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 may come as a shock to you, but many major U.S. cities consider themselves to be on the cutting edge of medical research and technology.
Boston doesn't have the only hospital in America.
Yea but there's a reason Boston has received the most NIH funding for 14 years straight (as of 2008). Boston receives more than twice the amount Philadelphia does. (Source) Philadelphia is very, very good in terms of medical research, as is Baltimore, New York and Houston...but Boston is the undisputed champion. It's also the reason Milliken named Boston the #1 life sciences area in the country.
As far as technology goes, Boston & Philadelphia are both impressive...but Boston appears to out-do Philadelphia in this area.
Here's a map of the most important Nanotechnology hubs in the country: Map
1. San Diego
2. Boston
3. Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill
4. San Jose
5. Seattle-Bellevue-Everett
6. Washington DC
7. Philadelphia
8. San Francisco
9. Oakland
10. Los Angeles
Yea but there's a reason Boston has received the most NIH funding for 14 years straight (as of 2008). Boston receives more than twice the amount Philadelphia does. (Source) Philadelphia is very, very good in terms of medical research, as is Baltimore, New York and Houston...but Boston is the undisputed champion. It's also the reason Milliken named Boston the #1 life sciences area in the country.
As far as technology goes, Boston & Philadelphia are both impressive...but Boston appears to out-do Philadelphia in this area.
Here's a map of the most important Nanotechnology hubs in the country: Map
1. San Diego
2. Boston
3. Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill
4. San Jose
5. Seattle-Bellevue-Everett
6. Washington DC
7. Philadelphia
8. San Francisco
9. Oakland
10. Los Angeles
1. San Jose
2. Seattle
3. Cambridge
4. Washington DC
5. Los Angeles
6. Dallas
7. San Diego
8. Santa Ana
9. New York City
10. San Francisco
Well yes - but you also realize that most of these companies (and the research being done in Cambridge especially is fantastic) are gobbled up to bring drugs to market by big or bigger Pharma - yes is a very good think tank and research center - no denying - great work and in all you discussed
There is also investment from Big Pharma driving this research in Boston on top of the NIH, or groups like BRG (Novartis's biologic think tank and development company etc. in Cambridge)
I actually just gave a speech on this topic; the future of Pharma and how to evolve and position the business for the non small molecule world.
C'mon people. All that matters is CSA GDP. Anything else is just trying to tweak the numbers. :-)
As far as the big picture when looking at an area's total output, I totally agree.*smiles*
2008 Combined Statistical Area Gross Product, Bureau of Economic Analysis
1. New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA $1.434 Trillion
Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Metro Area $81,389
Kingston, NY Metro Area $4,679
New Haven-Milford, CT Metro Area $37,643
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA Metro Area $1,264,896
Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Metro Area $21,029
Torrington, CT Micro Area
Trenton-Ewing, NJ Metro Area $24,458
2. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA CSA $866.095 Billion
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Metro Area $717,884
Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Metro Area $35,080
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Metro Area $113,080
3. Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV CSA $533.542 Billion
Baltimore-Towson, MD Metro Area $133,012
Lexington Park, MD Micro Area
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Metro Area $395,747
Winchester, VA-WV Metro Area $4,783
4. Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI CSA $526.895 Billion
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI Metro Area $520,672
Kankakee-Bradley, IL Metro Area $3,094
Michigan City-La Porte, IN Metro Area $3,336
5. San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA $508.418 Billion
Napa, CA Metro Area $7,434
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Metro Area $310,825
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metro Area $146,687
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA Metro Area $9,903
Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Metro Area $20,229
Vallejo-Fairfield, CA Metro Area $13,340
6. Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-RI-NH CSA $413.930 Billion
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Metro Area $299,590
Concord, NH Micro Area
Manchester-Nashua, NH Metro Area $20,782
Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA Metro Area $65,152
Worcester, MA Metro Area $28,406
7. Houston-Baytown-Huntsville, TX CSA $403.202 Billion
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Metro Area $403,202
8. Dallas-Fort Worth, TX CSA $383.082 Billion
Athens, TX Micro Area
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metro Area $379,863
Sherman-Denison, TX Metro Area $3,219
9. Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA $351.680 Billion
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD Metro Area $331,897
Reading, PA Metro Area $14,838
Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ Metro Area $4,945
10. Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL $276.197 Billion
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Metro Area $269,799
Gainesville, GA Metro Area $6,398
Another way of assessing the relative power of a city is by looking at the population of the defined economic areas (EA) provided by the BEA. A city’s economic area is basically a reflection of its regional economic importance. Cultural importance typically follows from economic importance. The population of the economic areas suggests the number of people who depend upon a given city to drive the regional economic engine. By this means of accounting, often-overlooked cities such as Cleveland and Indianapolis show their true influence.
The EA rank of the listed cities is:
San Francisco—4th
Houston---------11th
Atlanta-----------8th
Seattle-----------16th
Philadelphia----10th
Another way of assessing the relative power of a city is by looking at the population of the defined economic areas (EA) provided by the BEA. A city’s economic area is basically a reflection of its regional economic importance. Cultural importance typically follows from economic importance. The population of the economic areas suggests the number of people who depend upon a given city to drive the regional economic engine. By this means of accounting, often-overlooked cities such as Cleveland and Indianapolis show their true influence.
