EVER wondered where the rich and famous stay on holiday? Well we’ve been given an insight into their absolute favourite hotels around the world and they are pretty spectacular.

Paces with the most unforgettable food, cutting-edge design, and immersive experiences have been awarded a place on Conde Nast Traveler Readers’ Choice Best Hotels list for 2024.

5

5

Advertisement

5

5

These are the top eight hotels on the list:

1. The Lodge at Bodego Bay, California

A relaxed hotel along California’s Sonoma coast, guests here like to take day trips to local vineyards and stroll the empty beaches. 

The property came in for high praise for its ocean shell massages, signature breakfast sandwich and thoughtful details like a pair of binoculars in every room for guests to take in the ocean views. 

2. The Ritz-Carlton, Doha

Qatar’s newish Ritz Carlton was number two on the list thanks to its sea view gym, indoor tennis courts and luxury hammam spa. 

But also for the jaw-dropping flashiness in the interior, including the largest chandelier in the Middle East. 

3. Hermann Bungalows, Palm Springs, California

This chic Mid Century ‘hotel within a hotel’ was described as being ultra-luxe and uber stylish.

The stunning resort in the desert also has mountain views while you’re lounging by the pool.

4. The Thief, Oslo

This chic hotel in the Norwegian capital was loved by guests for its super fancy taste in art, with pieces from heavyweights like Antony Gormley and Andy Warhol lining the rooms and corridors.

Also a highlight was the secret underground tunnel leading to the hotel’s gym and spa.

5. The Ritz-Carlton, Kyoto

Clearly the Ritz Carlton knows how to impress guests – the second of the brand’s hotels on the list ended up there thanks to its exceptional views of the Kamogawa River and Higashiyama mountains. 

It has its own Japanese Zen Garden, naturally, and is known for its extra touches like the handmade soaps and Imabari bathrobes.

Meanwhile in Britain…

5

The first London hotel to make the cut was Raffles London at The OWO – one of the most talked about hotels in London this century, according to Conde Naste Traveler.

From 1906 to 1964 the hotel’s building served as the War Office where D-Day was planned.

Influential political and military leaders of the time walked the corridors, and spies, notoriously, had their own entrance.

In 2016, Mumbai-based Hinduja Group purchased the building’s lease and invested almost £1.6 billion in refurbishments. They also brought Raffles on board.

Refurbishments took seven years, but there’s now 120 rooms and suites, four restaurants, three bars, a Guerlain spa, and a 65-foot subterranean pool.

State offices have now become suites, which all honour the building’s Edwardian heritage.

Rooms are adorned with marble fireplaces, chandeliers and geometric carpets.

The Haldane Suite used to be Churchill’s former office.

Argentine chef Mauro Colagreco heads up three of the restaurants – one for fine dining, one with a private table option, and Saison by Mauro Colagreco, which is a space that offers Mediterranean cuisine.

The Guard’s Bar, the hotel’s main bar, offers sixteen signature drinks that pay homage to British ingredients, local producers or international influences in a nod to the Raffles locations found across the globe.

There’s also a tiny Spy Bar, which occupies old MI5 and MI6 interrogation rooms in the basement.

Ian Fleming, creator of James Bond, was a regular visitor to the Old War Office building, which is where he conjured the idea for 007.

The Spy Bar is located in two rooms that were numbered 006 and 007 in the early 20th century.

They acted as high security storage vaults for identity papers and mission reports of MI5 and MI6 agents. 

Guests can head to the speakeasy-style bar for a nightcap and to marvel at an Aston Martin DB5 mounted on the wall.

It seems there’s a price for luxury, as room rates at the hotel don’t come cheap.

For a one night stay in a room for two adults, you’re looking to pay around just shy of £3,500.

The hotel placed 33rd on the list out of a list of 50.

On the World’s 50 Best Hotels list, it was placed at 13.

BRITISH banks have been offering new and existing customers up to £200 free cash just in time for Christmas – here’s how you can claim.

More than four major banks have launched new schemes, allowing customers to pocket free cash.

1

Lloyds revealed that users who switch to their Club Lloyds account can receive a whopping £200.

Nationwide Building Society is offering customers £175 to switch to its FlexDirect, FlexPlus or FlexAccount current accounts.

Switching bank accounts has never been easier thanks to the Current Account Switch Service (CASS).

Through the CASS, customers can pick their switch date and leave it to the banks to move any active direct debits to their new account.

Here is the full list of banks offering the best switch offers.

Lloyds

Lloyds has confirmed that customers who switch to their Club Lloyds account can receive a whopping £200.

Both new and existing customers can take advantage of the free cash offer available for those who switch between October 2 and December 10.

