More Accolades for Nashville

[Baronakim]

7 hours ago, markhollin said:

Nashville's Peg Leg Porker is chosen as the #1 BBQ joint in Tennessee by Southern Living Magazine:

https://www.southernliving.com/souths-best/bbq-southern-states?slide=585275#585275

Nashville's most famous Barbque joint when I was growing up was Charlie Nickens & Sons at 2nd & Jefferson Street at the foot of the old steel truss bridge.  Here is Nashville mayor Ben West and Charlie Nickens  back in the 50s.   My grandfather faithfully made the trip ftom Inglewood almost every other Saturday for takeout sandwiches.  They had barbeque pork & beef as well as rabbit and chicken.  If I recall, the place finally closed after a widespread rumour that the rabbit was actually cats, whether that is true of not, I don't know.

Edited April 13, 2019 by Baronakim
spelling

[titanhog]

^^I imagine rabbit and cat both taste like chicken. 

[PruneTracy]

Most of the Nashville BBQ joints serve Memphis-style BBQ (or "West Tennessee" style, to avoid the Memphis debate) and advertise as such, including Peg Leg Porker, so not sure why all the butthurt.

As an aside, Whitt's is the notable deviant with their Carolina-style BBQ.

[smeagolsfree]

31 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

Most of the Nashville BBQ joints serve Memphis-style BBQ (or "West Tennessee" style, to avoid the Memphis debate) and advertise as such, including Peg Leg Porker, so not sure why all the butthurt.

As an aside, Whitt's is the notable deviant with their Carolina-style BBQ.

You have it right when you say "Deviant", because that is what it is. Nasty vinegar based BBQ.

[bnacincy]

39 minutes ago, smeagolsfree said:

You have it right when you say "Deviant", because that is what it is. Nasty vinegar based BBQ.

If I remember correctly Bar B Cutie's sauce was similar-have not tried Peg Leg Porker but maybe next time I'm down there.

As far as I'm concerned Jim Neely's Interstate BBQ on 3rd Street in Memphis is the best I've ever had.

[jmtunafish]

For what it's worth, in 2014 Travel + Leisure named Nashville as the country's best city for BBQ, and part of the reason is because of the multiple varieties of bbq available in Nashville as opposed to the one-size-fits-all approach of places like Memphis and Kansas City.  Having said that, in the 8+ years I lived in Memphis I had bbq at least once a week from all kinds of places, and it was always fantastic.  And I agree with bnacincy, Interstate BBQ was my favorite.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/life/food/2014/05/21/nashville-named-americas-best-city-barbecue/9373585/

Edited April 15, 2019 by jmtunafish

[titanhog]

6 hours ago, smeagolsfree said:

You have it right when you say "Deviant", because that is what it is. Nasty vinegar based BBQ.

I’ve actually gotten where I love the vinegar sauce.  Growing up in Arkansas, we always had Memphis / Texas bbq...so when I moved to TN in 93, that was my introduction to vinegar sauce bbq.

[BnaBreaker]

29 minutes ago, titanhog said:

I’ve actually gotten where I love the vinegar sauce.  Growing up in Arkansas, we always had Memphis / Texas bbq...so when I moved to TN in 93, that was my introduction to vinegar sauce bbq.

I prefer vinegar based too

[donNdonelson2]

I’m a vinegar man, although I do not in any way dislike many of the other variations. If the meat is prepared well, the sauce can be left off altogether.

[Armacing]

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/apr/16/bachelorettes-bibles-and-amazon-nashvilles-boom-brings-growing-pains

As you might expect from The Guardian, they lay on the progressive/socialist/SJW editorializing pretty thick in this article.  Take note of the part where the growth of small businesses is attributed to some stupid Entrepreneurship Incubator.  No, it's not because industrious and intelligent individuals found a place where they are free to try out their business ideas unfettered by an intrusive local government.  No, it's not because people get to keep more of the hard-earned fruits of their labor in a city/state with low taxes and a relatively low cost of living.  It's because of an Entrepreneurship Incubator.  Did you know that?

[ruraljuror]

18 minutes ago, Armacing said:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/apr/16/bachelorettes-bibles-and-amazon-nashvilles-boom-brings-growing-pains

As you might expect from The Guardian, they lay on the progressive/socialist/SJW editorializing pretty thick in this article.  Take note of the part where the growth of small businesses is attributed to some stupid Entrepreneurship Incubator.  No, it's not because industrious and intelligent individuals found a place where they are free to try out their business ideas unfettered by an intrusive local government.  No, it's not because people get to keep more of the hard-earned fruits of their labor in a city/state with low taxes and a relatively low cost of living.  It's because of an Entrepreneurship Incubator.  Did you know that?

I think cost of living and tax issues have a lot more influence on corporate relocations than start up companies, whose location choices are much more driven by the available complementary business-to-business services and the market they're targeting (these were the obvious primary considerations for the people used as examples in the article - music company, bachelorette company, and musicians).  Your point about startups looking for a place to try out their business ideas unfettered by an intrusive local government is true to a degree, but I think you're overestimating it's impact in startup hq locations, as is evidenced by SF and NY still dominating the game.

