There was an interesting moment at a dinner the other night that has stayed with me.
We were talking about the differences between Johannesburg and Cape Town, specifically around safety.
I was thinking about something I regularly see in Constantia—people jogging after dark without appearing particularly concerned. That’s a useful proxy for perceived public safety.
The person sitting opposite me paused and replied with something I hadn’t considered.
“Waterfall Estate is about three times larger than the Cape Town CBD. It’s probably safer than almost anywhere in Cape Town, and pound for pound, it’s cheaper too.”
The comment was like a light bulb going off in my head.
Perhaps we’ve been comparing the wrong things when it comes to Johannesburg and Cape Town, at least from a substance level.
Johannesburg has quietly developed an ecosystem of what can only be described as privately governed cities within the broader metro area.
Waterfall. Midstream. Steyn City. Dainfern Estate. Eye of Africa. Serengeti.
These aren’t simply gated communities. They have private security, private roads, landscaping, utilities, maintenance standards, and increasingly their own retail, schools and medical facilities. They operate with a level of consistency that many municipalities struggle to achieve.
Within their boundaries, they offer something many South Africans increasingly value above all else: predictability.
When people compare Johannesburg with Cape Town, they often compare the worst of Johannesburg’s public infrastructure with the best of Cape Town’s public infrastructure.
But what happens if the more appropriate comparison is between Cape Town’s municipal environment and Johannesburg’s privately managed environments?
Gone private
The picture becomes much less straightforward, at least from the perspective of the sheer numbers of people who’ve checked out of the government and gone private, something Frans Cronje has pointed out religiously.
We also should look at the value differences.
Property prices illustrate this surprisingly well.
Spend between R4 million and R10 million in estates like Waterfall or Midstream and you’ll generally buy a home that is substantially larger, newer and more luxurious than what the same budget purchases in Cape Town’s Southern Suburbs, the Southern Peninsula, City Bowl or Atlantic Seaboard.
Heck, even in large parts of Blouberg and the Northern Suburbs.
You typically get more land.
A larger house.
Better amenities.
And often lower levies and overall ownership costs relative to the value of the property.
The Cape Town premium is real.
The question is whether all that premium reflects objective quality—or whether some of it reflects something less tangible.
Does Cape Town benefit from “pretty privilege”?
It’s an unusual question, but I think it’s worth asking.
Cape Town is undeniably one of the world’s most naturally beautiful cities.
The mountain.
The ocean.
The vineyards.
The dramatic scenery.
Beauty influences perception in countless ways, often without us noticing.
“Halo effect”
Psychologists have long observed what they call the “halo effect”: when one positive characteristic causes people to assume other positive characteristics exist as well.
Could something similar be happening with cities?
Does Cape Town’s extraordinary natural beauty lead people to assume it performs better across every dimension?
Because once you move beyond the postcard images, the picture becomes more complicated.
Cape Town has some exceptionally well-managed suburbs.
It also has some of South Africa’s most dangerous communities.
The city simultaneously contains world-class neighbourhoods and areas facing profound social and economic challenges.
Both realities exist at the same time.
Yet public narratives often reduce the comparison to a simple conclusion: Cape Town works, Johannesburg doesn’t.
Reality is rarely that binary.
Perhaps the more interesting comparison isn’t really between Johannesburg and Cape Town at all.
Different models
Perhaps it’s between different models of governance.
Cape Town’s strongest selling point has always been the competence of its municipal government. Roads, public spaces, refuse collection and infrastructure generally function better than in many other metropolitan municipalities.
Johannesburg, by contrast, has increasingly seen affluent residents opt out of municipal dependence wherever possible.
Private estates provide the roads.
The parks.
The security.
The maintenance.
In effect, residents pay twice—once through taxes and again through levies—but receive a level of service that many believe justifies the cost.
It’s a different model altogether.
Whether it’s desirable from a broader societal perspective is another debate entirely.
But from the perspective of someone choosing where to live, it changes the calculation.
So, what if Johannesburg improves if Zille wins outright?
This is where the conversation becomes even more interesting.
Suppose Johannesburg’s municipal governance improves over the next decade.
Suppose areas outside these estates begin receiving more reliable infrastructure, cleaner public spaces and better service delivery.
If that happens while the city’s property prices remain significantly below Cape Town’s, the value proposition shifts dramatically.
Competing favourably
You would have estates already competing favourably with Cape Town on lifestyle, while the surrounding city steadily improves.
The upside becomes considerable.
This is one reason political outcomes matter.
If reform-minded leadership can gradually restore confidence in municipal governance, Johannesburg’s combination of relatively affordable property, higher average incomes in many sectors, established business networks and premium residential estates could become increasingly attractive.
But maybe the comparison itself is flawed.
The dinner conversation left me thinking that perhaps we spend too much time asking which city is “better.”
Cape Town and Johannesburg solve different problems.
Cape Town offers extraordinary natural beauty combined with comparatively stronger public governance.
Johannesburg offers economic opportunity, larger homes, and increasingly sophisticated privately governed communities that deliver an exceptional quality of life for many residents.
Both cities have serious weaknesses.
Both have significant strengths.
The more interesting question isn’t which one wins.
It’s whether we’ve been measuring them using the wrong yardstick all along.
Perhaps Johannesburg shouldn’t be judged solely by the condition of its public spaces, just as Cape Town shouldn’t be judged solely by the harrowing levels of violence and decay on the Cape Flats.
Honest comparison
Perhaps the more honest comparison recognises that South Africa is increasingly becoming a country where private governance and public governance coexist—and where the quality of life that people experience depends as much on which system they interact with as on which city they happen to live in.
As an aside, take this with whatever salt you will: If Zille wins outright, I am convinced JHB will eventually become three to four times richer than Cape Town.
The views of the writer are not necessarily the views of the Daily Friend or the IRR.
If you like what you have just read, support the Daily Friend