CHICAGO | Economic & Business Development

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

I honestly do not know how much marketing is really going to help. Any of you make choices on where to go abroad based on a pic or article in a magazine or online? I do not. I am going to known places with tons of history, or tropical beaches or because word of mouth. Lets face it, Chicago has a limited amount of things to offer. Nobody is coming here for beaches, outdoorsy stuff, gambling, and to some extent even history. We have the Art Institute, Opera/shows, and great architecture which are world class but the people who care about that are a limited and or dying breed. You think anyone is coming here from abroad for Navy Pier ? Give me a break. We need to host festivals (even those usually only draw from the states though) and fight for the best conventions, get people here for that and then word will spread slowly. Rahm really messed up by not agreeing to terms to host the World Cup here, THAT would have really drawn people. I just do not see it happening for people coming from abroad. Those are major trips for anyone and Chicago just does not justify the added time and expense for what a lot of people want. And TUP, Chicago will NEVER be close to Paris, London, Rome. NO WAY. It is just impossible for us , we simply do not have the draws that they do and frankly can't catch them. They were the center and capital cities of global empires and all the history and trimmings that come with it. We....had the railroads and stockyards. Look, i love Chicago as much as anyone , but get real.

I never said London, and yes Paris is probably a stretch. But Berlin and some other well known European cities are plausible. I think it's unfortunate how Debbie-Downer you guys all are on your home city that has so much to offer.

But I guess that's why our international tourism numbers are so paltry. The attitude has to start at home....

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21

I honestly do not know how much marketing is really going to help. Any of you make choices on where to go abroad based on a pic or article in a magazine or online? I do not. I am going to known places with tons of history, or tropical beaches or because word of mouth. Lets face it, Chicago has a limited amount of things to offer. Nobody is coming here for beaches, outdoorsy stuff, gambling, and to some extent even history. We have the Art Institute, Opera/shows, and great architecture which are world class but the people who care about that are a limited and or dying breed. You think anyone is coming here from abroad for Navy Pier ? Give me a break. We need to host festivals (even those usually only draw from the states though) and fight for the best conventions, get people here for that and then word will spread slowly. Rahm really messed up by not agreeing to terms to host the World Cup here, THAT would have really drawn people. I just do not see it happening for people coming from abroad. Those are major trips for anyone and Chicago just does not justify the added time and expense for what a lot of people want. And TUP, Chicago will NEVER be close to Paris, London, Rome. NO WAY. It is just impossible for us , we simply do not have the draws that they do and frankly can't catch them. They were the center and capital cities of global empires and all the history and trimmings that come with it. We....had the railroads and stockyards. Look, i love Chicago as much as anyone , but get real.

I hear what you're saying, but you simply don't understand what marketing is, it sounds like. The Barcelona Olympics a) made people aware of Barcelona and b) showed people what it was like. It transformed Barcelona. That's a very successful example, but it's marketing still, just with a megaphone.

But this happens all the time at scale. There are great beach destinations that no one considers because no knows about them. Tulum, for example. Then people hear about it and it becomes an option and people start going there. "Oh, yeah. I always forget about St. Petersburg, Russia. I didn't know it had all those canals. We should take a long weekend there."

The barrier to getting to Chicago is extremely low. The delta between perception and reality is about as large as it gets for any major city, so marketing dollars can be spent efficiently. It's not like you're trying to increase awareness of "m&m's" or something. "I didn't know Chicago had a beach!" "I didn't know Chicago was the #1 restaurant city in America!" "I didn't know Chicago had more music festivals than anyplace else on the planet." Once people hear that stuff, it goes from being out of mind, or somewhere-in-mind. Then it's simply a numbers game.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

See, now we might as well name them all--which is fine, they are wonderful cities:

Seattle, SF, Washington DC, Philadelphia, there we go.

There's that midwestern modesty that serves us so well... Don't stick your neck out, don't exaggerate just a little bit, don't stretch the truth just a little bit....

I think you guys are missing my point by a tad. No place became great by sitting there telling the cold, hard, sober truth all of the time--especially not Chicago. It wouldn't be the end of the world to bring some of that bravado back, at least if we're on the topic of marketing the city, which is what we were discussing.

It's okay to brag. Not the end of the world. Just saying....

The difference between that Chicago confidence of old ("make no small plans") and simply conjuring up false bravado in 2019 ("greatest city ever!") is that in the past, Chicago was doing huge things not seen anywhere else. Birth of the skyscraper, crossroads of America, and the hub of American transportation and industry. Chicago truly was one of a kind in North America and the world. It was on par with New York, albeit smaller, in that it was a true cultural and innovation hub. There was no LA, no Atlanta, no Houston, no San Francisco. even in the same realm.

