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.
Only a moron buys into these rankings by GWC, remember these being the same people who placed Atlanta as an Alpha world city back in 2000. Its 2011 and Miami has seen the worst secular decline in its history economically but makes it to the top of the Alpha - tier with the low quality income? What a joke
I continue to see many posters on this site bring the status of their city from GWC into question when they have something to prove, "its a alpha city" etc etc and I believe those are 9-5 average joes making family level income in middle class suburbia, the kings and queens of cookie cutter lifestyle. Not to sound elitist but this agency has time and time again been proven to be managed by imbeciles. Philly from gamma to alpha - in 2 years? Chicago above LA? Atlanta and Miami in the same tier as Boston? Houston below Atlanta and Miami? SF and DC in the same tier as LA?
Imbeciles.
I question it as well. But I still think it's an interesting way of looking at things.
Only a moron buys into these rankings by GWC, remember these being the same people who placed Atlanta as an Alpha world city back in 2000. Its 2011 and Miami has seen the worst secular decline in its history economically but makes it to the top of the Alpha - tier with the low quality income? What a joke
I continue to see many posters on this site bring the status of their city from GWC into question when they have something to prove, "its a alpha city" etc etc and I believe those are 9-5 average joes making family level income in middle class suburbia, the kings and queens of cookie cutter lifestyle. Not to sound elitist but this agency has time and time again been proven to be managed by imbeciles. Philly from gamma to alpha - in 2 years? Chicago above LA? Atlanta and Miami in the same tier as Boston? Houston below Atlanta and Miami? SF and DC in the same tier as LA?
Imbeciles.
Most people would put Atlanta and Miami in same tier as Boston, and most rankings I seen these cities switch back and fourth but usually they're not far from each other. Atlanta being a alpha back in 2000 was off, but if you look at the other cities that made the Alpha - list this time, Miami, Boston, Dallas, and Philly, it make sense Atlanta was put back, I agree with LInative these lists has been bias towards European cities and capital of small countries, when countless Americans cities with a higher GDP, regional importance, and etc, ranked lower because the US is a large county. It seem that really look at that and went wait a second. First off I can tell you tho they don't care about no dang cookie cutter houses this is not a Urban ranking or family level income Quality of life ranking.
How connective cities are, though competition, cooperation. Their looking at the world largest firms, not just where they're located, but what cities do they have a regional location, cities that are more connective rank higher.
But Anyways the things that I thought was off, first was Houston still not being Alpha, when Miami, Atlanta and Dallas did, I feel Houston should be too. But what I imagine happening, Atlanta means a lot to southeast for regional headquarters of large firms, and Houston is in a debate with Dallas for the central south but how did they come to just Dallas? And other thing Philly jump, it's like they went 2008 opps! I with kidphilly on this one.
Most people would put Atlanta and Miami in same tier as Boston, and most rankings I seen these cities switch back and fourth but usually they're not far from each other. Atlanta being a alpha back in 2000 was off, but if you look at the other cities that made the Alpha - list this time, Miami, Boston, Dallas, and Philly, it make sense Atlanta was put back, I agree with LInative these lists has been bias towards European cities and capital of small countries, when countless Americans cities with a higher GDP, regional importance, and etc, ranked lower because the US is a large county. It seem that really look at that and went wait a second. First off I can tell you tho they don't care about no dang cookie cutter houses this is not a Urban ranking or family level income Quality of life ranking.
How connective cities are, though competition, cooperation. Their looking at the world largest firms, not just where they're located, but what cities do they have a regional location, cities that are more connective rank higher.
But Anyways the things that I thought was off, first was Houston still not being Alpha, when Miami, Atlanta and Dallas did, I feel Houston should be too. But what I imagine happening, Atlanta means a lot to southeast for regional headquarters of large firms, and Houston is in a debate with Dallas for the central south but how did they come to just Dallas? And other thing Philly jump, it's like they went 2008 opps! I with kidphilly on this one.
I like Atlanta and think its a fine city, I don't have any complaints on where it ranks today.
Location: NY-NJ-Philly looks down at SF and laughs at the hippies
1,144 posts, read 1,296,920 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2e1m5a
Switch LA and Chicago and I'd agree with the list.
Why? I have always thought Chicago is the second most important city in this country, ahead of LA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dub King
GWC rankings: funniest thing since dave chanterelle chapelle. Of course Philly has been alpha all along. Now that has been fixed at least the rankings are a bit more credible.
Yeah, Philadelphia has always deserved to be an Alpha - or Beta +
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal
Most people would put Atlanta and Miami in same tier as Boston, and most rankings I seen these cities switch back and fourth but usually they're not far from each other. Atlanta being a alpha back in 2000 was off, but if you look at the other cities that made the Alpha - list this time, Miami, Boston, Dallas, and Philly, it make sense Atlanta was put back, I agree with LInative these lists has been bias towards European cities and capital of small countries, when countless Americans cities with a higher GDP, regional importance, and etc, ranked lower because the US is a large county. It seem that really look at that and went wait a second. First off I can tell you tho they don't care about no dang cookie cutter houses this is not a Urban ranking or family level income Quality of life ranking.
How connective cities are, though competition, cooperation. Their looking at the world largest firms, not just where they're located, but what cities do they have a regional location, cities that are more connective rank higher.
But Anyways the things that I thought was off, first was Houston still not being Alpha, when Miami, Atlanta and Dallas did, I feel Houston should be too. But what I imagine happening, Atlanta means a lot to southeast for regional headquarters of large firms, and Houston is in a debate with Dallas for the central south but how did they come to just Dallas? And other thing Philly jump, it's like they went 2008 opps! I with kidphilly on this one.
I would put Miami in the same tier with Boston, but not Atlanta. I believe Atlanta is one tier below Miami and Boston.
Why? I have always thought Chicago is the second most important city in this country, ahead of LA.
Yeah, Philadelphia has always deserved to be an Alpha - or Beta +
I would put Miami in the same tier with Boston, but not Atlanta. I believe Atlanta is one tier below Miami and Boston.
On what bases? Atlanta GDP is actually larger than Miami but it's not even just about GDP. Atlanta hub the American southeast not Miami, firms around the world that want influence in the American southeast won't choose Miami over Atlanta, Miami is important to the west indies which is another region.
Location: NY-NJ-Philly looks down at SF and laughs at the hippies
1,144 posts, read 1,296,920 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal
On what bases?
The basis of overall importance.
Quote:
Atlanta GDP is actually larger than Miami but it's not even just about GDP.
GDP is not everything taken into consideration when ranking cities in terms of importance.
Quote:
Atlanta hub the American southeast not Miami
Really? This is news to me..... Miami looks to be located in the southeast to me.
Quote:
firms around the world that want influence in the American southeast won't choose Miami over Atlanta
Atlanta does have some well known companies, but at the end of the day it's nothing to brag about.
Fortune 500 Companies by City
Houston - 24
Dallas - 24
Atlanta -12
Charlotte - 9
Charlotte has 9 and they are half the metro area population as Atlanta. Dallas and Houston is around the same metro population and they have exactly double the amount of fortune 500 companies.
Quote:
Miami is important to the west indies which is another region.
@Gateway Region, how do you come about this level of importance, because believe it or not your still wrong with your own method?
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.
