And the distance between Beijing and Tianjin is more than 100 km.

Not quite. Also, from wuqing district it's only 55km as the crow flies.

http://i.imgur.com/TiIfa.jpg

Langfang in the center is a good convergence point, and will act as the third hub once the cities are joined. Wuqing is proof that Tianjin is expanding towards Beijing.

Beijing and Tianjin are not merging anytime soon. Don't hold your breath, because the focus of Tianjin development is near the sea where Xiangluowan/Yujiapu are.

Beijing and Tianjin are not merging anytime soon. Don't hold your breath, because the focus of Tianjin development is near the sea where Xiangluowan/Yujiapu are.

Right.
And Beijing is also not expanding toward Tainjin but to Changping, Tongzhou and Fangshan.

Beijing population should exceed 100 million in order to merge with Tianjing, and I don't think it will ever happen. Not in the next 50 years at least.

Regarding the office space in XLW, according to the report I posted before, the developers there tried to talk with BJ based companies and asked them to more to XLW, but without success. It looks like most of the tenets are local companies.
IMO, XLW will be a disaster, but we will have to wait and see.

Xiangluowan/Yujiapu is just a part of the Binhai New Area, China's latest, updated and improved super "Special Economical Zone".

By the end of 2010, 285 Fortune Global 500 companies had invested and established branch offices there. Binhai is intended to be a base for China's advanced industrial and financial reform and innovation. A number of major companies including Rockefeller, TISHMAN SPEYER, Motorola, Airbus have buit branches there. For instance, EADS Airbus has already opened an assembly plant for its A320 series airliners, operational since 2009.

Nowadays Binhai New Area consists of nine functional zones namely Advanced Manufacturing Zone, Airport-based Industrial Zone, Binhai High-tech Industrial Development Zone, Seaport based Industrial Zone, Nangang Industrial Zone, Seaport Logistics Zone, Coastal Leisure & Tourism Zone， Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-City and Central Business District. In addition, Tianjin Port whose throughput ranks 5th in the world also locates in here.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binhai_New_Area

oh so binhai chook tai fook center will be around that construction sites?

oh so binhai chook tai fook center will be around that construction sites?

^^ Probably.

BTW, any new pictures from the site. :cheers:

oh so binhai chook tai fook center will be around that construction sites?

Chow Tai Fook will be in TEDA, a little bit north of Xiangluowan/Yujiapu. I already posted a map showing their relative locations a while back.

Chow Tai Fook will be in TEDA, a little bit north of Xiangluowan/Yujiapu. I already posted a map showing their relative locations a while back.

i went back a few pages and found your statement, chow tai fook is about 3km away :) tianjin will have a pretty spread out but amazing skyline

^^

This render shows what the area will look like within a few years. It's a render of Chow Tai Fook facing southward with Yujiapu/Xiangluowan in the background, you can see how close they are to each other.

http://i.imgur.com/Qgw9g.jpg

That was amazing. :cheers:

May 5

http://i.imgur.com/GXyux.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/y97pb.jpg

wow they are close

Coming along nicely.

Damn the chinese are fast at building.

So how much does this cost?

So how much does this cost?

6.9bn USD as of May 2011 it seems. Probably more by now or in a few years time.
Source: http://gochina.scmp.com/tianjin/government/investment-business-district-hits-434b-yuan

^^ Seems that this district is almost done. :cheers:

Cladding is up next. :)

http://i.imgur.com/nZr2o.jpg

^^ Seems that the other business district is just on the other side :)

The background is Xiangluowan, the buildings in the foreground are in Yujiapu. Pic is taken from a building in Yujiapu, facing west toward Xiangluowan.

The background is Xiangluowan, the buildings in the foreground are in Yujiapu. Pic is taken from a building in Yujiapu, facing west toward Xiangluowan.

Thanks a lot. :)

http://i.imgur.com/1gV1P.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/19twK.jpg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-18831935

@BarbaricM: seems that a few buildings along Xiangluowan are topped-off already. Now claddings and interiors are up next...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-18831935

Citing the reporter:

Rising skywards, this is China, celebrating yet another skyscraper. Acres of them are built here on the coastal mud flat at Tianjin. They stand brand new and empty.

To do this Tianjin and dozens of cities like it have borrowed money billions upon billions, they are now deep in dept. If China's economy is slowing, that raises huge questions, would Tianjin ever fill these buildings? Would it make a profit? Or will China's dept drag it down?

It's from BBC, what do you expect?

I thought Chinese People resent the narcissistic CNN rather than the snobbish BBC. Or maybe both? :lol:

It looks like the building cluster here are not close and high density enough. Also, they should be built taller, like a couple of 700m+ and 800m+ will make better use of land.

Also, they should be built taller, like a couple of 700m+ and 800m+ will make better use of land.

would be awesome, but won't happen :)

I thought Chinese People resent the narcissistic CNN rather than the snobbish BBC. Or maybe both? :lol:

It's both... :lol:

What can we expect from their non-sense and aggressively biased reporting... :lol:

I thought Chinese People resent the narcissistic CNN rather than the snobbish BBC. Or maybe both? :lol:

Both are hated, but the BBC is better at shit stirring

^^ Make better use of land! This is China, that's illegal. Buildings should be inconveniently spaced apart and surrounded by plants and fences. This makes it a pain just to cross the street. The greenery makes it look green eventhough the development is built for cars and is not pedesterian and bike friendly.

Tianjin has a very nice CBD I don't know why they can't just build these offices there. These buildings will never be full, its a GDP padding project. "If you build it they will come" worked in Pudong because it was conveniently located in the largest city in China. Tianjin isn't a small city, but this is in the middle of nowhere. I can just imagine how bad the food will be at the canteens they open in the basements of these buildings.

^^ Make better use of land! This is China, that's illegal. Buildings should be inconveniently spaced apart and surrounded by plants and fences. This makes it a pain just to cross the street. The greenery makes it look green eventhough the development is built for cars and is not pedesterian and bike friendly.

Wrong.

Tianjin has a very nice CBD I don't know why they can't just build these offices there. These buildings will never be full, its a GDP padding project. "If you build it they will come" worked in Pudong because it was conveniently located in the largest city in China. Tianjin isn't a small city, but this is in the middle of nowhere. I can just imagine how bad the food will be at the canteens they open in the basements of these buildings.

Wrong again.

Tianjin has a very nice CBD I don't know why they can't just build these offices there. These buildings will never be full, its a GDP padding project. "If you build it they will come" worked in Pudong because it was conveniently located in the largest city in China. Tianjin isn't a small city, but this is in the middle of nowhere. I can just imagine how bad the food will be at the canteens they open in the basements of these buildings.

You do realize that 285 of the Global Fortune 500 companies already have branch offices is Tianjin Binhai New Area? So apparently "they" are already coming.

In 2010 Foreign Direct Investment (not from the Chinese government) in Binhai reached 7,04 billion $.

^^ Good supporting arguments!

Being serious or sarcastic? :lol:

I was talking to the poster above you, sarcastically

As skyscraper fans, we should only be focused on the buildings and skylines themselves. Who cares if they get occupied or not. We like the towers themselves, not so much the economics behind it. Of course it would be best if its occupied, but it shouldn't bother us so much and it shouldn't be the focal point!!

You do realize that 285 of the Global Fortune 500 companies already have branch offices is Tianjin Binhai New Area? So apparently "they" are already coming.

In 2010 Foreign Direct Investment (not from the Chinese government) in Binhai reached 7,04 billion $.

Where in Binhai new area are these companies located now?

Where in Binhai new area are these companies located now?

If you look on Google Maps you can see an industrial/office zone north of the Xiangluowan Business District.
http://goo.gl/maps/9Hzc


EADS Airbus, Rockefeller, Nestle, Unilever, Motorola, Tishman Speyer, Chevron, Pepsi, Siemens, Toyota, HSBC, Citibank...
Just to name some of the companies that already openend offices or plants in Binhai.

The world's 5th largest port (Tianjin Port) is only 5km away.

^^ Make better use of land! This is China, that's illegal. Buildings should be inconveniently spaced apart and surrounded by plants and fences. This makes it a pain just to cross the street. The greenery makes it look green eventhough the development is built for cars and is not pedesterian and bike friendly.

Somewhat agree here. This project isn't the worst offender but could be a lot better.

Tianjin has a very nice CBD I don't know why they can't just build these offices there.

Massive amounts of construction are also happening in Tianjin's old CBD. It's not an either-or scenario, it's both, and why not?

These buildings will never be full, its a GDP padding project. "If you build it they will come" worked in Pudong because it was conveniently located in the largest city in China. Tianjin isn't a small city, but this is in the middle of nowhere. I can just imagine how bad the food will be at the canteens they open in the basements of these buildings.

Bullshit speculation. It is a possibility, but it is very unlikely that North China's premier financial district will remain empty for long. The entirety of North China doesn't have a project like this, while East China already has Lujiazui, and South China already has Zhujiang New City, and soon Qianhai. Also this isn't in the middle of nowhere. It's a little far away from the city center, near the coast, but within 10 years the urban areas of Tianjin city and Binhai New Area should be merged. There will also be a direct high-speed rail connection from Beijing and Tianjin city, and a metro line connecting to Tianjin city and other places in Binhai. In China things change FAST, Tianjin was a completely different city in 2000 (3rd world shithole, honestly), and will be a completely different city by 2020.

Where in Binhai new area are these companies located now?

At the moment, not in Binhai ... but all over the world!

At the moment, not in Binhai ... but all over the world!

He was talking about the plants and branch offices of those companies in Binhai, not about their company headquarters.

He was talking about the plants and branch offices of those companies in Binhai, not about their company headquarters.

So after all these companies move into their new Binhai offices, will the existing special economics zone just to the north be redeveloped?

^^Not for a while, the area isn't even full yet. But I could definitely envision some kind of redevelopment as the area grows into a large city, but really not for at least another decade.

http://i.imgur.com/q9Yok.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/SZiFV.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/jzcJi.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/EGraH.jpg

^^
The render looks like Chicago on steroids.

Why is there a reflection of the Shanghai skyline in the water? :lol:

When is this going to be finished? or partly finished?

It should be mostly done by 2014. A few buildings probably won't finish until 2020 though.

http://i.imgur.com/1gV1P.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/19twK.jpg

Incredible pictures

^^

When will they start hiring people to fill those buildings? I want a high paying job with a nice office in Xiangluowan. :cheers:

Progress is looking great!

^^

When will they start hiring people to fill those buildings? I want a high paying job with a nice office in Xiangluowan. :cheers:

Progress is looking great!

but you also have to endure the unbearable noise :)

When will they start hiring people to fill those buildings?

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

http://i.imgur.com/EGraH.jpg

guys, check out the reflection! :lol:

I think Shanghai would still be more iconic due to the fact that it was built bit by bit, although a large chunk was built all at once. It was also built during the beginning of China's rise as an economic power, hence has historical significance.

This place on the other hand lacks that significance plus we don't really know what the names of the buildings are!!

It should be mostly done by 2014. A few buildings probably won't finish until 2020 though.

But some of the buildings already started the cladding stage...

if you keep posting useless comments like that i'm gonna have to put you on my ignore list. sick of you clogging up and bumping threads with nonsensical posts.

wow impressive massive constructions

I just can't stop asking to myself where're people who will live and work here! I mean you can't just fill in a city with inhabitants from nowhere lol I know the population of China is enormous and I now the country's living moments of outstanding growth of it's economy, but still.....this is breathtaking!! Even more than Dubai.

Just WOW.

but still.....this is breathtaking!! Even more than Dubai.

Like 100 dubais. ;)

This district could very well rival Manhattan in the about 20 years. T&F Guangdong will be taller than 1WTC and the ESB based on roof height and that is not to say they won't build another tower taller in Xianglouwan in coming years.

I'd imagine they put Lujiazui's reflection in the Xiangluowan rendering to signify that this is the new Pudong?

As skyscraper fans, we should only be focused on the buildings and skylines themselves. Who cares if they get occupied or not. We like the towers themselves, not so much the economics behind it. Of course it would be best if its occupied, but it shouldn't bother us so much and it shouldn't be the focal point!!

I think people are what makes a skyscraper truly come to life. So when I see an empty skyscraper with no people in it, it's like it doesn't have a soul.

Today

http://www.flickr.com/photos/corbery/7831671812/

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8450/7889757338_6a4c0b74a0_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/corbery/7889757338/)
XiangLuoWan (http://www.flickr.com/photos/corbery/7889757338/) by specialdj (http://www.flickr.com/people/corbery/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8437/7831671812_6876f698ab_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/corbery/7831671812/)
Xiangluowan Business District (http://www.flickr.com/photos/corbery/7831671812/) by specialdj (http://www.flickr.com/people/corbery/), on Flickr

http://i.imgur.com/fXTxY.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/UVDo6.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/INwPK.jpg

That´s what I call developmnent. :D

Its a shame most of them are boxes, but I guess the cladding and height differences will make up for it.

Will they have shopping centers and pedestrian streets, I really like ped streets...

Boxy is nice.

The good thing would be to build at least a few unboxy buildings to stand out.
I also wonder how high is Tianjin vacancy rate? :dunno:

^^ Tianjin has a vacancy rate for the prime offices just above the 10% and declining, it's healthy at the moment

But when all these towers are completed from 2014 the total office supply will increase dramatically. Then it will be a challenge to fill these towers as quickly as the most recent big additions to the market where able to do.

Building a whole new city, next to the existing city

http://i.imgur.com/6EC2P.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/v0d1K.jpg

^^ Tianjin has a vacancy rate for the prime offices just above the 10% and declining, it's healthy at the moment

But when all these towers are completed from 2014 the total office supply will increase dramatically. Then it will be a challenge to fill these towers as quickly as the most recent big additions to the market where able to do.

Thanks for that vacancy rate number, as you eluded to it doesn't really tell the whole story though. I'd be interested to know how many square feet of prime office space currently exist in Tianjin where that 10% vacancy rate exists, how many square feet of comparable office space is expected to come on line, what a square foot costs in what is currently defined as prime offices, and what the costs per square foot will be in these new buildings that are currently U/C.

Not expecting an answer to all those questions, but thanks for that vacancy rate number again.

I don't think office space in China is measured in 'feet'.

I don't think office space in China is measured in 'feet'.

