Why is Philly not considered cool like Chicago/NYC? (clubs, suburban)
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.
The average country music listener is 45+, listens to music mostly over FM/AM radio and uses Facebook. The average hip hop fan is 15-34, listens to music mostly over Spotify and uses Instagram and YouTube.
So are you really going to sit here and tell me that the face of "cool" is a 45-year old+ White person who uses Facebook?
I guess the NBA isn’t cool either?
When something is popular enough the average fan is going to be pretty old because the median American, is 40. If your average fan is like 24 that’s only possible if it’s not popular in general. If you look at the general demographics Rick and country are up at the top, and guess what? They have old fans.
The average age of an NBA fan is 36, not 45+. The average NBA fan is also a racial minority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4
When something is popular enough the average fan is going to be pretty old because the median American, is 40. If your average fan is like 24 that’s only possible if it’s not popular in general. If you look at the general demographics Rick and country are up at the top, and guess what? They have old fans.
You act like country is more popular than hip hop. It's not. It's less popular. Less streamers, less album sales, pretty much less of everything.
So census records tell you why people visit cities?
YOU made the claim that Nashville has a ton of people moving there for "pure vibes" while San Francisco has people ONLY moving there for economic reasons. The burden of proof is on you, Ak.
I never claimed that people were visiting for any particular reason. I merely pointed out that cool cities, in fact, *do* get lots of visitors.
Nashville is a relatively homogeneous, largely Black-White city that doesn't even have the quirkiness of Portland. So the appeal is going to be far more limited compared to that of SF that's going to appeal to Asians, Latinos, Whites and even some Black people (the other 40% of the U.S. population). Not to mention foreigners.
YOU made the claim that Nashville has a ton of people moving there for "pure vibes" while San Francisco has people ONLY moving there for economic reasons. The burden of proof is on you, Ak.
I never claimed that people were visiting for any particular reason. I merely pointed out that cool cities, in fact, *do* get lots of visitors.
Philly economy 2019/2002: 186%
Cincinnati 196%
Nashville 185%
Chicago 180%
San Francisco 247%
Seattle: 266%
Does it make economic sense Nashville grew the fastest demographically?
For comparison Houston, a sunbelt boom town was 255%
Or or may the city be “cool”
Does it make economic sense Nashville grew the fastest demographically?
Or or may the city be “cool”
Why would a large metro with a large base population have as high a percentage increase as a far smaller metro?
I think you're discounting the fact that a lot of people move to Southern metros for a lower COL. I have some friends in Nashville and they're not there because it's "cool." They like it enough, but they happened to land good jobs there, and it's cheaper than the cities they moved from.
If you're into the country/indie scene, and don't mind living in a sort of culturally homogeneous place, and don't mind the Bible Belt influence, then Nashville could very well be a "cool" place. But if you're not into that, and want a more diverse city, what would be the point of moving there outside of a low COL?
Why would a large metro with a large base population have as high a percentage increase as a far smaller metro?
I think you're discounting the fact that a lot of people move to Southern metros for a lower COL. I have some friends in Nashville and they're not there because it's "cool." They like it enough, but they happened to land good jobs there, and it's cheaper than the cities they moved from.
If you're into the country/indie scene, and don't mind living in a sort of culturally homogeneous place, then Nashville could very well be a "cool" place. But if you're not into that, and want a more diverse city, what would be the point of moving there outside of a low COL?
While not universally cool, I think Nashville being a pretty big outlier in terms of Ecinomic vs demographic growth is a sign people think it’s cool. And while Country music is big enough to dominate a metro the size of Nashville, so it’s a city whose demographic pull is stronger than it’s economic pull.
Boston, SF, Seattle and Chicago are on the “unusually strong growth considering demographics”
Which is a sign they’re not very cool. Because people are less willing to make economic concessions to live there.
While not universally cool, I think Nashville being a pretty big outlier in terms of Ecinomic vs demographic growth is a sign people think it’s cool. And while Country music is big enough to dominate a metro the size of Nashville, so it’s a city whose demographic pull is stronger than it’s economic pull.
Boston, SF, Seattle and Chicago are on the “unusually strong growth considering demographics”
Which is a sign they’re not very cool. Because people are less willing to make economic concessions to live there.
Greenville, SC must be really cool then.
Hardly any of the so-called "cool" cities have positive net domestic migration. Manhattan has barely grown at all and yet you are quick to label NYC a "cool" city (or is Manhattan excluded in your view?) Most of the cool cities, in fact, are places where people party it up for a few years and then move to smaller, lower cost metros. It's not like the 20-somethings moving to London are going to buy a house there and raise a family. They're there for a good time, not a long time.
Hardly any of the so-called "cool" cities have positive net domestic migration. Manhattan has barely grown at all and yet you are quick to label NYC a "cool" city (or is Manhattan excluded in your view?) Most of the cool cities, in fact, are places where people party it up for a few years and then move to smaller, lower cost metros. It's not like the 20-somethings moving to London are going to buy a house there and raise a family. They're there for a good time, not a long time.
I think a big thins is NYC is so big and generally the mobile “creative class” is comparatively small it gets lost in the vastness of Demographic trends.
It’s compared to economic growth.
LA economy is 202% it’s 2001 economy
Cincinnati is 199%
Pittsburgh’s economy is at 199% it’s 2001 level
LA’s population grew 14.7% Cincinnati by 12.3%, Pittsburgh lost population. So I’d say LA’s population doesn’t really lag it’s economic growth, but like New York, it’s really really big. So I think it’s tough for it to significantly outperform
That’s is much more true in a city like London where 1/5th of the country lives in the metro
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.
