If Pittsburgh wasn't so artificially small (Philadelphia, Lebanon: low income, sales, chapel)

[GregHenry]

Originally Posted by Blackbeauty212

Pittsburgh is is 22nd largest up from 24 or 25

Rare is a down trend that doesn't have the occasional uptick.

Pittsburgh may be at 22, but it's a sitting duck for these markets:

24 Raleigh-Durham (Fayetvlle) 1,143,420 0.997
25 Charlotte 1,140,900 0.995
26 Indianapolis 1,109,970 0.968

28 San Diego 1,077,600 0.940
29 Nashville 1,024,560 0.894


32 Columbus, OH 932,680 0.814
33 Salt Lake City

I've been to all these markets, and most Americans would choose any of them over Pittsburgh. Sorry, but that's backed up by 50 years of population trends.

Looking at Pittsburgh as a developer, it's a waste of resources to have to scrape off the top of a hill to put any sort of development that may not even be seen from the road and having to build inclined roads from a winding street to the top of that hill. That's a big hassle. I can chase the same customer dollar for a much lower capital expense elsewhere. And once I'm at the top of that hill, I'm all by myself, with no shopping synergy to share with fellow developments. That's not how retail business is done in America, these days, where the suburban shopping experience is a long, flat, wide street with abundant shopping on all sides.

Logistically, I'm going to find Columbus or Indianapolis a far better choice, and if you've been to those cities, you'll see that my opinion is well shared by those holding the corporate pursestrings.

[LIRefugee]

I'll pick to live in Pittsburgh over Indianapolis or Columbus any day. Your "50 years of population trends" is a gross oversimplification. If you don't like Pittsburgh, that's fine, but it's a bit much to claim to speak for "most Americans".

Anyway, whether Pittsburgh is #22 or #222, I still like it for what it is.

[GregHenry]

Originally Posted by LIRefugee

If you don't like Pittsburgh, that's fine, but it's a bit much to claim to speak for "most Americans".

Please don't change the subject or take this personally.

[szug-bot]

people were talking about media market ranking.

someone said they remembered it being as high as #6. i do remember night time radio talk host Perry Marshall saying he remembered it being as high as #4.

but what does that mean? what advantage is there is being a highly ranked media market? the best answer i can think of is that you get more people hoping to sell in your market. i guess a big media market also translates into more souls employed IN the mass media.....?

[LIRefugee]

Originally Posted by GregHenry

Please don't change the subject or take this personally.

Please don't dictate forum decorum.

[GregHenry]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

but what does that mean? what advantage is there is being a highly ranked media market?

In a moment's glimpse, the ranking is merely a measure of a city's economic power. Does it mean a city is better if it's ranked 12th or 20th? Likely not. What is of tremendous importance, however, is a city's advancement or decline in the rankings. If a city drops from 6th to 22nd, that slippage is clear proof of the comparative decline of that city's economic power, while the reverse is also true.

[PeterRabbit]

Artificialily small means what? It is better that we fit into our size than to overgrow it.

[Neckbeard89]

Indianapolis is like a giant southside works.


Are all the boroughs and municipalities as broke as the city is?

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

people were talking about media market ranking.

someone said they remembered it being as high as #6. i do remember night time radio talk host Perry Marshall saying he remembered it being as high as #4.

but what does that mean? what advantage is there is being a highly ranked media market? the best answer i can think of is that you get more people hoping to sell in your market. i guess a big media market also translates into more souls employed IN the mass media.....?

I think it means you can charge more for commercials in larger markets.

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by GregHenry

Rare is a down trend that doesn't have the occasional uptick.

Pittsburgh may be at 22, but it's a sitting duck for these markets:

24 Raleigh-Durham (Fayetvlle) 1,143,420 0.997
25 Charlotte 1,140,900 0.995
26 Indianapolis 1,109,970 0.968

28 San Diego 1,077,600 0.940
29 Nashville 1,024,560 0.894


32 Columbus, OH 932,680 0.814
33 Salt Lake City

I've been to all these markets, and most Americans would choose any of them over Pittsburgh. Sorry, but that's backed up by 50 years of population trends.

Looking at Pittsburgh as a developer, it's a waste of resources to have to scrape off the top of a hill to put any sort of development that may not even be seen from the road and having to build inclined roads from a winding street to the top of that hill. That's a big hassle. I can chase the same customer dollar for a much lower capital expense elsewhere. And once I'm at the top of that hill, I'm all by myself, with no shopping synergy to share with fellow developments. That's not how retail business is done in America, these days, where the suburban shopping experience is a long, flat, wide street with abundant shopping on all sides.

Logistically, I'm going to find Columbus or Indianapolis a far better choice, and if you've been to those cities, you'll see that my opinion is well shared by those holding the corporate pursestrings.

Actually, this link gives #23-33 as the following:
Table of United States Metropolitan Statistical Areas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Portland
San Antonio
Sacramento
Orlando
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Kansas City
Las Vegas
San Jose
Columbus
Charlotte

These numbers are accurate as of 7/1/2011