Well his name is yankeesfan so I think it's perfectly normal for him to use ft^2 than m^2.

http://i.imgur.com/iJiyc.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/cIZUw.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/bDy6j.jpg

This might have been answered before, but I'm curious what all the now-empty land in those pictures used to be? Farming? Industrial?

wow, this project sooooo great! China rocks!

This might have been answered before, but I'm curious what all the now-empty land in those pictures used to be? Farming? Industrial?

Villages and industry. The former villagers got moved to the towers in the foreground of the 1st and 2nd pics.

Thanks for the update BM. I was already wondering what's happening there. Any chance to see it from the previously posted angles like this (http://i.imgur.com/UVDo6.jpg) one?

What is the planned cost for this district?

What is the planned cost for this district?

I tried to Google some data but it's not very clear. Some sources give a figure of around 30bn USD while others cite 160bn USD as already having been invested. It's really unclear. I would guess the figures that mention hundreds of billions of USD include all fixed-asset investments like transport, infrastructure, etc.

http://i.imgur.com/KuhHn.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/4zFQT.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/q1QTd.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/a1dIv.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/xDAJe.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/3RVtg.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/vyMIA.jpg

^^
R&F Guangdong Tower is diagonally behind the complex that is half cladded? Just imagine in 5-6 years when R&F is complete and stands above these nice surrounding towers. Great district and awesome photos! :cheers:

I can already imagine the traffic jam on that bridge linking Yujiapu and Xiangluowan.

^^

Will there be good subway connections to/from and throughout this development? It doesn't seem like one line with one station for the whole development would be enough if that's their plan.

I can already imagine the traffic jam on that bridge linking Yujiapu and Xiangluowan.

Won't there be any tunnels?

There's gonna be a ton of bridges, multiple metro lines, and at least one road tunnel.

^^
That sound about right then. :D

http://i.imgur.com/JCIOW.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/MK4g5.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/KdJIJ.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/V40va.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/LRBeb.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/X5nIH.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/Ogv4x.jpg

I'm glad to see they're planting trees in the district. Any idea when this district will be finished and fully functional?

I would say within 12-18 months.

http://i.imgur.com/ZjobUWk.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/WGVXAra.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/oRGFVJL.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/M06sRcG.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/vMAyQRe.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/fH19LTq.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/74r47yL.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/nCizd1m.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/ValfjSr.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/1IKF4cn.jpg

It now starts to look like a real city. I guess this is on my top must-see in China list now.

^^

Wait until it's finished and in the meanwhile go to other cities in China such Beijing, Chengdu, Chongqing, Wuhan, Nanjing and Xi'an. :)

As a kid I wondered how it be like if a city is build all at once. Never thought it would actually happen. But now especially Dubai and Tianjin showed me that it is possible.

This place looks great! Are there going to be any well world renowned hotels in this area?

Are there going to be pedestrian shopping streets in this district, like Nanjing East in Shanghai? A shopping street will make it more hustle and bustle. Do these tall buildings have sufficient parkades to accommodate the cars that will flow into this district.

According to the CBS show "60 minutes', a lot of these towers have stopped construction and most of them are sitting empty; is that true? Would someone from Tienjin verify please.

According to the CBS show "60 minutes', a lot of these towers have stopped construction and most of them are sitting empty; is that true?

Since we have an opportunity to watch the progress right in this thread, the enswer is, of course, no.

This is a problem of many Western journalists. They don't speak or read Chinese, they don't read even relevant English-language sources (like SSC ;)) and they have zero clue about what's actually happening in China.

However they have to create a sensation. And they do by any means or imagination they have. Then you get outright comical stories about 'Chinese ghost cities' or 'real estate bubble which is about to burst very very very soon'.

Since we have an opportunity to watch the progress right in this thread, the enswer is, of course, no.

This is a problem of many Western journalists. They don't speak or read Chinese, they don't read even relevant English-language sources (like SSC ;)) and they have zero clue about what's actually happening in China.

However they have to create a sensation. And they do by any means or imagination they have. Then you get outright comical stories about 'Chinese ghost cities' or 'real estate bubble which is about to burst very very very soon'.

Eh... There's usually some truth. Most of the time it's sensationalized, yes, but there is a lot of misallocation of capital in the country (and it's not just "western" journalists that do it. I've read similar type stories from the Chinese press...).

However, what they always fail to grasp is that the economy is in a state that a rather large number of "white elephants" can be absorbed.

But it's a bit disingenuous to go on like there aren't any bad manipulations in the real estate market...and retail for that matter.

Office space, however, is a pretty good investment.

Eh... There's usually some truth. Most of the time it's sensationalized, yes, but there is a lot of misallocation of capital in the country (and it's not just "western" journalists that do it. I've read similar type stories from the Chinese press...).

However, what they always fail to grasp is that the economy is in a state that a rather large number of "white elephants" can be absorbed.

But it's a bit disingenuous to go on like there aren't any bad manipulations in the real estate market...and retail for that matter.

Office space, however, is a pretty good investment.

And yet they ignore missalocation of capital back at their home countries. As if it makes sense to bail-out bankrupt banks yet ignore the fact that transport infrastructure has been starved of investment for decades now (UK is a rather extreme example of that. US is probably not doing too well there either).

The point is that China's economy fundamentals are strong. Perhaps as strong as they possibly could be in the current global context. The very same countries whose press is identifying 'misallocations' of resources in China are in a much, MUCH more serious danger of economic difficulties if not outright decline. I mean primarily UK and, to a lesser extent, the US.

Therefore it looks a bit suspicious once they blatantly ignore very deep-rooted and fundamental problems of their own countries (or worse, explicitly portray it as a non-issue) yet make a big deal out of something that happens in China that they have no clue and knowledge of and in some cases distort the information to make it look something else from what it actually is.


Just take China's HSR development as an example. Even if it's not a real-estate topic it suits the case rather well. Almost every single article posted by the likes of The Economist, WSJ and many other popular mainstream and 'respectable' Western media outlets (not talking of some niche and professional industry media, that's a different story) were publishing dozens of articles many of which without going much into details, without any exaggeration, amounted to utter and complete nonsense.

Such media tirade has been going on for ages and it has become a 'standard' to post how bad is this and that in China, how dangerous it may be and how unsustainable is everything from A to Z, how bad (and always getting worse and worse) is the situation with the 'human rights' and pretty much everything else.

Even if there is some truth in that such irresponsible and openly biased publishing doesn't improve the credibility of those sources. Repeating the same all over and over again and showing the same 5 year old video broadcasts about some ghost-town somewhere along with a vacant shopping mall and concluding that China's real estate bubble is about to burst is nothing but sham journalism based on phantom 'facts'.

Even if there is some truth in that such irresponsible and openly biased publishing doesn't improve the credibility of those sources. Repeating the same all over and over again and showing the same 5 year old video broadcasts about some ghost-town somewhere along with a vacant shopping mall and concluding that China's real estate bubble is about to burst is nothing but sham journalism based on phantom 'facts'.

Well that reporter wasn't walking through Tianjin from five years ago. She was walking through the current Yujiapu district. And even the local Chinese officials admitted it went on hold. How long construction is suspended will be the story. Could be fairly short, could be long term. We'll find out over time.

There are empty skyscrapers in China. But certainly more full ones than empty ones. As for us westerners, I think we just find it fascinating a country can construct huge buildings so frivously. It's not how are market works.

It's not how are market works.
??

