If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck it's probably a duck, right? Wrong. Just ask the Rolls-Royce motor company. It is mightily unimpressed by a concept car produced by Chinese carmaker Geely, on display for the first time at this year's Shanghai auto show.

At first glance you can see why.

Chinese automaker Geely unveiled its GE in Shanghai.

Geely has produced the GE which looks uncannily like the Rolls-Royce Phantom: from the iconic bonnet (hood) ornament - the Spirit of Ecstasy - to the stately and equally recognizable grille. Even the rear end tapers in on the Geely.

Now you may have expected Rolls to shrug it off, to look down its aristocratic nose and smile benevolently at an upstart paying it a sort of back-handed compliment.

Absolutely not. In the whispering, highly refined world of top-end luxury marques, Rolls was pulling no punches.

"Yes, I've had a good look at it," said Richard Carter, head of worldwide communications for the fabled British carmaker, now owned by BMW.

"It's a copy and we are frankly disappointed with Geely."

Geely's response is to say it's absolutely not a copy. It's an entirely original design, and what's more they really don't want to get into a discussion about it.

Take a look at the pictures and decide for yourself.

Copying is nothing new in the auto industry. The Japanese did it, the Koreans did it and the Chinese are now doing it, said Michael Dunne of auto research house, JD Power.

It's a long-standing joke in the auto industry that R&D stands not for Research and Design, but Receive and Duplicate.

But why is Rolls-Royce so sensitive? After all, it's not likely anyone will buy a Geely GE (if it ever makes it to production) in the mistaken belief it's a Roller. And Rolls-Royce says it can't imagine the car, even if it were in production, having an impact on its own profits.

What Rolls' action does show, according to Dunne, is just how concerned the global auto industry is by the imminent arrival of China on the world stage.

He added that it will take perhaps three to five years for China to start competing against the likes of the mass-produced family cars from Europe, Japan and Korea. It will take longer at the luxury end.

But in the meantime the non-Chinese automakers are sending a message to China that it cannot take anything for granted as it makes its way up the value chain.

It's a tough industry, especially in these times, and no one is going to get a free ride.

Rolls-Royce, quite understandably, defends its reputation vigorously against anyone who uses its designs without asking. This is no exception.

The question, though, is what can Rolls-Royce actually do about it.

"Western auto makers have taken Chinese carmakers to court in the past over what they see as major copyright infringements, but so far they have never won a case," said Dunne.

But, if the reaction of Rolls-Royce, is anything to go by they are not going to stop trying.

If Angelina or Brad had been at Davos this year, they would have been given the treatment ‘Royal celebs' deserve. But they are not here, so in the absence of glitz we have to find other ‘stars' to hang onto.

Thankfully there are plenty of alternative delegates worthy of our attention. For instance, economists like Stephen Roach of Morgan Stanley Asia and Joseph Stiglitz formerly of the World Bank. Not heard of them? Not hanging on to their every utterance? Tut tut. No wonder you're in this mess!

These men may not have the good looks or dashing manner of Hollywood stars, but here at Davos this year they are ‘rock stars' in their own right.

When they walk through the hallways they are feted. Crowds gather to hear the words from their lips. A private chat with one or the other is economic nirvana.

Just this morning as I walked through the lobby, there was Roach holding court; cameras recording his words, journalists jostling to hear his view on how bad things would get.

For some time both men have been forecasting the horrible financial disaster we now face and were sneered at. They said it was going to get worse...and it did. And now at Davos both men can look us in the face and say "told you so." Neither is actually saying that of course. Instead they are putting forward ideas and solutions to get us out of the mess.

What worries me is Roach and Stiglitz are saying the plans on the table won't work, from stimulus packages, to co-ordination, to regulatory reform – they claim more needs to be done. We have ignored these economic rock stars before, to our cost. Let's not make THAT mistake again.

Tune in to CNN International each evening at 1900 GMT to catch Richard's new show, ‘Quest Means Business'.

For more coverage of this year’s World Economic Forum, go to our special Davos page.

