New WTC buildings cheaper than Esplanade..Why???

• cwill

  1 Mar 03, 03:02

  Today's ST reported that the new building(s) to replace the WTC will cost S$525m, thereabouts. And it will have the tallest building in the world.
  
  Why did our durian cost S$680m? To be the biggest durian in the world???
  
• cwill

  1 Mar 03, 03:03

  Could it be that acoustics required for the halls add to the bill for the Esplanade?
  
• cwill

  1 Mar 03, 03:03

  Imagine how much the durian will cost without bangla labour? Do it mean that white man labour is even cheaper? Maybe Singapore should start importing white folks for construction work.
• jOhO

  1 Mar 03, 03:04

  ahhaha..
  
  well the first thing that comes to mind is that maybe materials and labour is cheaper in US?
  
  another is that the "design" (if u can call it that) of the building warranted a high price?
  
  *shrugggggggggggg*
  
  anywayz i'm gonna watch a piano concerto there come Sunday.
• toothie

  1 Mar 03, 10:50

  
• |-|05|

  1 Mar 03, 14:39

  special foundations had to be laid so that when loud music is played in the halls it would not cause the land in the area to vibrate also......in addition the building was built on reclaimed land and all the materials had to be imported
• wee (aka danger)

  2 Mar 03, 16:35

  why didnt everyone put the critics against US? the new WTC buildings cost cheaper because they know it's gonna encounter another terrorist attack. thus... they see no need to invest too much. it's gonna be blown anyway.... hiak hiak hiak!
• cwill

  3 Mar 03, 02:04

  Originally posted by wee (aka danger):

  why didnt everyone put the critics against US? the new WTC buildings cost cheaper because they know it's gonna encounter another terrorist attack. thus... they see no need to invest too much. it's gonna be blown anyway.... hiak hiak hiak!

  
• edLow

  3 Mar 03, 02:10

  the WTC u all refering is not refering to the WTC in S'pore hor?
  
  heheheheh!
• jOhO

  3 Mar 03, 02:23

  Originally posted by wee (aka danger):

  why didnt everyone put the critics against US? the new WTC buildings cost cheaper because they know it's gonna encounter another terrorist attack. thus... they see no need to invest too much. it's gonna be blown anyway.... hiak hiak hiak!

  hmm u can try not to joke about this so blatantly. some of us have frens or relatives that died in that incident.
  
  but... if u still persist, there's nothing i can do about it. maybe i could just spark a thought of pity and reverence in you for the many pple that died innocently.
• wee (aka danger)

  3 Mar 03, 14:02

  Originally posted by jOhO:

  hmm u can try not to joke about this so blatantly. some of us have frens or relatives that died in that incident.
  
  but... if u still persist, there's nothing i can do about it. maybe i could just spark a thought of pity and reverence in you for the many pple that died innocently.

  nothing against u or to the innocent ppl who lost their lives during the 911 incident. but to the ppl in the bushy administration. they shud really make the new WTC cheaper if they wanna continue to "terrorise" the weaker countries of the world, e.g. iraq.
  
  an article for ur reading, if u can read chinese http://www.cna.tv/stories/commentsarticles/view/2028/1/gb/.html
• gasband

  3 Mar 03, 14:06

  there will never be a good enough reason to take 2 planes and fly it into buildings of people who has done no wrong to you. Its just like me saying to my indian neighbour, i gonna kill indians cos u earn more money than me as an example, this is just pure nonsense. Osama's reasons are just nonsensical.
• orange_oceanz

  5 Mar 03, 10:28

  Shouldn't its new name be Harbour Front instead of WTC?
• the Bear

  5 Mar 03, 11:27

  heh heh heh.. that WTC was in New York lah.. the ones that got hammered by Osama dust-bin LardAss, the camel-sodomiser of a terrorist...
  
  Seems that our Durians are more expensive
  
  

  Originally posted by orange_oceanz:

  Shouldn't its new name be Harbour Front instead of WTC?