It is exactly how market works. :D

A number of buildings are on hold or have the appearance of being on hold, but the entire district is far from on hold as a whole. There is no point in opening buildings before the surrounding infrastructure is completed so a lot of topped-out buildings look on hold while surrounding buildings continue to rise. They're currently building parks and a 2nd bridge over the river and it doesn't seem like the schedule has slipped that much, most buildings are going for a mid-2014 opening along with the HSR station.

And yet they ignore missalocation of capital back at their home countries. As if it makes sense to bail-out bankrupt banks yet ignore the fact that transport infrastructure has been starved of investment for decades now (UK is a rather extreme example of that. US is probably not doing too well there either).

The point is that China's economy fundamentals are strong. Perhaps as strong as they possibly could be in the current global context. The very same countries whose press is identifying 'misallocations' of resources in China are in a much, MUCH more serious danger of economic difficulties if not outright decline. I mean primarily UK and, to a lesser extent, the US.

Therefore it looks a bit suspicious once they blatantly ignore very deep-rooted and fundamental problems of their own countries (or worse, explicitly portray it as a non-issue) yet make a big deal out of something that happens in China that they have no clue and knowledge of and in some cases distort the information to make it look something else from what it actually is.

Just take China's HSR development as an example. Even if it's not a real-estate topic it suits the case rather well. Almost every single article posted by the likes of The Economist, WSJ and many other popular mainstream and 'respectable' Western media outlets (not talking of some niche and professional industry media, that's a different story) were publishing dozens of articles many of which without going much into details, without any exaggeration, amounted to utter and complete nonsense.

Such media tirade has been going on for ages and it has become a 'standard' to post how bad is this and that in China, how dangerous it may be and how unsustainable is everything from A to Z, how bad (and always getting worse and worse) is the situation with the 'human rights' and pretty much everything else.

Even if there is some truth in that such irresponsible and openly biased publishing doesn't improve the credibility of those sources. Repeating the same all over and over again and showing the same 5 year old video broadcasts about some ghost-town somewhere along with a vacant shopping mall and concluding that China's real estate bubble is about to burst is nothing but sham journalism based on phantom 'facts'.

I just think talk like this is over generalizing.

I'm not saying there isn't a particular editorial line being pushed; there sometimes is (all you have to do is speak with foreign correspondents in China - a lot of them don't want to cover half the stories they're made to).

I'm just also pointing out that there are plenty of developments that don't always "add" up. A lot of it is really just growing pains, and some of it is systemic.

I just think healthy debate about these kinds of stories can be enlightening if they have substance.

As much as journalistic hyperbole irritates me, this creeping notion of Chinese infallibility does even more (almost as much as American exceptionalism- which isn't ubiquitous, by the way).

China's good at economic policy and commands respect for it, but they also fuck up from time to time. I mean (to borrow from your example), we also thought Wall Street was pretty infallible as well...

I think essentially, weeding out horrible writing from actual critiques is my core issue. Being critical doesn't mean they're out of touch or anti-china. That's really all I meant to say. There have been many a book written about the collapse of the Chinese economy (mostly shit, excuse my French), but that doesn't mean that recent indications of certain issues should be discounted.

*and practically every media story I've ever read about China's HSR has been nothing short of praise and (in our case here in the US) envy. Even with the imperative citing of safety concerns, I've read more scathing articles about the state of our transport than that in China.

Then again, I don't read the WSJ.

The show (60 minutes) missed to show a few things:
1) Chinese has the highest savings rate in the world; in other words, they have cash.
2) The concept of mortgage, borrowing money to buy property or car, is relatively new in China, a great portion of the property market were being bought with full cash or large down payment. At the end of the show, it shows people are still lining up to buy property. If people have money and are still buying, that means there is no bubble.
3) The show missed to mention the Chinese cultural tradition, that is buying property for their relatives. A couple with means will very likely buy a couple of extra units for their parents and definitely one for their son or daughter. They don't mind to let the units sit empty until their relatives need to occupy them.
4) No mention the rate of vacancy for the commercial/office space. I understand that the vacancy rate in Shanghai is around 9% while Los Angels is over 14% and Toronto is around 12%.

I just think talk like this is over generalizing.

I'm not saying there isn't a particular editorial line being pushed; there sometimes is (all you have to do is speak with foreign correspondents in China - a lot of them don't want to cover half the stories they're made to).

I'm just also pointing out that there are plenty of developments that don't always "add" up. A lot of it is rrally just growing pains, and some of it is systemic.

I just think healthy debate about these kinds of stories can be enlightening if they have substance.

As much as journalistic hyperbole irritates me, this creeping notion of Chinese infallibility does even more (almost as much as American exceotionalism - which isn't ubiquitous, by the way).

China's good at economic policy and command respect for it, but they also fuck up from time to time. I mean (to borrow from your examole), we also thought Wall Street was pretty infallible as well...

I think essentially, weeding out horrible writing from actual critiques is my core issue. Being critical doesn't mean they're out of touch or anti-china. That's really all I meant to say. There have been many a book written about the collapse of the Chinese economy (mostly shit, excuse my French), but that doesn't mean that recent indications of certain issues should be discounted.

*and practically every media story I've ever read about China's HSR has been nothing short of praise and (in our case here in the US) envy. Even with the imperative citing of safety concerns, I've read more scathing articles about the state of our transport than that in China.

Then again, I don't read the WSJ.

Of course there are exceptions but the general trend in the Western media is the following (ragarding the HSR development). Similar stance is taken regarding real estate or pretty much any other area of the economy:

- China's HSR boom is unsustainable, too expensive for 'ordinary people' (on the other hand they say tickets are too cheap to cover even operational costs... a bit of a contradiction)
- Safety standards are flawed (pointing to the Wenzhou accident for a millionth time in every single article since the accident took place)
- Fixed asset investment is bad and unsustainable
- bla bla bla.

At least this is what most of the articles wold argue for. And I do read pretty much everything on the subject in the UK and American media therefore I'm sure I'm not missing much.

The point is that the overall stance of the popular and respected media outlets is very biased, agenda-based and misinforming. The fact that there are some dangers in the Chinese real estate or other areas does not change that. There are dangers in real estate in pretty much every country in the world (with some exceptions... like Germany perhaps) and especially the US. The problem is that any of such potential dangers in China (where they are far from being the most dangerous compared to US or some other countries where economy is 'driven' by the means of 'quantitative easing' and similar fundamentally unsustainable measures) are completely blown out of proportion.

Many such articles 'argue' that China's real estate 'bubble' is very dangerous and may have consequences much harsher than the past bubbles in the US. Even using common sense and very fundamental logic one can identify that such claims are flawed in principle. This is because China's financial posituion and structure of the financial market as well as banking system and rules of buying property are in a different planet compared to the US or even EU countries. The conventional US style housing bubble is simply impossible in China. Not because some believe that China is somehow 'infallible' but simply because there are factors which make a conventional US bubble physically impossible in China.

There may be certain consequences and indicators in the housing market (and very likely they have been taking place for a while now) but there isn't and won't be a 'bubble' in a conventional (looking from the US and European perspective that is) form.

