July 14, 2005

08:00:01 am Stopover in Hong Kong; Day Trip to Macau  

On Friday morning, July 8, we flew from Manila to Hong Kong on Cathay Pacific. Cathay's flight to Delhi, India was not until 11PM, so rather than have an undesirable 10-hour layover, we opted to spend the night in Hong Kong and fly to Delhi the next night, Saturday, July 9 (arriving around 2AM Sunday, July 10).

As we had previously spent four nights in Hong Kong in May, our sole reason for going there again was that it is the most direct routing from the Philippines to India. We stayed at the same hotel, Miramar, in Kowloon and ran a few errands, including laundry, and tracking down the only optical store in Asia that sells Boston Advanced Daily Cleaner for Rigid Gas Permeable Contact Lenses.

Saturday the 9th was a busy day as we took a day trip via the one-hour high-speed ferry to Macau. So less than a day after we exited the Philippines and entered Hong Kong, we exited Hong Kong, entered Macau, exited Macau, entered Hong Kong, exited Hong Kong, and entered India. That's eight passport stamps in one and one-half days!

Macau was a Portuguese colony for several hundred years before reverting to China in 1999, much as Hong Kong reverted from a British colony to Chinese control two years earlier. Similar to Hong Kong, China agreed not to change Macau's existing political and economic systems for 50 years after the handover. As indicated above, even though Hong Kong and Macau are now both controlled by China, you have to clear immigration in both places when traveling between them.

Macau is the only place in China where gambling is legal. After the Chinese assumed control, they opened up the casino licensing process (previously one Hong Kong businessman controlled all of the casinos), and the Las Vegas casinos are now rushing in. The Sands is open, Wynn Casino (Steven Wynn opened Treasure Island, Mirage, and others in Las Vegas) and several others are under construction.

Macau is a lucrative market for the US operators because the Chinese tend to be serious gamblers, betting far more than the typical Las Vegas customer does. Macau casinos generate far more revenue per square foot of casino space than does Las Vegas. With several major casinos under construction, we had read that Macau is on a pace to surpass Las Vegas in terms of total gaming revenue once they open.

After visiting, we find this hard to believe. Even with all of the construction, Macau looks less impressive than Atlantic City or even downtown Las Vegas (ignoring the Strip). Nick was in Macau in the fall of 1990, and the place looks more like it did then, than the future gambling mecca of Planet Earth.

The companies planning to open in Macau are generally US public companies, so there must be some substance to what they are saying about the gaming revenue potential. Nonetheless, we'd like to see a bit more detail backing up these claims before we bet the house on Macau displacing Las Vegas as the top gaming revenue location in the next few years.

To be clear, no one has said that Macau is going to put Las Vegas out of business, or that it will come close to matching Las Vegas as a destination. Las Vegas simply has too much more too offer in terms of entertainment beyond gaming, while Macau is pretty much a place to go to gamble, period. And being the only place in China for gaming is legal is a huge advantage for Macau. There are other places in Asia where gambling is legal, but traveling outside of China is not easy for most Chinese. So this gambling monopoly, if you will, will be a huge boost for Macau. One day it may be a glitzy city, and a sought out destination, known the world over. But for now, that process is at the very beginning, with progress less visible than we expected. We expect Macau will likely see more change in the next 5 years, though, than it has in the last 15, and it will be interesting to see what this nearly 500-year-old city becomes.

Send feedback • Permalink

July 07, 2005

10:04:53 pm Taiwan  

Country Background:
Population: 23 million
Per capita GDP: $23,000 in purchasing power parity; figure in absolute terms not available, but we guess it is in the $15,000 - $19,000 range.
Size: slightly smaller than Maryland
Currency: New Taiwanese dollar, 31 per US dollar
Language: Mandarin, Taiwanese. Basic English taught in schools, and thus common, similar to South Korea.

Itinerary:
Cathay Pacific flight from Tokyo to Taipei
Four nights at KDM Hotel

Taipei

Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - Sunday, July 3, 2005
Temperature high/low during our stay: 95/80
Population: 2.6 million. Unlike most Asian cities, Taipei's population is not growing--it peaked at 2.7 million in 1990. We suspect this may be partially explained by a migration within the metropolitan area from the city to the suburbs, but we don't have any data on this. Within the city, the birthrate is dropping as the population ages. Births are barely above deaths and look to fall below deaths in a few years if the present trend continues. In addition, more people are moving out of the city than moving in. This was a common phenomenon in the US after World War II but it is unusual for Asia.

Notable Activities:

Taipei 101. For now the world's tallest building (see pictures in the image gallery and the previous post on The World's Tallest Building), making this a must-do attraction. The elevators zip you to the top in 37 seconds, making them the world's fastest elevators. They take a slightly more leisurely 45 seconds to descend, "so not get sick," according the elevator operator, suggesting perhaps a human limit to high-speed elevator design.

In addition to having the world's tallest building, this area is the epicenter for a new part of Taipei, with government, businesses, shopping, and entertainment all intermingled to create a vibrant area day and night. The basement of Taipei 101 has a huge Asian food court and a grocery store that sells Raspberry Snapple by the case. The first four floors of Taipei 101 are a shopping mall with a fantastic English language bookstore, the near equal of Borders. Within walking distance are some historical/tourist attractions of medium interest such as the Discover Taipei Center in City Hall, with okay exhibits on Taipei's history, and the Sun Yat-Sen Memorial with an overview of the life and times of the man regarded by the nationalists and by the communists as their father figure.

