It seems that the only way to become really rich is to build a monopoly and convert that monopoly into other monopolies. I guess it sounds kind of simple when you say it out loud, but it’s the key insight into the Wall Street Journal’s profile of “Mexico’s Mr. Monopoly”, Carlos Slim. Some monopolies are bought (particularly in “developing” countries like Russia and Mexico) and others are arguably made. Slim’s monopolies appear to be a combination of the two methods.

A few facts from the Wall Street Journal:

• The 67-year-old tycoon controls more than 200 companies in telecommunications, cigarettes, construction, mining, bicycles, soft-drinks, airlines, hotels, railways, banking and printing.
• His companies make up more than 1/3 of the value of Mexico’s leading stock market index
• His fortune represents 7% of the country’s annual economic output. (At his height, John D. Rockefeller’s wealth was equal to 2.5% of U.S. gross domestic product.)
• His fortune has grown faster than any in the world during the past two years, rising by more than $20 billion to about $60 billion currently (Bill Gates is worth about $56 billion).
• This is the first time that the world’s richest person has come from the “developing” world since Forbes started tracking the wealthy outside the U.S. in the 1990s.

A lot of Slim’s fortune appears to have come from a nice bit of networking. Knowing the right people seems to be a key ingredient of becoming really successful, and that’s true in any country and probably throughout human history. In Slim’s case, he was obviously a very intelligent and talented guy, but his rise in power seems connected to the rise of Carlos Salinas in 1988. Salinas was trained at Harvard and was intent on modernizing Mexico. He and Slim became friends in the mid-1980s, and Salinas often promoted Slim as the country’s best and most intelligent young businessperson. Under Salinas, hundreds of government companies were sold in auctions, including companies that constitute the core of Mr. Slim’s current wealth. Unsurprisingly, Mr. Slim won many of these bids, leading some to suggest that he won them due to his connections.

It seems pretty much the same story as the Russian oligarchs that now own half of London.

And much like in Russia, the key question in Mexico is whether the government will be able to control the oligarchs that they have helped to create and who might become more powerful than the State itself.

It’s interesting to see how democracy, money and networking intertwine to create undemocratic and inegalitarian icons.

Say what you will about the US, but I think that the Google guys and Bill Gates made their billions in a lot more transparent way that was related more to innovation and less to “enchufes” (contacts) and unjust privatization initiatives. In the US, we don’t mind that people are rich. That’s apparently the goal of life and the basis of our individual and collective self-worth. Money is power. But we expect that people should earn their money to the greatest degree possible (let’s not be naive, there’s always some element of luck and contacts). It may be idealistic and in some cases hypocritical (look at the Clinton and Bush political dynasties), but that’s what we prefer.

Developing countries seem to transfer wealth from the state to friends of the state.

The same thing happens in the US — look at George Bush, Dick Cheney, Halliburton and lobbyists in general. But I think that the key differences are of scale and transparency. And, as Bill Gates found out, any threat of a monopoly gets attacked by the full power of the state and put under intense scrutiny to make sure that the public doesn’t end up subsidizing the rich any more than necessary.

The desired transfer of wealth is from rich to poor, not vice versa. And even America’s business oligarchs recognise it. Hence, the Gates Foundation and Warren Buffet’s donation to the Gates Foundation.

On the other hand, I think that a lot of Spanish companies are in no danger of becoming monopolies anytime soon. The focus on quality of life over material wealth definitely has a downside. Indeed, one way not to make a lot of money — and maybe to get run out of business — is to expect your customers to adapt to your preferences, whether we’re talking about online or offline commerce. That’s what I found out today, when I went to my gym and found that they now have “August hours”, which means that they open later (at 10AM) and close earlier (9:15PM) during the week, and are completely closed during the weekend.

But wait a minute: Don’t most people work out before work, after work and on weekends? Who works out during normal working hours during the week? Do people no longer need to go the gym because it’s August?

I must have missed the memo.

Taking into account that the typical Spanish workday begins between 9 and 10 AM, and ends between 7 and 8PM, this schedule makes absolutely no sense, except for the fact that the owner wants to enjoy the nice weather. She’s apparently not alone — I’d say that half of the shops and restaurants in Barcelona are closed, even though this is “high season” for tourists. But I don’t see the owner’s vacation schedule should inconvenience me if I have to continue paying the full gym dues during the month of August.

In the US, the customer is always right.

In Spain, it’s more like: The customer? Who cares?

Time to look for a new gym.