Those who switch to the Club Lloyds account can expect the £200 to be paid within three days.

To finalise the switch, customers can either scan the QR code available on the bank’s website or use the mobile app.

Once completed, Club Lloyds customers will be able to select from a range of perks, including a 12-month Disney+ subscription, a choice of Vue or Odeon cinema tickets, a magazine subscription, or a Coffee Club and Gourmet Society membership.

Here are the details and costs of the Lloyds’ account.

Club Lloyds

• £3 monthly fee, waived each month that you pay in £2,000 or more.
• Earn credit interest on balances up to £5,000,  when you pay out two different direct debits each month.
• Choose a yearly benefit from: 12 months of Disney+, six x cinema tickets at ODEON or Vue cinemas, An annual Coffee Club and Gourmet Society membership, An annual magazine subscription.

Nationwide Building Society

Nationwide Building Society has launched a new offer of £175 to switch to its FlexDirect, FlexPlus or FlexAccount current accounts.

To get the free money, you must switch through the Current Account Switch Service (CASS).

It’s also giving account holders a £50 interest-free overdraft buffer to ease burden at what can be an expensive time.

First Direct

First Direct has confirmed that they have relaunched its popular cash switch incentive for anyone who opens a 1st Account.

Customers can receive a payment of up to £175 by using the Current Account Switch Service (CASS).

Users have to switch at least two direct debits or standing orders within 30 days of opening the account to qualify for the cash.

Switchers also need to add at least £1,000 into the account, register and log on to internet banking and use the debit card at least five times within 30 days of opening the account.

Customers who meet the criteria should expect the free bonus in their accounts by the 20th of the following month.

The bank revealed that new customers switching to their current account to first direct can expect several extra perks, including a £250 interest-free overdraft.

You won’t qualify for the switching incentive if you have previously held a First Direct product or opened an HSBC current account on or after January 1, 2018.

Customers moving across to the bank will also get access to a regular savings account paying 7% interest, one of the best deals around, as well as a 0% overdraft on the first £250.

How do I switch bank accounts?

SWITCHING bank accounts is a simple process and can usually be done through the Current Account Switch Service (CASS).

Dozens of high street banks and building societies are signed up – there’s a full list on CASS’ website.

Under the switching service, swapping banks should take seven working days.

You don’t have to remember to move direct debits across when moving, as this is done for you.

Advertisement

All you have to do is apply for the new account you want, and the new bank will tell your existing one you’re moving.

There are a few things you can do before switching though, including choosing your switch date and transferring any old bank statements to your new account.

You should get in touch with your existing bank for any old statements.

When switching current accounts, consider what other perks might come with joining a specific bank or building society.

Advertisement

Some banks offer 0% overdrafts up to a certain limit, and others might offer better rates on savings accounts.

And some banks offer free travel or mobile phone insurance with their current accounts – but these accounts might come with a monthly fee.

Co-operative Bank

The Co-operative Bank has announced eligible customers could receive up to £150.

The first £75 is given when a customer completes a switch to the bank.

Then, the bank is offering three monthly instalments of £25 – another £75 – to make up the £150.

Both new and existing customers can apply to switch to a current account to make themselves eligible for the payment.

Like any good offer, there are a few boxes to tick off before the big payment comes in.

Customers must apply for a Standard Current Account or Everyday Extra account.

To be eligible, customers must not have benefited from a switch incentive at The Co-operative Bank since 1 November 2022.

And to receive the first £75, customers need to follow a series of rules.

They are:

• Deposit a minimum of £1,000 into their new account (this includes balances transferred as part of the switch).
• Have 2 active Direct Debits.
• Make a minimum of 10 debit card or digital wallet transactions (pending payments will not count toward the fulfilment of this criteria).
• Register for our online and/or mobile banking service.
• Set up the debit card in a digital wallet (Apple Pay, Samsung Wallet or Google Pay).

That leaves the three £25 instalments – and there are some rules to claim them too.

Bankers need to deposit at least £1,000 into their account, have two direct debits and make a minimum of 10 debit card transactions.

Barclays

Barclays is offering £175 to new customers who switch before August 30.

The offer is only open to new customers who open a Barclays Bank Account or Premier Current Account.

To get the money, you must start a full switch by the deadline  – and complete it within 30 days.

The switch must include at least two active direct debits, and you need to pay £800 into your new bank account by August 30.

If you choose to open the sole Barclays Bank Account, you’ll need to join Blue Rewards, which costs £5 a month.

In return, you get Apple TV+ and MLS Season Pass subscriptions, you can earn up to 15% cashback with participating retailers and you get up to 5% interest on your savings with a Rainy Day Saver. 