Of course there are exceptions but the general trend in the Western media is the following (ragarding the HSR development). Similar stance is taken regarding real estate or pretty much any other area of the economy:

- China's HSR boom is unsustainable, too expensive for 'ordinary people' (on the other hand they say tickets are too cheap to cover even operational costs... a bit of a contradiction)
- Safety standards are flawed (pointing to the Wenzhou accident for a millionth time in every single article since the accident took place)
- Fixed asset investment is bad and unsustainable
- bla bla bla.

At least this is what most of the articles wold argue for. And I do read pretty much everything on the subject in the UK and American media therefore I'm sure I'm not missing much.

The point is that the overall stance of the popular and respected media outlets is very biased, agenda-based and misinforming. The fact that there are some dangers in the Chinese real estate or other areas does not change that. There are dangers in real estate in pretty much every country in the world (with some exceptions... like Germany perhaps) and especially the US. The problem is that any of such potential dangers in China (where they are far from being the most dangerous compared to US or some other countries where economy is 'driven' by the means of 'quantitative easing' and similar fundamentally unsustainable measures) are completely blown out of proportion.

Many such articles 'argue' that China's real estate 'bubble' is very dangerous and may have consequences much harsher than the past bubbles in the US. Even using common sense and very fundamental logic one can identify that such claims are flawed in principle. This is because China's financial posituion and structure of the financial market as well as banking system and rules of buying property are in a different planet compared to the US or even EU countries. The conventional US style housing bubble is simply impossible in China. Not because some believe that China is somehow 'infallible' but simply because there are factors which make a conventional US bubble physically impossible in China.

There may be certain consequences and indicators in the housing market (and very likely they have been taking place for a while now) but there isn't and won't be a 'bubble' in a conventional (looking from the US and European perspective that is) form.

Not the same. I never implied that.

The problem in the US isn't about debt, nor about national spending but about wealth distribution, which is paralleled in China. This is where the similarities end for the most part.

Our problem is falling purchasing power (wealth is being concentrated more and more at the top), while China's problem is that purchasing power is not growing fast enough (income is rising quickly, but actual wealth - like home ownership - isn't keeping up).

China's issue isn't at the national level, it's at the local level. If land were to suddenly drop in value, it wouldn't be a crisis of demand (there are millions of households who will absorb that stock) but would be troubling for local governments because of the way they're forced to finance growth through it.

There is always some systemic problems in any given economy.

I don't know, maybe I just don't read as much mainstream media as I thought I did :-) but I've never felt it was overwhelmingly biased. Condescending, but not overtly biased.

I honestly just think you're over generalizing. There is bad reporting on China and there is good reporting. Most of it is in the middle, honestly.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't fault the "west" for over-simplyfiying and then over-simplify.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't fault the "west" for over-simplyfiying and then over-simplify.

But that's what pretty much happens most of the time. A report on 'ghost towns' and then an expected conclusion of a looming housing bubble. No analysis or data (such as proportion of unoccupied housing of the total). That is oversimplifying and that happens on an enormous scale in the Western media. Of course there are attempts to look deeper than that but for most part this is what happens - primitive and unprofessional reporting which is aimed to make a 'sensation' rather than provide us with some relevant information. The fact that I mention that doesn't mean I'm over-simplifying myself.

very nice business center....:)

But that's what pretty much happens most of the time. A report on 'ghost towns' and then an expected conclusion of a looming housing bubble. No analysis or data (such as proportion of unoccupied housing of the total). That is oversimplifying and that happens on an enormous scale in the Western media. Of course there are attempts to look deeper than that but for most part this is what happens - primitive and unprofessional reporting which is aimed to make a 'sensation' rather than provide us with some relevant information. The fact that I mention that doesn't mean I'm over-simplifying myself.

I didn't say you were over simplifying yourself. I said your over simplifying hundreds of organizations, publications, and individuals into one thing "western media" and I'm saying it's much more nuanced than that.

I didn't say you were over simplifying yourself. I said your over simplifying hundreds of organizations, publications, and individuals into one thing "western media" and I'm saying it's much more nuanced than that.

I mean mainstream western media such as BBC, CNN, WSJ, NYTimes, The Economist etc. I.e. media outlets that make up perhaps over 90% of English-language media in volume terms. Of course there are various media outlets that do not fall under 'mainstream media'.

Xiangluowan is definitely on the list of CBDs I'd like to pay a visit.

Not the same. I never implied that.

The problem in the US isn't about debt, nor about national spending but about wealth distribution, which is paralleled in China. This is where the similarities end for the most part.

Our problem is falling purchasing power (wealth is being concentrated more and more at the top), while China's problem is that purchasing power is not growing fast enough (income is rising quickly, but actual wealth - like home ownership - isn't keeping up).

China's issue isn't at the national level, it's at the local level. If land were to suddenly drop in value, it wouldn't be a crisis of demand (there are millions of households who will absorb that stock) but would be troubling for local governments because of the way they're forced to finance growth through it.

There is always some systemic problems in any given economy.

I don't know, maybe I just don't read as much mainstream media as I thought I did :-) but I've never felt it was overwhelmingly biased. Condescending, but not overtly biased.

I honestly just think you're over generalizing. There is bad reporting on China and there is good reporting. Most of it is in the middle, honestly.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't fault the "west" for over-simplifying and then over-simplify.


The 'distribution of wealth of the two economic powerhouse is parallel' is a very good idea indeed. However, you need to proceed on what the economic precautions or social interference to prevent a bubble. Somewhat the interference was tackle before by the Chinese. Somewhat it prevents it from bursting and even deflated it.

The Chinese precautionary measures to tackle the inflation is somewhat working well. Both individual spending and savings are generating such a good factor to the social life of the Chinese. The Chinese Government are doing well to provide the economic measures to accommodate the needs of the Chinese society.

However, the Chinese needs to take a precaution on the leadership side of the Chinese government. The leadership is currently tackling corruptions. It is a good enforcement to the system of wealth distribution that tackles such complicated 'manner'.

However, the one thing they have to fundamentally look at is the qualities and characteristics of the leadership. They need to watch which one is 'for the the people' and which one is for the 'large corporations'. They need to make the leadership realize that greed and corruption is a 'poison' and an 'addiction' that cannot just be tackled easily. It is a precaution that requires discipline and philosophy. It requires a new system of 'idealism' and not just a confucius philosophy, communism, marxism or even democracy. The most similar system is the 'Lee Kuan Yew' system but I am very sure the Government is already aware and that system is the one being implemented currently (not Keynesian).

However, money is 'hard not to absorb.' It does not keep people from thinking clearly and it always lead them to a disastrous decisions that leads a disastrous cause and the effect will always lead to calamity. We are humans after all and not animals. We need to keep thinking that way for animals don't think.

I mean mainstream western media such as BBC, CNN, WSJ, NYTimes, The Economist etc. I.e. media outlets that make up perhaps over 90% of English-language media in volume terms. Of course there are various media outlets that do not fall under 'mainstream media'.

Overall I agree with you. There is a sport going on among the mainstream western media, that is 'China Bashing'. They all try to win a gold medal.

To avoid dragging this on, I've just removed the comment.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, I guess.

What kind of hotels will be in this area? Anything like Hilton's, Sheraton's, Shangri-La....etc(world class hotels).

China it's playing simcity with cheat codes

^^

Pansori is right, I agree with him totally not because what I think, but because I know.

