View Full Version : Economic Forecast OKC 2005



Karried
03-26-2005, 09:56 PM
"The Oklahoma City area looks to sustain employment growth beyond the national and state growth rates adding nearly 10,000 jobs to area payrolls in 2005. Expect healthy growth in hiring in the Mining, Construction, and Services sectors, while the Manufacturing, Real Estate, and Government sectors will remain weak. The forecast anticipates weakness in the Goods-Producing sectors to be offset by relatively larger gains in Services sectors.

Overall, metro area employment prospects for 2005 are significantly better than in 2004. "

Midtowner
03-26-2005, 10:46 PM
It worries me that the "services" sector will be growing. Keep in mind that call centers are counted under "services". Anyone know what we'll be mining?

xrayman
03-26-2005, 10:58 PM
Cube rats.

Karried
03-27-2005, 09:30 AM
"Recently, Oklahoma City and Tulsa have seen a reversal in their rankings in terms of energy-related jobs. As Tulsa's Natural Resources & Mining employment continues a downward slide, the Oklahoma City metro area has found this sector a source of employment growth. The reversal took place in 2000 as Oklahoma City's employment in this sector exceeded that of Tulsa, with Oklahoma City's lead widening four years later. The recent acquisition activity by Oklahoma City-based independent energy giants Devon Energy Corporation and Chesapeake Energy Corporation is evidence of the changing landscape for Oklahoma City's oil and gas industry.

Elevated national energy prices are expected to continue to support higher levels of employment in the Natural Resources & Mining sector, but energy prices are projected to stabilize at lower levels in 2005. The Oklahoma City metro area is expected to continue the current pace of employment gains in this sector and post 7.7 percent employment growth for an additional 500 jobs.

Trade, Transportation, & Utilities employment made moderate hiring gains in the first half of 2004 but has since ebbed to marginal growth projections for the fourth quarter of 2004. Additional strength is expected in 2005, with most of the employment gains in this sector attributable to Wholesale and Retail Trade. Wholesale Trade activity generally fluctuates with Manufacturing activity, and is expected to see job gains of 0.9 percent next year. Retail Trade employment growth is projected to remain strong, increasing from 1.5 percent in 2004 to 1.8 percent growth in 2005. Hiring in the Transportation and Warehousing sector is expected to remain weak through 2005, while Utilities are expected to post a 3.8 percent decline"

The metro area Services sectors, including Professional & Business Services, Educational & Health Services, Leisure & Hospitality, and Other Services, are expected to generate more than 7,000 new jobs for all of 2004. The services sectors should remain the driving force behind the projected recovery by adding 6,000 new jobs in 2005, roughly two-thirds of the metro area's expected employment gains next year. Leading the Services sectors in employment gains is Professional & Business Services with employment growth projected for 2005 of 3.9 percent. Hiring in the Leisure & Hospitality Services sector is expected to post a 2.7 percent gain, while Educational & Medical Services hiring should expand 2.9 percent in 2005."

Nuclear_2525
03-27-2005, 04:43 PM
"The Oklahoma City area looks to sustain employment growth beyond the national and state growth rates adding nearly 10,000 jobs to area payrolls in 2005


Just curious if anyone knows this...How many people does 1 new job bring in to the metro area? Do statistics say that for every new job created, that two people move to satisfy that job?

Just trying to figure out population and such, because if it is 2 people for every 1 job, say a husband and wife, then that means this year alone the OKC metro will grow by around 20,000 people. Which means over a 10 year period, it would be 200,000 people. This is more than OKC usually grows and over half of what the state usually grows. But I am sure this can't be right. Anyway, 10,000 jobs is good, but OKC can and should do better.

Just read an article on NewsOK.com that said over the next 20 years that the Fayetteville area is expected to reach 700,000 in population. Kind of scary for Tulsa...I would hate to see Fayetteville become the economic center for that area over Tulsa. Tulsa and the state better get on the ball QUICK. Also, I think it is sad that if the Fayettville area can grow by around 250,000 to 300,000 every 10 years, OKC and Tulsa should be growing at least that much too. Both cities and the state better start doing some major business law overhauls and some major business recruitment. By the time Fayetteville reaches 700,000, OKC needs to reach 2 million and Tulsa needs to be somewhere around 1.5 million or we are going to start losing some economic benefits to that area like we already are.

mranderson
03-27-2005, 09:14 PM
I really can not see how these jobs can generate two new people in town for each job. The transferees with Dell are largely single. That means one new resident for each job. Plus, the majority of people staffed by these companies are locals. So, how do these people figure two people for each job? Makes no sense.

