CHICAGO | Economic & Business Development

[left of center]

Originally Posted by rgolch

Sometimes the local media and news outlets also seem to prefer the negativity train. Crains, The Chicago business journal, and the like often seem to highlight the negative news. At least a good chunk of the time.

The news media is a business, and negativity sells. As does hyperbole, exaggeration, and straight up lies. Its a good business model, especially if you are running to be President nowadays.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by rgolch

Sometimes the local media and news outlets also seem to prefer the negativity train. Crains, The Chicago business journal, and the like often seem to highlight the negative news. At least a good chunk of the time.

Crains is especially bad at this. Obviously you must show both sides of the spectrum but I've noticed in the last year Crains has been especially bad/uneven at showing the negativity. I also know from personal experience that they are especially critical of anything positive and quick to dismiss it. However, when it's something pretty well proven out they will run with it if it's positive, so at least that's good. It's just kind of hard to convince them sometimes of it. For example, when the city posted at the beginning of the year (March?) its lowest unemployment since like 2000, they didn't want to run a story on it at all and basically dismissed it because the labor force was down. I had proven that this is only part of the reason why unemployment went down and if the number of unemployed persons went down proportionally with it that the unemployment rate would be a lot higher. Simple math - they didn't get it.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Crains is especially bad at this. Obviously you must show both sides of the spectrum but I've noticed in the last year Crains has been especially bad/uneven at showing the negativity. I also know from personal experience that they are especially critical of anything positive and quick to dismiss it. However, when it's something pretty well proven out they will run with it if it's positive, so at least that's good. It's just kind of hard to convince them sometimes of it. For example, when the city posted at the beginning of the year (March?) its lowest unemployment since like 2000, they didn't want to run a story on it at all and basically dismissed it because the labor force was down. I had proven that this is only part of the reason why unemployment went down and if the number of unemployed persons went down proportionally with it that the unemployment rate would be a lot higher. Simple math - they didn't get it.

There's something up with the Chicago psyche at the moment. Even with things going reasonably well, there are quite a few people out there that don't want to see it. The media is definitely responsible for a lot of that. I agree Crains has been negative more often than not. Even when they're positive, they're still sure to use headlines that remind us of the issues the city faces. The Cubs winning the World Series was proof of that. The headline if I recall correctly was something like "Chicago is Camelot for Just a Moment". Why did we need a headline that had negative implications for something as insignificant (in the grand scheme of things) as the Cubs winning the World Series?

I wonder how long it takes us to rebound and regain that bravado that we're historically known for. I try to address all the misinformation I see about the city and region, but I'm only one man out here

[rgolch]

I think the biggest reason it's in vogue to bash on Chicago right now is conservatives love to use it as the poster child for failed liberal policies. Tough gun laws, but highest murder tolls. Huge union power, and near bankrupt city and state. High taxes, and concurrent population loss. And Crain's probably has a lot of older conservative readers who sort of feel like pointing out all the problems is like tough love. Like telling your child who's falling short that they're a total failure in the hopes that'll light a fire under their ass.

But with all this negative press, I still can't believe Chicago gets so much tourism and convention business. So clearly there are a ton of people who know that the bad is balanced by all the good.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Like I said before, I am totally fine with our little secret here. They will eventually change their tune once the revival we all see happening grows to the point that it is undeniable and right in your face. The progress this city has made just since I moved here 10 short years ago is staggering. Let them think we are Detroit, in the meantime I will purchase the entire SW side.

[the urban politician]

^ Right on. More obtuse people will see the SW side as "declining in population", but those are all sites for future gentrification. The problem is, we have some of the worst elected officials in America here in Chicago. And despite our abundant cheap housing they are creating a manufactured crisis in "affordable housing" which, of course, they will fix by passing asinine new ordinances.

That alone may get in the way of the city's rebirth and reinvestment.

[LouisVanDerWright]

The population isn't even falling on the SW side due to any sort of vacancy. It's falling as first generation immigrants who may have had 6, 7, 8+ offspring and we're unable to afford sizable accommodations are replaced by those children who grew up in large families and want to get married at 28 instead of 19 and want to have 2 or 3 kids, if any. The flow of Mexican immigrants has slowed to a trickle (unfortunately for construction prices) and the Mexican American community becomes ever more wealthy, established, and assimilated to the way of life of their fellow Americans with every passing year. Not a single white person could move to Pilsen and it would still gentrifying as the children of immigrants return from college with physical therapy degrees or get jobs as professors at nearby universities. More than half of my tenants in the area fall into the "highly educated second generation immigrant" demographic.

[Justin_Chicago]

Heavy hitters back Chicago ed-tech startup ThinkCerca

Education-software maker ThinkCerca has lined up a group of A-list investors. The company, founded by former Chicago Public Schools teacher and administrator Eileen Murphy Buckley, raised $10 million, led by Intuit software founder Scott Cook and his wife, Signe Osby. Other investors who joined in: LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner; Mike Gamson, a Chicago-based senior executive; TAL Education Group, a large education and test-prep company in China; and Plum Alley Investments, which backs women-led companies.

In addition, Tom Chi, who helped develop Google Glass, joined ThinkCerca as a board member.

ThinkCerca, started five years ago, is hitting its stride, signing up schools in 40 states, Murphy Buckley says. Big customers include Chicago, New York and Fayette County, Ga., near Atlanta.

