World cities

Old May 17th 2002, 7:39 pm
  #1  
Forum Regular
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Location: Languedoc
Posts: 243
mpprh has a brilliant futurempprh has a brilliant futurempprh has a brilliant futurempprh has a brilliant futurempprh has a brilliant futurempprh has a brilliant future
Default World cities

Hi

I've been following the various threads entitles something like "Should I go to X ?...

It seems to me there are cities, and there are "world cities".

From my experience, world cities are -

San Francisco
Sydney
London
Berlin
Seoul
Tokyo
Cairo
Paris
Rome
Rio


In order of number of letters !

Of course this is subjective,

Any comments ?

Peter
mpprh is offline  
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #2  
Steve Martin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

"mpprh" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Hi
    >
    > I've been following the various threads entitles something like "Should I go
    > to X ?...
    >
    > It seems to me there are cities, and there are "world cities".
    >
    > From my experience, world cities are -
    >
    > San Francisco Sydney London Berlin Seoul Tokyo Cairo Paris Rome Rio
    >
    >
    > In order of number of letters !
    >
    > Of course this is subjective,
    >
    > Any comments ?
    >
    > Peter
    >

I think Barcelona should be in your list and, to a lesser extent, Amsterdam. I
suppose New York should be there, or did you just include places that might be
nice to visit?

Steve Martin.
--
www.smartco.clara.co.uk
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #3  
Harvey V
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

I espied that on 17 May 2002, mpprh <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Hi
    >
    > I've been following the various threads entitles something like "Should I go
    > to X ?...
    >
    > It seems to me there are cities, and there are "world cities".
    >
    > From my experience, world cities are -
    >
    > San Francisco Sydney London Berlin Seoul Tokyo Cairo Paris Rome Rio
    >
    > In order of number of letters !
    >
    > Of course this is subjective,
    >
    > Any comments ?
    >
    > Peter
    >

Hmmmm.......I can't imagine that any list of world cities can possibly
exclude New York.

My list -- which is unabashedly western-centric; is the view of an town planner/urban
designer; isn't meant to be comprehensive; and doesn't account for some overlap
begween groups -- would be divided into a greater number of categories.

Group 1A -- world cities due to age, culture, size and economics

London, Paris, New York, Moscow, Tokyo, Rome

Group 1B -- world cities due purely to size and economic importanace

Mexico City, Seoul, Rio, Sydney, Hong Kong

Group 2 -- regional cities, but important in more than just their own region

Chicago, San Francisco, Amsterdam, Berlin, Stockholm

Group 3 -- nice places, but of true economic importance only in their own region

Toronto, Frankfurt, Auckland, Munich, Milan, Edinburgh

It's possible to continue with more groups, but I'll resist the temptation......

--
Cheers, Harvey
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #4  
Miguel Cruz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

mpprh <[email protected]> wrote:
    > I've been following the various threads entitles something like "Should I go
    > to X ?...
    >
    > It seems to me there are cities, and there are "world cities".
    >
    > From my experience, world cities are -
    >
    > San Francisco Sydney London Berlin Seoul Tokyo Cairo Paris Rome Rio
    >
    > Any comments ?

I guess when I think World Cities I think of those with the greatest combination
of far-ranging cultural and/or economic weight, plus a healthy helping of actual
urban oomph.

New York, London, Paris, Cairo, Bombay, Tokyo, Hong Kong.

Some of these are great places to be (others aren't necessarily). I'd say many of the
most pleasant cities to actually be in fall in the next level down: San Francisco,
Sydney, Amsterdam, Kuala Lumpur, Istanbul, etc.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #5  
Miguel Cruz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Group 1B -- world cities due purely to size and economic importanace
    >
    > Mexico City, Seoul, Rio, Sydney, Hong Kong
    >
    > Group 2 -- regional cities, but important in more than just their own region
    >
    > Chicago, San Francisco, Amsterdam, Berlin, Stockholm

Somehow I just don't see Sydney in list 1B rather than 2 (or even 3). It's a nice
place (heck, I lived there for two years), but it's not that large and frankly
doesn't have that much economic significance.

    > Group 3 -- nice places, but of true economic importance only in their own region
    >
    > Toronto, Frankfurt, Auckland, Munich, Milan, Edinburgh

Likewise I'd demote Auckland right off the bottom (and promote Frankfurt). It's
dull by comparison to other cities in NZ, let alone places like Edinburgh, Munich,
and Milan.

    > It's possible to continue with more groups, but I'll resist the temptation......

Fun, isn't it, though?

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #6  
David Horne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Group 1A -- world cities due to age, culture, size and economics
    >
    > London, Paris, New York, Moscow, Tokyo, Rome

If you include Moscow, you can't really exclude Cairo, surely? Yes, weak on
ecomonics, perhaps, but bursting on everything else.

    > Group 1B -- world cities due purely to size and economic importanace
    >
    > Mexico City, Seoul, Rio, Sydney, Hong Kong
    >
    >
    > Group 2 -- regional cities, but important in more than just their own region
    >
    > Chicago, San Francisco, Amsterdam, Berlin, Stockholm

Stockholm is surely below Amsterdam, no?

    > It's possible to continue with more groups, but I'll resist the temptation......

Oh no- go ahead!

