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.
This is an excellent list if metros are not separated into individual cities.
If this is separated by city limits, I don't see SF, without San Jose and Oakland being in a tier with Chicago.
No way no how is SF without Oakland and San Jose comparable to Chicago.
Combine all 10 metros and Lord knows how many cities around the Bay and then there becomes an argument for that region to be comparable to Chicago.
By City Dallas would be ahead of Miami.
Even by metro division, the Dallas Plano Irving division whoops the Miami -Miami Beach- Kendall metro division. Dallas-Plano- Irving alone- without the Fort Worth side is comparable to Atlanta and Philly and definitely ahead of Miami.
Dallas without FW GDP is about $400B
Miami Metro division is about $160B
Full metro to metro: DFW is about $690B compared to Miami's $480B
At this point Dallas is about 8 or 9.
Miami is an important tourist spot and it's important to Latin America, but DFW is more important to the US. DFW is also over 2M people larger than Miami. That difference is about 30% of Miami metro so DFW is about a third larger than Miami. At this point Miami is Closer to Phoenix and Seattle than it is to DFW.
There might even be good arguments to list Seattle ahead of Miami
Metro GDP in Billions:
San Francisco 729
Dallas - 688
Atlanta - 525
Philadelphia - 518B
Seattle 517B
Boston 504B
Miami - 483B
Phoenix - 362B
Notice that Dallas is only 30B away from San Francisco but over 200B over Miami.
Conversely Miami is 120B larger than Phoenix. So Miami is closer to Phoenix and Seattle than it is to DFW.
I did contemplate placing Chicago, LA, and NY in their own tiers, and then SF and DC within their own. This may make more sense...
My issue with Dallas is how small it's core is comparatively speaking. Atlanta's is larger abd just feels much more bustling, with more events, subways, and there are more people on the streets at any time than you find in Dallas. This may be a symptom of Dallas being in a multinodal region but I think other cities being standalone cities and producing at, near, or above Dallas is a point in those cities favors. I haven't been to either Miami or Houston to draw the eyeball test, and I'm not sold on Miami either...
Ultimately I think the 9-12 of Dallas, Miami, Philly and Seattle fits, and two are outside looking in. But I'm comfortable with any arrangement of those four cities to be honest...
Quote:
Originally Posted by NC_MVP
I would rank Cleveland a bit higher (specifically higher than Oakland). I agree with the other poster about Providence's ranking. While I have never been to Providence, I would argue that Omaha should replace it as top 50 - especially in terms of influence & popularity. Also, is Newark more relevant in 2024 than Raleigh or SLC? Overall though, this is a very good ranking.
Newark may not be more relevant than Salt Lake or Raleigh. I do think it's in that "hanging on for dear life" phase that many of these legacy cities are in, because it's been surpassed by many cities and others will surpass it...
Omaha probably is a really good call, I think my hang up is that it's short of even a million people in its metro while everywhere else is at least 1.15 million. But I can't say I disagree with it being included in lieu of one of the lower cities...
Notice that Dallas is only 30B away from San Francisco...
Yes, but Dallas was higher than SF 10 years ago, also Dallas has over 8 million people while SF only has 4 million. Dallas 'should' have at least 200B more than SF yet here we are.
Move Dallas up to just under Houston or even 1 above Houston. If you asked the Dallasites they would tell you to move Dallas up to just under New York. IF you isolate just the Dallas side then yes leave it where it is and put Fort Worth at #21.
Move Dallas up to just under Houston or even 1 above Houston. If you asked the Dallasites they would tell you to move Dallas up to just under New York. IF you isolate just the Dallas side then yes leave it where it is and put Fort Worth at #21.
It's everything, it's the city and the metro it represents, it's reach and influence, it's everything...
I'm definitely not positive that Miami is Top 10 but it's close enough that I won't quibble with it. Between Miami, Dallas, Philly, and Seattle, two are left out as those are the four cities in my opinion, in that 9-12 range of cities...
Got damn lol...
Phoenix is a destination city, and if we count that for other places, I think it counts for Phx. It's also quite massive, and size does play a part in how we think of city esteem, otherwise we'd call Annapolis or Topeka America's best cities...
