Jump to content

Cities Cut-official


Recommended Posts

OK, but if you were asked to name 10 top cities in North America and 10 top cities in Europe, what would they say?

I doubt top Austrian city Vienna would make the European list, but third ranked American city Chicago would probably make the North American list.

It's not like Chicago is Bangor, Maine or Eugene, Oregon.

Exactly. The majority of people always list the top 3 American & European as; New York, L.A. & Chicago; London, Paris & Rome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply
OK, but if you were asked to name 10 top cities in North America and 10 top cities in Europe, what would they say?

I doubt top Austrian city Vienna would make the European list, but third ranked American city Chicago would probably make the North American list.

It's not like Chicago is Bangor, Maine or Eugene, Oregon.

Then name me the "Top 10 European Cities."

You're going to have London, Rome, and Paris. Then what?

Madrid, Athens, Prague, Munich, Berlin? Then what?

Naming Top 10 American Cities?

New York, San Francisco, Miami, Las Vegas, Los Angeles. Guaranteed Top 5.

Then maybe... Chicago, Honolulu, Seattle, Boston, Detroit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then name me the "Top 10 European Cities."

You're going to have London, Rome, and Paris. Then what?

Madrid, Athens, Prague, Munich, Berlin? Then what?

Naming Top 10 American Cities?

I'd say: Paris, London, Rome, Berlin, Madrid, Frankfurt, Brussels, Moscow, Geneva, maybe Amsterdam for 10th.

For the US: NYC, Chicago, LA, San Francisco, Wash-DC, Boston, Miami, Houston, Philly, 10th place would be a tie between Seattle and Honolulu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 European cities off the top of my head...

London, Paris, Berlin, Rome, Moscow, Athens, Madrid, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Prague.

10 North American cities (note, I said NORTH) off the top of my head.

NYC, LA, Mexico, Toronto, Montreal, Chicago, San Francisco, Washington, Vancouver, Miami.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 European off top of my head (in the order that I think of them):

London, Paris, Berlin, Madrid, Rome. Moscow, Stockholm, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Vienna

10 North American:

New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Toronto, Mexico City, Boston, Philadelphia, Houston, San Francisco, Montreal

Obviously a highly unscientific survey but a good indicator that everyone has their own opinion as to which cities are most recognisable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

brussels? i thought that city was quite ugly..and i dont see the point of belgium. interesting city though...def not top 10 in europe..it must be a personal fave of urs barona

I included Bruxelles because, like Geneva, it is home to the EU and NATO. When we say "top," obviously not just their size but their importance must be weighed in.

OK, Correction for top 10 NORTH American cities (sorry, Canada & Mex):

- NYC, Toronto, Mexico City, Wash-DC, Chicago, LA, SF, Montreal, Vancouver, and Tijuana! Just kidding for #10. Probably Boston, I'd say -- since it is the Athens of North America (in terms of the seats of higher learning anchored to Boston).

Anyway, these lists are entirely speculative, and like the votes the IOC will cast in coming years, personal factors certainly play in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, that makes much more sense, lets look at the statistical data. Your info was from 2003 and here are the numbers from 2005, from the U.S. Department of Commerce, 2005 Market Share in perenthasis:

1. New York City (26.8%)

2. Los Angeles (11.9%)

3. San Francisco (9.8%)

4. Miami (9.6%)

5. Orlando (9.3%)

6. Oahu/Honolulu (8.4%)

7. Las Vegas (8.2%)

8. Washington, DC (5.1%)

9. Chicago (5.0%)

10. Boston (3.7%)

Complete data set here: http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/cat/f-2005-45-562.html

I'm sure people who don't like the looks of this list will find reason to disagree but I can't think of a more objective way to look at overseas interest in US cities then to look at the data. BTW, Atlanta is at number 11 with a 54% volume increase, very large compared to the rest of the list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then name me the "Top 10 European Cities."

You're going to have London, Rome, and Paris. Then what?

Madrid, Athens, Prague, Munich, Berlin? Then what?

Naming Top 10 American Cities?

New York, San Francisco, Miami, Las Vegas, Los Angeles. Guaranteed Top 5.

