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.
Yes, you are more crowded-congratulations. No one said any differently.
But you severely lack the world class amenities SF has coming out it's ears-both before, during and since the gentrification craze that occurred in Brooklyn.
I haven't a clue why your arguing this? It's a moot point. dead.
Depends on the amenities. Some of them Brooklyn has, some of them it doesn't but Manhattan is very accessible. The larger, more exciting clubs these days are in Brooklyn as is much of the music scene. There's a certainly a lot more to do in Brooklyn than there is in SF. It's nice having all the boroughs of NYC to go around.
Well just like you live in Oakland and are able to enjoy anything in SF you want both in your local Oakland neighborhood, Berkeley, Albany and SF, people in Brooklyn can enjoy what's in Brooklyn and get into Manhattan far more easily than people in the East Bay. So, it all works out, it's still NYC, and Oakland is still part of the Bay Area core. Brooklyn is definitely not hipsters only, there are 2.6 million people in Brooklyn. I think even the most hipsterfied hipster would start to complain about too many hipsters if everybody was...
Yes we can all enjoy the same amenities, but I'm not arguing that Oakland has just as many amenities as places that truly do have levels more amenities.
And I'm sooo glad it was you who brought Oakland into the conversation this time(because it's purely to illustrate a point, and not meant disparagingly) and not the other guy who I'm sure was just about to do just that...LOL
Depends on the amenities. Some of them Brooklyn has, some of them it doesn't but Manhattan is very accessible. The larger, more exciting clubs these days are in Brooklyn as is much of the music scene. There's a certainly a lot more to do in Brooklyn than there is in SF. It's nice having all the boroughs of NYC to go around.
See you guys continue to point out niche things that only appeal to specific groups(like hipsters and clubbers). Not all people.
Just thinking about most of the sort of trips people take:
Business
Wild Weekend
Family Vacation
Cultural Getaway
Day Trips
I can't see how Brooklyn could possibly appeal to more people than SF just from the standpoint of "what to do" but you are free to disagree.
See you guys continue to point out niche things that only appeal to specific groups(like hipsters and clubbers). Not all people.
Just thinking about most of the sort of trips people take:
Business
Wild Weekend
Family Vacation
Cultural Getaway
Day Trips
I can't see how Brooklyn could possibly appeal to more people than SF just from the standpoint of "what to do" but you are free to disagree.
You mean for a tourist? I think SF is better for most tourists than Brooklyn if no one is allowed outside city boundaries. SF is especially better for tourists when it comes to visiting iconic landmarks. I think your list makes sense for a strict SF and Brooklyn comparison for tourists except for the wild weekend category.
Yes, you are more crowded-congratulations. No one said any differently.
But you severely lack the world class amenities SF has coming out it's ears-both before, during and since the gentrification craze that occurred in Brooklyn.
I haven't a clue why your arguing this? It's a moot point. dead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
You mean for a tourist? I think SF is better for most tourists than Brooklyn if no one is allowed outside city boundaries. SF is especially better for tourists when it comes to visiting iconic landmarks. I think your list makes sense for a strict SF and Brooklyn comparison for tourists except for the wild weekend category.
I'm still attempting to understand his logic. Lol
Montclair what are you specifically referring to? You've evidently never heard of Brooklyn Academy of Music, but that doesn't take away it's 150 Year history. Let's not discuss how many projects/developments are approved for the area and already has financing. . . This ONE area of Brooklyn. Not even the rest of the borough, .
Performing Arts and Culture? The NYOpera is shutting down because it couldn't secure $7 Million dollars (Only raised 2 Million). Meanwhile in Brooklyn. . . .With $10 Million Gift, Theater for a New Audience Home Gets a Name - Though you probably wouldn't know The Polonsky Foundation is based in London. And that's not a shot at Manhattan at all, because it's still the same city.
You've probably never heard of any restaurants in Brooklyn but evidently we're not lacking in the food department. I know you also like numbers so we DO have a 3-Star Michelin restaurant - Chef's Table at Brooklyn Fare. How many 3-Star Michelin rated restaurants does San Francisco have? Not the Bay Area, San Francisco specifically? Exactly. 0.
