Why do Californians seemingly ALWAYS want to come to Austin vs the other big cities? (Houston: buses, moving)

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by feconi

The only thing you can really base this statement on is MSA population change from 2008 to 2009. Problem is, year-to-year fluctuations in migration aren't terribly meaningful; in some respects it's like noise against a large-scale background trend of increasing growth.

Case in point: look at the dramatic change between 2006 and 2007 for migration into Houston: in 2006 it gained nearly 92,000 by domestic migration, and then in 2007 it gained only around 19,000. Did you think Houston had started to "decline" back then?

Over a more meaningful timeframe--say, over any five year period--migration has trended upwards in Houston, and the same could be said for Austin.

Austin has been declining for longer than that in domestic migration. And the only reason why Houston was that bloated was because of the Katrina evacuees. The reason why it was so low the next year was because most of them went back to New Orleans or other parts of LA.

[sxrckr]

Originally Posted by atxcio

I think perhaps Houston and Dallas need to spend more time working on their less-than-desirable reputations, rather than worry about how Austin handles its own.

The city of Austin, UT, etc... gets the love for obvious reasons that are silly to try to argue (although we have artsyguy and eepstein to give it the old college try!). Overhyped? Sure, I'll agree with that. Are Dallas and Houston equally nice places to live? For many people, yes. But they seem perpetually unable to put a good foot forward, or fix the issues that make people consider them undesirable.

But what's funny is that many of the "issues" I hear that make them "undesirable" are ones that Austin has as well, yet people seem to forget or ignore -- weather (intense summer heat, severe thunderstorms), bad traffic, sprawl, stripmalls, "Texas" attitudes, etc.

[sxrckr]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

overhyped to the nth degree and Austonians believe in the hype and tend to look down on other Texas cities.

It's Austinites, not Austonians! Don't get me started on that stupid Condo name.

And yes, there is a smugness, I assume you are referring to Austitude or something similar. Urban Dictionary: Austintude

[wehotex]

Originally Posted by sxrckr

It's Austinites, not Austonians! Don't get me started on that stupid Condo name.

And yes, there is a smugness, I assume you are referring to Austitude or something similar. Urban Dictionary: Austintude

How did they come up with that stupid condo name anyway? the owners must have been from houston.

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by atxcio

I don't know, it's stuff like this: Muller: Michael Vick Gets Key To The City Of Dallas? Unreal « CBS Chicago

In Austin, Portland, SF, etc.. the animal cruelty issue would trump the other factors. Easily. No one, not even the assistant to the assistant of the mayor pro tem, would ever think that was a good idea.

Perhaps Houston and Dallas just don't care about their image, or aren't as good at marketing as Austin. Although I thought Dallasites were known for caring about appearances... even overly so. Either way, I don't see why they should get their panties in a wad about the good rep Austin gets.

Most of the things I've read are people talking about what Austin is like to them.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by atxcio

Sigh. Do you really believe "marketing" is lying? If so, the Detroit chamber of commerce must have closets filled with flame-resistant pants.

Anyway, I don't see why Houstonians and Dallasites even care how Austin is seen by the rest of the country. It's certainly entertaining that they will fill 10 pages worth of a thread discussing Austin's rep vs. their own, but honestly I don't understand why.

you know very well why. But I guess you don't like Austin being exposed for the fraud that it is

[feconi]

Originally Posted by Scarface713

Austin has been declining for longer than that in domestic migration. And the only reason why Houston was that bloated was because of the Katrina evacuees. The reason why it was so low the next year was because most of them went back to New Orleans or other parts of LA.

Again, it has been "declining" much in the way Houston or Dallas declined after 2006 or 2007 (let me reiterate for you: one or two years is not enough time to establish a real trend in population change). I know you want Austin to be declining, but there just isn't enough of a trend to suggest it really is. Sorry.

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by feconi

Again, it has been "declining" much in the way Houston or Dallas declined after 2006 or 2007 (let me reiterate for you: one or two years is not enough time to establish a real trend in population change). I know you want Austin to be declining, but there just isn't enough of a trend to suggest it really is. Sorry.

You serious? Since 2006, Austin's domestic migration has been declining. The same can't be said for Houston and Dallas.

[feconi]

Originally Posted by atxcio

Sigh. Do you really believe "marketing" is lying? If so, the Detroit chamber of commerce must have closets filled with flame-resistant pants.

I know, it's downright hilarious how we get these vague references to "marketing" when every city is guilty of it--but nevermind that.

I would admit that Austin has been much more successful at it than most other cities, but you cannot fault the city for trying to project a good image. These people are kidding themselves if they think Dallas and Houston don't (aggressively) do the very same thing.

Since Austin was basically a small town just a few decades ago, it has been able to "invent" an identity which has managed to stick. Dallas and Houston don't have the flexibility to reinvent themselves as "liberal, progressive" cities because they are already very well-established and have been big cities for decades. Thirty years ago no one had heard of Austin and it was basically a sleepy college town.

So, much to the chagrin of some Houstonians and Dallasites, somewhat subjective labels like "liberal" and "artsy" and "high tech" are the buzzwords that have stuck with Austin over the past several years and will probably continue to do so for the next several years at least.

[feconi]

Originally Posted by Scarface713

You serious? Since 2006, Austin's domestic migration has been declining. The same can't be said for Houston and Dallas.

I know what the data says. I said: "[Austin] has been "declining" much in the way Houston or Dallas declined after 2006 or 2007." Sure looks like there is a similar overall trend between Dallas and Austin, with the exception of 2009 (and yet again, I reiterate my earlier point about variation between single years not being very significant).

Now, I agree that two consecutive years of increased migration suggest Houston an upward trend for Houston, but again, the numbers are far down from 2006, which was my point--all three cities have declined to some degree since then.

Austin:
2006: 41,069
2007: 40,211 decline
2008: 33,838 decline
2009: 25,655 decline

DFW:
2006: 76,443
2007: 50,566 decline
2008: 42,857 decline
2009: 45,241 increase

Houston:
2006: 91,985
2007: 19,466 decline
2008: 37,158 increase
2009: 49,662 increase