Now it's just silly, and transparently so, to claim Chicago is THE BEST IN THE WORLD (or country, as it were). It's not impossible to get back to that status, but provincial thinking over the decades allowed these other cities to catch up to, and in some areas surpass, Chicago. If the “marketing” plan is to con some small town folks with false bravado vs. actually making big gains in art, architecture, urban infrastructure, etc. to back up the confidence, count me out. Chicago has the foundation and history other cities dream about, we need to actually use it.

Rahm saw that to get the city back to being top tier urban leader, investments had to be made in public transit, public art, and urban design. My hope is that Lightfoot can continue that legacy while tackling some of the neighborhood issues that have plagued Chicago's image over the past 10+ years.

Once the neighborhoods are safe enough to match our downtown's beauty, it's time to start pushing Chicago in film, television, music, art worlds to attract people who otherwise think New York and Los Angeles are the only real cities in the US.

[ChiMIchael]

I think the problem is that Chicago (and the Midwest in general) rejected culture to come off innocuous but ultimately left the city without a true identity. Of what major cultural movement/scene has Chicago been the center in the last 60 years? How do we define Chicago without referring to more identifiable US cities?

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by ChiMIchael

I think the problem is that Chicago (and the Midwest in general) rejected culture to come off innocuous but ultimately left the city without a true identity. Of what major cultural movement/scene has Chicago been the center in the last 60 years? How do we define Chicago without referring to more identifiable US cities?

Chicago has absolutely boatloads of identity. You don't need to be the center of something recently to have identity. What the heck has Athens been the center of in the last 60 years? But ignoring that, Chicago has a Sense of Place. If I blindfolded you and dropped you into a random spot in 30 different world class cities, I bet you could identify many of them seconds after removing your blindfold. Like hearing the first chord of a famous song. Chicago's got that. And that's all you need to get started, but there's lot's more.

Think about how absurd this discussion would sound if it were about beaches. "We used to be a great beach but in the last 40 years, Thailand has had a less provincial attitude and now their beaches have surpassed ours as a place to spend time." There are tons of great beaches and people don't want to go to the same one over and over. And not everyone prefers the same thing. Chicago doesn't need to be the "best city in the world" to have successful tourism promotions.

There was a Houston tourism promotion a few years ago that sucked. It was all about opera and ballet and fine dining. People don't go to Houston for ballet. They go for icehouse bars and rodeo and the ability to shoot someone without consequence if you feel threatened. Houston should sell to their strengths and not try to be something it's not. And so should Chicago. And we have boatloads of strength.

Chicago's an "American City". People visit America in droves. We've got more to show off than most of our peers and some undeserved negative perceptions. We just need to highlight that to get our share of tourism. We're punching below our weight right now and that means there's opportunity. The good news is that the early returns can be huge once the ball is rolling.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum

Think about how absurd this discussion would sound if it were about beaches. "We used to be a great beach but in the last 40 years, Thailand has had a less provincial attitude and now their beaches have surpassed ours as a place to spend time." There are tons of great beaches and people don't want to go to the same one over and over. And not everyone prefers the same thing. Chicago doesn't need to be the "best city in the world" to have successful tourism promotions.

To be fair, lots of discussions would be absurd if the subject was changed to something completely different and unrelated but the arguments remained the same.

Chicago's an "American City". People visit America in droves. We've got more to show off than most of our peers and some undeserved negative perceptions. We just need to highlight that to get our share of tourism. We're punching below our weight right now and that means there's opportunity. The good news is that the early returns can be huge once the ball is rolling.

That's pretty damn good. Chicago: American City. Frame it as the epicenter of the American entrepreneurial, innovative spirit. Someone get Choose Chicago on the phone!

[SIGSEGV]

This is kind of sad:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ed_art_museums

A lot of those museums are not as good as the Art Institute...

[Baronvonellis]

Well a great example is Rahm built the Riverwalk into an awesome destination! But how many people in Antwerp would know about it? You have to market your strengths of your city to other countries. When I would meet people in Europe the first thing that came to their mind if they knew anything about Chicago was crime and violence, and that's it's a dangerous place to visit. I have 2 friends in Munich that are literally scared to come visit me in Chicago, they think they will get shot walking around. That's not the kind of place you want to spend thousands on for a international vacation. We really have to get the crime under control, and fix our image problem, and start marketing so people have positive ideas of Chicago!

