Battle of "number three" US cities: Chicago, SF, DC, Houston or Boston? (California, state)

[tmac9wr]

Originally Posted by sittingduck41

I have to respectfully disagree. New York has stocks for the most part, London stocks and some futures. Futures are more important, especially those derived from interest rate products. London trades those, and Chicago does too. Chicago also has energy, agriculture, currency, and meats. Not to mention, heavily traded futures based on the major stock indexes. So I'd say Chicago, London, then NYC as far as trading importance goes.

I'm not sure. There's plenty of arguments for either side. I don't think there's anyway you can convince me Chicago is more important from market-perspective, and I don't think I'll be able to convince you to my side either.

[Nafster]

Originally Posted by yoyobubba

I notice that too. When I actually posted US Census data he doesn't even believe it and then changes the numbers. Now Chicago is at 2.7 million (magically lost 150,000 people) and LA is at 3.9 million (magically gained 50,000). And saying weird stuff like "parking garages at the base of every building" and making fun of a very transit oriented city for using cars and having strip malls, coming from a resident of LA, the king of auto centricity and strip malls, is kind of a sick joke. You can't really trust someone who is willing to lie to you so I'd just ignore him. You certainly haven't seen the last of him though. The guy is totally obsessed with Chicago clearly.

The board has it's share of these guys (Dementor in particular)

They tend not to last more than a few weeks.

[sittingduck41]

Originally Posted by tmac9wr

I'm not sure. There's plenty of arguments for either side. I don't think there's anyway you can convince me Chicago is more important from market-perspective, and I don't think I'll be able to convince you to my side either.

Well I guess it is impossible to be sure without having more knowledge than either of us have. Regardless, I respect your view but my main argument would have to be the importance of US Treasuries being traded in Chicago.

[grapico]

chicago more important than nyc and london on markets? laugh of the day. yes chicago is important but..come on...

i'd probably put chicago around 6 globally, slightly over frankfurt with tokyo, singapore, hong kong ahead...

that is not like it is in bad company, sheesh.

[sittingduck41]

Originally Posted by grapico

chicago more important than nyc and london on markets? laugh of the day. yes chicago is important but..come on...

i'd probably put chicago around 6 globally, slightly over frankfurt with tokyo, singapore, hong kong ahead...

that is not like it is in bad company, sheesh.

What is your reasoning though? Do you have something worth stating that disagrees with what I said? What markets in New York or London are more important than those in Chicago? Don't say stocks, because that is simply not true. Note that Chicago is also home to some of the best traders in the world. Who dominates the S&P futures? A firm in Chicago, and more specifically an individual that I won't name. Who dominates the treasury markets, both basis and futures? Again, 2 firms in Chicago, both of which I won't name. Eurodollars? You guessed it.

[Osito57]

Originally Posted by sittingduck41

What is your reasoning though? Do you have something worth stating that disagrees with what I said? What markets in New York or London are more important than those in Chicago? Don't say stocks, because that is simply not true. Note that Chicago is also home to some of the best traders in the world. Who dominates the S&P futures? A firm in Chicago, and more specifically an individual that I won't name. Who dominates the treasury markets, both basis and futures? Again, 2 firms in Chicago, both of which I won't name. Eurodollars? You guessed it.

All the top finance MBAs from Kellogg and U of C go to NYC and London!

Any financial talent in Chicago soon leaves, because there's little opportunity.

You need to tell them what they're missing in the Midwest!

[tmac9wr]

Originally Posted by Osito57

All the top finance MBAs from Kellogg and U of C go to NYC and London!

Any financial talent in Chicago soon leaves, because there's little opportunity.

You need to tell them what they're missing in the Midwest!

Yes, there's absolutely no opportunity in one of the most powerful financial services cities on the planet. Got any facts to back up your claim?

[Osito57]

Originally Posted by tmac9wr

Yes, there's absolutely no opportunity in one of the most powerful financial services cities on the planet.

No, there's plenty of opportunity in financial centers.

I said there was little opportunity in Chicago/Midwest/Rust Belt.

Top talent leaves for NYC, London, etc.

[tmac9wr]

Originally Posted by Osito57

No, there's plenty of opportunity in financial centers.

I said there was little opportunity in Chicago/Midwest/Rust Belt.

Top talent leaves for NYC, London, etc.

So you're really going to just ignore that Chicago is the undisputed king of commodity/derivatives trading and one of the top financial centers on the planet? Get real man. Top talent moves to Chicago along with London and NYC...not away from it.

[Osito57]

Originally Posted by tmac9wr

Top talent moves to Chicago along with London and NYC...not away from it.

Yes, top talent is just itching to move to the Rust Belt, to Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland; all for the privilege of poor pay, low quality of life, no opportunity, and some of the nation's highest unemployment.

And sure, financial talent moves to places with no banks or financial services!