DAVOS, Switzerland - I often ask myself why do I bother to come here? Then I remember, I am here as a journalist covering what the leaders say and do. But why do so many delegates, who have a choice, come here? Surely they would be better off tending to their business back home?

Ordinary delegates say they want to hear what world leaders say about crisis.

This morning I got the official schedule. Some of the sessions are extremely timely and relevant. The "Brainstorm - What happened to the Global Economy?" panel promises to be good. But other sessions, like "What is Good Design?" or "Political Art: What Now?" while interesting in an esoteric way, are hardly vital at this time of crisis.

In the registration hall I asked "ordinary" delegates why they came. Not the high and mighty - just mid-level executives and officials who make up the bulk of Davos.

Some said they wanted to hear world leaders and decision makers talk about the best way out of the financial mess (after all Vladmir Putin, Angela Merkel, Gordon Brown Wen Jiabao are all scheduled to speak). Others come to continue their dialogue with clients and suppliers and discuss what they need to do next.

Representatives from NGOs and aid groups like UNICEF attend, to make sure their causes are not forgotten in this moment of crisis. One lucky businessman is here to talk to investors in medical research - yes, there are still some people with money to invest.

Lots of delegates have been coming to Davos for many years - this event is part of their calendar. Just as you don't stop going to visit relatives at Christmas, so you still come to Davos in a crisis; even more so, they would say.

Perhaps the real reason to be here is summed up by the delegate from Asia who said "opportunity is the opposite of crisis." Quite!

Tune in to CNN International each evening at 1900 GMT to catch Richard’s new show, ‘Quest Means Business.’

For more coverage of this year’s World Economic Forum, go to our special Davos page.

If we needed reminding why this week's World Economic Forum  is important, look at the pages of any newspaper: job losses, bank  write downs, economic collapse and no end in sight.

In previous years at Davos there has been the feeling that the delegates have been deciding the best way to improve the world;  rarely tempered by doubts of failure or mistake. Now the errors, the failures, the disasters of decision making are as evident as the mountain itself. So this year when some delegates sound off about what must be done, they might be met with, "You got us into this  mess in the first place."

Klaus Schwab the founder of the WEF recognises this, telling me this year's forum will be "...more modest. People see that they have  failed to a certain extent as leaders. Even in Davos ...nobody was really listening."

Which begs the question why we are bothering to listen to these people again? Simple. They are the ones who have to get us out of  the mess. Schwab points out "take the bankers, they are part of the problem but they are also part of the solution so that's the reason we still integrate them here. "

Klaus Schwab agreed that there had to be more humility at this years forum. Ultimately he admits that means hearing bankers and leaders say "sorry."

Tune in to CNN International each evening at 1900 GMT to catch  Richard's new show, 'Quest Means Business.'

For more coverage of this year’s World Economic Forum, go to our special Davos page.

DAVOS, Switzerland - I like to arrive in Davos a few days before the World Economic Forum begins when I can experience the picturesque Swiss town without the thousands of delegates. During the Davos week, getting a hotel room here is impossible.

Many stay in apartments, or worse, in nearby towns (oh the shame of it!). This year I made a bit of Quest Personal History (QPH)! I am so early I am the only person staying in my hotel. The existing guests checked out (a group of German skiers) and the manager asked me what time I wanted him to come in to make my breakfast, since I am the only person here.

In all my years of travel for CNN Business Traveller, I have stayed in big hotels, small hotels, grand hotels, shocking hotels… but I have never been the ONLY guest staying in a hotel.

By this evening, other early birders will have arrived and I shall have to ‘share’ my hotel! In the days ahead I shall write about the issues at Davos.

Until then I shall enjoy another moment of QPH… today I will ski! I know of no real research into this, but delegates always ask each other, “have you ever actually skied during Davos?” The answer is usually long and rambling about why best intentions have been thwarted; panels, meetings, lunches “got in the way."

This year I will get up the mountain, then when the question is asked I can be very smug and say “of course I have skied, oh, and I even had the hotel to myself!”

Hotels and skiing… this is indeed going to be an historic Davos meeting!

