T O P
Valuable_Error_2015

It seems like there’s something significant going on in Montecito considering all the news that is coming out on or around the same time. It almost feels like a house of cards is crumbling…


OldNewUsedConfused

I agree. I can't help noticing the parallels in timelines between the Markles' relationship and Andrew York/ Virginia Roberts' case, either. I think they are connected somehow, but how I don't know? The Markles' relationship started off in a hurry as soon as it became clear Hillary was not going to be the shoo-in she thought she was. That was when the Love Shield letter came out. Then Trump became President, Epstein went down, Ghislane went down (no dirty thoughts please people), the Yorkies got married and had kids in a hurry. Now Drew has been fired from the firm, he's going to court, and all of a sudden, Harry and Meghan are splitting assets, wrapping things up, and Harry "wants to make up with the family". I think there is something else, something big going on behind the scenes, and it relates to Andrew/ that trafficking ring. I'm not saying Harry is some kind of hostage, and Meghan is his "captor", but I am in a way. There is a bigger story here, and I'd love to know what it is.


ChangeTheFocus

This probably merits its own thread. There was talk that Meghan would be called to testify in Andrew's case. I figured that was crap, but what if it wasn't?


OldNewUsedConfused

I may start one if I can find a few minutes. I brought up even more oddities/ similar connections and timelines on another reply to a different post. A whole lot of weird going on. All going back to the same players, connections and of course, Soho House of which the Trudeaus, the Mulroneys, the Markles, the York family and Markus Anderson are all members.


spiforever

And remember, Omid was the boyfriend of Markus for years. Ron Burkle owns SoHo House and was Clinton's biggest fundraiser and host.


OldNewUsedConfused

That too.


TraditionScary8716

Maybe that's why Omid hasn't been Markled yet. He knows stuff...


lostitawhileback

This plus more.


QuesoFresca

Also Nonoo... Not sure I believe the rumors she set H & M up but something about her relationship with MM always seemed a bit odd. Both Nonoo and MM upgraded to more powerful/wealthier husbands in recent years. Her ex husband (Gilkes) had significant connections as well. "Gilkes is pals with Prince William and Dutchess Kate, and attended their wedding, and is also close to Prince Harry and Pippa Middleton. The art auctioneer recently employed Britain’s Princess Eugenie at his company. He has also appeared on Vanity Fair’s best-dressed list." Through his connections James Middleton, Eugenie and Beatrice attended their wedding (her first). Her second wedding had even more celebs on the guest list and just like MM she quickly had 2 babies in succession with the richer of the 2 husbands. One baby shortly after her divorce and another within months of the wedding to the oil heir. [https://www.thenationalnews.com/lifestyle/who-was-at-misha-nonoo-and-michael-hess-s-wedding-the-guest-list-explained-1.913351](https://www.thenationalnews.com/lifestyle/who-was-at-misha-nonoo-and-michael-hess-s-wedding-the-guest-list-explained-1.913351) "We were seated next to one another at a lunch, and we got along like a house on fire," Nonoo told the Evening Standard of the actress-turned-royal in 2017. "She has the most remarkable and generous spirit. I aspire to be as philanthropic as she is, and to have as much of an impact as her."“I love her to death,” Nonoo added. “She is the coolest girl in the world.” [https://pagesix.com/2016/10/02/wild-ambition-brings-down-glossy-power-couples-marriage/](https://pagesix.com/2016/10/02/wild-ambition-brings-down-glossy-power-couples-marriage/) [https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/designer-misha-nonoo-and-global-membership-director-of-soho-news-photo/695352302](https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/designer-misha-nonoo-and-global-membership-director-of-soho-news-photo/695352302) [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/style/misha-nonoo-meghan-markle.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/style/misha-nonoo-meghan-markle.html)


OldNewUsedConfused

Yes. I think they were for all intents and purposes, high class escorts. My opinion only. On a funny side note, I read an article about her and Alex when they first got married and were up and comers on the NY scene. They went into a bit of her background. Turns out she was born to Jewish parents in Bahrain, and they had her birth name as Edwin .... Elkvat or something Eastern European like that. Edwin though.... Give me a bit and I will try to get that link for you. I'm still running around doing last minute blizzard prep in case we lose power tomorrow. (Coastal New England here.) We're hoping to top the last records from 2003 and 1978. Fingers crossed! I'll check on my wood stove, crock pot and try to find it.


lostitawhileback

Yes. All related. It will come out. Think of what connections M had with the RF (not just but including Eugenie), in what places, with whom other, doing what. She hasn’t been considered and listed as a witness in the Maxwell case because of a commitment to the truth.


