Most Powerful City in the South....Not Named Atlanta Dallas Houston or Miami (metro, largest)
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.
I can agree that two cities can be in the same tier and not necessarily equal. I also can agree that Nashville is ahead of Richmond. My issue lies in asserting that Nashville is in a whole tier higher; I just don't believe that...
In response to the "pulling away" comment from @aries, that ties in to my belief that they are of the same tier. Nashville isn't "pulling away" from Richmond in terms of anything except metropolitan/overall population growth. Depending on the source (Forbes, Sperling's, BLS) Richmond and Nashville are essentially equal on job growth, however Richmond has a higher projected job growth for the next ten years. Both cities are seeing the same amount of growth in-city. Nashville is larger, and will always be larger, thus why it will always have a larger gdp. And I respect how Nashville isn't a one-trick pony, that it's economy is also booned by the healthcare industry. Clearly, pop culture significance is in Nashville's favor. Historic significance is in Richmond's favor, and Richmond has a more well-rounded and diverse economy...
Bith cities are essentially equal in educational attainment, although Nashville has more colleges and Vanderbilt, which is more well-known than anything in Richmond. Richmond absolutely plays a more important role in federal governnment, and has the more renowned reputation in government, law, and finance. This certainly isn't anything to scoff at, as those are three industries of prominence and decision making for the nation, and on their face, more important, in actual relevance, than most other industries...
In terms of actual culture (not pop culture), Nashville has a film festival that is slightly more attended and slightly more entrants than Richmond's. But Richmond, of course, is right down the street from DC, To be able to have a film festival that is that comparable to Nashville's, while being a smaller city and so close to a major metropolis, is worth mentioning. Both cities are known for their food scens; Richmond's is more popping right now, as far as popularity and coverage, but Nashville's has been recognized longer. Richmond's folk festival is far more attended than Nashville's folk festival, twice as much according to some estimates, Richmond's arts and museum senes are more notable than those in Nashville (not saying Nashville's isn't, only pointing out that Richmond's is more recognized)....
So these are the reasons I don't believe Nashville belongs in another tier than Richmond. Richmond isn't stagnant, which was incorrectly mentioned on here before, nor is it light on culture, so Nashville isn't pulling away from anything in Richmond besides population. However, again, I personally feel it is a few spots up on Richmond. It has always had a larger entertainment and healthcare scene. In this case, being an epicenter of music is so large that it cannot be undermined, and of course it is the larger city with the larger economy...
For different specifics, I feel San Antonio and Raleigh don't belong in a higher tier, either. One thing in common, though, again, is that Richmond is more relevant than all economically (when considering F500's headquartered and operating in areas), Richmond is more relevant in terms of finance and government. I understand that to some these may not carry a ton of weight. Obviously, Richmond can't match the tourism numbers...
One thing though, I believe the secret is getting out about Richmond. People are moving back into the city, which it and the metro are seeing the highest growth since the 40s, and is developing a high esteem culturally, arts and food in particular. While it's metro is signicantly smaller and less enticing, within the cities themselves, only Nashville offers more in the way of entertainment and amenities. The other two certainly don't play within a higher field specifically regarding those areas...
Also, while it's become en vogue on this website to clown the GaWC rankings, I think consideration should be given to its methods. You're right, and I agree that Pittsburgh is of a higher tier than Richmond---but it also of a higher tier than the other three cities we're mentioning. I disgree with your notion on importance within region. Richmond is very important regionally, probably legitimately equal to Nashville's sphere of influence, going points west and south. I mean, is San Antonio more important regionally? It's an hour from Austin, it's state capital with a larger influence nearly everywhere. Raleigh's influence is certainly felt throughout all of eastern Carolina. But I get the size, growth, and gdp arguments, and if that is the barometer we are using, I can agree Richmond is a lesser city. I just think there are other intangibles we should consider in breaking down city comparisons...
If we're basing population growth as a factor in our decisions, Nashville isn't quite on Raleigh or San Antonio's tier either. This is why I believe critical thinking is essential. Raleigh is growing faster than damn near everywhere, but offers nothing more than Nashville offers, so that would throw that growth opinion out of the window if I were solely comparing those two cities. My comment that Nashville is Charlotte-lite was solely based subjectively off the feel of the two cities, I've lived in Charlotte and visited Nashville. The "look" of Nashville is Charlotte-esque. Not a scientific or statistical way of comparing cities, and not suggesting that it is....
@aries, saying that a city is a "lite" version of somewhere isn't disrespectful nor disgraceful in my opinion. Anybody with a brain knows that each city has it's own identity. Richmond is DC-lite---it has the corporate, governmental, architectural, geographical, and artistic sensibilities on a smaller scale....
To drive back home to my initial point, I can understand the argument for Austin not being placed in a higher tier. I think, though, that as a destination, with its growth being so other-wordly, and with its cultural relevance and national/international profiles growing so large, it is outgrowing it's posiotion alongside SA or Nashville. I can see the other side of the argument, though...
@aries, saying that a city is a "lite" version of somewhere isn't disrespectful nor disgraceful in my opinion. Anybody with a brain knows that each city has it's own identity. Richmond is DC-lite---it has the corporate, governmental, architectural, geographical, and artistic sensibilities on a smaller scale....