Taipei International Film Festival. This is not a reason to visit Taipei, but it was something fun to do that happened to be held while we were there (it runs during late June and early July). We saw Born into Brothels, a documentary about children of prostitutes who work in Calcutta, India's red-light district. This film first debuted at Sundance in January 2004, but we could not get tickets as all of its viewings sold out. The film went into general release about a year later in early 2005, as we left the US. So having missed it twice, we saw it this third opportunity. Very good.

Chiang Kai-Shek Memorial Hall. The most impressive public space in Taipei, with a huge square surrounded by a Chinese gate at one end, the CKS Memorial Hall at the other, and the National Theater and National Concert Hall on the two sides. Inside the memorial are exhibits on the life and time of CKS, including a startlingly lifelike wax reproduction of the man, sitting at his desk (see image gallery).

Lunch with Brian Chan and family. During the city tour of Seoul, Deanna met Brian, president of Inspire I.T., a Taiwanese software company, who was in Seoul on a business trip. He invited her to contact him once we were in Taipei, which we did. He and his wife and son Henry (see image gallery) graciously took us out to lunch and to a few sites we had not seen. Throughout our trip, we have often met other travelers who have invited us to have a meal or stay with them later when we reach their home country. For us, this has been a great part of the trip, allowing us to see places with people who know them best and giving us the ability to talk with people other than each other. We really appreciate the hospitality we received from Brian and his family and our numerous other hosts around the globe.

National Palace Museum. The building has the greatest single collection of Chinese artifacts anywhere in the world. Unfortunately, due to renovations you cannot see many of them right now. The work is schedule to finish sometime in 2007 or 2008. More generally, on this trip we have learned that one-third of all museums in the world are being renovated at all times.

Commentary:

We are fond of what-if questions and we had two as we visited Taiwan. One is a historical question. The other is a current question, which makes it technically not a what-if question, but since we have not seen the future yet, it still has the attribute of the answer not being knowable (for the moment at least).

The questions are:

1. What if Chiang Kai-Shek and the Republic of China leaders had not proclaimed Taiwan as the continuation of the Republic of China when they retreated to the island following their defeat by the communists in the Chinese Civil War? What if instead, they simply acknowledged their defeat, renounced all claims to be a legitimate government of the mainland Chinese people and any future attempt to retake the mainland, and instead proclaimed that they were creating a new country, Taiwan, that would forever be different and separate from China?
2. With China adopting a capitalist economic system, is Taiwan losing its relevance?

With regard to the first question, let's review what did in fact happen. After the last emperor of the Qing Dynasty was overthrown, Sun Yet-Sen and others founded the Republic of China on the mainland in 1911. During the decades that followed, the nationalist government battled the communists for control of the country. World War II intervened, but after the defeat of the common enemy Japan, the two sides went back to fighting each other, with the communists prevailing in the late 1940s and the nationalists retreating to Taiwan. Taiwan was an already inhabited island of mainly ethnic Chinese with a small Taiwanese aboriginal minority. Taiwan had been a Japanese colony from 1895 onward, but China ruled it previously, and the Allies returned it to China following World War II. When the nationalists retreated to Taiwan, neither they nor the communists viewed the conflict as over, each vowing to take over the territory controlled by the other. Aside from some intermittent skirmishes over small islands in the Taiwan Straits, the military conflict did end in the late 1940s, with the US security guarantee for Taiwan keeping the superior Chinese forces from invading otherwise vulnerable Taiwan. Separate from the armed conflict, was the battle of diplomacy. Each side claimed to be the one legitimate government of the Chinese people. At first, Taiwan held the upper hand here, but in the 1970s the worldview gave in to reality. The Chinese communist government was not going away and the mainland did represent over 98% of the combined population of Chain and Taiwan. Further, the mainland accounted for one in five people on the planet, a number too large to pretend did not exist. Therefore, during the 1970s, one government after another recognized China as the government of the Chinese people, dropping relations with Taiwan. Taiwan lost its UN seat and other world bodies such as the IMF and World Bank booted Taiwan out.

China has maintained all along that Taiwan is part of China, not a separate country. This One China policy has been abetted by Taiwan's historical stance that as the Republic of China, founded on the mainland, it is the legitimate government of the Chinese people. Today, if Taiwan were to announce that it no longer speaks for the Chinese people and is declaring itself as a new country, it would spark a diplomatic crisis and risk a war with China, who is determined not to let its rouge province of Taiwan secede. Thus, Taiwan is boxed in. Its own diplomatic policy has led unintentionally to a situation where hardly any country recognizes it and it has little representation in world government bodies. It is nearly impossible, however, to change this policy. So Taiwan tries to maintain an uneasy status quo while improving its ties to China gradually. It does not want to unify with China now, but maybe over two or three decades once China's economic reforms lead to political reforms, unification would be thinkable or even desirable.

While declaring itself a new country is not likely or advisable now, what if Taiwan had done this in the late 1940s? There would still have been a risk then that China would have not accepted this declaration and invaded Taiwan. With the US defending Taiwan, this could have been a disastrous situation. Alternatively, the fighting may have been limited--such as how Chinese and US troops fought each other in Korea. That was a significant conflict, but it was limited to Korea--in other words, it stopped short of being an all-out battle between global titans. On the other hand, China just as likely might have limited its anger to harsh rhetoric but no aggressive military action. In that circumstance, the rest of the world would not as easily accept China's one-China policy. There would be much less justification for excluding Taiwan from world bodies such as the UN. Since Taiwan was once a member of these groups, our guess is that they would have never booted out Taiwan had it never claimed to speak for all of China. With the world not paying attention in effect to the one-China policy under this scenario, China might have no choice but to abandon it. A renouncement of any claim on Taiwan might even have been a condition of establishing diplomatic relations with the US and other countries in the 1970s.

