Chicago isn’t growing and they continue to build massive apartment building one after another. Difference is that people in the Chicagoland want to live in the city. We don’t need strong regional and population growth to see growth in the city.
Chicago has endless data points (achieved rents and successful exits) that a developer can be more than confident that they will fill 300 (give or take) apartments in their development. The same can be said about the larger metro areas in the US.JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑Jan 13, 2025Chicago isn’t growing and they continue to build massive apartment building one after another. Difference is that people in the Chicagoland want to live in the city. We don’t need strong regional and population growth to see growth in the city.
KC, Nashville, Indy, and Minneapolis are all good examples where population growth and the factors driving it have resulted in a development boom.
I’m not sure what a new airport, I assume you mean terminal in the same spot, not a completely new airport somewhere, would have changed.Fraydog wrote: ↑Jan 13, 2025One of the big what ifs I have is “what if STL had built a new airport instead of pumping money into a useless 29L”?dredger wrote:My uneducated opinion is fragmentation, more so county, has been a huge issue for St. Louis region and stumbling block. City isn't big enough in terms of population & economy to be an effective city/county entity on the national scale or say to compete against the top 20 metros and maybe even top 40 metros. The county itself has way too many muni's. So say from an infrastructure part you end up with Lambert being behind the curve and metrolink expansion stalling. Heck, most regions would have had cross county extension well in place in now instead of a stub line ending at a parking lot in Shrewsbury and staying that way for decades. Heck, can't even get a decent TOD project in county.
But Fraydog brings up another good point. Cities handed out subsidies like candy to corporations. Their is more then one reason Dorsey/Twitter was HQ in San Fran on Market Street in its heyday. Tech Talent one thing the other was they were given a lot of subsidies to be in San Fran and no different than why a lot of companies were glad to move employees to Houston, Dallas and Austin.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yea I agree. The new runway was built for projected airline expansion. TWA was probably getting bought by AA regardless of the runway or airport.jshank83 wrote: ↑Jan 13, 2025I’m not sure what a new airport, I assume you mean terminal in the same spot, not a completely new airport somewhere, would have changed.Fraydog wrote: ↑Jan 13, 2025One of the big what ifs I have is “what if STL had built a new airport instead of pumping money into a useless 29L”?dredger wrote:My uneducated opinion is fragmentation, more so county, has been a huge issue for St. Louis region and stumbling block. City isn't big enough in terms of population & economy to be an effective city/county entity on the national scale or say to compete against the top 20 metros and maybe even top 40 metros. The county itself has way too many muni's. So say from an infrastructure part you end up with Lambert being behind the curve and metrolink expansion stalling. Heck, most regions would have had cross county extension well in place in now instead of a stub line ending at a parking lot in Shrewsbury and staying that way for decades. Heck, can't even get a decent TOD project in county.
But Fraydog brings up another good point. Cities handed out subsidies like candy to corporations. Their is more then one reason Dorsey/Twitter was HQ in San Fran on Market Street in its heyday. Tech Talent one thing the other was they were given a lot of subsidies to be in San Fran and no different than why a lot of companies were glad to move employees to Houston, Dallas and Austin.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
STL is a medical hub hitting hyperdrive growth since COVID. Education and Health Services since 2000.JaneJacobsGhost wrote:We’re a medical hub. Whenever anyone suggests StL is dead or dying (we’ve all heard it) remind them of this fact. Medical hubs don’t die.
This sector is one reason St. Louis will always feel one step ahead of many peers. The sector is not only well paid and stable, it generates A TON of economy. As long as this sector is growing, St. Louis has a future and a foot in the door of becoming the next Charlotte, Raleigh, Austin.
