What keeps Atlanta from reaching LA, Chicago, or NYC levels?

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by mhays

No it doesn't. It's (a) only about business, (b) even then it's only white collar, and (c) even then it omits local companies in those fields, in-house capabilities, etc.

It's as much as someone chose to bite off. Basically a data point when used correctly which it rarely is.

We're talking about world class cities, who cares about anything local? It's not perfect obviously but I tend to agree with the rankings, especially the closer you get to the top/Alpha Cities. It's all subjective anyways, so if you go find some other rankings, how would they be any better?

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by The North One

I might be a little meticulous here but this isn't exactly a fair comparison since Randstad is a megalopolis with multiple large and distinct cities. Metro Amsterdam itself has a population of 2.4 million, while metro Detroit CSA is around 4 million. So no, Amsterdam itself is not larger.

Detroit MSA (which has an area much more comparable to Randstad) is at about 5 million, Randstad is about 7 million. So yes Randstad is definitely larger and more important.

This is the whole "breaking up of the SF Bay Area thing" you realize that? Randstad is not a "megalopolis" it's a metro area just like the Bay Area. Is San Francisco smaller than Detroit?

Amsterdam is a city of 870,000 people (on 60 sqm). Detroit has 200,000 less (on 140 sqm). If you extent Amsterdam to the size of Detroit it would have 1.4M and that's only because it has a Greenbelt and its outer suburbs and satellite cities are beyond that. This is as fair a comparison as any and shows Amsterdam to be at least twice as big. Or otherwise go stand in the center of both and tell me which is the international bustling metropolis.




You can argue that Detroit's urban fabric goes beyond its city limits, but so does the urban fabric surrounding Amsterdam. And in case of Amsterdam/Randstad, it puts a lot more people in a lot less space and everything is well connected.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

This is a hard case to argue against because you set it up that way. Ok so Indonesians use Dutch loan words...what does that have to do with modern Amsterdam? And you are being disappointingly unbecoming by simply defining Chicago culture by silly cliches like deep dish pizza.

I know house and deep-dish pizza were painfully obvious and not really fair, but other than those two plus "skyscrapers" I couldn't come up with a Chicago cultural export equivalent to NYC's hip hop / b-boy culture, or LA's Hollywood model. Look, I am a huge Boston homer, and I readily admit that Boston doesn't have a single globally-influential cultural export either. Plainly said, most places don't.

A huge part of my job is to constantly measure brand equity, and a big part of brand equity is unaided brand association: which attributes and characteristics, whether negative or positive, are associated by consumers with a brand. We have a host of Chamber of Commerce / Economic Development Board / Board of Tourism global clients, and I have to find ways of working with Western (mainly American) cities and states who want exposure in Asia-Pacific. I am constantly - constantly - taken aback by how Americans overestimate specific American cultural footprints outside of the US / Canada.

To a general audience in Japan or Korea or Singapore or Vietnam, the entire FM1-FM3 universe knows of and can articulate an opinion on New York City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. That's it. Places like Chicago and Dallas and Atlanta index higher with specific, niche audiences like business travelers. Las Vegas and "Hawaii" (which almost always means Honolulu) index higher with M2-F1 leisure travelers. But generally speaking, American cities are not well known, and even if their cultural exports are known, in many cases there is no consistent association drawn between the cultural export and the city or region it originated from.

Originally Posted by the urban politician

It's hard to distinguish what cultural exports came from Chicago versus other places because America is such a melting pot. But there are business cultural exports, architectural and building standards throughout the world, as well as global culture celebrated locally that may not necessarily be exported to any substantial degree. It's hard to quantify, but I continue to wonder how you can even begin to quantify a place's culture versus another unless you are intimately knowledgeable about it.

I am not trying to quantify (or qualify) culture at all. I don't have to here. I speaking about awareness of culture, at whatever volumes and qualities it's presented at.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

We're talking about world class cities, who cares about anything local? It's not perfect obviously but I tend to agree with the rankings, especially the closer you get to the top/Alpha Cities. It's all subjective anyways, so if you go find some other rankings, how would they be any better?

It's subjective? Well then. We agree, it's subjective.

Nobody has published a third-party list here that even attempts to cover "importance" in a broader sense. It's possible. Even the best list would only be true within a given definition, which would have to be made clear to readers but generally wouldn't be once it hit the mass market.

As for what's world class (though I thought the topic was importance), did you really think through your question? I'd say "world class" most commonly means the best of something, or the upper echelons of something. Are multinationals the only firms who qualify as among the best?

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by Shawn

You think a barely 200 year old city with a limited cultural footprint in its own country has more global cultural relevance than the 700 year old capital of once-global colonial empire?

No one in Indonesia cares (or even knows) that house is from Chicago or what deep dish pizza is. But 220 million+ Indonesians use a ton of Dutch loan words throughout their daily conversations. And we have the Dutch to thank for Sinterklaas. Santa is from Amsterdam, not the North Pole.