Its software, which helps teach critical thinking and writing skills that lie at the heart of many standardized tests, is starting to show results. Murphy Buckley says the number of students meeting or exceeding state standards at Hendricks Community Academy on the South Side doubled to about 60 percent since the school has used its software. Fayette County schools achieved similar results.

ThinkCerca was part of Impact Engine, an incubator for startups with a social mission, five years ago. It now has about 45 employees, up from fewer than 30 a year ago.

Article: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...kcerca-chicago

[marothisu]

Guys - the SW side isn't losing population. It's gained 6500 people since 2010. If you count Clearing, Mount Greenwood, etc in that then it's grown by 9000 people since 2010. The "far south side" is losing by far the most population - and the "far west side" is losing a little - everywhere else has gained population in the city region wise since 2010. Not sure where this is coming from that the SW side is losing population.

[marothisu]

GDP by Metropolitan Area was released today for 2016. Chicago increased its GDP by $5.18B which would have been the lowest percentage gain and raw gain in the top 5 most populous metro areas if not for Houston. Houston managed to decrease its GDP by 3.02% (just under a $14B decrease in GDP).

Now the good news is that the per capita GDP of the Chicago MSA is just under $60K in 2009 chained dollars which is not only over $5K more than what it was in 2009 but it is the highest per capita GDP of any year since 2001. The next highest was 2007 which was about $600 less. Unfortunately though it's still less than the MSAs of NYC, LA, Houston, Dallas, Philadelphia, Boston, SF, etc but above Phoenix and Miami areas. Progress I guess, right? Being at the high for the last 16 years for this is at least alright to highlight.

[the urban politician]

^ Chicago needs a new growth engine

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ Chicago doesn't need a new growth engine. As he pointed out, per capita numbers increased pretty rapidly. Of course area GDP is going to be hampered when you are losing population. However, the overall economic picture and the picture for those who have not moved out is improving immensely.

Originally Posted by marothisu

Guys - the SW side isn't losing population. It's gained 6500 people since 2010. If you count Clearing, Mount Greenwood, etc in that then it's grown by 9000 people since 2010. The "far south side" is losing by far the most population - and the "far west side" is losing a little - everywhere else has gained population in the city region wise since 2010. Not sure where this is coming from that the SW side is losing population.

This depends on what you are defining as the SW side. TUP and I are discussing primarily Pilsen and Little Village. Pilsen saw a 15% population drop from 2000 to 2010 most of which was attributed to the loss of family population.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Chicago needs a new growth engine

Like this?


From Lee Duncan

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

This depends on what you are defining as the SW side. TUP and I are discussing primarily Pilsen and Little Village. Pilsen saw a 15% population drop from 2000 to 2010 most of which was attributed to the loss of family population.

I mean, 2000-2010 change numbers are kind of irrelevant to this when we have 5 more years of population data per neighborhood from 2011 to 2015. It also depends on what you are comparing to as I think Little Village when you compare against one, its losing population versus another its about the same/slightly gaining. What I mean when i say "one" is comparing against the 2010 Census or 2010 ACS. You are only supposed to compare ACS against the ACS, but it seems almost everyone on the planet doesn't understand this.


As far as the growth engine comment goes, a lot of the more granular data for Chicago you cannot see but there were a number of industries that went up. I was really hoping to see "Information" - but the data is not public right now for that. The "Government" industry for the area decreased by almost $1B but on the other hand, the "Finance and Insurance" industry increased by about $1.6B which beat out the growth for NYC, LA, Philadelphia, Dallas, Houston, etc. So far the only MSA I see that beat out Chicago on this category was San Francisco MSA. Educational services, health care, etc also went up by almost $1B. Professional and Business Services went up by almost $750M which was greater than LA and Houston, both of whom decreased in this category.

[Justin_Chicago]

Clearcover Raises $11.5M to Change the Way You Buy Car Insurance

A Chicago startup that uses artificial intelligence to help you buy car insurance just emerged from stealth mode, and raised $11.5 million from a handful of notable investors.

Clearcover, founded by a former VC at American Family Insurance, has built a technology platform that lets people buy car insurance efficiently and at a lower cost. The round of funding was led by Lightbank, with participation from Greycroft Partners, 500 Startups and Silicon Valley Bank.

Clearcover says it uses artificial intelligence to make custom coverage recommendations for customers, and it can save people up to 50% on car insurance compared to traditional players like State Farm and Allstate.

It can do that by eliminating the overhead that brick-and-mortar insurers take on, and it doesn’t spend money on expensive ads, celebrity spokespeople or outdated technology, said CEO and Founder Kyle Nakatsuji, who left his role at American Family Insurance last year to start Clearcover.

Article: https://www.americaninno.com/chicago...car-insurance/

[Vlajos]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...921-story.html

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by emathias

Like this?


From Lee Duncan

I like that better than Amazon.

Seriously, the staff at Crains are just obsessed with this Amazon HQ2 thing. It's as if Chicago will be hit by an asteroid if we don't get it.

[F1 Tommy]

Originally Posted by marothisu

The "Government" industry for the area decreased by almost $1B but on the other hand, the "Finance and Insurance" industry increased by about $1.6B which beat out the growth for NYC, LA, Philadelphia, Dallas, Houston, etc.

Do you know what the main driver for the large decrease in government industry was caused by?

[the urban politician]

^ No Illinois budget for 2 yrs?

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ No Illinois budget for 2 yrs?

I was originally thinking "No, that's not it" - but I believe these industries are by NAICS code, and there's no NAICS industry "Government"...so..yeah maybe..