I think that the reason midwestern cities like Indy, Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati, (with Indy and Columbus being more successful than the latter two) put so much effort into conventions is for marketing purposes rather than pure economic impact. Our region has lost much cachet to places with warmer weather. Add to that bad connotations that Ohio or Indiana brings. Cornfields etc, or mistake on the lake for Cleveland.

 

And I think the idea is, let's try to attract some people here and show them a halfway decent and interesting place, and maybe over time those reputations can start to change, which could pay dividends in the long, long term.

 

The average person just sees what they want to see when they go places for work or pleasure, unfortunately. There are heroin needles and piles of garbage all over San Francisco, but it hasn't put a huge dent in tourism there. But if someone bumped into an aggressive panhandler in Cleveland, it would probably confirm their bias about Cleveland being a terrible place. I'd agree that things could eventually change in the long, long term, but I don't know if playing that long of a game is the most effective use of public funds.

 

How else do you suggest getting people to these cities? Most people won't be going to Cleveland or Cincinnati for vacation. Maybe some people would come for sports or concerts, but those are mostly local or regional draws. Conventions offer a chance to bring people to these cities that they would otherwise have to reason or inclination to visit. If the concern is that people will have a bad experience here, the solution should not be to simply keep visitors away, it's to make the city better. I think more people are likely to have the reverse experience of the one you cited. The average person in the country seemingly has no perception or knowledge of Cincinnati. People I talk to in California generally know that it exists, and maybe that we have a couple pro sports teams, but that's about it. Bring that person to Cincinnati and let them dine at a nice restaurant, and take in the architecture and picturesque streets of OTR, and I think most people would leave pleasantly surprised. When I show coworkers (planners, who theoretically should not be clueless about urban stuff) pictures of OTR, most are blown away and say they had no clue something like that exists off the East Coast. That surprise would almost certainly weigh more heavily in the mind of a visitor than an encounter with a homeless person, unless the visitor is from a small town, and has no exposure to the homeless.

Tourist itineraries don't include bars on West Sides that still let people smoke in them

 

Last week my goofiest cousin was in town and stayed at my house.  He didn't really grow up here and has lived all over the country and overseas.  He was really rattled by black people hitting him up for money and drugs on the street in Cincinnati.  I don't even think about it when it happens, because it happens all of the time, and has happened for as long as I can remember.  What's more, it happens WAY LESS than it used to 10+ years ago, so to us who remember how it used to be, we honestly don't think about it today at all. 

 

Cincinnati still has a buzz of shadiness about it that I think throws people off.  I'm not sure what they think when they come here but I think the ubiquity of low-class commotion makes them uncomfortable.  In a place like New York City or New Orleans it's "culture", but in Ohio these people just curl up and want it to all go away. 

 

About 6-7 years ago I took a writer from New Orleans on a driving tour of the bad areas of Cincinnati.  We drove the length of McMicken, Beekman/State, buzzed around lower Price Hill and the West End.  He was loving it.  The used tire stores.  Those horses in the West End.  Kaiser Pickles.

 

Again, that exact same kind of stuff in New Orleans is "culture".  Here it's something to run away from. 

 

I think that the reason midwestern cities like Indy, Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati, (with Indy and Columbus being more successful than the latter two) put so much effort into conventions is for marketing purposes rather than pure economic impact. Our region has lost much cachet to places with warmer weather. Add to that bad connotations that Ohio or Indiana brings. Cornfields etc, or mistake on the lake for Cleveland.

 

And I think the idea is, let's try to attract some people here and show them a halfway decent and interesting place, and maybe over time those reputations can start to change, which could pay dividends in the long, long term.

 

The average person just sees what they want to see when they go places for work or pleasure, unfortunately. There are heroin needles and piles of garbage all over San Francisco, but it hasn't put a huge dent in tourism there. But if someone bumped into an aggressive panhandler in Cleveland, it would probably confirm their bias about Cleveland being a terrible place. I'd agree that things could eventually change in the long, long term, but I don't know if playing that long of a game is the most effective use of public funds.

 

How else do you suggest getting people to these cities? Most people won't be going to Cleveland or Cincinnati for vacation. Maybe some people would come for sports or concerts, but those are mostly local or regional draws. Conventions offer a chance to bring people to these cities that they would otherwise have to reason or inclination to visit. If the concern is that people will have a bad experience here, the solution should not be to simply keep visitors away, it's to make the city better. I think more people are likely to have the reverse experience of the one you cited. The average person in the country seemingly has no perception or knowledge of Cincinnati. People I talk to in California generally know that it exists, and maybe that we have a couple pro sports teams, but that's about it. Bring that person to Cincinnati and let them dine at a nice restaurant, and take in the architecture and picturesque streets of OTR, and I think most people would leave pleasantly surprised. When I show coworkers (planners, who theoretically should not be clueless about urban stuff) pictures of OTR, most are blown away and say they had no clue something like that exists off the East Coast. That surprise would almost certainly weigh more heavily in the mind of a visitor than an encounter with a homeless person, unless the visitor is from a small town, and has no exposure to the homeless.

