The couple made the landmark decision last year to leave their royal life behind and set up home across to the pond in a bid to live a “financially independent life” away from the monarchy. But since then, they have launched a series of allegations towards the Firm, including on delicate topics such as race and mental health. Among Harry’s targets has been Charles, who the Duke of Sussex claimed was “trapped” inside the Royal Family due to his one day becoming monarch.

He also criticised his father’s parenting style, and argued he was “cut off” financially from the Firm immediately after their announcement to quit had been made public.

This prompted a response from Prince Charles’ spokesperson, who said, when the Clarence House financial accounts for the year were released in June, that the Sussexes received a “substantial sum” on their exit and that they were funded up to the summer of 2020.

And in the aftermath of these allegations being made during interviews such as with Oprah Winfrey on CBS, commentator Daniela Elser said it appeared the feud between father and son showed no signs of being healed.

Writing in May for the New Zealand Herald, Ms Elser noted: “If, having experienced the fallout from the Oprah interview and essentially gone ahead and done the same thing again, it would seem that Harry has no intention of backing down or at least backing away from his current competitive stances.

“All of which leaves us here: The battle lines have been drawn and no one seems willing to back down. There will be no ceasefire, any time soon.

“Sadly, it is hard to see how any of this ends well for either side.”

In September last year, the couple signed two lucrative contracts with streaming giants Netflix and Spotify, confirming two projects ready to begin with the former.

The two Netflix projects include one by Meghan, who will be producing an animated series called Pearl.

JUST IN: Prince Harry to return to UK with film crew – with plan to visit Queen

Meanwhile, Harry’s contribution will include a documentary on the Invictus Games – the sports competition for wounded ex-servicemen and women.

But as the deal was signed nearly a year ago, Ms Elser argued that Netflix could be expecting a bit more from their more than £100million investment in the couple.

She added: “When the Sussexes do start unveiling their slate of TV and podcasting projects they will get one shot; that is, one chance to impress audiences and make their mark either in terms of steaming figures or critical plaudits.

“When the novelty and the lustre of working with members of the Royal Family wears off, if they don’t have streaming counts or a clutch of awards to show for themselves, then will their contracts be renewed?

DON’T MISS:
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Netflix dream in tatters [ANALYSIS]
Princess Anne thought Harry ‘behaved appallingly’ in royal split [INSIGHT]
Jeremy Clarkson warned Harry and Meghan against ‘revolting’ chat shows [LATEST]

“Essentially, they will have a brief window to prove they are worth the hundreds of millions that corporate behemoths have bet on them. No pressure now or anything.”

“The fact is, even billion-dollar companies can’t afford to keep ploughing truckloads of cash into two very, very famous contractors if they do not prove to be a sound investment.”

Similar scrutiny was placed on the couple’s Spotify deal by Eric Schiffer, chairman of Reputation Management Consultants.

He told Newsweek last year that the deal would be “based upon performance kickers”, but admitted that while the contract was “great for them” it was “terrible” for the monarchy “because they are choosing to sell it at fire sale prices”.

He concluded: “I think they are systematically benefiting from the halo of the monarchy.

“If Harry wasn’t involved no one would care about this, if she didn’t have the royal ties.

“There’s this reckless war on this pristine historical brand that has represented the people of England for centuries.”