So our view is that Taiwan's late 1940s determination to preserve its historical link to China has put them in a worse spot on the global stage than they otherwise would have commanded. Ironically, though, because they cannot now claim they are a separate country, reunification down the road is more likely than it would be had they declared themselves separate from the beginning. So the goal of maintaining the historical link with China may one day be fulfilled. Therefore, in a roundabout way, Taiwan's policy may succeed in preserving the historical link to China. Their intention to retake the mainland by force won't occur, but if a capitalistic China eventually adopts some democratic reforms, then it could be said that Taiwan's ideals defeated China's in a way that Taiwan's military never could.

Let's back up and ignore the future, which of course could turn out differently than anything projected here. Just focusing on what has actually happened to date, it could be said that Chiang Kai-Shek made a mistake in not declaring Taiwan a new country in the late 1940s because of the diminished stature Taiwan now has on the world stage. Even if it were agreed this was a mistake, it would have been nearly impossible in the late 1940s to visualize the sea change that occurred in the 1970s where China was recognized and Taiwan was shunted aside. So having to make a decision in the present, as all decisions must be made, we are not critical of Chiang Kai-Shek's decision to call Taiwan the continuation of the Republic of China. After all they had ruled the mainland only a short time before, and it was not clear if the communists would have the staying power they have shown in the nearly six decades since then.

Further, we have come to realize that such a stance may have been hugely unpopular at the time or even since. We asked Brian Chan if he thought Taiwan would have been better off declaring itself separate from the beginning. He said such a view would be unacceptable to him. Brian is our age, so Taiwan has had no realistic chance of retaking the mainland his entire life. Moreover, he like most Taiwanese, does not want unification any time soon. China needs to reform politically before the Taiwanese take unification too seriously, no matter how excited they may get about developing closer ties to the mainland now. Despite this, having grown up reading Chinese history, Brian sees it as his history, and he would not have wanted his country to cut itself off from the rich culture of China's past.

So depending on how you look at it, Chiang Kai-Shek's decision could be 1) ingenious, foreshadowing a day in the 21st Century where capitalism and democracy would infiltrate the mainland; 2) an unfortunate decision that lessened Taiwan's stature for decades; or 3) a decision that made sense at the time, led unexpectedly to problems for Taiwan in the medium term, but worked out well in the long term (assuming there is one day unification on terms acceptable to Taiwan). Our view is #3.

Is Taiwan becoming Irrelevant?

In an earlier post, we stated that we thought Hong Kong was losing its uniqueness and would be one day surpassed by Shanghai as the most important commercial city in China. We don't expect that to happen suddenly or immediately, however. It will take a couple decades to play out given how much of a head start Hong Kong has and how much higher its income levels are. Even with its astounding growth rates, the math dictates that Shanghai will need this long to catch up. But the laws of compounding also suggest that it is likely to catch up.

Taiwan is not Hong Kong. It is more complete, although less vibrant. It is a country that now has democracy, not a former colony that never had full democracy. Nevertheless, the logic is similar in that if China's adoption of capitalism causes Hong Kong to lose uniqueness, this must also hold true, at least partially, for Taiwan. Let's accept that Taiwan must lose some of its uniqueness if for no other reason that managing over one billion people under a communist economic system was going to fail eventually. So the period where Taiwan was the only Chinese country with democracy and capitalism was bound to only last a few decades anyway, we can say confidently in hindsight. Losing the capitalism differentiator still leaves the democracy differentiator. Of course, everyone, including Taiwan, wants to see China become a democracy. But if it does, will Taiwan have anything left? Will it become irrelevant? Is it already becoming so? We have opined that we actually think capitalism is more important than democracy because capitalism creates over time the conditions of prosperity that lead to people demanding democracy. So is Taiwan's fate sealed?

We pose these questions not because we have the answers, but because they are the questions on our mind as we visit. Again, we asked Brian Chan this question. He said that many in Taiwan saw China's opening up as an opportunity. It created a much bigger market for Taiwan's products and services. It also provided a source of low-cost labor. On the other hand, manufacturing employees and others in low-value-added positions in Taiwan were already losing their jobs to people in China. Taiwanese farmers are especially worried and vulnerable. So as with all changes, there are winners and losers, people who benefit and those who do not. Brian's explanation of what is happening in Taiwan sounded similar to what we expect will happen in South Korea should unification with North Korea occur (see our South Korea post). For him, a member of senior management in a software firm, the change is positive. For others, it is not. Whether it is positive or negative for Taiwan as a whole depends on whether Taiwan can move up the food chain, adding new valued-added jobs and innovative service companies while it sheds old jobs and sees old companies wither away. The more it tries to resist the change (e.g., by protecting old jobs and companies), the more it will suffer. The more it embraces and attempts to accelerate the change, the more it will benefit, as long as it can avoid the pace of change becoming so dislocating that social unrest occurs. So, to conclude, we think whether Taiwan remains relevant or not is largely up to how Taiwan responds to China's move to capitalism. If Taiwan resists change, its relevance will diminish. Taiwan must embrace change to have the best opportunity to remain a unique place on the world stage.