 

Many in Cincinnati don't want people visiting Cincinnati. They justify their views in a variety of ways. They cause traffic...they'll take my parking place!....they cost us more than they bring in...it brings in 'undesirable' people...they create garbage....if they don't know about Cincinnati, it's their loss..... but it all serves the same purpose. This isn't a failure in Cincinnati's efforts to promote itself, it's the intention of powerful politicians and local businesses owners who don't want Cincinnati to promote itself. In their view, Cincinnati is for 'them' and not anyone else. They feel that they can do whatever they want with Cincinnati because it is 'theirs.' It's not some cultural conspiracy against Cincinnati, it's Cincinnati itself doing this.

I think that the reason midwestern cities like Indy, Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati, (with Indy and Columbus being more successful than the latter two) put so much effort into conventions is for marketing purposes rather than pure economic impact. Our region has lost much cachet to places with warmer weather. Add to that bad connotations that Ohio or Indiana brings. Cornfields etc, or mistake on the lake for Cleveland.

 

And I think the idea is, let's try to attract some people here and show them a halfway decent and interesting place, and maybe over time those reputations can start to change, which could pay dividends in the long, long term.

 

The average person just sees what they want to see when they go places for work or pleasure, unfortunately. There are heroin needles and piles of garbage all over San Francisco, but it hasn't put a huge dent in tourism there. But if someone bumped into an aggressive panhandler in Cleveland, it would probably confirm their bias about Cleveland being a terrible place. I'd agree that things could eventually change in the long, long term, but I don't know if playing that long of a game is the most effective use of public funds.

 

How else do you suggest getting people to these cities? Most people won't be going to Cleveland or Cincinnati for vacation. Maybe some people would come for sports or concerts, but those are mostly local or regional draws. Conventions offer a chance to bring people to these cities that they would otherwise have to reason or inclination to visit. If the concern is that people will have a bad experience here, the solution should not be to simply keep visitors away, it's to make the city better. I think more people are likely to have the reverse experience of the one you cited. The average person in the country seemingly has no perception or knowledge of Cincinnati. People I talk to in California generally know that it exists, and maybe that we have a couple pro sports teams, but that's about it. Bring that person to Cincinnati and let them dine at a nice restaurant, and take in the architecture and picturesque streets of OTR, and I think most people would leave pleasantly surprised. When I show coworkers (planners, who theoretically should not be clueless about urban stuff) pictures of OTR, most are blown away and say they had no clue something like that exists off the East Coast. That surprise would almost certainly weigh more heavily in the mind of a visitor than an encounter with a homeless person, unless the visitor is from a small town, and has no exposure to the homeless.

 

I actually think you summed up what my personal viewpoint is on this subject - word of mouth from someone with knowledge and passion for a place who shows it off to his acquaintances is going to have more of an impact than just dropping people in a random location and expecting them to figure it out or read a local brochure put out by the tourism board. At most conventions I've been to, my coworkers just want to grab a steak and a drink at whatever fancy restaurant is closest to their hotel or the convention center, and then they turn in for the night. Obviously, if you're in a field that values the urban experience you'll get out a little bit more, but most of these conventions are for boring, unadventurous businesspeople who just want to get back to their families as soon as possible. Someone is much more likely to seek out new experiences and heed the advice of a friend than listen to a tourist board when they're away somewhere for work.

 

I will say that watching peoples' expressions when they discover what Cincinnati actually looks like (aka "wow I thought this whole place was going to be Bob Evans and corn!") is always a joy, and I obviously want this to happen more frequently. I just personally think having boots on the ground and word-of-mouth is going to do more to change opinions than a convention ever will. Of course, maybe one or two conventioneers will become that next word-of-mouth catalyst... but I'm not sure if the payoff is worth it. Maybe it is; I'm not an analyst of these types of things.

Tourist itineraries don't include bars on West Sides that still let people smoke in them

 

Last week my goofiest cousin was in town and stayed at my house.  He didn't really grow up here and has lived all over the country and overseas.  He was really rattled by black people hitting him up for money and drugs on the street in Cincinnati.  I don't even think about it when it happens, because it happens all of the time, and has happened for as long as I can remember.  What's more, it happens WAY LESS than it used to 10+ years ago, so to us who remember how it used to be, we honestly don't think about it today at all. 

 

Cincinnati still has a buzz of shadiness about it that I think throws people off.  I'm not sure what they think when they come here but I think the ubiquity of low-class commotion makes them uncomfortable.  In a place like New York City or New Orleans it's "culture", but in Ohio these people just curl up and want it to all go away. 

 

About 6-7 years ago I took a writer from New Orleans on a driving tour of the bad areas of Cincinnati.  We drove the length of McMicken, Beekman/State, buzzed around lower Price Hill and the West End.  He was loving it.  The used tire stores.  Those horses in the West End.  Kaiser Pickles.

 

Again, that exact same kind of stuff in New Orleans is "culture".  Here it's something to run away from. 