The EA rank of the listed cities is:
San Francisco—4th
Houston---------11th
Atlanta-----------8th
Seattle-----------16th
Philadelphia----10th
Interesting - do you have a link to this data? Though this methodology likely bias toward island like cities without cities of significance in close proximity
Another way of assessing the relative power of a city is by looking at the population of the defined economic areas (EA) provided by the BEA. A city’s economic area is basically a reflection of its regional economic importance. Cultural importance typically follows from economic importance. The population of the economic areas suggests the number of people who depend upon a given city to drive the regional economic engine. By this means of accounting, often-overlooked cities such as Cleveland and Indianapolis show their true influence.
The EA rank of the listed cities is:
San Francisco—4th
Houston---------11th
Atlanta-----------8th
Seattle-----------16th
Philadelphia----10th
????? Sounds like more statistical hogwash.
Those cities have been behind Philly for all of U.S. history, why do they, as of recently, have a problem accepting that.
Those cities have been behind Philly for all of U.S. history, why do they, as of recently, have a problem accepting that.
Aww, it sounds like someone needs a tissue
//www.city-data.com/forum/gener...maps-data.html Arbitron Radio Market Rankings - Spring 2010
1 PPM BH S/PPM New York 15,669,500
2 PPM BH S/PPM Los Angeles 10,999,100
3 PPM BH S/PPM Chicago 7,862,200
4 PPM BH S/PPM San Francisco 6,145,800
5 PPM BH S/PPM Dallas-Ft. Worth 5,216,100
6 PPM BH S/PPM Houston-Galveston 4,815,700
7 PPM BH S/PPM Atlanta 4,413,800
8 PPM BH S/PPM Philadelphia 4,357,600
9 PPM BH S/PPM Washington, DC 4,279,900
10 PPM BH S/PPM Boston 3,977,400
DMA Rankings - US TV Households by Market (http://www.tvb.org/rcentral/markettrack/us_hh_by_dma.asp - broken link)
1 New York, NY 7,493,530
2 Los Angeles, CA 5,659,170
3 Chicago, IL 3,501,010
4 Philadelphia, PA 2,955,190
5 Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX 2,544,410
6 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA 2,503,400
7 Boston, MA (Manchester, NH) 2,410,180
8 Atlanta, GA 2,387,520
9 Washington, DC (Hagerstown, MD) 2,335,040
10 Houston, TX 2,123,460
Where's your fourth largest media market now? How come you Philly homers always talk about TV media markets, but neglect radio? Why is TV more important than radio, even when more people listen to radio than watch TV?
It's not like I've not been to the East Coast to see Philadelphia. After all, I lived a year in Staten Island, NY. I personally always thought that Mercer County was the dividing line between NYC metro and Phily metro, based on radio stations alone (after all, its easy to see the distance of an FM transmitter rather than the waves of a TV satellite).
However, its not like the CSA is without merit. Most people in this thread (and on CD) have agreed that San Jose-San Francisco should have been designated as one metro.
MTC -- Maps and Data -- County-to-County Commute Patterns
According to the MTC, 11.773% of commuters from Santa Clara county work OUTSIDE of Santa Clara County (in 2000). This is an increase of 2.6% from 1990, when only 9.2% of Santa Clara County commuters worked outside Santa Clara County.
However, 18.8% of total commuters that commute to Santa Clara County on a daily basis live in counties outside of Santa Clara. This doesn't deviate that much from the nor//www.city-data.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=13445051m. I got this number by adding up all the number of people who commute from other Bay Area counties to Santa Clara County, then divided it by the amount of Bay Area commuters to Santa Clara county in total.
It's pretty clear that the East Bay and Peninsula are sending more people to Santa Clara County than San Francisco, but somehow they're considered two different metro areas?
When the BART opens to Santa Clara County, how many more commuters do you think Santa Clara County contributes to the rest of the Bay Area? Why is it strictly seen as a downtown SF-downtown SJ sort of thing? How about Fremont to San Jose? Fremont to SJ (15 miles) is way closer than Fremont to SF (40 miles).
It's funny though because before I came to this site, I never thought SF-SJ were in different metro areas. My friends from San Jose were way more defensive about the Bay Area than the people who were from San Francisco.
Quote:
30 seconds of TV ad-space could buy you 300 minutes of radio ad-space. Radio is becoming a neglected medium in the age of technology/ mass communication.
That being said. Keep in mind that Philly actually has 7 radio markets within what could be construed as a "CMSA", you know those endless geographical expanses that people like to brag they are part of?
Radio markets in the Philly region.
Philadelphia
Trenton
Wimington
Atlantic City
Reading
Lacaster
Allentown
First, they aren't all 'endless geographical expanses' because the Bay Area CSA is in fact smaller than most other cities MSA. San Francisco and San Jose metro APART are way smaller than most other cities MSA by themselves! Let's do a comparison
San Francisco Bay Area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bay Area CSA: 8,757 sq. mi
San Francisco MSA: 3,241 sq. mi (Marin, Contra Costa, Alameda, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties)
San Jose MSA: 2,695 sq. mi (of which, 1391 sq. mil are San Benito County, most of which is impossible to build on)
I think I got my point across. San Francisco's MSA is way smaller than the mean for how big government MSA's, but apparently the CSA is too big even though its in fact smaller than Chicago, Dallas, and Houston's MSA. That makes a LOT of sense.
Most of San Francisco's CSA is either underwater (San Francisco Bay) or too mountainous to build on (or unwilling to build on).
However, most Bay Area residents and posters here know the truth and that's what matters the most.
Second of all, if your theory on radio is correct, then how come there are more listeners of radio than TV watchers in ALL markets? After all, we are just dealing with FM waves, as opposed to what could be endless TV satellite range?
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.