And it's not as though the article was trying to give all the credit to the EC anyway, buy you're right that it does come across as giving the EC more credit than it probably deserves: "A proportion of Nashville’s economic rising star can be attributed to the grassroots investment the city has made into its new and existing residents with incentives like the nonprofit Entrepreneur Center, which took shape in 2010."

 

 

[Armacing]

2 hours ago, ruraljuror said:

...I think you're overestimating it's impact in startup hq locations, as is evidenced by SF and NY still dominating the game.

It's true about those places being major centers of start-ups, but I think people starting up in SF have way more resources than people starting up in Nashville.  In my assessment, Nashville (like other 2nd tier cities) serves as a poor-man's silicon valley because it's just cool enough to attract talented people, but not so expensive that you have to be rich to even get in the game or afford the cost of living like SF & NY.

Actually, the article doesn't really make the case that Nashville has a disproportionate number of start-ups, only that it has some start-ups.  In fairness to other cities, there are start-ups everywhere.  I think you are correct to bring up corporate relocations because that factor, in combination with start-ups, is giving Nashville an advantage over a place like Cleveland or Milwaukee, where there are plenty of start-ups, but not very many corporate relocations.

[Mr_Bond]

4 hours ago, Armacing said:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/apr/16/bachelorettes-bibles-and-amazon-nashvilles-boom-brings-growing-pains

As you might expect from The Guardian, they lay on the progressive/socialist/SJW editorializing pretty thick in this article.  Take note of the part where the growth of small businesses is attributed to some stupid Entrepreneurship Incubator.  No, it's not because industrious and intelligent individuals found a place where they are free to try out their business ideas unfettered by an intrusive local government.  No, it's not because people get to keep more of the hard-earned fruits of their labor in a city/state with low taxes and a relatively low cost of living.  It's because of an Entrepreneurship Incubator.  Did you know that?

I have some experience in this area since I started an early fin tech company here in 1995 and did mergers and acquisitions with a small, local M&A firm for a few years.  The company I co-founded got VC backing (all local) and was eventually bought by an international company.  The investors in our company were many of the same people who founded the Nashville Tech Council and what eventually led to the EC.  The EC is just an expression of the people behind it - primarily locals who choose to live in Tennessee because they keep more of what they make and because there is a climate here that values talent and excellence.

Because startups usually need help in the form of money and management, they tend to HQ where their backers live.  So Nashville startups stay in Nashville because their backers can provide assistance quickly and cheaply.  Angel investors tend to back companies who can benefit from their experience and they want to be close so they can experience the prestige and fun of going to board meetings, seeing faces light up when their wisdom is shared, and making an appearance onsite when they have the time.

So, our health care industry breeds health care startups, our logistics industry breeds logistics startups, and our tech industry is beginning to breed tech startups.

[volsfanwill]

my take away from the article was that "stand up Nashville"  likes urban sprawl, and hates "mix use" buildings.  

[markhollin]

Bridgestone Arena had one of its busiest months in history with 385,000 attendance in 14 different events covering 21 days.  This included the SEC Basketball Tournament (13 games), World's Toughest Rodeo (2 nights), UFC Fight Night, 5 sold-out Preds games, (now up to 152 straight sellouts), concerts by PINK, Travis Scott, Mumford & Sons, Impractical Jokers, Zac Brown Band, and Kelly Clarkson. 

[nashvylle]

@markhollin do we know when the existing lease with the Predators ownership expires? I think I read somewhere that they wanted to extend it. 

[jmtunafish]

5 hours ago, markhollin said:

Bridgestone Arena had one of its busiest months in history with 385,000 attendance in 14 different events covering 21 days.  This included the SEC Basketball Tournament (13 games), World's Toughest Rodeo (2 nights), UFC Fight Night, 5 sold-out Preds games, (now up to 152 straight sellouts), concerts by PINK, Travis Scott, Mumford & Sons, Impractical Jokers, Zac Brown Band, and Kelly Clarkson. 

I've said it before and I'll say it again:  Phil Bredesen was a visionary when he pushed hard for a new arena downtown.  Think how much different Nashville would be if the arena had been built out in some suburb, or not at all.  Also, I think we've got the best arena sponsor name in the country.  Bridgestone just sounds so much more, I don't know, "butch" than most other arenas.  Vivint Smart Home Arena?  Amway Center?  Smoothie King Center?  Amalie Arena??

[donNdonelson2]

Many like the sound (or taste) of Dunkin‘ Donuts Center! 

[NashvilleObserver]

2 hours ago, donNdonelson2 said:

Many like the sound (or taste) of Dunkin‘ Donuts Center! 

Or Louisville's "KFC Yum! Center"...

