Houston1stWordOnTheMoon Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 ANyway cities that are likely to gold it have higher salaries also. Minimum wage in California is like $7. Here it's $5.I dont know much about minimum wage here or anywhere for that matter because i havent worked for minimum wage. I must be one of the rare people in Houston that doesnt work for minimum wages....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 I have no doubt that Houston could host a successful Olympics, but I think that when the games come back to the US, they will likely go to one of our "flagship" cities; e.g. New York, Washington, San Francisco, or Chicago.San Fran is not a flagship city of the US. They're under a million in population and not in the top 10 list of US largest cities. They're beautiful.. Thats all they got going for them. Nice terrain, nice bridge.. Thats all.NewYork is the flagship city.LA and Chicago are the 2nd and 3rd.Hell, Thats LA too. Beautiful fake people. If it weren't for the fact that the film industry set up base there.. LA wouldn't be on that list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 San Fran is not a flagship city of the US. They're under a million in population and not in the top 10 list of US largest cities. They're beautiful.. Thats all they got going for them. Nice terrain, nice bridge.. Thats all.San Francisco's population rank is very deceptive. When including the Bay Area it has over 6 million people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 San Francisco's population rank is very deceptive. When including the Bay Area it has over 6 million people.San Fran is still ranked 12th as far as US Metro Statistical Areas are concerned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 San Fran is not a flagship city of the US. They're under a million in population and not in the top 10 list of US largest cities. They're beautiful.. Thats all they got going for them. Nice terrain, nice bridge.. Thats all.NewYork is the flagship city.LA and Chicago are the 2nd and 3rd.Hell, Thats LA too. Beautiful fake people. If it weren't for the fact that the film industry set up base there.. LA wouldn't be on that list.While I'm not quite sure what a flagship city is, much less how you define it, why the talk of flagship cities, anyway? The Olympics has never been held in a US flagship city, however you define it. St. Louis? Atlanta? LA, maybe, but you just claimed otherwise.The USOC has their criteria to get include in the final group. Houston passed that test, and would easily pass it again, only 4 years later. After that, it is a judgment call, based on what they think will succeed at the IOC level. And that is a very political process, not related to the criteria that's been discussed here.Any suggestion other than that, is just personal preference of the poster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 Back on transportation and aiports...Is there any US airport that is the primary hub for more than one airline ?Delta - AtlantaCont - HoustonAmerican - DallasUnited - Chicago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston1stWordOnTheMoon Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 Back on transportation and aiports...Is there any US airport that is the primary hub for more than one airline ? Delta - Atlanta Cont - Houston American - Dallas United - Chicago Yes, ATL is the primary hub for both Delta and Airtran Now, what do i win? :):) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 San Fran is still ranked 12th as far as US Metro Statistical Areas are concerned.I don't have the numbers in front of me, but when San Jose is included in the San Francisco-Oakland metro area as it used to be, the area ranks about the 4th largest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesternGulf Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 I never understood why San Jose was not considered part of the metro area. In any other metro, including Houston, it would. There is even plenty of developed land between both cities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 I don't have the numbers in front of me, but when San Jose is included in the San Francisco-Oakland metro area as it used to be, the area ranks about the 4th largest.Yeah...You're right.. I didnt realize there was this Combined Statistical Areas entity out there.It's a combo of Metropoilitan Statistical Areas and neighboring Micropolitan Statistical Areas...Which basically pushes Houston down the list because we have less nearby micro SAs around us.It's all relative.. CSA mapMSAs -1 NYC2 Chicago3 LA4 Philly5 DFW6 Miami7 Houston8 DC9 Atlanta10 Detroit11 Boston12 San FranCSAs -1 NYC2 LA3 Chicago4 DC5 San Fran6 Philly7 Boston8 Detroit9 Dallas10 Houston11 Atlanta12 Seattle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 Thanks for clarifying that. Now I realize that the metro population listing I had from 2004 was by CSA. Under the MSA definitions, San Jose is not included with San Francisco, and Riverside is not included w/LA. If you've been to either place, it seems odd. These kind of things will always be arbitrary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 (edited) These kind of things will always be arbitrary.Like why is Huntsville and Bay City MiSA included in our CSA but El Campo and Brehnam MiSA are not....Distances:Riverside to LA - 54 milesSan Jose t0 San Fran - 47 milesYah.. that would be like not including galveston.. that makes sense.Brenham to Houston - 73 milesEl Campo to Houiston - 73 milesNot included butBay City to Houston - 80 miles and Huntsville to Houston - 69 miles are included ?!? Edited April 18, 2006 by Highway6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ V Lawrence Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 While I'm not quite sure what a flagship city is, much less how you define it, why the talk of flagship cities, anyway? The Olympics has never been held in a US flagship city, however you define it. St. Louis? Atlanta? LA, maybe, but you just claimed otherwise.The USOC has their criteria to get include in the final group. Houston passed that test, and would easily pass it again, only 4 years later. After that, it is a judgment call, based on what they think will succeed at the IOC level. And that is a very political process, not related to the criteria that's been discussed here.Any suggestion other than that, is just personal preference of the poster.I agree with ya, RedScare. I think Houston has already proven that we can host the Olympics, but it absolutly became a political battle once the USOC/IOC criteria was met. Politics were the reason why London upset Paris for the 2012 bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 NewYork is the flagship city.LA and Chicago are the 2nd and 3rd.I'd say Chicago is more like 4th. In my experience, Miami/Orlando/Florida is second in people's minds, especially people in Europe and South America. And the people I've met in Asia are more interested in San Francisco than LA. But then, I haven't met everyone there yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWSchultz Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 (edited) I'd say Chicago is more like 4th. In my experience, Miami/Orlando/Florida is second in people's minds, especially people in Europe and South America. And the people I've met in Asia are more interested in San Francisco than LA. But then, I haven't met everyone