# in youre eyes , what cities are hypercities ?



## Klas (May 16, 2005)

i want to know what cities are hypercities in your eyes ? hypercities are over megacities and must have over 20 million inhabitants ! what you think about the term hypercities !? i think the only "hypercities" are NYC Sao Paulo , Mexico City , Tokyo and Seoul ! what u think about it ?


----------



## schmidt (Dec 5, 2002)

^^ I think you could add Los Angeles to that list too, it's HUGE and well, it has almost 20 million inhabitants as well.


----------



## Audiomuse (Dec 20, 2005)

1 Tokyo
2Seoul
3NYC
4Sao Paulo
5Shanghai
6 Hong Kong
7 Toronto
8L.A.
I think hypercities are cities who are energetic, modern, vibrant, have a lot of people, lot of shopping /nightlife, and are well known around the world.


----------



## dhuwman (Oct 6, 2005)

Well, if the definition of a hypercity is solely based on population, then there are 4 or 5 hypercities: Tokyo, Mexico City, Seoul, New York, and maybe Sao Paulo.


----------



## Metropolitan (Sep 21, 2004)

Why would you call this "hypercities" and not "gigacities" ? Well, anyway, all those words are rather empty to me.


----------



## legal (Aug 19, 2003)

IMO, the hypercities are:

Tokyo, Sao Paulo and NY


----------



## samba_man (Dec 26, 2004)

IMO, the hypercities are four:

Tokyo,Mexico city, São Paulo and NY !


----------



## Mr Bricks (May 6, 2005)

macon4ever said:


> 1 Tokyo
> 2Seoul
> 3NYC
> 4Sao Paulo
> ...


Toronto???


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

Tokyo is the only "hypercity" in my opinion.


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

Tokyo
Mexico
New York
Los Angeles
Seoul
Sao Paolo
Rio de Janeiro
Shanghai
Lagos
London


----------



## Mr Bricks (May 6, 2005)

wjfox2002 said:


> Tokyo is the only "hypercity" in my opinion.


I agree.


----------



## micro (Mar 13, 2005)

macon4ever said:


> 1 Tokyo
> 2Seoul
> 3NYC
> 4Sao Paulo
> ...


I would replace Shanghai with London in your list. (It's not only the sheer number of residents that makes a city "hyper" IMO).


----------



## grachtengordeldier (Mar 7, 2006)

Emmer Compascuum!


----------



## Marcanadian (May 7, 2005)

SuomiPoika said:


> Toronto???


He said "I think hypercities are cities who are energetic, modern, vibrant, have a lot of people, lot of shopping /nightlife, and are well known around the world."

Thats Toronto to me.

But anyway Out of the Top 3.
Tokyo
NYC
Sao Paulo


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

New York
Tokyo
Seoul


----------



## JDRS (Feb 8, 2004)

Yes I agree in that Tokyo is the only hypercity. It's sheer size advocates this!


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

Tokyo is the only hypercity. It is the only urbanized area in the World with over 20 million. New York will be a hypercity in 2014.


----------



## LordMandeep (Apr 10, 2006)

Toronto is a hyperpcity comapred to the other Canadian cities.


----------



## Skybean (Jun 16, 2004)

What about Mexico City?


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

IMO Tokyo (or more accurately Kanto region) is the only city that qualifies as Hypercity.


----------



## Jue (Mar 28, 2003)

I wouldn't consider Shanghai a hypercity, and its small geographical area doesn't help either.


----------



## spyguy (Apr 16, 2005)

Mumbai, Delhi?


----------



## Sahil12345 (Apr 2, 2006)

Lol, mega cities, hyper cities, giga cities, gama cities, beta cities, same shit..

Based on population- 
NYC, Sao Paulo, Seoul, Tokyo, LA, Mumbai (place has a ginormous population, though thats honestly not a good thing), London


----------



## ChicagoSkyline (Feb 24, 2005)

Well, don't know the word hypercities, but if you say that is like mega cities then I would say Tokyo-Osaka-Kyoto-Nagoya, Sao Paulo, NYC, HK-Shengzen are quite hyper!


----------



## Kwame (Nov 18, 2005)

in my eyes i see tokyo when i hear the word "hypercity"


----------



## Daniel_Portugal (Sep 24, 2005)

Ultra City: Tokyo (more than 30 million in an urbanized area)

Hyper Cities: São Paulo, New York, Mexico City, Seoul (more than 20 million)

Mega Cities: (more than 10 million)

Big Cities: (more than 1 million)

Medium Cities: (more than 50.000)

Small Cities: (less than 50.000)

 complete description :hilarious lolol


----------



## JBOB (Aug 26, 2005)

:wtf: :fiddle: :dance:


----------



## urban_phx (Apr 13, 2006)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population 

theres a list of the 100 largest metro populations in the world. Theres quite a few really big cities that you never hear about.


