Why isn't Philly seen more as a "cool" destination?

[jpdivola]

Originally Posted by summersm343

I understand what you're saying, trust me I do. But show me a street in the aforementioned cities nicer than this and I'll concede your point.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9471...ug!2e0!6m1!1e1

These cities are definitely nice, no doubt. And Philly certainly has it's share of rundown neighborhoods. Too many, in fact, if you ask most Philadelphian's. However, these cities are largely suburban in nature when compared to the majority of Philadelphia's typical urban residential neighborhoods. Northwest Philly and the Eastern portion of Montgomery County would compete much more favorably with the development styles of Seattle, Denver, Portland, Minneapolis.

100% agree with you. Rittenhouse is one of the most urbane neighborhoods in the county (and can really only be rivaled by those in NYC, Bos, SF, Chicago and maybe DC). Philly has tons of world class museums, the Ben Frankiln Parkway, Society Hill, Old City, Penn, the Main Line, etc.

But, much like Chicago it also has more per capita issues with crime and poverty than it's urban peers NYC, SF, and Boston. I think this in part accounts for the relative "underrated" nature of Philly and Chicago. Perception is often based on per capita or averages, not the "aggregate total" of nice stuff in each city.

Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, and Denver all get lots of nice press for their work on "smart growth", public transit, tech economies, active lifestyles and generally high quality of life. San Diego, Austin and Raleigh also get a lot of this. These cities all do well on a "per capita" basis. Philly (and Chicago) blow the hip, new urban, liberal/micrbrew cities Seattle, Portland and so on out of the water.

Yet these smaller, new yuppie cities tend to get lots of glowing press and do really well on the per capita lists:

How Portland Got Its Groove Back
http://www.slate.com/articles/busine..._portland.html

Study: Minneapolis, Seattle, Denver Most Literate Cities
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=1399491
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/b...olis/25531751/

Minneapolis-St. Paul are the healthiest, fittest cities in the USA for the third year in a row, fitness index finds.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...-paul/2363677/
http://www.mensfitness.com/life/outd...s-america-list

I think there are lots of people in the country who aren't so concerned with density/true urbanism and are more concerned with being in a shiny new place. For better or worse, Denver, Portland and Seattle do give off a more consistently prosperous feel than Philly, which has world class neighborhoods and some more run down areas in close proximity.

[pdxtex]

wow, 4% income tax? and 3.5 for non residents? thats some extraordinary bullshit. how does the local populous feel about that?

[UrbanRevival]

Originally Posted by Shawn

These are the two issues I picked up on. "Issues."

Philly is situated next to NYC, DC, and Boston. Each of these metros "owns" a category or two (or more). NYC? Too many to list. DC? National government. Boston? Education and biotech. Philly? ...

Of course, every metro can't be Number 1 at something. Having a well-rounded, strongly performing "portfolio" is better than being Number 1 at something and being poor at everything else. But from a branding perspective, Philly falls short of its Northeast neighbors. And I get the distinct impression that the city and metro's leadership either don't understand this or don't really care. Maybe if the shale oil / fracking industry sustains itself, Philly can own it. Pittsburgh might have something to say about though.

I am also under the impression that the city itself is quite business-unfriendly, with a higher tax burden (both residential and commercial) than competitor cities in the Northeast. Another impression I have (echoing others): Philly is blue-collar, and the city/metro doesn't have the same level of employment base in Finance/Tech/Biotech that NYC, Boston, and DC have. Philly has no VC environment to speak of, so you won't see the same type of tech start-up scene you have in The Bay Area or Boston. There just aren't as many "cool" jobs available for new white-collar grads, hence it being less of a "cool destination", per the OP.

I think a little fact-checking is in order (although I recognize part of the issue is a lack of awareness/"branding," as you point out).

You make valid points in terms of Philly not necessarily being "#1" at something economically, although it could be argued that a metro area benefits from an unusually diverse economy.

