CHICAGO IS THE BIGGEST SCAM!! (but let's keep it a secret) (Evanston: fit in, power lines)

[DavePa]

Originally Posted by SkylarkPhotoBooth

That's the key part of your quote.

Or if you prefer legitimate news sources:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/colum...212-story.html

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...-lose-its-name

The key is that it was the Hancock company that asked for its free naming to be removed. It wasn't the owner removing it.

No negativity intended (other than the obvious negativity of the reality of the situation), and certainly no politics intended. I don't even know the politics of the owners or former tenant.

Guess Wikipedia remains unreliable. It was about money .... always is. Guess just a coincidence it got a new owner and no doubt said time to start paying again.

Chicago's downtown still has plenty of prestige to be in. Sales force took naming rights for a new tower. Bank of America did for another .....

[brodie734]

to be fair to the John Hancock Building, John Hancock used to own a bunch of towers and asked that their name no longer be used for any of them. The Boston John Hancock Building also had it's name changed and it's similarly iconic in that city.

The nickname "second city" may seem farcical or even cringey in a world where Chicago may soon cease to even be the third largest city in the country but imo it's more about the role the city performs. Cities like Montreal and Manchester and Melbourne are similar to Chicago... economic hubs for particularly important regions with less going on in terms of media activity and more of a focus on the residential than the tourist focused prime city. Obviously the US is more polycentric, but if you could separate Hollywood from Los Angeles, the latter would just become like the American answer to Birmingham in the UK... the second biggest city, but really just a morass of people with no wider import.

[SkylarkPhotoBooth]

Originally Posted by DavePa

Guess Wikipedia remains unreliable. It was about money .... always is. Guess just a coincidence it got a new owner and no doubt said time to start paying again.

Of course it's about money-- They apparently determined they would ultimately lose money by having their name associated with the building. Yes, it's possible the new owner had something to do with their decision, if they thought that owner would make decisions that would make them not want to have their name associated with the building. The ownership change probably was a coincidence, though, since (as noted by the previous poster), they did the same thing with other buildings in other cities at the same time.

We can speculate about details all we want, but all reports are that it was Hancock who asked the owner to remove their name and logos, not the other way around.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by brodie734

Cities like Montreal and Manchester and Melbourne are similar to Chicago... economic hubs for particularly important regions with less going on in terms of media activity and more of a focus on the residential than the tourist focused prime city..

While it's true statistically, Montreal is not really a second city in the way it's being discussed here or generally envisioned. In Canada it's more accurate that Toronto and Montreal dominate over their respective spheres.


Montreal most definitely does not play second fiddle to Toronto in terms of media and entertainment.


It's also not less "tourist-focused" than Toronto is. For most Canadians (non-French speakers) Montreal is more of a place to play than a place to live and work. Toronto is very much the dominant metropolis for the latter two life needs.

[Tall Traveler]

I compared the cost of living versus the average income and Chicago does win out over the cities you mentioned, especially over NYC. But it would lose the same "bargain" comparison with Dallas and Houston.

For me, where I used to live (Seattle), has a higher income to cost, much prettier, less crime, and a much better climate than Chicago and is a much better bargain even if it's not considered a "World Class city."

We have good friends from the UK that just visited Chicago and will be visiting us for a week starting Tuesday, I'll solicit their opinion of Chicago other than it was "bloody cold."

[Master Jay]

And WHAT the HECK became of our OP friend, edsg25?!?

Come back! We miss you!

[dtyfygiu]

Originally Posted by Tall Traveler

I compared the cost of living versus the average income and Chicago does win out over the cities you mentioned, especially over NYC. But it would lose the same "bargain" comparison with Dallas and Houston.

For me, where I used to live (Seattle), has a higher income to cost, much prettier, less crime, and a much better climate than Chicago and is a much better bargain even if it's not considered a "World Class city."

We have good friends from the UK that just visited Chicago and will be visiting us for a week starting Tuesday, I'll solicit their opinion of Chicago other than it was "bloody cold."

1. Compare Chicago to its peers, not Houston and Dallas. Houston and Dallas are not in Chicago's league.


2. Seattle is not a bargain lmao. Average home price is $790k, downtown is dirty and filled with homeless, way too far left (Chicago is more center), the tech workers have sucked the culture out that city, nightlife is garbage, etc. It's definitely safer and prettier tho, I'll give you that. Higher income doesn't really matter when the median home price in Chicago is 300k vs damn near 800k in Seattle and its only going up every month. People are getting priced out. And better climate is debatable. Seattle is in the rainiest section of the country.

[TBideon]

Houston isn't Chicago's peer? Oh come on.

[dtyfygiu]

Originally Posted by TBideon

Houston isn't Chicago's peer? Oh come on.

Chicago peers are New York, LA, Boston, SF, LA, Philly, etc.



Houston in the tier with Dallas, Atlanta, Miami, not really in that top tier. Like do a city vs city comparison Houston vs Chicago. Houston's not coming on top.

[Tall Traveler]

Originally Posted by TBideon

Houston isn't Chicago's peer? Oh come on.

You're correct but unrealistic homers always amuse me. If Chicago can say Houston isn't in their league, then LA & NYC can say Chicago isn't in their league.