I'm seriously curious as to which Chicago cultural exports you feel are global outside of house, which semi-ironically has been driven by European DJs - particularly Dutch ones - since the mid 90s.

It's not that I'm discounting Chicago's cultural offerings even (or any American city's really). I'm sure it's in the global top despite it not getting credit for it often. I'm thinking about contributions in architecture, sports, movies, art, popular culture and indeed music (not just house). Chicago also has things like a major symphony orchestra and world class museums, theaters, galleries and such.

Also one of the world's top art museums. Thing is..., Amsterdam has three. Two of which with higher attendence than the Art Institute of Chicago. And the Hermitage Amsterdam... And the Anne Frank House... And all those other world class cultural offerings as well.

Indeed Shawn, it's hard to beat 700 years of history packed in a compact city. And Amsterdam is not the only city that has this to offer either. "The Old World" is riddled with them.

[ThePhun1]

My biggest criticism is the lack resonance for history. Istanbul, Rome and especially Jerusalem should be much higher. Some random Brazilian or Chinese city is not more of a world city than Jerusalem.

Other than that, I'm fine with it.

[mhays]

Jerusalem is the religious center of the world for what, a few billion people? Yes it has cultural relevance.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Shawn

I know house and deep-dish pizza were painfully obvious and not really fair, but other than those two plus "skyscrapers" I couldn't come up with a Chicago cultural export equivalent to NYC's hip hop / b-boy culture, or LA's Hollywood model. Look, I am a huge Boston homer, and I readily admit that Boston doesn't have a single globally-influential cultural export either. Plainly said, most places don't.

A huge part of my job is to constantly measure brand equity, and a big part of brand equity is unaided brand association: which attributes and characteristics, whether negative or positive, are associated by consumers with a brand. We have a host of Chamber of Commerce / Economic Development Board / Board of Tourism global clients, and I have to find ways of working with Western (mainly American) cities and states who want exposure in Asia-Pacific. I am constantly - constantly - taken aback by how Americans overestimate specific American cultural footprints outside of the US / Canada.

To a general audience in Japan or Korea or Singapore or Vietnam, the entire FM1-FM3 universe knows of and can articulate an opinion on New York City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. That's it. Places like Chicago and Dallas and Atlanta index higher with specific, niche audiences like business travelers. Las Vegas and "Hawaii" (which almost always means Honolulu) index higher with M2-F1 leisure travelers. But generally speaking, American cities are not well known, and even if their cultural exports are known, in many cases there is no consistent association drawn between the cultural export and the city or region it originated from.



I am not trying to quantify (or qualify) culture at all. I don't have to here. I speaking about awareness of culture, at whatever volumes and qualities it's presented at.

This is all fine, but I'm saying something similar to what Shiro is saying (even though he comes to the conclusion that Chicago falls short of Amsterdam) You are specifically discussing cultural exports, whereas I'm talking about culture.

Exporting new cultural ideas is something only major media centers can do, but that doesn't necessarily mean that such culture originates locally.

Many cities have amazing cultural attributes, and have done a marvelous job of interpreting and celebrating global culture. Chicago happens to be an example of that, regardless of whether it is blasting deep dish pizza around the world.

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by mhays

It's subjective? Well then. We agree, it's subjective.

Nobody has published a third-party list here that even attempts to cover "importance" in a broader sense. It's possible. Even the best list would only be true within a given definition, which would have to be made clear to readers but generally wouldn't be once it hit the mass market.

As for what's world class (though I thought the topic was importance), did you really think through your question? I'd say "world class" most commonly means the best of something, or the upper echelons of something. Are multinationals the only firms who qualify as among the best?

World class is subjective as well.

See my post just above.

EDIT: I see you responded to it above, never mind.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by SHiRO

Randstad is not a "megalopolis" it's a metro area

It's a megalopolis unless you're going to argue I just take your word for it:

The Randstad is a megalopolis in the central-western Netherlands consisting primarily of the four largest Dutch cities and their surrounding areas. Among other things, it contains the Port of Rotterdam, and Amsterdam Airport Schiphol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randstad

This is the whole "breaking up of the SF Bay Area thing" Is San Francisco smaller than Detroit?

Umm no, now you're putting words into my mouth.

Amsterdam is a city of 870,000 people (on 60 sqm). Detroit has 200,000 less (on 140 sqm). If you extent Amsterdam to the size of Detroit it would have 1.4M and that's only because it has a Greenbelt and its outer suburbs and satellite cities are beyond that. This is as fair a comparison as any and shows Amsterdam to be at least twice as big. Or otherwise go stand in the center of both and tell me which is the international bustling metropolis.

I compared their respective metros and I'll stand by that. Since that is undoubtedly how cities function in the modern world with tangible boundaries. Rotterdam is it's own city, to tack it on and call it Amsterdam is dishonest.

If I stood in Campus Martius right now It would be packed like sardines with people, so you tell me really.