[timmay143]

14 hours ago, jmtunafish said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again:  Phil Bredesen was a visionary when he pushed hard for a new arena downtown.  Think how much different Nashville would be if the arena had been built out in some suburb, or not at all.  Also, I think we've got the best arena sponsor name in the country.  Bridgestone just sounds so much more, I don't know, "butch" than most other arenas.  Vivint Smart Home Arena?  Amway Center?  Smoothie King Center?  Amalie Arena??

Much better than the Sommet Center .

[Armacing]

19 hours ago, jmtunafish said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again:  Phil Bredesen was a visionary when he pushed hard for a new arena downtown. 

No doubt the arena was an early and crucial catalyst for the expansion of downtown tourism.  However, we shouldn't overlook the fact that Bredesen wasted innocent Nashvillians' money on a huge multi-million dollar capital expenditure that generated inferior ROI for the local economy.  From the perspective of the tourist industry, Bredesen is a God.  From the perspective of whatever industry would have been the recipient of those investment dollars absent the arena, Bredesen is Hugo Chavez.

[japan]

On 4/19/2019 at 3:45 PM, Armacing said:

No doubt the arena was an early and crucial catalyst for the expansion of downtown tourism.  However, we shouldn't overlook the fact that Bredesen wasted innocent Nashvillians' money on a huge multi-million dollar capital expenditure that generated inferior ROI for the local economy.  From the perspective of the tourist industry, Bredesen is a God.  From the perspective of whatever industry would have been the recipient of those investment dollars absent the arena, Bredesen is Hugo Chavez.

Bredesen was a socialist strongman?

[Armacing]

23 hours ago, japan said:

Bredesen was a socialist strongman?

If you want to only read the last sentence of the post and base your response on that, sure, go ahead and run with that.

[ruraljuror]

22 minutes ago, Armacing said:

If you want to only read the last sentence of the post and base your response on that, sure, go ahead and run with that.

If you don't want people to run with the point you're making in the last sentence of your post, maybe you shouldn't be making that point in your conclusion or using such an attention-catching analogy.  From a rhetorical standpoint, I assumed you'd done that on purpose with the intent of having 'Bredesen is Hugo Chavez' as the final thought in order to give it a greater impact and have a lingering effect in the reader.    In any case, it's hard to blame Japan for having that response.

Beyond that, I'm really not sure what other point/effect you were trying to make/have with the rest of your original post anyway.  You acknowledge that spending city money on Bridgestone was great for the tourism industry (which in turn is been great for the city), but it seems your complaint is that it's theoretically possible that an even greater ROI could have been attained by hypothetically investing that money into other projects/industries instead.   Is that the point you're trying to make?  

If that is your point, you're right  that an alternative/road-not-taken investment could have brought in a better ROI, but that's the case for pretty much every investment ever.  Given how central the arena was to downtown revitalization, I'm curious what hypothetical investment you would have preferred and/or what industries you think are aggrieved by Bredesen's choice? 

[Armacing]

2 hours ago, ruraljuror said:

...it seems your complaint is that it's theoretically possible that an even greater ROI could have been attained by hypothetically investing that money into other projects/industries instead.   Is that the point you're trying to make?  

Yes!  You read that right, that's the point.  But you almost sound like you're disappointed in the pragmatic impact of that point.  Countries have succeeded and failed based on their comprehension of that point.  Cities have succeeded and failed based on their comprehension of that point, so it's not a trivial point to make.  Granted, it is perhaps an unpopular point to make.  It's a very difficult point to make because it really needs the reader to have a basic understanding of how free markets transmit decision-making information among buyers and sellers using the market pricing mechanism.  So it's a fairly cumbersome point to make, but I hold the readers of this forum in very high regard.  These are smart people here, and they get it, as you have graciously demonstrated.

2 hours ago, ruraljuror said:

 I'm curious what hypothetical investment you would have preferred and/or what industries you think are aggrieved by Bredesen's choice? 

Well, that's the great thing about the free market.  The knowledge about "which investment is most profitable" is spread out among the whole populace.  If I knew the best investment in Nashville I would go out there and invest in it right now - but my knowledge of the market is imperfect and incomplete.  So is everybody else's.  The beauty of the free market is that it automatically incorporates everybody's market knowledge into one system of prices so that people can make their own investment and purchasing decisions based on the prices they see. 

Returning to the Arena now: Every private real estate investor or developer in Nashville back in the late 90's could have said "hey, I see an opportunity to make money with an arena", and they could have obtained financing and gone into the arena business.  But they didn't.  The market decided the return wasn't worth the risk, and/or the returns were better on other investments.  Why didn't Gaylord form a partnership with Marriott and a bunch of Broadway honkey-tonks and country music stars and other rich Nashville investors and finance their own arena to boost their downtown hotel/bar/restaurant businesses?  I don't know.  Maybe they found a willing "facilitator" in Bredesen and he agreed to make it a publicly-financed arena, much to the benefit of downtown businesses.