Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu
Things are more nuanced than just how big you are. Seattle's success in this space goes back to the 80s with Microsoft and Nintendo, which then attracted other companies and formed others as time went on. Austin goes back to the 80s with companies like Dell and then later just attracted expansions. Austin is good but also overrated in terms of things like startups - guess it depends on what you want. DC has tons of government contractors who started their own things too. LA has been big on video game development since the late 80s or early 90s. Boston goes back to bio medical.
You should think beyond size and what should be. That's really not how it works no matter how much everyone wants to believe it. I think Chicago and midwest in general has a lot more talent (which is very hard to measure) than most people realize (you need to understand just how many people in Silicon Valley are from the midwest - it's not a small number at all). I think the issue with Chicago is more marketing - it's been the problem for a long time. Chicago's marketing sucks and it's only recently that it's attracted some of these fairly major expansions. You can't compare it to Seattle, Austin, etc - they've been getting this stuff since the 80s and 90s. NYC has done a good job of playing catchup and that's basically just in the last decade only, but NYC has excellent marketing. Most cities are playing catchup as these other places have had a few decades head start on a lot of people and have kept it going.
Again, most people just assume Chicago is flyover country, there's nothing there, and/or it's not nice. It's about marketing. I can't tell you how many times I've met people visiting who have the same reaction of "WHO KNEW!?" or just showing people here at my office in NYC street view of Chicago. They're always like "I just assumed there was nothing there and it wasn't nice." That actually happened today when talking to someone and I told her I moved to NYC 2 years ago from Chicago. She said "wow that must have been a big change" - She's never been to Chicago and I told her no, because Chicago is not hugely different as far as lifestyle goes from NYC (at least my lifestyle). Showed her some coastline pic of Chicago and she said "nice - is that Florida?" and when I said it was Chicago she just said "wtf?" - showed her more streetviews "Wow, I never knew Chicago was this nice..." It's all about marketing and sometimes this trickles down to companies who should be doing their homework better than normal people like you and me, but they don't always.
The 2 things holding Chicago back is basically how everyone thinks it's -20 degrees in the winter and reports of crime on the news. People in various parts of the coasts kind of have a self importance and think there's nothing worth visiting outside of that. Which is funny because the same people claim to be cultured and knowledgeable, but yet don't know shit beyond a few places in the US. Some others are those from the midwest who grew up in small towns, who basically write off everything midwest including Chicago (even though they don't know about it in reality because they grew up in Iowa never having actually visited Chicago) and want to act cool for their "cultured" coastal peers, so they trash talk everything and say there's nothing worth going to in the midwest. So they assume Chicago too. Unfortunately these types of people are sometimes running the companies you want expansions from.
|
I am going to run something by you guys that I ask you guys to give serious consideration to before denouncing it as poppycock. But what about if Chicago, and cities/states in the upper mid-west, put together something to re-name the region. I mean, this whole "mid-west thing" seems to be a bit of an albatross around Chicago's neck. Furthermore, I have never considered myself a mid-westerner and I know many Chicagoan's who feel the exact same way. I remember being shocked, as a kid, the first time I found out that Chicago was in the mid-west. I mean, really, how much does Chicago really have in common with Oklahoma? Kansas? Iowa? Nebraska? Even Indiana or Ohio? It seems that the further North you go in the mid-west that whole region takes on a more cultured vibe, whereas the lower you go, and further west you go, it seems a bit more rural, farmer, hick vibe.
Before you say, "no way" consider this.... technically Texas could be considered the mid-west by the same definition used to encompass Chicago in the mid-west. And then consider how Texas would fight tooth and nail against such a notion and how Texas has seemingly carved out its own distinct area separate and apart from being considered in the "deep south". And look at how California has been considering dividing itself up into 3 distinct areas - No Cal, Cal, So Cal - I believe thats how it goes. Also consider how Indiana has gone to an Eastern Time Zone when they are clearly not an eastern state. Done to further business and to create an air of prestige and how it seems to be working for them as they have ticked up a bit as a state since going to that change.
I haven't really thought it through but I would imagine you could take the Great Lakes Region and give it its own name.... include the Chicago area, the Milwaukee area, Minneapolis, Michigan and upper Ohio areas... possibly even Toronto. It would take a while for that label/name to stick but in time, it would become a part of the everyday lexicon of Americans and would be more in line with the true values and ideals of Chicagoans. Moreover, such a change would shake off some of the negatives that are commonly associated with being considered in the "mid-west".
Something like this would likely take years and would be a huge initiative but in the long run I think the benefit would outweigh the cost. It can be done.
Just a thought.
Prev
Linear Mode