Send feedback • Permalink

10:03:15 pm World's Tallest Buildings  

A couple of months ago we posed a trivia question that asked what two cities had projects underway that would surpass Taipei 101 as the world's tallest building. We received several responses, but we never got around to answering the question because the responses revealed that we needed to do more research. Moreover, that research reveled, well, the answer we had in mind was not correct, and any answer is more complicated than we anticipated. Now having just visited Taipei 101, we procrastinate no further and provide an answer.

The cities we had in mind were Shanghai and Dubai, and the buildings we had in mind were, respectively, the World Financial Center (WFC), and Burj Dubai. Subsequent research on our part has shown Shanghai's WFC not to be a correct answer. At the time of its original conception in mid 90s, it was to be the world's tallest. A multi-year construction delay occurred, however, due to--take your pick--1) a glut of office space in Shanghai; 2) financing problems after the 1997 Asian crisis; or 3) soil tests showing the site would not support the original design structurally. Whatever the reason, the architects changed the design during the delay, and the WFC will now be shorter, coming close, but no longer surpassing Taipei 101. On our visit to Shanghai, we confirmed that construction has resumed, although at this point there is nothing to see but a hole in the ground. Some rumors suggest there is a secret plan to add some form of structural appendage to the top so that WFC would be taller than Taipei 101. This strikes us as wishful thinking by Shanghai boosters because the design of WFC does not allow easily for such an appendage (see Shanghai image gallery for a depiction of the finished building). Further, it's probably a moot point anyway, because with the delay in Shanghai, the much taller Dubai building is now scheduled for completion around the same time.

This illustrates an issue with the announcement of future world's tallest buildings. Most announcements never get off the ground. We recall that two different projects announced in Chicago over the past two decades, the Miglin-Beitler Tower at Madison and Wells in 1989, and the Dearborn Tower at Madison and Dearborn in 1999 were never built due to financing problems. That developers announced each shortly before a recession that scuttled their financing plans is no coincidence. Tall building announcements are often a contrarian indicator about future economic activity. For someone to have audacity to build the world's tallest building usually takes a prolonged period of economic prosperity. And after such a prolonged period, things are usually due to take a tumble. For such a project to be completed, it must be well under construction when the downturn hits. Consider three prior world's tallest buildings. Each signaled a major economic downturn, but each was far enough along to be completed. The Petronas Towers were completed in 1998, the year after the Asian Crises hit Malaysia and the rest of developing Asia. The Sears Tower was completed in 1974, while the painful 1973-1974 OPEC oil embargo recession was underway. The Empire State Building topped out in 1931 during the Great Depression.

Here are the figures. Taipei 101 is 1,670 feet tall. Burg Dubai is scheduled to finish in 2008 at an eye-popping 2,314 feet. While a building is never certain until it's finished, the foundation work is complete and we think more likely than not, this building will be built. (We will be in Dubai in two weeks and probably will talk more about what's happening in that city at that time.) There are some rumors that the final height of Burj Dubai may be different from the initial figure here, and it could be even higher. The Shanghai WFC now will not finish until 2008 and it will be 1,614 feet.

Here's a web link to information on Burj Dubai:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burj_Dubai

Note that outdated information for Shanghai WFC remains prevalent on the web, indicating an earlier completion date than 2008 and taller height. You will also find incorrect information on the web for a project called Union Square Phase 7 or Kowloon Station Phase 7 in Hong Kong. The outdated information is that this building will be around 1900 feet, which could have made it the world's tallest. Developers have since redesigned that building down to 1,588 feet. It has a 2007 completion date--we do not know if it remains on schedule. Also on the web are extremely sketchy details on something called the Center of India Tower in Katangi, India that is to be 2,222 feet, making it the world's tallest, if you ignore the Dubai building. This project was first announced years ago and with no substantial information available on it today, we are skeptical it will ever be built. Finally, there's the Freedom Tower in New York City to be built on the site of the World Trade Center. A third iteration of its design was released last week. While this iteration fixes the security problems present in the second iteration, in our opinion it re-introduces the aesthetic concerns that scuttled the first iteration. Now not scheduled to be completed until 2010, the present design retains the spire that will rise to a symbolic 1,776 feet. At present, we believe the chance of the current design being built is 50% at best. Even if it is, we think it is unlikely that this building will ever hold the title of the world's tallest building.

Now let's recognize those who answered our question. Cheryl Hays of Plant City, Florida, aka Deanna's mom, was not the first to answer, but she was the first to provide the answer we had in mind. She not only named the buildings in Dubai and Shanghai, she also mentioned Union Square in Hong Kong and the Freedom Tower in New York City. No penalties for guessing here! We award her the no*prize for this trivia question!

Larry Padgett of Buchanan, Michigan aka Nick's dad responded first. He also named the Hong Kong building, which he prefers to call Kowloon Station, as well as the Center of India Tower. Sorry dad, but you had outdated information on Kowloon Station's height and the India building is does not have a credible chance of being built, in our opinion. Nevertheless, we do not want to be ungracious, so we award you an honorable mention early bird no*prize for your superior responsiveness!

Finally, John Stierman of Macomb, Illinois, aka Nick's mom's neighbor, correctly, albeit a bit belatedly, named Dubai as one of the two cities we were looking for. He had the good sense not to name Shanghai since it wasn't a correct answer anyway. John wins the high-percentage answerer no*prize honorable mention award.