Then maybe... Chicago, Honolulu, Seattle, Boston, Detroit

You would really venture to put Las Vegas ahead of Chicago? Really? An argument for Miami (considereing the huge international diversity of the city) is valid, but even that I have doubts of. Back to Las Vegas, it is a city based purely on tourism, gambling, and shopping. Chicago on the other hand is a city with some real history and has been culturally significant since its inception. Have you ever heard of Las Vegas Jazz, or Miami Style Pizza? I sure havent. Have you ever heard Las Vegas called the cradle of modern architecture?

We're talking about the third most populous city. I want to ask you seriously, have you ever been to Chicago? And not just a layover at O'Hare- im talking about the actual city. I have said this before... Chicago always seems to suprise people. The media always focuses on L.A. or New York, but the truth is those cities are really pompous and pretentious about their image. New Yorkers have to constantly remind themselves that they're living in "the greatest city in the world". Or those from San Francisco who their city's "European" and "progressive" feel. In reality, a city such as Chicago has many of the same qualities as New York (Ask a New York who has spent some time in Chicago and they will tell you its a smaller, cleaner, and friendlier New York) and San Francisco (Chicago is "European" in the sense that it is arguably the most liberal city in the midwest and has a huge Eastern European ethnic base).

The main reason in my opinion that people dismiss Chicago is because Chicagoans do not brag or flaunt or city at all. They don't need to. Anyone who has visited the City will recognize that it is something special and a bit of a suprise. Not that it isn't flaunt worthy, it's beacuse in all honestly Chicago is a little bit of every other city in the country. Someone referred Boston as the Athens of America earlier in this thread well Chicago is home to two leading instituions in the world- The University of Chicago and Northwestern University. Chicago also has many local production companies- music, film, and television- that's our L.A. The list can go on and on. That's what makes Chicago unique- it's the quintessential American city, the best example of Urban America.

That's not to say that Chicago doesn't own anything of it's own... we have amazing eatery, shopping, sports, museums, architecture, history, local theater, nightlife, and local music/art scenes.

Unfortunetly post the 2000 election and the huge political divide in this country there is a tendency amongst Americans from the coasts to completely dismiss inland America. If it is a political issue, keep in mind that John Kerry won Illinois by the SAME margin that he won California in the 2004 election- 10%. That's pretty funny considering many people from east or west coast simply look at the midwest as "flyover states", even when the Great Lakes area went blue in 2000 and 2004.

If it isn't a political issue or another issue which I havent already touched on, then why is it that you put LAS VEGAS of all cities above Chicago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would really venture to put Las Vegas ahead of Chicago? Really? An argument for Miami (considereing the huge international diversity of the city) is valid, but even that I have doubts of. Back to Las Vegas, it is a city based purely on tourism, gambling, and shopping. Chicago on the other hand is a city with some real history and has been culturally significant since its inception. Have you ever heard of Las Vegas Jazz, or Miami Style Pizza? I sure havent. Have you ever heard Las Vegas called the cradle of modern architecture?

I would place Las Vegas ahead of Chicago for International recognizition. Yes. Does that make Las Vegas a "better" city? No. I'm well aware Las Vegas is a destination city.

But to say Las Vegas doesn't have an "history" is really not true. Las Vegas has an interesting history, from its founding as a railroad town to the creation of Hoover Dam. Perhaps it's not grand or glorious as Chicago or even San Francsico, but it is a history. Les Vegas might not be the "cradle of modern architecture," but it is where the world's first mega-hotels and mega-casinos were first established.

We're talking about the third most populous city. I want to ask you seriously, have you ever been to Chicago? And not just a layover at O'Hare- im talking about the actual city. I have said this before... Chicago always seems to suprise people. The media always focuses on L.A. or New York, but the truth is those cities are really pompous and pretentious about their image. New Yorkers have to constantly remind themselves that they're living in "the greatest city in the world". Or those from San Francisco who their city's "European" and "progressive" feel. In reality, a city such as Chicago has many of the same qualities as New York (Ask a New York who has spent some time in Chicago and they will tell you its a smaller, cleaner, and friendlier New York) and San Francisco (Chicago is "European" in the sense that it is arguably the most liberal city in the midwest and has a huge Eastern European ethnic base).

I have been to Chicago about a dozen times. In fact I was just there last week for a weekend. Actually, I was in Rockford, IL for the wedding, but spent some time in Chicago after that as my parents had never been there before.

I've actually always felt CHicago was exactly like New York... just cleaner and friendlier.

