Bloomingdale's to Monroeville Mall?

[pittsburgheer]

Originally Posted by alleghenyangel

I agree that each of the suburbs have different overall vibes, but none are in my mind inferior or "bad" areas. Suburbs in general are pretty homogenous: you have the chain stores, chain restaurants, strip malls, shopping malls, etc. Most of the same ones are in each area. Then you have the huge parking lots, split-level ranches, and apartment buildings with balconies. I don't know how you can say one looks better than the other. They're all ugly.

i tend to agree with this overall assessment of our suburban shopping districts. they are for the most part generic and old/rundown with the same bland big box stores. also, one area does not scream 'upscale' more than the other one. it does seem though that mcknight road/ross is healthier than monroeville.

i think pittsburgh just doesn't have the concentration of wealth to have a truly upscale shopping district (http://www.cnbc.com/id/21917314/ - broken link). i also know the linked examples are extreme, but it just goes to show that our shopping districts are more similar than they are different - the separation is minimal at best.

the 'pittsburgh bubble' strikes again!

[Little Mizz Pittsburgh]

Hmmmph. They can put one out there if they choose to. IIIIIIIIIIII still won't be visiting that mall.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by pittsburgheer

i think pittsburgh just doesn't have the concentration of wealth to have a truly upscale shopping district (http://www.cnbc.com/id/21917314/ - broken link).

Retailers tend to be lagging indicators. There is wealth in Pittsburgh, and increasingly so. It's just that not many upscale retailers other than Nordstrom have noticed yet.

[pittsburgheer]

Originally Posted by Gnutella

Retailers tend to be lagging indicators. There is wealth in Pittsburgh, and increasingly so. It's just that not many upscale retailers other than Nordstrom have noticed yet.

yes, there is some wealth, but not a high comparative concentration of wealth...and nothing has dramatically occurred to cause a great influx of new wealth. it seems like pittsburgh just shifts it's wealth around.

check out this map. go to 'view more maps'...click 'income'....then go to 'households earning more than $200,000'. finally, compare the concentration/area/number of wealthy census tracts in the pittsburgh metro to a truly wealthy area such as...anywhere on the east coast. pittsburgh compares favorably to columbus, cleveland, cincy, etc....however, the east coast we are not...although our cost of living is lower here as well.

i also would not say that retailers are lagging. it's not like all of a sudden we had an explosion of wealth and the retailers are trying to play catch up. i'd say pittsburgh has been pretty stable for a while now....giving retailers plenty of previous time to 'catch up' to whatever small increase that may or may not have occurred. in d.c. for example, that's another story...it's crazy there.

or perhaps....a subsection of pittsburgh is getting more of a fashion sense? i don't know.

[BrianTH]

But check out the change in median household income map. There are some areas in the eastern quadrant with decent median income increases.

[pittsburgheer]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

But check out the change in median household income map. There are some areas in the eastern quadrant with decent median income increases.

do these isolated gains compensate for what appears to be an overall decline? i don't know...but i don't think so.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by pittsburgheer

do these isolated gains compensate for what appears to be an overall decline? i don't know...but i don't think so.

Yes, they do actually:

Pittsburgh makes top 10 list for personal income growth | Pittsburgh Business Times

Personal income has been on the rise in Pittsburgh over the past 25 years, so much so that a new study ranks it No. 6 among the nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas in terms of income growth.

Stats from the study:

25-year income growth rate (1984-2009): 212.4%

20-year income growth rate (1989-2009): 132.8%

15-year income growth rate (1994-2009): 87.3%

10-year income growth rate (1999-2009): 44.8%

5-year income growth rate (2004-2009): 21.7%

If you look just at the 2000s and adjust for local inflation, Pittsburgh does even better:

Personal Income in the 2000s: Top and Bottom Ten Metropolitan Areas | Newgeography.com

However, perhaps the biggest surprise is the metropolitan area that slipped into the number two position between Baltimore and Washington. The Pittsburgh metropolitan area, which may have faced the most severe economic challenges of any major metropolitan area over the past 40 years, achieved per capita personal income growth of 8.2 percent.

Note the lower percentage due to the inflation adjustment.

The bottomline is that the Pittsburgh Metro is experiencing relatively rapid gains in real personal income. Despite what New Geography stated, this actually isn't surprising, because Pittsburgh is also experiencing relatively rapid gains in terms of things like the educational attainment of its workforce, and meanwhile it was not as affected by the Great Recession as most places.

[pittsburgheer]

that's good to hear that we are improving. once you hit bottom....there is only one way but up though. one study quotes data from 1989 to 2009....things have improved since then. the other study takes our change in buying power into consideration in comparison to other areas of the country. again things are improving which is good.

however, since we were depressed for so long...our per capita income has a lot of catching up to do....as do our 'wealthy' earners in comparison to other metros. that's one reason why the pittsburgh housing market is still a bargin for most people moving into the area from elsewhere.

i still stand by my statement that pittsburgh lacks a high concentration of wealthy individuals...which is why we have a relative lack of high end stores...we can't support them.

[BrianTH]

We are definitely still in transition, but we have now caught up with or passed a lot of metros, and are closing at least somewhat with most of the higher-income metros. Given things like the educational trends among our younger population, these income trends will likely continue for quite a while.

And a lot of the growth is at the top. For example, from 1999 to 2009, the number of households in the Pittsburgh Metro with $150,000 in income or more increased about 90%, going from about 3.3% of the households in 1999 to 6.1% of the households in 2009. That is actually a large part of why our per capita income is increasing so rapidly.