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.
LAnative, I don't mean to jump on your case, but to help avoid some confusion. It appears that the populations in Rainrock's post which you quoted are for the metro areas' urban cores. Looks as if the ones you quoted are entire metro area populations. I'm curious about where you got this info, because it also appears that some of those are MSA populations while others are CSA, which undermines legitimate comparisons, and that some of those numbers are not up to date, even if the year listed is '09. Just want to make sure everyone is on the same page.
Im no Houston expert but I think I can reply based on what I do know.
History-
Culture-Houston is the most racially diverse city in the south, and less than half of its population is white. As far as metro areas go, only LA, SF and Miami can say the same.
Transportation-Houston has a very large port and its a hub of Continental Airlines.
Media-
Population-4th largest US City.
International Recognition-I think Houston has more foreign diplomatic offices in the US than anywhere except NY and DC.
National Recognition-Well, How is Houston lesser known than anywhere else? NASA,
LAnative, I don't mean to jump on your case, but to help avoid some confusion. It appears that the populations in Rainrock's post which you quoted are for the metro areas' urban cores. Looks as if the ones you quoted are entire metro area populations. I'm curious about where you got this info, because it also appears that some of those are MSA populations while others are CSA, which undermines legitimate comparisons, and that some of those numbers are not up to date, even if the year listed is '09. Just want to make sure everyone is on the same page.
Nope. Not metro area populations, they are the uban area populations projected as of 2009. Heres the link, you can read it yourself:
Interesting report. The explanations are a little confusing, but if you take a close look, it becomes apparent that they are using dated stats. Check the table of "current" populations beginning on page 11. Look at the U.S. cities listed. The righthand column in this table lists the "base year" for the data. In the case of the United States, they use Census Bureau data from 2000. The several pages leading up to this table also explain how they use data from the government authorities in various countries. For the U.S., they use metro area population, CSA population for those cities that were parts of CSA's in 2000, MSA population otherwise.
What clued me in that the data you listed did not look like "urban area" as the U.S. Census Bureau defines it was that I noticed several cases where I know the approximate metro area populations, and saw that they matched the numbers you listed in your post. For example, New York City's CSA population is the 21m-plus which you quoted from this report.
Another "urban area" which did not look right for other reasons was Boston's. The 5.2m you quoted is larger than the entire MSA population of 4.5m. A closer look at the report shows what I suspected, which is that the 5.2m figure was Boston's CSA population before Providence was added. The pages shortly before the table on page 11 show this, when they include the info that figures for Boston include Worcester and Nashua, but they say nothing about Manchester or Providence. As the table that begins on page 11 shows, the "base year" for U.S. area data was 2000. That 5.2m figure for Boston was the CSA population as of the 2000 census, before Providence and Manchester were included.
Bottom line: Their data for U.S. "urban areas" are the metro area--usually CSA for the larger metros--populations based on the U.S. Census Bureau's definitions of metropolitan areas, using population data from the 2000 census.
People may laugh at your list but I'll agree with you on Gary.
Since Michael's death, it is likely that Gary will house the "Jackson Family Museum" complex that should some day rival shrines like the Black Stone Mosque in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. I think Laredo, however, should be upgraded a tier or so because they have some of the Tex-Mex fajita casitas in the world. Also, where else can you sell your battered T-250 extended-bed pickup for so much money to smugglers!
And If you are measuring by TV Market Catchment Area then Philadelphia has about 1.5 M more people than Bay Area.
The census ridiculously says the family from Trenton(15 mi away) or Lehigh Valley isnt part of Philadlephia eventhough these families get 5 channels of local Philadelphia TV and radio programming. Plus all 4 major sports on their radios and Tvs
You make all this fuss about the TV market in Philadelphia being bigger (it's bigger by about 600,000 than SF's), but SF has a radio market that's nearly 2 million stronger than Philly's:
radio market, fall 2009:
4 PPM BH S/PPM San Francisco 6,145,800
8 PPM BH S/PPM Philadelphia 4,357,600
TV market, fall 2009:
4 Philadelphia 2,925,560
6 San Francisco-Oak-San Jose 2,355,740
also there's this little factoid, which reveals that using media markets to gauge a metro's size isn't the best idea anyways:
Quote:
3) The media markets don't necessarily correlate with CSA/MSA boundaries. For example, Washington and Baltimore are still considered two separate media markets; Riverside-San Bernardino have their own radio stations but not their own TV stations (where they are in the LA media market).
4 Philadelphia 2,925,560
6 San Francisco-Oak-San Jose 2,355,740
also there's this little factoid, which reveals that using media markets to gauge a metro's size isn't the best idea anyways:
The numbers are slightly off even thought the rankings are correct. Here are the numbers for the top 10 TV media markets in 2009:
1 New York, NY 7,493,530 6.524
2 Los Angeles, CA 5,659,170 4.927
3 Chicago, IL 3,501,010 3.048
4 Philadelphia, PA 2,955,190 2.573
5 Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX 2,544,410 2.215
6 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA 2,503,400 2.179
7 Boston, MA (Manchester, NH) 2,410,180 2.098
8 Atlanta, GA 2,387,520 2.079
9 Washington, DC (Hagerstown, MD) 2,335,040 2.033
10 Houston, TX 2,123,460 1.849
DMA Rankings - US TV Households by Market (http://www.tvb.org/rcentral/markettrack/us_hh_by_dma.asp - broken link)
(note: tier cities are not all about population. Its also about status, its importance, its urban nature and amenities. So a city with a certain population can be in a lower tier than another city that has less people)
Tier 1 cities
New York, NY pop: 8,244,910
Los Angeles, CA pop 3,792,621
Chicago, IL pop 2,695,598
Philadelphia, PA pop 1,526,006
Houston, TX pop 2,099,451
Boston, MA pop 617,594
Tier 2 cities
Phoenix, AZ pop 1,445,632
Cleveland, OH pop 396,815
Baltimore, MD pop 620,961
Charlotte, NC pop 731,424
Atlanta, GA pop 420,003
Denver, CO pop 600,158
Tier 3 cities
Birmingham,AL pop 212,237
Orlando, FL pop 238,300
Louisville, KY pop 741,096 (consolidated)
Greensboro, NC pop 270,505
Montgomery, AL pop 205,764
Raleigh, NC pop 403,892
Richmond, VA pop 204,214
Most cities below 200,000 people would be tier 4 cities
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
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.
What is your source for this information? I would be extremely surprised if Houston had more consulates than Los Angeles or Chicago.
People may laught, but ...
