Phillip Schofield #40 The grumours were all true.

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
So Holly is the face of M&S, Garnier, Nobody's Child (clothing) and Beauty Pie. Am I missing any?

Did you buy things because of her in the first place? Would you still buy things if she stays as brand ambassador? Personally I find her childlike, wide eyed, Bambi schtick nauseating and steer clear of anything she is associated with.

I hope she gets the boot.
No as I said on an earlier post I won't buy clothes from M & S that she endorses.

I'm the same with any product that an 'influencer' promotes, I don't buy it. Mrs Hinch on cleaning products, nope I'll go for own brands if I had to, same with Stacey Solomon.

I avoid all that like the plague!
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 24
I must say I think Kelvin MacKenzie is reaching a bit with his comment on the ITV share price. It's been bouncing around the 70p mark for a good few weeks now and the whole market's down today. The last time ITV was over a £ was back before Russia invaded Ukraine and it's been bouncing around 70 - 80p since then because of fears of consumer confidence, discretionary spend etc.

This PS thing won't in itself affect the share price but if McCall resigns, or if loads of other advertisers pull out, or if clear evidence emerges of proper pweirdo / criminal activity at ITV, then yes it will start declining.

TBH the main thing ITV investors worry about is ITV's ability to compete with streaming services given that ITV Hub or whatever it's called is turning out to be a bit crap. The main problem is that ITV has rubbish content compared with Netflix, iPlayer etc.

But claiming that a 1p decline in share price in a crappy horrible market is a bit of a reach unfortunately and just an excuse to put the boot in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10
I am fond of a tipple every now and again - but for someone who is on a morning TV show which for all intents and purposes is meant to be a friend to all, isn’t it weird that

- they talk about being drunk partying etc
- drink wine and alcohol on screen (for segments to be fair but still)
- PUT THEIR NAMES TO ALCOHOL

Feels really off. I’m not a prude but imagine you’re an alcoholic and PS is rattling on about a nice gin he had at the weekend? Maybe I’m just a prude…
I don't have to imagine that.
Lived with an alcoholic and its hell and this show always triggered me as if they promoted a boozing lifestyle without considering the consquences.

I have long been fed up of watching them openly discuss their love of drinking as they sniggered its a family TV show etc.

That awards nights defo sticks in my mind.
She always had a look in her eyes like she on high 🤪

yes love a drink but dont promote your personal life of partying, boozing as it comes across badly especially when influential youngsters affected by alcoholism are watching 😠
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 19
Is Schofield going to respond to any of this? It’s been almost 48 hours since his last ‘statement’ now. Maybe someone has taken his phone off him?
He's probably stomping across Westminster Bridge in defiance.

Thread title suggestion - I'M GAY, I'M GAY!!!
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 22
No as I said on an earlier post I won't buy clothes from M & S that she endorses.

I'm the same with any product that an 'influencer' promotes, I don't buy it. Mrs Hinch on cleaning products, nope I'll go for own brands if I had to, same with Stacey Solomon.

I avoid all that like the plague!
I’m the same, I wouldn’t intentionally buy anything just because it’s endorsed by a celebrity but I have bought stuff that had a celebs name on but that was more because I liked the look of it and didn’t realise it endorsed by a YouTuber I never heard of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5
Plus, for some unknown reason MM was being represented by his top, expensive legal firm paid for by PS.

MM reportedly told the lawyers that he was no longer happy to lie about the relationship. But the overarching point is, why was PS paying for his legal team for MM?
It's certainly odd isn't it and suggests that PS thought that MM was safely onside and happy to continue keeping schtum to preserve PS's precious career.

Imagine his shock when MM turned around and bravely told the expensive lawyers that he was no longer willing to lie!

I do wonder who's paying for them now - highly doubt it's PS - maybe they are continuing to help MM pro bono (which would suggest they see a legal case in it) or may MM now no longer has any representation.

On the rent thing - it would be truly disgusting if PS had been paying MM's rent when they were 'together' and then stopped and left him high and dry without the requisite funds when they 'split'.

The whole thing suggests that PS basically saw MM as a prostitute.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 23
Does anyone else feel that they no longer want to watch ITV? It’s mostly tit anyway but it feels very tainted now. All of it. Fake plastic crap. I hate how they are burying their heads in the sand hoping it will all go away. It’s not going to.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 24
Does anyone else feel that they no longer want to watch ITV? It’s mostly tit anyway but it feels very tainted now. All of it. Fake plastic crap. I hate how they are burying their heads in the sand hoping it will all go away. It’s not going to.
Kinda but I got a week's worth of Emmerdale to catch up on so....
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 19
I offer this comment not to be a contrarian (because you need only look at my prev comments to see that just like you, I've genuinely been overwhelmed with sadness thinking of poor MM), but rather to help us keep sight in this confusing mess - we've gotten things wrong in these threads.

