U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 11-02-2007, 04:07 PM
 
Location: Chicago
395 posts, read 1,218,190 times
Reputation: 191

Advertisements

It's funny to see all the City X vs. City Y threads. Why have two cities completely in different tiers compete? Do compact sport cars compete in the same tier as american muscle cars? NO. Here's my take on cities that you can compare in "Tiers"

Tier 1 - World Cities:
New York
Chicago
Los Angelas

Tier 2 - Large Cities With High Growth Potential:
Boston
San Fran
Philadelphia
Seattle
Houston
Dallas
Atlanta
Phoenix
Washington DC
Miami

Tier 3 Medium-Large Cities (Some with large growth some not):
Detroit
Cleveland
Minneapolis
St. Louis
Portland
Pittsburgh
Baltimore
San Diego
Denver
Tampa

Tier 4 Cities (Mid-Sized Cities):
New Orleans
Kansas City
Jacksonville
Charlotte
Indianapolis
Cincinatti
Columbus
Milwaukee
Richmond
Sacramento
San Antonio
Austin
Nashville

Tier 5 Cities (Smaller Cities):
Omaha
Madison
Oklahoma City
Orlando
Raleigh
Boulder
Memphis

Odd Ball Tier:
Las Vegas? - kind of in its own tier

PLEASE MAKE YOUR OWN TIERS AND CHANGES OR ADD CITIES I DIDN'T MENTION. DONT EXCLUDE CITIES MENTIONED ABOVE THOUGH. ALSO, MOVING YOUR CITY TO A HIGHER TIER JUST FOR THE SAKE OF IT DOESN'T HELP - YOU NEED TO PROVIDE A REASON. IE, MOVING "HOUSTON" TO WORLD CITIES JUST FOR THE SAKE OF IT WITHOUT REASONING

Last edited by chitownwarrior; 11-02-2007 at 04:17 PM..

 
Old 11-02-2007, 04:15 PM
 
Location: Phoenix metro
20,005 posts, read 69,277,487 times
Reputation: 10104
Vegas would be a "tier" 2 or 3 if you ask me.
 
Old 11-02-2007, 04:16 PM
 
Location: Chicago
395 posts, read 1,218,190 times
Reputation: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-o View Post
Vegas would be a "tier" 2 or 3 if you ask me.
I was thinking that too...but then again, it doesn't seem to fit with any of the cities...Kind of like in it's own tier...
 
Old 11-02-2007, 04:17 PM
 
8,376 posts, read 27,734,421 times
Reputation: 2362
I would put Charlotte on tier 3. It has a booming economy and it's population continues to grow due to an inflow of people from the northeastern states and Florida. Add Orlando to tier 4.

Last edited by compelled to reply; 11-02-2007 at 04:31 PM.. Reason: giving reasons
 
Old 11-02-2007, 04:21 PM
 
Location: Portland, Maine
4,180 posts, read 13,026,375 times
Reputation: 1609
What on earth are these "tiers" based on? If it is population, then they have to be redone. If it is your personal taste, that is understandable I guess. But I would argue that if it is city alone, "Tier 1" would be NYC. "Tier 2" would include all of the cities with one million or more people. "Tier 3" would probably include cities with 500 to 1 mil. I think that would be most objective, disregarding personal taste.
 
Old 11-02-2007, 04:27 PM
 
Location: Chicago
395 posts, read 1,218,190 times
Reputation: 191
Cities you can actually make comparisons on, partly based on MSA populations (city populations are misleading and metropolitan population gives a better picture of how big a city is)...but also based on personality/living/etc.

Yes, it is personal and opinion based, of course, like 95% of all the postings on this site.

Make your own tiers if you want. It's supposed to be fun to see people's different "tiers" or "classes" that make city comparisons actually valid. IMHO, you can't compare a city like Portland to Chicago. Completely different cities, like comparing a subaru legacy to a chevy corvette.

I personally think my tiers are pretty good : D .
 
Old 11-02-2007, 04:34 PM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
32,258 posts, read 54,960,967 times
Reputation: 15287
Tier 1(in order) World Cities that are entities unto themselves.
New York, Los Angeles, Washington DC, San Francisco
As far as being famous around the world, I think these 4 are the most known US Cities. They are the epicenters of power in many of the US' most influential business sectors, NY, LA and SF have been the biggest destinations of immigrants in that order for 6 decades now. Washington DC is the most influential political center probably in the world. The nations greatest concentration of wealthy individuals are in NY, LA, SF and DC. Cultural Revolutions and world altering business innovations have begun in these places. All you have to do is say these cities' names and clear images instantly conjur up in peoples minds.

Tier 1a Not quite as iconic as the above, but World Cities nonetheless
Chicago, Boston, Dallas, Atlanta, Houston, Miami, Seattle, Philadelphia, Detroit, Las Vegas, Minneapolis, Denver
Very important US cities, dominate in many areas economically and culturally and are world class in the amenities they offer.

Tier 2
All other Cities.
 
Old 11-02-2007, 04:51 PM
 
Location: Live in VA, Work in MD, Play in DC
697 posts, read 2,020,890 times
Reputation: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by chitownwarrior View Post
Odd Ball Tier:
Las Vegas? - kind of in its own tier
I would also put Washington DC in the Odd Ball Tier.

It's just too different of a city in purpose, history, location, jurisdiction, regulations, economy, and even rights.
 
Old 11-02-2007, 04:56 PM
 
Location: DFW Texas
3,096 posts, read 6,760,533 times
Reputation: 2141
San Antonio with a population of 1.3-1.4 million is hardly medium sized city, it needs to be in Tier 2.
 
Old 11-02-2007, 05:12 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
5,608 posts, read 20,668,510 times
Reputation: 5338
How about ranking metropolitan areas based on the number of fortune 500 companies headquartered there? I think that would actually be a better indicator of a city's importance on the national and international level than just going on population alone, or "growth," which is too fuzzy of a criteria to judge cities. Phoenix metro area, for example, has over 4 million, but only has 4 fortune 500 companies. Phoenix is a severely underpowered city, and it's NOT that important for the national economy as a whole. The influence of Phoenix ends the second you cross over the Arizona border. Phoenix isn't even much of a city; it's basically just a collection of some nice real estate-- a million houses blobbed together in the middle of the desert. I also question why Phoenix is tier 2 and Denver is tier 3. Denver metro area has about 2.5 million people, with 11 fortune 500's. I would actually put Denver a tier above Phoenix.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top