Chicago Economic & Finance News - Page 78

Steely Dan · #**1541** Posted: **Apr 27, 2012, 7:49 PM**

^ wow, all of that without even answering a simple question.

let's try this again, in your view, is milwaukee "just as important and integrated to the global economy" as detroit or is milwaukee "for its size, not too far off from Detroit" in that regard?

it can be one or the other, but not both.

the urban politician · #**1542** Posted: **Apr 27, 2012, 8:46 PM**

I'm guessing the debate of Milwaukee's economic importance can continue in this thread only if we proclaim it to be a suburb of Chicago.

Otherwise, I'm not sure this debate should continue on this thread.

So what will it be: is Milwaukee a suburb of Chicago (carry on the debate!), or is Milwaukee a separate entity (get the fuck out of here!)

lawfin · #**1543** Posted: **Apr 27, 2012, 10:50 PM**

Some people simply have a history of being unable to admit when they are wrong; they will contort and twist arguments a stretch credulity to the point of pretzel logic just so they they can affirm in their own minds that they were not mistaken and simply move on. That is my last post on this topic ; the evidence seems quite clear and convinving to everyone save one.

lawfin · #**1544** Posted: **Apr 28, 2012, 12:04 AM**

Baker & McKenzie tops U.S. list of biggest-revenue law firms

(Crain's) — DLA Piper U.S. LLC grew the fastest among Chicago's big law firms last year, as revenues surged 14.6 percent, to $2.25 billion, according to the AmLaw 100 nationwide ranking released today by American Lawyer magazine.
The increase was nearly enough to make DLA the highest-grossing U.S. law firm, but another Chicago firm, Baker & McKenzie LLP, held on to the crown, reporting a 7.7 percent revenue jump, to $2.27 billion.
The average gross revenue increase across the top 100 was 6 percent.

Read more: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...#ixzz1tHzgE7Nu
Stay on top of Chicago business with our free daily e-newsletters

the urban politician · #**1545** Posted: **Apr 28, 2012, 1:11 AM**

^ While I'm not surprised, I had no idea Chicago had some of the largest grossing law firms in the US.

I guess there is a shitload of legal work around here, there being 2 bagillion municipalities in the Chicago area and all...

lawfin · #**1546** Posted: **Apr 28, 2012, 7:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ While I'm not surprised, I had no idea Chicago had some of the largest grossing law firms in the US.

I guess there is a shitload of legal work around here, there being 2 bagillion municipalities in the Chicago area and all...

The legal market here is huge. It is one of the more important regions in the country, The 7th circuit is one of the more influential circuits. The IP work here is among the larger in the nation. It has way more to do with the huge Chicago and 7th circuit economy than it does with there being x amount of munis.

lawfin · #**1547** Posted: **Apr 28, 2012, 8:45 PM**

More awesomness. Come to rogers park......please....cheap rent. Probably LS or Pilsen Bridgeport, Douglass park, maybe avondale

http://www.chicagotribune.com/featur...,7354010.story

Centropolis · #**1548** Posted: **Apr 29, 2012, 6:54 PM**

Cool stuff. The Munster location is not ideal...

Logan Square? Crazy watching a neighborhood continue to redevelop during a recession. As an aside I was at Longman and Eagle friday - two hour wait and worth it.

emathias · #**1549** Posted: **May 1, 2012, 3:49 PM**

This is an interesting 12+ year-old article by Ed Zotti in the Reader:

Living for the City: Why am I here? Where else is there?

Baronvonellis · #**1550** Posted: **May 1, 2012, 4:54 PM**

Thanks thats a pretty cool article. I can't believe there were gangs and people running around with guns in Lakeview in 1999. When I moved there in 2006 it seemed like a yuppie eden with tons of moms with strollers. I can't believe it changed that fast unless he was exaggerating on the dates.

Standpoor · #**1551** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 3:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Thanks thats a pretty cool article. I can't believe there were gangs and people running around with guns in Lakeview in 1999. When I moved there in 2006 it seemed like a yuppie eden with tons of moms with strollers. I can't believe it changed that fast unless he was exaggerating on the dates.