In terms of your impression, however, it should be noted that any reference to the metro area as "blue collar" is long outdated. The Philly metro compares very favorably to peers on a number of relevant metrics that bode well for its future:

- Growth in college grads: http://cityobservatory.org/wp-conten...port-Final.pdf

- White-collar jobs (per capita): http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjourna...07101735926574

- Fast-growing companies: http://www.inc.com/jill-krasny/inc50...tro-areas.html

And while the VC scene in Philly certainly is not as robust as other regions, it's quite an exaggeration to say there's "nothing to speak of:"

https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/Reports...nal_2014-4.pdf

I think the key here is that while the Philly region has done incredibly well in modern years in terms of not only transitioning to a knowledge economy--but competing among peer regions--the moral of the story is the Philadelphia proper needs to reap more of the benefits of this success (as Boston, NY and DC have for their respective metro regions).

There definitely are solid, extremely encouraging signs that the city is rebounding to levels not seen in decades (and the region finally seems to be where it was pre-recession), but it is still a relative "work-in-progress."

The good news is that the "better economy" piece honestly seems to be the only missing part for the city. With a formidable arts/cultural/culinary sector, world-class educational and healthcare institutions, a very enviable geographic location in the US, superb walkability, unique historical attributes, robust public transportation and pleasant, bucolic natural surroundings (much more than its given credit for), everything else will fall into place for Philly.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by Shawn

These are the two issues I picked up on. "Issues."

Philly is situated next to NYC, DC, and Boston. Each of these metros "owns" a category or two (or more). NYC? Too many to list. DC? National government. Boston? Education and biotech. Philly? ...

How is Philadelphia any different than Chicago in this sense? Chicago does not necessarily "own" any one industry either, yet Chicago is - for the most part - seen in a favorable light. More-so than Philadelphia at least. Philadelphia, like Chicago, has a very diverse industry. It's strong in a ton of fields: Finance, education, medical/research, pharma, Real Estate, fashion/retail, telecom/media, law, industry/manufacturing, energy, hospitality/tourism, etc. etc. the list goes on and on. Philadelphia has major players in every single industry either headquartered in Philadelphia or with a major base of operations in Philadelphia.

Of course, every metro can't be Number 1 at something. Having a well-rounded, strongly performing "portfolio" is better than being Number 1 at something and being poor at everything else. But from a branding perspective, Philly falls short of its Northeast neighbors. And I get the distinct impression that the city and metro's leadership either don't understand this or don't really care. Maybe if the shale oil / fracking industry sustains itself, Philly can own it. Pittsburgh might have something to say about though.

I agree totally. I would argue it's leaders in government in both PA Senate and Philadelphia City Council have no vision, and really no understanding of how short Philadelphia falls compared to it's potential. However, I would definitely argue that it's business leaders are trying to push for tax reform to help spur job growth in Philadelphia. It's been in every Philadelphia publication imaginable lately.

http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelp...-creation.html

I would be hard-pressed to believe that Pittsburgh would take over the Fracking/Shale scene from Philly. Most of the blue collar refinery and factory jobs would be in Pittsburgh, but the majority of the office jobs would be located in Philadelphia. The gas would be pumped to factories and plants in Philadelphia by Sunoco among others, where it would then be sent via rail and boat to NYC, DC, Boston, all up and down the East Coast and abroad to Europe and South America. Companies would locate their offices in Philadelphia to have a better pool of top talent from Philadelphia itself, but NYC and DC. If Fracking/Shale takes off, it would benefit both cities and the state of PA, but Philadelphia would likely benefit more.

I am also under the impression that the city itself is quite business-unfriendly, with a higher tax burden (both residential and commercial) than competitor cities in the Northeast. Another impression I have (echoing others): Philly is blue-collar, and the city/metro doesn't have the same level of employment base in Finance/Tech/Biotech that NYC, Boston, and DC have. Philly has no VC environment to speak of, so you won't see the same type of tech start-up scene you have in The Bay Area or Boston. There just aren't as many "cool" jobs available for new white-collar grads, hence it being less of a "cool destination", per the OP.