Nov 2014 (Nov 2024)
St. Louis: +19% (291,700)
Indianapolis: +35% (195,100)
Pittsburgh +4% (187,900)
Cincinnati: +15% (186,500)
Nashville: +32% (184,600)
Kansas City: +19% (174,200)
- 925
I get that. My curiosity is how do we have all this job growth without the population increase and development increase to come with it. Everything seems out of proportion here - jobs and economy up aren’t driving the rest of things like they seem to in other places with similar job growth. KC for example economy and jobs are similar, yet seeing much more development and population growth. Just trying to figure out what mystery element is at playSTLAPTS wrote: ↑Jan 13, 2025The lack of population growth is the biggest issue. A national developer and the institutional equity that backs them needs as much certainty as possible that a project will be successful. For a project to be successful, it needs to achieve projected rents which will in turn allow for a successful exit (typically a sale). Metro areas with population growth have more projects and as a result more data points to substantiate which provides certainty.JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑Dec 24, 2024I’m sure one of the real estate bros on here will give an inadequate explanation.delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑Dec 23, 2024
While being the cheapest COL besides Memphis probably? Though, again with these type of incomes it is appalling we aren’t seeing more investment into “luxury” towers and complexes or just more development period than peers.
Despite our success St. Louis has terrible vibes because people in St. Louis loathe St. Louis. It will take out of town developers to turn the tide. Wish the city would prioritize out of town developers (maybe they do).
- 1,609
I saw an interesting presentation at a recent industry meeting that highlighted the number of companies spawned by University of Wisconsin in the last 2 decades or so, for our particular segment. It was rather impressive. I have not heard much, outside of Cultivation Capital, which has strong Wash ties, of the sort of IP/company formation our flagship research institution/university is putting out into the world. Does anyone know if they have such infos available?
- 1,797
People have mentioned we’re too spread out. And it’s particularly bad on the IL side. You have to drive atop the bluff before you get the bulk of the population
Curious to know how we stack up compared to Cleveland, which I would guess ranks close to if not above St. Louis as a medical hub.addxb2 wrote: ↑Jan 13, 2025STL is a medical hub hitting hyperdrive growth since COVID. Education and Health Services since 2000.JaneJacobsGhost wrote:We’re a medical hub. Whenever anyone suggests StL is dead or dying (we’ve all heard it) remind them of this fact. Medical hubs don’t die.
This sector is one reason St. Louis will always feel one step ahead of many peers. The sector is not only well paid and stable, it generates A TON of economy. As long as this sector is growing, St. Louis has a future and a foot in the door of becoming the next Charlotte, Raleigh, Austin.
Nov 2014 (Nov 2024)
St. Louis: +19% (291,700)
Indianapolis: +35% (195,100)
Pittsburgh +4% (187,900)
Cincinnati: +15% (186,500)
Nashville: +32% (184,600)
Kansas City: +19% (174,200)
Wash. U's Skandalaris Center for Entrepreneurship probably has the info you're asking about.TheWayoftheArch_V2.0 wrote: ↑Jan 13, 2025I saw an interesting presentation at a recent industry meeting that highlighted the number of companies spawned by University of Wisconsin in the last 2 decades or so, for our particular segment. It was rather impressive. I have not heard much, outside of Cultivation Capital, which has strong Wash ties, of the sort of IP/company formation our flagship research institution/university is putting out into the world. Does anyone know if they have such infos available?
- 1,797
Cleveland is huge. Cleveland Clinic and BJC are on par. University Hospitals and Metrohealth are also really big. Not sure how they compare to Mercy/SSM system-wide.
We also have the HQ for Ascencion, although no local hospitals.
I certainly envy Cleveland’s quantity of secular healthcare providers.
We also have the HQ for Ascencion, although no local hospitals.
I certainly envy Cleveland’s quantity of secular healthcare providers.
December 2024 will be released in late January.
January 2025 and 2024 revisions will be released around mid-March.
Q1 is quiet time for BLS.
January 2025 and 2024 revisions will be released around mid-March.
Q1 is quiet time for BLS.
December 2023 to December 2024. These numbers are likely to be revised as a part of annual revisions in February/March
Just a reminder for those who get hyper fixated on KC. KC is not the region you should be looking to or worried about. Indianapolis and Nashville are both now larger than Kansas City and will be closing in on St. Louis by 2040 to 2050. This is the gap between STL and those three peers in employment.
- 1,797
Yikes, Jason sure has his work cut out for him in Columbus.
