Why is São Paulo seemingly a non-event outside of Brazil?
 

Disclaimer before I get dragged - I know my take is more of a Euro/NA centric view.

Unlike other major megacities of the world, São Paulo (22M+ people!) which is the economic powerhouse of this country doesn't seem super romanticized or desirable from a global media/collective consciousness perspective. Yet from what I hear, the quality of life and safety is far better there than Rio, and it's extremely diverse and cosmopolitan...and it represents a microcosm of the multi-faceted nature of Brazil.

Aside from distance, what hinders São Paulo's status as a premier tourist destination in the league of Tokyo, Mexico City, Shanghai, NYC or London?

short answer: Rio


Rio steals a decent chunk of Sao Paulo's thunder in terms of international prominence.

Mexico City and Buenos Aires don't have a city like Rio within their national borders that they compete against for international prominence.

Rio is an iconic city, with global renown. SP isn't as well-known, and doesn't have any globally iconic scenes or attractions.

It's a huge business city, but can anyone name an attraction that would draw the globe to SP? Tokyo, Mexico City, NYC and London have such attractions. Not so sure about Shanghai. Do people really talk about Shanghai as an iconic location? Can the average person say anything informative about Shanghai besides "big Chinese city"?

Because unlike NYC, Tokyo, Paris or London Sao Paulo isn't tied into the international consciousness of "Brazil".

Think about it: If you say the word "Brazil" in your head what images begin to appear? Beaches filled with gorgeous residents, Carnival, Samba music, old portugese colonial architecture, favela covered hillsides, etc. Rio is in many ways the "Face of Brazil" much more than Sao Paulo. While it would be impossible to say "France" without images of Paris it's unfortunetly the case that Sao Paulo simply doesn't fit with the popular notion of what Brazil is....

For decades before WWII Shanghai was the main point of contact between the western world and China. For that reason it still has an impact on people's consciousness.

Planning a trip to Brazil around São Paulo is a rookie mistake.

In fairness, I'd still put Mexico City second to the "Tourist Cities" (Acapulco, Tijiuana, Cancun, Cabo) in terms of the outside world's view of Mexico. Even here in the US you'd be shocked how many people have gone to Mexico multiple times and yet have never even come near Mexico City.

Hmm, maybe it's just the circles I run in but literally everybody I know is dying to visit Mexico City or have frequented there multiple times, even looking to live there temporarily. It's definitely the rage at the moment.

That is a very new trend. A decade ago almost nobody was talking about Mexico City as a tourist destination.

People in the business world probably know it's a decent place. The problem is many people wrongly assume the cartel crisis is concentrated in the cities (it's not, rural areas are far far more dangerous) coupled with the fact that Mexico for most is a place they go for a beach vacay more than anything else.

It's like folks thinking Spain consists of Mallorca, Ibiza, Barcelona and the Canary Islands. Madrid is completely underrated as a destination (I was just there 2 weeks ago)

Maybe its a LA thing? Anecdotally, people around me just go to Cancun/Cabo when it comes to Mexico.

As far as the OP, Sao Paulo is definitely the better city compared to Rio as far as living, but I am not sure that is the case when it comes to tourism.

Not if you're a city nerd like many of us here, Sao Paulo is awesome! Plenty of things to see, do, and eat. Also, the nature and beaches nearby are beautiful.

Right. Even now, the average American knows nothing about Mexico City but "huge Mexican city".

Non-Mexicans typically visit Mexico for beaches, rainforests and sun. Mexico City has none of this, and isn't near any of this. There's kind of an urbanite/hipster/foodie recognition of Mexico City, but comparatively niche and recent.

Also, I feel most of the recent recognition of Mexico City is pretty dumb. It's a fascinating city, but most of the alleged appeal is just way off.

yeah, that's a fair point. to A LOT of americans, "mexico" is cancun/cabo (ie. lounging in a beach chair all afternoon with plates of half-eaten nachos and quesadillas on the side table and bottomless slushy margaritas in hand).

but cabo/cancun are essentially just bloated conglomerations of beach resorts, not actual proper top-tier cities like Rio.

the SP/Rio dynamic is a bit unique in that the much smaller "real" city overshadows the bigger brother.

it usually doesn't work that way when it comes to national mega-cities (russia is moscow, france is paris, japan is tokyo, argentina is BA, etc.), but your Madrid/Barcelona example is another good exception to the rule.

You have a point. São Paulo has a better quality of life, it's wealthier, safer and way more cosmopolitan and open-minded than Rio.

Regarding international recognition, I guess it depends who you ask. When it comes to business, than São Paulo gets all of it. Virtually every international company operating in Brazil (or even South/Latin America) is HQed in the city. So in that sense, it's plenty of recognition.

About tourists, São Paulo is getting more and more international one. On domestic tourists, than it overtake Rio for a while.


To be fair, the type of tourist attracted by Mexico City or Buenos Aires would certainly enjoy São Paulo.

I'm a huge city nerd and I stand by what I said. I've gone to Brazil about half a dozen times over the past 11-12 years, but I haven't gone back to SP since my very first trip to Brazil. It felt like Brazilian equivalent of a US Sun Belt city, and I would not have been impressed by Brazil as a place if I had not also gone to Rio that first time. I'm going to give it another try sooner or later, but SP just wasn't a place that appealed to me. But I could see myself living in Rio.

I've visited both and would concur that Rio is more interesting from a intl. visitor perspective. Don't think it's particularly close.

But I'd probably rather live in SP.

I think historical "seeding" also plays into it. Rio de Janeiro was the capital of Brazil for almost 400 years and was also the biggest city in the country within living memory of a lot of people.

Stuff like that leaves a lasting impression in the global consciousness.

Down here in Brazil, Madrid is very popular, as big as a destination as Barcelona. The islands, it's just a small niche.


Moreover, São Paulo has direct flights to over 100 airports in Brazil. Options in Rio are more limited. São Paulo is definitely a good base for one wanting to know the country.


Why? I don't know much about it, but isn't it the same kind of appeal New York or Tokyo have? By virtue of being a big city with all the stuff attached to it?

Agreed for the most part; however, there's also a not-insignificant number of tourists who are drawn to Mexico City and environs for the history and archaeology, which are fairly unique for cities in the Americas.

Anecdotally speaking, Mexico City registers as at or around #2 for gay tourists in Mexico after PV in my experience, and the gay clubs in the city tend to have much larger concentrations of American and Canadian tourists than the average nightlife spot in the tourist-y areas (coincidentally, I'd argue that SP also has a much higher profile in the NA gay community than elsewhere).