 

 

Yeah, I agree completely. I'm tempted to think it's because Cincinnati, and really all of Ohio, has never really embraced its black population. Not to say we should embrace panhandling and the like, but the fact that each of the 3 Cs have large black populations should be a selling point, I think. In a state that most people associate with corn and country white people, our pockets of black culture should be played up. Some of the best funk music ever recorded came out of Cincinnati and Dayton, but almost no one knows that. The Isley Brothers, who are massively respected in musical circles and among black people all over the country, are from Cincinnati (Lincoln Hts but close enough) and the city/region does almost nothing to celebrate that! It's insane! New Orleans' whole narrative is about how the city is this mix of diverse cultures- African Americans, French, Spanish, Native Americans, plus all the hybrid races they have like Creoles and Cajuns, each group contributing to the music, cuisine, and culture of the city. Cincinnati has a unique mix, too, but all we ever hear about is German German German. If we embraced and celebrated the African American and Appalachian communities instead of trying to suppress them and hide them away, Cincy would probably have a cooler culture, and maybe more tolerance for some of the stuff we desperately try to hide away.

 

Many in Cincinnati don't want people visiting Cincinnati. They justify their views in a variety of ways. They cause traffic...they'll take my parking place!....they cost us more than they bring in...it brings in 'undesirable' people...they create garbage....if they don't know about Cincinnati, it's their loss..... but it all serves the same purpose. This isn't a failure in Cincinnati's efforts to promote itself, it's the intention of powerful politicians and local businesses owners who don't want Cincinnati to promote itself. In their view, Cincinnati is for 'them' and not anyone else. They feel that they can do whatever they want with Cincinnati because it is 'theirs.' It's not some cultural conspiracy against Cincinnati, it's Cincinnati itself doing this.

 

Oh, this again  ::) We all know how you feel. Do you have any basis for these statements? Why do we have a convention and visitors bureau if this is the case? I hesitate even engaging with you, because I know you'll just respond with more drivel about elites and other nonsense, but if you have a link, or really anything beyond your own opinions on this, perhaps you could share them.

 

Some of the best funk music ever recorded came out of Cincinnati and Dayton, but almost no one knows that. The Isley Brothers, who are massively respected in musical circles and among black people all over the country, are from Cincinnati (Lincoln Hts but close enough) and the city/region does almost nothing to celebrate that! It's insane! New Orleans' whole narrative is about how the city is this mix of diverse cultures- African Americans, French, Spanish, Native Americans, plus all the hybrid races they have like Creoles and Cajuns,

 

White tourists think it's cute when a black dude comes up and tells them a riddle in the French Quarter, then asks them for $5.  Same exact thing in Cincinnati and their heart rates are maxing out and they tell everyone about how scared they were in Cincinnati. 

 

Wow, this is really getting interesting.  I don't think I've seen a thread stray so far off topic since that last time I read the Cincy Street Car thread. ;D

 

Many in Cincinnati don't want people visiting Cincinnati. They justify their views in a variety of ways. They cause traffic...they'll take my parking place!....they cost us more than they bring in...it brings in 'undesirable' people...they create garbage....if they don't know about Cincinnati, it's their loss..... but it all serves the same purpose. This isn't a failure in Cincinnati's efforts to promote itself, it's the intention of powerful politicians and local businesses owners who don't want Cincinnati to promote itself. In their view, Cincinnati is for 'them' and not anyone else. They feel that they can do whatever they want with Cincinnati because it is 'theirs.' It's not some cultural conspiracy against Cincinnati, it's Cincinnati itself doing this.

 

Oh, this again  ::) We all know how you feel. Do you have any basis for these statements? Why do we have a convention and visitors bureau if this is the case? I hesitate even engaging with you, because I know you'll just respond with more drivel about elites and other nonsense, but if you have a link, or really anything beyond your own opinions on this, perhaps you could share them.

 

This forum is filled with opinions of all kinds. Why target mine? Do you have any opinions of your own on Cincinnati's lack of convention trade?

 

Many in Cincinnati don't want people visiting Cincinnati. They justify their views in a variety of ways. They cause traffic...they'll take my parking place!....they cost us more than they bring in...it brings in 'undesirable' people...they create garbage....if they don't know about Cincinnati, it's their loss..... but it all serves the same purpose. This isn't a failure in Cincinnati's efforts to promote itself, it's the intention of powerful politicians and local businesses owners who don't want Cincinnati to promote itself. In their view, Cincinnati is for 'them' and not anyone else. They feel that they can do whatever they want with Cincinnati because it is 'theirs.' It's not some cultural conspiracy against Cincinnati, it's Cincinnati itself doing this.

 

Oh, this again  ::) We all know how you feel. Do you have any basis for these statements? Why do we have a convention and visitors bureau if this is the case? I hesitate even engaging with you, because I know you'll just respond with more drivel about elites and other nonsense, but if you have a link, or really anything beyond your own opinions on this, perhaps you could share them.

