Burj Dubai -- world's tallest Building

[Free Capitalist 0]

This image speaks for itself:

Construction of the world's tallest building, the Burj Dubai, has been delayed and will be completed only in September next year, the developer was quoted on Tuesday as saying.

The tower, which is expected to reach a final height of 900 metres (2,953 feet), was due for completion in the bustling city state at the end of 2008.

"The luxury finishes that were decided on in 2004, when the tower was initially conceptualised, are now being replaced by upgraded finishes," developer Emaar said, according to the Gulf News.

The Burj Dubai had already become the tallest man-made structure on the planet, when Emaar announced in April that it has surpassed the 629-metre (2,063-foot) KVLY-TV mast in the United States.

Many building projects in Dubai, which is going through a construction frenzy, have been facing delays caused by shortage of building materials and skilled labour.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=08...=1ℑ=large

[Arnold 0]

Your gasoline money at work!

[Stussy88 0]

Your gasoline money at work!

In fact, Dubai has very limited oil reserves. Their zero tax policies, and the fact they are not overly fussy with Muslim prudery has attracted the investment, it has little to do with oil revenues.

I was there in late 2007 and you could see it from the airport even then. It is just awesome.

My only worry about Dubai is when/if Israel nukes Iran, Shiraz maybe a primary target and the potential fallout could make Dubai a hard place to be given the proximity.

[PhilO 0]

Your gasoline money at work!

In fact, Dubai has very limited oil reserves. Their zero tax policies, and the fact they are not overly fussy with Muslim prudery has attracted the investment, it has little to do with oil revenues.

Are you saying that Dubai capital does not primarily come - ultimately - from oil revenues being spent and invested there?

[JRoberts 0]

Your gasoline money at work!

In fact, Dubai has very limited oil reserves. Their zero tax policies, and the fact they are not overly fussy with Muslim prudery has attracted the investment, it has little to do with oil revenues.

Are you saying that Dubai capital does not primarily come - ultimately - from oil revenues being spent and invested there?

According to Wikipedia:

Although Dubai's economy was built on the back of the oil industry, [3] revenue from petroleum and natural gas currently account for less than 3% of the emirate's gross domestic product...The government has set up industry-specific free zones throughout the city. Dubai Internet City, now combined with Dubai Media City as part of TECOM (Dubai Technology, Electronic Commerce and Media Free Zone Authority) is one such enclave whose members include IT firms such as EMC Corporation, Oracle Corporation, Microsoft, and IBM, and media organisations such as MBC, CNN, Reuters, ARY and AP.

Even though it is a part of the UAE, Wikipedia states:

The emirate's share in UAE's gas revenues is about 2%.

[PhilO 0]

Even though it is a part of the UAE, Wikipedia states:

The emirate's share in UAE's gas revenues is about 2%.

Yes, but that misses my point, as Stussy88's original post misses it: it isn't that the oil revenues *directly from USA* is funding Dubai, it's *oil revenues from the rest of the oil producing countries* that are surely supplying most of the capital (or, equivalently in the end, the oil-money rich customers to pay back non-Middle Eastern capital investments) to buy all of those things using knowledge, materials, labor from the West.

[PhilO 0]

[...] that the oil revenues *directly from USA* is funding [...]

That should read: *directly from the UAE*

[R.M.Alger 0]

This image speaks for itself:

From an architectural perspective, it’s a very attractive building. A lot of horizontal lines, but this is made up by the escalation of the various “appendixes” of the skyscraper; the building looks tall*.

I’m a big fan of skyscrapers, and I like this new addition to the “club.” Though, as current projects go, I’m a little more partial to America’s whimsical new skyscraper, the Chicago Spire; even if it won’t break as many records.

- Ryan

* Perceived height of a building and it's actual height are interesting. For instance, when shown pictures of the Empire State Building and the Chrysler Building, most people think the Chrysler is taller, simply because of its design.

[Stussy88 0]

Even though it is a part of the UAE, Wikipedia states:

The emirate's share in UAE's gas revenues is about 2%.

Yes, but that misses my point, as Stussy88's original post misses it: it isn't that the oil revenues *directly from USA* is funding Dubai, it's *oil revenues from the rest of the oil producing countries* that are surely supplying most of the capital (or, equivalently in the end, the oil-money rich customers to pay back non-Middle Eastern capital investments) to buy all of those things using knowledge, materials, labor from the West.

This is a slightly more complex question, but ultimately it is Western money funding Dubai growth as a cursory visit to the country will demonstrate. That reliable source of information, (some local cab drivers), told me that there are far more non-Arab people in Dubai than Arabs.