The link below details the 100 tallest buildings in world as of right now (buildings under construction are not listed). We list the top 20 in this post (the formatting is messed up but you should be able to read the table). We note that the city of Hong Kong now has as many buildings in the top 20 as the entire United States. China leads all countries with five in the top 20--nine if you include Hong Kong and 11 if you include Taiwan. Asia has 16 of the top 20, the US four. The US does have 11 buildings in the next top positions, 21-40.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001338.html

Rank; Building; City; Year; Stories; Height in Feet
1. Taipei 101, Taipei, Taiwan
2004 101 509 1,670
2. Petronas Tower 1, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
1998 88 452 1,483
3. Petronas Tower 2, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 1998 88 452 1,483
4. Sears Tower, Chicago
1974 110 442 1,450
5. Jin Mao Building, Shanghai 1999 88 421 1,380
6. Two International Finance Centre, Hong Kong 2003 88 415 1,362
7. CITIC Plaza, Guangzhou, China 1996 80 391 1,283
8. Shun Hing Square, Shenzhen, China 1996 69 384 1,260
9. Empire State Building, New York
1931 102 381 1,250
10. Central Plaza, Hong Kong 1992 78 374 1,227
11. Bank of China, Hong Kong 1989 72 369 1,209
12. Emirates Tower One, Dubai 1999 54 355 1,165
13. Turntex Sky Tower, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 1997 85 348 1,140
14. Aon Centre, Chicago 1973 80 346 1,136
15. The Center, Hong Kong 1998 73 346 1,135
16. John Hancock Center, Chicago 1969 100 344 1,127
17. Wuhan International Securities Building, Wuhan UC05 68 331 1,087
18. Shimao International Plaza, Shanghai UC05 60 331 1,087
19. Ryugyong Hotel, Pyongyang, N. Korea 1995 105 330 1,083
20. Burj al Arab Hotel, Dubai 1999 60 321 1,053

Finally, as we have written before, there are multiple definitions of how a building's height is measured. The definitions multiplied when Petronas Towers surpassed Sears Tower by the official measure, but Sears boosters pointed out that it was actually still taller by three alternative measures. As of its completion, Taipei 101 now tops the list under three of the four definitions (including the official definition), with Sears still holding the title under one definition, and Petronas no longer having any claim as world's tallest.

Here is an article that explains these definitions (1 meter = 3.28 feet). Again, the formatting is messed up, but you should be able to read what it says.

For immediate release – April 20, 2004

“World’s Tallest” Confirmed for Taiwan

Chicago . . . The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat’s Height Committee, after reviewing its height criteria, has officially designated Taiwan’s Taipei 101 as the “World’s Tallest”. The initial announcement was made by CTBUH Chairman, Ron Klemencic, at the Structural Engineers Foundation of Illinois’ 2004 Lecture on April 15 in Chicago, where members of the Taipei 101 design team made a presentation on the construction of the building.

Measured to the architectural top, Taipei 101 has a height of 508m, which places it above Malaysia’s twin Petronas Towers, measuring in at 452m. Chicago’s Sears Tower now moves into fourth place at 442m, followed by the Jin Mao Building in Shanghai at 421m.

The CTBUH official criteria states that “The height of a building is measured from the sidewalk level of the main entrance to the architectural top of the building, including penthouse and tower. Towers include spires and pinnacles. Television and radio antennas, masts, and flag poles are not included.”

In 1996 the Council voted to expand the data gathered to include three additional height categories – Highest Occupied Floor, Top of the Roof, and Top of Pinnacle or Antenna. Although the Sears Tower held the record in these three categories, Taipei 101 has now taken over two of the three, with the Sears Tower remaining as the record holder for Top of Pinnacle or Antenna at 527m.

The international membership of the CTBUH Height Committee includes Mir Ali of the University of Illinois, Champaign, IL; Eli Attia of Eli Attia Architects, New York, NY; Georges Binder of Buildings & Data, Brussels, Belgium; John Chapman of Schindler Elevator Corporation, Morristown, NJ; Joseph Colaco of CBM Engineers, Houston, TX; W. Gene Corley of Construction Technology Labs, Skokie, IL; Mahjoub ElNimeiri of the Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL; James Forbes of Scott Wilson Irwin Johnson Pty Ltd, Sydney, Australia; Tom Fridstein of the Hillier Group, New York, NY; Marshall Gerometta, St. Joseph, MO; Jeff Herzer of World’s Tallest Media, Inc., St. Joseph, MO; Nicholas Isyumov of The University of Western Ontario, Southwold, Canada; Tom McCool of Turner Steiner International, Doylestown, PA; R. Shankar Nair of Teng & Associates, Chicago, IL; Gary Pomerantz of Flack + Kurtz, New York, NY; Mark Sarkisian of Skidmore Owings & Merrill, San Francisco; Jan Vambersky of Corsmit Consulting Engineers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; and George von Klan of Edgett Williams Consulting Group, Mill Valley, CA.

The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, based at the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, IL is the only international organization that brings together all of the disciplines involved in creating the urban environment on a global basis. Its mission is to disseminate information on healthy urban environments and tall building technology, to maximize the international interaction of professionals involved in creating the built environment, and to make the latest knowledge available to professionals worldwide in a useful form. Currently there are over 1,000 members from 80 countries representing a wide spectrum of professional specialization.

Send feedback • Permalink

June 08, 2005

04:53:41 am China, Week 4  

Itinerary:

China Air flight from Lhasa to Xian
Two nights at the Bell Tower Hotel
China Eastern flight from Xian to Beijing
Five nights at Poly Plaza Hotel

Location Background:

Xian
Thursday, June 2, 2005 - Saturday, June 4, 2005
Temperature high/low during our stay: 90/70
Xian population: 7 million
Xian is the capital of the Shaanxi province, and is the city nearest the world famous Terra Cotta Warriors archeological site.