San Francisco believe it is more "european" and "progressive" because it IS more "european" and "progressive." San Francisco attracts a lot of European tourists. Many of them want to "see the Pacific." The streets and neighboord feel of the entire city is very European. As for the progressiveness?? Well, I think that's self-explanatory already.

Now let me ask you... "Have you ever spent time in San Francisco." And if you have... did you do other things than go to Pier 39?

The main reason in my opinion that people dismiss Chicago is because Chicagoans do not brag or flaunt or city at all. They don't need to. Anyone who has visited the City will recognize that it is something special and a bit of a suprise. Not that it isn't flaunt worthy, it's beacuse in all honestly Chicago is a little bit of every other city in the country. Someone referred Boston as the Athens of America earlier in this thread well Chicago is home to two leading instituions in the world- The University of Chicago and Northwestern University. Chicago also has many local production companies- music, film, and television- that's our L.A. The list can go on and on. That's what makes Chicago unique- it's the quintessential American city, the best example of Urban America.

San Francisco doesn't flaunt a thing. It's reputation precedes it.

You're pointing out a variety of things about Chicago, especially that it's a "little bit of every other city." But that doesn't make Chicago unique and original and stand out on its own. Everything is/seems borrowed.

San Francisco has movie companies... including LucasFilms and Coppola's production company. And if you want to look at the Bay Area, we have Pixar and Dreamworks. San Francisco is home to UCSF, one of the top medical schools in the country, SF General, the top AIDS research center in the world, the new Biotech center, Hastings School of Law.

Oh yes... San Francisco is called "The Paris of the Americas." High praise indeed.

It's not about what is what... or what city does X and Y better. It's about the whole package. There's no doubt that SF, CHI, and LA have international pull; otherwise, the three would be on the short list. ALl three will be able to pull together a successful Games. All three have unique features to showcase to the world.

But if the USOC is trying to "repair" international relations and image, I think the only city in America that can really showcase America as an international friendly country is.... San Francisco. Aside from New York, it is the most recognized city in America. I don't believe there's any doubt about that.

That's not to say that Chicago doesn't own anything of it's own... we have amazing eatery, shopping, sports, museums, architecture, history, local theater, nightlife, and local music/art scenes.

And everything Chicago can throw in these categories.... San Francisco can throw back... Chicago may be stronger in some areas (museums), and San Francisco may be stronger in others (ballet, opera,food) and are on par in others (nightlife, history, shopping).

Unfortunetly post the 2000 election and the huge political divide in this country there is a tendency amongst Americans from the coasts to completely dismiss inland America. If it is a political issue, keep in mind that John Kerry won Illinois by the SAME margin that he won California in the 2004 election- 10%. That's pretty funny considering many people from east or west coast simply look at the midwest as "flyover states", even when the Great Lakes area went blue in 2000 and 2004.

Yes, there is that divide. And if anything, that's probably going to be the deciding factor. I think Chicago is the exception for the MidWest. It's like the center of everything in the MidWest. I'm not sure if that's the international image the US wants to portray to the world, especially due to the sketchy international image of the US now.

If it isn't a political issue or another issue which I havent already touched on, then why is it that you put LAS VEGAS of all cities above Chicago?

I don't. I believe it's just the recognition and reputation Las Vegas has internationall as a destination -- especially with the Asian nations. It doesn't make Las Vegas "better" -- just more recognized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Yorkers have to constantly remind themselves that they're living in "the greatest city in the world". Or those from San Francisco who their city's "European" and "progressive" feel.

I'm glad you said that; this has also been my observation. I notice that many New Yorkers and San Franciscans tend to sing their own praises a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, that makes much more sense, lets look at the statistical data. Your info was from 2003 and here are the numbers from 2005, from the U.S. Department of Commerce, 2005 Market Share in perenthasis:

1. New York City (26.8%)

2. Los Angeles (11.9%)

3. San Francisco (9.8%)

4. Miami (9.6%)

5. Orlando (9.3%)

6. Oahu/Honolulu (8.4%)

7. Las Vegas (8.2%)

8. Washington, DC (5.1%)

9. Chicago (5.0%)

10. Boston (3.7%)

Complete data set here: http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/cat/f-2005-45-562.html

I'm sure people who don't like the looks of this list will find reason to disagree but I can't think of a more objective way to look at overseas interest in US cities then to look at the data. BTW, Atlanta is at number 11 with a 54% volume increase, very large compared to the rest of the list.