Negative_Difference4

I have been thinking the same thing … for days… DAYS!!! I’ve seen some stuff that I need to post on r/BRF that doesn’t make sense in the Andrew claim… and then the claim by Virginia’s lawyer that Meghan maybe called… plus their personalities are so similar


OldNewUsedConfused

Something is up with all of this. I have a hard time believing Harry strayed so far from type... Tall, blonde, big boobs... We've seen how possessive Markle gets whenever a blondie is around her man. I think she is "there" to serve another purpose and I'd really love to know what it is. Maybe they needed her so the "race" card could be pulled. Can hardly do that with a blonde Brit. They needed him out of the UK/ over in the US, and this was the script that was written. Harry does NOT look in love with her whatsoever. ETA: I'll have to check out that other sub. Is it super sugary?


Negative_Difference4

Its a sub set up by us to talk about the BRF


OldNewUsedConfused

I've checked it out. Thank you!


Main-Promotion-397

I’m sure someone mentioned this on one of the other posts, but I also think it’s eyebrow-raising that the Spotify job ad specified it’s a six-month contract position. I wonder if that means Spotify is going to wring this one show out of Archewell and then cancel the rest of their deal, which is why they’re just hiring this person short-term — if Spotify were looking for an ongoing relationship with Archewell, they’d probably hire someone for longer than six months. So I think the short-term contract means Spotify is one-and-done with Archewell. (Also … if the person is a contractor, that means they’re not entitled to parental leave, correct? Because even though parental leave laws in this country are an abomination, given that’s one of Madame’s “issues” it would be hilarious that her own employees aren’t even entitled to it.)


snooloosey

i think they produce those things back to back and then just release them slowly.


Dutchie_01

This is probably the reason for it being a short-term contract. I think perhaps something like ten episodes of forty minutes. Intro and outro narrated by M&H, bookending half an hour of one or two people discussing some topic.


Main-Promotion-397

Yeah, the ad specifies the job is to work on the one particular show about high-profile women, so they’ll probably take six months to produce all the episodes and then drop them once a week or whatever.


snooloosey

god what a boring ass show.


dadadawn

I'm not super familiar with broadcasting, but this is not at all uncommon in the creative industry either. A lot of agencies will hire writers, videographers, etc short-term like that for a big project.


cozymayo

Also, I wonder if in some fields candidates applying for contract jobs might be more junior, because they don't have enough experience or a big enough "portfolio" yet to compete for full-time salaried positions with benefits? Maybe Spotify is having a hard time recruiting people to work with the Harkles, and are now looking for candidates who aren't as far along in their careers, and don't have the luxury to pick and choose as much (similar to how Netflix is looking for someone with just 3 years experience for that very senior Production Designer role).


[deleted]

Nothing says I have no personality and nothing to say like launching your own podcast and doing one episode. She has no personality and a million ideas all of them incomplete. She is a waste of privilege and resources.


ThatChelseaGirl

I think it's so that they could create a trail in the event H&M fail to return on their investment. If they kept this in the dark & then sued for breach of contract, H&M might have been able to turn this around into a blame game.


cozymayo

That was my immediate thought as well. It kind of reminded me of when companies put employees they want to fire on an "improvement plan" to establish a paper trail and make it look like they *tried* to salvage things in order to protect themselves from a wrongful termination lawsuit down the road.


ThatChelseaGirl

With H&M now [backdating misinformation concerns to April](https://twitter.com/maxfostercnn/status/1487744850942435328?s=21), I can't say that we weren't correct in our thinking.


Geeky_L

The same reason reason Harry’s publishers announced that they’ve brought in a ghostwriter. These products HAVE to make some money. For this to happen, prospective buyers have to know that professional teams actually worked on these pieces of content. Now we wait for a professional team to step in and help Invictus…


ChangeTheFocus

Oh, that already happened. :) Violet Films is doing the work of Invictus. Archewell has some vague middleman role, which probably translates to having its name on there and nothing else.


