Is the Burj Khalifa actually occupied?
What with the Arab world engaging in a contest of willy-waving with their skyscrapers, I'm just interested to know whether their economies actually support such ostentatious buildings?
(edited 13 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
they've planned a building twice as tall in saudi arabia... its truly ridiculous
(edited 13 years ago)
If it wasn't the Arabs, it would only be the Americans or the Chinese.
It's eery going round Dubai. In the centre, outskirts, the Palm - everywhere - there are just so many empty or half-finished buildings. I've been before the recession and after it. The change in atmosphere was astonishing; you could definitely feel that the bubble had burst.
I go to the UAE every summer, I have a family home in Abu Dhabi so I know a fair bit about the area.
The Burj Khalifa isn't fully occupied but they planned projects pre-world crisis and a lot of them depended on the super rich spending their wealth in the emirate. After they've been built, due to the circumstances they haven't had the forecasted net migration of expats and businesses.
It's got to the stage where there is so much vacant property available and the demand is so low that the government has actually had to start demolishing brand new buildings! Some of them that were only like 75% complete, and taken down to drive up the prices with fewer vacant property around.
Also this idea that Dubai affords these projects on the back of oil is a huge misconception. The ignorant immediately think Arab state = oil money. Dubai has had virtually a pittance of oil for the last 10 years, and oil only contributes less than 8% to its economy. That was the point of all the investment into Dubai for the past 20 years, to diversify the economy for the time that it no longer has oil.
Abu Dhabi is the real powerhouse though, without a doubt the wealthiest single city on the planet...statistically speaking of course.
The Burj Khalifa isn't fully occupied but they planned projects pre-world crisis and a lot of them depended on the super rich spending their wealth in the emirate. After they've been built, due to the circumstances they haven't had the forecasted net migration of expats and businesses.
It's got to the stage where there is so much vacant property available and the demand is so low that the government has actually had to start demolishing brand new buildings! Some of them that were only like 75% complete, and taken down to drive up the prices with fewer vacant property around.
Also this idea that Dubai affords these projects on the back of oil is a huge misconception. The ignorant immediately think Arab state = oil money. Dubai has had virtually a pittance of oil for the last 10 years, and oil only contributes less than 8% to its economy. That was the point of all the investment into Dubai for the past 20 years, to diversify the economy for the time that it no longer has oil.
Abu Dhabi is the real powerhouse though, without a doubt the wealthiest single city on the planet...statistically speaking of course.
Original post by jumpingjesusholycow
If it wasn't the Arabs, it would only be the Americans or the Chinese.
The Americans are too realistic these days. Even the twin towers' replacement, the One World Trade Center, isn't going to be that big, 1,776ft. That's far, far smaller than this thing in Saudi and only a little talelr than the Petronas Towers.
Original post by Drewski
Original post by Drewski
The Americans are too realistic these days. Even the twin towers' replacement, the One World Trade Center, isn't going to be that big, 1,776ft. That's far, far smaller than this thing in Saudi and only a little talelr than the Petronas Towers.
Sure, but it's only a matter of time before someone's going to think 'screw this, I'm just going to build a **** off building and settle this once and for all'. I just don't 'get' all the hate
Original post by jumpingjesusholycow
Sure, but it's only a matter of time before someone's going to think 'screw this, I'm just going to build a **** off building and settle this once and for all'. I just don't 'get' all the hate
Yeah, but at some point ambition is going to get ahead of what the engineering and construction businesses are actually capable of, I'd be surprised if this new one in Saudi wasn't somewhere near that point, tbh.
It's all an exercise in vanity, basically. There's no need for buildings of this size, the fact that other large buildings remain mostly unused is the proof. If there was demand for collosal amounts of office space in these locations it'd be understandable.
Anyway, not my money, not bothered. If they manage to build it, kudos.
Original post by Drewski
Original post by Drewski
Yeah, but at some point ambition is going to get ahead of what the engineering and construction businesses are actually capable of, I'd be surprised if this new one in Saudi wasn't somewhere near that point, tbh.
It's all an exercise in vanity, basically. There's no need for buildings of this size, the fact that other large buildings remain mostly unused is the proof. If there was demand for collosal amounts of office space in these locations it'd be understandable.
Anyway, not my money, not bothered. If they manage to build it, kudos.
It's all an exercise in vanity, basically. There's no need for buildings of this size, the fact that other large buildings remain mostly unused is the proof. If there was demand for collosal amounts of office space in these locations it'd be understandable.
Anyway, not my money, not bothered. If they manage to build it, kudos.
And why is it that people only make a point about calling out 'extravagance' when it's the Arabs? Almost all of the world's man-made 'wonders' have been extravagant projects which seemed to push the boundary of possibility. Sistine chapel, Eiffel tower, Mount Rushmore? They're all unnecessary structures which have no purpose but to be revered in their ambition. It's just a double standard I'm seeing here, I don't see anyone looking at the Eiffel tower or Statue of Liberty in disgust, but we're all ready to bust a nut when we hear of an Arab project.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by jumpingjesusholycow
And why is it that people only make a point about calling out 'extravagance' when it's the Arabs? Almost all of the world's man-made 'wonders' have been extravagant projects which seemed to push the boundary of possibility. Sistine chapel, Eiffel tower, Mount Rushmore?
I guarantee you, that had the internet been available at the time, plenty of people would have railed against each one of them. How many people hated the Millennium Dome? The new Wembley? The Scottish parliament? The buildings for the 2012 Olympics? And those are just British projects...
It just so happens that it's their turn, nothing more sinister.
Original post by jumpingjesusholycow
If it wasn't the Arabs, it would only be the Americans or the Chinese.