My best guess is that he lived at Irving Park and Paulina, which really isn't in the heart of Lakeview and I can imagine was dicier back then although I was never around that part of town back then. I base this on the fact that there are houses directly across the street from a Jehovah's witness meeting hall with a courtyard building behind it. So it seems that he was smashed in between Lakeview high school and the Ravenswood industrial businesses. Maybe someone else has memories of this area in the 90s.

the urban politician · #**1552** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 9:18 PM**

65 local startups move into 1871 in Mart

Total Attorneys gets $15M infusion from Bain Capital

Reyes Holdings expands at Rosemont HQ

the urban politician · #**1553** Posted: **May 2, 2012, 9:22 PM**

Forbes: Two of the top 10 startup incubators/accelerators in the country are in Chicago:

Top Startup Incubators And Accelerators: Y Combinator Tops With $7.8 Billion In Value

lawfin · #**1554** Posted: **May 3, 2012, 3:59 PM**

^^^^That is actually quite good news.

Some more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,7965365.story

chicagotribune.com

Chicago sees first gain in domestic visitors since 2008

By Kathy Bergen

Tribune staff reporter

7:31 AM CDT, May 3, 2012

advertisement
Chicago's hospitality industry saw a long-awaited rebound in a portion of its business last year as the number of domestic visitors rose by 11.2 percent, to 42.4 million, the city's newly merged tourism agency announced today.

This is the first annual gain since 2008, and good news for a local industry that saw domestic travel peak in 2007 at 45.2 million. The 2011 estimates, prepared by D.K. Shifflet Associates Ltd. for the city's tourism organization, Choose Chicago, indicate the increases were fueled most strongly by leisure visitors.

Leisure visitor levels rose 13.5 percent, to 31.8 million, while business traveler volume increased 5.1 percent, to 10.58 million. The city saw strong gains in overnight stays.

Data was not yet available for 2011 international visitor traffic, which also slumped during the economic downturn.

Nowhereman1280 · #**1555** Posted: **May 4, 2012, 3:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawfin

More awesomness. Come to rogers park......please....cheap rent. Probably LS or Pilsen Bridgeport, Douglass park, maybe avondale

http://www.chicagotribune.com/featur...,7354010.story

Shit, I didn't know he was up to this. I know Nick Floyd and one of my tenants is a good friend of his. I'll have to get on him about this and see what's up. Maybe I can get him to set up at Diversey/Milwaukee...

Nowhereman1280 · #**1556** Posted: **May 4, 2012, 3:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ wow, all of that without even answering a simple question.

let's try this again, in your view, is milwaukee "just as important and integrated to the global economy" as detroit or is milwaukee "for its size, not too far off from Detroit" in that regard?

it can be one or the other, but not both.

Not to continue this stupidity, but those aren't mutually exclusive statements. Also, I never said that Milwaukee is "just as important and integrated for its size" I said that Milwaukee's export figures out perform Detroit's when adjusting for size (paraphrasing, but it was directly in response to Lawfin's attack regarding his export numbers, not just some random additional statement I made with no context as you are portraying it as). They are two completely separate points considering I've already rejected the absurd notion that "total exports" is the only and exact method of measuring such a broad term such as "integrated" or "important.

So yes, Milwaukee is:

A. Definitely just as integrated globally as Detroit. You can't deny this one since "integration" has nothing to do with the size of an economy, but rather how connected/reliant it is on global trade. Lawfin's numbers only support my argument on this one because they clearly indicate the Milwaukee economy has a greater reliance on / amount of exports when adjusting for the population difference. Therefore the Milwaukee economy, as a whole, is more integrated than Detroit's. I'm sure Lawfin will flip shit over this point, but would you really be willing to say that Shanghai's economy is not more integrated globally than China's economy as a whole just because the total exports of the Chinese economy are greater than just Shanghai's? Because that is essentially what is implied when you claim that I wasn't considering the size difference from the start. That's why I used the word "integrated" and not just "important".

