The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! II - Page 72

Travis007 · #**1421** Posted **Jun 26, 2012, 5:03 PM**

caltrane74 · #**1422** Posted **Jun 26, 2012, 5:07 PM**

That is the Shit! Yo!

I love Yorkville, it's so glitzy!! - And if you think it's glitzy now, wait until Holt Renfrew, One Bloor and 50 Cumberland.....

Just gonna have a killer, killer skyline. Better than downtown Toronto.

Hey Travis, you working for Mizrahi? He is my former client you know....booked him into Lifestyle Magazine a few times back in 2011 selling 133 Hazelton.
http://www.133hazelton.com/

Ramako · #**1423** Posted **Jun 26, 2012, 5:20 PM**

Wow, I didn't immediately recognize what city that is.

DZH22 · #**1424** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 2:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Panama - 15 towers over 200 meters (built/u-c/proposed)
Toronto - 33 towers over 200 meters (built/u-c/proposed)

Panama's tallest - 284 meters (proposed Trump Tower)
Toronto's tallest - 298 meters (built FCP)

Panama - 270 highrises built/u/c/proposed
Toronto - 2200 Highrises built/u/c/proposed

Including CN Tower Toronto has 5 towers over 260 meters on the skyline, Panama cant touch Toronto.

This is exactly the kind of thing I brought up in the Ice thread and got screamed at for. It's not exactly like you are being straight-up dishonest, but it's a sales tactic saying 33-15. The truth is, only 12 of those 200 meter towers are built or at least T/O (including CN) and there are 5 more are U/C that have not yet topped the 200 meter mark (closest is L Tower). It is not fair to bring up proposals and unbuilt towers when comparing cities NOW.

Here are the stats that have Panama City *currently* ahead of Toronto http://homepages.ipact.nl/~egram/skylines.html

Also if you go here it looks like Panama City has a lot more than 15 200 meter towers http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=55336161

I personally think Toronto's skyline is WAY BETTER than Panama City, and most of their buildings are really shoddy and ugly, and in the future Toronto will probably assert itself mathematically as NA's 3rd best skyline (and not just visually). However, right now it isn't, and it's not a fair fight when you say 33 while you currently have 12, with no mention that this is your actual current amount.

Cue J.Will flipping out and calling me a liar in 3...2...1....

caltrane74 · #**1425** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 2:09 PM**

Before the end of the Year, ICE 1, ICE 2, L Tower, and Aura should be over 200 meters.

Toronto's over 200 meter tower list is longer and more impressive.

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=12

J.Will doesn't post in the Canada thread, you're safe for now.

DZH22 · #**1426** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 2:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Before the end of the Year, ICE 1, ICE 2, L Tower, and Aura should be over 200 meters.

Toronto's over 200 meter tower list is longer and more impressive.

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=12

Then feel free to make your assertion in 6 months when they are actually that tall. The thing is, right now they're not.

Also, a proposal is just that, a proposal. You guys have been on quite the tear, but there is a saying "don't count your chickens before they hatch", even if recent history says almost all of Toronto's have been hatching. I find Toronto's boom as exciting as any outsider (especially with all the changes since my visit 10 years ago, and with it within driving distance of Boston) but don't you ever worry that there is going to be a market correction at some point? Is your current pace really sustainable in the long run?

Also, that diagram you linked to me is full of proposals, while the one I linked only includes U/C and built. If you included proposals, Panama City has a pair of supertalls in there. Will they be built? Who knows. This is why I don't include proposals (I get EXCITED about them, but don't cite them as if they are already there).

EDIT: I also noticed that you have it so the diagram only includes buildings with drawings, where-as many of Panama City's buildings don't have drawings in the diagram function. One more way you have skewed the numbers in a very disingenuous way. Are you by any chance a used-car salesman?

