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.
Well-educated, highly talented employees and managers are picky about where they live because they can be. Since the SF Bay Area is a much, much more desirable region overall than Houston, it'll always be a place where executives and other high-ranking professionals will hang their hats while overseeing operations in Houston, mostly staffed by blue-collar workers who can't afford to live well in the SFBA. And eventually, once all of Houston/Texas' natural resources are depleted and the place no longer serves a purpose, it'll be on to the next. Maybe AL or MS--who knows?
Sometimes your posts are right on the money, but this is a load of steaming ****. The stereotypes are abundant. No "high ranking professionals" in the bay area are "overseeing operations in Houston". Houston has enough Fortune 500 companies headquartered there to oversee their own operations. Houston has a pretty even mix of white and blue collar in it's work force, but yeah. Just keep watching "Urban Cowboy" and go with those outdated 70's stereotypes.
Of course SF is more "desirable". I'm not arguing that point. If money were no object, I would choose to live in SF in a heartbeat before I chose Houston. However, not everybody thinks just like me. At least I get that. Also, as has been pointed out repeatedly throughout this thread, the big energy corporations are already getting into the Green game. When those fossil fuel resources are depleted, they will simply move on to the next resources. Trust me, I'm no fan of big oil, but I'm also not blind to the fact that the industry is gearing up for a transition. They have to if they are to stay in business.
San Francisco might come out on top but for the vast majority of people I.E. the middle class, Houston is the better place. Lots of money to be made in Texas and you can live a comfortable life. If I had a trust fund and had millions to spend **** yeah I would be in San Francisco in a heart beat, but life is good in Texas and there's a reason why millions are moving here.
They have a lot of trust fund kids in Texas as well. All that Oil Money lol
Well-educated, highly talented employees and managers are picky about where they live because they can be. Since the SF Bay Area is a much, much more desirable region overall than Houston, it'll always be a place where executives and other high-ranking professionals will hang their hats while overseeing operations in Houston, mostly staffed by blue-collar workers who can't afford to live well in the SFBA. And eventually, once all of Houston/Texas' natural resources are depleted and the place no longer serves a purpose, it'll be on to the next. Maybe AL or MS--who knows?
Your elitism is showing. Also Houston has no natural resources, although the city actually builds things, unlike San Francisco.
It's definitely the Bay Area by far. Cities like San Francisco and San Jose will continue to grow influence and importance much faster than Houston will. Also the Bay Area attracts better talent from not only the US but around the world. Houston location will somewhat hurt it in the long run because it will always have to compete with Dallas. The Bay Area doesn't have to compete so much with LA because it is removed far enough from its realm of influence. Houston will always have to fight tooth and nails against Dallas when it comes comparing economics in Texas.
Not that I don't think Dallas doesn't have a robust economy, but Houston has been outpacing Dallas economically by a good clip for at least a decade. Despite the Houston metro area being almost 10 percent smaller than DFW by population, Houston still has a larger economy by 16 percent. Houston produces 25 percent more output than DFW per capita. The way industries are situated in each metro, Houston is more prime to maintain its economic edge for the foreseeable future (because of energy and trade). One area Houston and DFW seem to alternate on any given year is annual population growth, but not so much so economically imo.
I do think, however, the Bay Area will still be more important economically than the Houston area for years to come because it can rely on other industries such as finance and education (even if they are tied to tech) to support its economy should something happen to its industry of bread and butter. While Houston's industry portfolio has gotten more diverse, it still has to inevitably invest more in other sources of energy and education to maintain growth long term, which I'm positive will happen.
^^^As if Houston hasn't been absolutely rocked by fluctuations in the oil markets or energy sectors. Enron? (that one company gave the whole city a beating in the early 2000s) The late 80s? (arguably worse effect on Houston than the 1st tech bubble burst).
Also, valuations might be out of whack, but most aren't forecasting another 2000 for the Bay Area. The Bay Area is more diversified than Houston. Both are prone to cycles, but so are all major world economies as all major economies are dominant global leaders in some sector or another, and all sectors go through cycles.
Not sure how Houston was in the '80s. Seemed pretty stable. Enron didn't decimate the whole city's economy when it went bust.