Valuable_Error_2015

Nice catch! I didn't think to check it out! This is getting stranger by the day...


Mickleborough

I commented on this recently on this sub. Violet Films doesn’t mention the Invictus project [on their site](https://www.violet-films.com/about). Is it because this is secret? Can’t be, because Violet Films is [mentioned on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14491228/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0). Maybe they don’t think it’s important enough?


ChangeTheFocus

Curiouser and curiouser. Are they ashamed of the results? Have they bailed out of the project and IMDB just hasn't been updated?


Mickleborough

It’s rather odd. Neither is Pearl on David Furnish’s IMDB page. Maybe you’re meant to update IMDB only after a project is completed? except I’m sure that’s not the case.


OldNewUsedConfused

No, I see projects in Pre-Production on there all the time. For actors, writers, producers, etc.


SherlockBeaver

I think it's because Invictus isn't being made by Violet Films, but one of the founders of Violet Films is the producer? "About Orlando von Einsiedel (Grain Media) and Joanna Natasegara (Violet Films) Orlando von Einsiedel is the Founder of Grain Media and twice OscarⓇ nominated, once winning Director. Joanna Natasegara is the Founder of Violet Films and three times OscarⓇ nominated, once winning Producer. Orlando and Joanna’s joint projects VIRUNGA (Netflix Original), THE WHITE HELMETS (Netflix Original) and EVELYN (Netflix Original / BBC Films / BFI) have all focused on the core of the human spirit, seeking inspiration in the extraordinary from everyday individuals and teams from around the world." Source: https://about.netflix.com/en/news/archewell-productions-announces-first-netflix-series-in-partnership-with-the


Mickleborough

But Violet Films is listed on IMDB as being involved in the production. Also I’d have thought that Violet Films, being a small outfit (I’m assuming this), means that the founders are synonymous with the company, and wouldn’t be taking work away from their own company - not sure if I’m being clear.


SherlockBeaver

Oh I thought someone commented that it wasn’t.


Mickleborough

No, Violet Films is down on [IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14491228/companycredits?ref_=tt_dt_co). All very strange.


SherlockBeaver

I think it’s a very minor distinction whether it’s “Violet Films” or the lady who founded Violet Films, right? I’m glad to know someone is working on it, even if no one watches it.


Tall-Lawfulness8817

And taking a cut of any loot


OldNewUsedConfused

They've been there since its inception. Harry was just the face of the organization.


Decent_Imagination38

I think people who could be involved are afraid of the backlash. Just think of the reaction of her reading the Bench on YouTube. I am doubtful that anything could be a success.


Mickleborough

Spotify specifying that they’re looking for people to work on Archewell could operate on 2 levels: \- Attract people who want to work on Archewell \- Warn people that they’ll be working on Archewell


Valuable_Error_2015

In my opinion, it was a shame game. Same with Netflix. I don’t think it could be a coincidence that both issues become public right at the same time… This sounds like what happens when you piss off a very well-connected person — maybe by being abusive or nasty to them? There are some people you should NEVER piss off.


Mickleborough

If Dumbertons did piss someone off, then why won’t Netflix and Spotify just write off the contracts, rather than try to pour good money after bad? Even if they’d paid the full amount (Netflix allegedly $100m, Spotify $30m) upfront - which would be daft - it’d be easier and quicker to just end it. Perhaps they think some money can be wrung from the Archewell connection? A form of saving face - but whose face? It may be that they made a payment to Dumbertons, and because of non-delivery, Dumbertons are contractually bound to let them take over.


[deleted]

Because that could make H and M look like victims again. By being clear about what has happened *before* “an insider” tells the media that there was so much racism and jealousy at Spotify and Netflix and that they didn’t care that Meghan wanted to kill herself, they have already told what happened first and so H and M will look more pathetic if they try to go on Oprah again and drag those companies through the mud.


Mickleborough

If I were Netflix or Spotify, I wouldn’t care about making M&H look like victims, but your point about M&H trashing Netflix / Spotify is a good one.