 

 

I totally agree with Matthew on this point. Many long-time Cincinnati residents don't want growth. They don't want tourists. They don't want change. They don't want competition for cheap on-street parking spaces near the Reds stadium.

Probably no one else here will take up any part of this debate. And, I only do so to point out the tedious conventional thinking above.

 

First, let me say that no one actually hates tourists or opposes parking for visitors. That is just silly. The worst that can be said is that folks who live in an urban area but have a car, need to park. Seems like a reasonable position. And, I'd like to think that the City Adm. prioritizes residents' needs.

 

As to growth, I have nothing against it, but what I read here is a "grow or die" type of philosophy that has hold of some folks. And, that is where we need to open our eyes and see that growth for growth's sake is just stupid. It is what has led much of Europe into a spiral that will probably end up killing the major cities there. If we want to grow, is the plan to bring in lots of third world people who have no desire to be here other than economic refugeeism? Or are we in a bidding war with neighboring cities to lure their residents away with amenities like sports franchises and concert venues? Is that the plan?

 

I draw your attention to Bordeaux France, perhaps the nicest place to live on the European continent  or maybe the entire world, for the last century or so, excepting a couple of world wars. Check its population "growth" or, rather lack of growth. Study it a bit to see how sports franchises and axe throwing bars have made it a better place to live and raise a family.

 

I totally agree with Matthew on this point. Many long-time Cincinnati residents don't want growth. They don't want tourists. They don't want change. They don't want competition for cheap on-street parking spaces near the Reds stadium.

 

Where/when have you heard that Cincinnati doesn’t want tourists? Anywhere that has a large amount of tourists will also have locals who complain about them. Ever hear New Yorkers talk about Times Square? That doesn’t mean people want tourism to cease, of course. It’s just a gripe about the slow/in the way nature of tourists. I sometimes take the Griffith Observatory shuttle to get home from the metro station in my neighborhood, as it goes close enough to my place, and runs longer hours than my normal bus. There are always tourists (mostly international for some reason) and they never know how much the bus costs, where it goes, where to get off, etc. It’s frustrating for me, because I just want to get home, but I don’t wish tourists would stop visiting LA, or even stop taking the bus. I wish the city would run my other bus longer hours and with more frequency so I wouldn’t have to take the observatory bus. I assume people who talk about tourists in Cincy taking parking spaces (also, what? Didn’t know Cincy got enough tourists for this to be an issue, but I’ll take your word for it) don’t want tourism to cease, they simply want easier parking. 

Jake strongly implied that he doesn't want tourists on this very thread..... and he actually lives in Cincinnati. When have you heard that Cincinnati does want tourists? Maybe it's just hard to hear from 2,000 miles away. Cincinnati has few tourists and most in Cincinnati are glad about that. If Cincinnatians ever change their minds, they can get tourists and conventioners to come. They aren't in Cincinnati because Cincinnatians don't want them. This is all up to Cincinnatians. The opportunities are there. If Cincinnatians don't get them, it's because they didn't try, not because the rest of the world was against Cincinnati, as some have suggested here.

I think the Millennium would be a really neat conversion into residential but they would really need to fix how those buildings meet the street and sidewalk. And tear down the weird portion north of 6th Street.

I am more of the thought that Cincinnati hasn't tried more so that they are against if that makes sense.

 

Our city hasn't made it a priority, plain and simple. It seems that Hamilton County Commissioners who are making it more of a priority now, but not enough.

 

Honestly it's embarrassing to me we can't get a damn NCAA tournament game and all the good press that goes with it. Same with a steady stream of convention business. We are definitely behind the times on this/tourism in general.

 

To me it seems Cincy city center is more of just a regional draw at this point and more specifically a suburban draw. As it continues to grow the more regional and international tourism will continue to grow but we need to jump boost it. If the Brent Spence actually happens and we get more room, build a new arena there. I'm more of the mindset we need an updated arena than a convention center, though both are shown to be net nothing really in terms of cost vs benefit. But there is a reason why the Cincy Chamber is pushing hard for a fix of the convention center so maybe that side is more important as others have discussed here.

 

I was in KC about 3 weeks ago for a convention. They had the hotels downtown close to the center and everything was clean and shiny. But it was mostly a dead area next to the behmost convention center besides the attendees. This wasn't a massive show but maybe 1k ppl. I can see how it's good for the surrounding hotels but not much more. I'm a city nerd and after talking to people literally from 7-7 the last thing I wanted to do was take the streetcar or explore KC. I just wanted to eat and go to my hotel room and go to bed. I think if the city can figure out the hotel situation though that will really help the convention business and hopefully get us up to par without a huge outlay or tax.

Jake strongly implied that he doesn't want tourists on this very thread.

 

I implied that a huge outlay of public funds for a convention center expansion isn't a sound use of public funds.  I said that tourism and convention business, even if it doubled, would continue to be an irrelevant fraction of the region's economy. 

 

 

Honestly it's embarrassing to me we can't get a damn NCAA tournament game and all the good press that goes with it.