And yet they ignore missalocation of capital back at their home countries. As if it makes sense to bail-out bankrupt banks yet ignore the fact that transport infrastructure has been starved of investment for decades now (UK is a rather extreme example of that. US is probably not doing too well there either).

The point is that China's economy fundamentals are strong. Perhaps as strong as they possibly could be in the current global context. The very same countries whose press is identifying 'misallocations' of resources in China are in a much, MUCH more serious danger of economic difficulties if not outright decline. I mean primarily UK and, to a lesser extent, the US.

Therefore it looks a bit suspicious once they blatantly ignore very deep-rooted and fundamental problems of their own countries (or worse, explicitly portray it as a non-issue) yet make a big deal out of something that happens in China that they have no clue and knowledge of and in some cases distort the information to make it look something else from what it actually is.

Just take China's HSR development as an example. Even if it's not a real-estate topic it suits the case rather well. Almost every single article posted by the likes of The Economist, WSJ and many other popular mainstream and 'respectable' Western media outlets (not talking of some niche and professional industry media, that's a different story) were publishing dozens of articles many of which without going much into details, without any exaggeration, amounted to utter and complete nonsense.

I don't buy the "biased Western media" at all. Not because it isn't often true, though as often it is lazy Western media, but because the underlying concerns are real. There is a considerable literature on booms, busts, and bubbles. There is no agreement on what causes business cycles, but "irrational exuberance" and misallocations is on the list, for one school it is the reason. There is no nation that has advanced from developing nation to developed nation without having at least one severe crash. Of course they survived it, after some rough years, otherwise they wouldn't have become developed nations.

Some believe that it is the transition itself that cause them. If they are right, and China is like Japan and South Korea, the guesstimate is that the Bad One will happen 5-10 years from now. That will of course have negative effects on the world economy. According to one model Germany would be particularly affected (in which case we should hope for 10 years so that Europe could get out of the current crisis before plunging into the next one).

Anyway, Big One aside, "first we build it, then they come" is far from economic ortodoxy, and it is not "China-bashing" to point that out. Apart from the risk of misallocations (with crisis-like potential), it is bad investment strategy to invest in what we will need in the future, and it is bad investment strategy to invest in what we should have had in the past, ideally we should invest just at the right time. If we need something in 5 years time, invest in something with a good return now, and then use that return on investment 5 years hence.

This should be tempered of course with the current need to keep unemployment low, and invest when the prices are low. I consider Xiangluowan risky. It may succeed, it may fail, and we won't know for several years. Given the size the stakes are quite high.

WSJ tend to be overly negative, but then they belong to that school of economics that is particularly sceptical of this kind of investment. The Economist I find fair. I don't believe they are wrong about China more often than they are wrong about any other economy. They have been wrong pretty often, on the other hand they have been good at catching things other mass media often miss. BBC in China is disappointing, they have too many fly-bys that haven't read up even to the basics.

I don't buy the "biased Western media" at all. Not because it isn't often true, though as often it is lazy Western media, but because the underlying concerns are real. There is a considerable literature on booms, busts, and bubbles. There is no agreement on what causes business cycles, but "irrational exuberance" and misallocations is on the list, for one school it is the reason. There is no nation that has advanced from developing nation to developed nation without having at least one severe crash. Of course they survived it, after some rough years, otherwise they wouldn't have become developed nations.

Some believe that it is the transition itself that cause them. If they are right, and China is like Japan and South Korea, the guesstimate is that the Bad One will happen 5-10 years from now. That will of course have negative effects on the world economy. According to one model Germany would be particularly affected (in which case we should hope for 10 years so that Europe could get out of the current crisis before plunging into the next one).

Anyway, Big One aside, "first we build it, then they come" is far from economic ortodoxy, and it is not "China-bashing" to point that out. Apart from the risk of misallocations (with crisis-like potential), it is bad investment strategy to invest in what we will need in the future, and it is bad investment strategy to invest in what we should have had in the past, ideally we should invest just at the right time. If we need something in 5 years time, invest in something with a good return now, and then use that return on investment 5 years hence.

This should be tempered of course with the current need to keep unemployment low, and invest when the prices are low. I consider Xiangluowan risky. It may succeed, it may fail, and we won't know for several years. Given the size the stakes are quite high.

WSJ tend to be overly negative, but then they belong to that school of economics that is particularly sceptical of this kind of investment. The Economist I find fair. I don't believe they are wrong about China more often than they are wrong about any other economy. They have been wrong pretty often, on the other hand they have been good at catching things other mass media often miss. BBC in China is disappointing, they have too many fly-bys that haven't read up even to the basics.


Bias is obviously there. I mean you must be completely blind not to see it. Part of it is probably due to the 'they are different, hence they must be wrong' and part is simply due to the lack of knowledge.

I understand that some topics might be out of the reach in terms of knowledge for some journalists but look at the 'ghost towns' or the HSR topics in China. What we've been witnessing was a rather aggressive, consistent and constant flow of articles pretty much all of which were nothing short of absolute nonsense and something that a 10 year old would write. Whether you call it bias or something else perhaps isn't that important.

There is poor reporting about China, and there is plenty biased reporting in the world that could be called "China-bashing". But it is not like this forum isn't biased either, we are for construction and for infrastructure. This forum wouldn't complain about ghost cities or underused infrastructure, because return on investment isn't really what it is about.

It would be China-bashing if it were wrong if China did it and right if some other country did. The economies of China and the US are not directly comparable (one has greater growth and poorer infrastructure, the other has a richer economy), but would there be voices criticising US developers/funders if there were ghost cities, in the US that would be ghost suburbs, or over-ambitious infrastructure? Yes, there were. Not many enough, and we got that housing crash, but there were many articles criticising it before the crash, including The Economy (that's the first place I heard of it, in early 2007 I believe).

There is mixed press on HSR, many see early infrastructure as a boon, others early capital expenditure as the opposite, and there are those who push for alternative infrastructure (roads, airports, low-fare low-speed rail, suburban commute rail). There are engineering reason for going slow as well, easier to control quality and (if not too slow) cost, better and usually cheaper technology, and learning from experience. Clever analysts weigh it all up without preconceived notions. I am not that clever so I believe HSR can be good, primarily because it can scale up in a manner air, cars, and buses can't, but not all HSR projects are good. The (in)famous WSJ article concluded that all HSR projects are bad, not only in China, but also Japan, Europe and (maybe crucially) in the US.

I think "ghost cities" are bad investments. Not because they won't get filled eventually, most will, but because investing ahead of demand is almost always sub-optimal, sometimes disastrously so. If you can afford it investing on HSR can be worth it. Sim City-like greenfield operations have no such benefit. Yes, you need to zone and plan for growth, including infrastructure, but you implement it on demand. That way you don't commit resources before they are ready, you are less likely to misallocate when they don't come, and you can adapt to new situations, and you can use newer technologies and experiences when you do implement the plan.

We have experience with planned cities, to which Tanggu/Binhai belong. Basically they fill up, but they don't perform better than cities with organic growth, even when that growth is rapid and chaotic. This place is strategically placed, but it will have too much of some and too little of other because it was built ahead of demand, not at demand.

