Given the rash of new skyscrapers going up how far do you think it will go? Do you think it will end up being like an American city in twentry years or so? ( have used Manchester as an example as it has the most developments of the provinces but the question applies to Glasgow, Birmingham etc too... ).

oh no, this is really going to start an arguement...I'm really surprised Earlybird hasnt posted in this thread yet...

anyway, I personnaly think that the number of high rise developments in Manchester being proposed will begin to decrease. I think that the reason for that many skyscraper proposals in Manchester is because they started building them a bit before Glasgow and Brum. I think that once the first skyscraper is built in a city there will always be a lot more proposed to be in competition with it, Elphinstone Place isnt even built yet and there is already a few skyscrapers proposed, and once Elphinstone Place begins construction there will definately be more in the pipeline, probably (dare I say it) just as many as Manc (this applies to Brum too) as cities with a larger 'city centre' population can surely support this level of development also. Its just a matter of time...

I remember when Elphinstone Place was first proposed, some of the Glasgow forumers were saying that there would probably not be another skyscraper proposed (for the Charing X area) for at least 10 years...but then Elmbank was proposed and the 3 cheapside towers.


:-)

I would like to think that cities such as my very own Leeds or Birmingham could start a mini skyscraper boom but the councils are just too slow or developers are dragging there feet, I think Glasgow will probably end up like Liverpool a lot of proposals that end up being nothing more than proposals. At one time it looked like Leeds had the edge with BWP etc but Manchester has surpassed the Leeds proposals many times over and unlike the our other cities Manchester is building it's proposals.Thank god now I have moved to Manchester I can live in a city where they are building what they propose. For me Manchester is leading by a country mile and putting the likes of Glasgow, Liverpool, Leeds etc to shame

Manchester will go much further. Eastgate, Hardman Square, Albany and Beetham are just the first few of many new skyscrapers. In 10 years out skyline will be one of the best in Europe.

The only limit to how much development all cities metioned imo is the economy. at the mo its strong. but if there was a major downturn then most proposals would be shelved or scrapped.

What would be great to see is office towers rising as well as residential.

Its true that Manchester is a city that tends to get things done instead of many fantasy proposals but remember its had a fair share of rejections too like Vectra tower whiched looked superb. The greengate proposals too seem like fantasy land at the moment. Anyone remember the rotunda like tower proposed for the free trade radisson hotel. Thank god that was rejected it looked like a giant cheese grater. lol

What would be great to see is office towers rising as well as residential.

Exactly what Manc is doing. We've got just 25,000sqft of vacant Grade A space in our city centre, and there have been several 100,000sqft+ lettings recently including one to the Bank of New York, most of these filling new build 10 storey high buildings. At The Pinnacle on King Street a sky high office rent set a new record for Manc - £34 per sqft. The office market is very strong.

1 Hardman Square will be upto 600,000sqft and 45 storeys high, should have no trouble filling up as we have demand for upto 5 million sqft of new space in the next few years, enough to fill half a dozen 40+ storey office blocks.

Demand for flats is starting to wane a little because so much has been built recently, but we can certainly support a few more big hotels.

I dont think that Glasgow will end up like Liverpool, GCC will really approve most things that are proposed now, unlike a few years ago. This is a good thing and a bad thing, as good developments (like Elphinstone Urban Village, Elphinstone Place, Elmbank, Tradeston, Graving Docks and hopefully Cheapside) will be approved, but shoody developments like Mizu, which I still have never saw more than a cartoon of, have been approved also and is currently U/C...you just have to hope that it will look ok

Royal Blue is spot on.

The economy is the only thing that could, and probably will hold Manchester back eventually.

But as long as it keeps going strong, then there is no reason why Manchester shouldn't have one of the best skylines in Europe for sure. Personally I'm delighted that there is so much going on in Manc - you guys are paving the way for the rest of the provincial UK cities in terms of highrise developments, and it seems that our cities are beginning to follow suit.

Long may Manchester's high rise boom continue, I say. No reason why it shouldnt. :)

I'm hoping Manc can go a lot further... but not sure where the limit should be.. I don't think we'll end up with as dense as some American cities, again we've already mentioned that Manchester will not have any real cluster, but a 'ring' of tall towers around the city fringes (well, mainly).. which will give dense and impressive skyline views, yet not impose the street level.

I just think Manc now needs some towers which a little extra to the shape, we're blessed with fine clad designs (mostly) and the height, Just think its time we get some curves and angles on the sky.

Overall I think Manc has the best boom at the mo, and will seem that way for a while..it'll slow down probably, and other cities may catch up again. Brum having the strongest present skyline doesn't need to be as fast anyway. With Orion and HCT being the biggest present U/C has helped that a lot..it just needs some more starting up on par with HCT's height.

Liverpool, tough one to call, it will have an amazing skyline on the waterfront.. (would of been miles better with the rejected tower mind isolated on its own).. Liverpool just needs get rid of the Lib Dems from its council, lol..

Glasgow is the dark horse, once its stunning tower gets up, and the other designs start to then it will get noticed a lot more I feel.

Leeds seems to have an impressive portfolio of proposals and some funky renaissance style towers in the form of Venture, CP etc.. give a nice unusual skyline.

London, well.. they just need to get their arses in motion.. then they'll put us all to shame, lol.. But Its a superb time for our Cities, finally being proud and realising that preservation of what we have doesn't mean stifling the time we're in now.

I think Glasgow will probably end up like Liverpool a lot of proposals that end up being nothing more than proposals

As yet Liverpool has only turned down Chieftain Tower and Brunswick Quay. Beetham, Beetham West (30 & 40 storeys), Alexandra (27), Unity (27 & 17) and City Lofts (20 & 10) are all either built or under construction. Add to this the 28 storey Lime Street Gateway, which has already been approved, Central Station tower (reported at 38 storeys and due to go for planning permission soon), Windsor Tower (25 storeys, withdrawn from planning for 'amendments') King Edward tower and Vermont tower, both reportedly the tallest in the city if and when built. Maro are already appealing the Brunswick Quay decision, and would likely win a third application if they amend their proposal further. :)

Nothing ever gets done in Liverpool. :cheers:

3 main factors will drive Manchesters highrise boom on!

1. Knowledge capital!
2. Manchester University!
3. financial and media institutions!

3 main factors will drive Manchesters highrise boom on!

1. Knowledge capital!
2. Manchester University!
3. financial and media institutions!

1. Knowledge capital of what,the north west maybe. But manchester isnt known for its educated population.

2. Students generaly leave once they are done. hence wh Cambridge, oxford, nottingham and loughbourgh arent major cities despite having huge universities. Therefore a large university will not result in tall buildings.

Your 3rd point however is true. Finacial institutions moving to a city will gereally result in high rise buildings.

Royal Blue, the presence of the university will attract more law firms and financial institutions. Thousands of newly qualified students leaving uni every year just down the road, wanting quality jobs, and city centre apartments.

And you have mis-understood the concept of the Knowledge Capital initiative.

As regard Manchester and all othe cities, i think that we will have to acknowledge than none of our cities will be like the london and frankfurts........

i can only talk about Birmingham for this as i am very familiar with past proposals. in the late 80's early 90's, birmingham was quite on a boom. we had just built the ICC and NIA bringing life back into the city centre and bring in business on a scale we could ot comprhend..... and alont with this came a number of large tower proposals..... Snowhill.... 40 storey office block with spire......Rotunda .....due to be replaced by a 30 storey office tower looking very similar to the crystler building. this was all sort fo sparked off by the construction of the Hyatt and there was a real sense of a new begining......

byut then came the economic downturn predicted and all were halted.

manchester is ahaead of all its competitors at the moment in terms of skyline and yes all cities in the race have many cards up their sleeves..... and with the amount of inner city flats that are being built in manchester, birmingham, liverpool its only a mater of time before office towers start to rise. i mean in birminghamoffice rents have soared to over £28sqft....and most of our cities have some of the worlds mot expensive rates.... but one bad day on the FTSE could spell doom for us all.

We just need construction companies too take a gamble and build big office blocks. Its easier to attract multinational companies when the infrastuctor is already in place.

1. Knowledge capital of what,the north west maybe. But manchester isnt known for its educated population.

2. Students generaly leave once they are done. hence wh Cambridge, oxford, nottingham and loughbourgh arent major cities despite having huge universities. Therefore a large university will not result in tall buildings.

Your 3rd point however is true. Finacial institutions moving to a city will gereally result in high rise buildings.

Royal Blue!

1. How do you define a well educated population/city?

2.Manchester University is world famous! It is one of the top Universities in the world, and one of the top 3 in the UK! Manchester has the biggest student population in Europe, and all places for next term were filled with in 36 hours, with thousands of other students missing out on places! You'll also find many University students who complete their courses decide to stay in Manchester, because they can find the careers and salaries they are looking for!

No a large University doesn't create tall buildings, but a good University does!
The Bank of New York chose Manchester for various reasons, one being its well educated work force!(they could have gone elsewhere) 350 vacancies were created! Many went to well qualified students, who inturn decided to buy apartments in the city centre!

Business=students=apartments=developers=towers

24 November 2004
The bank of New York selects Manchester as location for major new growth centre

The Bank of New York, a global provider of security services, announces that it has selected Manchester to be the location for a new growth centre for its business in the UK and Europe, to support the Company's growth over the next five to ten years. In making its selection, The Bank of New York partnered with MIDAS (Manchester Investment and Development Agency Service) and the Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA), and is currently working with FPD Savills to identify the best location and facility within Manchester for this major new office.

Plans have identified an initial requirement for 40,000 sq ft. It is expected that approximately 350 jobs will be created by summer 2006.

Commenting on today's announcement, Tim Keaney, Executive Vice President and Head of Europe, The Bank of New York said, "The Bank of New York has seen substantial growth in its activities in the UK and in Europe in the past five years. We expect that growth to continue, and in planning for this are delighted to announce this exciting new office project. We chose Manchester because it has an excellent transport and business infrastructure, a wide and deep pool of talent, and it aligns with regulatory and customer expectations of diversifying our business locations. We face an exciting future of growth whilst providing customer excellence, and the new Manchester office will be at the centre of this."

Steven Broomhead, Chief Executive of the Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA), said: “The NWDA is pleased to work alongside MIDAS (Manchester Investment and Development Agency Service) to support this major new investment in Manchester by The Bank of New York, which is solid evidence of the ever increasing confidence in the city as a international business location. England’s Northwest was recently named by UK Trade and Investment as the UK’s top region for job creation, and this major investment by one of the world’s leading financial institutions will build on this success, reaffirming the region’s competitive position in the global economy.”

In the UK, The Bank of New York employs 3,000 staff and currently has offices in London, Swindon, Liverpool and Edinburgh, and remains committed to these locations.

Manchester University certainly attracted me to come to Manchester... :)

manchester does not have the largest student pop in Europe, I thought that it was just EB who made up claims like that! and I am afraid Manchester Uni isnt one of the 3 best universities in Britain either!

manchester does not have the largest student pop in Europe, I thought that it was just EB who made up claims like that! and I am afraid Manchester Uni isnt one of the 3 best universities in Britain either!

If it's not got the largest student population then it must be pretty close to it, I have never seen so many students in one city, the pubs are full of them !

Manchester Uni is without a doubt the largest in the UK by a long way. A title that once belonged to Leeds I believe.

Whooaa there jrb - calm yourself down there!

Manchester University in the UK top 3?!

Good grief man!


That is complete Tripe, matey. Manchester may have a large student population, and it may have the largest University in the UK, but in terms of quality, Manchester is blown out of the water by the cities of Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, London, Glasgow and to a point (although not exactly cities) St Andrews and Durham.

Stop spouting your nonsense. Manchester University doesnt even get a look in when one is talking about the top UK Universities.

who gives a fuck! it's still up there and it's got a huuugeee student population (88,000, probably risen this year. all of the degree spaces in manchester were filled within 36hrs of the a levels being released :yes: ) which means more accommodation needed more jobs needed, more towers!

who gives a fuck! it's still up there and it's got a huuugeee student population (88,000, probably risen this year. all of the degree spaces in manchester were filled within 36hrs of the a levels being released :yes: ) which means more accommodation needed more jobs needed, more towers!
That is a fookin' huge amount of students, I'll give you that :)

Glasgow by comparison has 58,000 students - shows you how many people (too many people??) are in higher education in Manchester - quite impressive.

Boy David, Manchester fucking is regarded as one of the best in the UK, it was also ranked 43rd in the world, apparently.

manchester is a surprisingly low joint-16th this year, according to the times (pretty much the most authoritative source on university rankings): http://www.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/finalunitable2.pdf

that's in terms of (perceived) quality, and doesn't account for size or "significance".

/\ or what the uni has acheived in the years.

In that list (Times world rankings) Manchester is above Edinburgh. Thus it is flawed.




On a lighter note:

This list is hilarious - clearly compiled by Americans - look where Edinburgh is (47th?!)! And Manchester is 78th!! Now that is crap!!:)

http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2005/ARWU2005_Top100.htm

manchester is 53 on that list?

"Glasgow is home to a student population in excess of 168,000, second only to London in the UK"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow
http://www.scottish-enterprise.com/sedotcom_home/about_se/local_enterprise_companies/glasgow/glasgow-geographicprofile.htm
http://www.strath.ac.uk/research/strathclyde.htm
http://www.nexxusscotland.com/media_centre/facts_figures/west.html

;)

In that list (Times world rankings) Manchester is above Edinburgh. Thus it is flawed.

On a lighter note:

This list is hilarious - clearly compiled by Americans - look where Edinburgh is (47th?!)! And Manchester is 78th!! Now that is crap!!:)

http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2005/ARWU2005_Top100.htm
sadly, that list is from a chinese study, and reflects the truth pretty well. in terms of research, at least. american universities have ridiculous budgets, so they get first pick of personnel at every level from undergraduates to professors.

and what's so wrong with edinburgh? it's much better than manchester in my field (chemistry).

"Glasgow is home to a student population in excess of 168,000, second only to London in the UK"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow
http://www.scottish-enterprise.com/sedotcom_home/about_se/local_enterprise_companies/glasgow/glasgow-geographicprofile.htm
http://www.strath.ac.uk/research/strathclyde.htm
http://www.nexxusscotland.com/media_centre/facts_figures/west.html

;)

you gotta bear in mind that the figures i posted don't include salford, bolton and other institutions outside of manchester.

you gotta bear in mind that the figures i posted don't include...institutions outside of manchester.

:dunno:

The figures I posted don't include institutions outside of Glasgow ...

well then, we'd be starting this argument again wouldn't we ;)

and also, may i say that salford uni is closer to manchester city centre than manchester uni is.

www.manchester.gov.uk/business/econfacts/intro.htm

"Manchester has one of the largest student populations in Europe, with over 78,000 people choosing to study at one of the area's four universities. Within one hour's drive of Manchester, there is a total student population of over 300,000."

http://www.wh.gov.cn/enews/englishnew/twincity04.htm

"With 4 leading universities, each renowned for their own specialist centres of excellence, Manchester is home to over 78,000 students - one of Europe's largest university campuses. There are also another 14 universities and higher education institutions in the surrounding area, making for a total student population of over 300,000 within one hour's drive time of Manchester."

i think that says something.

These are the boundaries sensible people go by when refering to manchester, salford IS a part of manchester.

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/cities.php

and anyway, this isn't relevant, we're talking about manchester. The city that's getting skyscrapers.

KITR - doesn't the 88,000 figure include Salford anyway?

I thought it was:

Manchester Uni (Victoria + Umist)
+
MMU
+
Salford

"Glasgow is home to a student population in excess of 168,000, second only to London in the UK"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow
http://www.scottish-enterprise.com/sedotcom_home/about_se/local_enterprise_companies/glasgow/glasgow-geographicprofile.htm
http://www.strath.ac.uk/research/strathclyde.htm
http://www.nexxusscotland.com/media_centre/facts_figures/west.html

;)


''Glasgow is also a major education centre with four universities within ten miles of the city centre: the 15th-century University of Glasgow (which has one of the highest ratios of students who continue living at home), the "redbrick" University of Strathclyde, the concrete Glasgow Caledonian University, and the University of Paisley; as well as teacher training colleges, teaching hospitals, the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama, Glasgow School of Art, and 10 other further education colleges. Glasgow is home to a student population in excess of 168,000, second only to London in the UK''

The Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama eh? That's a university is it? What about the School of Art?

Can we include the Royal Northern College of Music in our total then? :?

Can we include the Royal Northern College of Music in our total then?

Does it matter to you that much that Glasgow has a higher student population than Manchester? ;)

Lets compare these figures using wikipedia:

Glasgow
University of Glasgow - 20,000 students
University of Strathclyde - 22,000
Glasgow Caledonian - 14,000
University of Paisley - 10,000

= 66,000

MANCHESTER

University of Manchester - 35,546
MMU - 30,000
+
Salford (as it is right next to Manc city centre) - 19,000

= 84,546


Are you sure Glasgow's 168,000 doesn't include every 6th former in the city? :laugh:

168,000+ full-time students. More than any city in the UK outside London. :cheer:

Argue with fact if you must ...

168,000+ full-time students. More than any city in the UK outside London. :cheer:

Argue with fact if you must ...

I just did. Please account for the 102,000 students missing from that total. And by the way, the 66,000 contains part time students too!

I just did. Please account for the 102,000 students missing from that total. And by the way, the 66,000 contains part time students too!

Ok, 168,000+ students. And no, I don't need to account for the other 102,000. I posted a link to a respectable organisation. I don't understand why you are so adamant that it can't be right. I think maybe your opinion of Manchester is in need of a major deflation. It might have the most skyscraper proposals, but this doesn't make it better than any other city in the uk. Going by this logic, most South American cities are heaven.

Accept it when Manchester is outdone by other cities, and don't get your knickers in a twist trying to disprove it. Jesus on a bike ... :ohno: !

i mean in birminghamoffice rents have soared to over £28sqft....and most of our cities have some of the worlds mot expensive rates.... but one bad day on the FTSE could spell doom for us all.

A SKY-HIGH rent of £34.55 a sq ft has been set at Manchester's Pinnacle office block. Record rents were achieved at Property Alliance Group's site as Manchester had its first view of the striking development on King Street.

What are the highest office rents in other UK cities? Lets get an arguement going people!

For comparison:
For 2004, Midtown New York posted the highest total office rent at $66.27 per square foot

That's £37.

Ok, 168,000+ students. And no, I don't need to account for the other 102,000. I posted a link to a respectable organisation. I don't understand why you are so adamant that it can't be right. I think maybe your opinion of Manchester is in need of a major deflation. It might have the most skyscraper proposals, but this doesn't make it better than any other city in the uk. Going by this logic, most South American cities are heaven.

Accept it when Manchester is outdone by other cities, and don't get your knickers in a twist trying to disprove it. Jesus on a bike ... :ohno: !

I'm adamant because one of your sources clearly shows that Glasgow has a university population of 66,000, that's all!

'Students' can mean more than simply university attendees, are you sure about what is included in this 168,000? Because if not you are likely comparing apples with oranges.

Yes, University population of 66,000 ... a total student population of 168,000+! What's so difficut to understand? 4 universities, 2 higher education institutes and about 12, maybe 15 further education colleges. You quoted it yourself on the last page!

Where's the eye rolling smiley?

''Glasgow is also a major education centre with four universities within ten miles of the city centre: the 15th-century University of Glasgow (which has one of the highest ratios of students who continue living at home), the "redbrick" University of Strathclyde, the concrete Glasgow Caledonian University, and the University of Paisley; as well as teacher training colleges, teaching hospitals, the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama, Glasgow School of Art, and 10 other further education colleges. Glasgow is home to a student population in excess of 168,000, second only to London in the UK''

/\ i'm, sure that there is an eqivlent stat for manchester that your sources haven't taken to account when saying '2nd to only london in the uk'. So until we find manchesters total student population there's no point in taking that to account.

Right, university student populations:

Glasgow - 66,000
Manchester - 88,000

I don't think a reliable source would claim something that wasn't true.

Jesus Christ, man. Any excuse. :ohno:

Arr all you guys might have all these students but Birmingham is the youngest city in Europe ... population wise ;)

..."With 37 per cent of the population aged 24 and under, Birmingham is youngest city in Europe. This is a USP we would do well to capitalise on. It enables us to position ourselves as a city of the future.

Demographically Europe is the oldest continent on the planet with nearly one in six of its citizens over 65. Birmingham stands out because it bucks this trend.

A young population signals large market potential to future investors and bodes well for economic growth in the medium- to long-term" ...

Oh, and while I remember. Glasgow is the UK's largest provider of post-graduate education after London and Strathclyde Uni is the UK's largest provider of post-grad education full-stop.

"is relatively young with 41.9% of Manchester residents aged 24 and under compared with 30.9% for England & Wales."

sorry bc

http://www.manchester2002-uk.com/facts.html

I don't think a reliable source would claim something that wasn't true.

Jesus Christ, man. Any excuse. :ohno:

we'll see ;) im trying to find the total number of students in manchester right now.

Manchester is home to two Universities: The University of Manchester and Manchester Metropolitan University. The former is the largest full-time non-collegiate university in Britain, and was created in autumn 2004 by the merger of the former Victoria University of Manchester with UMIST.

Together with nearby Salford University, and the Royal Northern College of Music, these give the area a student population in excess of 65,000. http://www.answers.com/topic/manchester

Number of full time students in the City's three universities/colleges of higher education: 57,500 http://www.manchester.gov.uk/planning/studies/keyfacts.htm

Manchester has the largest student population in Europe http://www.isi.salford.ac.uk/msc_common/masters_faq.php

:laugh: We all now know which university not to apply for!

Manchester is a confident, pleasant cosmopolitan city that is ranked first runner-up by Financial Times as UK’s best Second City. It is home for UMIST, rated by the same newspaper as one of the top ten universities in UK. This and 8-9 other major universities and colleges give Greater Manchester a total student population of 50,000 full-time students and another 50,000 part-time students, the largest concentration of students in any European city. http://www.ineer.org/ISCComm/Manchester011012.htm

There you go, 100,000 students!

Good grief - I had no idea that there were so many students in Glasgow! Does make sense I suppose.... the person that told me that there were only 58k must have been talking shite....

And Martyn, I'm not slagging off Edinburgh! - its an Amazing Uni, best in Scotland. So why its 47th in the world is beyond me.


"Manchester has one of the largest student populations in Europe, with over 78,000 people choosing to study at one of the area's four universities. Within one hour's drive of Manchester, there is a total student population of over 300,000."
Edinburgh is within 1 hours drive of Glasgow, so I dont think you want to go down that route :)

The Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama eh? That's a university is it? What about the School of Art?

That happens to be one of the Worlds finest Music and Drama schools. World renowned, the Art's world equivalent of Cambridge. So i think it should be included.


You guys cant argue with the stats from official websites. There is just no point.

There you go, 100,000 students!

Again! that doesn't include eqivilent institutions included in the figures you posted.

Again! that doesn't include eqivilent institutions included in the figures you posted

It does. Read it. it accounts for all Universities, colleges etc. in the Greater Manc area. I'll post it for you again ;)

UMIST, rated by the same newspaper as one of the top ten universities in UK. This and 8-9 other major universities and colleges give Greater Manchester a total student population of 50,000 full-time students and another 50,000 part-time students, the largest concentration of students in any European city.

Yes, University population of 66,000 ... a total student population of 168,000+! What's so difficut to understand? 4 universities, 2 higher education institutes and about 12, maybe 15 further education colleges. You quoted it yourself on the last page!

Where's the eye rolling smiley?

Yeah, so you were comparing apples with oranges.

KITR posts Mancs 88,000 purely university figure, you follow that with the 168,000 figure even though it includes HE colleges.

When it's apples with apples, Manchester has more uni students than Glasgow. After all that's what we were talking about, universities.

Is the Bolton Institute (now got university status) being included in Manchester's total student population in this thread? If not, it should be.
Just a reminder :)

KITR posts Mancs 88,000 purely university figure, you follow that with the 168,000 figure even though it includes HE colleges.

Yeah. And Manchester city council website says there are 58,000 uni students ... :|

Before this becomes a thread about universities I thought I'd add that I think Manchester has huge potential to become a much better city with a decent skyline in a decade, although we have to hope that the economy remains good and the demand is in place and that Manchester council continue to be one of the least restrictive councils in terms of skyscrapers and tall buildings. In the UK at the moment I think manchester has the best potential of any city except london.

"is relatively young with 41.9% of Manchester residents aged 24 and under compared with 30.9% for England & Wales."

sorry bc

http://www.manchester2002-uk.com/facts.html

Thats just for the "city of Manchester" now include the so called Greater Manchester, which you guys tend to do for everything else :cheers1:

with over 78,000 people choosing to study at one of the area's four universities.

MANCHESTER

University of Manchester - 35,546
MMU - 30,000
+
Salford (as it is right next to Manc city centre) - 19,000

= 84,546

Together with nearby Salford University, and the Royal Northern College of Music, these give the area a student population in excess of 65,000. http://www.answers.com/topic/manchester

Number of full time students in the City's three universities/colleges of higher education: 57,500 http://www.manchester.gov.uk/planni...es/keyfacts.htm

Ok, so we've had four different figures, 2 from the same source :laugh:

Well, technically 84,000 is over 78,000, which is what Kids said. ;)

hmmm so Manchester builds higher because it has about 10-15,000 students more than Birmingham and Glasgow :hahaha: :hahaha: :hahaha: :lol: :lol: come on guys be serious...

^^Every little helps...

hmmm so Manchester builds higher because it has about 10-15,000 students more than Birmingham and Glasgow

It doesn't even have more students. That's the point I was trying to make. It's a myth amongst Mancunians.

boasting over the number of students in your city. Now thats desperation :D

it may be pathetic but hey, lets throw in the birmingam totals lol

Birmingham University = 32,110
Aston University = 7,940
Univercity Central England = 23,380

Birmingham Total = 63,430

wider west midlands (ucas classing)

Birmingham University = 32,110
Aston University = 7,940
Univercity Central England = 23,380
Coventry University = 18,465
Keele University = 11,795
Staffordshire = 14,865
Warwick University = 29,150
Wolverhampton Uni = 23,990
Worcester Uni = 7,555

Wider West Midlands Total = 105,820

ok, not award winning but hey, four of those are in the top 50 unis in the country.... and 3 in the top 25...to say that birmingham is lacking students is something that cant be said!

MAnchester Metropolitan University hasn't been taken into account here. Seeing as it's more central to Manc than Manchester Uni (the Victorian one), the 85,000 figure can't be right. It must be over 100,000 with that alone.

Student Gwaunt....Tarquin...Adrian....furkin 'ell all those bleedin acne-ridden little shits cloggin up the pubs nursing half a lager for about 3 hours.
One student is one too furkin many as far as I'm concerned ;)
Anyway....bttt.....

MAnchester Metropolitan University hasn't been taken into account here. Seeing as it's more central to Manc than Manchester Uni (the Victorian one), the 85,000 figure can't be right. It must be over 100,000 with that alone.

ohh, god another one...I swear to god some people on here are soo full of crap :bash:

Be Happy!

My post refered to UNIVERSITY STUDENTS, not nursery places!

University of Manchester, UMIST(with is now apart of the UoM) Salford University, Manchester Metropolitan University are all in MANCHESTER and thats where the overall figure comes from! If you want, I'll throw in Bolton University aswell!(joking!)

Manchester has Britains largest University! I'm 99.9% its Europe's largest aswell!

http://education.guardian.co.uk/universitymergers/story/0,12544,908861,00.html

Manchester has Britains largest University! I'm 99.9% its Europe's largest aswell!

Woop dee doo. Glasgow has the UK's largest student population outside London. More graduates per capita. The UK's largest provider of post-grad education.

Woop dee doo. Glasgow has the UK's largest student population outside London. More graduates per capita. The UK's largest provider of post-grad education.

No it hasn't!

Correction!

Manchester has Britains largest sudent University population! I'm 99.9% its Europe's largest aswell!

Yes it has! :)

Isnt it funny how every major city has claimed to have the largest student population...

Don't even go there No1! :)

Leeds has not! :bash:

LOL! :rofl:

Leeds has claimed it (26,000 I think?), so has Manchester and I dunno about Birmingham. So I dont really say much about student populations coz I have o idea which has the largest, and I dnt think anybody does really.

Manchester has Britains largest sudent University population! I'm 99.9% its Europe's largest aswell!

You're an idiot if you believe that. Ever heard of a place called London?

Outisde London, Manchester may well have the largest university student population, however, as my link to an official, respectable organisation says, Glasgow's total student population is the largest in the UK outside London.

You can do a degree at college. So why do college students not count? It's because Glasgow wipes the floor with Manchester when you do this and you Mancs don't like it. ;) I provided a similar student count which took into account colleges for Manchester which gave a grand total of 100,000 compared to Glasgow's 168,000.

Thats just for the "city of Manchester" now include the so called Greater Manchester, which you guys tend to do for everything else :cheers1:

yeh, i was about to say that, if you included all the old grannies in salford it wouldn't be so high.

and guys, come on manchester is the capital of the largest economy in the uk outside London, students is just one of the many reasons.

http://www.nwra.gov.uk/region/index.php

"The North West of England, has an area of 14165 square kilometres and with 6.9 million inhabitants has the second largest population of the United Kingdom's regions and is three times more densely populated than the European average. Our £60billion economy is larger than five European member states - Republic of Ireland, Finland, Luxembourg, Portugal and Greece."

so technically manchester is about as important as lisbon, dublin, luxembourg, athens and helsinki.

http://www.nwra.gov.uk/region/index.php

"The North West of England, has an area of 14165 square kilometres and with 6.9 million inhabitants has the second largest population of the United Kingdom's regions and is three times more densely populated than the European average. Our £60billion economy is larger than five European member states - Republic of Ireland, Finland, Luxembourg, Portugal and Greece."

so technically manchester is about as important as lisbon, dublin, luxembourg, athens and helsinki.
..oh at least yeah

yeh, i was about to say that, if you included all the old grannies in salford it wouldn't be so high.

and guys, come on manchester is the capital of the largest economy in the uk outside London, students is just one of the many reasons.

Where did you get this from? Thin air?

What about the South East?

------------------------------------------

Uk total GVA - £952 Billion/ UK total Population - 59.6 million

Regional GVA as percentage of total/percentage total population = GVA per capita

North East 3.9%/4.3% = £32b/2.6million = £12,308 per capita
North West 10.3%/11.4% = £98b/6.8million = £14,412 per capita
Yorks & Humber 7.5%/8.4% = £71.5b/5million = £14,300

East Midlands 6.5%/7.1% = £62b/4million = £15,500
West Midlands 8.1%/8.9% = £77b/5.3million = £14,528

East Anglia 10%/9.2% = £95b/5.5million = £17,273
London 16.3%/12.4% = £155.2b/7.4million = £20,973
South East 15.6%/13.6% = £148.5b/8.1million = £18,333
South West 7.9%/8.4% = £75.2b/5million = £15,040

Scotland 8.1%/8.5% = £77b/4.8million = £16,042
Wales 3.9%/4.9% = £37.1b/2.6million = £14,269
N Ireland 2.4%/2.9% = £22.9b/1.7million = £13,470

Regions in order of overall wealth:

London £155.2b
South East £148.5b
North West £98b
East Anglia £95b
Scotland £77b
West Midlands £77b
South West £75.2b
Yorks and Humber £71.5b
East Midlands £62b
Wales £37.1b
North East £32b
Nothern Ireland £22.9b

Regions in order of Prosperity:

Average GVA per capita: £15,537. Figures given show how much GDP/capita is above or below average.

London +£5,436
South East +£2,796
East Anglia +£1,736
Scotland +£505
East Midlands -£37
South West -£497
West Midlands -£1,009
North West -£1,125
Yorks & Humber -£1,237
Wales -£1,268
N Ireland -£2,067
North East -£3,229

=> Combined wealth of 4 most prosperous regions = wealth of remaining regions.

Combined Wealth of 4 most prosperous regions = £476billion
Combined wealth of remaining 8 regions = £476billion
Total = £952 billion

------------------------------------------

City GDP/Capita

UK GDP: c£1,000b UK GDP/capita=£16,779

Cities below average (secondary figure given as -)

London £29,090 (+£12,311)
Edinburgh £24,052 (+£7,273)
Glasgow £21,905 (+£5,126)
Bristol £20,219 (+£3,440)
Leeds £17,592 (+£813)
Birmingham £15,155 (-£1,624)
Manchester £14,489 (-£2,290)
Newcastle £14,077 (-£2,702)
Liverpool £11,307 (-£5,472)

------------------------------------------

GVA per capita (to nearest £1,000)

Nottingham £15,000
Glasgow £18,000
Edinburgh £18,000
Bristol £17,000
Newcastle £14,000
Manchester £16,000
Cardiff £17,000
Leeds £15,000
Birmingham £12,000
Liverpool £10,000

http://www.scottish-enterprise.com/..._version_v5.pdf

------------------------------------------

Administrative boundary GDP contribution (%) to national economy:

Greater London c21%
Glasgow c1.3%
Birmingham c1.5%
Edinburgh c1.1%
Leeds c0.8%
Manchester c0.6%
Liverpool c0.5%

Glad to be of assistance :okay:

South east? do you mean the south east that quite a substantial part of london is in?...

"Manchester is the regional capital of the north west of England, the UK’s largest economic region outside London. The region comprises some 2.5 million households, has a population of over six million and a GDP of £50 billion. The Greater Manchester conurbation is by far the most densely populated part of the region, with over 2.5 million people living in an area of 1,200 km2. Manchester stands at the heart of both the conurbation and the region. The city itself, having a population of around 430,000, is the largest of the ten Greater Manchester districts, but in a relatively small area of 117 km2."

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/corporate/thecity/

i think you'll find that they are a reliable source.

:cheer:

North West includes Liverpool mate get it right

/\ yeh, so i don't know why you, be_happy, have posted city statistics as they are not relevant.

Be_Happy, you still persist with these dubious stats which, as I have pointed out about 4 or 5 months ago are fairly meaningless because they don't compare like with like (e.g. London is Greater London, but Manchester is just the city limits - in some of the stats, just to confuse things)

I'll repeat a much earlier post (May 19):

From the ONS:

1998 data:

UK GDP £743 billion

GDPs:
Inner London 84.5 (11.4%)
Outer London 48.6 (6.5%)
Total London 133.1 (17.9%)
G Manchester 28.6 (3.8%)
SW Scotland (includes "Greater Glasgow") 27.1 (3.6%)

Equivalent GDP per head
IL £30.7k
OL £10.99k
GM £11.02k
SWS £11.48k

Implied populations of the areas quoted above obtained by dividing the first figure by the second:

IL 2.75 million
OL 4.42 million
Total London 7.17 million
GM 2.58 million
SWS 2.36 million

Given that it seems (?) to be accepted that Greater Glasgow has a pop. of around 1.8 million obviously SWS is not the same thing and is somewhat larger in population, by 0.56 million.

So? I conclude that in absolute terms Greater Manchester had a larger economy than South West Scotland which includes "Greater Glasgow". POSSIBLY Greater Glasgow had a greater GDP per head, OR NOT dependent on the relative contribution from the anonymous 0.56 million. (in 1998!).

You may wish to argue that GMcr is not comparable with "Greater Glasgow" - fine, accepted, unfortunately for us the ONS don't collate data in this way.

Obviously SWS is going to capture nearly all of Glasgow's rich commuters, however it is not clear that G Manchester does this (comparitively rich areas like Wilmslow are not included)... A glance at the figures for Cheshire is interesting:

Cheshire (1998) GDP 14.1 billion, GDP/head £14.32k, population 0.98 million.

This thread is really funny to read... especially Be Happy's never ending rant about his city's "168'000+" students (which includes just about everybody who is learning something one way or another). Manchester's 88'000 figure is just students (ie people actively studying for a degree) and only includes the central unis in Manchester and Salford, not the whole of Greater Manchester.

What's more, Wikipedia is not that a great source of accurate information. As it's been written by, well, everyone (even I contribute on a big scale) the information can sometimes be somewhat opiniated and not impartial. A Glaswegian (is that right?) could have simply made up those figures and added them to the Glasgow page. It's not hard to do - I could do it right now, sitting in my room hundreds of miles away from Scotland.

Manchester, as far as I'm aware, has Britain's second largest student population (London, naturally, having the largest). Manchester University is second after the University of London now, thanks to the merger last year.

I'm sure Glasgow has lots of students, but I'm affraid I doubt Glasgow has 3 times the numbers that Manchester has! Especially considering the cities are of roughly the same size.

Be_Happy, you still persist with these dubious stats which, as I have pointed out about 4 or 5 months ago are fairly meaningless because they don't compare like with like (e.g. London is Greater London, but Manchester is just the city limits - in some of the stats, just to confuse things)

Dubious? Office of National Statistics... Ok, mate. Take away Greater London then. there's a like for like list.

Given that it seems (?) to be accepted that Greater Glasgow has a pop. of around 1.8 million obviously SWS is not the same thing and is somewhat larger in population, by 0.56 million.

Given that Glasgow doesn't have a recognised 'greater area' what the hell are you talking about? Greater Manchester is the the same as West Midlands, Merseyside and Strathclyde. Try 2.3 million. SWS is Strathclyde minus a few countys, but includes Dumfries and Galloway. Easy enough to understand?

This thread is really funny to read... especially Be Happy's never ending rant about his city's "168'000+" students (which includes just about everybody who is learning something one way or another). Manchester's 88'000 figure is just students (ie people actively studying for a degree) and only includes the central unis in Manchester and Salford, not the whole of Greater Manchester.

What's more funny is that some Mancs think that their city has the largest student population in Europe. haha. No wonder some are looked down upon by so many forumers, what a ridiculous claim. (and it's not the only one i've hear)

The 168,000 only accounts for Glasgow, no surrounding area. I thought I made that clear. 168,000 people in Further education. More than Manchester. And btw, wikipedia is an excellent source of accurate information, however, this is not what I was referring to when I said respectable organisation.

Manchester, as far as I'm aware, has Britain's second largest student population (London, naturally, having the largest). Manchester University is second after the University of London now, thanks to the merger last year.

Typical. The figures which say otherwise are right infront of you. As far as I'm aware, Glasgow has Britain's second largest student population (London, naturally, having the largest). 4 different figures have been provided quoting Manchester's student population. One over 50,000, one over 60,000, one over 70,000 and one over 80,000. Which one did the Mancs go with? The largest of course. No surprise there. Where is the source to support this claim? It is non-existant. Where is the source to support my claim? I provided 4!

Open your mind.

South east? do you mean the south east that quite a substantial part of london is in?...

No, I mean the South East which is a completely seperate region from London. (Which is why the office of national statistics provides data for both.)

oooh, yes as usual the Manc is always right

emm but BeHappy aint wrong. A student is not just a person in Uni...idiot

'I'm sure Glasgow has lots of students, but I'm affraid I doubt Glasgow has 3 times the numbers that Manchester has! Especially considering the cities are of roughly the same size.'

'doubt' all you like but the facts are there...ManchesterPlanner is suggest you come to Glasgow and take a walk around the west end, Byres Rd etc and then come back and talk crap!

I have no connections with Glasgow at all, but even I think its an amazing place which is much different to the other regional cities. It has a capital city feel about it despite it is not. The student populations in Manchester, Leeds and Glasgow are large- but so what- that doesnt make the place better or worse.

obviously you do not know the purpose for this thread, we are debating how long manchester can sustain its highrise boom and what is causing it, nothing to do with 'which city is better'.

Typical. The figures which say otherwise are right infront of you. As far as I'm aware, Glasgow has Britain's second largest student population (London, naturally, having the largest). 4 different figures have been provided quoting Manchester's student population. One over 50,000, one over 60,000, one over 70,000 and one over 80,000. Which one did the Mancs go with? The largest of course. No surprise there. Where is the source to support this claim? It is non-existant. Where is the source to support my claim? I provided 4!

Open your mind.

I added up the figure of 85,000 right before your very eyes. 85,000 people in Manchester City Centre are at a university. That is more than are at university in Glasgow. Want to dispute this? Go ahead.

We were after all talking about universities, not sixth formers. Your 168,000 figure had no relevance to the thread when you first mentioned it.

he isnt including sixth formers! he is including college and university students!

Be happy, Ross!

it's University students! :)

Jesus! :lol:

he isnt including sixth formers! he is including college and university students!

College smollege, that 168,000 includes everyone in higher education. College, sixth form, whatever youn want to call it.

66,000 are at a uni in Glasgow
102,000 'students' are not.

caw, why don't you try and figure out the same figure for manchester.

Why? Who cares about college students? :laugh:

not sixth formers

he isnt including sixth formers! he is including college and university students!


Arent Sixth formers college students?

/\ good point

Why? Who cares about college students? :laugh:

I do...delicious :lol:

I'm a 6th former and it seems so silly to me that all the wasters in my college could contribute to some total that is meant to promote the city. Half of them drop out before they even think about uni!

Same here. I have a student union card etc etc... but I dont consider myself a student student student.

Be Happy, what's with calling me a joker? I've done fuck all to antagonise you yet I add a little bit of information and you act like a prize tit. Sort your face out.

Right, here's something incredibly rich.

I'm getting really fucked off with this forum. SSC is full of children. A Manc attempts to correct an obviously stupid point (normally posted by no1, greggo or that tit brum culture) and then the whole fucking World comes down on them. "MAncs always claiming to be the best/Mancs saying their cock is bigger than ours". It's the same old fucking shit. Yes there are tits. Kurt (Metrolink now), Earlybird and a few other of our juvenile members are fair game MOST of the time (note, not all). But whenever somebody who actually knows their shit posts, they're slagged off with all manner of "fucking Mancs" insults thrown at us.

How about you all fuck off and look at yourselves before throwing the shit slinging sponge at Manc? Ross and Be Happy are most notable for their patheticness in this thread.

People need to fuck off blaming Manc for anything and everything. I'm getting annoyed just loading the forum up these days because I know that for every 3 posts I'll find informative, there're 30 by wankers, slagging Manchester and it's people off. Manc slags off any other city, there's hell to pay. Any city slags off Manc, MAncs aren't allowed to defend themselves because hey, we're fucking Mancs.

Stop the hypocrisy.

Be Happy, what's with calling me a joker? I've done fuck all to antagonise you yet I add a little bit of information and you act like a prize tit. Sort your face out.

Right, here's something incredibly rich.

I'm getting really fucked off with this forum. SSC is full of children. A Manc attempts to correct an obviously stupid point (normally posted by no1, greggo or that tit brum culture) and then the whole fucking World comes down on them. "MAncs always claiming to be the best/Mancs saying their cock is bigger than ours". It's the same old fucking shit. Yes there are tits. Kurt (Metrolink now), Earlybird and a few other of our juvenile members are fair game MOST of the time (note, not all). But whenever somebody who actually knows their shit posts, they're slagged off with all manner of "fucking Mancs" insults thrown at us.

How about you all fuck off and look at yourselves before throwing the shit slinging sponge at Manc? Ross and Be Happy are most notable for their patheticness in this thread.

People need to fuck off blaming Manc for anything and everything. I'm getting annoyed just loading the forum up these days because I know that for every 3 posts I'll find informative, there're 30 by wankers, slagging Manchester and it's people off. Manc slags off any other city, there's hell to pay. Any city slags off Manc, MAncs aren't allowed to defend themselves because hey, we're fucking Mancs.

Stop the hypocrisy.



I agree. It's a lot like when British people are attacked on the world forums for saying something British is better, or that London is better than Tokyo. On the world forums it seems that you can't say anything British is best, or you are accused of arrogance. It's the same thing here. I guess it must stem from jealousy. It would make sense at the moment, with Manchester being the boom city outside of London. People are always wanting to put Manchester down in some way. If Manchester's future skyline wasn't going to be the best outside London, we wouldn't say so. But the fact is, you can't really argue otherwise. Manchester's economy is booming and the high rises are coming as a result. We've all seen the renders for each of the cities, and there can't really be much argument that Manchester is going to have the best skyline.

We will have the better skyline! An I dont think the renders do our future look !full! justice.... Brummie folk find it hard to take, and fuck, their so bleeding bitter about it ( ;)but i like that:cheers: ) though i see why...I'd be gutted if my city ever got the same treatment...And hey it may do in the future... :cheers:

FFC SkyscrapercityMancForum! :lol:

No I'm not a Rag! :bash:

obviously you do not know the purpose for this thread, we are debating how long manchester can sustain its highrise boom and what is causing it, nothing to do with 'which city is better'.

What? Take a look back through the thread. I think you'll find that you joined in the festivities as much as me. Jesus Christ. Start an argument and then when you can't win, pass the blame. Well done. :applause:

I added up the figure of 85,000 right before your very eyes. 85,000 people in Manchester City Centre are at a university. That is more than are at university in Glasgow. Want to dispute this? Go ahead.

Yes. There is one very important word in there, right at the very beginning: I. You added them up. I don't think I need to say anymore...

College smollege, that 168,000 includes everyone in higher education. College, sixth form, whatever youn want to call it.

Sixth form? Higher Education? Maybe an education is what you are lacking. I'll be glad to inform you:

Higher Education: Post A level/Higher Grades (Scotland). HNC, HND degrees etc...
Further Education: Education recieved after leaving school, short of degree level. level GCE, GNVQ Foundation/Intermediate/Advanced, BTEC ND, BTEC HNC, City and Guilds etc...

All students, I think you'll agree.

I'm getting really fucked off with this forum. SSC is full of children. A Manc attempts to correct an obviously stupid point (normally posted by no1, greggo or that tit brum culture) and then the whole fucking World comes down on them. "MAncs always claiming to be the best/Mancs saying their cock is bigger than ours". It's the same old fucking shit. Yes there are tits. Kurt (Metrolink now), Earlybird and a few other of our juvenile members are fair game MOST of the time (note, not all). But whenever somebody who actually knows their shit posts, they're slagged off with all manner of "fucking Mancs" insults thrown at us.

Read what I said. I'm pretty sure I said 'some' Mancs. However, the other side to the story is this: whenever a non-Manc ever claims something for their city (even if it is backed up by facts and sources), the whole Manc forum (exageration) comes down on that person like a tonne of bricks. Seriously. It's not pleasant. Slightly reminiscent of the school bully. In this case though, it's the forum bully.

Some Mancunians need to lighten up. In the UK, there is London, and there is everywhere else. It's not like Manchester is up there with London like some of the forumers seem to think. Manchester doesn't dominate everything like some of the forumers here seem to think. Manchester is not perfect etc. etc. There are other cities in the UK which are equally as important, equally as beautiful. Get your feet back on the ground. Manchester is not Gods city.

People need to fuck off blaming Manc for anything and everything. I'm getting annoyed just loading the forum up these days because I know that for every 3 posts I'll find informative, there're 30 by wankers, slagging Manchester and it's people off. Manc slags off any other city, there's hell to pay. Any city slags off Manc, MAncs aren't allowed to defend themselves because hey, we're fucking Mancs.

I never blamed Manchester or its citizens, nor did I slag them off. Stop being a drama queen. This is strictly a forum issue. Some [not all] Manchester forumers [as I said above] believe they live in God's City. That's why it is so hard to "convince" them that Manchester isn't leaps and bounds ahead of any UK city, like some seem to think. Infact, it's fairly equal outside London. Cities have their strong and weak points. Manchester does not have a monopoly on everything. You used the word pathetic to describe me, but surely this is more pathetic?

This thread is testament to the fact that a proper discussion can't be held when certain forumers are involved. I stated Glasgow has the largest student population. Who complains? Mancs! Only Mancs! No Leeds forumers questioned me, no Brum forumers or Liverpool forumers. I didn't intend to cause an argument, I was only trying to enlighten the select few who believe Manchester has the largest student population in Europe, when it doesn't have the largest in the UK! However, it did cause an argument, and I was dragged into it. I take the blame for this, but I won't appologise and I stand by everything I have said.

I guess it must stem from jealousy. It would make sense at the moment, with Manchester being the boom city outside of London. People are always wanting to put Manchester down in some way.

This is not a stem of Jealousy. This is a stem of Big-headedness and frustration. I think you will find that this is a far more accurate statement and i'm sure there will be others who agree.

People are always wanting to put Manchester down in some way.

No. I never entered this thread intending to put Manchester down. I entered this thread and them decided to contribute my part when I came across the discussion about students [which I never started, although Kids in the riot believe I did]. And this is what I did. the result: descended upon by various Manc forumers who disagreed and disregarded anything I said, even though I provided sources to back up my claim.

---------------------------------------------------

Here's a summary of the discussion:

"facts" highlighted in bold; my comments underlined:

Royal Blue!

1. How do you define a well educated population/city?

2.Manchester University is world famousCambridge, Oxford, Harvard ... Manchester ... I don't think so! It is one of the top Universities in the world, and one of the top 3 in the UK!Nice, a source! Manchester has the biggest student population in Europe :bash: , and all places for next term were filled with in 36 hoursWhich is why there are a whole host of courses up for clearing, with thousands of other students missing out on places! You'll also find many University students who complete their courses decide to stay in Manchester, because they can find the careers and salaries they are looking for! (As they would do in any other city: Glasgow, Birmingham, Leeds etc.)

Some Manc forumers believe Manchester to be different from the other large cities of the UK, yet they all work in the same way. This is horribly patronising.

Here's our first Student population claim and first example of aggresive behaviour:

who gives a fuck! it's still up there and it's got a huuugeee student population (88,000, probably risen this year. all of the degree spaces in manchester were filled within 36hrs of the a levels being released ) which means more accommodation needed more jobs needed, more towers!

Where's the source? Non existant.

Our second example of agressive behaviour:

Boy David, Manchester fucking is regarded as one of the best in the UK, it was also ranked 43rd in the world, apparently.

Due to the use of the word, 'fucking,' then this statement must, indeed, be true.

My first comment in the thread:

"Glasgow is home to a student population in excess of 168,000, second only to London in the UK"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow
http://www.scottish-enterprise.com/...phicprofile.htm
http://www.strath.ac.uk/research/strathclyde.htm
http://www.nexxusscotland.com/media...gures/west.html

;)


Notice: sources!

Our second Manchester student population claim:

"Manchester has one of the largest student populations in Europe, with over 78,000 people choosing to study at one of the area's four universities. Within one hour's drive of Manchester, there is a total student population of over 300,000."

Notice, the same forumer posted 2 sets of different figures. The first set of figures claimed Manchester had 88,000 students in two universities (you gotta bear in mind that the figures i posted don't include salford, bolton and other institutions outside of manchester.) and our second set of figures takes into account four universities, yet is lower. This time, however, we have a source: Manchester City Council.

The first signs of Manc desperation:

Can we include the Royal Northern College of Music in our total then?

:laugh:

Our third Manchester student population claim:

MANCHESTER

University of Manchester - 35,546
MMU - 30,000
+
Salford (as it is right next to Manc city centre) - 19,000

= 84,546

Source? Must be hiding.

Right, university student populations:

Glasgow - 66,000
Manchester - 88,000

Another sourceless Manchester student population claim.

Our fifth Manchester student population figure:

Number of full time students in the City's three universities/colleges of higher education: 57,500

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/planni...es/keyfacts.htm

With a source of course: Manchester City Council. This time we have a figure representing full-time students in three universities. The first MCC figure was 78,000 and took into account all students, part time and full-time in the areas four universities. Given that their are around 8,000 (full time and part time) students at Bolton (according to their website) the 57,500 figures leaves room for 13,000 part-time students in the area three other universities. These numbers seem to fit, no?

Insanity: [without a source :laugh:]

MAnchester Metropolitan University hasn't been taken into account here. Seeing as it's more central to Manc than Manchester Uni (the Victorian one), the 85,000 figure can't be right. It must be over 100,000 with that alone.

Reality:

Student Gwaunt....Tarquin...Adrian....furkin 'ell all those bleedin acne-ridden little shits cloggin up the pubs nursing half a lager for about 3 hours.
One student is one too furkin many as far as I'm concerned
Anyway....bttt.....

Excellent counter arguments:

No it hasn't!

Well thought out and intellectual posts:

Manchester has Britains largest sudent University population! I'm 99.9% its Europe's largest aswell!

?

and guys, come on manchester is the capital of the largest economy in the uk outside London, students is just one of the many reasons.

A counter argument made up of official statistics from various official sources, including the office of national statistics:

Uk total GVA - £952 Billion/ UK total Population - 59.6 million

Regional GVA as percentage of total/percentage total population = GVA per capita

North East 3.9%/4.3% = £32b/2.6million = £12,308 per capita
North West 10.3%/11.4% = £98b/6.8million = £14,412 per capita
Yorks & Humber 7.5%/8.4% = £71.5b/5million = £14,300

East Midlands 6.5%/7.1% = £62b/4million = £15,500
West Midlands 8.1%/8.9% = £77b/5.3million = £14,528

East Anglia 10%/9.2% = £95b/5.5million = £17,273
London 16.3%/12.4% = £155.2b/7.4million = £20,973
South East 15.6%/13.6% = £148.5b/8.1million = £18,333
South West 7.9%/8.4% = £75.2b/5million = £15,040

Scotland 8.1%/8.5% = £77b/4.8million = £16,042
Wales 3.9%/4.9% = £37.1b/2.6million = £14,269
N Ireland 2.4%/2.9% = £22.9b/1.7million = £13,470

Regions in order of overall wealth:

London £155.2b
South East £148.5b
North West £98b
East Anglia £95b
Scotland £77b
West Midlands £77b
South West £75.2b
Yorks and Humber £71.5b
East Midlands £62b
Wales £37.1b
North East £32b
Nothern Ireland £22.9b

Regions in order of Prosperity:

Average GVA per capita: £15,537. Figures given show how much GDP/capita is above or below average.

London +£5,436
South East +£2,796
East Anglia +£1,736
Scotland +£505
East Midlands -£37
South West -£497
West Midlands -£1,009
North West -£1,125
Yorks & Humber -£1,237
Wales -£1,268
N Ireland -£2,067
North East -£3,229

=> Combined wealth of 4 most prosperous regions = wealth of remaining regions.

Combined Wealth of 4 most prosperous regions = £476billion
Combined wealth of remaining 8 regions = £476billion
Total = £952 billion

------------------------------------------

City GDP/Capita

UK GDP: c£1,000b UK GDP/capita=£16,779

Cities below average (secondary figure given as -)

London £29,090 (+£12,311)
Edinburgh £24,052 (+£7,273)
Glasgow £21,905 (+£5,126)
Bristol £20,219 (+£3,440)
Leeds £17,592 (+£813)
Birmingham £15,155 (-£1,624)
Manchester £14,489 (-£2,290)
Newcastle £14,077 (-£2,702)
Liverpool £11,307 (-£5,472)

------------------------------------------

GVA per capita (to nearest £1,000)

Nottingham £15,000
Glasgow £18,000
Edinburgh £18,000
Bristol £17,000
Newcastle £14,000
Manchester £16,000
Cardiff £17,000
Leeds £15,000
Birmingham £12,000
Liverpool £10,000

http://www.scottish-enterprise.com/..._version_v5.pdf

------------------------------------------

Administrative boundary GDP contribution (%) to national economy:

Greater London c21%
Glasgow c1.3%
Birmingham c1.5%
Edinburgh c1.1%
Leeds c0.8%
Manchester c0.6%
Liverpool c0.5%

An excellent grasp of Geography:

South east? do you mean the south east that quite a substantial part of london is in?...

Bollocks:

Be_Happy, you still persist with these dubious stats...

This thread is really funny to read... especially Be Happy's never ending rant...

My favourite quote:

obviously you do not know the purpose for this thread, we are debating how long manchester can sustain its highrise boom and what is causing it, nothing to do with 'which city is better'.

Yeh, right. Is that what your doing? :laugh:

Some quotes from me, before we move onto the next quote:

What's more funny is that some Mancs think that their city has the largest student population in Europe

No wonder some are looked down upon by so many forumers

Some un-necessary friendly banter:

Be Happy, what's with calling me a joker? I've done fuck all to antagonise you yet I add a little bit of information and you act like a prize tit. Sort your face out.

Some un-necessary insults targetted at un-involved forumers:

. A Manc attempts to correct an obviously stupid point (normally posted by no1, greggo or that tit brum culture) and then the whole fucking World comes down on them.

I'd like to point out, if you look through the thread there is one glasgow poster (me) vs half a dozen Manc posters. I'm the whole world? It's nice that you think of me in that way...

Some more un-necessary insults:

How about you all fuck off and look at yourselves before throwing the shit slinging sponge at Manc? Ross and Be Happy are most notable for their patheticness in this thread.

The End.

Kids in the riot, Caw123, jrb, dgnr8, Liam Manchester, Manchester Planner, Jasper etc. VS Be_Happy ... :cheers:

Now, i'm off to talk to a wall...i'll get more sense out of it, that's for sure.

Be Happy...... sunshine, you have far far too much time on your hands......
Try getting out more and enjoy your fine city, I was just there a few weeks ago and it's an ok place :okay:
Almost as good as the Republik of Mancunia :bow:

If it's not got the largest student population then it must be pretty close to it, I have never seen so many students in one city, the pubs are full of them !

Manchester Uni is without a doubt the largest in the UK by a long way. A title that once belonged to Leeds I believe.

Manchester University is now the largest Universtiy in the UK, since the merger with umist. It is also the most applied to university - this is the title that used to be held by leeds.

Manchester Metropolitan University is the second largest university now, having been knocked off the topspot by Manchester.

This means we have the two largest universities in the UK in Manchester. And not just that - they are situated RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER - literally next door neighbours.

Manchester does not have the largest student population - London takes that title - but it certainly has the largest student CONCENTRATION in Europe. The campus, which is a continous corridor running right from the city centre and south, containing Manchester, Man Met, The Manchester Business School and The Royal Northern College of Music - contains 80,000+ students in a two-mile corridor. And don't forget there is Salford University- pretty large - on the other side of the city.

And I have many freinds who came to Manchester for Uni, and ended up staying.

The thing I like about that post is it wasn't even half that length when I went to bed last night. The fact you stewed away for 3 hours to think of some biting and intelligent retort speaks volumes my friend.

What? Take a look back through the thread. I think you'll find that you joined in the festivities as much as me. Jesus Christ. Start an argument and then when you can't win, pass the blame. Well done. :applause:



Yes. There is one very important word in there, right at the very beginning: I. You added them up. I don't think I need to say anymore...



Sixth form? Higher Education? Maybe an education is what you are lacking. I'll be glad to inform you:

Higher Education: Post A level/Higher Grades (Scotland). HNC, HND degrees etc...
Further Education: Education recieved after leaving school, short of degree level. level GCE, GNVQ Foundation/Intermediate/Advanced, BTEC ND, BTEC HNC, City and Guilds etc...

All students, I think you'll agree.



Read what I said. I'm pretty sure I said 'some' Mancs. However, the other side to the story is this: whenever a non-Manc ever claims something for their city (even if it is backed up by facts and sources), the whole Manc forum (exageration) comes down on that person like a tonne of bricks. Seriously. It's not pleasant. Slightly reminiscent of the school bully. In this case though, it's the forum bully.

Some Mancunians need to lighten up. In the UK, there is London, and there is everywhere else. It's not like Manchester is up there with London like some of the forumers seem to think. Manchester doesn't dominate everything like some of the forumers here seem to think. Manchester is not perfect etc. etc. There are other cities in the UK which are equally as important, equally as beautiful. Get your feet back on the ground. Manchester is not Gods city.



I never blamed Manchester or its citizens, nor did I slag them off. Stop being a drama queen. This is strictly a forum issue. Some [not all] Manchester forumers [as I said above] believe they live in God's City. That's why it is so hard to "convince" them that Manchester isn't leaps and bounds ahead of any UK city, like some seem to think. Infact, it's fairly equal outside London. Cities have their strong and weak points. Manchester does not have a monopoly on everything. You used the word pathetic to describe me, but surely this is more pathetic?

This thread is testament to the fact that a proper discussion can't be held when certain forumers are involved. I stated Glasgow has the largest student population. Who complains? Mancs! Only Mancs! No Leeds forumers questioned me, no Brum forumers or Liverpool forumers. I didn't intend to cause an argument, I was only trying to enlighten the select few who believe Manchester has the largest student population in Europe, when it doesn't have the largest in the UK! However, it did cause an argument, and I was dragged into it. I take the blame for this, but I won't appologise and I stand by everything I have said.



This is not a stem of Jealousy. This is a stem of Big-headedness and frustration. I think you will find that this is a far more accurate statement and i'm sure there will be others who agree.



No. I never entered this thread intending to put Manchester down. I entered this thread and them decided to contribute my part when I came across the discussion about students [which I never started, although Kids in the riot believe I did]. And this is what I did. the result: descended upon by various Manc forumers who disagreed and disregarded anything I said, even though I provided sources to back up my claim.

---------------------------------------------------

Here's a summary of the discussion:

"facts" highlighted in bold; my comments underlined:



Some Manc forumers believe Manchester to be different from the other large cities of the UK, yet they all work in the same way. This is horribly patronising.

Here's our first Student population claim and first example of aggresive behaviour:



Where's the source? Non existant.

Our second example of agressive behaviour:



Due to the use of the word, 'fucking,' then this statement must, indeed, be true.

My first comment in the thread:



Notice: sources!

Our second Manchester student population claim:



Notice, the same forumer posted 2 sets of different figures. The first set of figures claimed Manchester had 88,000 students in two universities () and our second set of figures takes into account four universities, yet is lower. This time, however, we have a source: Manchester City Council.

The first signs of Manc desperation:



:laugh:

Our third Manchester student population claim:



Source? Must be hiding.



Another sourceless Manchester student population claim.

Our fifth Manchester student population figure:



With a source of course: Manchester City Council. This time we have a figure representing full-time students in three universities. The first MCC figure was 78,000 and took into account all students, part time and full-time in the areas four universities. Given that their are around 8,000 (full time and part time) students at Bolton (according to their website) the 57,500 figures leaves room for 13,000 part-time students in the area three other universities. These numbers seem to fit, no?

Insanity: [without a source :laugh:]



Reality:




Excellent counter arguments:



Well thought out and intellectual posts:



?



A counter argument made up of official statistics from various official sources, including the office of national statistics:



An excellent grasp of Geography:



Bollocks:





My favourite quote:



Yeh, right. Is that what your doing? :laugh:

Some quotes from me, before we move onto the next quote:





Some un-necessary friendly banter:



Some un-necessary insults targetted at un-involved forumers:



I'd like to point out, if you look through the thread there is one glasgow poster (me) vs half a dozen Manc posters. I'm the whole world? It's nice that you think of me in that way...

Some more un-necessary insults:



The End.

Kids in the riot, Caw123, jrb, dgnr8, Liam Manchester, Manchester Planner, Jasper etc. VS Be_Happy ... :cheers:

Now, i'm off to talk to a wall...i'll get more sense out of it, that's for sure.

Jesus H christ mary and joseph and a spike, what a horrid pile of wank you just ejaculated all over us.

The reason people had a go at your figures is because they were out of context with the thread at the time. We were talking about universities only, you compared Manchesters university population(85,000) with Glasgows entire higher education population(168,000), but of course, it's always the Mancs who want to have the biggest cock is it?


What is hard to understand about that? It's the equivalent of this happening:

*Preceding discussion entirely about buildings over 12 floors*

Be Happy: Glasgow has 300 buildings over 12 floors, this is the 2nd highest highrise total in the UK.

caw123: Aha! But Manchester has 400 buildings over 10 floors! Manchester is 2nd in the UK!

Be Happy: No, but we were talking about buildings over 12 floors only.

caw123: Yeah yeah, argue with a fact if you must, Glasgwegians have always got to have the biggest cock. 400 buildings over 10 floors, 2nd highest in the UK.



As for your quips about the 85,000 figure:
Yes. There is one very important word in there, right at the very beginning: I. You added them up. I don't think I need to say anymore...

MANCHESTER

University of Manchester - 35,546
MMU - 30,000
+
Salford (as it is right next to Manc city centre) - 19,000

= 84,546


Source? Must be hiding.


Did you not read the original post you were on about? YOU CUT OUT THE SOURCE FROM MY ORIGINAL POST!

Lets compare these figures using wikipedia:

Glasgow
University of Glasgow - 20,000 students
University of Strathclyde - 22,000
Glasgow Caledonian - 14,000
University of Paisley - 10,000

= 66,000

MANCHESTER

University of Manchester - 35,546
MMU - 30,000
+
Salford (as it is right next to Manc city centre) - 19,000

= 84,546


Are you sure Glasgow's 168,000 doesn't include every 6th former in the city? :laugh:

Oh look, Wikipedia, one of the very places you used as a source for your 168,000.

Oh but disregard this sourced information, but I added it up! How fucking spivvy can you get.

If you need every wiki page posted in front of your eyes then here we go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salford_University - 19000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Manchester - 35546
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Metropolitan_University - 30000

Are you doubting that this totals up at 84,546? And is more than Glasgow 66,000 from the same source?

There's the University of Bolton to through in as well.

That's miles out though innit. Not really 'Manc proper'.

Nor's Salford ;)

Good grief. I've never seen a thread turn sour like this before.

Ironic really that it was a Glaswegian that started this thread off with the best of intentions.

I believe this whole row started off because Jrb ventured that Manchester Uni was one of the Top 3 in the UK, which it is obviously not.

I told him it wasn't (its 16th in the UK - still a respectible placing considering the pedigree of further education the UK supports). The argument should have ended there guys. Seriously.

I will not take sides here, as neither are truely correct. In attempts to throw figures left right and centre at each other, both parties have deviated so far from the point that this thread has become nigh on unsalvagable.

In terms of this threads original topic, the discussion had clearly run its course. A lot of you guys are veterans on the Forum. You guys should have known better than to be sucked into this mess.

The fact that a Moderator of this forum has become so deeply embroiled in the proceedings is quite ridiculous. The Moderator in question should have nipped this thread in the bud before the discussion descended into the lunacy we see before us. Makes me question whether the Moderator is taking his/her duties on this forum seriously.


You guys have got to calm down.

Good grief. I've never seen a thread turn sour like this before.

Ironic really that it was a Glaswegian that started this thread off with the best of intentions.

I believe this whole row started off because Jrb ventured that Manchester Uni was one of the Top 3 in the UK, which it is obviously not.