Can Oklahoma City grow? Yes. Will it? Yes. Can we be at 600,000 in five years? Yes. However, it will not be two people for every new job. It will be by births, relocation for existing jobs, new jobs and more. IF you factor in illegal imigrants and bums downtown, we are nearly there now.

If we land America West, Microsoft, and Alaska Airlines, then that can add 5,000 to 10,000 jobs right there. I think if we stop the negitivity and get out fannies in gear and start doing things right we can.

We need to find out what these other cities and states are doing. Why is Arkansas with their stereotypical hillbillies, and Wyoming with a state population of more people than Oklahoma City proper, gaining people and taking better care of their states? We need to do the same thing. Then we can grow, and change our image. Oklahoma. The land of prosparity. Not Native America.

Nuclear_2525
03-27-2005, 11:26 PM
I really can not see how these jobs can generate two new people in town for each job. The transferees with Dell are largely single. That means one new resident for each job. Plus, the majority of people staffed by these companies are locals. So, how do these people figure two people for each job? Makes no sense.


I wasn't saying that each job creates 2 new people for OKC. That was just a guess...I was asking if anyone knew if there was a statistic like that.

My whole point with the post was that OKC NEEDS to start growing at a faster pace. If Fayetteville AR alone is almost outpacing the entire state of Oklahoma. That is just pathetic. It should be that OKC and Tulsa are adding close to 275,000-500,000 each every ten years or so. That would be a good steady pace for the two. It will be sad when the new figures come out, and OKC, a metro area of over 1.2 million in 2000 grew by 100,000, and Tulsa, a metro area of over 850,000 grew by 90,000. And then you see Fayetteville, a metro of 200,000 people in 2000 and it grew by 200,000. How rediculous does that make Tulsa and OKC look?

okcpulse
03-28-2005, 01:03 AM
I highly doubt that the Fayetteville area will hit 700,000. Perhaps Northwest Arkansas, including Fayetteville-Springdale-Bentonville-Rogers-Siloam Springs with hit close to 700,000. I have a lot of family in that area, so I know what the local companies are up to. Yes, the entire area is growing fast, but that growth WILL hit snags in the near future because of infrastructure. The opening of their regional airport sparked a lot of growth.

Wal-Mart has attracted a lot of food manufacturers because-believe it or not, food companies like to be close to Wal-Mart's headquarters for easier business deals. But, there are only so many, and this is not Oklahoma City's focus.

Oklahoma City's focus is research and technology, not food retail. Food retail is NW Arkansas' niche, and the growth will continue as much as the natural resources and infrastructure will allow, as well as national demands.

okcpulse
03-28-2005, 01:07 AM
BTW, the statistical population growth in relation to job growth is 1.4 people per job. From the U.S. Office of Management and Budget report. I remember this from an article I read at the Norick Library.

Midtowner
03-28-2005, 09:16 AM
I highly doubt that the Fayetteville area will hit 700,000. Perhaps Northwest Arkansas, including Fayetteville-Springdale-Bentonville-Rogers-Siloam Springs with hit close to 700,000. I have a lot of family in that area, so I know what the local companies are up to. Yes, the entire area is growing fast, but that growth WILL hit snags in the near future because of infrastructure. The opening of their regional airport sparked a lot of growth.

Wal-Mart has attracted a lot of food manufacturers because-believe it or not, food companies like to be close to Wal-Mart's headquarters for easier business deals. But, there are only so many, and this is not Oklahoma City's focus.

Oklahoma City's focus is research and technology, not food retail. Food retail is NW Arkansas' niche, and the growth will continue as much as the natural resources and infrastructure will allow, as well as national demands.


Let them have the food retail. Ever try to drive through Arkansas at night on the stretch of I-40 that goes by the Tyson farms? Disgusting. I had to pull over and clean off my windshield just to see out.

