Is Nashville a "second-tier" or "third-tier" U.S. city?

[Paramount747]

You need to chill out, I was simply going off what you've said, population of the city, which doesn't have a significant amount of sway and wondering if that was your only basis. Jacksonville is a prime example, 12 or 13th largest in the country (whichever stats you use) yet has a pitiful economic presence overall. Military, shipping/logisitics, and some tourism is really about it. I'd put them almost in 4th tier in that sector, it leaves A LOT to be desired economically and has seemingly regressed the last 20 years. 

 

The GAWC rankings from Edinburgh are pretty spot on, at least to me, because they take into account several factors, like population, transit, economy, influence, etc. to develop the equation. PH's Tier 3 rising cities are heavily in the driver's seat for the next decade.

 

I can see Nashville moving to "High Sufficiency" for the 2014 GAWC rankings and perhaps see Austin go Gamma -.

Nash, I am as chill as can be. Why don't you join us at the forum meet on Saturday. I would love to meet you since we never agree on anything. We have more in common than you think, we just see things differently. Yes, the definitions of tier 1 and tier 2 etc have changed.

[bwithers1]

With all due respect to everyone on this board and in this discussion, I honestly don't see the value of us sitting around arguing about what hypothetical city  "tier" Nashville is in, particularly if we can't all agree on the criteria.  If any ranking system is worthwhile, I would say that it would be the GWAC.  But then again, they rank Nashville according to their published criteria, and our opinions have zero influence on that.  Nashville as a city has a terrible case of constantly worrying too much about how we compare with others and what other people think about us, which is pointless and shows a tremendous lack of collective self-esteem.  The CVB and economic development folks have good reason to worry about those things, but not us.  This conversation has no bearing on and will not contribute in any meaningful way to the improvement of the built fabric/urban environment/quality of life in our fair city.  Let's just enjoy what we have and continue striving to make it even better for our visitors, our businesses and our residents. 

[UTgrad09]

With all due respect to everyone on this board and in this discussion, I honestly don't see the value of us sitting around arguing about what hypothetical city  "tier" Nashville is in, particularly if we can't all agree on the criteria.  If any ranking system is worthwhile, I would say that it would be the GWAC.  But then again, they rank Nashville according to their published criteria, and our opinions have zero influence on that.  Nashville as a city has a terrible case of constantly worrying too much about how we compare with others and what other people think about us, which is pointless and shows a tremendous lack of collective self-esteem.  The CVB and economic development folks have good reason to worry about those things, but not us.  This conversation has no bearing on and will not contribute in any meaningful way to the improvement of the built fabric/urban environment/quality of life in our fair city.  Let's just enjoy what we have and continue striving to make it even better for our visitors, our businesses and our residents. 

 

I agree that we get too tied up in where we stand -- and at times, Nashville seems like a city desperately trying to prove its worth to the outside world, when we really don't need to. I don't know if I would call it a lack of self-esteem, but certainly a lack of confidence at times.

 

However, I think one good side-effect from that is that we are not a city resting on our laurels. Our concern for how we stand is what drives us to better our city. We see what other cities do, and ask "why can't we do that?" rather than "we like things just the way they are" (that crowd certainly exists in Nashville, and at times trips us up when proposing things such as the Amp -- but the city's leaders are driving us in a forward direction, I think).

 

Seeing where we rank helps justify the work we are doing. Otherwise, some of the ambitious projects we have embarked on probably would have been laughed off the table as 'unnecessary'. 

 

In any case, I at least partially agree that the actual rankings, since most of them are subjective and based on a particular set of criteria, are not as meaningful as we make them out to be.

[Nathan_in_DC]

With all due respect to everyone on this board and in this discussion, I honestly don't see the value of us sitting around arguing about what hypothetical city  "tier" Nashville is in, particularly if we can't all agree on the criteria.  If any ranking system is worthwhile, I would say that it would be the GWAC.  But then again, they rank Nashville according to their published criteria, and our opinions have zero influence on that.  Nashville as a city has a terrible case of constantly worrying too much about how we compare with others and what other people think about us, which is pointless and shows a tremendous lack of collective self-esteem.  The CVB and economic development folks have good reason to worry about those things, but not us.  This conversation has no bearing on and will not contribute in any meaningful way to the improvement of the built fabric/urban environment/quality of life in our fair city.  Let's just enjoy what we have and continue striving to make it even better for our visitors, our businesses and our residents. 

 

Agreed.

 

I think it's fine to have a little good natured competition with peer cities like Austin or Charlotte, and I think it can be healthy to look at yourself in comparison to what else is out there, but these rankings (even the GWAC) are rather arbitrary, not to mention mildly silly.

