I agree completely with Steve when he said "Change will require an aggressive effort by city and civic leadership to address the large swaths in vacant land that exist in the urban core - especially in Midtown, Film Row, Farmers Market and along Automobile Alley and Western Avenue." I think that is a great place to start. In addition, density and developing a "big city feel" will never happen if OKC keeps tearing down existing building stock for new development rather than developing the large swaths of surface parking and grass lots.

I agree, but I hope that a Costco never ends up in any of those places, nor should that have anything to do with wanting to address the large swaths of land that exist in the urban core. Nothing would ruin the great atmosphere developing in those districts than the presence of a large national discount retailer.

I agree, but I hope that a Costco never ends up in any of those places, nor should that have anything to do with wanting to address the large swaths of land that exist in the urban core. Nothing would ruin the great atmosphere developing in those districts than the presence of a large national discount retailer.

Completely agree. Costco belongs on Memorial Rd or NW Expressway plain and simple. If they tried to come into the core, I think that would be something to fight against unless they could find a way to make it urban.

I agree, but I hope that a Costco never ends up in any of those places, nor should that have anything to do with wanting to address the large swaths of land that exist in the urban core. Nothing would ruin the great atmosphere developing in those districts than the presence of a large national discount retailer.

Right. This is where the writer was lazy. This broad brush reasoning was inane. Reasons for locating vary. This was a poor write up and explanation of why things are or are not happening. VERY LAZY reporting and Steve is just towing the company line.

The term is actually "TOE the line," not "TOW the line." Sorry; couldn't help myself. It's a personal pet peeve. Now back to your regularly-scheduled programming.

Steve said this in his chat today.

Steve Lackmeyer 11:33 a.m. I think Brianna did a great job with that story getting answers to questions asked by a lot of folks. As she reported, Oklahoma City is not losing out with every desired retailer. But there are enough big name retailers choosing a far smaller market like Tulsa that the question is worth asking - why does Costco pick Tulsa over OKC? And now we have an answer - one folks don't like. But in the game of business, perception is as important as reality and Oklahoma City has a problem thanks to its sprawl. Can we reverse this trend? You bet. But it will require an aggressive effort by city and civic leadership to address the large swaths in vacant land that exist in the urban core - especially in Midtown, Film Row, Farmers Market and along Automobile Alley and Western Avenue.

Steve Lackmeyer 11:51 a.m. I think Tulsa has done a better job at creating an urban perception of itself, and this is something Oklahoma City needs to work on.


So we now have an answer that "folks don't like??" It seems to me that many people have criticized the article (and the answer) because whether intentional or not, the question posed to the Costco rep was based on a false premise from the outset. Costco actually never "picked Tulsa over OKC" at all. They simply weren't able to close on the land they had selected as their first location of choice...Memorial and Western in Oklahoma City. And so they moved on to Plan B, which in this case was Tulsa. The Costco representative was never asked about this and that's why some have taken issue with the story as a whole. And had that issue been addressed, obviously the story's narrative is completely different. If OKC's demographics are so terrible and Tulsa's so great as the Costco rep alleges, then why did Costco try and locate in OKC first to begin with?? There's your story.

And I guess we all also supposed to believe Oklahoma City is losing out to some big name retailers like Costco to smaller markets like Tulsa because Oklahoma City "has a problem thanks to its sprawl"...all while Costco's Tulsa store will be located only a half a mile from the Bixby city limits at 103rd and S. Memorial. It's irony at its finest!

If I had a penny for every time I've shopped at one of the stores listed above, or had a desire to see them enter our market...I wouldn't have very many pennies. Off the top of my head, I know there would be four, then throw in however many for each time I've been to the Warren. Yes, part of that speakes to what does (or doesn't) appeal to me, but the fact is that whether a store comes here first or not isn't going to make or break this city. I get all of the stuff about perceptions and whatnot, but there are a lot of people that need to get a grip, methinks. Ooooh, Costco's opening in Tulsa first. Ooooh, [insert store here] chose OKC first. Good for the sake of novelty and expanded choices, but that novelty isn't going to last forever.

The presnce of a national retailer doesn't make one city better than the one that lacks that retailer. There's more this city can do to improve its image than attract some new store here.

This cracks me up, because 1) this is coming from a guy scouting COSTCO(!) locations and 2) this is where the Tulsa store is going:

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0137331,-95.8865854,3a,75y,275.8h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9srAocog0aMlC2MsYsLj1w!2e0

To be fair, (not that it really changes your point) that area has changed significantly since those pictures were taken.

And I guess we all also supposed to believe Oklahoma City is losing out to some big name retailers like Costco to smaller markets like Tulsa because Oklahoma City "has a problem thanks to its sprawl"...all while Costco's Tulsa store will be located only a half a mile from the Bixby city limits at 103rd and S. Memorial. It's irony at its finest!

Nearly every home in metro Tulsa will be with 14 miles of their store. If they built on Memorial/Penn in OKC what percentage of metro-OKC addresses would be within 14 miles? The answer is sprawl. You make decisions and you live with it.

