The global managerial class might also be called ‘‘global elite’’ or ‘‘transnational managerial elite’’ (Hannerz 1996). These people are mobile, often employed in business and finance, but inhabiting globalized spaces. They are part of the global fluids that Urry identifies and are thus influential. Hannerz (1996: 129) suggests, they ‘‘stand a better chance than others to extend their habitats . . . into other locations.’’ Unlike the super rich, however, they are less likely to interact or inhabit local spaces, clustering rather in ‘‘personal micro-networks’’ (Beaverstock and Boardwell 2000) situated by and large in spaces abstracted from the local (e.g. international hotels). Scholte sees the global elite as more or less isolated from the rest of society. He also points to the heterogeneous nature of the global elite. Specifically, he identifies three groups, the official (government or quasi government), the corporate and the intellectual elites. ‘‘The three sectors regularly intersect, for instance, at WEF events, WTO meetings, AEA conventions, and conferences of national bankers associations’’ (2005: 28). In addition, casual contact in globalized spaces is continual. ‘‘Both deliberately and subtly, these continual interactions have provided a strong social basis for neoliberal discourse’’ (Scholte 2005: 28). Global managerial individuals are ‘‘knowledge rich’’ and serviced

by the ‘‘knowledge poor.’’ Castells (1989) is particularly concerned about the growing gap between these two groups, in terms of affluence and opportunity.