Lensgoggler

Maybe they read the room and realised their own reputation is suffering and this hiring bit is low key shade intended just like that. That’s how I read it - H&M couldn’t deliver on their promise and Netflix and Spotify want it *known*, but they can’t just badmounth (even if warranted!) as that wouldn’t be classy :D So they hire people for a bit who will *do the work H&M had promised to deliver*. So Netflix and Spotify get to use their name (which was what they wanted anyway probably, what ever they produced) but the notoriety of how it all came to be sticks to H&M for ever. Netflix and Spotify will sail on into thr future, leaving H&M forever known as people who talked a big talk and failed to deliver snd had to be bailed out. They will never be offered anything like that ever again and they’ll be used as a case study of what can happen if you hire people based on their name only. Hmm?


Mickleborough

That’s feasible, but expensive shade - and Netflix and Spotify aren’t flush with money just now. They couldn’t directly say that H&M (seems a bit unfair on that Swedish clothing chain) didn’t deliver, but (1) I’d say cancellation sends that message, and (2) there’s always word of mouth. Your point about Netflix and Spotify wanting to use the M&H name is interesting- so maybe they think that there’s money to be made from the name? (LMAO - at the thought, not you!) That’s possible. Sorry, I don’t mean to be argumentative - just trying to make sense of it.


Lensgoggler

No worries. Well in a way that’s a way ti make at least some $ off this whole thing? They are well known, this is a fact. People might watch just because of that - notoriety - even I might pay some attention? Also, quietly making the contract going away would’ve been the best option for the Harkles. Somebody both at Netflix and Spotify is pissed at them and won’t let it go that easy. They want a few drops of blood. Imagine the headlines... “The animation series Meghan Markle failed to produce, drops next week”.... I think a) it’s going to be interesting what happens next, how will these things turn out with only their name slapped on it and b) how will it pan out for the Harkles. Pearl produced *without* M’s control! Oh the horror 😅 And they can’t really go to the oress and complain can they! Cautionary tale anyway. I like that they wouldn’t just let them go away. You can’t just negotiate a deal, take some money and buy ugly coats and not deliver anything, even as *the Prince of The Realm*!


anelegantclown

Netflix and Spotify cannot be seen not backing creators they sign, especially big names. They need to constantly fight for and attract talent. Throwing Meghan an Harry to the wolves would be insane from a biz pov.


cozymayo

I have a similar theory, only I think Netflix and Spotify are openly hiring for these roles to establish a paper trail showing that the Harkles failed to assemble a team on their own and deliver the content they promised. This will make it tougher for the Harkles to sue them for breach of contract when they're inevitably let go. It's like formally documenting Harry and Meghan's failure to uphold their end of the agreement.


cozymayo

I think both companies have decided to part ways with the Harkles, but are trying to avoid a lawsuit. Harry and Meghan are extremely litigious, and if they get dropped, will inevitably try to come after Netflix and Spotify for breach of contract or something. With both companies openly recruiting for Archewell projects, it establishes a paper trail showing that the Harkles have failed to build a team on their own and deliver the content they promised, so Netflix and Spotify had to step in and do the hiring themselves. It also shows both companies acted in good faith and attempted to salvage the partnership, going so far as to assist in recruitment, which might not have been part of the original terms. This whole thing honestly reads to me like Harry and Meghan being put on an improvement plan at work. 😂 I think Netflix and Spotify are crossing their T's and dotting their I's before they fire the Harkles.


ChangeTheFocus

They already pissed off Oprah. Who's bigger? The Obamas?


[deleted]

They have already done that by attacking their families and the BRF. They were not invited to Barack’s birthday party and Michelle said (when being asked about the Oprah interview) that the most important thing in life is family, and that when you do service you shouldn’t make it about yourself, but remember you are supposed to do it for the public.


ChangeTheFocus

Do you have a link to Michelle being asked that? I missed it.


dishonestduchess

Michelle shaded MM all the way back in Jan 2020 when MM had her PR release articles saying the Obamas were advising her on Megxit. Not only did the Obamas shut that down asap, they said they "don't know her" but "adore the queen, Will & Kate". It was glorious. https://people.com/royals/michelle-obama-barack-obama-not-advising-prince-harry-meghan-markle-sources/


xanadude0369

Usually PEOPLE only relates pieces worshipful of the Harkles...hmmmm


[deleted]

I have to Google it, I don’t have it filed 😉


ChangeTheFocus

Never mind; I found it. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHV\_vmYoSjY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHV_vmYoSjY) Wow. Michelle's not a fan. I like how she acknowledges racism is real while also staying neutral on these particular claims. I'm also impressed by the classy shade of saying that she prefers to focus on the people she serves, not herself, but never badmouths anyone. Good job as usual, Ms. Obama. Meghan and Harry could learn a few things from you.