David

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.co.uk Composer in Association- RLPO david (at) davidhorne
(dot) co (dot) uk
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #7  
Harvey V
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

I espied that on 17 May 2002, [email protected] (Miguel Cruz) wrote:

    > Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:

-snip-

    >> It's possible to continue with more groups, but I'll resist the temptation......
    >
    > Fun, isn't it, though?

It's basically a fool's mission, but then again.....the shoe certainly seems to fit
me.....wonder why......

--
Cheers, Harvey
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #8  
Keith Anderson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

On Fri, 17 May 2002 22:58:38 +0100, [email protected] (David Horne) wrote:

    >Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> Group 1A -- world cities due to age, culture, size and economics
    >>
    >> London, Paris, New York, Moscow, Tokyo, Rome
    >
    >If you include Moscow, you can't really exclude Cairo, surely? Yes, weak on
    >ecomonics, perhaps, but bursting on everything else.
    >
    >> Group 1B -- world cities due purely to size and economic importanace
    >>
    >> Mexico City, Seoul, Rio, Sydney, Hong Kong
    >>
    >>
    >> Group 2 -- regional cities, but important in more than just their own region
    >>
    >> Chicago, San Francisco, Amsterdam, Berlin, Stockholm
    >
    >Stockholm is surely below Amsterdam, no?
    >
    >> It's possible to continue with more groups, but I'll resist the temptation......
    >
    >Oh no- go ahead!
    >
Suggestion for a sub-group - "Places that once were world cities but no longer are.
But they still look and feel like world cities". That way Vienna gets on the list.

Keith Bristol UK Remove NSP to reply
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #9  
Harvey V
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

I espied that on 17 May 2002, [email protected] (David Horne) wrote:
    > Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:

    >> Group 1A -- world cities due to age, culture, size and economics
    >>
    >> London, Paris, New York, Moscow, Tokyo, Rome
    >
    > If you include Moscow, you can't really exclude Cairo, surely? Yes, weak on
    > ecomonics, perhaps, but bursting on everything else.

Like I said in response to Miguel, it's basically a fool's mission, this...

I probably still rank Moscow for old times' sake; it's probably shifted down to Group
2 over the past 10 years.

I think I'd probably put Cairo in Group 2, as well: world-level in terms of culture
and size, but otherwise of regional rather than world- level importance.

Where should one place Istanbul?

--
Cheers, Harvey
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #10  
Emil Jelstrup
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities - Moscow etc.

Harvey V wrote:

    > I espied that on 17 May 2002, [email protected] (David Horne) wrote:
    > > Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >
    > >> Group 1A -- world cities due to age, culture, size and economics
    > >>
    > >> London, Paris, New York, Moscow, Tokyo, Rome
    > >
    > > If you include Moscow, you can't really exclude Cairo, surely? Yes, weak on
    > > ecomonics, perhaps, but bursting on everything else.
    >
    > Like I said in response to Miguel, it's basically a fool's mission, this...
    >
    > I probably still rank Moscow for old times' sake; it's probably shifted down to
    > Group 2 over the past 10 years.

No, Moscow should *definitely* still be in group 1A.

It's the biggest city in Europe (9-15 million inhabitans), capital of a former
superpower (which still is the biggest and one of the most important countries in the
world), economic centre of the whole CIS, and still a very important cultural and
historic city.

    >
    >
    > I think I'd probably put Cairo in Group 2, as well: world-level in terms of culture
    > and size, but otherwise of regional rather than world- level importance.
    >
    > Where should one place Istanbul?
    >

Probably group 2.

    >
    > --
    > Cheers, Harvey

//Emil Jelstrup
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #11  
David Horne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Where should one place Istanbul?

Below Cairo? HTH.

David

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.co.uk Composer in Association- RLPO david (at) davidhorne
(dot) co (dot) uk
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #12  
Harvey V
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

I espied that on 17 May 2002, Keith Anderson
<[email protected]> wrote:

-snip-

    > Suggestion for a sub-group - "Places that once were world cities but no longer are.
    > But they still look and feel like world cities". That way Vienna gets on the list.
    >

I like it -- it answers my question as to where to put Istanbul. (And Prague?)

--
Cheers, Harvey
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #13  
Gus
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

Berlin in Group 2? Thats a little off, IMHO. Definitely somewhere in Group
1."David Horne" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1fccoq7.vqsry31dmfrrzN%[email protected]...
    > Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > Where should one place Istanbul?
    >
    > Below Cairo? HTH.
    >
    > David
    >
    > --
    > David Horne- www.davidhorne.co.uk Composer in Association- RLPO david (at)
    > davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #14  
Harvey V
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

I espied that on 17 May 2002, [email protected] (David Horne) wrote:

    > Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> Where should one place Istanbul?
    >
    > Below Cairo? HTH.

Keith Anderson's sub-category -- "Places that once were world cities but no longer
are. But they still look and feel like world cities" -- fits better, don't you think?

--
Cheers, Harvey
 
Old May 17th 2002, 11:20 pm
  #15  
David Horne
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: World cities

Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:

    > I espied that on 17 May 2002, [email protected] (David Horne) wrote:
    >
    > > Harvey V <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > >> Where should one place Istanbul?
    > >
    > > Below Cairo? HTH.
    >
    > Keith Anderson's sub-category -- "Places that once were world cities but no
    > longer are. But they still look and feel like world cities" -- fits better, don't
    > you think?

It's a great category for Istanbul, but I'd still place Cairo above it!

David

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.co.uk Composer in Association- RLPO david (at) davidhorne
(dot) co (dot) uk
 

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.