The Shard Opening

dacouch

Abbafan1972 wrote: »

The website in the original post has been removed!

Lol I thought it might as their facebook wall which was showing comments in real time and 95% of the comments were not very complimentary.

Here is the google cache of the display, note the vast vast majority of the people were on the other side of the bridge where it did not look anywhere near as good. The video makes it look much better than it was. I think it's had some editing as the lasers were just stationary shining on other landmarks

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ZJq5P8WftbIJ:the-shard.com/inauguration/+the+shard+inauguration&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

It wasn't helped by a Metro journalist bigging it up and promising fireworks

VfM4meplse

Anyone who expected an amazing show was sadly disappointed. I was watching from the bar at the Guoman Tower (Tower Bridge), the lasers weren't that evident from behind the glass, but when we went outside to the river they were a bit more obvious.

On the positive side, it was a lovely warm evening in town, loads of tourists on Boris bikes and congregated around the Tower of London, and there was a great atmosphere. It did make me praaad to be British.

Gavin83

Dave_C wrote: »

Exactly my point, "they" are saying that the shard is the "tallest building". If they said that the shard is the "tallest inhabited building" I don't have a problem with that.

As I said, splitting hairs over the definition of "building"

ETA:
I forgot to add the smiley at the end. Please don't take this too seriously.

The OED defines a building as "a structure with a roof and walls, such as a house or factory." which applies equally badly to both :-)

I've just found this in "Have I Got News For You" style Skyscraper News

I can't help but wonder which would be taller if they were swapped geographically. :-)

Dave

I don't think the geography surrounding this makes a difference. It's actually the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat that defines what the tallest buildings are and their based in the US. London has little say in the matter.

Anyway they define a building as a structure that has at least 50% of it's height made up of floor plates and it must have a habitable area.

Emley Moor has neither of these and therefore they categorize it as a tower. Even the CN Tower (which contains 3 or 4 floors, I forget which) isn't classed as a building.

It might be splitting hairs but there is definately a difference between the two.

Errata wrote: »

If a building must have a roof, then the shard isn't a building.

Of course it has a roof, everyone inside would get wet otherwise.

barbiedoll wrote: »

I'm not sure that the Shard would even qualify as an "inhabited building", they're apparently having trouble finding tenants to fill the office space and they haven't even begun to fit out the apartments yet, so they won't be occupied for a while.

The office space is very expensive, it's several times that of a standard office in central London which might explain why they're struggling to fill it. The best candidates are investment companies who have money to burn but most of these would prefer to be in the Canary Wharf area and naturally banks have their own established towers already in that area.

They may be forced to drop the price at some point to attract more business.

dacouch

Gavin83 wrote: »

The office space is very expensive, it's several times that of a standard office in central London which might explain why they're struggling to fill it. The best candidates are investment companies who have money to burn but most of these would prefer to be in the Canary Wharf area and naturally banks have their own established towers already in that area.

They may be forced to drop the price at some point to attract more business.

My boss is friends with one of the architects, he was told 18 months ago that they were expecting the country to be out of recession by the opening next year. This would mean there would be a big demand for premium office space by the type of companies you mention.

Not sure if they were right about being out of the recession by 2013

Azari

Gavin83 wrote: »

I don't think the geography surrounding this makes a difference. It's actually the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat that defines what the tallest buildings are and their based in the US. London has little say in the matter.

Nonsense!

They have no official capacity and no one has to take any notice of their decisions.

It would be quite possible for the Times to use one definition and the Guardian to use another.

lammy82

dacouch wrote: »

There were thousands of people waiting with baited breath

Sorry, couldn't resist posting this:

Cruel, Clever Cat

Sally, having swallowed cheese
Directs down holes the scented breeze
Enticing thus with baited breath
Nice mice to an untimely death.

Geoffrey Taylor, 1933