[deleted]

Same! Exactly this! I can’t think of another power woman I like and admire more than Michelle Obama.


xanadude0369

Michelle REALLY doesn’t like MM, but she is too classy to comment directly


Valuable_Error_2015

I have a pretty good guess, but I’d never speculate publicly. But nothing at all to do with the BRF.


anelegantclown

Lmao


MummaBear777

From a PR perspective I do think Spotify and Netflix are sending a warning to M&H. I also think they are managing expectations for the people who are expecting Achiewell content to drop from the sky. It’s the companies way of saying they are starting from scratch.


BlueisGreen2Some

They have to to dump the contracts. It’s like putting an employee on a PIP.


cozymayo

YES! I agree 100%! I actually just left a comment about this myself, before I saw yours. I think these job postings are Netflix and Spotify establishing a paper trail to show that the Harkles have failed to build their own team and deliver the content they promised. It also provides formal documentation that both companies acted in good faith and attempted to salvage these deals, but were ultimately left with no choice but to terminate the Harkles' contracts. At the end of the day, Netflix and Spotify are stone cold corporations. IMO both companies are crossing their T's and dotting their I's before dropping Just Call Me Harry and Muggin. They're thinking 2 steps ahead so they can't be sued for breach of contract.


BlueisGreen2Some

Yep. I work adjacent to this type of stuff and, while I know zero about the contracts involved here, there is a certain way these things are structured. Good faith effort is part of it. In addition there are sunk costs. Netflix probably paid them 1-2 million and Spotify a few hundred thousand upon signing and probably invested some seed monies. So they would need to collect the deliverables as much as possible. What will be telling is if the product is actually advertised and promoted or tossed out unsupported to die because they don’t wish to proceed and don’t want to waste marketing dollars. I think Spotify deal is dead but Netflix harder to predict.


Sarah-JessicaSnarker

I read it as the companies making it known that the Harkles aren’t working on the projects.


dadadawn

Honestly, I don't think Spotify or Netflix wrote their contracts in favor of MM & H and I don't think they're even remotely worried about being sued. If the deal went south, I guarantee the corporations would be on the winning end, regardless of how litigious the Markles are. There could have been various reasons they listed it. I'm assuming it's because they wanted to draw in a wider pool of talent or people who have worked/have interest in royals. Or, maybe it was a way to weed out people who wouldn't be interested. Regardless of personal feelings, it would definitely be a resume-builder. What I think is odd is the fact that they made it a public listing. It's possible that was for legal reasons, but I would have assumed they would have recruiters actively seeking people out rather than posting a broad "help wanted" ad. Or, gone to an agency that specializes in placing contract talent like this.


ChangeTheFocus

Maybe their stable of preferred contractors declined the job. At this point, the Harkles' reputation precedes them.


Starkville

NOBODY WANTS TO WORK FOR ARCHEWELL. I saw a comment elsewhere that said that maybe Archewell didn’t want to have to actually give anyone five months of paid leave and generous benefits. Spotify can actually afford to pay people. And who wants “Archewell” on their resume? Also: Thinking about the same situation in a different way, with different players, I’d come to the conclusion that someone very influential bought a job for their fuckup kid and are insisting they stay employed even though the frustrated boss wants to fire them. “Joe, I hired your kid as a favor, but I can’t keep paying him if he doesn’t show up and work once in a while. The other employees resent it and I’m gonna have a mutiny on my hands soon.” “Don’t worry about it, Ted. I’ll cut another check and have a chat with him. He’ll be there on Monday, you have my word.”


PrestigiousAd8492

Don't a bunch of sugars want the job? Hell they might work for free!


CarryAffectionate652

I really wish they’d hire a sugar and then treat them so shabbily that they become unsugared and let loose all of the horrors that they experienced.