I told him it wasn't (its 16th in the UK - still a respectible placing considering the pedigree of further education the UK supports). The argument should have ended there guys. Seriously.

I will not take sides here, as neither are truely correct. In attempts to throw figures left right and centre at each other, both parties have deviated so far from the point that this thread has become nigh on unsalvagable.

In terms of this threads original topic, the discussion had clearly run its course. A lot of you guys are veterans on the Forum. You guys should have known better than to be sucked into this mess.

The fact that a Moderator of this forum has become so deeply embroiled in the proceedings is quite ridiculous. The Moderator in question should have nipped this thread in the bud before the discussion descended into the lunacy we see before us. Makes me question whether the Moderator is taking his/her duties on this forum seriously.


You guys have got to calm down.

Manchester Uni & Umist merged last year.... no 16 IS NOT CORRECT... old data is useless, where is UMIST in the list you got Manchester Uni (16th) from? Add these two figures together and lets use those figures?

That's miles out though innit. Not really 'Manc proper'.

Nor are Salford, Trafford, Tameside et al (i.e. all the outside areas Mancs try to include as their city when arguing with Brummies/Glasgwegian/Tykes/Scousers etc etc)

The fact that a Moderator of this forum has become so deeply embroiled in the proceedings is quite ridiculous. The Moderator in question should have nipped this thread in the bud before the discussion descended into the lunacy we see before us. Makes me question whether the Moderator is taking his/her duties on this forum seriously.


You guys have got to calm down.

Well. I can't help it, I get wound up by this stuff. Maybe because of this I shouldn't be a mod. If you share this view, tell gothicform and get me downgraded. If I don't step down first that is, can't be arsed with this forum or the responsibilty much anymore.

Just because your a mod doesn't mean you can't have an opinion and engage in debate. It's not as though you resort to personal insults or anything

how is manchester 16th when it appears 53rd on the world scale with only 5 uk universities in front of it.

http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2005/ARWU2005_Top100.htm

Nor's Salford

i'll have you know that salford uni is nearer to manc city centre than manchester uni is ;)

TheFly - my figure is from the Times website - The Times University list is considered to be the authority in University rankings. To argue against it would be foolish at best.

Here is the link to the list:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/finalunitable2.pdf

Here is a link to the main part of the Times Website containing the link:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,716,00.html


Contradict this list at your peril.

Well. I can't help it, I get wound up by this stuff. Maybe because of this I shouldn't be a mod. If you share this view, tell gothicform and get me downgraded. If I don't step down first that is, can't be arsed with this forum or the responsibilty much anymore.
Listen man - I would never report you to gothicform or the likes - I actually agree with you and most of the posts you contribute to this site, and have respected you as a forumer since I joined here.

I believe the forums would lose a valuable asset should you leave.

All I am trying to say is that this discussion should never have been allowed to continue.

My post was not ment to hurt or belittle you and your status as a mod on this site.

Cheers,

Dave

TheFly - my figure is from the Times website - The Times University list is considered to be the authority in University rankings. To argue against it would be foolish at best.

Here is the link to the list:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/finalunitable2.pdf

Here is a link to the main part of the Times Website containing the link:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,716,00.html


Contradict this list at your peril.

Okay...

Cus all the previous posts here have been about student numbers not college rankings on other factors as this article states.

Can you please make your posts clear on such matters otherwise people may doubt your words

Thanks for clearing up where you got your figures from...

Well. I can't help it, I get wound up by this stuff. Maybe because of this I shouldn't be a mod. If you share this view, tell gothicform and get me downgraded. If I don't step down first that is, can't be arsed with this forum or the responsibilty much anymore.
Even though you are a mod, you are well within your rights to contradict peoples claims, especially when they are wrong.
Dont leave the forum whatever you do. What would you do after? Go back to dullville? (aka SSP :D )

Good grief. I've never seen a thread turn sour like this before.

That has to be a sarcastic comment! :laugh:

Listen man - I would never report you to gothicform or the likes - I actually agree with you and most of the posts you contribute to this site, and have respected you as a forumer since I joined here.

I believe the forums would lose a valuable asset should you leave.

All I am trying to say is that this discussion should never have been allowed to continue.

My post was not ment to hurt or belittle you and your status as a mod on this site.

Cheers,

Dave

Nah I've been a shit mod and I accept it. Too many times I've let threads continue when I should'nt have, and got involved and gone over the top. This isn't the first time, and I can't gurantee it'll be the last either which is why I should consider fucking off, for a bit at least.

Methinks its time to start another skybar campaign... This one must be about getting caw to stay!

didn't realise you passed the 10,000 mark accura, well done.

Thanks! :D

Why do the Manc Mods all seem to crack up and fuck off? :? How about we make Earlybird Manc Mod instead? :D

caw wont go

Nah I've been a shit mod and I accept it. Too many times I've let threads continue when I should'nt have, and got involved and gone over the top. This isn't the first time, and I can't gurantee it'll be the last either which is why I should consider fucking off, for a bit at least.
I can empathise with the way you must feel when (in your words) you see 'apples compared with oranges). I'm sure most people are aware that statistics can be bent, folded, mutilated and generally 'tailored' to suit an argument regardless of the source. When apples/oranges/areas and dates are misaligned to give corrupt data then I can see where everything gets out of control and I can understand why you must see red when figures of 168K students for one city are bandied about. I think most of us have sussed this number out to include a large proportion of non-university 'students'. If statistics have to be used in the context or theme of the thread, then imho the source(s) should be accredited by the forum as up to date and reasonably reliable. They will of course be all be totally useless if the criteria is not synchronous. If conflicting stats are presented from an alternative (reasonably reliable) source then we are stuck with the proverbial Mexican Stand-off and it's really down to who's stats do you want to believe, and the whole argument will have no credence to the neutral viewer. It's then, Caw when you should decide to pull the pin rather than let it degenerate into school-yard babble.
Up to now I think you've been a very fair and intelligent mod, and can think of no reason why you should step down.

Why do the Manc Mods all seem to crack up and fuck off? :? How about we make Earlybird Manc Mod instead? :D
Hey bunny lad our CAW is not a Kevin Keegan so back off :bash:

who was manc mod before caw????

Irish Blood English Heart (formerly known as Manchester Dan)

ahh, thought it might've been him. If caw goes, who would take over?? highriser maybe?

Yeah where did the guy go? His posts were great to read...

ahh, thought it might've been him. If caw goes, who would take over?? highriser maybe?
Count me out matey,i wont have enough time to have a crap in a few weeks never mind be a mod on here,,,Caw was doing a great job anyway,,there will always be heated debates on here and he is entitled to express his view as well,,,dont worry about it Caw its only a forum

Yeah where did the guy go? His posts were great to read...
From what I can gather, Irish blood English heart gives this place a wide berth because of the way the forum has become. The way some posters often resort to personal insults and childish ranting.
He actually made a brief 'appearance' a few weeks ago on some thread and was immediately laid into by the 'mouth of the mersey' aka liverpolitan who made a snide remark about his nom de plume that had no bearing on the context of the thread at all. It was after Lpltn's silly name-calling that IBEH realised why he left in the first place.

how far manchester will go???....hmmm the last 4 times I visited Manchester always was in the same place east of Liverpool and West of Leeds, I really don't think it went too far, it seems to me that remains still
:weird: :weird: :weird: :crazy:

Just compare the amount of cranes on Manchester's skyline to other cities, then you should have a fair idea.

Just compare the amount of cranes on Manchester's skyline to other cities, then you should have a fair idea.
Why ? The amount of cranes is an indication of present development, not future development. :yes:

^I was responding to soul_13's post, not the question in the thread title.

Why ? The amount of cranes is an indication of present development, not future development. :yes:


Manchester will have even more cranes next year! Don't worry yourself!

Eastgate, Crown, Chapel Warf, No1 and a host of other towers/developments will be starting!

Thats what I call future FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS

Manchester will have even more cranes next year! Don't worry yourself!

Eastgate, Crown, Chapel Warf, No1 and a host of other towers/developments will be starting!

Thats what I call future FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
I'm sure there will be more, but equally there will be some cranes there now that won't be there next year. My point was that the visibility of cranes is an indication of development now, nothing more. :)

Isn't this crane spotting getting a bit out of control, I was amazed to see a thread dedicated to it on the Brum forum a couple of years ago, now if they were to one day all perform a syncronized crane dance with laser lights attached at night... now that might interest me... slightly :)

^Your just jealous cos you dont have as many cranes, and yours arnt as big either! :D

damn you!

http://www.nwra.gov.uk/region/index.php

"The North West of England, has an area of 14165 square kilometres and with 6.9 million inhabitants has the second largest population of the United Kingdom's regions and is three times more densely populated than the European average. Our £60billion economy is larger than five European member states - Republic of Ireland, Finland, Luxembourg, Portugal and Greece."

so technically manchester is about as important as lisbon, dublin, luxembourg, athens and helsinki.

Slight understatement there! Greater Manchester is a whole load bigger economically than ALL these cities, except perhaps Athens.

Where did you get this from? Thin air?

What about the South East?

------------------------------------------

Uk total GVA - £952 Billion/ UK total Population - 59.6 million

Regional GVA as percentage of total/percentage total population = GVA per capita

North East 3.9%/4.3% = £32b/2.6million = £12,308 per capita
North West 10.3%/11.4% = £98b/6.8million = £14,412 per capita
Yorks & Humber 7.5%/8.4% = £71.5b/5million = £14,300

East Midlands 6.5%/7.1% = £62b/4million = £15,500
West Midlands 8.1%/8.9% = £77b/5.3million = £14,528

East Anglia 10%/9.2% = £95b/5.5million = £17,273
London 16.3%/12.4% = £155.2b/7.4million = £20,973
South East 15.6%/13.6% = £148.5b/8.1million = £18,333
South West 7.9%/8.4% = £75.2b/5million = £15,040

Scotland 8.1%/8.5% = £77b/4.8million = £16,042
Wales 3.9%/4.9% = £37.1b/2.6million = £14,269
N Ireland 2.4%/2.9% = £22.9b/1.7million = £13,470

Regions in order of overall wealth:

London £155.2b
South East £148.5b
North West £98b
East Anglia £95b
Scotland £77b
West Midlands £77b
South West £75.2b
Yorks and Humber £71.5b
East Midlands £62b
Wales £37.1b
North East £32b
Nothern Ireland £22.9b

Regions in order of Prosperity:

Average GVA per capita: £15,537. Figures given show how much GDP/capita is above or below average.

London +£5,436
South East +£2,796
East Anglia +£1,736
Scotland +£505
East Midlands -£37
South West -£497
West Midlands -£1,009
North West -£1,125
Yorks & Humber -£1,237
Wales -£1,268
N Ireland -£2,067
North East -£3,229

=> Combined wealth of 4 most prosperous regions = wealth of remaining regions.