Except that the new One World Trade Centre and the Shanghai Tower will actually be occupied, because the local economies aren't one-trick ponies that are going to be horrendously bankrupt basket cases once the oil runs out.
The Burj Khalifa is proof that you can't buy class. They threw the best architects and engineers (none of them Arabian) and a ton of money at a problem that didn't exist - that they didn't have the world's most pointless and tallest penis-compensator - rather than spend that $1.5bn on actually fixing the many problems of the UAE.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by jumpingjesusholycow
Sure, but it's only a matter of time before someone's going to think 'screw this, I'm just going to build a **** off building and settle this once and for all'. I just don't 'get' all the hate
Because they are Arabs and Arabs are supposed to be the poor brown bastards living in ****ed up Islamic states. So when they are doing well and defeating a stereotype it doesn't sit well with the dicks. This is particularly evident in people feeling the need to point out that its 'not even Arabs building it.'
(edited 13 years ago)
Yes, somewhat.
I've seen an apartment personally.
Many are not, however.
I've seen an apartment personally.
Many are not, however.
Original post by jumpingjesusholycow
And why is it that people only make a point about calling out 'extravagance' when it's the Arabs? Almost all of the world's man-made 'wonders' have been extravagant projects which seemed to push the boundary of possibility. Sistine chapel, Eiffel tower, Mount Rushmore? They're all unnecessary structures which have no purpose but to be revered in their ambition. It's just a double standard I'm seeing here, I don't see anyone looking at the Eiffel tower or Statue of Liberty in disgust, but we're all ready to bust a nut when we hear of an Arab project.
My question related to the UAE economy's ability to support such a building, and this thread has shown that it doesn't have that ability.
And in 19th century Europe, similar arguments were afoot against Napoleon's 'phallic' structure, the Eiffel Tower.
Original post by Aphotic Cosmos
Except that the new One World Trade Centre and the Shanghai Tower will actually be occupied, because the local economies aren't one-trick ponies that are going to be horrendously bankrupt basket cases once the oil runs out.
The Burj Khalifa is proof that you can't buy class. They threw the best architects and engineers (none of them Arabian) and a ton of money at a problem that didn't exist - that they didn't have the world's most pointless and tallest penis-compensator - rather than spend that $1.5bn on actually fixing the many problems of the UAE.
The Burj Khalifa is proof that you can't buy class. They threw the best architects and engineers (none of them Arabian) and a ton of money at a problem that didn't exist - that they didn't have the world's most pointless and tallest penis-compensator - rather than spend that $1.5bn on actually fixing the many problems of the UAE.
The UAE does not have problems, Dubai does.
Abu Dhabi, the capital, which acts as pretty much a state in itself couldn't be more thriving. It has the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world standing at over $1trillion dollars....which isn't so much of a problem as it is an unbelievable feat. The GDP of Abu Dhabi ranks 3rd in the world after Luxembourg. But of course Abu Dhabi is oil-rich, holding 10% of the world's oil and 6% of the natural gas. Considering it's about the size of London, that's incredible.
As for the other emirates of the UAE, they're not thriving nor experiencing much problems. They're just self sustaining and have remained pretty much the same as they have for decades. Culturally, socially, economically...they're only concerned about serving the extremely small emirati population which they seem to be doing just fine.
Dubai's ability to grow so rapidly within 20 years has also been its downfall. It developed faster than the population grew. It isn't as thriving as it was back in say 2005 but in the long term once the population grows it'll be okay.
Also, you're incredibly naive if you think $1.5 billion does anything to help their economic problem. Abu Dhabi gave $10 billion just to cover a debt of ONE of their state-owned construction company. $1.5 billion is a pittance in their eyes.
On top of that, the building was planned and started to be constructed many years ago, well before the economic crises...so spending $1.5 billion during that time was justified. Spending it to make a property like the Burj Khalifa is questionable, they expected more businesses and the super rich to move in.
But anyway, having a state of the art skyscrapers lying around empty is a better problem to have than not having the means to build such things in the first place.
Original post by Aphotic Cosmos
They threw the best architects and engineers (none of them Arabian) and a ton of money at a problem that didn't exist - that they didn't have the world's most pointless and tallest penis-compensator - rather than spend that $1.5bn on actually fixing the many problems of the UAE.
Original post by Lemozo
And in 19th century Europe, similar arguments were afoot against Napoleon's 'phallic' structure, the Eiffel Tower.
And in 19th century Europe, similar arguments were afoot against Napoleon's 'phallic' structure, the Eiffel Tower.
What is it with people and penises in this thread.
NOTE TO EVERYONE:
Just about every building that is longer in one dimension than it is in the other two is going to resemble a phallus. It's not because everyone wants to be reminded of penises all the time, it's because it makes sense to build vertically, than to use up precious land resources.
Honestly, the maturity of some people in this thread.
"IT'SASS PHAALLUSS HERP DERP!!11"
(edited 13 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Kallisto's Saturday Question: Buildings
- closeted gay muslim AMA
- Song that you loved from 2012-2015??
- Pre-Degree FORM 2023)2024,Khalifa Isiyaku Rabiu University, Kano Transfer Admission
- Student life in the UAE
- Is this a mental illness?
- Durham university UK 2024 sept batch
- OCR A-level Law Paper 2 (H418/02) - 6th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Do you ever feel randomly...bleugh, cause I feel like that now.
- OCR A Level Law 2024 Predictions
- anyone else have no idea how exams are going?
- Help with multiple choice A level chemistry question 😁
- CHEM stupid singly orbitals
- Mature Student.
- AQA Alevel law paper 2 2023
- A level Physics Help
- Regarding a level law
- Student House
- Chemistry
- Just how bad are SOAS protests and strikes? Did it affect you?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