Last year was an all-time high for tourists in New York.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Las Vegas has an interesting history, from its founding as a railroad town to the creation of Hoover Dam.

Actually, it was founded by Mormon settlers, who left because of the inhospitable conditions, and later moved on and founded San Bernardino, California, which incidentally, is one of the first cities, if not THE first city, in California to be given a Spanish name even though the founders themselves were not Spaniards.

I've actually always felt CHicago was exactly like New York... just cleaner and friendlier.

I beg to differ, I think Chicago isn't like New York City at all. The downtown is indeed cleaner, but Chicago's south side is not. Chicago also lacks the racial and ethnic diversity that NYC and LA have, and the culture that goes along with that. There's something about Chicago that gives me a "conservative" vibe, and sometimes even a "hokey" vibe. It really is the center of the Midwest. And a black guy I know who's from Chicago tells me that even he thinks, to this day, that Chicago is a very racially polarized city.

San Francisco believe it is more "european" and "progressive" because it IS more "european" and "progressive."... The streets and neighboord feel of the entire city is very European.

OK, I've asked this on these boards MANY times before, but how exactly is SF "very European," apart from equating "progressiveness" with being European, a very baroque-styled city hall and smaller-scale replicas of a few French buildings? If anything, I think SF is a VERY American city. It even has a gridiron street pattern, which many European cities DO NOT HAVE. And yes, I've been to SF not ONLY as a tourist; my sister used to live there and I used to visit her and her family often; so I know what it's like to actually try to get around the city, go grocery shopping, find parking for seeing a movie, etc.

Experiencing a city as the locals do instead of as a tourist can be an eye opener. Like living in Hawaii. My sister and her family now live there and MAN, outside the tourist areas, away from the beaches, living in Hawaii is just like living in... dare I say it... MIDDLE AMERICA. And I say that because there's like a WalMart EVERYWHERE, and little nothing else. When my sister moved to Hawaii from SF, she said it was a culture shock, and she misses things like The Container Store, Trader Joe's and Whole Foods Market. She even wishes they had a Target there, just so that they wouldn't have to keep shopping at the fricking WalMart for groceries and other mundane things. People in Middle America seem to shop at WalMart like it's the thing to do, but WalMart in California has that "lower-class" stigma to it... if I were to enter a WalMart, I would expect to hear a lot of Spanish, ghetto English, see baby girls with pierced ears and see a lot of clothing on the floor.

But I digress! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone's smoking some bad weed. Las Vegas is NOT ahead of Chicago as far as international recognition. You're basing it on hotels?? :huh: Nine out of ten people always say the top 3 U.S. cities are; New York, L.A. & Chicago. Las Vegas never gets mentioned. Las Vegas is not even ahead of your precious San Franciso, & SF hovers somewhere around the top five.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wal-Mart has that lower class stigma in just about every urban area, not just California. And as far as people speaking Spanish & ghetto English in there.. the people in there speaking "Spanish" are speaking the language just as "ghetto" as their English counterparts. Don't think you can take Spanish classes from them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it was founded by Mormon settlers, who left because of the inhospitable conditions, and later moved on and founded San Bernardino, California, which incidentally, is one of the first cities, if not THE first city, in California to be given a Spanish name even though the founders themselves were not Spaniards.

I beg to differ, I think Chicago isn't like New York City at all. The downtown is indeed cleaner, but Chicago's south side is not. Chicago also lacks the racial and ethnic diversity that NYC and LA have, and the culture that goes along with that. There's something about Chicago that gives me a "conservative" vibe, and sometimes even a "hokey" vibe. It really is the center of the Midwest. And a black guy I know who's from Chicago tells me that even he thinks, to this day, that Chicago is a very racially polarized city.

OK, I've asked this on these boards MANY times before, but how exactly is SF "very European," apart from equating "progressiveness" with being European, a very baroque-styled city hall and smaller-scale replicas of a few French buildings? If anything, I think SF is a VERY American city. It even has a gridiron street pattern, which many European cities DO NOT HAVE. And yes, I've been to SF not ONLY as a tourist; my sister used to live there and I used to visit her and her family often; so I know what it's like to actually try to get around the city, go grocery shopping, find parking for seeing a movie, etc.

