work out. But a deal with a really famous couple that doesn’t work out is going to get more coverage because they’re famous.
That’s totally fair, but it’s frustrating to see people like AV Club pretend like this is so anomalous while trying to act like entertainment experts.
This famous couple doesn’t work.
No, they’d rather quote a bunch of tabloids.
But…you do know many, many similar deals are made which don’t result in anything getting produced, right?Can you provide another example of someone who got an 8 figure deal from Spotify and only produced 12 podcasts over 3 years?
The actress in the new Indy film comes to mind. Why can’t I recall her name or her hit show that lasted like three seasons yet she spun that into like a 100million contract. Phoebe Waller-Bridge!!! Amazon. Only $60 million. Still zero content produced.
This is a really weird take…
You mentioned an “actress” and you supposedly can’t remember her name. (Non factor.) You supposedly can’t remember the name of her successful tv show, or the successful one-woman show it was named after. (Non factor.) You didn’t mention the work she did in a Star Wars film, so I guess you either don’t know or don’t care about that. (Presumably she got paid for that too.) But you DO know that she’s starring in a movie that isn’t even out yet. And then you remembered (or looked up) her name. And suddenly you know the company that paid her, and how much they paid her, and how much content they’ve released together.
I don’t think that conveys what you think it conveys…
Huh?
Also, Phoebe Waller-Bridge is a heavyweight nowhere near her peak and investing in her is an incredibly smart business decision.
THIS. And you know what isn’t going to change that one bit? A bunch of guys on the Internet whose sole qualification to evaluate her work is their annual struggle to write a moving card inscription for their Mother’s Day card.
“Actually having to produce content to get cash seems like a pretty normal way to do business…”Unless you’re a member of the British Royal Family, in which case, your only previous job was existing so people could create content about you.
Without a Monarchy to decide who gets what, you’re left with the evils of capitalism.
“Without a monarchy to decide how much they get and how much they let you have…”Fixed it for you.
“only previous job”All of the adults have served in the military, and Harry saw combat in Afghanistan.
The royals are lazy and want to get something for nothing?? ShockerI will say the one “documentary” they produced wasn’t very good but was popular afaik. Still, how hard would it be to throw your name on some kid show, like the Obamas did with Chip and Potato.
If we’re going to pretend to be an entertainment site could we at least actually report what they’ve done instead of quoting the Sun and random people who did not work with them.At Netflix, they have produced:
*Harry & Meghan – the documentary was a massive ratings success and is likely to win an Emmy.
*Live to Lead – including the last interviews with Ruth Bader Ginsberg
*Heart of Invictus – In production, a deep dive into the Invictus GamesWe can argue whether or not it’s “good content,” but it certainly aligns with what they must have expected to get from them. I’m sure this gets you clicks, but at least pretend like you know how content deals work, many of which never generate any content.
I’m sure Netflix is maybe not looking to renew their contract because it’s clear that their 15 minutes is finally coming to an end but they got their content
I’d like to believe this, but there’s been gazoodles of $/£ spent over decades chasing the British royal family & consuming the resulting stories. I feel like it’ll be another generation before their ‘15′ ends.
Anyone who would listen to or watch anything by these two is an idiot.
At first glance, I wondered where they could’ve been to get their picture taken standing in front of a portapotty.Never really considered how distinctive that Portapotty Blue is before.
In ye old England Portapotties are green and they call them “Old lady mildred’s chamber pot closets” or Millieshitters
Once they were out of daggers (needles?) with which to stab House Windsor in the back, looks like there wasn’t much else very interesting about them.
What are these two going to do for money now? They need a looooooot of money to maintain their lifestyle and they are not even 40 yet and the well seems dry.And, yes, I know they have tens of millions, but that’s not enough to live next to Oprah.
Actually Meghan is over 40. She’s turning 42 this summer.
Netflix is rayciss against da half black princess
Mary, you’re a fucking moron. How does someone so fucking stupid actually tell anyone to do anything?
But there’s also scrutiny over their faltering foray into the entertainment industry, which the Wall Street Journal has outright declared a “flop.”
Wow, a Rupert Murdoch-owned paper is repeating the same line as the Rupert Murdoch-owned British tabloids! Damn, that’s compelling stuff!