I actually like this alot. Providence is too strong to not be Top 50 at this point, but maybe it could be lower...
You may have some insight that I just don't, within New England, is Hartford considered a more important or relevant city? I've been to both but I don't think as a visitor I can guage clearly which city is more esteemed...
Providence is more fun Hartford is more important is the general idea..
This is an excellent list if metros are not separated into individual cities.
If this is separated by city limits, I don't see SF, without San Jose and Oakland being in a tier with Chicago.
No way no how is SF without Oakland and San Jose comparable to Chicago.
Combine all 10 metros and Lord knows how many cities around the Bay and then there becomes an argument for that region to be comparable to Chicago.
By City Dallas would be ahead of Miami.
Even by metro division, the Dallas Plano Irving division whoops the Miami -Miami Beach- Kendall metro division. Dallas-Plano- Irving alone- without the Fort Worth side is comparable to Atlanta and Philly and definitely ahead of Miami.
Dallas without FW GDP is about $400B
Miami Metro division is about $160B
Full metro to metro: DFW is about $690B compared to Miami's $480B
At this point Dallas is about 8 or 9.
Miami is an important tourist spot and it's important to Latin America, but DFW is more important to the US. DFW is also over 2M people larger than Miami. That difference is about 30% of Miami metro so DFW is about a third larger than Miami. At this point Miami is Closer to Phoenix and Seattle than it is to DFW.
There might even be good arguments to list Seattle ahead of Miami
Metro GDP in Billions:
San Francisco 729
Dallas - 688
Atlanta - 525
Philadelphia - 518B
Seattle 517B
Boston 504B
Miami - 483B
Phoenix - 362B
Notice that Dallas is only 30B away from San Francisco but over 200B over Miami.
Conversely Miami is 120B larger than Phoenix. So Miami is closer to Phoenix and Seattle than it is to DFW.
Just a quick correction your Boston number is in Chained 2017 dollars while the rest are in millions of 2022 dollars
I did contemplate placing Chicago, LA, and NY in their own tiers, and then SF and DC within their own. This may make more sense...
My issue with Dallas is how small it's core is comparatively speaking. Atlanta's is larger abd just feels much more bustling, with more events, subways, and there are more people on the streets at any time than you find in Dallas. This may be a symptom of Dallas being in a multinodal region but I think other cities being standalone cities and producing at, near, or above Dallas is a point in those cities favors. I haven't been to either Miami or Houston to draw the eyeball test, and I'm not sold on Miami either...
Ultimately I think the 9-12 of Dallas, Miami, Philly and Seattle fits, and two are outside looking in. But I'm comfortable with any arrangement of those four cities to be honest...
Newark may not be more relevant than Salt Lake or Raleigh. I do think it's in that "hanging on for dear life" phase that many of these legacy cities are in, because it's been surpassed by many cities and others will surpass it...
Omaha probably is a really good call, I think my hang up is that it's short of even a million people in its metro while everywhere else is at least 1.15 million. But I can't say I disagree with it being included in lieu of one of the lower cities...
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4
Just a quick correction your Boston number is in Chained 2017 dollars while the rest are in millions of 2022 dollars
$571,666----Boston–Cambridge–Newton, MA-NH
$525,888----Atlanta–Sandy Springs–Roswell, GA
$518,485----Philadelphia–Camden–Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
$517,803----Seattle–Tacoma–Bellevue, WA
$483,754----Miami–Fort Lauderdale–West Palm Beach, FL
$362,086----Phoenix–Mesa–Chandler, AZ
But I see the OP did include other factors in the ranking like core size.
DFW does have multiple centers of gravity, but so does Miami. Miami would have a stronger core than Dallas but not Seattle.
Seattle does have a stronger economy than Miami and a stronger core. It makes for a stronger case to at least make it to the top ten over Miami.
Also if we are giving cores weight then Atlanta and Philly are almost even on economy but Philly has a much stronger core.
Yes, Dallas belongs above Atlanta. It's economic impact and it's growth both outweigh Atlanta's
I disagree. Atlanta's cultural impact, media blueprint and rise in global health gives it a solid advantage over Dallas. Dallas may be growing faster, but Atlanta isn't sitting idle.
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.
Move Dallas