Experiencing a city as the locals do instead of as a tourist can be an eye opener. Like living in Hawaii. My sister and her family now live there and MAN, outside the tourist areas, away from the beaches, living in Hawaii is just like living in... dare I say it... MIDDLE AMERICA. And I say that because there's like a WalMart EVERYWHERE, and little nothing else. When my sister moved to Hawaii from SF, she said it was a culture shock, and she misses things like The Container Store, Trader Joe's and Whole Foods Market. She even wishes they had a Target there, just so that they wouldn't have to keep shopping at the fricking WalMart for groceries and other mundane things. People in Middle America seem to shop at WalMart like it's the thing to do, but WalMart in California has that "lower-class" stigma to it... if I were to enter a WalMart, I would expect to hear a lot of Spanish, ghetto English, see baby girls with pierced ears and see a lot of clothing on the floor.

But I digress! :P

I really dont know what you're talking about concerning a "hokey" vibe.... so I wont even address that. but concerning Chicago's segregation, it's a very interesting story. Mayor Richard J Daley (The current mayor's father) made huge efforts in order to keep the city segregated. When Martin Luther King Jr came to Chicago to desegregate the city, he ultimately failed due to the Mayor. Daley saw what was happening in Detroit and Cleveland (White Flight, Urban Decay, etc...) and did whatever he could in order to make sure that didn't happen in Chicago, including making sure that the city remained polarized and de facto segregated. Eventually Chicago did face white flight and urban decay, but not nearly as much as what destroyed Detroit. Chicago would be an entirely different picture today if J. Daley had caved into pressures from Civil Rights leaders. It's an interesting moral dilemma if you ask me, I'm not sure what I would've done in his position. Just a little bit of Chicago history for you guys :) .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow - according to that survey Orlando should be bidding for the games. <_<

OK, I've asked this on these boards MANY times before, but how exactly is SF "very European," apart from equating "progressiveness" with being European, a very baroque-styled city hall and smaller-scale replicas of a few French buildings? If anything, I think SF is a VERY American city. It even has a gridiron street pattern, which many European cities DO NOT HAVE. And yes, I've been to SF not ONLY as a tourist; my sister used to live there and I used to visit her and her family often; so I know what it's like to actually try to get around the city, go grocery shopping, find parking for seeing a movie, etc.

Thank you. Having lived in both Chicago and currently in San Francisco let me set something straight.

San Francisco is NOT, repeat NOT European. <_< If anything it is little Seoul/Tokyo/Bejing with all the Asians that live here. <_< Now, if being a city of leftist freaks, geeks, rude people, filthy hard to navigate streets and homeless people constitutes being European then perhaps we are.

As far as good food - where? I've lived here 2 years and outside of Cliff House, the Italian restaurants in North Beach and Boulevard I haven't eaten anyplace decent. Which is why when I have guests we go to Benicia, Walnut Creek or Napa/Sonoma for dinner. Heck, part of the reason I went back to Chicago a few weeks ago to visit was so I could go to some good restaurants for a change!

Now, I do hate fish which puts me at a disadvantage here as far as dining choices.

Don't get me wrong - I do like living in San Francisco - for now. But I totally see myself going back to Chicago as soon as the real estate market starts going back up and I can make a sh*&load of money off this house!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as good food - where? I've lived here 2 years and outside of Cliff House, the Italian restaurants in North Beach and Boulevard I haven't eaten anyplace decent. Which is why when I have guests we go to Benicia, Walnut Creek or Napa/Sonoma for dinner. Heck, part of the reason I went back to Chicago a few weeks ago to visit was so I could go to some good restaurants for a change!

Not that it means much since it is just a magazine, but GQ Magazine did name Chicago the best restaurant city in America in their June 2006 issue.

San Francisco is NOT, repeat NOT European. <_< If anything it is little Seoul/Tokyo/Bejing with all the Asians that live here. <_< Now, if being a city of leftist freaks, geeks, rude people, filthy hard to navigate streets and homeless people constitutes being European then perhaps we are.

San Francisco is nothing, if you want to see a real "Little Asia", just head up to Vancouver. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Previous Olympic host cities Atlanta and St. Louis weren't on many lists...interesting.

I dont know if St. Louis really counts... being one of the early games doesn't really give it too much historical precedence, since the political patterns of the IOC hadn't really been established. Besides, St. Louis was a major flop... could've been different had the games stayed in Chicago as planned. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...