Regarding the Art Institute, well most of those museums are in their capital cities of their countries so of course they are going to be more popular. And really you think the Art Institute is better than the Vatican museum? It's literally the epicenter of western Civilization for 2000 years!! Vs. a city that's only barley existed 200 years. No comparison. The only one I'd say that maybe doesn't equal the Art Institute is Reina Sofía in Madrid. It's a nice modern art museum that has a couple Picassos, but tickets there cost less than half the Art institute and it's in the capital of Spain. The government in Spain subsidizes the ticket price. I've wanted to visit the Art Institute many more times than I do, but the $25 ticket price is really steep. Imagine how many more people would visit if it was $10.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

It's literally the epicenter of western Civilization for 2000 years!! Vs. a city that's only barley existed 200 years. No comparison.

^ Does the Vatican museum have actual art from around the world or is it just another provincial museum that has a bunch of paintings/statues of dead European nobles and nativity scene kind of stuff?

What I love about the Art Institute, the Met, the British Museum, etc is their collections from various civilizations around the world.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Does the Vatican museum have actual art from around the world or is it just another provincial museum that has a bunch of paintings/statues of dead European nobles and nativity scene kind of stuff?

What I love about the Art Institute, the Met, the British Museum, etc is their collections from various civilizations around the world.

My favorite part of the Vatican is actually the art collection LOL. There's some awesome stuff there. I don't remember where everything was from..mostly Europe but not a bunch of nativity scenes. A lot of statues of various things too.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Does the Vatican museum have actual art from around the world or is it just another provincial museum that has a bunch of paintings/statues of dead European nobles and nativity scene kind of stuff?

What I love about the Art Institute, the Met, the British Museum, etc is their collections from various civilizations around the world.

I mean it has the Sistine Chapel and a bunch of other awesome stuff. But I don't think the Rijksmuseum is better the Art Institute, for example.

[LouisVanDerWright]

The fact is Chicago is the site of the genesis of what we now understand to be the modern world and modern Life. Rome has great historical heritage, but Chicago's short past is far more relevant. This is reflected in our architecture, art, music, industry, etc.

What means more to the average Joe today? The difference between one style of classical music and another or the difference between jazz, blues, and rock and roll?

What matters more to artists today? Anicent styles of art depicting the same Bible scenes over and over again or the entire evolution of modern art from Manet and Money onwards? What matters more to today's architects and engineers? The innovations of ancient Roman construction or the innovations that occurred in Chicago leading to Modern architecture and modern engineering?

Sure ancient styles of art or culture or architecture are interesting from a historical standpoint, but the ancient method of masonry construction has been pretty much rendered obsolete. Where was it rendered obsolete? In Chicago. What hurts is that Chicago has surrendered it's status as the cultural center of the world that it enjoyed for decades of early film and radio. The relevance of Chicago isn't widely preached because of it.,

[nomarandlee]

Interesting article in the Tribune about Loop Landlords needing to raise their game to keep up with new office corridors in Fulton Market, Riverwalk, and Lincoln Yards/78.

What do you think the Loop could do to help make itself a better office market to remain as competitive as ever?

https://www.chicagotribune.com/colum....html#nws=true

Column: Loop’s luster may be lagging: Chicago’s city center faces huge office vacancies, ownership changes and new competitors

.....In a tight labor market, many companies have placed a greater premium on factors such as river views and proximity to neighborhood amenities like restaurants, entertainment and open space. Real estate has become a key element in recruiting and retaining top employees, brokers and investors say......

But it may take more than swank tenant amenities like a gym and rooftop deck to attract companies into the Loop because, as CBRE office tenant broker Kyle Kamin said, “There’s almost no center of gravity anymore.”

The properties attracting large tenants include ground-up developments along the river and in Fulton Market and big existing buildings such as the Merchandise Mart along the north bank of the river and The Old Post Office redevelopment at the south end of the established office market.........

..

[Baronvonellis]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

The fact is Chicago is the site of the genesis of what we now understand to be the modern world and modern Life. Rome has great historical heritage, but Chicago's short past is far more relevant. This is reflected in our architecture, art, music, industry, etc.

What means more to the average Joe today? The difference between one style of classical music and another or the difference between jazz, blues, and rock and roll?

What matters more to artists today? Anicent styles of art depicting the same Bible scenes over and over again or the entire evolution of modern art from Manet and Money onwards? What matters more to today's architects and engineers? The innovations of ancient Roman construction or the innovations that occurred in Chicago leading to Modern architecture and modern engineering?