 

Those aren't that big of a deal. Columbus gets those and they fall under the category of "Of course Midwestern cities get those." They're borderline hokey.

Yeah I for sure get that, I just mean more on a selfish note, when Des Moines, IA and Omaha are getting big events like the NCAA Wrestling Tourney and Cincy doesn't even turn in a bid, to me it looks bad. But like I said I think a huge cash outlay or tax is proven by economists to be net neutral like sports stadiums for both convention centers and general arenas, I'm just jealous other cities get to have these awesome events in boring places.

 

Honestly it's embarrassing to me we can't get a damn NCAA tournament game and all the good press that goes with it.

 

Those aren't that big of a deal. Columbus gets those and they fall under the category of "Of course Midwestern cities get those." They're borderline hokey.

How is the NCAA tourney hokey?  Thousands of people attend the games every year and millions watch on tv.  The only reason we don't get to host them is because US Bank Arena is a complete dump.  If we had an even somewhat modern arena we'd be a shoe-in to host since we are within a couple hours drive of multiple big time basketball programs (X, UC, UD, OSU, UK, UL, IU, ect).  Those games would sell out in two seconds if we ever got the chance to host. 

An NCAA tourney game is a fraction of the size of a regular season NFL game. 

An NCAA tourney game is a fraction of the size of a regular season NFL game. 

You don't just host 1 tournament game.  You host 4 games in two sessions on Thursday/Friday and then another 2 games on Saturday/Sunday.  Yeah an NFL game is 60,000+ people normally (except for Bengals games which struggle to even get 50,000) but the vast majority of the people going to that game are locals whereas the vast majority of people attending the NCAA games aren't locals.  And again hosting a big event like that gets millions of people seeing your city on tv.  If all you care about is the direct profits the city gets from these type of events and give no benefit to increasing the cities name/brand awareness then you're never going to fully appreciate them. 

An NCAA tourney game is a fraction of the size of a regular season NFL game.

 

Not that hosting NCAA tournament games in and of itself is worth investing in an arena, but it is worth noting that a city doesn't host one game. You host a weekend of games spread out over Thursday-Sunday and many of the attendees come from out of town.

The NCAA *championship* game gets FEWER VIEWERS THAN MOST REGULAR SEASON NFL GAMES.  I wouldn't doubt that early NCAA tourney games get fewer TV viewers than a typical WWE episode, which is about 3 million. 

 

The typical Bengals game has 10 million viewers, which is what the NCAA championship game just got.  Some regular season NFL games get as much as 25 million viewers.  The NFC/AFC championship games get 40 million viewers.  The super bowl gets over 100 million. 

 

The NFL is HUGE.  Everything people think we're going to get from a convention center or a new arena is already happening to a much greater extent because we have an NFL team. 

 

 

Why not both?

The NCAA *championship* game gets FEWER VIEWERS THAN MOST REGULAR SEASON NFL GAMES.  I wouldn't doubt that early NCAA tourney games get fewer TV viewers than a typical WWE episode, which is about 3 million. 

 

The typical Bengals game has 10 million viewers, which is what the NCAA championship game just got.  Some regular season NFL games get as much as 25 million viewers.  The NFC/AFC championship games get 40 million viewers.  The super bowl gets over 100 million. 

 

The NFL is HUGE.  Everything people think we're going to get from a convention center or a new arena is already happening to a much greater extent because we have an NFL team. 

 

 

 

 

WLW and Cincinnati culture overexpose college basketball since important teams are located in the city, Cincinnati is close to Indiana and Kentucky and because Republicans like it.

Much of this discussion is centered around showing off our city, specifically OTR, to potential new tourists.  With the idea that that convention center would bring in new potential tourists that would otherwise never have come to Cincy.  However, since the area around the convention center is such a dead zone, and increasing the size of the convention center will only exacerbate the problem, it seems the best route forward would be to focus on improving the area around the convention center.  Get some first floor retail in place, New 3cdc hotel on 5th, new residential in the area, maybe a Cincinnati Special parking garage with apartments on top to replace the horrible garages on 6th.  Make the area surrounding it inviting so convention goers are enticed out into the city.

The NCAA *championship* game gets FEWER VIEWERS THAN MOST REGULAR SEASON NFL GAMES.  I wouldn't doubt that early NCAA tourney games get fewer TV viewers than a typical WWE episode, which is about 3 million. 

 

The typical Bengals game has 10 million viewers, which is what the NCAA championship game just got.  Some regular season NFL games get as much as 25 million viewers.  The NFC/AFC championship games get 40 million viewers.  The super bowl gets over 100 million. 

 

The NFL is HUGE.  Everything people think we're going to get from a convention center or a new arena is already happening to a much greater extent because we have an NFL team. 

 

 

 

 

WLW and Cincinnati culture overexpose college basketball since important teams are located in the city, Cincinnati is close to Indiana and Kentucky and because Republicans like it.

 

It's not overexposed if people here are invested in it.

Jake strongly implied that he doesn't want tourists on this very thread.