Yes, Philadelphia (and Pennsylvania for that matter) are very, very unfriendly to business. There is a high tax burden for businesses, however there is a move to change this. As for residential tax burden, it is certainly not higher than neighboring major east coast cities. It's definitely lower, but that's part of the problem. The biggest issue people have with Philly's tax structure is the Wage Tax. However, Philadelphia has much lower sales taxes, property taxes, etc.

Philly is slightly more blue-collar, but you'd be surprised how much this has changed in the city in just the past few years alone. As Jelly Roll pointed out, the uptick in the Philly start up scene in the past couple years has been pretty astonishing. Philly metro area is certainly not Blue Collar. I mean, Philadelphia does rank #7 in most millionaires of any US metropolitan area.

http://www.businessinsider.com/10-us...philadelphia-4

...among some of the highest percentages of blue collar jobs among major cities in the US:

http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjourna...07101735926574

Maybe the problem is that Philadelphia doesn't have one industry, and it is too diversified. It has top companies in every field, but doesn't have a Silicon Valley or Wall Street to draw a large pool of companies together. Maybe the Marcellus Shale is the answer, or maybe it will be something else. Either way, Philadelphia and Pennsylvania lawmakers need to be a little more visionary, realize the city's full potential, and create a true powerhouse in Philadelphia. It is certainly possible.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by JManc

Center City can compete with the best urban areas this country has.

Absolutely. I'll take it one step further and say the core of Philadelphia can compete with the best urban areas this country has to offer.

Center City, Northern Liberties, Fishtown, Fairmount/Spring Garden, Templetown, Graduate Hospital, Bella Vista, Queen Village, Hawthorne, Passyunk Square, East Passyunk Crossing, Newbold, University City, Powelton Village, Clark Park, Cedar Park, Walnut Hill, Garden Court.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by pdxtex

wow, 4% income tax? and 3.5 for non residents? thats some extraordinary bullshit. how does the local populous feel about that?

They hate it. There is movement FINALLY by government and business leaders alike to shift the tax burdens to properties as NYC, Boston and DC do and take it off of residents and businesses. The result will hopefully be a significantly reduced income tax (down around 2%) and significantly lowered business taxes.

The thought is to tax things that can't move like Real Estate instead of things that can like businesses and residents.

[dc_denizen]

I would note that there are also some serious tax advantages for buying in Philly. Eg, 5-year property tax abatement. You have to net this against the wage tax..

[mhays]

Boston does well in part because of its incredible array of universities and the tech/biotech/medical industries and other intellectual fields that are tied to it. Having generations of students come through from around the world has to help, as many of the country's and world's top movers and shakers have lived there for a while, and the youthful vibe is probably helpful.

Chicago is a commodities center and also the traditional crossroads of the US. It's also had a lot of room its downtown to grow due to the high amount of unused land next to it, which has allowed a lot of new companies and sectors to locate there. And it's been possible to build tens of thousands of housing units within walking distance of the Loop or Upper Michigan without breaking a sweat.

Philly has some universities but not on Boston's scale or notoriety. It's been pretty cohesive in land use terms, and can't grow as easily as Chicago in core districts. So growth has been pretty moderate.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

I would note that there are also some serious tax advantages for buying in Philly. Eg, 5-year property tax abatement. You have to net this against the wage tax..

10 year tax abatement in-fact for any property built before 2015 and still 10 year tax abatement for any property under $550k I believe. All over $550k are now 5 year tax abatement.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by mhays

Boston does well in part because of its incredible array of universities and the tech/biotech/medical industries and other intellectual fields that are tied to it. Having generations of students come through from around the world has to help, as many of the country's and world's top movers and shakers have lived there for a while, and the youthful vibe is probably helpful.

Really don't think Philadelphia is any different in this regard. UPenn, while a step behind Harvard, is certainly in the same league. Philadelphia has a large collection of top tier Hospitals and Universities. Many movers and shakers are coming through Wharton, and Philadelphia (so they say) trains 1/5th of the country's doctors.

Boston
2- Harvard
7 - MIT
1 ranked Mass Gen Hospital
1 tied rank Boston Children's Hospital

Philly
8- UPenn
Proximity to #1 ranked Princeton
7 ranked Penn Medicine Hospital
1 tied rank Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

Philly has some universities but not on Boston's scale or notoriety.