Tune in to CNN International each evening at 1900 GMT to catch Richard’s new show, Quest Means Business.

For more coverage of this year's World Economic Forum, go to our special Davos page.

LONDON, England – The economies of the Middle East are growing nicely, regionally about 7 percent this year. Oil revenues, with prices at around $85 a barrel, are still strong by historical standards.

So why are the major markets of the region drowning in a sea of red?

The simple answer is that these economies cannot stand alone in isolation with all the chaos around them. Markets in Saudi Arabia, Dubai and Cairo are now down more than 50 percent from their peaks in 2008. These heady markets have surged anywhere between 200 and 300 percent during the last five years.

They surged in part because investors were enthusiastic about the future. The other volatile part of this equation is that a great deal of hot hedge-fund money came into the region in search of growth. But it left faster than many anticipated.

There was a double-whammy, if you will. Many of the Western funds put money in thinking that the Gulf economies would soon abandon their pegs to the dollar after falling some 30 percent during the past few years. When leaders in the Gulf decided not to scrap that dollar peg, foreign investors looked for the exit.

This major market correction, if we want to limit the description to that, is a big test for the central bankers of the Middle East. They have been working to expand their tool kit to control money supplies, battle record inflation and keep a lid on borrowing for all those real estate projects which sprout up like mushrooms in the desert.

At Cityscape, a major property show held in Dubai this week, Middle Eastern developers showed off their latest wares at stands costing up to $8 million dollars each. One new planned development outside of Dubai called Jumeria Gardens has a price tag of some $95 billion.

Think about it. That is more than the $87 billion bailout the British government used to bail out the UK banking system today.

All told there are an estimated $1 trillion of development projects throughout the region. Sovereign funds in the Middle East have a reported $1.5 trillion under management. That is a lot of liquidity.

While some of that money was used this week to inject capital into local markets and banks, it could also serve as a great source of funds for Wall Street and for European markets.

But there is a problem in the Middle East that is similar to the challenge throughout the West - a lack of confidence.

The sovereign funds came on strong at the end of last year with some high-profile investments into the major money center banks.

After falls of 50 percent or more, they too are in no rush to jump back into this market.

HONG KONG, China – "A non-perfect plan is better than no plan at all." So said International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Khan in a recent interview. He was talking about the amended and reworked bailout plan going before the U.S. Senate.

But even if the plan is perfection itself, and the credit markets start trusting and loving each other again, we are not out of the woods. Not by a long shot. We then come to the next depressing piece of news: the real economy.

Take a look at this number. It was lost in the hullaballoo of the Dow's rise and bailout hopes yesterday. U.S. house prices in July were 16.3 percent lower than they were in July of last year. And house prices are also falling faster. The much-watched Case-Shiller home index, released by Standard and Poor's, reported the price of a home in the 20-city nationwide index fell 0.9 percent in July, compared with an 0.5 percent fall in June.

Overall prices are are now about 20 percent down from their peak in July 2006. And the really bad news is that many economists now say the fall may not stop until mid-2010.

That could be as much as another 20 months of falling home values, assuming the financial crisis is solved sooner rather than later. And that's the problem. The millions of U.S. homeowners were the backbone of the consumer spending boom that led U.S. economic growth. They're now AWOL. They aren't spending because not only is the value of their biggest asset disappearing before their eyes, they are also worrying increasingly about their jobs and their mortgage rate. Who's going to buy a new car with that in the back of their mind?

And there's no one else to pick up the spending mantle. We've seen the government attempt to kick-start the economy with a tax rebate a little earlier this year. That boost lasted all of a few weeks.

So bring on the bailout. It's just the start of a long and painful road to get the world's biggest economy back on track.

HONG KONG, China - You know what? At the risk of sounding like true believer, I think the credit crisis may actually be coming to an end.

The wild fluctuations on Wall Street left many traders scratching their heads this past week.

Most people are saying it's far too early to call but look at it this way.

The credit crunch, as distinct from the U.S. economic slowdown, is happening largely because banks have been too scared to do their jobs ... lend to other each other. If they aren't doing that the flow of money circulating around the financial world is being cut off. We saw that happening this week.

