When will Phoenix surpass Houston as the 4th largest city? (Surprise: real estate, transfer)

[h2obuff]

Originally Posted by cxray

I used to be an IT recruiter/headhunter so I'm very well aware of that industry particularly the software industry in Phoenix. There was more than enough talent in Phoenix. And I mostly placed server side/backend Java developers that earned well into the 6 figures so I'm not referring to NT admins. The problem with Phoenix was jobs not talent. In addition, it was extremely easy to recruit talent to Phoenix especially from the Bay area and Seattle. The cost of living is here is considerably less and it's the closest thing to California outside of California in regards to the overall look and feel of the city plus weather (aside from the summer). We just didn't have companies. But even then, companies were moving here.

Your friend at Google is right though. I'm not disagreeing with him. It's much easier to set up a company in the Bay area in which you can just steal talent from another company next door versus relocating someone. Yes, Phoenix has talent but not as much as those cities. However, Phoenix has significantly more talent in regards to IT related fields than Houston and most cities in the interior parts of the country. Most of the IT and hardware is concentrated near the west coast and parts of the east coast. So when one complains of talent here, that applies to the overwhelming majority of cities in the United States.

A "couple of hundred" people is quite a number of employees for a software/internet company. There were less employees in the Microsoft branch here years ago. 200 people is a lot of employees for a branch that just started here. I know someone who also works at Google and he made no mention of closing their doors and he is on their business development/account management side. Google is just a big name but there several other IT related companies in the valley that people haven't mentioned. Many of them are not publicly traded companies or Fortune 500 companies but that doesn't mean those companies are not profitable or viable.

What makes you state that "Phoenix has significantly more talent in regards to IT related fields than Houston and most cities in the interior parts of the country"? This is not an observation based on any factual data. I am not even in IT, bu tlookign up IT job data, teh number of employees in the IT field in Houston far oupaces that of Phoenix. Did you forget that HP has more emplyees in Houston than anyother location in the world (even its headquartes in Cali)? There are tons of other IT companies out here. Houston may not have % of IT jobs an Austin has, but it has much more in total numbers. Look at the data in the bizjournal.com for different cities to get a feel of the truth before making factless claims.

[sheena]

Originally Posted by paulrigsby

I don't the answer either but I do know that liberal cities near the west coast like Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, Boise and Los Angelas have grown considerably. Liberal cities like Chicago, Milwauke and Minneapolis have lost people due to weather and not politics

Visit some of the liberal city forums and you will see it's not the weather it's the taxes that drive them out. People rather cook themselves in a microwave for 8 months out of the year then pay those high taxes imposed on them.

[Mom2Feebs]

Population-wise, Houston's metropolitan area actually has 5 million people.

[londonbarcelona]

Originally Posted by cxray

I used to be an IT recruiter/headhunter so I'm very well aware of that industry particularly the software industry in Phoenix. There was more than enough talent in Phoenix. And I mostly placed server side/backend Java developers that earned well into the 6 figures so I'm not referring to NT admins. The problem with Phoenix was jobs not talent. In addition, it was extremely easy to recruit talent to Phoenix especially from the Bay area and Seattle. The cost of living is here is considerably less and it's the closest thing to California outside of California in regards to the overall look and feel of the city plus weather (aside from the summer). We just didn't have companies. But even then, companies were moving here.

Your friend at Google is right though. I'm not disagreeing with him. It's much easier to set up a company in the Bay area in which you can just steal talent from another company next door versus relocating someone. Yes, Phoenix has talent but not as much as those cities. However, Phoenix has significantly more talent in regards to IT related fields than Houston and most cities in the interior parts of the country. Most of the IT and hardware is concentrated near the west coast and parts of the east coast. So when one complains of talent here, that applies to the overwhelming majority of cities in the United States.