The Premier Current Account is free, but has strict eligibility criteria.

To qualify, you need to either pay a gross annual income of at least £75,000 into the account, or have a total balance of at least £100,000 in savings, in Barclays UK investments, or in a mix of both.

You get access to all the same benefits as a Blue Rewards member, and can also choose to pay £12 a month to join the Avios Rewards programme.

You can read the full details and apply to switch on the Barclays website.

How to switch current accounts

Switching bank accounts can in most cases be done via the Current Account Switch Service (CASS).

Dozens of high street banks and building societies are signed up, including Barclays, First Direct, Lloyds, Monzo, Santander and TSB.

The full list of participating banks and building societies is on the CASS website.

All you have to do is apply for your desired new current account and the new bank will tell your existing one that you’re making the switch – then they will do the rest of the legwork.

Any direct debits are moved across for you, but there are a few things you can do before applying.

This includes choosing the date you switch and transferring any old bank statements to your new account.

You can get these by asking your existing bank.

Not interested in free cash?

Switching current accounts has long been an easy way to pocket free cash from banks luring in new customers.

However, these lucrative deals might not be for everyone.

But other perks including free travel insurance, interest-free overdrafts, and cashback, can also make shifting providers worthwhile.

When Iran launched missiles at Israel in April, Benjamin Netanyahu’s government opted for a limited response, hitting back with a precision strike on an air defence system near Isfahan that showed Israel’s technological prowess, but did not force an escalation.

But in the wake of the 180-missile barrage from Iran on Tuesday night — which Israeli officials said was larger than anticipated — the Israeli response is expected to be less restrained. “Iran made a big mistake tonight,” Netanyahu said following the salvo. “And it will pay for it.”

Current and former officials say Israel’s options include attacks in Iran, such as on missile launchers or oil infrastructure. And some have even called for the more extreme scenario of strikes against its nuclear facilities.

One of the factors Israel had to bear in mind when responding to Iran’s April barrage — which Tehran launched in retaliation for a presumed Israeli strike on its embassy compound in Damascus — was that Iran could direct the allied Lebanese militant group Hizbollah to unleash a barrage of rockets at Israeli cities.

But Israel’s devastating recent offensive against Hizbollah has reduced its ability to do damage, according to Israeli officials. In recent weeks Israel has killed Hizbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah, decimated its chain of command and launched a massive bombing campaign in Lebanon that killed more than 1,000 people and degraded swaths of the group’s missiles and launchers.

The US, which played a key role in restraining Israel in April, seems less likely to hold its ally back this time. Jake Sullivan, US national security adviser, said Iran would face “severe consequences” for its latest barrage, which Tehran said was a response to the assassinations of Nasrallah and Hamas’s political leader Ismail Haniyeh in July. He added that the US “will work with Israel to make that the case”.

The start of Israel’s recent offensive against Hizbollah — which began last month after thousands of the group’s pagers and other communications devices detonated en masse, killing more than 30 people and injuring more than 3,000 — provided a glimpse of the type of options at the disposal of Israel’s military and intelligence services.

Israel has repeatedly been linked to covert operations in Iran itself during its decades-long shadow war with the Islamic republic. In 2010, a cyberweapon called Stuxnet wreaked havoc in the country’s nuclear centrifuges by causing them to spin out of control. In another case a prominent nuclear scientist was assassinated outside Tehran with a remote-operated machine gun in 2020.

But given the scale of Iran’s barrage, which a person briefed on the situation said had targeted military and intelligence bases near Tel Aviv and facilities elsewhere, Israel is widely expected to respond by striking Iranian targets directly.

“It does not exclude other options — but for sure there should be a kinetic element in the Israeli response,” said Yaakov Amidror, a former national security adviser to Netanyahu and fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America in Washington.

The person briefed on the situation said various options were under consideration but one “gaining momentum” was a strike that would hit Iran economically, such as by targeting its oil production facilities.

Israel on Sunday carried out a similar operation against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. Israeli fighter jets, supported by intelligence and mid-air refuelling aircraft, flew 1,800km — further than they would need to do to attack Iran — to bomb power plants and a port used to import oil and other military supplies.

Amidror said that operation could be a “prototype” for a raid on Iran, although a strike on the Islamic republic would be “more complicated”. The option is also unlikely to win favour with the US administration, which would be wary of disrupting oil markets in the weeks before the presidential election.

An alternative, which diplomats said western capitals had been attempting to persuade Israel to choose, would be for it to hit Iranian missile launchers involved in Tuesday’s barrage. They argued this would be seen as a symmetrical response and less likely to trigger a further cycle of retaliation.