Lotta progress on the park:

http://www.gaoloumi.com/viewthread.php?tid=642925&extra=page%3D1 (Click for latest construction update)

http://img14.poco.cn/mypoco/myphoto/20130403/18/54794491201304031821391404723714572_000.jpg

I think "ghost cities" are bad investments. Not because they won't get filled eventually, most will, but because investing ahead of demand is almost always sub-optimal, sometimes disastrously so. If you can afford it investing on HSR can be worth it. Sim City-like greenfield operations have no such benefit. Yes, you need to zone and plan for growth, including infrastructure, but you implement it on demand. That way you don't commit resources before they are ready, you are less likely to misallocate when they don't come, and you can adapt to new situations, and you can use newer technologies and experiences when you do implement the plan.

We have experience with planned cities, to which Tanggu/Binhai belong. Basically they fill up, but they don't perform better than cities with organic growth, even when that growth is rapid and chaotic. This place is strategically placed, but it will have too much of some and too little of other because it was built ahead of demand, not at demand.

By 'ghost cities' I didn't mean that they're good. Empty houses are not good per say. What I mean was the very same reporting of the very same 'ghost cities' again and again and again. I.e. a complete distortion of the picture without any concrete data. Just some 'scary' visuals and even scarier talks by the reporter. I.e. a bubble blown out of pretty much nothing.


This place is strategically placed, but it will have too much of some and too little of other because it was built ahead of demand, not at demand.

Says who?
That's the kind of policy that has been practiced in Singapore. Perhaps not to such an extent (Singapore is a small place after all) but strategic urban planning with looking into the future is not a bad idea in a developing country where hundreds of millions of poeple are still going to move to the cities.

How do you imagine a demand-based approach in China? I think we have one 'good' example of that: India. Thanks not.

The fact that such planning ideology has never been practiced in the West doesn't mean it's bad. It has worked in Singapore, Hong Kong, even the Soviet Union. It does work in China. I don't think China has time to waste when hundreds of millions of rural residents are moving into new urban areas.

didn`t know about the park areas. definitely my favorite aspect of the entire development.

^^ One thing I've learned is to never read any article about Asia, especially China, from any Western newspaper/site. The amount of ignorance is through the roof.

Really nice progress on the park. I kind of wish they would just build all skyscrapers and place a central park like in New York. Having the park along the edge of the river is a different idea and might actually work better, we'll see.

it definitely makes the project more attractive. the parks on the Eastern bank of the Huangpu are my favorite thing about Lujiazui. These parks look much more "lush,"
which softens the impact of the built area.

I would say within 12-18 months.

Doubt it, that's a lot of people and business to move in. That process may take years. Constructing the shell is one thing, finishing the inside, connect infrastructure, have services available and having people moving in is another.

In new developments like these, it's essentially a chicken and egg problem.

^^ One thing I've learned is to never read any article about Asia, especially China, from any Western newspaper/site. The amount of ignorance is through the roof.
That's because so few of them actually research and on the ground reporting. Instead, they just report news from Chinese media (which they will always add state media, no matter the source) and then apply a template to it. (Is it bias or laziness, i can't tell)

Here is the template for High speed rail news:

Chinese state media reported ....[the actual news].....(end of first paragraph with just a few sentences) Chinese high speed rail projects surfers from low ridership..........massive debt number ### billion.......expert from XXX [university|investment firm] says the practice is not sustainable...Much of the technology is stolen...lack of intellectually property protection in china...Also suffers from low quality....Wenzhou Collision....40 killed, some XXX source believe the actual figure is much higher....buried trains.....In 2011, the rail minister is arrested for corruption.....corruption is a massive problem in China......lack of democratic institutions and check and balances found in western countries.

Just for any on news on Chinese High speed rail and follows on this template.


Also another template, which usually accompanies any Chinese economics news, any economic news. With the usual Ordos new district (which always apply to the entire city of Ordos), South China Mall, local government and comments from Jim Chanos.
And before Ordos, there is Guangzhou CDB... As funny as it is watching him proclaiming buildings to be empty, I would at least give him credit for actually going there. Some experts on the other hand never set foot in the country (http://blog.chinatells.com/2010/09/4618).
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xfc3tl_china-empty-buildings_school#.UV6B1so5zfk

That's because so few of them actually research and on the ground reporting. Instead, they just report news from Chinese media (which they will always add state media, no matter the source) and then apply a template to it. (Is it bias or laziness, i can't tell)

Here is the template for High speed rail news:

Chinese state media reported ....[the actual news].....(end of first paragraph with just a few sentences) Chinese high speed rail projects surfers from low ridership..........massive debt number ### billion.......expert from XXX [university|investment firm] says the practice is not sustainable...Much of the technology is stolen...lack of intellectually property protection in china...Also suffers from low quality....Wenzhou Collision....40 killed, some XXX source believe the actual figure is much higher....buried trains.....In 2011, the rail minister is arrested for corruption.....corruption is a massive problem in China......lack of democratic institutions and check and balances found in western countries.

Just for any on news on Chinese High speed rail and follows on this template.


That's funny, maybe it's changed recently, but for the last few years (that they've even been reporting on the subject), the [default] template would be as follows:

I'm on this train, it's very fast ....[gives design speed].....this train is in China.....[gives cities on the line].....I'm currently on a new HSR line, it's really long....[gives length of line].... Talks about CRH380 (add additional info at will: speed record, indigenous technology, attempts to export the technology, etc). I'm jealous, very jealous (proceed to talk at length about Obama Administration commitment to rail, lack of anything substantial occurring yet, bickering in Congress, postering by Republican governors, etc). Quote of someone Chinese. (gloss over broader concerns of price, environmental impact, safety.) Desperate plea for America to follow suit....*

There are people who are "Bearish" and there are people who are "Bullish," most lay in between.

I tried to hold my tongue but I just can't...I understand that there are people who write BS about China (just like there are people in China who write BS about other countries...), I'll grant you that. You know what, I won't even argue if you said it was most, the majority, the vast majority, or even 99.99999%. Just, to say all Foreign journalists, who set out to write an article on China, are hell bent on manipulating public opinion towards an anti-China slant is...come [/I]on[/I]! I don't think you're saying that, but that's what I'm hearing, which is why I commented on that matter to begin with...

Broadcast media [in the US] is irresponsible, but I highly doubt they're motivated enough to embark on some concentrated campaign to do anything of the sort. Most of these networks fail to see the value in digging deeper or just don't think the audience will care much. But then again, this is making the mistake of believing that a majority of people still get their "news" primarily from these networks at all.

All in all, what I'm saying is, if it's bullshit, people will know it's bullshit. Smells the same no matter the source.

*I'm being ever so slightly sarcastic, but honestly, that's what the vast majority of what I've been reading sounds like.

Doubt it, that's a lot of people and business to move in. That process may take years. Constructing the shell is one thing, finishing the inside, connect infrastructure, have services available and having people moving in is another.

In new developments like these, it's essentially a chicken and egg problem.

I'm talking about the currently constructed buildings in the first phase. Most are going for a mid-2014 opening to coincide with the opening of the HSR station. By that time the parks should be complete and the area will look nice as a whole, but there will still be a few buildings U/C and probably an entire new phase starting.