This is funny. Some? Could you downplay it more? Boston has about 100 schools and 250,00 students enrolled in the area. Philadelphia has about 80 schools with over 300,000 enrolled in the area. These two would easily be up at one and two for Higher Education in the country - at least on a per capita basis. They're definitely the best college cities.

[llamaorama]

I'll be frank, my mental image of Philly is like NYC in 1980, but without the bohemian romance.


....

For everyone talking about racial issues, lets be fair and also point out that the traditional urban cities in the country are the most segregated.

To me race issues are like an allergic reaction. It's not the thing you are exposed to that really kills, you, its your own bodies' reaction. Places with high social cohesion = constructive leadership and politics. Dysfunctional urban politics are the result of a reactive, crisis mentality.

Generally "newer" cities that are just now becoming more diverse are doing a better job at integrating minorities without causing a shake-up because they don't have the legacy of de-industrialization, segregation, or entrenched ghettos to contend with.

Minneapolis might be very "white bread" to some people, but is actually an enormous immigration destination. And not educated white collar Asians or Indians, but people coming from some of the most 'foreign' and difficult cultures relative to the USA that exist- Somalia, Cambodia, etc.

Denver and Austin both have big Hispanic populations.

Also Portland is white doesn't mean some parts aren't really trashy.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by summersm343

How is Philadelphia any different than Chicago in this sense? Chicago does not necessarily "own" any one industry either, yet Chicago is - for the most part - seen in a favorable light.

Chicago owns the global commodities market. The CME handles 3 billion contracts worth approximately $1 quadrillion annually. Yes, that's "quadrillion." If you combined NASDAQ, the S&P500, the NYSE, and the LSE into one single exchange, that would still come short of what the CME has in terms of scale and influence on global commodities and futures.

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by mhays

Philly has some universities but not on Boston's scale or notoriety. It's been pretty cohesive in land use terms, and can't grow as easily as Chicago in core districts. So growth has been pretty moderate.

It's funny that the answer to this thread's thesis lies in all of the slightly wrong and misinformed answers over the last several pages... For example, Philly has more college students in its metro region than Boston. Is it Harvard/MIT, no it's Penn/Drexel with Princeton 35 miles north. For every Wellesley, there's Swarthmore - for Radcliffe there's Bryn Mawr.

Honestly, as someone who spent most of their developmental life in Europe - one of Philly's biggest image issues can simply be boiled down to one thing: Rocky. That film set the city back DECADES. My best friend is Spanish and lives in Madrid and will only meet me stateside in NYC - Philly, according to his perception - his all time favorite movie is Rocky by the way, is dirty and dangerous and disinteresting and simply not worth his time. On the flip-side, I've often hypothesized about the economic impact that Sex In The City has had on NYC's economy over the last 20 years - imagine if that show had been set in Rittenhouse Square? I mean that show might as well have been financed by NYCgo.com. The SITC tours are absurd, can you still not get into that shitty bakery Magnolia because of the queue?

As other posters have alluded to, PHilly got gut-punched, big time by suburbanization and the odd racial tensions that ensued. Mix that with some really ugly decades - 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s that's two generations! - from a crime, city morale point of view - throw in our proximity to more powerful centers like DC and NYC - and you have this strange, what's known as, Negadelphian attitude (mostly confined to the Northeast part of the city and certain areas of South Jersey imo). Two Generations of families and children being raised that the city is a heaping pile of shit is a huge mental hurdle to overcome. The Zeitgeist, even after about a decade of insanely positive renewal (if you haven't been here in the last 5 or so years the city is almost unrecognizable), is only just beginning to shift away from it's past.

I'd say in about 20 years, posts like this will be non-existent as Philly will have earned its due.

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

I'll be frank, my mental image of Philly is like NYC in 1980, but without the bohemian romance.

In spirit of the thread title, why?

[Leo the Dog]

No offense to Philly (I like The city, just trying to hypothesize) but if one is traveling all the way to the East Coast from say California, I doubt philly is on the radar. Why go there when you have the nation's capital to the south and NYC to the north. Baltimore also suffers from the same thing as Philly.

