Where the Global 1% Live Now

[i_am_hydrogen]

Where the Global 1% Live Now

The Atlantic
Richard Florida
Apr 12, 2012

London, Hong Kong, and New York rank as the top three cities for the ultra-rich, according to the 2012 Wealth Report released by real estate firm Knight Frank and Citi Private Bank.

The report is based on detailed data on the number, distribution, and preferred locations of high net-worth individuals (defined as households with more than $100 million in assets). This is the globe-straddling capitalist over-class that Cynthia Freeland has dubbed the "new global elite," or what the report itself labels the global economic "plutonomy" of the "richest 1%."

There are now 63,000 households worldwide with $100 million or more in assets, up 29 percent since 2006 and projected to rise even higher in the future. The top ten current preferred locations for the ultra-rich are:

1. London
2. New York
3. Hong Kong
4. Paris
5. Singapore
6. Miami
7. Geneva
8. Shanghai
9. Beijing
10. Berlin

The report also asked respondents to predict the most important cities in 10 years. The projected key cities of 2022 include:

1. London
2. New York
3. Beijing
4. Shanghai
5. Singapore
6. Hong Kong
7. Paris
8. São Paulo
9. Geneva
10. Berlin

Read more: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/job...live-now/1668/

[dave8721]

Thread from a couple of weeks ago from a different article on the same list:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=198482

[10023]

I'm surprised by Beijing but maybe it's just a function of government planning. It just seems like a much less appealing place to live than either Shanghai or Hong Kong.

Also, where the F is Tokyo? Japan's economy isn't showing impressive growth but it has a lot of existing wealth.

[Crawford]

Berlin? I don't think so.

I'm comfortable saying there's far more extreme wealth in Munich, Hamburg, Frankfurt & Duesseldorf, and I don't even think any of these cities would be close to Top 10 globally.

And I don't think Geneva would have more super rich than Zurich.

But none of those German/Swiss cities would have super rich than places like LA, Bay Area, Mexico City, Moscow, Mumbai, Tokyo, Seoul and a ton of other cities not on this list.

[10023]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Berlin? I don't think so.

I'm comfortable saying there's far more extreme wealth in Munich, Hamburg, Frankfurt & Duesseldorf, and I don't even think any of these cities would be close to Top 10 globally.

Agreed. Germany unlike the UK and France is de-centralized (a legacy of not being a unified nation-state until the late 19th century). Berlin is not nearly as dominant as London or Paris and there are many regional centers.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by 10023

Berlin is not nearly as dominant as London or Paris and there are many regional centers.

And, unlike London or Paris, Berlin is far poorer than the "secondary" cities. Berlin median and mean incomes are far lower than all the major West German cities.

[10023]

Originally Posted by Crawford

And, unlike London or Paris, Berlin is far poorer than the "secondary" cities. Berlin median and mean incomes are far lower than all the major West German cities.

I think it's catching up a bit but yes, the fact that West Berlin was an isolated outpost in the middle of the communist East destroyed its economy.

Hamburg is the trade center, Frankfurt is the financial center, Düsseldorf is the wealthiest of the cities in the industrial heartland (near the Ruhrgebiet), Munich is the capital of the wealthiest state / former kingdom. Stuttgart has money as well but is smaller.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by i_am_hydrogen

Where the Global 1% Live Now

The Atlantic
Richard Florida
Apr 12, 2012

London, Hong Kong, and New York rank as the top three cities for the ultra-rich, according to the 2012 Wealth Report released by real estate firm Knight Frank and Citi Private Bank.

The report is based on detailed data on the number, distribution, and preferred locations of high net-worth individuals (defined as households with more than $100 million in assets). This is the globe-straddling capitalist over-class that Cynthia Freeland has dubbed the "new global elite," or what the report itself labels the global economic "plutonomy" of the "richest 1%."

