In a scathing takedown that’s sending shockwaves through royal circles and celebrity branding experts alike, Meghan Markle has been labeled a “fraud” by top industry professionals. On the latest episode of Dan Wootton’s Outspoken podcast, dated July 27, 2025, the Duchess of Sussex’s latest venture, American Riviera Orchard (rebranded as “As Ever”), comes under fire as a complete disaster. Branding gurus from the Art of the Brand podcast didn’t hold back, declaring that Meghan and Prince Harry’s post-royal life is a series of flops, leading to the brutal verdict: “They suck.” Joined by royal biographer Angela Levin, Wootton dissects how the couple’s attempts at reconciliation, commercial deals, and product launches have all backfired spectacularly. As public backlash mounts, with even animated shows like Family Guy piling on the mockery, questions arise: Is this the end of the Sussex brand, or just another chapter in their controversial saga?

The Viral Podcast That Exposed the ‘Fraud’

The controversy ignited with a viral clip from the Art of the Brand podcast, hosted by Canadian lawyer Philip Miller and California marketing executive Camille Moore. These aren’t your typical royal commentators—they’re branding experts analyzing Meghan’s business moves with a cold, professional eye. Their assessment? Meghan’s brand “sucks” from top to bottom, built on opportunism rather than substance.

Miller and Moore pulled no punches, claiming Meghan is “milking her fame from Prince Harry to sucker people into buying her products.” They highlighted her lack of genuine involvement in her ventures, pointing out that her lifestyle brand, As Ever, relies on white-label products with zero ownership on her part. “She had zero ownership in this business. It’s effectively like she’s just labeling her brand,” Moore explained. They revealed how Netflix’s product department is pulling the strings, turning Meghan’s deals into mere revenue-boosting add-ons to her shows. “She up until the launch didn’t have one employee,” Miller added, noting her recent hire of a COO as a desperate move.

The experts traced Meghan’s failures back to the beginning: her children’s book The Bench bombed, her Netflix documentary flopped, Disney narration deals fizzled, podcasts were axed amid “effing grifters” accusations, and even her Instagram rollout was a non-event. Bought awards? Another flop. The jam from As Ever? No one was clamoring for it. “There wasn’t like an abundance of people looking to buy jam from Megan Markle,” they quipped. Their conclusion: Meghan’s brand is a “confederacy of dunces,” exploiting her royal ties without executing anything well, preying on gullible consumers.

Dan Wootton amplified this on his show, calling it “the most brutal I’ve ever heard, but also the most fair.” He argued that this expert verdict will stick, no matter what Meghan tells her PR team. “It doesn’t matter what Meghan Markle tells Tina Knowles. The experts are saying this is dire.”

Angela Levin Weighs In: ‘She’s Used Him’

Royal biographer Angela Levin, author of Harry: A Biography of a Prince, joined Wootton to unpack the critique. Levin praised the branding experts for their candor, noting that royal commentators like herself often hold back due to threats of racism accusations or worse. “These people, which is their jobs to watch how people deal with food and things, they feel open about saying something… I think they’re absolutely spot on,” she said.

Levin echoed the fraud claims, asserting that Meghan married Harry to advance her fame and fortune. “Megan um is actually got Harry because it’s really helped her become well known and to be rich. Um she’s disappointed that he’s not well rich enough,” Levin stated, referencing the late Queen Elizabeth II’s belief that Meghan never truly loved Harry. “The queen, the late queen said she never felt that Megan actually loved Harry and that’s what upset her very much, but she’s used him.”

She described Meghan’s behavior as inconsistent and self-serving: one moment publicly affectionate, the next sending Harry away for weeks. Levin criticized the ego driving Meghan’s ventures, where she insists on micromanaging—like stirring every pot—yet produces subpar results. “Megan has got a huge ego because she thinks she’s the most important one… It just shows that she needs to be part of it even though it doesn’t mean anything because she is the number one and she’s got it all wrong.”

On the Flamingo Estate collaboration that fell through, Levin agreed with the experts that Meghan should have partnered instead of copying. “If you’ve got an ego, it doesn’t mean you’re going to do very well. It doesn’t at all.” She slammed the British-inspired branding as hypocritical, given Meghan’s public disdain for the royals. “You’re meant to hate the royal family. You’re meant to hate everything about Britain… Yet your brand is totally tapping into the sort of British quirks.”

Mounting Public Backlash and Mockery

The podcast’s verdict has fueled widespread public outrage, with social media users and commentators branding Meghan “ungrateful” and “heartless.” Wootton highlighted how even woke American entertainment is turning against them. For the second time, Family Guy mocked the couple, equating their marriage to historical disasters like the Crusades and Hitler. In a clip, a character quips, “The Crusades, Hitler, Prince Harry marrying Meghan Markle.” Levin laughed at the satire but noted the Sussexes’ thin skin: “They don’t like people mocking them… Most people would roar with laughter, but they are absolutely furious.”

A taste test on the Daily Mail’s Palace Confidential further embarrassed Meghan’s wine from As Ever. Panelist Richard Eden described it as “so sweet at first, but with a bitter aftertaste,” drawing laughs and parallels to Meghan herself. Charlotte Griffiths called it “fine” but strong at 14.5% alcohol. Levin found the packaging odd—three bottles minimum, sent to friends on Queen Camilla’s birthday—and speculated on Camilla’s disapproval, given her wine expertise.

Levin dismissed defenses of Harry as a “traumatized” victim, like those from Belgium’s Princess Delphine, who claimed he’s “bullied by the public.” “I think that’s nonsense… He’s not the only person that’s had family tragedy,” Levin retorted, urging accountability for his family attacks. She contrasted Harry with William, who overcame similar traumas without victimhood.

The Bigger Picture: A Brand in Freefall?

This episode underscores the Sussexes’ brand in crisis. From Spotify’s “grifters” label to Netflix’s controlling hand, their independence seems illusory. Wootton questioned if trauma excuses Harry’s rage, spilled in Oprah interviews and Spare, but Levin argued he clings to victimhood: “He wants to be a victim… If he really wanted to leave all this nonsense and hurt behind, he could do it.”

As Ever’s rebranding and products—like jam and wine—face ridicule, experts warn of short-term ego over long-term strategy. “There’s an ego-centric approach… If you achieve some level of celebrity, you think you can build a brand,” said Moore. Levin concluded: “People just don’t like her… If he says that she sucks, he’s got a very good reason to say so.”

With over 5 million views and counting, this critique could be the tipping point. As Wootton put it, “This is going to be a verdict that sticks.” Will Meghan pivot, or will the flops continue? Only time—and perhaps another Netflix deal—will tell.