 

I implied that a huge outlay of public funds for a convention center expansion isn't a sound use of public funds.  I said that tourism and convention business, even if it doubled, would continue to be an irrelevant fraction of the region's economy.

 

Exactly. Your view that outsiders have no value to Cincinnati, even if they're just coming for the weekend or a conference, is widespread among Cincinnatians. Those attitudes are why Cincinnati has little tourism and convention trade. Cincinnati doesn't have a good convention hotel because Cincinnatians don't want one. They ask, 'why would I care? I live in Cincinnati, I don't care about a hotel I'll never stay in." They put pressure on government and local developers to create what they want...yet ANOTHER SPORTS STADIUM!, parking, and 'green space' that prevents anyone from developing parts of town they don't want developed. You're being honest and expressing views that are widespread in Cincinnati. Those views are the issue, not financial or infrastructure issues. There's no mystery here. Cincinnati is the way it is because a large block of Cincinnatians want it that way.

Jake strongly implied that he doesn't want tourists on this very thread.

 

I implied that a huge outlay of public funds for a convention center expansion isn't a sound use of public funds.  I said that tourism and convention business, even if it doubled, would continue to be an irrelevant fraction of the region's economy.

 

Exactly. Your view that outsiders have no value to Cincinnati, even if they're just coming for the weekend or a conference, is widespread among Cincinnatians. Those attitudes are why Cincinnati has little tourism and convention trade. Cincinnati doesn't have a good convention hotel because Cincinnatians don't want one. They ask, 'why would I care? I live in Cincinnati, I don't care about a hotel I'll never stay in." They put pressure on government and local developers to create what they want...yet ANOTHER SPORTS STADIUM!, parking, and 'green space' that prevents anyone from developing parts of town they don't want developed. You're being honest and expressing views that are widespread in Cincinnati. Those views are the issue, not financial or infrastructure issues. There's no mystery here. Cincinnati is the way it is because a large block of Cincinnatians want it that way.

 

Can you point out in bold where he said outsiders have no value to Cincinnati?

Jake strongly implied that he doesn't want tourists on this very thread.

 

I implied that a huge outlay of public funds for a convention center expansion isn't a sound use of public funds.  I said that tourism and convention business, even if it doubled, would continue to be an irrelevant fraction of the region's economy.

 

Exactly. Your view that outsiders have no value to Cincinnati, even if they're just coming for the weekend or a conference, is widespread among Cincinnatians. Those attitudes are why Cincinnati has little tourism and convention trade. Cincinnati doesn't have a good convention hotel because Cincinnatians don't want one. They ask, 'why would I care? I live in Cincinnati, I don't care about a hotel I'll never stay in." They put pressure on government and local developers to create what they want...yet ANOTHER SPORTS STADIUM!, parking, and 'green space' that prevents anyone from developing parts of town they don't want developed. You're being honest and expressing views that are widespread in Cincinnati. Those views are the issue, not financial or infrastructure issues. There's no mystery here. Cincinnati is the way it is because a large block of Cincinnatians want it that way.

 

Can you point out in bold where he said outsiders have no value to Cincinnati?

 

 

I didn't say no value, just less value than people want to think. 

 

People think that if people see Cincinnati one time that they're going to fall in love.  I drove for Uber right when it started in Cincinnati in 2014 and drove a lot of tourists around.  Some remarked that it seemed like a nice place.  Most just asked me where something was.

 

I never drove around telling people that this is so great and this is so great and this is so great.  Nobody really wants to hear that. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please keep the conversation to the Convention Center, and avoid arguments about each other.

If they put a hotel on this lot (Hopefully 25 to 30 stories) would it be smart to just build some sort of a connection from the hotel to the existing parking garage skywalk to the convention center instead of building a new one. Save some money on the project

^ Go big like the Atlanta Westin. Make it a signature tower for the city. Give a little bit of height to that part of downtown.

Please keep the conversation to the Convention Center, and avoid arguments about each other.

 

I didn't say no value, just less value than people want to think. 

 

People think that if people see Cincinnati one time that they're going to fall in love.  I drove for Uber right when it started in Cincinnati in 2014 and drove a lot of tourists around.  Some remarked that it seemed like a nice place.  Most just asked me where something was.

 

I never drove around telling people that this is so great and this is so great and this is so great.  Nobody really wants to hear that. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

People don't have to have any feelings about Cincinnati at all to find it a useful place to be for various reasons. Millions go to various cities to conduct business or find entertainment without having giving a thought to the city itself. Cities that have cultivated much larger conference trades like Columbus or Nashville are not 'suckers' who are tricked into footing the bill for out of towners to have have a good time. They are promoting their cities and fostering economically valuable relationships. Emotion has nothing to do with it. The issue here is Cincinnatians resenting the presence of people who don't share their identification with Cincinnati as a place.

 

On every visit I have ever made to Chicago, someone has offered to give me directions, recommended things I should visit, and asked about the reason for my visit. These were complete strangers sharing their enthusiasm for Chicago with me. Cincinnnatians' indifference, and sometime hostility, to non-locals is the real reason Cincinnati hasn't cultivated a tourist/conference trade.

