U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-26-2016, 10:57 AM
 
34,714 posts, read 32,103,854 times
Reputation: 22622

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
Based off past census results, it's usually the sunbelt cities that have over estimates when the official census stats are released. Atlanta is a great example of that.
Atlanta is probably the only example of that, and it's not really a typical Sunbelt city proper, being only 133 sq miles and having a population under half a million.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-26-2016, 11:07 AM
 
Location: The City
22,402 posts, read 34,194,672 times
Reputation: 7844
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnc2mbfl View Post
What happened to the other nearly 40 square miles of land?


Its the ports, airports, refineries and a 10,000 acre park. Though do agree with your point later in this thread that all cities have this aspect with some more then others. Philly really has no undeveloped areas and much of the ports and refineries or heavy manufacturing areas would likely never be redeveloped into anything residential but again not a unique aspect in that regard
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2016, 12:34 PM
 
1,353 posts, read 1,344,857 times
Reputation: 808
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade View Post
Houston is closing the gap between itself and Atlanta. Meanwhile, DC is flying up the list. Could pass San Francisco.

You’re looking at this simplistically, and way wrong. Even I am looking at this simplistically, but if you spend 15 minutes digging into the numbers, you’ll see that when you factor in population growth (and assume 2.5 people per household uniformly for each metro) you’ll easily see that the Nielsen market measurement is not a measurement of size or influence anymore. Not surprisingly, the homes of Netflix and technology are seeing the biggest shrinkage. Given that Atlanta’s home TV networks are among the most cutting edge with technology and appealing to millennials, despite its growth it’s clear that many people in that area have turned to internet/streaming as opposed to keeping up with basic cable. DC may be lower due to reliance on cable news moreso by its populace than other places. Philly is the home of Comcast and I don’t get the sense its populace is generally cutting edge. Chicago, like Philly, may just have demographic issues and is seeing less of a dropoff as a result. I guess everyone moving to Houston is sticking with cable so it’s almost 1:1 growth in population to growth in media market, assuming that 2.5 person per household ratio.

I digress, there’s always more to the numbers, so “catching SF Bay Area” really means nothing, if both areas are growing numerically in population fair equally, it just means the one catching the Bay Area is full of people stuck on ancient technology while the people in the Bay Area continue to advance into a new age.

So, by all means, pat yourself on the back

Areas with a weighted change in TV market size (weighted against population growth, household size assumption of 2.5 per HH on new growth, and most of these used CSA population)

LA: -2.6%
Atlanta: -2.6%
SF Bay Area: -2.5%
DFW: -1.6%
NYC: -1.4%
Boston: -1.3%
Philly: -1.1%
DC: -1.0%
Chicago: -0.5%
Houston: -0.4%

NYC:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 23,724,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: (65,500)
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 647,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: (324,300)
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: -1.4%

LA:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 18,680,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: (164,450)
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 803,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: (485,650)
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: -2.6%

Chicago:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 9,923,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: (17,630)
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 83,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: (50,830)
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: -0.5%

Philadelphia:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 7,183,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: (32,300)
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 115,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: (78,300)
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: -1.1%

Dallas Fort Worth:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 7,504,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 157,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 687,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 157,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 2.1%
Should have been: 3.7%
Differential: -1.6%

SF Bay Area:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 8,714,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 9,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 560,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 9,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 0.1%
Should have been: 2.6%
Differential: -2.5%

Boston:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 8,153,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 2,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 260,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 2,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 0.0%
Should have been: 1.3%
Differential: -1.3%

Atlanta:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 6,365,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 16,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 455,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 16,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 0.3%
Should have been: 2.9%
Differential: -2.6%

DC:
2016 MSA Base Population: 6,098,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 122,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 462,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 122,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 2.0%
Should have been: 3.0%
Differential: -1.0%

Houston:
2016 MSA Base Population: 6,657,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 268,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 737,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 268,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 4.0%
Should have been: 4.4%
Differential: -0.4%
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2016, 01:30 PM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,521 posts, read 3,355,055 times
Reputation: 2818
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
You’re looking at this simplistically, and way wrong. Even I am looking at this simplistically, but if you spend 15 minutes digging into the numbers, you’ll see that when you factor in population growth (and assume 2.5 people per household uniformly for each metro) you’ll easily see that the Nielsen market measurement is not a measurement of size or influence anymore. Not surprisingly, the homes of Netflix and technology are seeing the biggest shrinkage. Given that Atlanta’s home TV networks are among the most cutting edge with technology and appealing to millennials, despite its growth it’s clear that many people in that area have turned to internet/streaming as opposed to keeping up with basic cable. DC may be lower due to reliance on cable news moreso by its populace than other places. Philly is the home of Comcast and I don’t get the sense its populace is generally cutting edge. Chicago, like Philly, may just have demographic issues and is seeing less of a dropoff as a result. I guess everyone moving to Houston is sticking with cable so it’s almost 1:1 growth in population to growth in media market, assuming that 2.5 person per household ratio.

I digress, there’s always more to the numbers, so “catching SF Bay Area” really means nothing, if both areas are growing numerically in population fair equally, it just means the one catching the Bay Area is full of people stuck on ancient technology while the people in the Bay Area continue to advance into a new age.