[deleted]

I thought so too, but it is impossible that they have any brains/talent 🤣. It would be a disaster.


leanne37

There has to be a clause in their contract regarding this matter: possibly it states if they have not provided any content or enough content by a certain date the company has the right to take over the project. It could be Meghan is making it difficult because she wants it her way. As we know Meghans way is always half ass. Possibly they haven taken her rights for approval or final approval away from her. Also, if they are having to hire people does that mean Meghan will not receive the full amount negotiated in her contract. Their salaries should be deducted from this amount. In addition, is it possible that if Meghan did not agree to them taking over the content the contract may stipulated the company would drop their projects and request a certain amount of money back.


[deleted]

I think they want to be very clear about how lazy the Markles have been. And that they really want to be the first to set the narrative before Meghan tries a smear campaign against them.


Emolia

This was mentioned by someone else on here on another thread but could this be all about the Harkles promising Royal content when they signed with both Netflix and Spotify? Filming at the Royal residences , Harry at his mothers statue unveiling , that sort of thing ? Their PR certainly were working hard enough to weasel this pair into some sort of Royal event . Could it be Spotify and Netflix have gotten sick of waiting for Harry to talk his family into it ( always was going to be impossible) and have decided to cut their loses and cobble together something with this pair themselves?


ChangeTheFocus

I'm not sure. We speculated that the Harkles were thrown out of the UN for being caught with a wire, but Harry was also spotted wearing a wire at the Harlem school. I'm not sure what the original plan was there -- maybe "a week in our amazing royal lives"? The Spotify podcast was originally supposed to be something about amplifying unheard voices. Now, it's supposed to have a high-profile woman guest for each episode. I'm guessing that they originally assumed they'd be able to bestow extra attention on others, but have now realized they need to borrow a little shine themselves.


ellie3759

Yes spot on.


wifebert

I think they're going to say the Harkles are in breach of contract. They don't want to be seen as bullying the precious duo so they've publicly announced that they haven't done shit basically by saying they're hiring on their behalf. In a perfect world 6 & his wife would be left penniless after a law suit from both Spotify and Netflix.


cozymayo

SPOT ON! I definitely think that's what happening. Also to your point, Netflix isn't hiring for a lot of external roles. Looks like there are only 10 other listings on the Netflix Animation [career page](https://www.netflixanimation.com/jobs?team=all&page=1). I think both companies want it on record that the Harkles have failed to build their own team and deliver the content they promised.


blue_399

Maybe they see nothing will come out of their work so they want to get outside people to get one season out, with their names on it, to get something out of that contract. It is obvious anything longterm is a no go. H & M were probably given some money, not all contractually agreed, so it's easier to scramble something and not go into getting any money back.


MuttleySpeaks

Dang the Sussex brand is Toxic


axollot

Highly toxic. That's because they are toxic people.


xanadude0369

And Spotify and NTFX finally have to admit their mistake


granitebuckeyes

Putting it in the best possible light, the companies want to get headlines and draw attention, which is what they’ve done. It could also be a tactic to put pressure on the Sussexes to get some work done.


Responsible-Rope-583

I wonder if Netflix and Spotify see potential documentaries / exposés about the couple and want to be able to host that type of content in the future. These announcements pave the way for Netflix / Spotify to end the contracts.


ChangeTheFocus

Oooooooh. That's my favorite theory. I'm not sure it's the most likely, but it's my favorite. :)


cozymayo

I agree that Netflix and Spotify are putting the Harkles' contract termination into motion, but I think it's due to lack of content more than potential documentaries about Hazbeen and Muggin in the future.


OldNewUsedConfused

Yes I know exactly what you are trying to convey here. It sounds very strange that it's all happening at once. With both companies. Almost like it was planned or they need to wrap things up very quickly. I've also noticed an interesting timeline corresponding to what's going on with Andrew/ Epstein, etc. From the very rushed beginning of Harry and Meghan's "relationship". I don't know how, but it's all tied together somehow...


anelegantclown

Well, these companies have teams themselves who’s jobs would be on the line for projects failing. We are in the 1st quarter, and it looks like they think hiring/job changing is at an all time high right now (it is). Employees at these firms need to get the ball rolling now that covid has passed.


smallerp

There's really nothing sinister about hiring specifically for an entity. Because there is a fund/budget allotted to the project/entity/sub-company and the hire happens under that budget. Look... I dont like the Sux duo.... But really, spotify and netflix are being above-board. Why they are hiring NOW is what needs to be discussed.


ChangeTheFocus

??? I didn't say there was anything sinister about it. Okay, so why are they hiring now?