Imagine you were Muslim, had been drinking (probably a bit too much), and then were raped. After realising this, you report it to the police. Despite all the evidence, rape appears to play second fiddle to other crimes. For reference, this appears to have happened in Dubai to a British couple, and the woman in particular. No matter what your views on the other two, surely there is some logic in investigating the rape allegation - there may be even be some compassion in turning a blind eye to the other two "offences". The way that this situation appears to have played out is outrageous:

A British woman who made a rape complaint in Dubai has been arrested for having illegal sex with her fiance, according to reports. The woman, a 23-year-old from London, said she was raped by a waiter in a luxury hotel after celebrating her engagement to her 44-year-old boyfriend, also from London.But when she reported the alleged rape to police in the Middle Eastern state she and her boyfriend were arrested for having sex outside marriage and illegal drinking outside licensed premises. Her attacker is believed to have denied rape, saying the woman, a British Muslim of Pakistani descent, consented, but he has also been charged with "illegal sex".

Expect more Dubaibashing.

British woman arrested in Dubai after reporting rape
Woman raped in Dubai charged for having illegal sex

Yes another record - only a select few knew about it: Burj Khalifa (BK) is the new name for Burj Dubai. Curveball. BAM! BK - have it your way. How long will it take for people around the world to say Burj Khalifa Bin Zayed, when they have had Burj Dubai drummed into them for years.



Cynics would say that this is the price for the bailout. Loyalists would say that this is a symbol of unity. Plaudits would state that this was the biggest kept secret in the world.



Aside, if this was a last minute thing, then there may be a very rich domain hoarder at burjkhalifa.com

It's almost as if the tallest building in the world has been hiding behind a largest sheet in the world with all the announcement that the Burj Dubai is to be unveiled to the world on Monday. Actually it is quite the opposite, as The Burj Dubai has been used as a symbol of the the days of supposed extravagance that has now resulted in the doom days. It wasn't exactly like that but you get what I mean.



But it is no mean feat - it is a fantastic achievement - an 800m high building, higher than any other building in the world.

“The tower embodies Dubai’s determination and optimism of being a truly world city and a positive symbol of the whole Arab world,” said Mohamed Alabbar, the chairman of Emaar Properties, the developer behind the project. “Burj Dubai is a great achievement of a successful global collaboration and that is what Dubai is all about. We live in a globalised world and through collaboration we can push the boundaries and achieve the impossible.”

Gloat you may like - but unfortunately every single news story will be peppered with words such as bailout, bond repayment, credit crunch etc. There will be an extravagant party no doubt, but for the short to medium term, this building will symbolise the downturn in Dubai, especially as its floors remain empty.

But this is not the first time that tall buildings have been used to represent the downturn. In fact many buildings have been used to represent economic crises over the last century in a 1999 paper by Andrew Lawrence of Deutsche Bank: The Skyscraper Index: Faulty Towers:



Well long after the soothsayers cease the "I told you so"s, the Burj Dubai will still remain. There way be taller buildings and bigger crises. But we live with one of each at the moment. Enjoy the fireworks!

Billion dollars or bust – the Burj party goes on in Dubai

Skyscrapers and Business Cycles
Dubai financial uncertainty overshadows tower opening

Much has been made about the billions in bailout money that Abu Dhabi has provided to Dubai. So, when we're talking a few piddly hundred million, it shouldn't be too much of a big deal. But there you would be wrong, because the Abu Dhabian's want a return for their money. They have proved it in the past with shrewd investments, timely, and lucrative - and with supposedly the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world, they don't mess around.

So what to do with the quandry of Manchester City. The return would be claiming a place in next season's champions league. The intangible value of having Etihad beamed to millions as well as the other obvious benefits would be fantastic. However, with an investment in players of 200m+ sterling, Sheikh Mansour wants returns today and not tomorrow - and so the man that they had faith in when they took over, didnt deliver in time. While progress was being made, those draws were not success enough. If they had turned from draws to wins, there wouldn't be the headlines of the sacking of Mark Hughes and the appointment of Roberto Mancini.