So, by all means, pat yourself on the back

Areas with a weighted change in TV market size (weighted against population growth, household size assumption of 2.5 per HH on new growth, and most of these used CSA population)

LA: -2.6%
Atlanta: -2.6%
SF Bay Area: -2.5%
DFW: -1.6%
NYC: -1.4%
Boston: -1.3%
Philly: -1.1%
DC: -1.0%
Chicago: -0.5%
Houston: -0.4%

NYC:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 23,724,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: (65,500)
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 647,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: (324,300)
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: -1.4%

LA:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 18,680,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: (164,450)
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 803,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: (485,650)
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: -2.6%

Chicago:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 9,923,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: (17,630)
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 83,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: (50,830)
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: -0.5%

Philadelphia:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 7,183,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: (32,300)
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 115,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: (78,300)
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: -1.1%

Dallas Fort Worth:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 7,504,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 157,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 687,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 157,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 2.1%
Should have been: 3.7%
Differential: -1.6%

SF Bay Area:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 8,714,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 9,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 560,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 9,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 0.1%
Should have been: 2.6%
Differential: -2.5%

Boston:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 8,153,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 2,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 260,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 2,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 0.0%
Should have been: 1.3%
Differential: -1.3%

Atlanta:
2016 CMSA Base Population: 6,365,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 16,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 455,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 16,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 0.3%
Should have been: 2.9%
Differential: -2.6%

DC:
2016 MSA Base Population: 6,098,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 122,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 462,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 122,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 2.0%
Should have been: 3.0%
Differential: -1.0%

Houston:
2016 MSA Base Population: 6,657,000
2009-2016 Media Market Change: 268,000
2010-2015 CMSA Population Change: 737,000
Implied TV Viewer Change: 268,000
Percent of 2016 CMSA Base Population: 4.0%
Should have been: 4.4%
Differential: -0.4%
Ah, glad to see you're back.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2016, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Louisville
4,398 posts, read 4,202,516 times
Reputation: 7559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77 View Post
Atlanta is probably the only example of that, and it's not really a typical Sunbelt city proper, being only 133 sq miles and having a population under half a million.
I always find the Atlanta to Mesa comparison interesting. Cosmopolitan capitol of the south vs. what is largely considered the quintessential wasteful characterless sprawl monster, and how similar they appear on paper. In fairness Atlanta is gaining population faster than Mesa. In the 2010 census Mesa was the more dense of the two. Perhaps the estimates may be off, but it's definitely got a ton more urban/apartment/condo developments taking it up a notch.



Last edited by mjlo; 05-26-2016 at 02:42 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2016, 02:46 PM
 
5,546 posts, read 5,869,038 times
Reputation: 3795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade View Post
To be fair, in regards to Dallas, the city itself already stabilized. It barely grew in the 2000s and most of any new growth inside the city is due to infill. Houston, the city looks like it's growing but that's because their suburbs are in the city as well as in fill. But the inner loop part of Houston is not growing as fast as the outer areas of Houston. Let's face it, the suburbs are still very popular. With families, the suburbs are more attractive than the inner city. I would hardly say these cities are sitting idly by not addressing their economic instability (Houston has experience in this), infrastructure replacements, etc. There are many issues that Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston are addressing.
All these cities are still young. I don't expect any of them to sit idly when it comes to economic concerns, but there will be times when there are external factors that they cannot (or are not fit to) mitigate. And infrastructure has a lifecycle where the burden gets to be more and more over time. I didn't mean to insinuate that Houston was not replacing some infrastructure. But the critical mass that will eventually be required to be maintain has yet to come. All it takes is an economic hiccup, a slight population loss and infrastructure burdens to become more pronounced to cause major problems.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2016, 02:47 PM
 
Location: The City
22,402 posts, read 34,194,672 times
Reputation: 7844
^^ Philly is 134 sq but more an outlier in that comparison but all about the same size
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2016, 03:37 PM
 
1,151 posts, read 1,035,515 times
Reputation: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA View Post
All these cities are still young. I don't expect any of them to sit idly when it comes to economic concerns, but there will be times when there are external factors that they cannot (or are not fit to) mitigate. And infrastructure has a lifecycle where the burden gets to be more and more over time. I didn't mean to insinuate that Houston was not replacing some infrastructure. But the critical mass that will eventually be required to be maintain has yet to come. All it takes is an economic hiccup, a slight population loss and infrastructure burdens to become more pronounced to cause major problems.
Houston has already gone through two economic hiccups in the past 10 years.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2016, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
19,409 posts, read 29,056,755 times
Reputation: 10686
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA View Post
All these cities are still young. I don't expect any of them to sit idly when it comes to economic concerns, but there will be times when there are external factors that they cannot (or are not fit to) mitigate. And infrastructure has a lifecycle where the burden gets to be more and more over time. I didn't mean to insinuate that Houston was not replacing some infrastructure. But the critical mass that will eventually be required to be maintain has yet to come. All it takes is an economic hiccup, a slight population loss and infrastructure burdens to become more pronounced to cause major problems.
AKA, the middle of the 1980s regarding Houston.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2016, 07:23 PM
 
Location: The Mid-Cities
1,084 posts, read 1,557,961 times
Reputation: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Sun Belt cities are not really cheaper when compared to some other parts of the country, like the Midwest or in some cases even the interior Northeast. You are absolutely right about legacy costs though. All that new infrastructure in the South is going to age and get increasingly expensive to take care of. When that happens, the cities and states will have only a few options to address it- either ignore it and let the infrastructure decline, or do something like raise taxes. Either scenario will disrupt the current growth patterns. Cost of living is going to go up in these places, and it's going to go up by a lot. Economic advantage, the only real factor for the growth, will be wiped out and the region will lose its competitive edge vs. other regions. It has already started.
Dallas proper has already been experiencing this for some time now. The city only started to take off in population again after the 2010 census but mostly due to building up or building on poorly used lots. COL has certainly gone up but Dallas as a region hasn't lost it's competitiveness and I don't think that will happen for quite some time.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 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 > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top