HOT ROD
03-28-2005, 01:24 PM
I think 14,000 people growth for OKC is pretty nice. Hopefully the metro area would grow by double that in 2005. But yes, I agree that OKC and Tulsa need to work on growth - jobs and population.

I want OK to get its house member back! and maybe pick-up another one, in 2010. I think a state pop of 4M would get the rep we lost back, and 4.5M might get us an additional one.

I think the state could easily reach 4M by 2010 (if its not there already), OKC Metro should have 1.5M and Tulsa Metro should have 1M. That alone represents 500k pop growth over 2000 (300k for OKC metro and 200k for Tulsa Metro). If there is growth in the rest of the state, then --> the state would be over 4M.

I agree that we should NOT focus on food products, BUT - food distribution is a sector that OKC has long enjoyed and should pursue. While the jobs may not pay as high as high tech, OKC should have a diverse economy - to absorb the trials that market centric cities (like Tulsa) have failed to do.

If we have health care/pharmecuticals/bio, energy, mfg, wholesale distribution and trade, international distribution and trade, financial services/insurance, high technology mfg and r/d, and retail - in addition to service, govt, and finance that are already big -- we would have a very nice, diverse economy that could feed itself and grow.

I think another sector we should go after is corporate management. If not the corporate hq, we should go after the back-offices/admin office. Tampa and Atlanta are probably the biggest cities in the nation for backofficing. And we all know about their economies and the prosperity of there. Well, its mainly because both are backoffice to corporations in New York and Chicago. Ditto Charlotte, but they also have banking. Of course, in order to pursue corporate sector, OKC definitely needs to expand WRWA and get flights!!! An expansion of Wiley Post and/or Downtown Airport would also be necessary so the top execs can get here.

One final sector that I mentioned previously but I want to call attention to is International trade. OKC really needs to jump on this one. We should expand our freeways to encourage NAFTA trade and warehousing. We need to (once again) expand WRWA and Wiley Post to capture that international traffic. I thought OKC was supposed to become a hub for some flower business in South America. The flowers would arrive in OKC, then ship out to the coasts daily. Anybody have info on this?

This type of business is what OKC should pursue, which means more facilities are needed.

Nuclear_2525
03-28-2005, 06:10 PM
I want OK to get its house member back! and maybe pick-up another one, in 2010. I think a state pop of 4M would get the rep we lost back, and 4.5M might get us an additional one.

I think the state could easily reach 4M by 2010 (if its not there already), OKC Metro should have 1.5M and Tulsa Metro should have 1M. That alone represents 500k pop growth over 2000 (300k for OKC metro and 200k for Tulsa Metro). If there is growth in the rest of the state, then --> the state would be over 4M.


i think we will be lucky to even reach 4 million by 2010. The reason being??? Outmigration. I remember a story a few months back on KOTV that said OK was currently having more people move out than in.

HOT ROD
03-28-2005, 08:48 PM
really? Im sure the state has to be at at-least 3.7 mil currently. With OKC's continued expansion and Tulsa now picking up, I would definitely think the state would add another 300k by 2010 (5 years). There may have been an outmigration from Tulsa but this was NOT the case in OKC. Im not sure about the rest of the state, but I know OKC is not having an outmigration.

I really hope that the state does not lose out while just OKC grows. I hope both OKC and the state could grow and get that representative back (and give him to OKC), so the state's two largest cities will each have a house member.

Nuclear_2525
03-28-2005, 09:24 PM
OKC area and Tulsa area did not have outmigration...cities don't normally do that. But while those two areas were growing, the rest of the state was not. What the article was about is that even though Tulsa and OKC grew, total state population declined.

Sooner&RiceGrad
03-28-2005, 09:27 PM
Drive around the outskirts of the metro, highlight on Broadmoore, and tell me we aren't growing enough.

Noone can really beat Fayetville. But the concepts they use we should look at. We have to compete with them, which sucks, the rest of America doesn't.

OKC needs to boost it's education opportunities, to keep people from Oklahoma in Oklahoma, and needs to attract corporations. They also need to keep our cost of living LOW.