MI (and GR) fares well in new projects

[arcturus 131]

Not exactly sure how they define projects but they say 'facility deals' with Grand Rapids #10 in the nation for the 2nd tier metro population category.  Speaking of that tier what the heck is up with Dayton?  I thought that town was dying!

 

http://www.siteselection.com/issues/2013/mar/top-metros.cfm

[tSlater 110]

Maybe it was dying just like Newsweek said we were, years ago.

[wingbert 458]

Heck, I didn't think Battle Creek or Jackson were doing all that well but apparently I was wrong on that count according the article. Good for them.

[CarpenterJoseph 1]

Battle Creek seems to be setting itself up for more industrial growth. Fort Custer is nearly full. 

[GRDadof3 1653]

Not exactly sure how they define projects but they say 'facility deals' with Grand Rapids #10 in the nation for the 2nd tier metro population category.  Speaking of that tier what the heck is up with Dayton?  I thought that town was dying!

 

http://www.siteselection.com/issues/2013/mar/top-metros.cfm

 

 

I think Site Selection focuses a lot on industrial projects, because big industrial companies are more likely to use a site selection consultant to help them find and add new facilities, and use tax credits, which make it easier to track this info. So the 23 for Grand Rapids are most likely plant expansions and new facilities. It would be nice if they listed their methodology and the data.

 

It's good news. It's all about more jobs.

[RegalTDP 266]

The criteria they use for their database is here (link to PDF).  It's pretty much limited to large corporations and new industrial facility announcements.

Edited March 11, 2013 by RegalTDP