----------



## dhuwman (Oct 6, 2005)

urban_phx said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population
> 
> theres a list of the 100 largest metro populations in the world. Theres quite a few really big cities that you never hear about.


I think that source is weird.
For Tokyo and many Indian cities for instance, entire metropolitan areas are counted whereas cities like Riyadh and Seoul, only the city proper are counted. 
Likewise for cities like NY and Jakarta, only the urbanized area is counted where for cities like Shanghai or Beijing, the entire municipality is counted in. Chinese municipalities, AFAIK, include huge amount of rural area.

Although still not perfect, I find this a more realiable source.


----------



## Mosaic (Feb 18, 2005)

wjfox2002 said:


> Tokyo is the only "hypercity" in my opinion.


What is the scale of this pic?


----------



## Mosaic (Feb 18, 2005)

Sen said:


> IMO Tokyo (or more accurately Kanto region) is the only city that qualifies as Hypercity.


I quite agree!!


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

HK is definitely not a gigacity nor a megacity. It only has around 7 million people. 

Anyway, I prefer the term gigacities over hypercities. And to me, the only ones deserving of this term are Tokyo, Mexico City, Sao Paulo and to some extent, New York.


----------



## The Cebuano Exultor (Aug 1, 2005)

*Hypercities or Gigacities or Megacities...whatever you call them...*

For me the ultimate city would have to be Tokyo. Tokyo being a completely different league as compared to other urban human settlement. 

In my opinion these are the most powerful metro/urban economies in the world:
1. Tokyo-Yokohama-Kawasaki-Kanagawa-Chiba-Ibaraki-Saitama (Kanto Plain Region)
2. New York (Tri-State Area)
3. Los Angeles (Southland)
4. Osaka-Kyoto-Kobe (Kansai Region)
5. London
6. Paris
7. Seoul (Metro Seoul)
8. Chicago (Chicagoland)

Again, this is just based from my gut feeling. Although, I am definitely sure about Tokyo's and New York's places on the list.  

Feel free to re-arrange.


----------



## The Cebuano Exultor (Aug 1, 2005)

*For me...*

For me a true Ultra-City is one that not only has a huge population but also equally wealthy as well as having a huge overall integrated-infrastructure.

So, cities like: Mumbai, New Delhi, Kolkata, Dhaka, Lagos and Karachi do not fit to be considered as a *true ultra-city*.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

How about Mexico City? MC is huge!!


----------



## The Cebuano Exultor (Aug 1, 2005)

*Can someone...anyone...*

Can someone...anyone...help me identify what places the megalopolises of Mexico City, Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires and Sao Paulo fall on the list. Many thanks.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Mexico City is ranked the 2nd most populous city in the world.


----------



## The Cebuano Exultor (Aug 1, 2005)

*@ WANCH about Mexico City*

Mexico City might be large in terms of population (probably the world's 2nd largest metropolitan area) but it lacks the sprawl, the wealth, and the infrastructure of the afformentioned megalopolises. Hell, Sao Paulo seems to be even bigger than Mexico City based from pictures. This is, of coarse, in overall terms...meaning: sprawl, population size, infrastructure, wealth, or even the skyline are taken as the gauges.


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

Metropolitan said:


> Why would you call this "hypercities" and not "gigacities" ? Well, anyway, all those words are rather empty to me.


I agree, plus Gigacities sounds better than hypercities.


----------



## The Cebuano Exultor (Aug 1, 2005)

Here's how I ranked it. Based from the largest metropolitan areas in terms of population:

Largest Metropiltan Areas in terms of Population:
1. Tokyo-Yokohama-Kawasaki-Kanagawa-Chiba-Ibaraki-Saitama (Kanto Plain Region) 36 million
2. Mexico City 23 million
3. Metro Seoul 22.9 million 
4. New York (Tri-State Area) 22 million
5. Sao Paulo 20 million

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And based from the list of the world's largest metropolitan economies:

Largest Metropiltan Areas in terms of Economy:
1. Tokyo-Yokohama-Kawasaki-Kanagawa-Chiba-Ibaraki-Saitama (Kanto Plain Region) US$ 2 trillion (as of the latest statistics--not the US$ 1.315 trillion that Wikipedia posted)
2. New York (Tri-States Area) US$ 1.085 trillion for 2004
3. Los Angeles (Southland) US$ 735 billion for 2004
4. Osaka-Kyoto-Kobe (Kansai Region) US$ 577 billion for 2003


...I sort of averaged it based on my gut feeling and I came out with the list above.


----------



## Jue (Mar 28, 2003)

WANCH said:


> To me, hypercities are more fast paced cities where almost everyone is in a rat race. Examples of these would be Hong Kong, Tokyo and New York


By that measure, a bunch of large Chinese cities would count. That's just part of the culture there.  I say the standard includes large size, cosmopolitan culture, being a business hub, and having leading transport infrastructure.


----------



## The Cebuano Exultor (Aug 1, 2005)

*@unoh*

Really, I've been to Seoul and Tokyo but it seems that there are some aspects which make Seoul seem similar in size with Tokyo (i.e. the countless uniformly-designed midrise apartments that sprawl as far as the eye can see via the observation deck of the Seoul Tower).


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Jue said:


> By that measure, a bunch of large Chinese cities would count. That's just part of the culture there.  I say the standard includes large size, cosmopolitan culture, being a business hub, and having leading transport infrastructure.


True. Well cities like Shanghai can be an example of that but it's not as fast as HK.


----------



## Jue (Mar 28, 2003)

Here is some elaboration:

1. Large size
The city must have enough people to carry weight.

2. Cosmopolitan culture
This does not mean racial diversity, but rather the presence of many cultural influences.

3. Business importance
The city must be a world-class hub of international commerce, usually the continental or at least regional headquarters for many entities.

4. Transport infrastructure
If a city is indeed important enough, everybody should want to go to it, and everything should lead to it: flights, shipping lanes, highways, railways, etc. A large city without leading transport networks is simply a large city, no more.

And Shanghai is just as fast as HK, unfortunately on the days when I wish otherwise.


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

The Cebuano Exultor said:


> Wow, will you look at the agp between Sao Paulo and Mexico City! I thought Mexico City was wealthier than Sao Paulo considering the fact that it is the only megacity in Mexico as opposed to Sao Paulo which is one of two megacities (other one would be Rio de Janeiro).
> 
> 
> World's Largest Economies (GDP Nominal):
> ...


I made a mistake I used PPP for Sao Paulo and Nominal for Mexico City.
I thought I was using PPP for both but some sources are using PPP, and some are still using nominal and don't make a note. 

PPP
Sao Paulo-$350 billion
Mexico City-$390 billion

Nominal
Sao Paulo-$160 billion
Mexico City-$250 billion

Note: at PPP Brazil's economy is much larger than Mexico's.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Jue said:


> Here is some elaboration:
> 
> 1. Large size
> The city must have enough people to carry weight.
> ...


HK is one of those that best fits that description. Except for the large size but the city is vertical enough to house that population.


----------



## The Cebuano Exultor (Aug 1, 2005)

*@ polako*

Ok. Thanks polako.  So Mexico City is, indeed, larger than Sao Paulo in economic size as well as population. Infrastructure-wise, I still think Sao Paulo is more advantaged due to its labyrinth of high-rises. It could lose to Mexico City's subway, commuter rail and road infrastructure networks, though.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

The Cebuano Exultor said:


> Ok. Thanks polako.  So Mexico City is, indeed, larger than Sao Paulo in economic size as well as population. Infrastructure-wise, I still think Sao Paulo is more advantaged due to its labyrinth of high-rises. It could lose to Mexico City's subway, commuter rail and road infrastructure networks, though.


Sao Paulo also has an impressive metro network. But Mexico City's is older and cheaper.


----------



## dhuwman (Oct 6, 2005)

I'm not saying Mexico D.F. is the best at all, but I think Mexico City is really underestimated.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

dhuwman said:


> I'm not saying Mexico D.F. is the best at all, but I think Mexico City is really underestimated.


More underrated but we can't deny the fact that Mexico City is one of the largest in the world.


----------



## elkram (Apr 1, 2006)

Vancouver, coz it approved Starbucks' setting up shops kitty-corner to each other at their main intersection along their retail strip in town there.

Cheers,
Chris


----------



## Mosaic (Feb 18, 2005)

unoh said:


> beijing is political city,
> shanghai is ecomomic city.???


yep, that might be true as Shanghai is China's economic powerhouse.


----------



## Mosaic (Feb 18, 2005)

WANCH said:


> Shanghai is supposed to be the largest city in The Mainland.
> 
> As for Tokyo, it's large in both area and population though New York's metro area is par with Tokyo.


I agree with you totally. :cheers:


----------



## Mosaic (Feb 18, 2005)

WANCH said:


> To me, hypercities are more fast paced cities where almost everyone is in a rat race. Examples of these would be Hong Kong, Tokyo and New York


among those three, Tokyo seems to be fastest move as everyone walks really fast even in Kimono. :lol:


----------



## Mosaic (Feb 18, 2005)

elkram said:


> Vancouver, coz it approved Starbucks' setting up shops kitty-corner to each other at their main intersection along their retail strip in town there.
> 
> Cheers,
> Chris


Oh!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Mosaic said:


> among those three, Tokyo seems to be fastest move as everyone walks really fast even in Kimono. :lol:


Between HK and Tokyo, HK is much faster


----------



## Mosaic (Feb 18, 2005)

WANCH said:


> Between HK and Tokyo, HK is much faster


Really?, that means everyone in HK is almost being running-stage,lol :lol:


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Mosaic said:


> Really?, that means everyone in HK is almost being running-stage,lol :lol:


Almost everyone including myself  You'll feel it especially if you're in busy areas like Central, Mongkok or Causeway Bay.

How about this, please check out this video 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDHk-kw9cU0


----------



## Mosaic (Feb 18, 2005)

^^^^Thanks, Wanch. This URL is really interesting,lol. :lol:


----------



## Mosaic (Feb 18, 2005)

WANCH said:


> Almost everyone including myself  You'll feel it especially if you're in busy areas like Central, Mongkok or Causeway Bay.
> 
> How about this, please check out this video
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDHk-kw9cU0


Wanch, I notice that every shopping streets like in Mongkok, central and Causeway Bay, there are people flooding on the street, I was wondering if those streets are actually walking streets or they are just so crowded that vehicles can't pass?


----------



## Skabbymuff (Mar 4, 2006)

^ yes, its very different isnt it. shocking density.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

SuomiPoika said:


> The population of HK is too small to make it a hypercity.


HK's population isn't that large to be a megalopolis. But defining my version of hypercities which are vibrant cities, yes HK is among them.

If you look at San Francisco (city proper), it's not even a metropolis since it's population is less than 1 million but it's among the most vibrant cities in the west coast.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

Klas said:


> i want to know what cities are hypercities in your eyes ? hypercities are over megacities and must have over 20 million inhabitants ! what you think about the term hypercities !? i think the only "hypercities" are NYC Sao Paulo , Mexico City , Tokyo and Seoul ! what u think about it ?


Wasn't the intent of the thread to discuss *large* cities with *huge* populations?


----------



## koolkid (Apr 17, 2006)

dhuwman said:


> I'm not saying Mexico D.F. is the best at all, but I think Mexico City is really underestimated.


I visited MC last week for the first time and I agree that it is truly underestimated. It is quite wealthy and huge that even the city its self is growing up the mountains! The metro is also supper crowded but I think Tokyo would be in 1st place.
: )


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

koolkid said:


> I visited MC last week for the first time and I agree that it is truly underestimated. It is quite wealthy and huge that even the city its self is growing up the mountains! The metro is also supper crowded but I think Tokyo would be in 1st place.
> : )


Mexico City has already been big. Even when it was still Tenochitlan when Cortez was surprised to see the huge population of this city.


----------



## Spooky873 (Mar 2, 2005)

well, im looking for the opinions of our chinese counterparts. its obvious that your country has the most people in the world, at 1.6 billion and counting i believe. are you impressed with cities around the world that are very similar to yours?

what cities in particular?


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Spooky873 said:


> well, im looking for the opinions of our chinese counterparts. its obvious that your country has the most people in the world, at 1.6 billion and counting i believe. are you impressed with cities around the world that are very similar to yours?
> 
> what cities in particular?


I'm not Chinese but I live in a Chinese city. Anyway, Mainland cities are populous especially Shanghai and Beijing. But cities like Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Chongqing or Dalian are rising as well.


----------



## Spooky873 (Mar 2, 2005)

no i mean cities around the world, not chinese. like tokyo, nyc, london, paris, los angeles, chicago, sao paolo, toronto....


----------



## null (Dec 11, 2002)

^they are better than our mega cities


----------



## Spooky873 (Mar 2, 2005)

how so?


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

Spooky873 said:


> well, im looking for the opinions of our chinese counterparts. its obvious that your country has the most people in the world, at 1.6 billion and counting i believe. are you impressed with cities around the world that are very similar to yours?
> 
> what cities in particular?


I have been to a number of cities in mainland China and in the West (Europe & North America) in the past year. Chinese cities have embarked on a huge modernization and infrastructure building spree. So the airports, railways, and roads are all new compared to cities in the West. In fact, American cities in particular should be very impressed with the infrastructure in many Chinese cities. Meanwhile, European cities will always have the historical charm, whereas there is more contrast in China as old buildings are replaced with new skyscrapers, often with controversy.

I'd think the West would be very impressed with how much change has occurred in China over the past decade.


----------



## XCRunner (Nov 19, 2005)

If the term "hypercity" is defined numerically, then what do we need this thread for? Besided, so many cities have been mentioned now that practically no ground has been made thus rendering this entire thread pointless


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

hkskyline said:


> I have been to a number of cities in mainland China and in the West (Europe & North America) in the past year. Chinese cities have embarked on a huge modernization and infrastructure building spree. So the airports, railways, and roads are all new compared to cities in the West. In fact, American cities in particular should be very impressed with the infrastructure in many Chinese cities. Meanwhile, European cities will always have the historical charm, whereas there is more contrast in China as old buildings are replaced with new skyscrapers, often with controversy.
> 
> I'd think the West would be very impressed with how much change has occurred in China over the past decade.


As with European cities they have it's historical charm but they have ultramodern infrastructure especially in transportation. In fact I sometimes find European cities more modern than most American cities.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

WANCH said:


> As with European cities they have it's historical charm but they have ultramodern infrastructure especially in transportation. In fact I sometimes find European cities more modern than most American cities.


European transit systems at the core are very old. The London Underground and Paris Metro are very old systems. Even the tram systems throughout many European cities are decades old. The difference is that they have maintained their infrastructure, such as putting new tramcars on the tracks, and added some renovations to the old subway stations.

American cities are not transit-oriented, yet they are perfectly capable of having modern facilities. They do, in fact, but just not in the same scope as in Europe.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

hkskyline said:


> European transit systems at the core are very old. The London Underground and Paris Metro are very old systems. Even the tram systems throughout many European cities are decades old. The difference is that they have maintained their infrastructure, such as putting new tramcars on the tracks, and added some renovations to the old subway stations.
> 
> American cities are not transit-oriented, yet they are perfectly capable of having modern facilities. They do, in fact, but just not in the same scope as in Europe.


That's because of car culture in The US. Most average Americans prefer buying a car than commuting. But alot of US cities are improving it's public transportation.


----------



## unoh (Aug 13, 2005)

In my opinion,

Tokyo and New York are the biggest hypercities and followed by Hong Kong and Seoul, Los Angeles...


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

Hong Kong is not really a large city at all. The population is only 7 million.


----------



## unoh (Aug 13, 2005)

hkskyline said:


> Hong Kong is not really a large city at all. The population is only 7 million.


To be important is floating population and business people, not settled population..
HK is important business city and so many people from all of world come into there...

The settled population of 7 million never be small.....


----------



## smartlake (Jul 11, 2004)

Well, I think that they hypercities are: NYC, Tokyo, Seoul, Mexico City, those Brazilian ones, LA, Mumbai, Shanghai, HK. That is it.


----------



## koolkid (Apr 17, 2006)

If Hong Kong can be a hypercity then Buenos Aires should be as well. It has over 12 million people in its mero area and is a pretty prosperous city.


----------



## dhuwman (Oct 6, 2005)

AFAIK, UK's industry is pretty much concentrated around banking, insurance, petroleum, etc. They may have bigger economic power, but their brand values are much smaller than manufacturing/consumer goods brands.


----------



## whitefordj (Feb 18, 2006)

Calgary is an up and coming hyper city in many respects. the office vacancy is a world beating 1.2%, or likely less, as it drops every other day it seems. you can bet on more than one supertall to come of this.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

whitefordj said:


> Calgary is an up and coming hyper city in many respects. the office vacancy is a world beating 1.2%, or likely less, as it drops every other day it seems. you can bet on more than one supertall to come of this.


But it's still a medium sized city by world standards.


----------



## drmadham (Oct 1, 2004)

cities with too much caffeine...ha..ha...damn im sleepy


----------



## whitefordj (Feb 18, 2006)

I didnt know that size was a factor. when it comes to push and shove Calgary has got it going on and is a hypercity by any standerd. With your thinking Dubia would not be a hypercity as well. It is well under 2 million metro pop. The fact that Calgary is a small City: 1.1 million, and not a medium size City makes it even more so. Dubai and Calgary are the real examples of the term "Hypercity", because of the amount of dollars of investment per population. the amount of cash flying around alberta right now is second to none. Remember oil is the worlds most valuble comodity and alberta has by far the most of it. Calgary's oil barons are in contole of this oil. consturcton will amaze in the very short future be sure of that. size is only a footnote in all of this. It is no Hong Kong that is for sure, but It is well on its way to becoming one of the most influential Cities in the world. when you come looking for Oil you will find your self landing in Calgary. thats where it is. over 8 trillion brls of it. that says everything in todays economic reality. all of todays industy depends on oil, even Hong Kongs. 
Ps sorry my spelling is the craps


----------



## EtherealMist (Jul 26, 2005)

WTF is a hyper city anyway? Is there a population requirement?


----------



## dhuwman (Oct 6, 2005)

EtherealMist said:


> WTF is a hyper city anyway? Is there a population requirement?


I think the thread creator meant it by cities having more than 20 mil population in the metro.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

dhuwman said:


> I think the thread creator meant it by cities having more than 20 mil population in the metro.


term itself doesn't fit the definition. Megacities would be better or Gigacities.


----------



## Klas (May 16, 2005)

WANCH said:


> term itself doesn't fit the definition. Megacities would be better or Gigacities.


stop :sleepy: megacities is the definition of cities with more than 10 million inhabitans (UN defination :more than 8 million inhabitans ) , hypercities are cities with more then 20 million inhabitans in agglo or metro , then comes "gigacities" and Supergigacities" and and and .... (10 millions more 10 millions more .......)


----------



## Joey313 (May 2, 2006)

the hyper city to me would probably be tokyo


----------



## whitefordj (Feb 18, 2006)

dhuwman said:


> I think the thread creator meant it by cities having more than 20 mil population in the metro.


ok then that leavs what 4 cities in the whole world. why then did he ask what was our idea on this if only a city over 20million could be included in the discusion? too bad because that is just borring. i just dont see how the word hyper has anything to do with the number 20 million, or how they could be conected. I can however see the conection between a city with a booming economy and growing skyline overflowing with wealth being termed hyper. but like you said it is yet anouther tread reserved only for them cities that have more than 20 million people. has nothing to do with a cities growing power or abilities at all i guess. so i reluctently will resign the city of Calgary, a true, "hyper city" from this discusion. :goodbye:


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Tokyo is the only city that deserves it's term since the population of it's metro area is over 30 million. But I think in the future, Shanghai may overtake Tokyo again.


----------



## Kiss the Rain (Apr 2, 2006)

Agree absolutely, at the current growth rate and the huge population, shanghai can easily do just that, and beijings not far behind neither, the population difference between the two city is actually very small and it's the capital after all.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Kiss the Rain said:


> Agree absolutely, at the current growth rate and the huge population, shanghai can easily do just that, and beijings not far behind neither, the population difference between the two city is actually very small and it's the capital after all.


Shanghai is booming and I'm sure alot a large population of Mainland Chinese will move there. 

Besides Shanghai and Beijing, I think The Pearl River Delta region is also facing a population growth as well.


----------



## globill (Dec 4, 2005)

Tokyo and Seoul, both of which to me (along with NYC) arre true hypercities.

However, Seoul is more densely built up, maybe cause there are no earthquakes in korea compared to Japan.

Tokyo proper has about 12,000,000 people in an area of 2,187 square kilometers.
Seoul proper has around 11,000,000 people in an area of 607 square kilomaters. 


In many ways Seoul is more crowded, dense, hectic and vibrant than Tokyo.

Seoul is hemmed in by numerous mountains, creating massive Manhattan level densities even in outlying "sub"urban areas , whereas even in central districts of certain Tokyo wards, you can still find small old single family houses tucked away on side alleys. This is less common in Seoul because of the density. 

It would be interesting to see how big Seoul would have grown if North and South never split in two and had the Korean war never happened. My guess is that it's metro population would have exceeded 30,000,000 by now, in an area much smaller than metro Tokyo, just a guess.

And if ever there is unification with freedom of movement etc., Seoul could easily add another 5 plus million people.


----------



## EtherealMist (Jul 26, 2005)

^^ isnt tokyo just a massive conglomeration of once small villages?


----------



## bayviews (Mar 3, 2006)

EtherealMist said:


> ^^ isnt tokyo just a massive conglomeration of once small villages?


To a large degree that's true. Tokyo's neighborhoods seem very distinctive & tight-knit. Still like small towns. But that's also the case with many of the what have become the largest megacities. Even moreso in the less developed countries.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

bayviews said:


> To a large degree that's true. Tokyo's neighborhoods seem very distinctive & tight-knit. Still like small towns. But that's also the case with many of the what have become the largest megacities. Even moreso in the less developed countries.


Isn't that the same with Los Angeles? Ok, LA is not a hypercity but it has one of the largest metropolitan areas in The United States.


----------



## Wallbanger (Mar 8, 2005)

If there are only like 5 Hypercities, then this has to be the stupidest thread ever. Because if there are only 5, then everyone will be posting the same 5 over and over and over again. 
What a waste of a thread. 
I think Hypercities should be cities with a lot of vibrancy, people, shopping, nightlife, and just wild, hence the term HYPERcity. Thats a better deffinition in my opinion. 
If you wanted the other def, as in saying Hypercities are cities over 20 million, thats like starting a thread saying LIST YOUR FAVOURITE ULTRA CITY! and everyone would just post Tokyo over and over. 

Anyway....
My Deffinitions of HyperCities would be . -
1. Tokyo
2. New York City
3. Rio DeJeniro
4. London
5. Los Angeles 
6. Paris
7. Miami
8. Shanghai
9. Bangkok
10. Chicago
11. Hong Kong 
12. Toronto 
13. Beijing 
14. Sydney
15. Montreal


----------



## bayviews (Mar 3, 2006)

WANCH said:


> Isn't that the same with Los Angeles? Ok, LA is not a hypercity but it has one of the largest metropolitan areas in The United States.


Very true! 

Somebody once called LA something like a collection of suburbs in search of a city. 

First time entered LA, saw the sign on the freeway that said: welcome to the city of LA population 2.5 million or whatever it was then. But there was nothing but suburban-looking single family houses, car dealerships, parking lots, drive-ins, hamburger & taco stands, etc! 

Very disappointing as I was looking forward to entering a big city of millions. But all I saw were what looked like suburbs & villages. And that's what it looked for almost the whole 20 mile ride into "downtown", which didn't look like one. 

Since then, LA's become much more of a city in terms of having lots more hi-rises & many, many apartment complexes, & lots more towers downtown. But it is still very decentralized with lots of outlying downtowns. 

My first impressions of Tokyo were very similar. Tokyo is much higher density city but really just a collection of largely low-rise wooden neighborhoods, with many separate, decentralized downtowns often located around the railway & subway junctions. 

Found HK to be very different, very dense, centralized, built up. But Bangkok, found that very decentralized like LA. Jakarta, Manila, very decentralized. So too Mexico City, Sao Paulo, etc. 

Collections of villages!


----------



## Chilenofuturista (May 24, 2005)

Klas said:


> i want to know what cities are hypercities in your eyes ? hypercities are over megacities and must have over 20 million inhabitants ! what you think about the term hypercities !? i think the only "hypercities" are NYC Sao Paulo , Mexico City , Tokyo and Seoul ! what u think about it ?


There are a few in the world.



I am also interested in knowing which is the biggest megalopolis in the world...


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Wallbanger said:


> If there are only like 5 Hypercities, then this has to be the stupidest thread ever. Because if there are only 5, then everyone will be posting the same 5 over and over and over again.
> What a waste of a thread.
> I think Hypercities should be cities with a lot of vibrancy, people, shopping, nightlife, and just wild, hence the term HYPERcity. Thats a better deffinition in my opinion.
> If you wanted the other def, as in saying Hypercities are cities over 20 million, thats like starting a thread saying LIST YOUR FAVOURITE ULTRA CITY! and everyone would just post Tokyo over and over.
> ...


You're forgetting Mexico City


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

bayviews said:


> Very true!
> 
> Somebody once called LA something like a collection of suburbs in search of a city.
> 
> ...


Yes Manila is very decentralized since the metro area has alot of cities and CBDS. But Manila still has one main CBD which is Makati. 

As for HK, it's becoming a bit decentralized since alot of new CBDs are sprouting up like Union Square or Vision City in Tsuen Wan. And not all of the city's business and financial activities is happening in Central.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

WANCH said:


> Shanghai is booming and I'm sure alot a large population of Mainland Chinese will move there.
> 
> Besides Shanghai and Beijing, I think The Pearl River Delta region is also facing a population growth as well.


Wrong. China has migration controls in place to ensure the peasants won't flood the cities, so Shanghai and Beijing are not going to grow into astronomical hypercities. That will spell a disaster for the social infrastructure and the government is not going to let that happen.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

hkskyline said:


> Wrong. China has migration controls in place to ensure the peasants won't flood the cities, so Shanghai and Beijing are not going to grow into astronomical hypercities. That will spell a disaster for the social infrastructure and the government is not going to let that happen.


If that's the case with both Shanghai or Beijing then it would be the same with other major Mainland cities like Guangzhou, Shenzhen or Chongqing.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

WANCH said:


> If that's the case with both Shanghai or Beijing then it would be the same with other major Mainland cities like Guangzhou, Shenzhen or Chongqing.


There are restrictions in place to control migration from rural to urban areas in general. Shanghai, Beijing, and other cities along the east coast are far more prone since they are more affluent, while it is less of a problem for interior cities (although it still is a problem).


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

hkskyline said:


> There are restrictions in place to control migration from rural to urban areas in general. Shanghai, Beijing, and other cities along the east coast are far more prone since they are more affluent, while it is less of a problem for interior cities (although it still is a problem).


If that's the case than Shanghai or any other Chinese city won't reach or exceed Tokyo's population.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

WANCH said:


> If that's the case than Shanghai or any other Chinese city won't reach or exceed Tokyo's population.


That's the whole point. Shanghai will not grow to Tokyo's size. The nearest contender is Chongqing, which I have mentioned earlier already.


----------



## Klas (May 16, 2005)

*@all*

Hypercities for me are only cities with more than 20 milllion inhabitans

-cities with an international airport with hub 
-cities with an CBD 
-cities with a not culture and nightlife

So the only hpercities or so callled metacities are 1.) Tokyo 2.) NYC 3.) Soul
4.) Sao Paulo


----------



## Kenwen (May 1, 2005)

hkskyline said:


> That's the whole point. Shanghai will not grow to Tokyo's size. The nearest contender is Chongqing, which I have mentioned earlier already.


No, u r wrong, the policy is relaxing, the governemnt just tryin 2 control the pase of the movement, by 2010, shanghai will have 25 mil, thats the government prediction, dont u see big cities in china are keep building new areas and expanding the cities like monsters, they r building those for the new comers, maybe in a few yrs the governemnt will abolish the laws prevent rural to city...........this law was implemented in the 1950s, but shanghai still grow from afew million to todays 20mil, eventough this law will never abolish, the speed of urbanization will be as slow as today but whouldnt prevent city growing, if the cities doesnt grow just because this law, can u explain the construction boom of china now to me.............big cities build more surburbs...small cities merge together, is happening all the time now. I think by 2015 shanghai would have similar pop to tokyo imo or maybe even bigger!!china is unpredictable. and by 2010 the urban citizens will be 50% of the whole country's population, the urbanization of china is really fast which is increase by 1% every yr!!!! And that explain why the chinese cities grow so fast now.......so shanghai will be growing very fast and is already happening, i can bet 1 trillion in it.


----------



## Kenwen (May 1, 2005)

China have 1.3 billion people, if cities cant grow as big as tokyo, than there will be tons of 20mil cities, by 2010 650millon people will be living in the cities, i think financial centers like beijing shanghai guangzhou will keep growing until China reach the stage of todays japan,uk us........well thats ages...by then i think shanghai should at least has 40mil


----------



## Yörch1 (Oct 31, 2006)

A few pics of Mexico City... A city I think it's quite underrated these days.

Almost 22 million people with it Metropolitan Area...


----------



## Sideshow_Bob (Jan 14, 2005)

/\ It looks big.
But also like a big urban mess without any visible character. Dull.


----------



## Yörch1 (Oct 31, 2006)

Yes, maybe you're right. Mexico City should have (or people should choose) one sector that identifies the city as Manhattan works for NYC.


----------



## daniel220776 (Nov 14, 2004)

It seems that the criteria to choose the size of the cities is somehow something like this:

1 person of a poor country= 1/3 a person
1 person of a developing country= 1/2 a person
1 person of a developed country= 2 people

So a city of 10 million people in a developing country will be equally important to a city with 2,5 million people in a developed one. By these standards Mexico City or Sao Paulo are as important as Toronto, Madrid or Houston.

Call me old fashion, but I grew up thinking one person equals one person everywhere.


----------



## Shanghai City (Jan 22, 2006)

Hypercities must have this conditions (in my opinion):
- min 20 mil
- they must booming or have a high GDP
- good infrastructure
- Int Airport
- MTR system

so this cities are "hypercities":
Shanghai
Tokyo
New York
maybe Seoul

future:
Beijing
Jakarta


----------



## tocoto (Jan 18, 2003)

Shanghai City said:


> Hypercities must have this conditions (in my opinion):
> - min 20 mil
> - they must booming or have a high GDP
> - good infrastructure
> ...



Why have population as the most important aspect of your 5 criteria? If you go by large GDP for example then Boston and San Franciso (each metro pop in 2005 ~7.5M) are far ahead of some cities with 20 Mil residents). My point is a large, highly active and important city is not defined first and forememost by population. 

I also agree that the pop number stated for Toronto at 7.8M is about 2.5M too high. There is no official Canadian census number that puts it at that level. However, that doesn't mean it can't be a "hypercity", whatever that means.


----------



## Minato ku (Aug 9, 2005)

Hyper city by me. :lol: 
Population (+ 15 millions )

Tokyo
Seoul
Mexico City 
New York City 
São Paulo
Mumbai 

GDP (+ 500 billion $)

Tokyo 
New York
L.A
Osaka
Paris
London

Good infrastructure (not in order )

London
Moscow
New York
Osaka
Paris
Seoul
Tokyo

*Hypercities *
3 New York, Tokyo
2 London, Paris, Seoul


----------



## Tubeman (Sep 12, 2002)

Stop digging up ancient threads please


----------