Yes, but look at the size difference between Richmond and DC. This is basically saying that Richmond is a mini-DC (which is true in some respects) whereas it wouldn't be accurate to call Nashville a mini-Charlotte at all. They aren't all that different in size and while they have their similarities, they also have different key industries and claims to fame. I understood the point that was being made when the term "Charlotte-lite" was used, but it was an incorrect one IMO. "Atlanta-lite" would be more accurate truthfully.
"-lite" to me implies a watered-down version of something else and Nashville certainly is not a watered-down version of Charlotte. It's undeniably distinctive from Charlotte in numerous ways despite some similarities mostly stemming from sharing a region and when they started their current growth spurts. Nashville is not a "Charlotte-lite" just because it's a slightly smaller Southern metro that's gaining traction a little later. Under such an over-simplified definition, almost any slightly smaller metro could be a "-lite" of regional peers that are a little bigger.
I wasn't using "lite" in a negative bash towards Nashville, obviously both cities have their own identity. Charlotte is just larger with the characteristics and statistics to go along with it - something Nashville will eventually reach one day.
Size/population, growth, amenities, economy...the Triangle and Charlotte are in the same general tier in those terms. That doesn't mean that they are clones of each other though.
Education and growth are the only two areas that the Triangle has similarities toward Charlotte with. Metro Charlotte's economy is over twice the size of the entire Triangle CSA and the same can be said with tourism numbers/amenities. Charlotte's tier with those is Tampa.
Education and growth are the only two areas that the Triangle has similarities toward Charlotte with. Metro Charlotte's economy is over twice the size of the entire Triangle CSA and the same can be said with tourism numbers/amenities. Charlotte's tier with those is Tampa.
Charlotte may have a larger economy but it definitely isn't twice the size. The combined GDP of Raleigh-Durham (just the MSAs) is $109,123 billion. Charlotte is $139,022 billion and Tampa is $122,515 billion. Keep in mind that the Triangle CSA has 4 micropolitan areas which if could be added would definitely put the Triangle close to or at Tampa's level as far as GDP. So as you can see, Charlotte is realistically about 25% larger economy than the Triangle. Now, when you consider that some of Charlotte's metro goes into SC, then Charlotte and Triangle's impact on the state is roughly even for NC.
I wasn't using "lite" in a negative bash towards Nashville, obviously both cities have their own identity. Charlotte is just larger with the characteristics and statistics to go along with it - something Nashville will eventually reach one day.
Nashville and Charlotte are in the same tier, and so is Austin.
Education and growth are the only two areas that the Triangle has similarities toward Charlotte with. Metro Charlotte's economy is over twice the size of the entire Triangle CSA and the same can be said with tourism numbers/amenities. Charlotte's tier with those is Tampa.
Charlotte may have a larger economy but it definitely isn't twice the size. The combined GDP of Raleigh-Durham (just the MSAs) is $109,123 billion. Charlotte is $139,022 billion and Tampa is $122,515 billion. Keep in mind that the Triangle CSA has 4 micropolitan areas which if could be added would definitely put the Triangle close to or at Tampa's level as far as GDP. So as you can see, Charlotte is realistically about 25% larger economy than the Triangle. Now, when you consider that some of Charlotte's metro goes into SC, then Charlotte and Triangle's impact on the state is roughly even for NC.
I don't know where in the world he was getting that from about Charlotte's economy being over twice the size of the Triangle's.
The two regions are set up differently and have their own particular strengths and weaknesses, but they are in the same league for all intents and purposes.
Thanks for your response. I think cities can be in the same tier without being equal such as how global cities are classified. For example, Atlanta and Chicago are both Alpha cities, however, no one would confuse each of them as being of equal importance on an economic/global/population scale. Chicago is an Alpha city while Atlanta is an Alpha-. Actually the metrics places Richmond higher than Nashville, Austin, and Pittsburgh as a High Sufficiency city. Clearly, if anyone has ever lived or even visited the cities, no one would mistake Richmond for Pittsburgh. I place Richmond in a lower tier based on population, population growth, GDP, and importance in its respective region. It matches or exceeds cities such as Birmingham, Memphis, Jacksonville, Louisville etc. The argument can be made for Raleigh being in the same tier, but not quite as the MSA leaves out a very integral part of its metro (Durham). Many see Raleigh (currently) as a multinodal metro area including high growth projections, world class institutions, and a very important tech sector. I have to disagree with you on Austin being closer to Charlotte/Orlando/Tampa than Nashville/San Antonio/Raleigh. Austin and Nashville have nearly identical populations, GDPs, and economic influence etc. San Antonio is larger than both Austin and Nashville. The Charlotte is Atlanta-lite comparison doesn't really hold up either as Atlanta is significantly larger and more important than Charlotte vs. Nashville being Charlotte-lite as Charlotte is not even half the population of Charlotte while Nashville is more than 75% the size of Charlotte.
San Antonio MSA: 2.3 million
Austin MSA: 1.95 million
Nashville MSA: 1.8 million
Richmond MSA: 1.2 million
San Antonio's GDP is much more than 96 billion that figure is extremely conservative.
Last edited by SweethomeSanAntonio; 09-17-2015 at 09:35 AM..
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.