[Justiceham]

With all due respect to everyone on this board and in this discussion, I honestly don't see the value of us sitting around arguing about what hypothetical city  "tier" Nashville is in, particularly if we can't all agree on the criteria.  If any ranking system is worthwhile, I would say that it would be the GWAC.  But then again, they rank Nashville according to their published criteria, and our opinions have zero influence on that.  Nashville as a city has a terrible case of constantly worrying too much about how we compare with others and what other people think about us, which is pointless and shows a tremendous lack of collective self-esteem.  The CVB and economic development folks have good reason to worry about those things, but not us.  This conversation has no bearing on and will not contribute in any meaningful way to the improvement of the built fabric/urban environment/quality of life in our fair city.  Let's just enjoy what we have and continue striving to make it even better for our visitors, our businesses and our residents. 

Very well said!

[Justiceham]

JHam,

 

I'm probably biased toward older cities that have strong building/people density, lots of  well-established cultural attractions (museums, zoos, universities, parks, etc.) and vibrant, mixed-use, walkable neighborhoods. In those respects, Cincinnati and Pittsburgh are much more impressive than Charlotte and Tampa/St. Pete. I've visited all four and find each appealing in its own way. I much prefer Cincy over Tampa (though YBor City is very cool) and Pittsburgh over Charlotte. BUT I can see how some might have all four in the same tier.

 

WW

I understand. Charlotte and Tampa are like the young, accomplished, yuppies at a party clearly for veteran, more established members. They come in with their new clothes and shiny shoes and bump into the older members without saying excuse me. 

[MLBrumby]

Nashville's media does a horrendous job of getting any sort of image as an urban center out to the country.  For example, I can't recall any article in either the Tennessean or Nashville Business Journal... or TV segment that references the city's population correctly.  Of course, I realize that journos are not really numbers people, and large numbers can flummox them easily.  But I thumbed through the last edition of the NBJ, and there was a list of municipalities in Middle Tennessee and their populations... and (mmm-hmmmm) the woman who had compiled the list showed the population as 447,000 (200k off !!!!!!!)   And number of households as 320,000... so any small business that might need that information as a subscriber to the NBJ... well, they'd have the wrong info.  And there are still many members of the media (and CofC) who love to refer to Nashville as "Country Music Capital"... when the official nickname is Music City.  Just little things like that. In comparison, every other city where I've lived (grew up in ATL) lived in the RTP... Charlotte (for one summer as an intern) ... and Dallas (as intern)... they all were extremely loud and proud of saying, "Whoooo-weeee... look at us... we're a reeeeeeeal city!"   I don't get that sense from the local yokels.

[FrankNash]

If Atlanta,Charlotte,and Dallas could suck in as much as they blow out all three cities would be oceanfront.

[jliv]

Nashville's media does a horrendous job of getting any sort of image as an urban center out to the country.  For example, I can't recall any article in either the Tennessean or Nashville Business Journal... or TV segment that references the city's population correctly.  Of course, I realize that journos are not really numbers people, and large numbers can flummox them easily.  But I thumbed through the last edition of the NBJ, and there was a list of municipalities in Middle Tennessee and their populations... and (mmm-hmmmm) the woman who had compiled the list showed the population as 447,000 (200k off !!!!!!!)   And number of households as 320,000... so any small business that might need that information as a subscriber to the NBJ... well, they'd have the wrong info.  And there are still many members of the media (and CofC) who love to refer to Nashville as "Country Music Capital"... when the official nickname is Music City.  Just little things like that. In comparison, every other city where I've lived (grew up in ATL) lived in the RTP... Charlotte (for one summer as an intern) ... and Dallas (as intern)... they all were extremely loud and proud of saying, "Whoooo-weeee... look at us... we're a reeeeeeeal city!"   I don't get that sense from the local yokels.

 

If you look at those three regions and their history of development, they wouldn't exist as they are without powerful engines of civic boosterism.  From Henry W. Grady to Hugh McColl, these areas grew because businessmen were able to draw capital and people into their cities.  However, forums like these show how people keep drinking the Kool-Aid of the civic boosterism that permeates the local media.  I wish people would worry more about building livable cities and stop trying to rank their cities against others.  Nashville has plenty of lovely attributes and a world-class university.  Unfortunately, it happens to sit in the state of Tennessee (which is the same feeling I have for Austin!)

[Hey_Hey]

the woman who had compiled the list showed the population as 447,000 (200k off !!!!!!!).

I noticed that too. I have no idea where that number came from. I bet that the household number is correct if we're using a 2-2.5 people per household average, but the total population is obviously wrong.

I was watching the new "Real Wives of Nashville" (or whatever it is called) on TNT simply because of the Nashville location. They were definitely perpetuating the stereotypes. At one point they are shooting a .45 at a watermelon and say that "in most places hearing a gunshot is bad, but in Nashville it means something needed to be shot." Of course, they weren't actually in Nashville but rather Leipers Fork in their 7000 sq foot house, and in reality no one in Nashville actually discharges a weapon in the city limits (outside a gun range) for a good purpose. The show is pepetuating this myth that the country music industry is a bunch of good ole boys that live their lives in a manner that is consistent with their music. The country music industry wants this idea perpetuated because it legitimizes their product in the eyes of the millions of fans that actually do live their lives in places where it is perfectly acceptable to shoot guns at will. They want to fight the reality that country music singers and executives actually are incredibly wealthy, from all parts of the country, and live their lives in a way that would be absolutely foreign to 99.9% of their fans, and they don't mind portraying Nashville as a back woods, small town, redneck haven to keep that illusion alive.