I think it just happens to lie in a geographical void in people's minds.

I went to Philly for the history and loved center city. But most people don't enjoy these things. Also, when I lived in Boston, many Bostonians talked major trash about Philly (and def NY) I think their sports fans' reputations carry an image to America that isnt desirable.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Really don't think Philadelphia is any different in this regard. UPenn, while a step behind Harvard, is certainly in the same league. Philadelphia has a large collection of top tier Hospitals and Universities. Many movers and shakers are coming through Wharton, and Philadelphia (so they say) trains 1/5th of the country's doctors.

I believe the whole point of this thread is about perception, no? I can tell you this unequivocally: in the three markets I am responsible for "having my finger on the pulse of perception" (Japan, South Korea, Mainland China), Boston is the holy grail of education. Harvard and MIT are the only East Coast schools worthy of a Party Princeling's presence. In April 2015, there were 37,600 searches for "Harvard University" across Google and Yahoo in Japan; there were 720 for "University of Pennsylvania" and just 30 for "Wharton School".

Never underestimate the power of brand perception. In the part of the world I have lived in the past 15 years, "Boston" = "best education money can buy." Is this notion grounded in reality? Does it even matter? It's become accepted as a self-evident truth, built on the back of Harvard and MIT's brands.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by Londonee

Honestly, as someone who spent most of their developmental life in Europe - one of Philly's biggest image issues can simply be boiled down to one thing: Rocky. That film set the city back DECADES.

YES!

My Japanese wife's only image of Philly is Rocky (she's obsessed with Stallone).

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by Shawn

Chicago owns the global commodities market. The CME handles 3 billion contracts worth approximately $1 quadrillion annually. Yes, that's "quadrillion." If you combined NASDAQ, the S&P500, the NYSE, and the LSE into one single exchange, that would still come short of what the CME has in terms of scale and influence on global commodities and futures.

Forgive my ignorance, but I can't quite comprehend why CME is so big, and how it is more important in the Finance world than Wall Street. I understand it handles $1 quadrillion worth of contracts, but only employs 2300 and has a total revenue of $3 billion. CME might be a huge boon for Chicago, but it doesn't "own" the finance industry - New York does. Comcast is a huge boon for Philadelphia - and the largest Media and soon to be tech conglomerate in the world with a total employment of 136,000 and $65 bill in revenue - but Philadelphia doesn't own the media industry.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

No offense to Philly (I like The city, just trying to hypothesize) but if one is traveling all the way to the East Coast from say California, I doubt philly is on the radar. Why go there when you have the nation's capital to the south and NYC to the north. Baltimore also suffers from the same thing as Philly.

I think it just happens to lie in a geographical void in people's minds.

I went to Philly for the history and loved center city. But most people don't enjoy these things. Also, when I lived in Boston, many Bostonians talked major trash about Philly (and def NY) I think their sports fans' reputations carry an image to America that isnt desirable.

Those from the West Coast wouldn't want to travel to Philadelphia to learn about the place where the country they live in was founded? That's a lot more than Baltimore, don't ya think?

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by Shawn

I believe the whole point of this thread is about perception, no? I can tell you this unequivocally: in the three markets I am responsible for "having my finger on the pulse of perception" (Japan, South Korea, Mainland China), Boston is the holy grail of education. Harvard and MIT are the only East Coast schools worthy of a Party Princeling's presence. In April 2015, there were 37,600 searches for "Harvard University" across Google and Yahoo in Japan; there were 720 for "University of Pennsylvania" and just 30 for "Wharton School".

Never underestimate the power of brand perception. In the part of the world I have lived in the past 15 years, "Boston" = "best education money can buy." Is this notion grounded in reality? Does it even matter? It's become accepted as a self-evident truth, built on the back of Harvard and MIT's brands.

I was speaking nationally, not internationally. On an international level, Harvard blows Penn out of the water. It's not only Philadelphia that needs a better PR agency, but many of Philly's top institutions as well.