Sure ancient styles of art or culture or architecture are interesting from a historical standpoint, but the ancient method of masonry construction has been pretty much rendered obsolete. Where was it rendered obsolete? In Chicago. What hurts is that Chicago has surrendered it's status as the cultural center of the world that it enjoyed for decades of early film and radio. The relevance of Chicago isn't widely preached because of it.,

Sorry Sir, but I beg to differ. Chicago only exists because of the 2000+ years of western civilization that came before it. Otherwise it would still be an Indian trading post. Chicago is the current pinnacle of all that came before it. Greco-Roman civilization built the foundations and walls of society and culture that allow Chicago to even exist. Your saying that a roof is more important than the structure and foundation of a building? How would a roof stand up if it weren't for the walls and structure?

I don't know where to even begin to explain all of western civilization that came from Greece and Rome!!

You need to get out of the quadrant of Wisconsin, Iowa, and Chicago and explore the world a bit.


The Vatican museum, has gifts from all around the world that the Popes got for 2000 years! The place is enormous! Plus, lots of great Roman works of art. The popes were the king makers of Europe from 500 to 1700 or so. They were the center of the global age of exploration and global empires. You should watch the show the Borgias with Jeremy Irons to get a sense of how powerful the Popes were.

[the urban politician]

^ I don't doubt there is some truth to that.

But I also take interest--a TON of interest--in cultures other than the Greco-Roman world. There is a mass of history out there (Persia, Ancient Near East, India, The Moghals, East Asia) that I suspect that the Vatican museum won't cover--am I wrong about this?

The AI's Asian collection is impressive, plus we have an absolute GEM in the Oriental Institute. Glad we have that here in Chicago

[Baronvonellis]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I don't doubt there is some truth to that.

But I also take interest--a TON of interest--in cultures other than the Greco-Roman world. There is a mass of history out there (Persia, Ancient Near East, India, The Moghals, East Asia) that I suspect that the Vatican museum won't cover--am I wrong about this?

The AI's Asian collection is impressive, plus we have an absolute GEM in the Oriental Institute. Glad we have that here in Chicago

Yea, the Vatican museum is for the gifts that the Popes have received. It's not meant to be a survey of world art. There's not much Asian or African art.

The most popular Museum in Berlin and Germany is very similar to the Oriental Institute. The Oriental Institute is criminally under visited. I would move it's collection to the Art Institute if I was Mayor lol.

[SIGSEGV]

Hell I work a few blocks away from the Oriental Institute and I've never gone there...

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Hell I work a few blocks away from the Oriental Institute and I've never gone there...

I believe it's the first institution in the US solely dedicated solely to the study of the ancient near east (i.e. Middle East) and Egypt. It's not a huge museum by physical area but there's a TON of stuff and information in there. You can certainly see it in a day but if you are one to read anything and everything in a historical museum, then it might be overload for trying to fit everything in a few hours TBH.

Surely underrated though - somehow it's not a well known place to the general public.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Yea, the Vatican museum is for the gifts that the Popes have received. It's not meant to be a survey of world art. There's not much Asian or African art.

The most popular Museum in Berlin and Germany is very similar to the Oriental Institute. The Oriental Institute is criminally under visited. I would move it's collection to the Art Institute if I was Mayor lol.

The first time I went to the Vatican, everyone told me about this but I kind of brushed it off. Then when I saw it in person, it was really awesome. My favorite part for sure. Rome is a great historical city, but I'd already been to Istanbul before which has about 10X more historical things than Rome - and some of the things are massive (like the Aya Sofya) so St. Peter's impressed me but not as much due to past travels.

The thing is about the Vatican, and maybe TUP hasn't been there, but you basically can't just walk into anywhere in the Vatican as a normal person. You pretty much have to go with a tour group of some kind (whether a tour that has more to do with the Vatican or just one you get there). That means pretty much everyone goes to the art area of the Vatican whether they want to or not and that's one reason there's so many visitors to it. Actually it's kind of creepy. The tour guide we got is good friends with the wife of the head of the Swiss Guard. She told us things that most people do not because of this - like how they listen to literally everything the tour guide and us say. If there's something they don't like, they'll ask the tour guide to step aside and explain themselves over a microphone. Somehow due to the relationship, our guide covered her mic a few times and said some borderline atheistic things LOL Anyway, it's kind of creepy that they are listening to everything you say and pretty much everyone goes through the art gallery area.


In any case, a place like AI should be visited more than it is. It's an awesome institution and definitely amongst the top art museums I've ever been to in the world.

[Tom In Chicago]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Hell I work a few blocks away from the Oriental Institute and I've never gone there...

Yeah. . . this place is sorely under-rated. . . you must go. . .

. . .