A branded residence is, as the name suggests, a residential building with a known branded attached to it. Historically, these have tended to be hotel brands. But it really just needs to be any brand that people know, care about, and will pay a premium for. So it could also be a fashion brand, a car brand, or whatever else.
This is a growing segment of the residential market. According to UK-based Savills, there were only 15 or so of these "schemes" in the 1990s (the UK uses scheme in lieu of project, which always sounds conniving to me), but by the end of this decade they expect the pipeline of branded residences to exceed over 1,200.
I would also argue that projects designed by celebrated architects and/or designers are a form of branded residence. And this is not being captured in Savills' number above.
Whatever your definition, today, the branded residence capital of the world seems to be Dubai, which feels right. And the biggest brands, by what appears to be a long shot, are Four Seasons and Ritz-Carlton (hotel side), and YOO and Trump (non-hotel side). Here are the full rankings from Savills:


This is an interesting part of the real estate business for a few reasons. One, it makes sense. A New Balance shoe that gets co-branded with Aimé Leon Dore unlocks additional value for both sides. ALD has a brand that certain people care about. So, of course the same would be true of real estate paired with the right brand.
Two, it's a growing market, and I think this is aided by the fact that development is an intensely local business -- so it can be hard to grow a globally-significant brand on your own. Sometimes you just need to borrow someone else's.
And three, it's usually a less risky approach to getting your name on buildings. Branded residences typically operate on a licensing model, which means developers pay for the right to use the brand. The brand may also capture some of the upside in the form of a percentage of sales. That's less risky than putting up your own money.
A branded residence is, as the name suggests, a residential building with a known branded attached to it. Historically, these have tended to be hotel brands. But it really just needs to be any brand that people know, care about, and will pay a premium for. So it could also be a fashion brand, a car brand, or whatever else.
This is a growing segment of the residential market. According to UK-based Savills, there were only 15 or so of these "schemes" in the 1990s (the UK uses scheme in lieu of project, which always sounds conniving to me), but by the end of this decade they expect the pipeline of branded residences to exceed over 1,200.
I would also argue that projects designed by celebrated architects and/or designers are a form of branded residence. And this is not being captured in Savills' number above.
Whatever your definition, today, the branded residence capital of the world seems to be Dubai, which feels right. And the biggest brands, by what appears to be a long shot, are Four Seasons and Ritz-Carlton (hotel side), and YOO and Trump (non-hotel side). Here are the full rankings from Savills:


This is an interesting part of the real estate business for a few reasons. One, it makes sense. A New Balance shoe that gets co-branded with Aimé Leon Dore unlocks additional value for both sides. ALD has a brand that certain people care about. So, of course the same would be true of real estate paired with the right brand.
Two, it's a growing market, and I think this is aided by the fact that development is an intensely local business -- so it can be hard to grow a globally-significant brand on your own. Sometimes you just need to borrow someone else's.
And three, it's usually a less risky approach to getting your name on buildings. Branded residences typically operate on a licensing model, which means developers pay for the right to use the brand. The brand may also capture some of the upside in the form of a percentage of sales. That's less risky than putting up your own money.
The third edition of Savills' annual Tech Cities report is now out. Savills is a global real estate company headquartered in London and a few years ago they started looking and what makes a successful "tech city." As always, you should take these rankings with a healthy dose of scepticism. But this one is based on over 100 individual metrics across 6 main categories:
Business environment (such as the size of the financial services industry)
Tech environment (such as the amount of inward VC investment)
City buzz and wellness (is it a cool place to live?)
Talent Pool (is the city creating and attracting young/smart talent?)
Real estate costs
Urban mobility
Here are the top 30 cities for tech and startup companies:

New York takes the top spot, supposedly because of its deep talent pool and position as one of if not the capital the world. But my friends in the Bay Area tell me that their housing shortage is also starting to impact SF's tech dominance.
Generally, the report finds that the above "tech cities" should see their GDP rise by 36% over the next decade, compared to 19% for other developed cities. I'm not sure how much of this has to do with tech, but the above list does differ from what you'd see in a more conventional global cities index. Here you have Austin ahead of global cities such as Hong Kong. And you have Toronto ahead of cities like Tokyo and Paris.
One takeaway that shouldn't come as a surprise to readers of this blog is the rise of Chinese cities in the index. Beijing is ahead of New York, London, and San Francisco by a wide margin in terms of annual VC investment. And Chinese cities as a whole are starting to take a greater share of global VC dollars (second chart below).


If you'd like to download a PDF of the full report, you can do that here.
Image: Photo by Jason Briscoe on Unsplash
The third edition of Savills' annual Tech Cities report is now out. Savills is a global real estate company headquartered in London and a few years ago they started looking and what makes a successful "tech city." As always, you should take these rankings with a healthy dose of scepticism. But this one is based on over 100 individual metrics across 6 main categories:
Business environment (such as the size of the financial services industry)
Tech environment (such as the amount of inward VC investment)
City buzz and wellness (is it a cool place to live?)
Talent Pool (is the city creating and attracting young/smart talent?)
Real estate costs
Urban mobility
Here are the top 30 cities for tech and startup companies:

New York takes the top spot, supposedly because of its deep talent pool and position as one of if not the capital the world. But my friends in the Bay Area tell me that their housing shortage is also starting to impact SF's tech dominance.
Generally, the report finds that the above "tech cities" should see their GDP rise by 36% over the next decade, compared to 19% for other developed cities. I'm not sure how much of this has to do with tech, but the above list does differ from what you'd see in a more conventional global cities index. Here you have Austin ahead of global cities such as Hong Kong. And you have Toronto ahead of cities like Tokyo and Paris.
One takeaway that shouldn't come as a surprise to readers of this blog is the rise of Chinese cities in the index. Beijing is ahead of New York, London, and San Francisco by a wide margin in terms of annual VC investment. And Chinese cities as a whole are starting to take a greater share of global VC dollars (second chart below).


If you'd like to download a PDF of the full report, you can do that here.
Image: Photo by Jason Briscoe on Unsplash
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog