Pure Michigan: Detroit

**begingri** · May-26-11, 11:25 PM

I've been seeing a lot of Grand Rapids Pure Michigan commercials on TV, and I did some investigation. I found that Grand Rapids has both a TV and radio ad, while Detroit only has a radio ad.

Grand Rapids TV ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RptTZjUS14
Grand Rapids radio ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLo7lq-26zM

Detroit radio ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLmUcWjW2Zw

I could have missed it, but I did not see a TV ad for Detroit.

Does anyone else find it a little ridiculous that Grand Rapids is being promoted more heavily than Detroit as a tourist destination? I know Detroit doesn't have the greatest reputation, but I still feel like it's worth promoting. I feel that outside of our state's "natural beauty", Detroit should be the largest tourist destination in the state.

I saw an Illinois TV ad and it promoted both Chicago and Illinois' "natural beauty". Note that it didn't promote Aurora, which is Illinois' second most populous city.

Grand Rapids is a great city. I don't want to take anything away from them. But I think overall, Detroit [[and by extension, Metro Detroit) has more to offer as a tourist destination.

Thoughts?

**begingri** · May-26-11, 11:28 PM

More food for thought:

Tom Walsh: State tourism spending soars

[S]pending by out-of-state leisure visitors surpassing that of in-state Michigan travelers for the first time. The narrow margin: $6.37 billion to $6.25 billion.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...=2011105250406

**BrushStart** · May-26-11, 11:41 PM

I have nothing but love for Grand Rapids. They are pulling together and doing a lot of things right. I think Detroit can actually learn something from its little brother. That said, I think a Detroit video is in order.

In regards to Grand Rapids, if you haven't seen this, YOU MUST!

**Swimmaven** · May-27-11, 02:32 AM

That's a compelling video!

I love the Pure Michigan ads. It makes Michigan look so romantic. Makes me homesick for all the trees, the light that has a green cast to it and the ruralness [[guess that's an urban word).

lilpup · May-27-11, 06:42 AM

Originally Posted by begingri

I could have missed it, but I did not see a TV ad for Detroit.

You're looking in the wrong place.
http://www.michigan.org/Partners/Det...n/Default.aspx

**HistoryNotHisStory** · May-27-11, 07:15 AM

The promotion piece is called "Pure Michigan" and not "Pure Detroit".

Michigan's economy is no longer centered around the City of Detroit. So it has to highlight its greatest assets.

Detroit does not need to be put in a commercial. The nation needs to see that there is more to Michigan besides Detroit.

Let's show them Muskegon, Traverse City, Holland, Mackinaw, and some of the best coastal property in America.

**JDKeepsmiling** · May-27-11, 07:59 AM

I am pretty sure that the way the Pure Michigan campaign works is that funding for individual cities radio/tv spots comes from those cities or tourism boards for those cities. They will be amde and slotted into the overall Pure Michiagn campaign, but they will not get made if they are not locally funded. The general money for the campaign buys the ad time and pays for the generic Pure Michigan ads. So this is not anyone slighting Detroit, just Detroit not having enough money to pay for the creation of a new TV ad.

**laphoque** · May-27-11, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by HistoryNotHisStory

Michigan's economy is no longer centered around the City of Detroit.

Metro Detroit is still responsible for the majority of Michigan's GDP. $200 860 000 000 / $372 400 000 000 = 54% Despite being only 43% of the state's population.

**JDKeepsmiling** · May-27-11, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by HistoryNotHisStory

The promotion piece is called "Pure Michigan" and not "Pure Detroit".

Michigan's economy is no longer centered around the City of Detroit. So it has to highlight its greatest assets.

Detroit does not need to be put in a commercial. The nation needs to see that there is more to Michigan besides Detroit.

Let's show them Muskegon, Traverse City, Holland, Mackinaw, and some of the best coastal property in America.

I have no problems howing off other areas of the state, but to say that the economy is not centered around the City of Detroit is plain wrong. Metro Detroit is home to over 2/3rds the states population and while I don't know the exact number, I would guess well over 50% of state GDP is generated in SE Michigan. Grand Rapids is not the engine of the Michigan economy. I am not trashing GR, I like it, and it is a great place, just don't pretend it is something that it is not.

**313WX** · May-27-11, 08:26 AM

It's the "Pure Michigan" way. Until our state and regional leaders lose the silly idea that they can get somwhere without Detroit [[a couple member here have summed up why pretty well) then our state and region will continue to head down the crapper.

**Bham1982** · May-27-11, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by laphoque

Metro Detroit is still responsible for the majority of Michigan's GDP. $200 860 000 000 / $372 400 000 000 = 54% Despite being only 43% of the state's population.

Right, but the thread specifically referred to the City of Detroit, not Metro Detroit. Detroit has a very minor and steadily declining contribution to overall metro area economic output.

And the thread reinforced this distinction by citing Aurora, IL, which is nothing but an outer sprawlburb of Chicago. Not remotely comparable to Grand Rapids [[City or Metro).

The main point of the Pure Michigan ads is to get out-of-state folks to spend money in-state. Given that Chicagoland is the biggest population center within proximity, it makes sense that West Side locations are given highest priority.

And, let's be real, Michigan's greatest tourist assets lie Up North. Detroit, or Metro Detroit, don't come close.

**iheartthed** · May-27-11, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

Right, but the thread specifically referred to the City of Detroit, not Metro Detroit. Detroit has a very minor and steadily declining contribution to overall metro area economic output.

