I'm perfectly fine with hearing multiple opinions, but don't appreciate you foisting your argument on others and expecting (insisting) others accept it when it doesn't sound right as you so impolitely put below. Or when there are glaring inconsistencies, or your poo-poohing statistics. 1) On the stats thing indicating purchasing behavior: "Not long ago the British footwear brand George Cleverley took its wares to Singapore for a trunk show. It was a test-the-waters experiment, since the south-east Asian city-state is not a centre for bespoke shoe-wearers (locals tend to favour easy-on slippers). The Cleverley crew rented a hotel suite and stacked it with whisky and multi-thousand-pound, Goodyear-welted shoes made from exotic skins. Clients came to stare and sip. And then something unexpected happened: Cleverley sold more shoes in one day at that trunk show than on any other day in its 53-year history." http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/e206ebf6-2cb6-11e1-aaf5-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2U9Xj4aWL The Rake in a Singapore publication. How the rich in Singapore spend. 2) Singapore is a multi-racial society comprising of 4 ethnic groups. As homogeneous as KL. 3) No comments on Point 3. 4) Not sure which shopping mall you're referring to, tbh. But check out Marina Bay Sands in Singapore 5) Any how might they have judged that? (Btw, I'm beginning to think that you don't really have a clue about how the wealthy in Malaysia and Singapore behave and spend). 6) That's definitely plausible -- a point I made in my original comment 7) Eustace Tilley's comment about partnering up with a KL partner seems quite likely and is often how niche brands venture into the local market. Berluti partnered up with Club 21 (a major luxury retailer in Singapore) before coming away from Club 21 having tested the market, risk-free.