December 18, 2013 11:22 AM, Errol Pinto <wrote: Catching up with old issues of The Economist in the Atacama desert. http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21582254-indias-super-rich-elite-are-colonising-heart-former-british-empire-passage Bagehot A passage to Mayfair India’s super-rich elite are colonising the heart of the former British empire Jul 27th 2013 | From the print edition IN THE days of the British Raj, the colonial government used to up sticks in May and flee the searing plains for the cooler hills. What passed for India’s high society, army officers, anthropologists and the odd touring aristocrat followed it, making Shimla, a rickety Himalayan hill town, one of the gayest spots of the British empire. It was a place of promenading, parties and extramarital affairs. It is a wonder the government still functioned. These days India’s super-rich elite makes a similar migration, to London. From June to August, when the temperature in Delhi rarely drops below 35 degrees Celsius, wealthy Indians and their wives flock to the former imperial capital—especially to its most exclusive quarter, Mayfair. This is not entirely new: rich Indian nabobs and maharajas have shopped and owned houses in Mayfair for a century and more. But in recent years their numbers have swollen, by one estimate, to a seasonal migration of perhaps 3,000 rich Indians. Last year almost a quarter of the houses and flats that sold in Mayfair were bought—for up to £3,500 ($5,400) per square foot—by Indians, according to Peter Wetherell, an estate agent, making them the second biggest buyers after Britons. Russians and other Europeans, whose lust for prime London property is more often blamed for pushing up prices, were responsible for a similar proportion between them. Early in the morning, St James’s Park resembles Lodi Gardens in Delhi or the Hanging Gardens in Mumbai, such is the procession of well-heeled Indians perambulating around it. They are overwatched from the Mall by the lavish quarters of a family of ex-India industrialists, the Hinduja brothers—bought from the queen and renovated at an estimated cost of £50m. At the Buckingham Palace end of the park, a five-star hotel part-owned by Tata Sons, India’s biggest private-sector company, forms the headquarters of the Indian elite’s London season. On a recent afternoon Bagehot took tea in its courtyard with a senior Hindu nationalist politician and one of India’s national cricket selectors. The chief minister of the state of Assam, a member of India’s ruling Congress party, stopped by for a chat, flanked by a pair of mustachioed flunkies. They were succeeded by a pair of Bollywood A-listers, Ajay Devgan and Kareena Kapoor (who is also the daughter-in-law of India’s greatest cricket captain, the late Tiger Pataudi). Each member of this constellation—representing politics, cricket and Bollywood: the firmament of Indian celebrity—appeared unsurprised by the encounters. They are what India’s rich and powerful expect in London these days. Indeed they come for more than the weather. Many see London property as a secure investment. All enjoy the capital’s world-beating choice of services—sometimes too much. An Indian entrepreneur of Bagehot’s acquaintance, who owns a flat just outside Mayfair, glumly confesses that he dreads hearing about his wife’s daily purchases: “I keep telling her, we’re not as rich as the others.” British public schools are also becoming popular with rich Indians—and likely to become more so, after Shahrukh Khan (the “King of Bollywood”) sent his son to board at Sevenoaks School in Kent. A dim—sometimes very dim—sense of history makes such British luxuries all the more enticing. A very rich Indian with a London abode says it makes him mad to see so many fine Victorian monuments built with the stolen wealth of India (“but what about all the millions he’s stolen?” another Indian migrant harrumphs). Yet like the Britons who once flocked to Shimla, India’s elite come to London mainly for the self-validating glory of their own company. To be part of the London scene is a mark of distinction. It can also provide for excellent networking. Rich Indians from different realms and cities are often likelier to cross each other’s paths in London than in Delhi or Mumbai. For those seeking to curry favour with them, being in a foreign city (albeit one substantially owned by Indians) can also provide good opportunities to do so. Even Indian billionaires are said to be shocked by the cost of London taxis and correspondingly grateful to the man who sends them a car. Mostly, however, the Indians in London hang out with the same crowd as they do back home—and in much the same supercharged atmosphere of “frivolity, gossip and intrigue” that Rudyard Kipling once noted in Shimla. An unserious business Yet there is a troubling flip-side to the historical comparison. The British in Shimla shut themselves off from India—even banning some Indians from the hill-station’s main promenade. London’s super-rich Indians cannot go to such lengths. Yet their contact with British society is minimal. Surprisingly few socialise with British or other non-Indian tycoons or even, unless the India cricket team is in town, attend the traditional events of the London summer: the Lord’s Test match, Wimbledon, the Henley regatta. Despite a push by the coalition government to strengthen business ties with India, their contact with the British economy also rarely extends beyond the services they use. In recent years Britain has seen a handful of big investments by Indian companies, including Tata Motors’ dazzlingly successful purchase of Jaguar Land Rover in 2008. Yet Britain’s trade with India remains pitiful; India imports more from 20 other countries. The usual explanation is that Britain’s competitive advantage is in high-end financial and legal services, which India hardly imports, in deference to its cosseted local providers. Nonetheless, this is a worryingly poor record for two countries with a common history, language and legal system—which looks even worse when you consider how many Indian tycoons keep houses in London. Why do they not see more business opportunity in Britain? Like the imperial rulers of India, their affection for their adopted country is less emotional than transactional, and perhaps easily erased. Economist.com/blogs/bagehot From the print edition: Britain -- Tel: +1-585-298-4464