Xian Top Activities:
- Terra Cotta Warriors. One of the early emperor's put his subjects to work creating some 7000 unique life-size warriors made of terra cotta, to defend his tomb in the afterlife. We would not have wanted to be on the work crew of this roughly 40-year project, but it has resulted in one of the world's great archaeological sites some 2000 years later. See image gallery.
- Bike ride on top of city wall. The city wall around Xian is now completely restored. You can rent a bike on top of either the north gate or the south gate for a few dollars and ride on top of the wall. It takes about 90 minutes to ride around the entire wall.

Beijing
Saturday, June 4, 2005 - Thursday, June 9, 2005
Temperature high/low during our stay: 85/65
Population: 14 million
Beijing is the capital of China. It will host the Summer Olympics in 2008. It and Shanghai are the two most important cities of mainland China. Beijing looks and feels like a capital city, with wide streets, public plazas, and more low-rise construction than Shanghai with its commercial skyscrapers.

Beijing Top Activities:
- The Great Wall of China. There are numerous wall sites 60-90 minutes from Beijing. You won't go wrong at any of them. The most popular is Badaling, which Nick went to in 2004. The wall is steep and crowded at Badaling--it would be a liability trial lawyer's wet dream if only it were in the United States. On this trip, we went to Mutianyu, further away, at 90 minutes, and much less crowded as a result. You can take a cable car to the top of the hill where the wall is built, walk on the wall (it is steep at all sites, but Badaling is steeper than Mutianyu), and ride the toboggan chute down. See image gallery for multiple wall pictures. The steep shot of the stairs is at Badaling in 2004, but all other shots are at Mutianyu.
- Tiananmen Square, a huge public square with little decoration other than gates at each end and Mao's mausoleum. It's crowded and popular, so it's good for people watching. The National Museum and the Great Hall of the People face each other on each side of the square, while the Forbidden City is just to the north and the Urban Planning Center is just to the southeast, so all of these attractions are within walking distance of each other.
- National Museum of Chinese History. Under renovation until 2007 to get ready for the Olympics. A few exhibits are open. Okay, will probably be much better once renovations complete.
- The Great Hall of the People. A big building with lots of big rooms. Worth an hour.
- Forbidden City. The emperor's palace, probably the most popular attraction in Beijing. Featured in the movie The Last Emperor.
- Beijing Urban Planning Exhibition Center. Good, like similar centers we visited in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Shanghai (the Chinese do like to show off their prowess at city planning), but for such a new building, there is a disappointingly small amount of English. A real oversight with the Olympics coming.
- Lotus Lane (Houhai Hu). Restaurants and bars on a lake setting. Perfect for people watching. Did you know that 46% of Chinese women get their hair colored? This according to a Smith-Padgett observational survey of female passersby conducted on June 4, 2005 at Lotus Lane.
- Summer Palace. The Forbidden City apparently got a bit too steamy during the summer, so the royals had a similar complex built northwest of the city on a lake, where the breezes kept them from overheating.
- Beijing Opera. We saw three short performances that totaled about 80 minutes. That was just right. Worth seeing for that amount of time. The 800-seat theater had exactly 41 people in the audience, making it the least crowded place in all of China when the show began.
- Dazhaimen, Bai Family Restaurant. Great imperial-style restaurant in huge, scenic courtyard. Ask your hotel concierge to book a private room for you at this restaurant, with a waitress who speaks English since there no English menus. Pay attention to prices--there are many dishes under $10 and many dishes over $100. See Anniversary Dinner picture in image gallery.

China Week 4 Commentary:

We should report for the sake of accuracy that once we finished writing our week 3 post, which among other things mentioned how lousy we felt in Lhasa, Nick began to feel much better. So his fourth day in Lhasa was not so lousy after all, although Deanna still felt subpar, having not had the cathartic experience of scribing a blog complaining about her health.

During our trip, we have read two different, but nearly identical, quotations that say you should write your impressions of a place as soon as you arrive, before the unfamiliar becomes familiar. In this spirit, on Nick's first trip to China, he handwrote pages of observations now sitting in his filing cabinet back in Chicago. On this second, more familiar visit, he feels his observations may not be as sharp in this online web log as they are in those inaccessible notes stored back home. Why there's nothing in these blogs about how you can't walk 100 meters in China without bumping into a sidewalk merchant selling ice cream and something to drink, even on the Great Wall; or how the Chinese understand the concept of refrigeration quite well, but often fail to deliver an ice-cold Coke to a finicky American due to excessive opening of the refrigerator door. There's no explanation of how Pizza Hut is widely popular with the Chinese, yet has dozens of menu items you would not find in the US. No, those anecdotes, and a few dozen others that ought to be noted here, are not. The reason for this is found in what we offer as a corollary to the write-as-soon-as-you-arrive quotation. It states that as a practical matter you should write earlier in the trip rather than later, for your energy to comment on China in day 29 of a 30-day China trip will be somewhat flagging, as ours is now!

So rather than musing on in a directionless manner, we'll keep this post as mercifully short as the Beijing Opera we saw, and we will retake the stage in Mongolia.