A "couple of hundred" people is quite a number of employees for a software/internet company. There were less employees in the Microsoft branch here years ago. 200 people is a lot of employees for a branch that just started here. I know someone who also works at Google and he made no mention of closing their doors and he is on their business development/account management side. Google is just a big name but there several other IT related companies in the valley that people haven't mentioned. Many of them are not publicly traded companies or Fortune 500 companies but that doesn't mean those companies are not profitable or viable.

Spoken like a true RECRUITER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Master Shake]

Part of the tremendous growth in Phoenix over the last 3-5 years was due to people leaving California and moving to Phoenix, due to the (relatively) cheap housing that Phoenix used to have at that time. From what I have heard and seen, it is now Houston's turn -- many of the people leaving California are now moving to Houston, and for the same reason.

[steve22]

Topical story on the dearth of knowledge-based opportunities in Phoenix, and the consequent "talent flight" from Arizona to other places. I would count myself among those, actually. Left for exactly the same reasons, essentially, in addition to the fact that I couldn't freakin' stand Phoenix. Here's the link:

Does quality of life fall short?

By the way, I love some of the responses by readers at the bottom of the page. Hilarious. And so true, so true...

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by Master Shake

Part of the tremendous growth in Phoenix over the last 3-5 years was due to people leaving California and moving to Phoenix, due to the (relatively) cheap housing that Phoenix used to have at that time. From what I have heard and seen, it is now Houston's turn -- many of the people leaving California are now moving to Houston, and for the same reason.

I was one (possibly one of the few) who was delighted to see the cost of housing escalate a couple of years ago. Cheap housing tends to attract lower income types, and more riff raff. It's also beneficial for the established homeowners who saw their values increase.

Of course, there are some drawbacks to a high housing market as well ... but Phoenix, being one of the largest cities and metro areas in the nation, really should be known for more than just sunshine & cheap housing. The days of the Valley being a retirement haven, or a mecca for sun loving, cheap home buying refugees should be a thing of the past by now. We should be attracting more large corporations (Fortune 500 companies) to locate here, which would increase wages and the quality of life for the majority of the workforce.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by Master Shake

Part of the tremendous growth in Phoenix over the last 3-5 years was due to people leaving California and moving to Phoenix, due to the (relatively) cheap housing that Phoenix used to have at that time. From what I have heard and seen, it is now Houston's turn -- many of the people leaving California are now moving to Houston, and for the same reason.

People from California are (or were, their houses aren't selling either) to every state. WA, OR, NV and AZ get a big proportion of them due to proximity, I suppose. I forget the number now but it was something like 40000 California licenses were turned in for AZ licenses in the first four months of this year. I would say 2/3 of the out of state plates I see (illegally) dropping their kids off at school are from California. They may be moving to Houston, but we still get them by the boatload. Let's not fight over them.

[joninaz]

The answer to the original question comes down to available land for expansion. That's the true cap of a metro area's growth potential.

LA, San Fran, San Diego, etc. really can't grow much bigger - they've run out of space. There are pockets of development here and there, but nothing like the blank canvas of AZ. I've heard that Vegas is facing a similar problem. Lots of open space, it would seem, but much of it owned by the Feds. They are land locked by openess.

Greater Phoenix seems to have a lot of room left for development. I'm not saying it's smart. I'm not saying it's good. There are plenty of valid arguments against re. water, pollution, transport, infrastructure, etc. But apart from preserve areas, is there anything to stop continual growth for quite a while?

I don't know the situation in Houston. Is there still a lot of room to build?

The larger city will be the one with the most room to grow.

[londonbarcelona]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

People from California are (or were, their houses aren't selling either) to every state. WA, OR, NV and AZ get a big proportion of them due to proximity, I suppose. I forget the number now but it was something like 40000 California licenses were turned in for AZ licenses in the first four months of this year. I would say 2/3 of the out of state plates I see (illegally) dropping their kids off at school are from California. They may be moving to Houston, but we still get them by the boatload. Let's not fight over them.

They can have 'em.............
(except my older sister who lives there. I want her. She's one of the good ones!)