U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Halloween!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 04-23-2007, 04:44 PM
 
609 posts, read 2,085,266 times
Reputation: 133
Yes they are two distince cities, so is Minneapolis/St. Paul, Seattle/Tacoma, San Francisco/Oakland, but the US Govt. recognizes all these city pairs as a single metropolitan entity with the larger urban core being the principle city, in this case Dallas, in the Bay area's case San Francisco.
And DFW is learning to act as a single entity. They made a bid for the 2012 olympics, though failed. They just recently came together and made a bid for the 2011 Superbowl. They came together for Love Field. They've come together for a nice train system that connects the two cities.
Both cities have learned to set aside their differences. As a person living in the mid-cities, I can attest that the cities are now more than ever acting as a single region, and the dividends have paid off.
Companies are moving to us in flocks. We're alternating with chicago every year for the #1 or #2 spot for most number of corporate relocations. Land is cheap, corporate HQ buildings are sprouting up in the city and in the burbs.

 
Old 04-23-2007, 04:55 PM
 
Location: In God
3,073 posts, read 8,341,815 times
Reputation: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroplex2003 View Post
The airport situations in Houston and Dallas are similar.
Must compare Love field to Hobby, and DFW to Intercontinental.
You can't compare Hobby to Love Field because they're two totally different types of airports.

Quote:
the New York City area airport Newark Liberty, which is appropriate since NYC is clearly much more of a world destination than Houston.
Newark isn't really a New York airport. It's mostly a last resort when access to the Queens airports are a stretch. In the same way that if Hobby or Intercontinental are too difficult, it's off to Beaumont. Although, all three airports are under the Port Authority of NY/NJ.
 
Old 04-23-2007, 05:00 PM
 
Location: In God
3,073 posts, read 8,341,815 times
Reputation: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroplex2003 View Post
Yes they are two distince cities, so is Minneapolis/St. Paul, Seattle/Tacoma, San Francisco/Oakland, but the US Govt. recognizes all these city pairs as a single metropolitan entity with the larger urban core being the principle city, in this case Dallas, in the Bay area's case San Francisco.
And DFW is learning to act as a single entity. They made a bid for the 2012 olympics, though failed. They just recently came together and made a bid for the 2011 Superbowl. They came together for Love Field. They've come together for a nice train system that connects the two cities.
Both cities have learned to set aside their differences. As a person living in the mid-cities, I can attest that the cities are now more than ever acting as a single region, and the dividends have paid off.
Companies are moving to us in flocks. We're alternating with chicago every year for the #1 or #2 spot for most number of corporate relocations. Land is cheap, corporate HQ buildings are sprouting up in the city and in the burbs.
Well the points that you're making are basically what this whole thread was about in a way. DFW can act as one entity if they want to, but not to team up and compare themselves to one single city. The GaWc ranks cities, not "super areas".
 
Old 04-23-2007, 05:01 PM
 
609 posts, read 2,085,266 times
Reputation: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpope409 View Post
You can't compare Hobby to Love Field because they're two totally different types of airports.

Newark isn't really a New York airport. It's mostly a last resort when access to the Queens airports are a stretch. In the same way that if Hobby or Intercontinental are too difficult, it's off to Beaumont. Although, all three airports are under the Port Authority of NY/NJ.
Just a quick note: Most airline industry would agree that the 3 major NYC area airports are: NYC JFK, NYC La Guardia, and Newark Liberty.

Yes Love and Hobby are different, though I do believe in the future SWA's announced plans will make Love busier than Hobby. Afterall, Love is the world headquarters of SWA< something that Houston cannot claim.
 
Old 04-23-2007, 05:07 PM
 
Location: In God
3,073 posts, read 8,341,815 times
Reputation: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroplex2003 View Post
Just a quick note: Most airline industry would agree that the 3 major NYC area airports are: NYC JFK, NYC La Guardia, and Newark Liberty.
Okay? I wasn't saying that you were wrong, I was just making it clear that Newark isn't New York's airport. Hell, LaGuardia and JFK aren't even New York's airports. They all belong to the PANYNJ. Versus other cities owning there own airports. They just slapped an airport system in that area. Most people in The City use LaGuardia or JFK, though.

Quote:
Yes Love and Hobby are different, though I do believe in the future SWA's announced plans will make Love busier than Hobby. Afterall, Love is the world headquarters of SWA< something that Houston cannot claim.
But Hobby is international. Something Dallas Love Field cannot claim.

In my opinion, this has kind of fallen off topic anyway because airports and flights have nothing to do with a city's worth. I do believe we've already squashed that.
 
Old 04-23-2007, 05:11 PM
 
609 posts, read 2,085,266 times
Reputation: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpope409 View Post
Well the points that you're making are basically what this whole thread was about in a way. DFW can act as one entity if they want to, but not to team up and compare themselves to one single city. The GaWc ranks cities, not "super areas".
Yes, but once again as I have said earlier, it's hard to tell where cities end. Atlanta proper has only 483,000 people. That's smaller than Milwaukee, WI or Indianapolis, IN or Louisville, Kentucky.
But almost all lay people would agree that Atlanta is a more major city than these other places mentioned.

The US govt. recognizes this fact, and that's why we have metropolitan statistical areas, b/c the govt. has done research and defined what is one culturally identifiable entity.
Having said that, CMSA's have also been used by the govt, and even using CMSA statistics, Houston area is still smaller than DFW, though DFW drops some rankings down b/c the CMSA's shoots up the Bay Area's stats with San Jose added to the mix.

