Hot on the heels of Kim Kardashian's Parisian apartment heist and last year's raid on Jensen Button's St. Tropez holiday home, the mega-rich may be forgiven for considering France a somewhat hostile destination; even if the rest of us still flock to the Paris and resorts all over the country following terror attacks in the capital and Nice.
As any mediaeval peasant living under the iron grip of their feudal lord would attest, public displays of wealth are nothing new. Although many publicity-shy billionaires keep their chattels firmly under wraps, the rise of the super-celebrity coupled with social media tropes such as 'Rich Kids of Instagram' have created a shop window attracting a very sinister breed of viewer, one quite apart from the usual harmless, breathless enviers of shiny baubles and supercars.
Violent criminal gangs have carried out several attacks on the road between Le Bourget airport, just north of Paris. In addition to the sisters mentioned earlier, in summer 2014 the convoy of a Saudi prince was robbed of €250,000 and, in April last year, an east Asian art collector lost jewels worth €4m.
How these attacks were planned isn't clear, although Le Bourget is well-known as a business airport serving a large percentage of high net worth individuals among its clientele. By contrast, Kardashian's experience was touted as the result of having 'advertised' her jewels in a series of images posted to her social media accounts.
The roar of disapproval was instant; headlines in both The Telegraph and The Independent were quick to publish comments made by the Parisian police department suggesting Kardashian had been targeted after posting photographs on twitter and Instagram of a 20 carat diamond ring and her diamond-encrusted mouth grille days four before the attack.
If Kardashian 'flaunts' her wealth as avidly as it would seem the Qatari sisters conceal theirs, are their respective robberies a sign that having great wealth, privilege or fame, and the physical evidence of such, brings with it the consideration of managing who gets to see it, then determining the level of threat they may pose?
Widespread reports of individuals targeted specifically for high-value personal items began circulating almost twenty years ago following a spate of street robberies in west London. Among the most well-known victims was Slavica - then-wife of Formula One boss Bernie Ecclestone - robbed of a ring worth up to £700,000 outside her Chelsea home in 1997.
It may be no co-incidence that 1997 was the year social media was born, with the launch of contact network-based Six Degrees.
Since then, we've been busy putting our lives online; there are currently estimated to be around two billion active social media accounts. A window into the lives of others is as easy as any other online task - from paying our bills to seeing what our ex is up to in one simple step.
Those with the most money to burn - typically tendering in pounds, dollars, roubles, RMB's or riyals - likely started off their social media existence in the same way the rest of us did; connecting with close friends, family and near acquaintances. Social media platforms diversified, in line with online content expanding exponentially. There began a trend towards images over written content, as evidenced by the popularity of platforms such as twitter and its mean 140 characters per tweet rule and Instagram where no-one had to know anyone in the real world but could simply 'follow' them. 'This is useless without pictures' became an often-used phrase. Everyone was able to see everyone else's stuff at random - or, more importantly, at will.
When you own or experience things of significant (and subjective) monetary worth, the temptation to show 'n' tell can be difficult to resist. It's writ, tellingly large, even at the most basic level. How many photos of glasses of champagne, palm tree-fringed beaches, crystalline swimming pools under a far-flung sun or hands bearing recently-presented engagement rings have caused you an internal groan while idly scrolling though your Facebook feed?
At the super-rich end of things, however, the need to 'show' explodes into a Croesus-like obsession with the amassing of valuables. They appear no more than fleeting whims; boiled sweets in a fistful of gems, a Lamborghini for every day of the week when your chauffeur always drives, and a home on every continent when you never leave Beverly Hills.
Thus, you show... and show.... and show, until one or two shady characters among your (in Kardashian's case, 49 million) twitter followers start wondering how easy it would be to relieve you of the undoubted weight of that 20 carat diamond. They know they could never sell it, but they could definitely use it as collateral on a large-scale deal. Or maybe they did it because you showed too much? The latter explanation doesn't seem plausible, as violent criminal gangs rarely execute such robberies in the name of envy alone.
Whether by accident or design, the very wealthy advertise that wealth every day: by rote of a Mayfair address, a £200,000 supercar on the drive, by carrying a £15,000 Hèrmes Birkin handbag, by a non-executive directorship of a FTSE100 company and by regular appearances in the society pages of any number of glossy publications. They're all showing, so you can bet your last custard cream someone's watching.
If you're in a chauffeured Bentley on the road to an airport well-known as a hub for the monied elite, the chances are there's also collection of Louis Vuitton luggage (a small suitcase starts at around £1,600) in the boot. You're showing, even if you think you're not.
If you're out and about in west London wearing the national debt of a small African kingdom on your finger, you're definitely showing.
And, when 49 million people can see your diamond-encrusted mouth grille and 20 carat diamond ring, you're showing in the most obvious way possible.
Of course, scorn should be reserved entirely for the perpetrators of robberies and violent crimes involving the theft of valuables from anyone, regardless of their status. An interesting development is the shift towards sentiments of blame upon the victim, even within the wealthy elites' own circle. Karl Lagerfeld (a man otherwise wholly protected from reality in his own unearthly bubble) when questioned on Kardashian's robbery replied; "... Kim cannot display wealth then be surprised when she is robbed". Other murmurings among the rich and famous have been similarly bent.
The determination to amass wealth, to keep it for yourself and do no good with it stings the watching majority. The hazards of wealth are not restricted only to the worst-case scenario of violent criminals running your car off the road on the way to the airport, or tying you up to fear for your life in a luxurious Parisian apartment.
The far more common and increasingly loudly-voiced hazard of wealth is that, as greater numbers of people all over the world become poorer, the gap between those with and those without is thrown into ever-sharper relief.
When even Karl Lagerfeld can see that it's probably time to consider exactly why you need yet another, well, anything and more so, why you need to show the rest of the world that you have it.