PARIS | Projects & Construction

[Cyril]

[I don't want to make biassed statements but comparing Ile de France with Greater London is irrelevant. London's economy spreads far beyond the M25. Either you should compare The Greater Paris with the Greater London, or you should compare Ile de France with South East imo.]

[Sanchez]

very good point, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/n...re/3852867.stm
the london metropolis swallows the entire south east of the UK, wheras paris is confined by countryside

[Manuel]

[@Brisavoine
I've checked the GVA growth for GL. At current price, between 1995 and 2003, GL GVA grew by 66%. Can you link me to the IDF figures, please.]

[brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Cyril

[I don't want to make biassed statements but comparing Ile de France with Greater London is irrelevant. London's economy spreads far beyond the M25. Either you should compare The Greater Paris with the Greater London, or you should compare Ile de France with South East imo.]

Ok, so when you don't like figures, you accuse them of being meaningless. That's facile! South East of England is much larger than Ile de France FYI. It would be great to have aggregated figures for Greater London and neighboring counties, but these figures simply don't exist. In any case, even if we aggregated neighboring counties, there's no way that these counties could be booming so much as to significantly increase London's output growth rate. There would need to be a totally unrealistic 10% growth or more in places like Surrey or Berkshire to signicantly change the figures I gave above. So your criticism is moot.

[bnmaddict]

Originally Posted by brisavoine

I don't understand this need by some people to always belittle Paris and everything French. To move beyond clichés, let's have a look at hard figures. According to the French national statistics office, Paris metropolitan area's total output (measured as GDP) registered 1.31% growth per annum between 2000 and 2003 (the last year available). According to Greater London Authority, in the same time period (2000-2003) Greater London's total output (measured as GVA, a measure identical to GDP) registered a 0.55% growth per annum.

Even if we skew the numbers in favor of London by including London's booming years of the late 1990s, there appears to be no particular discrepancy between both metropolises: Paris's output between 1997-2003 had a growth rate of 2.76% per annum, whereas London's output growth rate during the same time period was 2.95% per annum. The best year for Greater London was 2000 with 5.97% growth compared to previous year. For Paris metropolitan area the best year was 1999 with 5.58% growth compared to previous year. On the other hand, Greater London experienced recession from the fourth quarter of 2001 to the first quarter of 2003, whereas Paris experienced no recession. The worst year in Paris metropolitan area was 2003 with only 0.53% growth, whereas the worst year in Greater London was in 2002 with negative growth of -0.81%.

So the figures show that this idea of London outperforming Paris is simply a myth, albeit a widespread one, like so many other urban myths. Now let's stop belittling Paris and get back to Paris skyscrapers projects please.

Source please???

[brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Manuel

I've checked and the GL figures are correct. Can you link me to the IDF figures, please.]

The IDF figures can be found here: http://www.insee.fr/fr/ffc/docs_ffc/PIB_reg.xls

[Manuel]

Originally Posted by brisavoine

Ok, so when you don't like figures, you accuse them of being meaningless. That's facile! South East of England is much larger than Ile de France FYI. It would be great to have aggregated figures for Greater London and neighboring counties, but these figures simply don't exist. In any case, even if we aggregated neighboring counties, there's no way that these counties could be booming so much as to significantly increase London's output growth rate. There would need to be a totally unrealistic 10% growth or more in places like Surrey or Berkshire to signicantly change the figures I gave above. So your criticism is moot.

I'm checking the 95-03 growth rate for the restrictive London metro in my database...hold on

[bnmaddict]

Originally Posted by Cyril

[I don't want to make biassed statements but comparing Ile de France with Greater London is irrelevant. London's economy spreads far beyond the M25. Either you should compare The Greater Paris with the Greater London, or you should compare Ile de France with South East imo.]

You're already biased, Cyril... Perhaps you're spending too much time listening to Manuel's propaganda!

[Cyril]

roooooo..nein! let's just compare what is comparable, that's all Manuel and brisavoine back up their posts with actual figures, all this is interesting finally. BUT that's not the topic of the thread. We'll have to clean this stuff away later

[Manuel]

Between 95 and 03, Greater London grew by 65.6% and the rest of the metro area (GEMACA) grew by 67%, bringing the total growth at 66%

[Manuel]

Well, IDF just grew by 35% in the same period using the same criteria.

For those interested, here is the link to the UK regional figures.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/lgva1205.pdf

[brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Manuel

Between 95 and 03, Greater London grew by 65.6% and the rest of the metro area (GEMACA) grew by 67%, bringing the total growth at 66%

You figures are wrong I'm afraid. Greater London didn't grow by 65.6% between 95 and 2003. That would mean 6.5% growth rate per annum (8th root of 1.656 = 1.065), which is totally impossible and contradicting Greater London Authority figures (GLA figures for 95-03 are 2.93% per annum).

The reason for your error is because you compared output at current basic prices (i.e. you forgot to deflate inflation), whereas comparisons ought to be made at constant price (after inflation is deflated).

[FabriFlorence]

London Vs Paris... I've ever liked this battle!

[brisavoine]

Originally Posted by FabriFlorence

London Vs Paris... I've ever liked this battle!

It's not a "battle", FabriFlorence, it's just presenting real figures and debunking bogus data and myths. Aren't you fed up with always reading people who write about subjects they have little knowledge of?

[eklips]

Very interesting, now what about those project, does anybody have anything to say about them?

[Metropolitan]

Originally Posted by brisavoine

You figures are wrong I'm afraid. Greater London didn't grow by 65.6% between 95 and 2003. That would mean 6.5% growth rate per annum (8th root of 1.656 = 1.065), which is totally impossible and contradicting Greater London Authority figures (GLA figures for 95-03 are 2.93% per annum).

2.93% annual growth from 1995 to 2003 makes 26% total growth.


Anyway, why all threads about Paris have to be polluted with London fans ? Seriously, are London supporters jealous of Paris or what ? London is a great city, there's absolutely no reason for London fans to behave as if they had an inferiority complex towards Paris. After all, there's no Parisian constantly polluting London's threads so why the opposite is always nearly mechanically true ?

[rocky]

Originally Posted by Metropolitan

Anyway, why all threads about Paris have to be polluted with London fans ? Seriously, are London supporters jealous of Paris or what ? London is a great city, we all know it, there's absolutely no reason for London fans to behave as if they had an inferiority complex towards Paris. After all, there's no Parisian constantly polluting London's threads so why the opposite is always nearly mechanically true ?

Anyway, why all threads about Paris have to be polluted with London fans ?

[BMXican]

are there renderings showing the axa tower after renovation?

60 meter height increase is impressive...

[Cyril]

New AXA tower rendering after renovation:

[BMXican]

omg! that's cool. I like it, it looks like a completely new building. and 220m is a very good height.