You've probably never heard of Prospect Park or seen the beautiful arch at the Grand Army Plaza. You've probably never walked around in Boerum Hill or Brooklyn Heights to witness the wonderful Brownstones.
Sure Brooklyn isn't home to Fortune 500 companies or house many high fashion brands (yet, though we do have a flagship Barneys store) but that still doesn't change the fact that Brooklyn is only moving forward. No matter how many times you try to bash it and mention our "lack of" high end retail or major corporations, which are coming, inevitably, Brooklyn is still New York City. You can go back under your rock now friend, since that seems to be your special place of refuge.
Montclair what are you specifically referring to? You've evidently never heard of Brooklyn Academy of Music, but that doesn't take away it's 150 Year history.
Performing Arts and Culture? The NYOpera is shutting down because it couldn't secure $7 Million dollars (Only raised 2 Million). Meanwhile in Brooklyn. . . .With $10 Million Gift, Theater for a New Audience Home Gets a Name - Though you probably wouldn't know The Polonsky Foundation is based in London. And that's not a shot at Manhattan at all, because it's still the same city.
Yawns. The trifecta of Opera-Ballet-Symphony is an area where San Francisco particularly lays a hurting on Brooklyn. The SF Opera, SF Ballet and SF Symphony are all considered among the best in their musical genres and are heavily patronized and supported by local socialites. There is no comparison as far as this one.
Same goes for Museums. The de Young Museum, California Academy of Sciences, Asian Art Museum, SFMOMA etc are patronized and supported by a huge class of people that yet largely elude Brooklyn's institutions comparatively speaking because Manhattan is where the action mainly is.
Quote:
You've probably never heard of any restaurants in Brooklyn but evidently we're not lacking in the food department. I know you also like numbers so we DO have a 3-Star Michelin restaurant - Chef's Table at Brooklyn Fare. How many 3-Star Michelin rated restaurants does San Francisco have? Not the Bay Area, San Francisco specifically? Exactly. 0.
Oh, okay, so let's talk about the Michelin ranking.
Michelin Star-rated Restaurants, 2014
San Francisco City: 18
Brooklyn Borough: 5
Remember Brooklyn has 3 times more people and way more land.
And since we're talking about the best restaurants we should also talk about the best hotels since these diners might want somewhere equally as stunning to stay the night.
Sure Brooklyn isn't home to Fortune 500 companies or house many high fashion brands (yet, though we do have a flagship Barneys store) but that still doesn't change the fact that Brooklyn is only moving forward.
So call me when you arrive and are not just in transition, in the meantime please stop insisting that Brooklyn holds its own against real cities because it doesn't.
In the meantime, on top of top caliber opera, ballet, symphony, theater, museums, restaurants and hotels, and then to throw on top of that shopping amenities that blow Brooklyn out of the water completely, San Francisco is a destination that covers ALL bases, lacking NOTHING.
See you guys continue to point out niche things that only appeal to specific groups(like hipsters and clubbers). Not all people.
Just thinking about most of the sort of trips people take:
Business
Wild Weekend
Family Vacation
Cultural Getaway
Day Trips
I can't see how Brooklyn could possibly appeal to more people than SF just from the standpoint of "what to do" but you are free to disagree.
Brooklyn probably has less conventional tourist stuff than San Francisco, but that's logical, because Brooklyn doesn't encompass the central city. And when Manhattan is your neighbor, obviously the tourists will gravitate there.
But none of that has anything to do with urbanity or desirability for living. Pacific Heights in SF has nothing from a tourist standpoint; doesn't mean it isn't super-desirable. Fisherman's Wharf isn't more desirable for living just because it gets a ton of visitors.
And obviously if you want all that central city type stuff, you are better off in Brooklyn than in SF, because you have Manhattan right next store. Brooklyn is not a city, it's part of a city; obviously what it lacks can be found in other parts of the city.
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.
. 