2024 revisions are on the horizon. Happens every year and is a part of the process. (Although I see reason to be skeptical of all federal data going forward.)
Here are the drafted headlines on the laptops of STL local journalists.
1. 2024 Jobs Numbers Revised Downward in Latest BLS Report
2. BLS Lowers 2024 Employment Estimates, Raising Economic Questions
3. Regional Job Growth Slower Than Expected After BLS Revision
4. 2024 Employment Revision Signals Weaker Economy Than Previously Thought
5. Job Market Stumbles: BLS Downward Revision Undercuts Economic Optimism
6. Revised Jobs Data Paints Gloomier Picture of Regional Economy
7. Economic Warning Signs: Job Numbers Revised Down, Growth Slows
8. Major BLS Revision Wipes Out Thousands of Jobs from 2024 Reports
9. Employment Data Shock: BLS Cuts Regional Job Growth in Latest Revision
10. Economic Trouble Ahead? BLS Jobs Revision Suggests a Weaker Recovery
In the off chance the numbers are revised upwards, here are three more.
1. Too Good to Be True? BLS Job Revision Raises Questions About Accuracy
2. Revised Job Numbers Paint a Rosier Picture—But Is It Just a Statistical Fluke?
3. BLS Ups Job Estimates, But Wage Growth and Stability Still Lag Behind
Here are the drafted headlines on the laptops of STL local journalists.
1. 2024 Jobs Numbers Revised Downward in Latest BLS Report
2. BLS Lowers 2024 Employment Estimates, Raising Economic Questions
3. Regional Job Growth Slower Than Expected After BLS Revision
4. 2024 Employment Revision Signals Weaker Economy Than Previously Thought
5. Job Market Stumbles: BLS Downward Revision Undercuts Economic Optimism
6. Revised Jobs Data Paints Gloomier Picture of Regional Economy
7. Economic Warning Signs: Job Numbers Revised Down, Growth Slows
8. Major BLS Revision Wipes Out Thousands of Jobs from 2024 Reports
9. Employment Data Shock: BLS Cuts Regional Job Growth in Latest Revision
10. Economic Trouble Ahead? BLS Jobs Revision Suggests a Weaker Recovery
In the off chance the numbers are revised upwards, here are three more.
1. Too Good to Be True? BLS Job Revision Raises Questions About Accuracy
2. Revised Job Numbers Paint a Rosier Picture—But Is It Just a Statistical Fluke?
3. BLS Ups Job Estimates, But Wage Growth and Stability Still Lag Behind
- 925
I would assume the revisions will mostly apply downward across the board? So relatively amongst metros, would be in similar place?addxb2 wrote: ↑Feb 25, 20252024 revisions are on the horizon. Happens every year and is a part of the process. (Although I see reason to be skeptical of all federal data going forward.)
Here are the drafted headlines on the laptops of STL local journalists.
1. 2024 Jobs Numbers Revised Downward in Latest BLS Report
2. BLS Lowers 2024 Employment Estimates, Raising Economic Questions
3. Regional Job Growth Slower Than Expected After BLS Revision
4. 2024 Employment Revision Signals Weaker Economy Than Previously Thought
5. Job Market Stumbles: BLS Downward Revision Undercuts Economic Optimism
6. Revised Jobs Data Paints Gloomier Picture of Regional Economy
7. Economic Warning Signs: Job Numbers Revised Down, Growth Slows
8. Major BLS Revision Wipes Out Thousands of Jobs from 2024 Reports
9. Employment Data Shock: BLS Cuts Regional Job Growth in Latest Revision
10. Economic Trouble Ahead? BLS Jobs Revision Suggests a Weaker Recovery
In the off chance the numbers are revised upwards, here are three more.
1. Too Good to Be True? BLS Job Revision Raises Questions About Accuracy
2. Revised Job Numbers Paint a Rosier Picture—But Is It Just a Statistical Fluke?
3. BLS Ups Job Estimates, But Wage Growth and Stability Still Lag Behind
^ absolutely! But STL doesn’t have typical journalism.