Israel could also target senior figures in Iran instead of infrastructure. In his response to Iran’s missile salvo, Netanyahu name-checked several Hamas and Hizbollah leaders recently assassinated by Israel, such as Mohammed Deif and Nasrallah, warning they had not understood “our determination to defend ourselves and to exact a price from our enemies”.

“Apparently, there are those in Tehran who do not understand this either,” the prime minister said. “They will.”

Beni Sabti, a researcher in the Iran programme at the Institute of National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, said he doubted Israel would do something as escalatory as targeting Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But he said senior figures in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard or advisers to the leader could be a target. “If they are not there, part of the leader is not there,” he said.

Hawks have called for Israel to go further, and use the opportunity created by the weakness of Hizbollah — which Iran built to be a deterrent against Israeli attacks — to target the Islamic republic’s nuclear programme, which Israel views as its most serious strategic threat.

“Israel has now its greatest opportunity in 50 years, to change the face of the Middle East,” former prime minister Naftali Bennett wrote on X. “We must act now to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, its central energy facilities, and to fatally cripple this terrorist regime.”

Yet despite Israel’s raid in Yemen, a strike on Iran’s nuclear programme — which is widely dispersed, with key elements in reinforced facilities deep underground — would be a far bigger task. Few observers think Israel could mount such an undertaking without US support, both to carry out the attack, and to ward off the Iranian response.

Amidror argued that whatever option Israel chose, the most important thing should be the message it delivered. “From my point of view, it doesn’t matter what. But it should be very precise and very decisive,” he said.

“We are not going to solve here the historical problems of Israel. What we want is to show Iranians that there is a price, a big one, that they will pay if they continue to attack Israel.”

Additional reporting by Henry Foy in Brussels

Data visualisation by Steven Bernard and Alan Smith

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

It may sound a bit like a science fiction plot, but in the future artificial intelligence could conceivably reach the point of rapid self-improvement, evade human control, and unleash chaos upon humans through cyber attacks or even nuclear disasters. That is the concern of some scientists and developers, and was the motivation for an AI safety bill in California, which is home to 32 of the world’s 50 leading AI companies. But on Sunday, state governor Gavin Newsom vetoed the legislation. The decision is seen as a big win for Big Tech, a reckless decision for public safety, and a missed opportunity to set de facto AI safety standards nationally. It is not that simple.

Setting out rules to protect against the potential harms of a technology, particularly one still in development, is a tricky balancing act. If it is too overbearing, it risks stifling innovation in the first place, which means society misses out on its potential benefits too. And, although California’s bill was watered down following intense lobbying from Silicon Valley, uncertainties around its effect on AI development and deployment still remained.

One broad aim of California’s bill was to raise developers’ accountability for the misuse of their models. However admirable that may be, it can have side effects. For instance, it is difficult for developers to know ex-ante how their technology might be used. They might reconcile that by pulling back from research. AI experts also worried that the bill’s safety protocols — which included a requirement for companies to build a “kill switch” into models over a certain threshold — could discourage development and the use of open-source models, where much innovation takes place.

Another worry was that the legislation did not specifically target AI systems used in high-risk environments, such as in critical infrastructure, or if they used sensitive data. It applied stringent standards to even basic functions.

Given these concerns, Newsom’s decision seems reasonable. That, however, does not mean tech companies should get a free run. As the AI race gains speed, there is a genuine concern that model builders could overlook weak spots. So it would make sense for lawmakers now to rework the proposed rules and clarify the vague wording, to better balance concerns around the impact on innovation today. Newsom announced a promising partnership with experts to develop “workable guardrails”. It is also welcome that the governor has recently signed bills targeted at regulating clear and present AI risks — rather than hypothetical ones — including those around deepfakes, and misinformation.

While California’s leadership on AI regulation is commendable, it would also be better if safety rules were hashed out and enacted at a federal level. That would provide protections across America, prevent a patchwork of varying state laws from emerging, and avoid putting the Golden State — the epicentre of American and global AI innovation — at a competitive disadvantage.

Indeed, though the allure of the Silicon Valley investor and talent pool remains strong, there is a risk that unilateral and overly stringent AI regulation could push model development elsewhere, weakening the state’s AI tech ecosystem in the process. As it is, California has high taxes and is the most heavily regulated state in the US. Property is expensive, too. Firms including US data analytics business Palantir and brokerage Charles Schwab have left the state recently, and some tech companies have cut office space.

Managing safety concerns around AI development is an art in preserving the good while insuring against the bad. Technological threats to our societies should not be taken lightly, but neither should be stunting the emergence of an innovation that could help diagnose diseases, accelerate scientific research, and boost productivity. It is worth making the effort to get it right.