Speaking of stages, there are also many loose ends on the world stage to discuss, and it seems we never have time to get to them. Traveling opens your mind up to so much that is going on around the globe, but the pace at which we travel makes it hard to go back and write about subsequent events in the places we've left behind. We're always writing about the new place where we've just arrived, but meanwhile interesting things are happening in the countries and continents already ticked off our list. Perhaps if we had more energy, we would comment on the Bolivian presidential resignation yesterday, the second silly South American country to drive its president from office for a silly reason after we left. Ecuador was the first, in April, an event we never got around to mentioning. Perhaps we should examine how a euro now costs 12 cents less than it did 10 weeks ago when we said we thought the dollar had bottomed. Things are also happening in places we have not yet been. Two European constitutional referendums have come and gone and we never translated any of the thoughts in our mind to the keyboard. We don't think the referendum failure is a disaster for Europe, or necessarily the end of a European constitution, but we don't know if we will ever get around to fleshing out those thoughts. That also is probably not a disaster for Europe.

We could explore our thought that the German stock market is now a buy, while the German bond market is a sell. Or maybe we will comment on Chinese-Japanese relations and how deep seated the anger between these two countries is. Over one-half of page five of today's China Daily, the main English-language paper in China, is devoted to biographical sketches of Japan's top 14 World War II criminals, all of whom were executed over 50 years ago--hardly breaking news. We could look at Japan's surprisingly strong economic growth in Q1, which suggests it is not headed for its fifth recession since 1990 as we thought and wrote it was several months ago. Why we could even answer our future skyscraper trivia contest question. But all of that will have to wait, as we procrastinate a bit longer.

1 feedback • Permalink

June 01, 2005

02:52:01 am China, Week 3  

Itinerary:
China Eastern Airlines flight from Shanghai to Yichang
Yangzi River Cruise upriver from Yichang to Chongqing on the East Queen, 4 nights
Air China flight from Chongqing to Lhasa (Tibet)
Four nights at ShangBaLa Hotel

Location Background:

Yangzi River / Three Gorges Dam
Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - Sunday, May 29, 2005
Temperature high/low during our stay: 80/60
Yichang population: 4 million
Chongqing population: 6 million (city); 33 million (municipality).
Population along river basin: 300 million

The Yangzi River is the longest river in China and the third longest in the world, after the Amazon and the Nile. The Three Gorges Dam, begun in 1994, will be the largest dam in the world once completed in 2009. The dam requires the resettlement of over one million people displaced by the resulting higher water level of the Yangzi River.

Chongqing is one of four municipalities in China, under direct central government control, rather than being part of a province (sort of like Washington, D.C. not being part of a state). The others are Beijing, Shanghai, and Tianjin. Chongqing is the newest of these municipalities, created in 1997 when three counties were split off from Sichuan province.

Lhasa
Sunday, May 29, 2005 - Thursday, June 2, 2005
Temperature high/low during our stay: 75/50. Bring your sunscreen, the sun is searing due to high altitude.
Population: 200,000
Tibet province population: 3 million

Lhasa Top Activities:
Potala Palace
Jokhang Temple
Barkhor Market
Deprung Monastery
Sera Monastery
Tibetan home visit

Commentary:

The Yangzi River runs through the industrial heartland of China just as the Great Lakes provided a focal point for American industrialization. The Three Gorges Dam represents the best and worst of China's controlled society. The massive project is a triumph of engineering prowess and state will, but at the cost of flooding dozens of ancient towns and historical sites, and requiring the relocation of over 1 million people, much of which has already occurred. Such a dam in such a populated area could never be built in the West--the lawsuits would drag on until the 22nd century.

The scenic Three Gorges that give the dam its name will not disappear once the dam is complete, as some accounts have misreported. Their beauty is reduced by the higher water levels, we have no doubt, but the peaks still tower hundreds of meters over the water. (It's hard for us to judge how much the gorges will have changed because most of the change has already occurred before our trip. The water level has already risen 135 of its eventual 175-meter increase. But there are still three distinct gorges and they will remain once the water rises another 40 meters. The peaks of Wu Gorge, for example, are 900 meters high.)

The dam's purpose is three-fold: 1) to control Yangzi flooding, which regularly causes significant damage and loss of life; 2) to allow for improved shipping access to China's interior; which should help 3) to promote economic development in the interior, which has lagged that of China's costal areas.

Visually, the Three Gorges Dam itself was less impressive than we expected. Shrouded in the ever-present mist/smog that blankets much of China, it's hard to see for one thing, and it certainly looks smaller than the Itaipu Dam (spelling?) between Brazil and Paraguay, for another. Having seen each, we'd bet that Itaipu is longer, but there is probably some legitimate statistic (e.g., vertical height or amount of water contained or something like that) allowing Three Gorges to legitimately claim the world's biggest dam title.

The clouds, rain, and mist reduces the visual beauty of the gorges as well. Probably this is as significant a factor as the higher water level in making the gorges themselves a bit of an anti-climax. The trip was interesting, but more for observing firsthand the impact of the dam project and for seeing the countryside than as a scenic cruise. Parts of the gorges were beautiful, but there were large areas in between that were not. The cruise may have been more interesting a few years ago before the water level rose to 135 meters. Then it would have been possible to see old villages still in use with the new, replacement villages built a few hundred meters higher on the hillside. Now, most of the old villages are already demolished (to prevent shipping obstacles) and flooded, with people resettled to the new villages. Several sites remain in use today that will be flooded in the future; however, not as many are viewable as would have been a few years ago.

Thoughts that the people would not agree to be resettled are countered by observation that most have already been. After the dislocations of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, being moved up the hillside to a new house and receiving some modest compensation for your old house may seem not all that bad to the Chinese.

