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.
Your conclusion is 100% correct. I've never met anyone that actually gets into boats looking for lobsters. It's just some dumb romantic vision people like peddling.
That certainly means people who deep sea fish don’t exist.
Also something as simple as the tides change the experience on the ocean beach vs lake beaches.
You don’t see kids having Sand Castle conditions to see whose can survive the incoming tide the longest for example. Or interesting tide pools or whatever. It’s not the same experience.
Some cities report on the county and not just the city, which is why I noted Austin and Charlotte estimates was the Metro and Regional estimates. I get why someone from Boston may get upset to read his or her city is not as popular as they thought, but those are the numbers and they may not be perfect but they likely are close to being correct. The estimates come after looking at hotel stay numbers, flights into the city data,,,etc.
This says more people visit one American revolution site in Boston than Disney world..do I buy it..probably not..there are different ways to calculate this stuff even if it’s coming from the tourism dept...there is no doubt there are way more people visiting the la region...Santa Monica, Malibu etc than visiting Chicago...Boston is too busy now and has plenty of tourists regardless of how the numbers are calculated
Faneuil Hall ranked 7th on a list of the 50 most-visited tourist attractions in the world, according to research by the site lovehomeswap.com.
The site pinpointed the most iconic destinations around the globe and researched how many people visit them annually. Faneuil Hall Marketplace, in 7th place, boasts 18,000,000 visitors per year.
If correct, that is one location that was visited by 18 million. Chicago has so many attractions where people can't visit them all. The 18 million does not say anything about Boston getting over 57.6 million visitors like Chicago. [
Also, the website you are referring to said NYC Times Square gets 39.2 million visitors per year when NYC official visitors bureau website says 50 million per year.
You said: there is no doubt there are way more people visiting the la region...Santa Monica, Malibu etc than visiting Chicago..
I am only quoting the numbers. And numbers don't lie.
Boston obviously has many more attractions than Faneuil Hall..the point is a lot of these numbers including those from tourism dept are subject to questioning..I was questioning la number because 7 million visit Malibu alone in the summers 3 months..these numbers can’t include surrounding areas ...regardless of numbers Boston is packed and not lacking in tourists
Like I said I am only quoting the numbers without any feelings one way or the other. If LA gets more visitors than Chicago or vice versa does not really matter because it is not going to put money in my pockets, but for the time being the official numbers are showing Chicago is getting more tourists than Los Angeles with Boston being about 30 million behind.
I get why you want to believe my numbers are off. You want to think that Boston is up there with New York, Los Angeles and Las Vegas, but the numbers are showing otherwise so just let it go. Also, I am not talking metro stats. I am sure LA metro is getting more tourists than Chicago since there's not another big tourists city around, but head-to-head Chicago is beating Los Angeles by about 6.7 million.
I question whether Chicago is seeing similar tourism rates as LA and NYC too, but tourism has definitely shot up over the past couple years, as sol said thanks to the increase in hotel rooms, as well as Chicago in general evolving and developing a lot recently. I also read somewhere conventions have been choosing Chicago a lot over other cities, so that would make sense too. I feel like Chicago, more than most other cities, is possibly the biggest "local" tourist city; meaning people from Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, Iowa, Missouri, downstate IL, even the suburbs go to the city and essentially become tourists, as opposed to say people flying from Washington all the way here for vacation (though that also does happen for sure).
Even Atlanta is getting over 50 million. The biggest question is: what is wrong with Boston? For a so-called major city to be on even level with Charlotte is sad, but than again I have never heard anyone I have met say they want to visit Boston. There's tiers for everything and there's nothing wrong with being a tier 2 or tier 3 city. I for one can't wait to visit St. Louis, Memphis and Kansas City within the next few months.
That’s the thing..I don’t believe Boston has the same amount of tourists as Charlotte...you must hang out with a pretty sophisticated bunch that never care to see one of the cities that led to the birth of the United States...more meaningful attraction the American revolution or the bean?
You need to travel more if you don’t think every city is developing a lot right now...and for a skyscraper obsessed city nyc is currently leaving you in the dust
That’s the thing..I don’t believe Boston has the same amount of tourists as Charlotte...you must hang out with a pretty sophisticated bunch that never care to see one of the cities that led to the birth of the United States...more meaningful attraction the American revolution or the bean?
I really wish this attitude weren't so common here. First of all, almost nobody in Boston has a nuanced understanding of the American Revolution. It typically comes across, as your post does, as unthinking chauvinism. Boston's "role" in the revolution is mostly propaganda. For example, even the name "the Boston Massacre" is hyperbolic. Paul revere himself was a propagandist who decades later was post-mortem propagandized. The average Bostonian cannot explain a damn thing about why the Revolution started.
Even Atlanta is getting over 50 million. The biggest question is: what is wrong with Boston? For a so-called major city to be on even level with Charlotte is sad, but than again I have never heard anyone I have met say they want to visit Boston. There's tiers for everything and there's nothing wrong with being a tier 2 or tier 3 city. I for one can't wait to visit St. Louis, Memphis and Kansas City within the next few months.
If you genuinely believe that it’s not the accounting method and Charlotte gets more tourists than DC and Boston then I don’t know what to tell
you. Because a city whose perimeter attraction is the NSACAR HOF does not attract the same amount of interest as Washington DC.
I really wish this attitude weren't so common here. First of all, almost nobody in Boston has a nuanced understanding of the American Revolution. It typically comes across, as your post does, as unthinking chauvinism. Boston's "role" in the revolution is mostly propaganda. For example, even the name "the Boston Massacre" is hyperbolic. Paul revere himself was a propagandist who decades later was post-mortem propagandized. The average Bostonian cannot explain a damn thing about why the Revolution started.
Frankly it doesn’t matter that it was propganda the impact of the Boston massacre was the rest of the colonies reactions not the actual event. If you knew so much more about history than everyone else you’d know that.
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.
