How many people are really leaving the NYC area. And do you think NYC will still remain the biggest radio market in the country
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
NYC radio market population
- Thread starter CassChopper96
- Start date
The people who will leave a just in few groups. One is retirees with money. Another is made of professionals who can work from anywhere. Another is younger people who can look for jobs elsewhere.
But most people are tied to homes, jobs, family, familiarity and friends and habits.
Because most of those who can move are high income, it will further reduce the tax income of the city and state. If just a percent or two of the population leave, but those people are the most affluent, it could produce a tax revenue effect well into the double digits.
NYC is in trouble if the wealthy leave.
Wall Street has been the engine of NYC for over 40 years. The pandemic proved that people can now work from remote locations. If Wall Street (and I use that term to encompass the entire financial industry) leaves for low tax states like Florida and Texas, NYC as we knew it will cease to exist. It will become the home only of lower income people and poor people on government assistance.
The LA Metro is growing, principally due to Hispanic and Asian immigrants and larger families among Hispanics particularly.
Non-Hispanic white and Black populations are decreasing in both number and percentage of the total market.
Chicago is somewhat similar, but mostly due to increased Hispanics and large "white flight". In that case, both the city and state are suffering for terrible fiscal policies and governance.
For NYC, it is too soon to tell if major commercial sectors are being effected. While the City has a vastly unpopular mayor, this is not the first time for that. But if banks, investment houses, corporate HQs and the like all begin to seek new homes, there could be a severe domino effect. For local residents, it's not a matter of jumping the river to NJ as the high taxes and confusing regulatory policies make that even worse.
NJ anecdote: I have a friend near Princeton with a home valued at about half of what my vastly overpriced CA house is "worth". Yet he pays nearly four times the property taxes that I pay. Texas, FL, TN and even locations like NC are very attractive looking for NYC metro businesses and their employees. Of course, Ocasio-Cortez will prevent new businesses from even thinking about locating there.
Still, the NYC MSA is projected over the next 5 years to grow at a 0.5% annual rate. LA is projected at 0.7% annually and Chicago at 0.6%. In all three cases, the growth is almost entirely in the ethnic and immigrant communities.
Total population of the Metro Survey Areas for 2019 are
Chicago 9.523 million
NYC at 19.187 million
LA at 13.599
These are different from the OMB Metropolitan Statistical Areas and from the 6+ or 12+ ratings estimates.
These are Claritas numbers based on the annual Census Bureau survey and independent data sources.
He won with 66% of the vote in 2017. He was very popular before he became mayor. We'll see what happens when he comes up for re-election.
However this thread is about the MARKET, not the city. So if city residents move to the suburbs, as they did prior to 1990, it may not change a thing.
Yes it's expensive to live there, and salaries usually reflect the cost of living. At least they did at one time. As expensive as it is to live in the NYC area, it's even more expensive to live in San Francisco. And yet a lot of people do.
I should have linked my source for those numbers. It was not the census or Nielsen. But they were 2019 numbers.
Bill de Blasio's reëlection campaign will have to wait. The limit for the Mayor of the City of New York is three, four-year terms, of which two may be consecutive. (At present, Mayor de Blasio is serving his second consecutive term.)
Which also addresses the comment that he is "vastly unpopular."
Although I'm sure the description applies on the first floor at 1211 Avenue of the Americas.
In that den of fairness and balance.
Likely the difference is that Nielsen MSAs are not the same as the OMB's MSAs. Metropolitan Statistical Areas are defined by economic metrics, while Metro Survey Areas are defined by the predominance of radio listening in each county.
In some cases, both MSAs are the same. In many others, they are quite different. Thus the population data looks considerably different.
Nielsen does not directly use the annual Bureau of the Census updates as "the law" for the annual population adjustments in their radio surveys each fall. They use the services of another division of Nielsen to establish the population estimates as well as all demographic breaks, including not just gender, ethnicity and age but income, education and the like.
Due to a 2010 referendum, the term limit for elected city positions has been cut back to two. Therefore, Mayor de Blasio is ineligible for reelection.
New York has a long tradition of hating their mayors but they keep getting re-elected. "Unpopular" DeBlasio won a second term, unpopular Bloomberg got 3 terms, unpopular Giuliani got 2 terms. The growth of NYC and the health of its commercial sectors don't seem to depend on whether the mayor is deemed popular, which seems to be largely a product of opinion pundits.
AOC represents parts of the Bronx and Brooklyn. She objected to outlandish tax breaks being offered by NY to Amazon, a company that already has a reputation for paying no taxes despite being one of the richest companies in the world, in the city's effort to get them to open its second corporate headquarters there. It was a divisive issue but many people supported her, especially in her district which is what counts for a member of congress. But that was a specific, unique situation and her district isn't even located where most new businesses would think about locating in NYC so she's not going to prevent anything of the sort.