So where do we come out on this project? Nick is probably 2/3 for it and 1/3 against, Deanna the opposite. Nick's reasoning is that the benefits of the dam are significant enough to outweigh the downside. And some of the downside (not all) has been exaggerated. While we can understand that anyone would hate to leave their home (not to mention seeing their home town destroyed!), we also think that some of the nostalgia for the old is diminished when you hear that the old homes largely did not have electricity or running water (which the new homes will). At least this is what we were told. Admittedly, we have some skepticism about the relocation after we heard the umpteenth tour guide tell us how happy the villagers are in their new homes. Clearly, all of the guides are reading from the same state-written tour manual. There's no way to know how much is true and how much is communist propaganda. But if it is true there was no running water, then sign us up for the relocation plan!

We say the some of the criticism is exaggerated because some of the more negative predictions have already been disproved as the dam nears completion. Projects requiring great engineering feats always have their naysayers, but more often than not, the will of those driving the project outlasts the critics. The critics usually have some good points, but often these are lost as the shrillness of their rhetoric causes everything they say to be discounted. One criticism that can never really be disproven and which no one wishes to see is that the dam will be unstable due to risk of earthquake. A dam collapse would put much of Yichang, population 4 million, under water. Interestingly, a Discover Channel program we viewed showed Americans and Westerners saying repeatedly that the dam cannot be built, and the Chinese saying that it can. While we recognize that there is no avenue for dissent in China, it was an interesting juxtaposition. A hundred years ago, many thought the Panama Canal could not be built, especially considering it had been tried and failed several times, lastly by the French. Theodore Roosevelt showed that America had the willpower to get it done. In this century, the Chinese appear to have the most willpower to create massive public works of infrastructure. Whatever your view, it is interesting to watch what they create.

Somewhere in the past year, we came across a Chinese saying, "If you don't get rid of the old, the new won't come." That sums up the Three Gorges Dam project.

And now, before we head to Tibet, an interlude, with three hints on how to pronounce Chinese words:

- "zh" is pronounced "j"
- "q" is pronounced "ch"
- "x" is pronounced "sh"

So Suzhou is pronounced as if it is "Sojou" or "Sue-joe" phonetically. Xian is pronounced as if it is "Shian" or "She-ahn" phonetically. The last dynasty was the Qing dynasty, pronounced "Ching."

Feeling Lousy in Lhasa

Here's a summary of our experience in Lhasa:

- The surrounding countryside is beautiful
- There is a place in China where the suns shines and the sky is blue!
- The religious sites are interesting to behold
- The above three factors combine to produce some excellent pictures, maybe the best since the glaciers of Argentina.
- You can see the main sites in two days. Since you need to rest the day you arrive due to high altitude, a three-day visit is sufficient, or take four days if you want some free time (say to update your internet site, for example).
- Because of the altitude, your body will feel not quite right the entire time you are there. This could be as mild as barely noticeable (e.g., shortness of breath after climbing stairs), or it could incapacitate you. Everyone is affected to some degree. "How bad do you feel?" replaces "Where are you from?" as a conversation starter.
- After four days, we are glad to have visited, and we are glad to be leaving.

Tibet reminded us of Bolivia. Each area is at high altitude, producing unlimited sunshine days with blinding brightness, but cold nights. Each is populated by a poor peasant class. Enough basic Western amenities exist to be comfortable, but don't expect a luxury experience--that's nowhere to be found (yet, it will come with time, to Tibet at least). And we felt lousy for parts of our stay in each place. This was not so much due to the altitude alone, but to having by coincidence caught a cold at our prior stop. Layering high altitude on top of a cold left us feeling run down much of the time we were in Bolivia and Tibet. It's not that we were laid up in bed unable to do things (although this does happen to many people), we just always felt kind of blah, without a lot of energy.

We never took Diomox for altitude sickness, as our symptoms seemed more cold related than altitude related, and we were already taking cold medicine. But as we experienced one sleepless night after another, we began to think that maybe we should have take Diomox upon arrival. Unlike Bolivia, where we were at an even higher altitude than Lhasa, we did not really feel better as time passed. So our advice would be to take Diomox or a similar medication, even though we did not. It will probably help.

Is this just a bunch of whining? After all, you may be saying, you've never experienced altitude effects. Why you've even been to the mile-high city, Denver, Colorado! Sorry, Denver is the minor leagues. A mile is 5,280 feet. Lhasa is 3700 meters high, or over 12,000 feet. In some places in Bolivia, we were at 4100 meters, or around 13,500 feet. You will feel something, maybe just a headache, maybe you will just notice your heart racing, but you will feel it. Our symptoms included (and this excludes the cold related symptoms): headaches, dry mouth, bloody noses, sleeplessness, body aches, and fatigue. And from listening to others, we figure that we fared no worse than the average person did, and perhaps better!

While we enjoyed Lhasa, it affirmed for us our decision not to visit Nepal and Bhutan. (Pause for collective groan to emanate from the more adventuresome travelers reading this.) Although they are printed on our trip card, we first decided a couple months ago to cross these two countries off the list when a palace coup occurred in Nepal. We've met travelers recently who have said it's not that bad politically, and that's probably true, but our reasons are as much to do with focusing more on what we enjoy. The political issues in Nepal were just the final reason to bail on those two countries. Frankly, we enjoy civilization more than primitiveness. We are glad we went to Bolivia and Tibet. But that's enough high altitude, basic conditions for us. The combination of those two factors limit your enjoyment of the place while you are there. So we are going to spend an extra 7-10 days in Europe, where there is so much we have not seen, rather than go to Nepal and Bhutan and possibly feel bad much of the time we are there. It's not the macho traveler thing to do, but it's what we prefer.

Send feedback • Permalink

:: Next Page >>