You also have to think about states with only 1-2 important cities vs. Ohio with 6. With multi-nodal states, the most central city will always get a lot of convention and trade show business.

Yep, Cincinnati is in a tough place attracting conventions (and concerts) since we have so many other mid-sized cities within a two hour drive. Places like Kansas City, Denver, and SLC can more easily attract those regional events because they are many hours away from the next nearest city.

You also have to think about states with only 1-2 important cities vs. Ohio with 6. With multi-nodal states, the most central city will always get a lot of convention and trade show business.

 

Yeah I think people have this idea that the events in convention centers are typically drawing people from around the entire country.  Like everything is the Detroit Auto Show.  No, a lot of it is just regional gymnastics tournaments, quilting bees, etc.  I walked the hallways of the Opryland Hotel about two years ago, beer in hand, and happened upon a clogging convention.  There were like 200 people in a ballroom clogging.  I just stood there in shock for about three minutes and then moved on. 

 

We really need to spend $500 million dollars to get those clogging conventions.  And snag the psychic convention featuring Elvira from Sharonville. 

 

 

Don't underestimate the fact that there are the Northern KY and Sharonville Convention Centers taking  smaller convention and gathering business from the Cincinnati Convention Center as well.  It seems like the best path forward is to provide larger space, but at what cost?

^ Or, what if the inverse is true? If Hamilton County invested in expanding the Sharonville Convention Center and decommissioned the Duke Energy Convention Center, allowing that space to be used for other development, would we get the same ROI?

^ Or, what if the inverse is true? If Hamilton County invested in expanding the Sharonville Convention Center and decommissioned the Duke Energy Convention Center, allowing that space to be used for other development, would we get the same ROI?

 

I cant think of one major municipality that has its convention center int he suburbs.

Yep, Cincinnati is in a tough place attracting conventions (and concerts) since we have so many other mid-sized cities within a two hour drive. Places like Kansas City, Denver, and SLC can more easily attract those regional events because they are many hours away from the next nearest city.

 

Columbus is a mid-sized city with other mid-sized cities within a two hour drive. That doesn't prevent IT from attracting conventions and concerts.

I used to work in the convention and trade show industry. In Columbus, a lot of our shows were the Ohio Association of _______ . Columbus is naturally going to get a lot of those since if you have them in Cleveland then Cincinnati and Portsmouth attendees don't show up as much whereas if they are in Cincinnati, Cleveland and Stubenville people are absent.

Yeah I'd be willing to bet that outside the one or two "marquee conventions", most midsize cities that have a good convention game are that way because they're a central hub for the region, not because the city is more amenable to tourism.

If not for the river flooding issue (and the inevitable outcry about there not being enough parking), putting a new convention center underneath The Banks would have been a win-win. If I were in charge, I'd move the whole thing to where the PBS building is at Ezzard Charles and Central Parkway. You could pretty much sprawl the thing all the way from Music Hall to City Hall if you really wanted to. Maybe find a way to incorporate residential and hotels on top of the thing with some mixed-use stuff along Central to help soften the huge wedge it would put between OTR/CBD and the West End. Or shoehorn it in as part of the casino and build a new garage elsewhere.

Yeah I'd be willing to bet that outside the one or two "marquee conventions", most midsize cities that have a good convention game are that way because they're a central hub for the region, not because the city is more amenable to tourism.

 

Here's Columbus' convention center schedule https://columbusconventions.com/calendar/. There are some Columbus and Ohio specific events there to be sure but some national ones also. For comparison here's Cincinnati's. http://www.duke-energycenter.com/events/month/May/2018.

 

Cincinnati was a "central hub for the region" long before Columbus. How did that change? Is it just the 'capital city' effect? Maybe so, but I don't think that is just a functional issue. Columbus is a planned city in a sense and that makes it a more 'neutral ground' in which a wider variety of people can feel comfortable socially as well as geographically. That's why, for example, it's become the center of GLBT life in this region. This isn't just a financial or infrastructure issue. It's a social/cultural one, too. If Cincinnatians could accept that, they could open the door to a lot of new possibilities for their city, including a larger and revitalizing tourist and convention trade.

You can thank Delta Airlines and the CVG airport authority for Cincinnti's convention problems. 20 years of Cincinnati being the most or in every survey one of the most expensive cities in the entire US to fly in or out of took its toll.

 

And, if you need a co-defendant to blame, its a toss up between the GLBT and the black activist. If you were some Portland you would have thought Cincinnati had weekly lynchings from the whining before and after the riots.

You can thank Delta Airlines and the CVG airport authority for Cincinnti's convention problems. 20 years of Cincinnati being the most or in every survey one of the most expensive cities in the entire US to fly in or out of took its toll.

 

And, if you need a co-defendant to blame, its a toss up between the GLBT and the black activist. If you were some Portland you would have thought Cincinnati had weekly lynchings from the whining before and after the riots.

