Quote:
Originally Posted by downtown1
Looks like SF & Houston are on a roll. I wonder why D.C is not included in the study. It's a city of opportunity IMO.
|
Even more impressive is that SF rated so high without the inclusion of Silicon Valley. Just went over the study and found numerous references where they clearly stated SF as separate from SV. Who knows what place (up or down?) the SF Bay Area would have taken if actually rated as a whole metro.
The reason I love this study is because it de-emphasizes the constant d*ck measuring that goes on where NYC, London, and Paris always come out on top without question, primarily because of sheer size, with people acting as if there is no discussion. Instead, this study has taken a holistic approach and has broken it down to ten important criteria and weighed each of them accordingly:
-Intellectual capital and innovation
-Technology readiness
-Transportation and infrastructure
-Health, safety and security
-Sustainability
-Economic Clout
-Ease of doing business
-Cost
-Demographics and livability
-Lifestyle assets
Of course NYC, London, Paris still do very, very well. However, this is how smaller but not quite Alpha++ cities like Toronto, San Francisco, Stockholm, etc., can be rationally be compared to the Big Dogs. And why no one should be surprised if a person prefers a Sydney or a Houston to a NYC or LA.
Bigger is not always better and this study goes a long way in showing this.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
kdogg