Now when you ask where does the moeny come from ultimately, it depends how far back down the line you want to go. You could say development capital for residential accommodation comes from buyers (since you have to 'pay-as-you-go' in Dubai), but where does that money come from? International banks, but where do they get their money, International commerce. I suspect it is rather more complex than simply assuming the crown prince of Saudi Arabia writes a cheque

[Cometmaker 0]

I’m a big fan of skyscrapers, and I like this new addition to the “club.” Though, as current projects go, I’m a little more partial to America’s whimsical new skyscraper, the Chicago Spire; even if it won’t break as many records.

I am not going to believe that the Burj breaks any height records until the thing is completed. A building that stays the same number of floors but continues to climb in height with each press release from Emaar does not mean much to me until it is actually built. Plus, I am not impressed by huge echoing spaces that are intended to be offices but cannot be filled with anything but dust bunnies because there are insufficiently wealthy (read: untaxed and not-overly regulated) companies in the world that can afford the lease such that the occupancy rate would beat the Chicago Spire's projected occupancy rate. Or the occupancy rate of most highrise buildings in America. I too am very interested in skyscrapers. The Chicago Spire, despite the name, does not have a spire on the top to extend its height like the Burj. SOM's design of the Burj is not beautiful to me - there are several buildings in Dubai which are much more beautiful in overall shape and spatial layout on the interior.

[Cometmaker 0]

Even though it is a part of the UAE, Wikipedia states:

The emirate's share in UAE's gas revenues is about 2%.

Yes, but that misses my point, as Stussy88's original post misses it: it isn't that the oil revenues *directly from USA* [uAE] is funding Dubai, it's *oil revenues from the rest of the oil producing countries* that are surely supplying most of the capital (or, equivalently in the end, the oil-money rich customers to pay back non-Middle Eastern capital investments) to buy all of those things using knowledge, materials, labor from the West.

I don't follow. What is the issue or contentious point?

This is a slightly more complex question, but ultimately it is Western money funding Dubai growth as a cursory visit to the country will demonstrate. I suspect it is rather more complex than simply assuming the crown prince of Saudi Arabia writes a cheque

It is not one prince, it is a few hundred princes writing cheques.

[Stussy88 0]

Even though it is a part of the UAE, Wikipedia states:

The emirate's share in UAE's gas revenues is about 2%.

Yes, but that misses my point, as Stussy88's original post misses it: it isn't that the oil revenues *directly from USA* [uAE] is funding Dubai, it's *oil revenues from the rest of the oil producing countries* that are surely supplying most of the capital (or, equivalently in the end, the oil-money rich customers to pay back non-Middle Eastern capital investments) to buy all of those things using knowledge, materials, labor from the West.

I don't follow. What is the issue or contentious point?

This is a slightly more complex question, but ultimately it is Western money funding Dubai growth as a cursory visit to the country will demonstrate. I suspect it is rather more complex than simply assuming the crown prince of Saudi Arabia writes a cheque

It is not one prince, it is a few hundred princes writing cheques.

No, it is several hundred thousand non-princes writing cheques like my father-in-law*. Dubai has a system whereby, when 10% of the build is complete, you pay 10%, when 20% is complete you pay 20% etc until completion. Hence the capital required to fund residential developments comes largely from end-users after some seed capital. Though of course there are institutional investors as well as high net-worth individuals, and many may well get their wealth from petro-dollars.

I've no reason to assume payment structures any different for companies like Microsoft or Planet Hollywood or CNN or a thousand others who have operations out there.

(*Proof if proof were needed that you should never listen to a word Stussy88 says, comes from this evidence. Several years ago, my father-in-law excitedly rings me from Dubai saying he is buying a flat which is being built a quarter of a mile out to sea. After I suggested this maybe a scam, he says "No, no, now could you please wire me $30,000 as I need to make a deposit payment" So after confirming that he had to pay me back one way or another, I agreed.

Two years later, the Palm in Dubai is almost built The Palm Jumeirah and it has pretty much doubled his initial stake money. He enjoys reminding me of this.)

[Cometmaker 0]

No, it is several hundred thousand non-princes writing cheques like my father-in-law*. Dubai has a system whereby, when 10% of the build is complete, you pay 10%, when 20% is complete you pay 20% etc until completion. Hence the capital required to fund residential developments comes largely from end-users after some seed capital. Though of course there are institutional investors as well as high net-worth individuals, and many may well get their wealth from petro-dollars.

I've no reason to assume payment structures any different for companies like Microsoft or Planet Hollywood or CNN or a thousand others who have operations out there.

The contribution of the relative assets value increase of residential property in UAE to the growth of Dubai (or UAE) as a whole is not relevant to the princes who have invested several billions into the infrastructure of Dubai, and it is not a matter of your anecdotal proof being an accurate representation of reality or not. I do not know what other members are referring to, but I am referring to the infrastructure growth that has brought Sheikh Mohammed's Economic Development Plan to reality. You do not have to make assumptions about payment structures. If you have information to show the Nakheel and the Dubai Real Estate Corporation, and various other public commercial institutions were not funded by those in the Middle East who could afford to take the risks before the corporations' targets switched to the middle and lower real estate market segments, I'd be glad to be corrected.