Most regions STL size won’t even report on it. STL will analyze, misquote economists, find a closed business, run it at 6pm. Then every white guy “venture capitalist” will write a think piece on LinkedIn.
Most regions STL size won’t even report on it. STL will analyze, misquote economists, find a closed business, run it at 6pm. Then every white guy “venture capitalist” will write a think piece on LinkedIn.
- 1,797
The white guy venture capitalist line made me lol. Nice work
Mostly accurate, but you forgot to tie this directly to downtown STL in the headline.addxb2 wrote: ↑Feb 25, 20252024 revisions are on the horizon. Happens every year and is a part of the process. (Although I see reason to be skeptical of all federal data going forward.)
Here are the drafted headlines on the laptops of STL local journalists.
1. 2024 Jobs Numbers Revised Downward in Latest BLS Report
2. BLS Lowers 2024 Employment Estimates, Raising Economic Questions
3. Regional Job Growth Slower Than Expected After BLS Revision
4. 2024 Employment Revision Signals Weaker Economy Than Previously Thought
5. Job Market Stumbles: BLS Downward Revision Undercuts Economic Optimism
6. Revised Jobs Data Paints Gloomier Picture of Regional Economy
7. Economic Warning Signs: Job Numbers Revised Down, Growth Slows
8. Major BLS Revision Wipes Out Thousands of Jobs from 2024 Reports
9. Employment Data Shock: BLS Cuts Regional Job Growth in Latest Revision
10. Economic Trouble Ahead? BLS Jobs Revision Suggests a Weaker Recovery
In the off chance the numbers are revised upwards, here are three more.
1. Too Good to Be True? BLS Job Revision Raises Questions About Accuracy
2. Revised Job Numbers Paint a Rosier Picture—But Is It Just a Statistical Fluke?
addxb2 wrote:
4. 2024 Employment Revision Signals Weaker Economy Than Previously Thought
It’s going to be this one. Bad revision for St. Louis incoming.
To be fair, every region I have spot checked as had massive reductions. Pre-revision, most Midwest MSAs were 1.5 to 3%. Now most are 0 to 1.5% and many hovering around 0% for January 2025.
- 1,797
The Trump admin is already laying the groundwork to begin fabricating labor and economic data like Russia and China.
https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/npr-new ... ?_amp=true
There were downward revisions last year guy. Stop the far left propaganda.JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑Mar 17, 2025The Trump admin is already laying the groundwork to begin fabricating labor and economic data like Russia and China.addxb2 wrote: ↑Feb 25, 20252024 revisions are on the horizon. Happens every year and is a part of the process. (Although I see reason to be skeptical of all federal data going forward.)
https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/npr-new ... ?_amp=true
- 977
flipz wrote:There were downward revisions last year guy. Stop the far left propaganda.JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑Mar 17, 2025The Trump admin is already laying the groundwork to begin fabricating labor and economic data like Russia and China.addxb2 wrote: ↑Feb 25, 20252024 revisions are on the horizon. Happens every year and is a part of the process. (Although I see reason to be skeptical of all federal data going forward.)
https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/npr-new ... ?_amp=true
Flipz you gotta actually read what’s being posted. That article isn’t saying that the recent revisions aren’t valid. It’s calling out concerns about data integrity moving forward and gives the following reasons for that concern.flipz wrote:There were downward revisions last year guy. Stop the far left propaganda.JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑Mar 17, 2025The Trump admin is already laying the groundwork to begin fabricating labor and economic data like Russia and China.addxb2 wrote: ↑Feb 25, 20252024 revisions are on the horizon. Happens every year and is a part of the process. (Although I see reason to be skeptical of all federal data going forward.)
https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/npr-new ... ?_amp=true
“The government recently disbanded two outside advisory committees that used to consult on the numbers, offering suggestions on ways to improve the reliability of the government data.
At the same time, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has suggested changing the way the broadest measure of the economy — gross domestic product — is calculated.
Those moves are raising concerns about whether economic data could be manipulated for political or other purposes.”
If you disagree with what the article is saying, fine, share why. Don’t just mindlessly regurgitate right wing talking points.