 

We can't use the airport excuse anymore. http://www.rcnky.com/articles/2018/04/23/cvg-airport-shows-passenger-growth-lower-fares-first-quarter.

 

So perceptions of Cincinnati as racist and anti-gay, unfair in your view, hurt Cincinnati's tourism and convention business. If Cincinnati isn't really like that, it will be easy to fix this since we don't have to overcome real racism and homophobia but just the unfortunate and mistaken impression of racism and homophobia, that have for some strange reason become associated with Cincinnati. How could we improve that image for visitors of various kinds? Some here have said that we should give up on attracting visitors to Cincinnati..that it's a fools game.... How do others see this issue of Cincinnati's image as a tourist/convention destination?

 

If not for the river flooding issue (and the inevitable outcry about there not being enough parking), putting a new convention center underneath The Banks would have been a win-win. If I were in charge, I'd move the whole thing to where the PBS building is at Ezzard Charles and Central Parkway. You could pretty much sprawl the thing all the way from Music Hall to City Hall if you really wanted to. Maybe find a way to incorporate residential and hotels on top of the thing with some mixed-use stuff along Central to help soften the huge wedge it would put between OTR/CBD and the West End. Or shoehorn it in as part of the casino and build a new garage elsewhere.

 

This is the whole problem with convention centers.  They are paradoxically giant dead spots. They kill traditional street life around them.  So a huge sacrifice of historic buildings and traditional urban structure must be made to position them anywhere close to a city center. 

 

This is what Cincinnati lost to build our current convention center:

If not for the river flooding issue (and the inevitable outcry about there not being enough parking), putting a new convention center underneath The Banks would have been a win-win. If I were in charge, I'd move the whole thing to where the PBS building is at Ezzard Charles and Central Parkway. You could pretty much sprawl the thing all the way from Music Hall to City Hall if you really wanted to. Maybe find a way to incorporate residential and hotels on top of the thing with some mixed-use stuff along Central to help soften the huge wedge it would put between OTR/CBD and the West End. Or shoehorn it in as part of the casino and build a new garage elsewhere.

 

This is the whole problem with convention centers.  They are paradoxically giant dead spots. They kill traditional street life around them.  So a huge sacrifice of historic buildings and traditional urban structure must be made to position them anywhere close to a city center. 

 

This is what Cincinnati lost to build our current convention center:

 

I very much doubt that building would be there if Cincinnati hadn't built a convention center there. Economic growth doesn't come without a price. You should see the buildings that were demolished in NYC to make way for skyscrapers! Cities are like people, institutions, and ideologies...they either change and grow or they die.

Tourist itineraries don't include bars on West Sides that still let people smoke in them

 

Last week my goofiest cousin was in town and stayed at my house.  He didn't really grow up here and has lived all over the country and overseas.  He was really rattled by black people hitting him up for money and drugs on the street in Cincinnati.  I don't even think about it when it happens, because it happens all of the time, and has happened for as long as I can remember.  What's more, it happens WAY LESS than it used to 10+ years ago, so to us who remember how it used to be, we honestly don't think about it today at all. 

 

Cincinnati still has a buzz of shadiness about it that I think throws people off.  I'm not sure what they think when they come here but I think the ubiquity of low-class commotion makes them uncomfortable.  In a place like New York City or New Orleans it's "culture", but in Ohio these people just curl up and want it to all go away. 

 

About 6-7 years ago I took a writer from New Orleans on a driving tour of the bad areas of Cincinnati.  We drove the length of McMicken, Beekman/State, buzzed around lower Price Hill and the West End.  He was loving it.  The used tire stores.  Those horses in the West End.  Kaiser Pickles.

 

Again, that exact same kind of stuff in New Orleans is "culture".  Here it's something to run away from. 

 

 

Yeah, I agree completely. I'm tempted to think it's because Cincinnati, and really all of Ohio, has never really embraced its black population. Not to say we should embrace panhandling and the like, but the fact that each of the 3 Cs have large black populations should be a selling point, I think. In a state that most people associate with corn and country white people, our pockets of black culture should be played up. Some of the best funk music ever recorded came out of Cincinnati and Dayton, but almost no one knows that. The Isley Brothers, who are massively respected in musical circles and among black people all over the country, are from Cincinnati (Lincoln Hts but close enough) and the city/region does almost nothing to celebrate that! It's insane! New Orleans' whole narrative is about how the city is this mix of diverse cultures- African Americans, French, Spanish, Native Americans, plus all the hybrid races they have like Creoles and Cajuns, each group contributing to the music, cuisine, and culture of the city. Cincinnati has a unique mix, too, but all we ever hear about is German German German. If we embraced and celebrated the African American and Appalachian communities instead of trying to suppress them and hide them away, Cincy would probably have a cooler culture, and maybe more tolerance for some of the stuff we desperately try to hide away.

 

On that note, here's a music video from a local Cincinnati rapper. The song is only okay, but the music video paints a pretty cool picture of Cincinnati.