You can argue that Detroit's urban fabric goes beyond its city limits,

You wouldn't argue that, that would be a fact.

but so does the urban fabric surrounding Amsterdam.

Okay, that's what a metro is.

And in case of Amsterdam/Randstad, it puts a lot more people in a lot less space and everything is well connected.

Well duh, you're comparing Europe to the United States, lol.

[DMPHL]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

My biggest criticism is the lack resonance for history. Istanbul, Rome and especially Jerusalem should be much higher. Some random Brazilian or Chinese city is not more of a world city than Jerusalem.

Other than that, I'm fine with it.

I think the real point in this is that, yes, Guangzhou or Hong Kong or Sao Paulo are each more of a world city than Jerusalem, Rome, or Istanbul, when you look at certain criteria and place value on those criteria. In this case, that's international economic and financial connectedness. And that's a perfectly legitimate set of criteria to value.

But it's also true that that is absolutely not the only way to measure a city's importance or global stature. Historically, for certain people, Jerusalem or Rome have much higher importance culturally with respect to other criteria, and it's totally legitimate to value that framework.

There are many ways to assign value to a city's importance, and in each of those sets of standards, different cities, and different types of cities will come out on top.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

World class is subjective as well.

See my post just above.

Obviously yes. But it sounded like you were discrediting the validity of someone else's subjective opinion.

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by mhays

Obviously yes. But it sounded like you were discrediting the validity of someone else's subjective opinion.

That was not my intention if so.

[10023]

Originally Posted by Shawn

I know house and deep-dish pizza were painfully obvious and not really fair, but other than those two plus "skyscrapers" I couldn't come up with a Chicago cultural export equivalent to NYC's hip hop / b-boy culture, or LA's Hollywood model. Look, I am a huge Boston homer, and I readily admit that Boston doesn't have a single globally-influential cultural export either. Plainly said, most places don't.

Blues? Mobsters? There’s still a tourist economy around the latter and shows/films like ‘Chicago’, etc.

Michael Jordan was the most globally famous athlete of all time, and closely associated with Chicago (although that is becoming dated).

And though it’s not really fair/accurate, BBQ - I’ve seen lots of places in Europe, even the UK, called “Chicago Rib Shack” or something along those lines. BBQ ribs may be more of a KC or St Louis thing, but people over here don’t know those cities, at all. Sorry.

But point taken.

Also what is “b-boy culture”?

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by SHiRO

Which is it?

What I'm saying is it hits well for its weight and certainly has an international presence but also pales in comparison to much bigger places. It's historic value also helps as opposed to some out of nowhere metropolis of the last 100 years, and there are many of those worldwide. But it's still no New York or even a Beijing or Rome.

[10023]

Originally Posted by The North One

If I stood in Campus Martius right now It would be packed like sardines with people, so you tell me really

I’d be very curious to see evidence of Campus Martius “packed like sardines with people”, at least outside of some special event like celebrating the Red Wings winning the Stanley Cup.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by 10023

I’d be very curious to see evidence of Campus Martius “packed like sardines with people”, at least outside of some special event like celebrating the Red Wings winning the Stanley Cup.

"Packed like Sardines" is quite the exaggeration. Maybe by Michigan standards, it is.

Yes, progress is slowly being made with Detroit becoming a normal city. However, compared to other major cities in America (or even cities like Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Nashville, etc.), downtown Detroit is still fairly empty on a typical day and has a long way to go before it's "packed like sardines."

[dc_denizen]

Chicago has globally significant architecture (birthplace of the skyscraper and home of masterpieces like the carbon and carbide building), music (blues and the mighty Chicago orchestra), art museums, great food and drink, great neighborhoods, world-class universities.

Can’t believe we are reducing Chicago’s cultural offerings to deep dish pizza.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Chicago has globally significant architecture (birthplace of the skyscraper...)

That's debatable. Yes, Chicago technically had the first "high rise", but it was NYC that perfected the idea of a skyscraper.

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

music (blues and the mighty Chicago orchestra)

All of the legacy major cities from the early-mid 20th century have mighty orchestras. It's not unique to Chicago.

As far as blues, I tend to disagree. Any music buff knows that Chicago Blues (or Detroit Blues),is derived from Delta Blues. If any major city really has the right to claim they're the birthplace of Blues, it's Memphis.

art museums, great food and drink, great neighborhoods, world-class universities.

Again, none of these things are unique to Chicago.

Now don't get me wrong. Chicago is one of my favorite US cities (partially because in many ways, it reminds me of Detroit. If Detroit and NYC had a child, it would be named Chicago). And yes, it is socially and culturally significant. But I also think too much offense is being taken from those who are criticizing the city and you're overstating the great things about the city.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Can’t believe we are reducing Chicago’s cultural offerings to deep dish pizza.

Yeah this discussion has gotten weird.

We could dismiss Amsterdam's cultural offerings to weed cafes and sex shops or Houston as NASA and oil. Or San Francisco to sour dough and blue jeans.