That's because so few of them actually research and on the ground reporting. Instead, they just report news from Chinese media (which they will always add state media, no matter the source) and then apply a template to it. (Is it bias or laziness, i can't tell)

Here is the template for High speed rail news:

Chinese state media reported ....[the actual news].....(end of first paragraph with just a few sentences) Chinese high speed rail projects surfers from low ridership..........massive debt number ### billion.......expert from XXX [university|investment firm] says the practice is not sustainable...Much of the technology is stolen...lack of intellectually property protection in china...Also suffers from low quality....Wenzhou Collision....40 killed, some XXX source believe the actual figure is much higher....buried trains.....In 2011, the rail minister is arrested for corruption.....corruption is a massive problem in China......lack of democratic institutions and check and balances found in western countries.

Just for any on news on Chinese High speed rail and follows on this template.


Also another template, which usually accompanies any Chinese economics news, any economic news. With the usual Ordos new district (which always apply to the entire city of Ordos), South China Mall, local government and comments from Jim Chanos.
And before Ordos, there is Guangzhou CDB... As funny as it is watching him proclaiming buildings to be empty, I would at least give him credit for actually going there. Some experts on the other hand never set foot in the country (http://blog.chinatells.com/2010/09/4618).
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xfc3tl_china-empty-buildings_school#.UV6B1so5zfk

I love the way you did the format of Asia / China Bashing. Such format are usually being followed by such respectful, entertaining media. I will probably do that kind of format for more China Bashing. It's entertaining and humiliating but they really don't care, hehe.

Good progress by Tianjin, by the way. These are built so fast.

^^
LOL...the South China Mall...
(Western) media brings up this ghost mall every few months, looks like they're running out of examples for China's real estate bubble. This one mall is just too insignificant for a large economy like this (some developer lost some money, that's it).

And the coverage of the "ghost" city Ordos the other prime example for China's bubble is becoming less and less. Why? Well, it isn't a ghost town anymore.

You mind giving me proof? Discredit the "Western media" for me. show me proof that all these ghost towns are filled and more White Elephant projects are successes. We all know the South China Mall is a White Elephant

The South China Mall is of course a White Elephant, but one mall won't bring the whole RE market down.

Ordos is getting filled: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=92235853&postcount=231

Let's try to keep this on topic of Xianqluowan BD. :)

I admit I find the "ghost cities"-thing fascinating. I actually like the occasional skeptism. It's kind of refreshing from all the usual "rah-rah, everything is going great" attitude. But let's not stray too far off topic.

Actually all this discussion sort of illustrate the difficulty of the constructing outside of existing city center, which is where Xiangkuowan is located.

Take the case of South China Mall, it is not that Chinese people isn't shopping. This is Dongguan's Fuming Pedestrian Shopping Area, and compare it South China mall. It opened in 2003, and fully populated in 2005, around the same time South China Mall opened in Dongguan as well. The difference is Fuming is located in City center, while South China Mall is half an hour drive/bus away. In the US, we are used to travel long distances, however in China even 2 km is long enough that people wouldn't even bother.

Fuming Street/Expo Square
http://www.dgkp.gov.cn/UploadFile/2009/3/19/1275832092841662_sm.jpg
South China Mall, notice how far away it is from the city itself. The area around the mall populated a bit more since, due a new bus transit station opened close by.
http://gzshopper.com/wp-content/themes/testeer/includes/timthumb.php?src=http://gzshopper.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/yp.jpg&h=444&w=670&zc=1

Developing outside of the city center means you don't have tear down existing (and possibly historical) houses, and plan the area the modern way instead of following plans laid down several hundred years ago. However, it creates a chicken and egg problem that makes the first mover's life really really hard for both businesses and residents. Since the first residents that settles can't get services, while the first business to open up can't get customers.

Tianjin is trying to solve this by carrot and stick all the State own enterprises tomove to the Binghai new area, and hopefully the employees would have move along. (Including Sea-Gull watch company, my other passion) However, I wonder if it is enough. Many of the cities are trying to replicate Pudong, however, Pudong, despite being a country side place before development is not physically that far away from Shanghai center.

That's great. If China eliminates its barbaric One-Child Policy and give full reproductive rights to its citizens, then I'll believe in the "China hype."

China also needs to give more freedom of speech to its citizens and take down its "Great Firewall" in order to foster creativity and innovation among its citizens

China is not innovative at all. Baidu is a Google rip-off. Weibo is a Twitter rip-off. Youku is a Youtube rip-off......

Just read this and thought, well this guy is clearly well informed :lol: we should send him to Beijing and call a meeting with China's top leaders so he can express his opinions in a more productive way!
This comment (if genuine) is an example of how serious the consequences of Western media can be. People become... stupid? :ohno:

South China Mall was a "what were they thinking?" project. I hope I don't insult luhai but Dongguan would be among the last places I put a large shopping mall, let alone a huge one. Dongguan is where things are made, it is not really a city but a loose collection of smaller cities and factory towns, the infrastructure, public transport, and integration is poor to non-existant. A big mall in Guangzhou, Shenzhen, or a smaller city like Foshan could work, but they wouldn't go to a Dongguan mall. At least it would have to at a sensible location in easy reach, which South China Mall isn't, it's not even convenient to get there from Dongguan.

Being "biggest" isn't enough. The next on the biggest list is Golden Resources Mall in Beijing, a dusty mall in the west of Beijing which only now, a decade later, got a metro stop. New and shiny beats big, and Golden Resources Mall looks like a throwback to the 1980s, and the bigness works against it. It looks empty. This is another issue with early development, by the time it gets into use it can already be old-fashioned.

Many of the cities are trying to replicate Pudong, however, Pudong, despite being a country side place before development is not physically that far away from Shanghai center.

The Binhai location is good, at least in principle, but you are right it is not Shanghai, at least not yet. And the integration with Tianjin proper is as of yet not good enough. That I presume will improve significantly in the years to come. Long-term (say the 2030s) I am bullish on Binhai, but less sure on the years in between.

http://i.imgur.com/yisdmrq.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/tqCtfqA.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/0BtFiWJ.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/WJWpTlb.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/iSsOT7L.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/Mljgqgq.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/smTTASn.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/olyNJ5z.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/rvHkH5A.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/BI0jN2k.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/CRdoLKd.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/jmMF6W2.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/RCmTnox.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/8werUV0.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/FJ18IB7.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/ZDo3OPn.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/kMITy8Y.jpg

got to say im not impressed with the speed nowadays :(

@dtlc445:

Either stay on topic or leave.

by 走着去梅阿查

http://ww3.sinaimg.cn/large/72b0cd7btw1e3j8ciwbpoj.jpg

South China Mall was a "what were they thinking?" project. I hope I don't insult luhai but Dongguan would be among the last places I put a large shopping mall, let alone a huge one. Dongguan is where things are made, it is not really a city but a loose collection of smaller cities and factory towns, the infrastructure, public transport, and integration is poor to non-existant.

None taken, but keep in mind Dongguan has 8 million people, and 8 million people still have to buy things. I you look at the actually busy shops in Dongguan, they almost all sell in cheap items less than 500 yuan (and most less than 100 yuan). This South China Mall wants to invite those shops, it may well have being populated, but it decides to be some kind of resort than a destinations. (who the hell integrates a hotel in a mall?) Perhaps the original developer expected people to fly in and shop in the mall... (perhaps wants a no sales tax/VAT deal, but didn't bribe enough to get it?)

As for Xiangluowan Business District, there are risks, but given it's close to TEDA and the port district, so the city center can move to Binhai District. But I expect that will take time, perhaps over the period of 10 year after completion of the first self sustainable neighborhood.