[East Side Urbanite]

I understand. Charlotte and Tampa are like the young, accomplished, yuppies at a party clearly for veteran, more established members. They come in with their new clothes and shiny shoes and bump into the older members without saying excuse me. 

Nice.

[East Side Urbanite]

This has been a robust board discussion and I'm glad to see so. Though BWithers makes good points that the exercise is a bit pointless, UTGrad nicely counters by giving reasons that such subjective rankings, though driven largely by personal bias, can be both helpful and fun.

[volsfanwill]

all reality shows in the south perpetuate stereotypes, I hate it

I noticed that too. I have no idea where that number came from. I bet that the household number is correct if we're using a 2-2.5 people per household average, but the total population is obviously wrong.

I was watching the new "Real Wives of Nashville" (or whatever it is called) on TNT simply because of the Nashville location. They were definitely perpetuating the stereotypes. At one point they are shooting a .45 at a watermelon and say that "in most places hearing a gunshot is bad, but in Nashville it means something needed to be shot." Of course, they weren't actually in Nashville but rather Leipers Fork in their 7000 sq foot house, and in reality no one in Nashville actually discharges a weapon in the city limits (outside a gun r

ange) for a good purpose. The show is pepetuating this myth that the country music industry is a bunch of good ole boys that live their lives in a manner that is consistent with their music. The country music industry wants this idea perpetuated because it legitimizes their product in the eyes of the millions of fans that actually do live their lives in places where it is perfectly acceptable to shoot guns at will. They want to fight the reality that country music singers and executives actually are incredibly wealthy, from all parts of the country, and live their lives in a way that would be absolutely foreign to 99.9% of their fans, and they don't mind portraying Nashville as a back woods, small town, redneck haven to keep that illusion alive.

[fieldmarshaldj]

and (mmm-hmmmm) the woman who had compiled the list showed the population as 447,000 (200k off !!!!!!!)

That was Nashville's population in 1970.

[UTgrad09]

The 447,000 number is not far off from the estimated population of the Urban Services District. My guess is that's what the lady used. I don't have a source for the 2013 estimate, but it's in the ballpark of the 2012 number.

 

If you reference the Tennessee Blue Book, it quotes that population rather than the 'balance' population the Census Bureau uses (Davidson County minus the independent municipalities). My guess is the reasoning is the USD is considered the true city, because they provide full city services, as opposed to general county services (though all are under the same governmental umbrella, with countywide police and fire).

 

http://www.state.tn.us/sos/bluebook/11-12/7_Statistics.pdf

 

Page 106 -- the population listed is 427,119 (2011-2012 Blue Book)

 

 

http://www.nashville.gov/Portals/0/SiteContent/Finance/docs/OMB/fy14Budget/Fiscal%20Year%202014%20Operating%20Budget.pdf

 

Page 773 (yeah -- fair warning -- huge file) lists the USD population at 427,119 in 2011 (432,125 in 2012).

 

 

It's still a mistake on the part of the reporter, but there's a lengthy explanation of where that number is coming from.

[MLBrumby]

Good research.  I guess that's where the numbers came from despite what she called "certified" census estimates. I'm not "up" on the numbers, but immediately knew they were way off from all the census numbers I saw. Never in my life would I even guess the Blue Book was not using the census numbers. Maybe that's another example of the whole point above.

[UTgrad09]

Good research.  I guess that's where the numbers came from despite what she called "certified" census estimates. I'm not "up" on the numbers, but immediately knew they were way off from all the census numbers I saw. Never in my life would I even guess the Blue Book was not using the census numbers. Maybe that's another example of the whole point above.

 

Well, they are actual Census numbers. The Blue Book only uses the official decennial Census figures and any official special Censuses or annexations.

 

It's just weird because the USD population is a very obscure stat. Only geeks like me would catch it. The 'balance' population is what is almost universally and officially used, since everyone in Davidson County NOT in one of the independent municipalities is technically a Nashvillian. 

[bellinibean]

Seattle looks pretty on postcards, but honestly, living here, paints a vastly different portrait.. I debate with co-workers daily as to why Nashville can and does stand toe to toe with Seattle. just my .02 cents. longtime lurker, seldom poster.

[UTgrad09]

Seattle looks pretty on postcards, but honestly, living here, paints a vastly different portrait.. I debate with co-workers daily as to why Nashville can and does stand toe to toe with Seattle. just my .02 cents. longtime lurker, seldom poster.

 

First off, welcome to the forum!

 

I've been to Seattle a few times, and I definitely enjoyed my time there -- but visiting and living are two very different things. The same could certainly be said about folks who move here and find it to be a bit different than just visiting. It's all about personal preferences.

 

Personally, I would put Seattle a couple of notches above Nashville as a city, but that doesn't mean I would rather live there. There are certain charms of living here that I enjoy.