And the thread reinforced this distinction by citing Aurora, IL, which is nothing but an outer sprawlburb of Chicago. Not remotely comparable to Grand Rapids [[City or Metro).

The main point of the Pure Michigan ads is to get out-of-state folks to spend money in-state. Given that Chicagoland is the biggest population center within proximity, it makes sense that West Side locations are given highest priority.

And, let's be real, Michigan's greatest tourist assets lie Up North. Detroit, or Metro Detroit, don't come close.

I'd bet that the city of Detroit has by far the biggest GDP of any municipality in Michigan.

**gazhekwe** · May-27-11, 09:26 AM

How 'bout this one? Funny!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLaVU...ature=youtu.be

**313WX** · May-27-11, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

And the thread reinforced this distinction by citing Aurora, IL, which is nothing but an outer sprawlburb of Chicago. Not remotely comparable to Grand Rapids [[City or Metro).

I agree that was a bad comparison. I would compare Aurora to Warren and Naperville to Sterling Heights [[Joliet to Pontiac, Flint to Gary, Rockford to Ann Arbor, etc.).

I think a better Grand Rapids-Illinois comparison would be Peoria.

**Gistok** · May-27-11, 11:31 AM

I don't know where some of you get your misinformation from... but Aurora Illinois is as far away from Chicago as Ann Arbor is from Detroit. It was incorporated in 1857... and was big enough by the 1920s to have 1/2 dozen theatres, a downtown, and even its' own airport. Yes the Chicago metro area has reached its' tentacles out to Aurora. But its been a self sustaining community for over 150 years.. one would hardly call it sprawlville... a better comparison would be to Ann Arbor.

**Bham1982** · May-27-11, 01:14 PM

I've been to Aurora and it's nothing whatsoever like Ann Arbor.

It looks and functions like exurban Macomb County, and is one of the fastest growing sprawlsvilles in Illinois.

Yes, there's a very small historic center, but the community is 99% sprawl. It's like saying Macomb and Shelby Townships are real cities because of the two-block Utica downtown.

And, nowadays, it's completely within the Chicago orbit. It doesn't have a unique, Ann Arbor-style orbit.

**13074Glenfield** · May-27-11, 04:24 PM

Folks, it's not reasonable to think that you could promote Detroit as a tourist destintion to people in other states. Michigan, yes. Detroit, no.

**old guy** · May-27-11, 05:12 PM

Living in Wisconsin, I see the Pure Michigan ads frequently here. I think they're really well done. Wisconsin promotional ads don't seem to push our metropolitan areas either. I think part of the reason is that too many groups in metro areas want to be highlighted. Creating a 30 or 60 second spot needs to be basic to be effective.

**Ray1936** · May-27-11, 05:43 PM

As I mentioned on another topic, I lived in Grand Rapids, 1938 - 1941, before starting kindergarten at Parker School in Detroit [[reason for moving back to DTW a long story). Anyway, having photos of the old homesteads from back then, I returned to Grand Rapids two years ago to find the old homes. Amazingly, all the homes built in the teens, twenties, and thirties are in beautiful condition, and the neighborhoods are all sparkling. It was an absolute pleasure to drive through the area.

Then we got to Detroit and found all the old homesteads turned to ghetto shit.

**jcole** · May-27-11, 07:49 PM

**Lowell** · May-27-11, 08:14 PM

I agree that Detroit, city and metro, should be promoted purely on the grounds that it possesses the ability to generate the greatest amount of non-Michigan tourist revenue with it's cultural institutions like the DIA and Henry Ford and it's high dollar entertainment venues of major league sports and casinos. Additionally it is easily accessible to dense population areas of Ohio and Ontario.

However the legislative sausage machine gives a lot of weight to outstate legislators whose votes are needed to carry out the Pure MI budget.

**Gistok** · May-27-11, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

I've been to Aurora and it's nothing whatsoever like Ann Arbor.

It looks and functions like exurban Macomb County, and is one of the fastest growing sprawlsvilles in Illinois.

Yes, there's a very small historic center, but the community is 99% sprawl. It's like saying Macomb and Shelby Townships are real cities because of the two-block Utica downtown.

And, nowadays, it's completely within the Chicago orbit. It doesn't have a unique, Ann Arbor-style orbit.

Lets put this into the right context....
http://www.city-data.com/forum/city-...ecorded-3.html

Yes it is one of the fastest growing cities... but had 46,000 residents by 1930... so that makes it a little bit different than purely an urban sprawl city. But that's another matter...

**ever_helpful** · May-27-11, 10:34 PM

Going back to the original question in this thread, as lilpup pointed out, they did make a Detroit TV ad, one easily found on Youtube after searching for "pure Michigan Detroit:"

Detroit was of course not forgotten in a more general TV ad about visiting Michigan's cities as well.

And truthfully, both of these ads were much better than the Visit Detroit ads that were running a few years ago...

DetroitPole · May-28-11, 09:58 AM

I think the focus should be on downriver:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDCCcxlKzDU

**Corn.Bot** · May-28-11, 06:38 PM

Oh, but wait! Pure Michigan has competition from ...OMG, who'da thunk they'd COPY anything from MICHIGAN??? I ask you! The NERVE! LMAO. Allow me to present to you...

http://www.youtube.com/enjoyillinois.../0/fFxqon72t3Q

GMAB. Really. I'm seeing the ads every 15 minutes on my frickin local TV stations here in SW Michigan. I realize Kalamazoo is like just about exactly halfway between Detroit and Chicago, but I can't help feeling resentful over imaginary stolen thunder.