I hope that they aren't forecasting another 2001-2002 bust for the Bay Area but many say it's inevitable. I mean, how many BS start up's can a local economy handle before they all start to fall apart? Thing come and go in waves.
Don't get me wrong, I prefer San Francisco over Houston, but I do think the energy boom down there is a wee bit more stable than all the tech stuff in the Bay Area. I do think San Francisco will hold it's own long term -- it could take a hit and still be strong. Remember, all this Bay Area tech growth has only started in the last 3-4 years. Back in 2006-2007 it wasn't there at all.
I do also think that LA will eventually feed off San Francisco for all these tech companies secondary offices. "Silicon Beach" where I work is already playing off that role.
SF is probably the most gorgeous place for scenery of any city I ever been to. Only drawback to the BAY AREA is the cost of living but make no mistake SF is the coolest cities on earth. I like Houston but it doesn't compare to SF in any way.
Houston also attracts top talent and provides amazing executive housing opportunities for cheaper than the Bay Area, and isn't necessarily a "slouch" with cultural/entertainment outlets.
I don't think either economy is going anywhere, but the Bay Area's is imo more deeply rooted and more diverse, given its longer history and role in a variety of arenas, not just tech. That could be a plus for sustainability.
I also see the ability for the Bay Area's economy, more specifically the tech sector, to transform itself over time than I see for the energy sector, which is bigger, bulkier, and subject to far more regulation. The Bay Area is defined by "transformation", which is already reflected in what you're seeing in the tech sector.
RE: LA - just today a Bay Area firm closed up its shop in LA and offered all employees options to move to the NYC office. Granted, it wasn't a Silicon Beach firm and chose to office along Wilshire, but Silicon Beach will never be able to offer up the scale/infrastructure that the Bay Area does. For one, it's the most expensive part of LA/SoCal, so it doesn't offer much of a "cost savings" for firms to locate or expand there. Secondly, it's in the most constrained/regulated part of LA. Aside from some areas such as Playa Vista, being able to build a ton of office space to capture tech growth is not going to happen. Lastly, it doesn't have the engineering/programming attraction that the Bay Area has and will always have, nor does it have the VC infrastructure/support.
It's a "player", but won't effectively "steal" from the Bay Area like NYC, Boston, and Chicago potentially can, imo.
Houston also attracts top talent and provides amazing executive housing opportunities for cheaper than the Bay Area, and isn't necessarily a "slouch" with cultural/entertainment outlets.
I don't think either economy is going anywhere, but the Bay Area's is imo more deeply rooted and more diverse, given its longer history and role in a variety of arenas, not just tech. That could be a plus for sustainability.
I also see the ability for the Bay Area's economy, more specifically the tech sector, to transform itself over time than I see for the energy sector, which is bigger, bulkier, and subject to far more regulation. The Bay Area is defined by "transformation", which is already reflected in what you're seeing in the tech sector.
RE: LA - just today a Bay Area firm closed up its shop in LA and offered all employees options to move to the NYC office. Granted, it wasn't a Silicon Beach firm and chose to office along Wilshire, but Silicon Beach will never be able to offer up the scale/infrastructure that the Bay Area does. For one, it's the most expensive part of LA/SoCal, so it doesn't offer much of a "cost savings" for firms to locate or expand there. Secondly, it's in the most constrained/regulated part of LA. Aside from some areas such as Playa Vista, being able to build a ton of office space to capture tech growth is not going to happen. Lastly, it doesn't have the engineering/programming attraction that the Bay Area has and will always have, nor does it have the VC infrastructure/support.
It's a "player", but won't effectively "steal" from the Bay Area like NYC, Boston, and Chicago potentially can, imo.
I don't think one tech firm closing is indicative of the tech climate of Los Angeles. I don't think LA is really gunning to "dethrone Silicon Valley" but there is a tech scence worth keeping an eye on. This article today from Tech Crunch can explain it better than me
I don't think one tech firm closing is indicative of the tech climate of Los Angeles. I don't think LA is really gunning to "dethrone Silicon Valley" but there is a tech scence worth keeping an eye on. This article today from Tech Crunch can explain it better than me
Agreed that there is something going on down here with tech. Will never be of the same scale as Silicon Vallley, but we hold our own.
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.