We thought that picture of Holly at the NTA was her looking disgusted at MM and assumed she was pretending not to know him, and then a few days ago(?) we see that actually we got things wrong, and mere seconds later he was kissing her on the cheek.

It makes me so sad to think that he might
have had additional vulnerable traits, but we can't take anything as certain anymore, so if that at all helps make your heavy heart feel a bit better, then at least I've done that, even if I risk people thinking I'm being a troublemaker. I'm not - again, I want nothing but the best for PS's young victims.
He's probably stomping across Westminster Bridge in defiance.

Thread title suggestion - I'M GAY, I'M GAY!!!
Let's hope he walks off the bridge this time, the dirty scumbag.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 7
I wonder how much money Phil has got stashed away for a divorce now he won’t have any income.
£4k a month to MM, £30k a month to a crisis management firm, goodness knows how much on lying to extremely expensive lawyers, whatever he is paying Big Ben, shag pad in central London.
It all adds up, can he maintain his outgoings now? Has he put aside what he needs to for HMRC?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 17
It's certainly odd isn't it and suggests that PS thought that MM was safely onside and happy to continue keeping schtum to preserve PS's precious career.

Imagine his shock when MM turned around and bravely told the expensive lawyers that he was no longer willing to lie!

I do wonder who's paying for them now - highly doubt it's PS - maybe they are continuing to help MM pro bono (which would suggest they see a legal case in it) or may MM now no longer has any representation.

On the rent thing - it would be truly disgusting if PS had been paying MM's rent when they were 'together' and then stopped and left him high and dry without the requisite funds when they 'split'.

The whole thing suggests that PS basically saw MM as a prostitute.
If it’s the legal firm that PS has usually used himself, I wonder if they would even be allowed to represent MM separately? It might be a conflict of interest. I have no idea how it works!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9
Been thinking non stop abou this and these threads..looking at the old slime ball… nobody would batter an eyelid at the old saggy arse bastard if he wasn’t on TV . He’s used his “fame” and I use that word very lightly to get what he wants… when really he’s just a sad old closet bleep.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 14
No as I said on an earlier post I won't buy clothes from M & S that she endorses.

I'm the same with any product that an 'influencer' promotes, I don't buy it. Mrs Hinch on cleaning products, nope I'll go for own brands if I had to, same with Stacey Solomon.

I avoid all that like the plague!
Holly needs a wholesome image for the brand she promotes. As she enters her 40s, she is trying to appeal to the wholesome, happy family market, such as when she did the BB cream advert showing her getting ready in the morning. M&S have a wholesome image, look at the other ambassadors they have had in the past, Emma Willis, Myleene Klass.

I think Holly has her own skeletons that she is worried Philth's scandal could expose now that they are well and truly under the microscope. There was the saga where she reported her car as stolen, only for it to turn up parked somewhere shortly after. The HW thread on here has long suggested that she likes more than just tequila on a night out.

M&S, Garnier et al cannot afford to have their brand associated with this kind of scandal. If she did cover for Philth and if MM was underage when the relationship started, then no mums or dads are going to buy a product with her name to them. As I said, it's all ifs and hypothesis with her at the moment, but I reckon she is bricking it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 18
Does PS's wife have any self respect? I’m guessing she loves the greenback as much as PS loves bareback 👀🤷‍♀️😇
I'm in the US and don't know much about her, but if I was in her position I'd stay in the nice house with a new boyfriend and take some long pricy vacations on my not-yet-wasband's dime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8
If it’s the legal firm that PS has usually used himself, I wonder if they would even be allowed to represent MM separately? It might be a conflict of interest. I have no idea how it works!
If PS uses Mishcon de Reya, and also paid for them to represent MM, then it means that he thought MM was on 'his' side yes. Mishcon are rottweiler celeb lawyers who help their clients cover up and injunct loads of nasty stuff. They act for a lot of politicians, ex-PMs, that kind of stuff.

If MM turned around and basically said, PS lied to you, then yes that would represent a conflict of interest. Different firms would deal with that in different ways and it really entirely depends on the nuances of the situation and also whether there's any civil or criminal case in the offing.

But we just don't know enough about what's gone on behind the scenes tbh. But I think that in itself is incredibly juicy - I'm sure it'll all come out in the wash
 
  • Like
Reactions: 15
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.