DZH22 · #**1427** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 2:29 PM**

Also this is exactly what I was talking about with the Chicago/Toronto thing. Like, yeah, maybe they will be close(r) in 4-5 years, and get back to me then when many of these towers are built. But don't quote these proposal numbers to show how close they are NOW, because that's what I have seen, and what I erroneously commented on in the wrong thread.

WhipperSnapper · #**1428** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 3:28 PM**

You're wasting your breath on the proposal argument.

I don't have a problem predicting towers under construction that have risen out of the ground as they have a 99% chance of being completed regardless of any major market correction.

kw5150 · #**1429** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 4:03 PM**

I like to 200+m listing. It is informative. You can CLEARLY see which ones are proposed, under construction and already built.

No problems with this at all.

Thanks for posting.

Ramako · #**1430** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 4:25 PM**

After working tirelessly for 15 seconds, I managed to construct these very informative diagrams:

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=55337392

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=55337414

caltrane74 · #**1431** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 4:37 PM**

Pretty obvious to me what's going on here.

DZH22 · #**1432** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 4:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramako

After working tirelessly for 15 seconds, I managed to construct these very informative diagrams:

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=55337392

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=55337414

When you split it down to Built/UC, Toronto wins the first page 14-11 and loses the second page 11-14 (so tied after 50). Although, many of Panama City's UC are also much further along than Toronto's at the present.

When you go by just proposals, Toronto rocks Panama's face off, although to be fair Panama is very poorly represented here compared to Toronto (illustrated by the fact that even some of their BUILT 200 meter towers don't have pictures).

Basically, right now they very comparable, while in the future Toronto is expected to blow Panama out of the water. The key point to that is IN THE FUTURE, and numbers like "33-15" which by the way, undercount Panama's towers to begin with by not including towers w/out a drawing, should not be used to compare the 2 cities TODAY.

That's all for me folks

Chadillaccc · #**1433** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 6:01 PM**

Crappy quality of pics but still, for being taken a good 10 km from downtown, not too bad.

Source=Me

isaidso · #**1434** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 7:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DZH22

Then feel free to make your assertion in 6 months when they are actually that tall. The thing is, right now they're not.

I agree 100%. It's nice to be proud of your city, but exaggerations, bragging, and put downs of rivals are really off putting. Portraying Toronto as a city with 33 200m+ buildings is a misrepresentation of the facts and designed to deceive.

Caltrane, I know you're in advertising and that's what you do for a living but most people don't like to be manipulated and treated like idiots. Stick to honest representations please. I appreciate all the work you do here on SSP, but you're only painting yourself in a poor light by posting stuff like that.

Trickery/marketing/deceit is best left in the boardroom.

caltrane74 · #**1435** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 7:30 PM**

Unless you think people on this board are retarded or can't read, there is nothing in my post here which is a lie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74
Panama - 15 towers over 200 meters (built/u-c/proposed)
Toronto - 33 towers over 200 meters (built/u-c/proposed)

Panama's tallest - 284 meters (proposed Trump Tower)
Toronto's tallest - 298 meters (built FCP)

Panama - 270 highrises built/u/c/proposed
Toronto - 2200 Highrises built/u/c/proposed

Including CN Tower Toronto has 5 towers over 260 meters on the skyline, Panama cant touch Toronto.

Chadillaccc · #**1436** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 7:37 PM**

except for your signature at the bottom.

caltrane74 · #**1437** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 7:43 PM**

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/11/us-condos-bubble-idUSBRE85A05120120611

Quote:

With 325 condominium projects on the market and another 173 towers under construction, Toronto's skyline is spiking with condo units and cranes, with more new buildings underway than in any other city in North America.

From REUTERS....

Chadillaccc · #**1438** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 7:44 PM**

Doesn't say anywhere that it is a Canadian or a world record there.

Rico Rommheim · #**1439** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 8:03 PM**

I think it is clearly implied in the article that this is a North American world record.

WhipperSnapper · #**1440** Posted **Jun 27, 2012, 8:06 PM**

At least we now know his absolutely ridiculous source; a freak'n journalist over a skyscraper devoted fan site.