Think of it as the Minneapolis/St. Paul of Texas (though DFW is bigger). Or SFO (San Francisco/Oakland)
 
Old 04-23-2007, 05:18 PM
 
609 posts, read 2,085,266 times
Reputation: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpope409 View Post
Okay? I wasn't saying that you were wrong, I was just making it clear that Newark isn't New York's airport. Hell, LaGuardia and JFK aren't even New York's airports. They all belong to the PANYNJ. Versus other cities owning there own airports. They just slapped an airport system in that area. Most people in The City use LaGuardia or JFK, though.

But Hobby is international. Something Dallas Love Field cannot claim.

In my opinion, this has kind of fallen off topic anyway because airports and flights have nothing to do with a city's worth. I do believe we've already squashed that.
Yes you're right, Hobby is Int'l, but not by much. It's primarily a domestic airport served mainly by Southwest. Southwest has done a great job at building up Hobby and taking over the majority market share there.

As for airports, airports can tell you something a/b a city.

San Antonio proper clearly has more people than Dallas, yet their airport only has 30 gates as opposed to DFW's 168 and Love's current 32.

Louisville, Kentucky proper has more people than St. Louis proper. Yet Lambert Field in St. Louis has 83 gates as opposed to Louisville's roughly 20 gates.

Cincinatti, OH has fewer people than Omaha, NE, yet Cincinatti, OH's airport is Delta airlines 2nd largest hub.

Airports are representative of population and of the city. They roughly correlate.

Hence the reason why DFW and Houston area are only a handful of cities with viable secondary airports.

St. Louis obviously has failed in the secondary airport market with MidAmerica airport.
 
Old 04-23-2007, 05:20 PM
 
Location: In God
3,073 posts, read 8,341,815 times
Reputation: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroplex2003 View Post
Yes, but once again as I have said earlier, it's hard to tell where cities end. Atlanta proper has only 483,000 people. That's smaller than Milwaukee, WI or Indianapolis, IN or Louisville, Kentucky.
But almost all lay people would agree that Atlanta is a more major city than these other places mentioned.

The US govt. recognizes this fact, and that's why we have metropolitan statistical areas, b/c the govt. has done research and defined what is one culturally identifiable entity.
Having said that, CMSA's have also been used by the govt, and even using CMSA statistics, Houston area is still smaller than DFW, though DFW drops some rankings down b/c the CMSA's shoots up the Bay Area's stats with San Jose added to the mix.

Think of it as the Minneapolis/St. Paul of Texas (though DFW is bigger). Or SFO (San Francisco/Oakland)
The fact still remains that cities are ranked as single locations. It doesn't matter if they're a fusion of other areas. You have to look at those cities which are not co-dependant on their metropolitan area.

New York, by itself would not be any less important without it's metro. Same for Chicago, Houston, and probably Los Angeles. Boston and San Francisco as well. Dallas' metro and a large portion of "its" business is shared with a whole other major city.
 
Old 04-23-2007, 05:25 PM
 
Location: In God
3,073 posts, read 8,341,815 times
Reputation: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroplex2003 View Post
Yes you're right, Hobby is Int'l, but not by much. It's primarily a domestic airport served mainly by Southwest. Southwest has done a great job at building up Hobby and taking over the majority market share there.

As for airports, airports can tell you something a/b a city.

San Antonio proper clearly has more people than Dallas, yet their airport only has 30 gates as opposed to DFW's 168 and Love's current 32.

Louisville, Kentucky proper has more people than St. Louis proper. Yet Lambert Field in St. Louis has 83 gates as opposed to Louisville's roughly 20 gates.

Cincinatti, OH has fewer people than Omaha, NE, yet Cincinatti, OH's airport is Delta airlines 2nd largest hub.

Airports are representative of population and of the city. They roughly correlate.

Hence the reason why DFW and Houston area are only a handful of cities with viable secondary airports.

St. Louis obviously has failed in the secondary airport market with MidAmerica airport.
Then why does Dallas have more air traffic than New York. Clearly you're not saying that Dallas is more important. You'd also be saying that if was more relevant than Houston, and I wouldn't like that very much, lol. No just playing, but it still stands that Houston has two int'l airports.
 
Old 04-23-2007, 05:26 PM
 
609 posts, read 2,085,266 times
Reputation: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpope409 View Post
The fact still remains that cities are ranked as single locations. It doesn't matter if they're a fusion of other areas. You have to look at those cities which are not co-dependant on their metropolitan area.

New York, by itself would not be any less important without it's metro. Same for Chicago, Houston, and probably Atlanta. Boston and San Francisco as well. Dallas' metro and a large portion of "its" business is shared with a whole other major city.
Atlanta is dependent on its metro area. So is Houston.

OVerall, I do believe that the few cities in this country that really stand out are NYC, Boston, Chicago, SF, and DC.

LA, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta in my opinion do not make that list. These cities just do not have the densities that the above mentioned do. Houston and Dallas are more similar to LA than to your SF, NYC, Boston, Chicago, and DC. They tend to mimic the sprawled out American city rather than the dense city. And as for Houston, it's area is twice the size of Dallas, but most urban economist recognize had Dallas not be bound by its suburbs, Houston and Dallas would virtually be the same type of city...sprawled out and not dense relative to the northern counterparts.
Dallas and Houston represent the new american city, SF, NYC, Boston, Chicago, DC the old.
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.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top