B. Just as important globally as Detroits. This is the ONE point you might be able to get me on because you could argue this is a pure numbers game. However, my point was that "importance" isn't purely numerical, but based also upon how many sectors the economy is active in and many other factors (i.e. the economy of MKE not collapsing like Detroit's) other than just "Hurrr durr they have more total exports".

C. Milwaukee unquestionably outperforms Detroit across the board when you adjust for size of the metro. It's exports are growing faster, it's manufacturing base is more diverse, it's got more exports per person, etc. That was a seperate point I made to emphasize that, even when you consider Detroit is MUCH larger metro, Milwaukee, at a minimum has an edge when you adjust for population.

Somehow you all magically decided that all of my statements are bound by the one and only measure of "importance" which is raw export numbers. Because obviously economics is completely one dimensional and extremely broad statements can be boiled down to one statistic...

Steely Dan · #**1557** Posted: **May 4, 2012, 4:01 PM**

^ if you don't think milwaukee is as globally important as detroit, economically speaking, then you shouldn't have said it, and then a whole giant slew of bullshit that often follows your poorly worded posts could have been avoided.

think about what you say.

Nowhereman1280 · #**1558** Posted: **May 4, 2012, 4:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ if you don't think milwaukee is as globally important as detroit, economically speaking, then you shouldn't have said it, and then a whole giant slew of bullshit that often follows your poorly worded posts could have been avoided.

think about what you say.

No, I DO think it is as globally "important AND integrated". Stop trying to split my statements into separate ideas. Is Milwaukee's economy larger than Detroit's? No, but I never said that. That is not the debate at hand (despite Lawfin's attempts to make it such). Size is only one factor that makes economies "important". For example, Detroit is extremely important to the global automobile industry and almost nothing else. Meanwhile Milwaukee has a diverse slough of major international manufacturing corporations making it more integrate AND more important* if you value having more than one industry in any capacity.

All you need to ask is "would the world bat and eyelash if the Big 3 would have been allowed to go bankrupt" as they almost did. The answer, I think, is no. No one would care because, as high grossing as auto sales are, the Big 3 aren't really that big of a chunk of the industry anymore. Meanwhile Milwaukee has industries that dominate certain niches. Manpower, for example, is arguably the largest staffing firm in the world and the most "global" staffing firm as judged by it's international reach. If Manpower suddenly went under the repercussions would be huge because it controls a lot more of the market than GM does.

If you don't want to read context then of course you are going to misunderstand my statement. When did I even say I don't think it is as globally important? I just got done saying there is more to the word "important" than "how many raw exports does it have".

*More important than it would be, not necessarily more important than Detroit. Need to specify this before you all go bananas and decide I'm now claiming Milwaukee is more important, not just equally.

PS, let's not forget that companies like Miller are no longer "in" Milwaukee, even though their headquarters relocations are largely symbolic. That's another massive industry that Milwaukee is hugely dominant in as it is the pseudo headquarters of what is basically 40% of the global beer industry with 50% being InBev and 10% other. If Miller went under, the consequences would be a wee bit more significant than GM which has a measly 10% market share.

Steely Dan · #**1559** Posted: **May 4, 2012, 4:46 PM**

^ protest all you want, but not many people are going to agree with you that milwaukee is just as globally important as detroit, economically speaking.

you want to insist that it is, but no one else is with you on this. you gave your sales pitch, but no one is buying what you're selling.

i think we can move on. now back to chicago economic news.

spyguy · #**1560** Posted: **May 4, 2012, 7:56 PM**

Hopefully they don't rename it Motorola Mart.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...ity-to-chicago

Google makes plans to move Motorola Mobility to Chicago
By John Pletz May 04, 2012

Google Inc. is shopping for more than 500,000 square feet of office space downtown for Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. once it completes its $12.5 billion takeover of the mobile phone maker.

Among the handful of sites under consideration are upper floors of the landmark Merchandise Mart in River North and Fulton Market Cold Storage, a large warehouse that's slated for redevelopment in the West Loop, according to a source familiar with the matter.