The banks are afraid that the other party they are lending to may be riddled with the so-called "toxic holding," and be about to go under.

So what's the likely solution?  Take away all that toxic stuff. Actually buy it from the banks. After that, the banks can get back to basics, safe in the knowledge that they aren't doing business with an institution stuffed full of the ticking time bombs of property-backed financial instruments. No wonder stocks of investment banks around the world are having record one-day rises.

So ... who's the loser? Well, I'm glad I'm not a U.S. taxpayer. The estimates of exactly how much toxic stuff there is vary from tens of billions to hundreds of billions, even trillions. All of which will be bought by the U.S. government (i.e., U.S. the taxpayer).

They've done it before. In the 1980s the U.S. government bailed out the savings and loans companies who had hopelessly - and in some cases fraudulently - mismanaged their operations. That cost the U.S. taxpayer about $120 billion. That's nothing compared with what this one could be. Did the US government have a choice? Unfortunately, we will never know. They clearly thought they did not.

And that leaves the banks getting a giant get-out-of-jail card, and the poor U.S. taxpayer cleaning up the mess. Again.

LONDON, England – If I had a pound for every time that someone has asked me to explain what "short selling" is over the past 24 hours then I'd be able to help the banks out of their "toxic" debt problem. I wrote at the start of the week when Lehman Brothers collapsed, despite frantic efforts to save it, that I'd never known a weekend like it.

Well, it's now Friday and I can firmly say that I've never known a week like it either.

Who'd have thought that in the space of just a few days we'd see two Wall Street icons effectively disappear; one of the world's biggest insurers being rescued by the US government; plummeting share prices; Britain's biggest lender forced into merging with a smaller rival; central banks riding to the rescue of a paralyzed financial system; a ban on "short selling" in Britain and the U.S.; and American authorities announcing a plan to rid banks of their debt?

I don't know about you, but this white-knuckle, thrill-a-minute week has left me completely exhausted.

But here's the thing.

Thanks to the relief inspired by news of the bailout plan - as I write at lunchtime in London - European share indices have bounced back to more or less where they were first thing on Monday morning.

Imagine this: a city trader has been away on a seven-day desert island vacation, away from phones and news media (unlikely I know – these people are permanently wired in, but bear with me on this.)

They will arrive back this coming Monday to find that colleagues are battle wearied and bruised, that associates have fallen by the wayside and that the financial landscape has completely changed.

But they'd also find that, eerily, share prices are pretty much just where they left them.

Surely they could be forgiven for thinking: "Did I miss something?"

LONDON, England – "Mumbai, Shanghai, Dubai or ... bye bye" - this is the rather dark joke that's been doing the rounds in London's financial community recently.

The gist is that unless you work in emerging markets, prepare to lose your job.

Europe's biggest bank, HSBC, illustrated the trend this week when it revealed huge losses in America, but big profits in Asia.

There just isn't the money to be made in Western markets that there once was, so the banks are cutting back dramaticially on their headcount.

Bankers rarely get sympathy when there are job cuts because they are generally paid very well for what many see as straightforward gambling. But this time round they are getting even less sympathy.

In fact, they are being blamed for being the architects of their own downfall and for dragging the rest of us down with them. Critics say the industry should be taught a lesson.

What that lesson should be will be considered today by a group of European finance ministers called Eurogroup.

According to El Pais, the meeting will consider whether the Anglo-Saxon market model is a danger to global financial stability and whether firms chased immediate profits at the cost of massive sackings.

Has the short-term pay structure of modern capitalism become deformed, causing firms to take on excessive risk without regard to stakeholders or society?

In other words, should bankers be punished for causing the credit crisis by having their performance bonuses slashed - by law?

Britain's Daily Telegraph has its view: "Bankers' pay may be excessive and geared too much toward risk-taking but it is not the job of government to regulate it, it is the job of shareholders who have lost billions in the credit crisis to insist on new rules if they want them."

What do you think? Post a response here on this blog.