There are now 63,000 households worldwide with $100 million or more in assets, up 29 percent since 2006 and projected to rise even higher in the future. The top ten current preferred locations for the ultra-rich are:

1. London
2. New York
3. Hong Kong
4. Paris
5. Singapore
6. Miami
7. Geneva
8. Shanghai
9. Beijing
10. Berlin

The report also asked respondents to predict the most important cities in 10 years. The projected key cities of 2022 include:

1. London
2. New York
3. Beijing
4. Shanghai
5. Singapore
6. Hong Kong
7. Paris
8. São Paulo
9. Geneva
10. Berlin

Read more: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/job...live-now/1668/

No, this is a ranking based on what Knight-Frank/ Citi wealth advisors say are cities important to their clients. and is not a ranking of where these people actually live. So its odd that the Atlantic would title this article so incorrectly.

As far as where this demographic actually RESIDES, this chart I made using data from Wealth-X should give us an idea(Top 10 US and Top 10 European cities ranking combined):

[pesto]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

No, this is a ranking based on what Knight-Frank/ Citi wealth advisors say are cities important to their clients. and is not a ranking of where these people actually live. So its odd that the Atlantic would title this article so incorrectly.

As far as where this demographic actually RESIDES, this chart I made using data from Wealth-X should give us an idea(Top 10 US and Top 10 European cities ranking combined):

Intuitively, this sounds quite accurate. This is where I see investment coming from.

The other list has no validity at all as far as my experience goes. Sounds more like a brochure for a town-house and resort real estate investment program.

[MolsonExport]

Munich is again the obvious choice for number 1, followed by Austin.

[mousquet]

Bah, I tell you what, I actually feel sorry for that stupid comment I just made. But seriously, what's wrong with them chauvinists and their useless rankings? I swear I make the same fun of the French when I see that over here. Just wish people felt cool and lovable.
Besides, Britain is obviously a nice place for real. Isn't it enough?

[WilliamTheArtist]

Not to be too picky, but 63,000 people does not equal 1% of the worlds population. The BBC the other day had a thing where you could plug in your income and it would show you where you ranked in the world income wise. I was suprised to see that, even I, a lowly artist in the US, made more money than over 90% of the worlds population did.

[The Dirt]

It sounds like cost of living doesn't make it into the equation. Some places are ridiculously cheap to live in. I survived on $15 a day in southeast Asia including food, hotel, transportations and, when lucky, sightseeing and souvenirs.

[samne]

Would think Moscow would be somewhere on the list. Oligarchs!

[tdawg]

I think many of Russia's oligarchs have expatriated to the likes of London and NYC.

[PoshSteve]

Originally Posted by samne

Would think Moscow would be somewhere on the list. Oligarchs!

Moscow has more billionaires than any other city, but compared to those other cities, not as many people between that $30m lower threshold and $1b. very large wealth gap in Russia!

[J. Will]

Originally Posted by PoshSteve

Moscow has more billionaires than any other city, but compared to those other cities, not as many people between that $30m lower threshold and $1b. very large wealth gap in Russia!

No, if what you're saying is true, that would mean a smaller wealth gap than elsewhere, not a larger wealth gap.

[PoshSteve]

Originally Posted by J. Will

No, if what you're saying is true, that would mean a smaller wealth gap than elsewhere, not a larger wealth gap.

If you have a few people with tens of billions of dollars, and a bunch of people with only a few thousand dollars, and nobody in between, that would be a very large wealth gap. Im exaggerating, but its the same effect.

Moskva has the most Billionaires of any city, but they are all the Oligarchs who took literally everything during the economic catastrophe of the early 90s. True today that there is a growing and very vibrant middle class in the city, so its not only super rich and super poor, but there isnt the cadre of owners of small and medium businesses, ect, that would give rise to the group of people with $30-999m that you see in greater numbers in the other cities on this list. Hence Moskva having the most billionaires, but not being one of the cities with the most wealthy individuals (based on the lists criteria). And thus, no "center" equals a big gap between the top and the rest.

[TarHeelJ]

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

No, this is a ranking based on what Knight-Frank/ Citi wealth advisors say are cities important to their clients. and is not a ranking of where these people actually live. So its odd that the Atlantic would title this article so incorrectly.

As far as where this demographic actually RESIDES, this chart I made using data from Wealth-X should give us an idea(Top 10 US and Top 10 European cities ranking combined):

There is not one Asian city on that list.