Combined Wealth of 4 most prosperous regions = £476billion
Combined wealth of remaining 8 regions = £476billion
Total = £952 billion

------------------------------------------

City GDP/Capita

UK GDP: c£1,000b UK GDP/capita=£16,779

Cities below average (secondary figure given as -)

London £29,090 (+£12,311)
Edinburgh £24,052 (+£7,273)
Glasgow £21,905 (+£5,126)
Bristol £20,219 (+£3,440)
Leeds £17,592 (+£813)
Birmingham £15,155 (-£1,624)
Manchester £14,489 (-£2,290)
Newcastle £14,077 (-£2,702)
Liverpool £11,307 (-£5,472)

------------------------------------------

GVA per capita (to nearest £1,000)

Nottingham £15,000
Glasgow £18,000
Edinburgh £18,000
Bristol £17,000
Newcastle £14,000
Manchester £16,000
Cardiff £17,000
Leeds £15,000
Birmingham £12,000
Liverpool £10,000

http://www.scottish-enterprise.com/..._version_v5.pdf

------------------------------------------

Administrative boundary GDP contribution (%) to national economy:

Greater London c21%
Glasgow c1.3%
Birmingham c1.5%
Edinburgh c1.1%
Leeds c0.8%
Manchester c0.6%
Liverpool c0.5%

Glad to be of assistance :okay:

Be Happy - if you want to start quoting relative GVA figures, and GDP contributions, you really need a better understanding of economic geography. If the figures for Glasgow were limited to just inner-city Glasgow, the East End and half of South Glasgow, then it would be a great deal poorer than most of the places you compare it with. You're not comparing like for like.

The GVA/per capita figures for Scotland appear so big, because they include oil revenues. Without these, they would be amongst the lowest.

The figures for Glasgow include all its wealthy suburbs, those for Birmingham and Manchester refer largely to the old industrial inner cities.

I hate getting into these futile arguments (unless pushed) and I hate offending people, but the fact remains that the economy and population of the North West is much larger than that of the whole of Scotland, the population of Greater Manchester is greater than the much larger-in-area Strathclyde/Greater Glasgow. Not only is its economy greater, but it's also larger 'per capita'. The North west requires much less subsidy from central government, 'per capita', as you probably know. Manchester is in much better economic shape.

This is demonstrated pretty adequately by the fact that Glasgow Airport handles very, very few direct flights to European business destinations, because there is nowhere near the same demand as there is from Manchester and Birmingham.

(You can view this sort of stuff - international connectivity - as a direct economic barometer)

why bother even replying when complete idiots are making up shite that isnt even true...but I will anyway

1.I think you might find that those statistics include EXTREMELY poor areas aswell as very affluent areas.

2.Why shouldnt oil revenues be added to the GDP of Scotland? that is one of the main industries in the country!

3. The figures from Glasgow do NOT show the figures from ALL its wealthy suburbs, although some are included, they also include some of the most deprived areas in Europe!

4.Dont start youre bollocks about Manchester being in better economic shape, you talk shite! By the end of the year ALL of Glasgow's office developments are to be let and MUCH more office space is needed in the City.

www.glasgowifsd.com

5. are you kidding me? Glasgow is one of the best cities in Europe for business and is the most popular conference destination in Europe. And there are direct flights to Eurpoean business destinations you complete twat!

You really need to stop thinking that Manchester is the centre of the earth when its clearly not!

BTW, glasgow also has very wealthy areas just outside of the city, East Renfrewshire is an extremely affluent area that isnt included in the GDP!

And you were not pushed into this arguement...you just do not like the fact that Manchester is not as wealthy as Glasgow is!

4.Dont start youre bollocks about Manchester being in better economic shape, you talk shite! By the end of the year ALL of Glasgow's office developments are to be let and MUCH more office space is needed in the City.


I wouldn't start with the office thing mate! Lets have a decent discussion here, a nice, friendly comparison between our two great cities.

A recent report said Manchester needs upto 5 million sqft of new office space over the next few years alone, how much does Glasgow need? :)

What is Glasgows largest office scheme underway at present? Manchesters is the 2.5 million sqft office portion of the Spinningfields scheme(which is 4.5m sqft total), most of which is now complete.
So far the Royal Bank of Scotland have taken 640,000sqft. The Lord Chancellor took the 350,000sqft Civil Justice Centre. Law firm Halliwells took 120,000sqft, among others. Manc has also taken lettings from companies including the Bank of New York. What are Glasgows most notable recent lettings?

Manchester achieved rents of £34.55 at a scheme on King Street, what is Glasgows highest rent?

In recent news Barclaycard are currently looking for 90,000sqft in Manchester. Oh, and then theres the small matter of the BBC, who will need a hefty amount.

well, some of the companies that have recently moved to the IFSD are The National Australia Group, JP Morgan, AON etc and there are also rumours that Sony and TimeWarner are looking at Pacific Quay digital media campus as a UK HQ.

and the rental is an average (in the city centre) of 347-370 euros per sq m per annum (these are the only stats i could find)

102,000 sq ft was let to 02 at SkyPark and 90,000 was let to Dell. I havent a clue about any more because whyglasgow havent updated their website, but seeing as there was ~400,000 sq ft of office space vacant, and there is soon to be a shortage, then I would assume the 400,000 sq ft has been let aswell.



www.whyglasgow.com has some statistics aswell. :-)

BBC is currently building its HQ at Pacific Quay (330,000 sq ft) and SMG (scottish tv- 60,000sq ft)

Interesting stats as qouted elsewhere.......

Economic growth in the Manchester city-region is being led by the private sector, a fact that differentiates it from many other areas in the north. The scale of growth is also significant when compared with other areas of the north, with the city region generating a GVA that is almost equal to that of the cities of Leeds, Liverpool and Sheffield combined.

http://www.thenorthernway.co.uk/docs/appendices/manchester.doc

20 scrapers over 100m+ rumoured by somone (?) can't be far wrong if Manc is growing faster than both Liverpool & Leeds combined!!!

STUNNING!

Apparently the BBC need in the region of 400,000sqft in Manchester.

Manchester currently cannot meet demand for space, there is said to be as little as 25,000sqft of quality space currently available.

Did a bit of searching, found this:

http://www.kreic.com/e_pds/pds2_view.jsp?bbs_id=14502
The average rent in the London City area was US$1053, falling from 2nd to 4th. Paris, France and Moscow, Russia ranked 5th and 6th, respectively, followed by Dublin, Ireland, Hong Kong and Edinburgh and Manchester, Great Britain, filling the rest of the top ten.

Does Manchester just mean the City center? If it does I would like to see the Salford Quays demand.

Good quote there caw123 - if I'm being perfectly honest, Manchester is definetaly ahead of Glasgow in terms of office space and its high profile Tennents.

Edinburgh is the main financial city of Scotland, and at present is much further ahead than Glasgow interms of resident companies, rent prices and infrastructure. This is demonstrated best by the Royal Bank of Scotland's new central offices just outside the city centre - they redesigned a whole part of one of the main road arteries into the city just to suit the bank, built a train station near it and rerouted a lot of advanced communications technologies to run straight into it.

Edinburgh is in the lead here, definetaly over Glasgow, possibly over Manchester in terms of the high profile organisations that are based there (but probably not in office space - Manchester is of course a much bigger city).

Ross, so far, I'm a complete idiot, a complete twat, and I'm talking bollocks. I may well be mate, but you'll still find (without over-reacting) that what I said has more than a grain of truth.

(There are direct flights from Scotland to Europe, but they're notoriously inadequate)

My beef wasn't with you in the first place, and I was reacting against Be_Happy's barrage of damn statistics and attitude throughout this thread, much of which comes across as an attempt to discredit Manchester (if you read it from the beginning).

I find it extremely difficult to tolerate that, just as you do re Glasgow.

Is that ok? :cheers:

My thoughts are that Manchester will establish itself as THE media/arts capital of the UK. With the onset of the digital revolution, broadcasting departments need not be next to one another. News gathering will undoubtedly remain in London, as will finance, but it wouldn't surprise me if the movement of BBC sports to Manchester is just the start of the exodus.

As for other cities - Yorkshire might have a problem with Sheffield and Leeds competing for business - it just depends on whether professions consolidate in Leeds or move to the 'new boy' Sheffield (I say new boy because Sheffield is losing industry to the far east). Glasgow I guess would attract most business, but the professional services may well stay in Edinburgh (although tourism is one of their strongest industries).

I think Birmingham will do well as long as we establish our credentials - we are the conference capital of the UK and the professional sector is growing rapidly (Birmingha Airport is the 2nd busiest business airport in the country after Heathrow). We need to change to hi-tech industries if we are to keep our manufacturing base. We also have the advantage of having no major regional rival whereas Manhcester (Liverpool), Glasgow (Edinburgh), Leeds (Sheffield), Bristol (Cardiff) all have.

Therefore, as long as the major cities carve out their own niches on a regional, national and international basis they will all prosper. London will still suck in all the money though... ;)

Biosonic - some good points there. I don't know too much about the West Midlands economy, but I believe manufacturing industry is still important to it...(?)

Personally, I doubt that Manchester will become the media/arts capital. In some ways, the BBC move is a bit of tokenism, and central government usually arrange to dole out just enough to keep us provincials quiet.

Just one point, Birmingham Airport did claim that they were the second largest business airport, as a proportion of total passengers carried. BHX doesn't handle nearly as much charter traffic as MAN, which means that it's business traffic is higher as a percentage, although numbers of business passengers aren't.

Bit of a shame really, it was a bit of false accounting!

Lies, damn lies and statistics! Thanks Jonge :)

Basically what we are saying is that we can't trust any figures we see...

I think Manchester will do well in media - the Beeb are moving 5 live there aren't they? Plus independent television and radio will have an effect - as long as the people they want stay in Manchester then the companies will invest. Do you know what other niches Manchester will operate in?

Manufacturing is still big in Brum - our largest sector I believe (although service may have trumped that now). The last 12 months hace been sad though - the loss of MG Rover was a big morale blow (I don't think it will affect the city too much overall) and the West Midlands region has lost its crown to the South-East for its manufacturing output. Per capita though it remains well above anywhere else in the country.

But, the future is bright as long as we turn to high-technology and new technology such as biotech and nanotech. The A38 technology corridor (Lichfield/Birmingham/Worcester/Malvern) will have a huge impact.

Lies, damn lies and statistics!

We have to be really careful with statistics, because they can be (and are) usually manipulated to mean whatever anybody wants them to mean.

For example, the Manchester Evening News told us repeatedly that Manc was now Britain's third biggest city for overseas tourists. You can tell that it's right up there in the top.......I dunno, seven, because the city's full of them, but the way they arrived at this statistic is by interviewing departing foreign passengers at MAN airport and asking where they spent their last night in the UK.

Of course, loads said Manchester (surprise, surprise). Sorry to disappoint any of my fellow Mancs, but this is apparently true

Manchester's had a bit of a head start with the media, having been home to a large BBC centre, and ITV franchise, and having been the other national (English) publishing centre until the late 80s. Nowadays only the Guardian and Sport(!) are published here.

In answer to your question, Manchester will be competing with Birmingham and everywhere else for biotech industries and IT/knowledge based industries. The chemical industry is also hugely important to the NW too, as is aerospace, along with the usual suspects like education, health, financial and professional services.

The Republic will go from strength to strength

Not far enough for my liking! Several thousand miles will do. ;)

Manufacturing is still big in Brum - our largest sector I believe (although service may have trumped that now). .
service is far bigger than manufacturing. The impoertance of manufacturing to the West Midlands id=s constantly overrated.