None of that has anything to do with radio and considering there's a big yellow banner at the top of the page asking people to avoid posting anything partisan, and you're a moderator, I think you're letting your political bias contradict that reminder.
Many companies in growth mode pay no taxes as they are applying loss credits from startup periods and amortizing huge investments in facilities and other assets. They end up growing and becoming immense tax revenue contributors when the growth slows down and profits can not be "discounted" with expense amortization. Much of Amazon's low tax payment situation is due to investing more than they earn in new warehouses, data centers and businesses.
That's exactly the kind of business you want in your area: newer technology and greater worker security for the future. Or would you rather have a nice, safe lead-acid battery factory?
The possibility of many middle and wealthy class residents leaving the market has everything to do with radio. The economy of the whole metro is within the "Three Degrees of Separation" from Wall Street and the financial community.
If the investment banks, mutual funds, venture capital and related industries leave, the economy will be severely endangered. That effects the media very directly. The market was off over 15% in radio revenue from 2014 to 2019. It will be off more than 25% additional this year, meaning a net loss of over a third. Chicago and LA are both predicted to exceed NYC in revenue this year.
A loss of over 30% of all market radio revenue is huge. Today, few radio companies have 30% margins, so that means reducing costs. Staff, research, promotion, equipment, office space, just about everything gets trimmed. And most stations won't make any profit this year.
Some, although admittedly not all, of that loss is due to a bad business environment. De Blasio is much blamed for the economy and the loss of personal security. NY and NJ legislators for high property taxes. Overall, not a good business environment.
Oh, and tax breaks to attract job-creating business are a common strategy of areas that have a need for jobs, particularly if they were dependent on the "old economy". Bringing Amazon would have had a positive domino effect, but Ocasio's knowledge of economics is less than mine of rocket science.
The header here is "NYC Radio Market Population". One of the issues is whether the market is declining in population, as that affects radio revenue directly as rates are based on audience size and that, in turn, is based on the market itself. If the market is declining in population and radio revenue, that is definitely a radio topic.
Last edited:
However, De Blasio and Cuomo are the two who were responsible for making the deal with Amazon, according to Snopes:
So he may be unpopular for some things he did, but wasn't this something he did that was good?
In December, Amazon signed a lease for a new 335,000 square foot office in NYC anyway, and said it plans to hire over 1,500 new employees. So not only did AOC *not* prevent Amazon from establishing new business in NYC, but her protest of the original plan led to Amazon doing it without any tax breaks from the city or state. It turns out Amazon was going to open up in NYC all along and they didn't really need those concessions to do it.
https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-new-office-in-nyc-2019-12
OK. There's been a lot of media attention on people leaving the NYC market as a result of Covid and the ability to work remotely. Some of it is overblown by the conservative media which loves to use NYC as its liberal boogeyman and constantly attack it. It's true that some of New York's wealthy have left for their homes in the Hamptons and sure there are reports of people fleeing to the safety of places like Vermont to work remotely. No one can really predict how it will all play out in the long run but the general consensus in the financial papers and non-tabloid media seems to be that people will return after Covid and New York will be just fine.
Big difference between 1,500 employees in an office complex and nearly 10,000 in a warehouse and fulfillment center.
What they built in NY was a "fullfillment center" which is a distribution hub. By comparison, the warehouse near me in my country has one location with over 1,000,000 square feet and 4 more larger than the NYC center. So NYC lost a huge employment and business opportunity.
That is not what I read. I am hearing about plans being laid for migration out of the heavily taxed NY/NJ area for less costly areas of the nation, using the current situation to cover long-ranging relocation plans.
A significant mutual fund I get mailings from sent an email that says that their new investor services are relocating and giving information about the new offices in the south (I prefer not to say any more as it reveals investments). That's a major move.
It's only "good" if it actually happens. In this case, the tail was wagging the dog.
This is long overdue. I own stock in a number of major blue chip companies, and none of their investor services departments are located in New York City. In fact, several of them are outsourced to independent investor relations services companies, rather than run by the companies themselves. If you broaden the view, most of the radio companies I've either worked for or done work for were incorporated either in the state of Delaware or Nevada, for obvious tx reasons. However, their main corporate offices were in New York City.
None of this has anything to do with anything. These changes have been going on for years. The two huge mutual fund companies, Vanguard and Fidelity, are not based in New York City. They never have.
But you totally ignore why rich people love living in New York City. They love it because of the excitement. Because of the culture. The Metropolitan Opera. You HAVE to be rich to love that kind of music. The New York Philharmonic. The history. The ballet. The museums. The art galleries. The concert venues. The Village Vanguard. Radio City Music Hall. I could go on and on. You might find cheaper places to live, or warmer places to live, but you won't find that music culture and that music quality in such a concentrated area. And when you're rich, you can afford to live anywhere, but a lot of rich people choose to have one of their residences in NYC. That won't change. This current situation won't last. In a few months we'll be going back to concerts and sports events. And when that happens, we'll remember why we love big cities.
- Status