And so to Mancini - although very successful in the Italian gamed both as a player and as a manager, he has limited experience of the Premiership. Could the appointment of Mancini be an inspired one for the future of Manchester City and the investments of Abu Dhabi, or is he really 3rd choice to Mourinho and Hiddink - who both didn't want to drink from the poisoned chalice. The Abu Dhabi royalty have a penchant for Serie A football, so they will know the risk they are taking.

As far as Abu Dhabi goes, the investment in Manchester City was a gamble, and now that the chips are down, here comes another gamble. No doubt more money will be available but for now the hot seat belongs to Mr Mancini. Good Luck to you My Friend. Let's hope the stress is worth the 9 million pounds.

You would think to hear "Hyatt" and "Abu Dhabi" spoken together when the hotel at capital gate launches next year....but it has taken on a new meaning. The Abu Dhabi Wealth Fund has taken a 10.9% stake in Hyatt's class A shares that were floated last month:

The filing said the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority bought nearly 4.8 million, or 10.9 percent, of Hyatt's Class A common shares. Its overall stake in the company is considerably lower, however, because the wealthy Pritzker family holds the bulk of other stocks known as Class B shares that give it voting control over the company. ADIA spokesman Euart Glendinning confirmed the purchase Tuesday. He said the fund intends to remain a minority shareholder. Financial terms were not disclosed. Hyatt shares closed at $29.05 apiece Friday, the last trading day before the deal became public. At that price, ADIA's stake is worth about $139.4 million. ADIA is the largest of several investment funds Abu Dhabi uses to invest its oil wealth. It is perhaps best known for agreeing to pump $7.5 billion in Citigroup Inc. in late 2007.

Hyatt is a reputable hotel brand - and Abu Dhabi are shrewd investors, most of the time. Nice little transaction. Apparently, the leaning tower of Abu Dhabi is still on track for completion at the end of next year.

Abu Dhabi wealth fund takes stake in Hyatt Hotels

One back story that is starting to get traction around the bigger story of bailouts and defaults in Dubai is the story of insider trading. One commentator has his rant:


This is the crazy real world. A month ago Nakheel bonds were trading at 110%. They fell below 40 cents two weeks ago. This morning the bonds were trading north of 70. Some of the bonds look to be paid at par. That is enormous price action in a very short period of time. The opportunity to make money on both the downside and the upside was there. Another way to have played the Nakheel bond story was through the CDS market. Pricing in that market mirrored the action for the bonds. Very big bucks were made and lost as this played out. To take advantage of this one would have had to have been an insider. No outsider could have sold high and bought low. So the question is how many insiders were there on this deal? My guess: A few thousand.

Is there something else going on or is this pure coincidence? Can it be pure coincidence?

Dubai Story Reeks of Insider Trading

Many commentators are expressing surprise at the apparent bailout of Dubai by Abu Dhabi. Those of you that read this blog will know two things:

1. That there is a deep tie between the Emirates
2. This is not the first bailout

Although $10bn is a lot of money, back in february this is what we had to say:

Whatever you want to call it - the world sees it that Abu Dhabi has saved Dubai. Lex has coined the phrase Dubailout. We predict that there will be more dubailouting happening over the next year or so. The markets think otherwise, with trading up on announcement of the injection/bonds/bailout. But that might just be because there is now an acceptance that Dubai and Abu Dhabi are now bound by more than just being neighbours.



At the time, Lex, from the FT stated that this gave Dubai valuable breathing room. Until the shenanigans at the beginning of the month. And now we have that same situation again. Bailout, markets reacting well. This is ridiculous volatility. What does that mean for markets. As a direct result of this yoyoing, someone has made a lot of money while someone has lost a lot. And this is not the first time it has happened.

This, to put it quite simple, is unsustainable.

The breathing room that has now been established until April needs to be put to making some difficult decisions:

- Will there be an asset sell off by Dubai World?
- Will Dubai World be left for bankruptcy?
- How can Dubai reestablish its reputation?
- How can this sort of freefall be prevented from happening again?

So what now? The $4.1 sukuk will be paid off. The rest of the money will support Dubai World until April. There will now be more speculation about swapping control of assets, but the real question is the rest of the debt that is still outstanding. This story is only part told.

Abu Dhabi provides Dubai $10 bln in bailout money