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.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,278,704 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
It doesn't, obviously. Probably they're not using apples-to-apples numbers.
What is a tourist? There's no common definition.
SIMPLE NOLA. You know NYC so well. Whatever the criteria is to register DOMESTIC Tourist in NYC. That is the standard for Chicago. If isn't? How is it you don't know but certainly not applauding for Chicago. Seems anything POSITIVE IN STATISTICS FOR CHICAGO. You see it as a ....MEH or can't be right. But if it's NEGATIVE? Seems You DEFEND, ARGUE FOR IF and Slam those who claim otherwise.
Just civil opinion I assess from numerous threads. Nothing personal mind you......
Actually, it was the result of a brand survey conducted by the English consulting firm cited in the article.
LOL.
The criteria:
Quote:
The report measures two aspects of a city's brand: its “assets” – attractions, climate, infrastructure (particularly transport), safety and economic prosperity – and its “buzz”, a combination of social media (Facebook likes and Twitter sentiment analysis) and media mentions.
50% of the survey must have been skewed to weather (which has nothing to do with "city brand"), because New York trounces Los Angeles in each and every indices they used to create the ranking. I mean, what else could it be? Economic prosperity? Hahaha. Public transport? LOL. Safety? No.
More Facebook Likes? No.
Facebook Likes
New York 13,000,000
Los Angeles 6,000,000
SIMPLE NOLA. You know NYC so well. Whatever the criteria is to register DOMESTIC Tourist in NYC. That is the standard for Chicago. If isn't? How is it you don't know but certainly not applauding for Chicago. Seems anything POSITIVE IN STATISTICS FOR CHICAGO. You see it as a ....MEH or can't be right. But if it's NEGATIVE? Seems You DEFEND, ARGUE FOR IF and Slam those who claim otherwise.
Because steeps, some of us have logical reasoning skills. There is no metric where a city 1/3 the size of another is going to generate more visitors, absent some extremely unique local characteristic, like a Las Vegas or Orlando.
Given that everyone knows Chicago isn't a tourist or business center like NYC, and given that we have Census-verified population statistics, it's absurd to claim a city that is less of a tourist/business center and 1/3 the size somehow generates more tourists. There would be no logical reason for this.
LA is the most photographed city... Hollywood is in LA not Nyc.... celebrities live in LA, BelAir, BevHills,Malibu not in NYC.....
I would wager that NYC has as many celebrities as LA (and outside of the entertainment industry probably 4-5x as many celebrities), and is far more photographed than LA (though how to measure this, I don't know).
I would wager that NYC has as many celebrities as LA (and outside of the entertainment industry probably 4-5x as many celebrities), and is far more photographed than LA (though how to measure this, I don't know).
LA is the city for rich and those that serve them....NYC is for poor third world immigrants lol....
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.