When I referred to the Burj earlier in this thread, I should have specified the Burj Dubai, to differentiate it from the Burj al Arab, my apologies.

[Nathaniel Hale 1775 0]

This is a great engineering achievement regardless of where the money came from. It is already the tallest man-made structure in the world at its present height. This post is, after all, under Engineering and Technology.

[Cometmaker 0]

This is a great engineering achievement regardless of where the money came from. It is already the tallest man-made structure in the world at its present height. This post is, after all, under Engineering and Technology.

Regardless of where the money came from, I do not know that a concrete structure designed to be 574.4 metres but claimed to be taller is the tallest man-made structure in the world. I also do not know its present height. And regardless of its present and final height, SOM did design a wonderful thing.

[Nathaniel Hale 1775 0]

This is a great engineering achievement regardless of where the money came from. It is already the tallest man-made structure in the world at its present height. This post is, after all, under Engineering and Technology.

Regardless of where the money came from, I do not know that a concrete structure designed to be 574.4 metres but claimed to be taller is the tallest man-made structure in the world. I also do not know its present height. And regardless of its present and final height, SOM did design a wonderful thing.

Do you have any evidence that they are lying?

[Cometmaker 0]

Do you have any evidence that they are lying?

When the information is crafted by Sheikh Alabbar, for all of his good qualities, I require independent verification of the Emaar claim that the Burj Dubai is currently the tallest.

[Nathaniel Hale 1775 0]

Do you have any evidence that they are lying?

When the information is crafted by Sheikh Alabbar, for all of his good qualities, I require independent verification of the Emaar claim that the Burj Dubai is currently the tallest.

That is reasonable enough, but it seems that it would be rather difficult to make false claims about the height of a building when it is quite easily verified; I mean its right there and its rather big ( :-p) and there are plenty of westerners there that could do it independently of the Emaar.

[R.M.Alger 0]

Do you have any evidence that they are lying?

When the information is crafted by Sheikh Alabbar, for all of his good qualities, I require independent verification of the Emaar claim that the Burj Dubai is currently the tallest.

That is reasonable enough, but it seems that it would be rather difficult to make false claims about the height of a building when it is quite easily verified; I mean its right there and its rather big ( :-p) and there are plenty of westerners there that could do it independently of the Emaar.

This site might help you out a bit. Or did you mean in it’s current state of construction? If so, sorry.

[Cometmaker 0]

This site might help you out a bit. Or did you mean in it’s current state of construction? If so, sorry.

How does the site help, regardless of whether it's the final or current state?

[R.M.Alger 0]

This site might help you out a bit. Or did you mean in it’s current state of construction? If so, sorry.

How does the site help, regardless of whether it's the final or current state?

Sorry, I thought you where asking about the height of the building (in relation to other buildings) in which case this site would be very helpful; as it is updated frequently.

[Cometmaker 0]

Sorry, I thought you where asking about the height of the building (in relation to other buildings) in which case this site would be very helpful; as it is updated frequently.

It is not helpful unless the building illustrators go out and make independent measurements of those jaw-dropping buildings. It is a secondary source of information that obtains information from Emaar and Arabtec (the construction firm).

[Stussy88 0]

Sorry, I thought you where asking about the height of the building (in relation to other buildings) in which case this site would be very helpful; as it is updated frequently.

It is not helpful unless the building illustrators go out and make independent measurements of those jaw-dropping buildings. It is a secondary source of information that obtains information from Emaar and Arabtec (the construction firm).

Surely it is a matter of absolute geometric simplicity to assess the height?

Simply stand at a point say 200 metres away from the base, get a laser to give you your exact distance, measure with a theodolite the angle that bisects the top of the structure. We know the building was constructed at right angles to the ground, and thus we can calculate the height.

I don't see what is hard about this?

[Cometmaker 0]

Surely it is a matter of absolute geometric simplicity to assess the height?

Simply stand at a point say 200 metres away from the base, get a laser to give you your exact distance, measure with a theodolite the angle that bisects the top of the structure. We know the building was constructed at right angles to the ground, and thus we can calculate the height.

I don't see what is hard about this?

I do not know if you mean there is no difficulty in determining the height of the structure (whether at present or its final form) or that there is no difficulty for people competing for the claim of tallest man-made structure to make the measurement. All measurements of structural height are based on certain criteria which is why you read about many different claims of "tallest".

[RayK 0]

The only criteria that could possibly make sense is to measure the actual height. What is so difficult about that?