there yet.That's kind of irrelevant, isn't it? Comparing Florida to Chicago? When I think of US cities and how big they "feel" to me, and I have been to most major cities, I would rank them this way:1. NYC2. Chicago3. LA4. SF5. DC6. Houston7. Dallas8. Miami9. AtlantaI put Miami so low because it is far better known for Miami Beach than the city of Miami itself. When I was there in November, the city is practically shut down three blocks in on the mainland at night. Of course, this is all subjective. And for me, the question is what does it "feel like" when you're walking around the core of the city. I haven't been to Boston, Philly, or Detroit so I wasn't able to place them on the list. Edited April 19, 2006 by BWSchultz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ V Lawrence Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 I'd say Chicago is more like 4th. In my experience, Miami/Orlando/Florida is second in people's minds, especially people in Europe and South America. And the people I've met in Asia are more interested in San Francisco than LA. But then, I haven't met everyone there yet.I never really heard of Orlando in that regard, but definately Miami.I would almost consider Seattle a city of that regard. It's usually the first city you go through when going from Asia to the States, and everyone here knows where the city is forone reason or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Plastic Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 The San Fransisco Bay Area is quite a bit larger than ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ V Lawrence Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OLY...EMPLATE=DEFAULTHouston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco will all be be checked out by scouts from the USOC during the next 2 weeks. NYC isn't out of the running, but I guess these 5 are the five that are currently the front-runners for the next U.S. bid. The IOC decides the winning city in 2009. Also, it is believed that 2016 is the USA's best shot at winning the Olympic host site before 2028, because 2020 and 2024 are expected to be in South America and Africa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstonsemipro Posted May 3, 2006 Share Posted May 3, 2006 Ummmm, this will be a very close race. I say in this order the IOC will decides...1. Chicago/L.A.2. San Francisco3. Houston/Philadelphia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ V Lawrence Posted May 4, 2006 Share Posted May 4, 2006 Ummmm, this will be a very close race. I say in this order the IOC will decides...1. Chicago/L.A.2. San Francisco3. Houston/PhiladelphiaRemember, they're only scouting the cities now. There's no concrete bid presentations yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxDave Posted May 6, 2006 Share Posted May 6, 2006 Back on transportation and aiports...Is there any US airport that is the primary hub for more than one airline ?Delta - AtlantaCont - HoustonAmerican - DallasUnited - ChicagoI think Chicago O'Hare is the only airport left with a dual "major airline" hub - United and American. Chicago may not be American's "primary" hub, but it is equivalent and a serious operation. After Delta pulled out of Dallas, there were no other dual hub airports left (regarding legacy carriers - the low-cost guys may shake things up)Some industry experts have even questioned how long this situation at O'Hare might last - although there seem to be no signs of change anytime soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted May 7, 2006 Share Posted May 7, 2006 The news tonight said that Houston lost out on the 2012 Games due to it's low international standing, relative to New York and San Francisco. Since that time 4 years ago, the city put on the Super Bowl, the World Series, and 2 All Star Games. More importantly, they said that the city's response to Katrina put it in the world spotlight, showing the goodwill of the city, and that area governments can work together to get things done on a grand scale.Wouldn't it be amazing if the worst natural disaster in US history became Houston's greatest moment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 I have a good feeling of us hosting in 2016. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston1stWordOnTheMoon Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 The news tonight said that Houston lost out on the 2012 Games due to it's low international standing, relative to New York and San Francisco. Since that time 4 years ago, the city put on the Super Bowl, the World Series, and 2 All Star Games. More importantly, they said that the city's response to Katrina put it in the world spotlight, showing the goodwill of the city, and that area governments can work together to get things done on a grand scale.Wouldn't it be amazing if the worst natural disaster in US history became Houston's greatest moment?Already happened, remember the big hurricane that hit Galveston? There are some very good and welcoming people here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houstonian in Iraq Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 The news tonight said that Houston lost out on the 2012 Games due to it's low international standing, relative to New York and San Francisco. Since that time 4 years ago, the city put on the Super Bowl, the World Series, and 2 All Star Games. More importantly, they said that the city's response to Katrina put it in the world spotlight, showing the goodwill of the city, and that area governments can work together to get things done on a grand scale.Wouldn't it be amazing if the worst natural disaster in US history became Houston's greatest moment?Good points-I just think it's a bit early to tell. I'm sure it's covered somewhere in this thread, when is the commitee suppose to decide on US cities? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ V Lawrence Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/3847162.htmlThe 5-city tour apparantly is being done so the USOC could decide if the USA has a legitimate shot at winning the host spot for 2016, and the five cities are the cities the USOC thinks currently has a good chance at winning the U.S. candidate spot should they pursue. I think the fact that Houston was one of the five cities says a lot. Notice that Washington D.C. and NYC are not on the tour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KimberlySayWhat Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 Not going to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 Somebody wake Rick Perry from his slumber! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstonsemipro Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 I agree with Kimberly. It's not going to happen. I just can't see Houston hosting the Olympics. Besides, we have to wait until damn there 2009 just for who going to get the 2016 Olympics. That's 3 more years from now.Anyhow, I can't see it. Houston still have strong competition. Chi-town, San Fran, L.A. and Philly (and Philly is no push over).I beleive Houston will get cut first, or second round. The final two will be Chi-town and San Fran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citykid09 Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 It would be really cool if it did happen. Just think of all of the improvments and new stuff that would be built if it does come to Houston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.