If I had a penny for every time I've shopped at one of the stores listed above, or had a desire to see them enter our market...I wouldn't have very many pennies. Off the top of my head, I know there would be four, then throw in however many for each time I've been to the Warren. Yes, part of that speakes to what does (or doesn't) appeal to me, but the fact is that whether a store comes here first or not isn't going to make or break this city. I get all of the stuff about perceptions and whatnot, but there are a lot of people that need to get a grip, methinks. Ooooh, Costco's opening in Tulsa first. Ooooh, [insert store here] chose OKC first. Good for the sake of novelty and expanded choices, but that novelty isn't going to last forever.

The presnce of a national retailer doesn't make one city better than the one that lacks that retailer. There's more this city can do to improve its image than attract some new store here.

Let me guess - you are a Walmart shopper.

So we now have an answer that "folks don't like??" It seems to me that many people have criticized the article (and the answer) because whether intentional or not, the question posed to the Costco rep was based on a false premise from the outset. Costco actually never "picked Tulsa over OKC" at all. They simply weren't able to close on the land they had selected as their first location of choice...Memorial and Western in Oklahoma City. And so they moved on to Plan B, which in this case was Tulsa. The Costco representative was never asked about this and that's why some have taken issue with the story as a whole. And had that issue been addressed, obviously the story's narrative is completely different. If OKC's demographics are so terrible and Tulsa's so great as the Costco rep alleges, then why did Costco try and locate in OKC first to begin with?? There's your story.

And I guess we all also supposed to believe Oklahoma City is losing out to some big name retailers like Costco to smaller markets like Tulsa because Oklahoma City "has a problem thanks to its sprawl"...all while Costco's Tulsa store will be located only a half a mile from the Bixby city limits at 103rd and S. Memorial. It's irony at its finest!

100% correct.

You forgot the third, in my opinion most likely, option - Walmart's cheap.

Yep, most times they are cheapest. And if for some reason they aren't the cheapest it's only because the other place put it on sale to try and compete with Walmart. Fact is when you go to Walmart, you can have a reasonable expectation that you are getting a low price, or very close to it, meaning you are never going to go there and pay 30% more for an item than somewhere else. Because of this I am a Walmart shopper, and dare I say, I like Walmart. I love competition and that's about the only reason I care if Costco comes, but even if they do I doubt I shop there.

Let me guess - you are a Walmart shopper.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Nearly every home in metro Tulsa will be with 14 miles of their store. If they built on Memorial/Penn in OKC what percentage of metro-OKC addresses would be within 14 miles? The answer is sprawl. You make decisions and you live with it.

There were obviously enough addresses close to Memorial and Western that they chose that location first to begin with. Houston is the very definition of "sprawl" and they have like 9 Costcos. Time to find another "Boogie Man."

You say that like it's a bad thing.

There is nothing wrong with liking Wal-Mart and being happy with that and not desiring anything else. Different people have different priorities. Some people love Wal-Mart and others dislike it for one reason or another. It would be really interesting to see however how many Wal-Mart shoppers in OKC shop there because they prefer it vs how many reluctantly do so because there are so few other options.

In a city where Wal-Mart has 60+% of the marketshare (most other cities its in the 30% range at highest) I am sure a sizable group shop there out of necessity and will jump ship when they have an alternative.

There were obviously enough addresses close to Memorial and Western that they chose that location first to begin with. Houston is the very definition of "sprawl" and they have like 9 Costcos. Time to find another "Boogie Man."

Sprawl is one thing and yes Houston has it by the barrel full, but there are different levels of sprawl. Even with Houston's sprawl it is still way more dense than OKC's sprawl. Costco is not a store that would fit well in a truly walkable urban city center anyhow, if for no other reason than urban dwellers don't have the space to store 24 rolls of paper towels.

Let me guess - you are a Walmart shopper.
You say that like it's a bad thing.

It is, but that is a different subject.

Costco is not a store that would fit well in a truly walkable urban city center anyhow, if for no other reason than urban dwellers don't have the space to store 24 rolls of paper towels.

Nor would they have the room to transport pretty much any sizable merchandise on the train/bus/bike ride home.

OK, so I was one of the first to call out this article as having flaws. I still think that's the case, but hey, Brianna Bailey is a fine reporter and she'll be doing a follow up. Bygones are bygones, that's been "cussed and discussed," as my grandmother used to say. So be it.

I think a lot of people are going overboard on this whole subject of the Costco executive's comments about Tulsa being "more cosmopolitan" than OKC. And intuitively, what seems to be getting some people in a twist is the thought that somehow it feeds in to some hugely important perception problem regarding OKC vs. Tulsa.

Let me just say this from my perch in St. Louis: this is such an unimportant debate if your main worry is the perception of our home town. There are 58 people in my office and I can guarantee you that the other 57 have never once thought about whether there is a Costco in Oklahoma City or Tulsa or who gets one first. I can further guarantee that the other 57 have no concept of whether Tulsa is seen as "more cosmopolitan" than OKC or not. There aren't more than a handful of people in St. Louis that have ever been to the NewsOk website to see those comments. People outside of OKC and Tulsa not only don't know this supposed "perception," they don't care. The only people that care are those in OKC that somehow see one store or another as some sort of validation and probably some misguided folks in Tulsa that see it the other way around.

I will say this: All 58 people in my office have heard of the Thunder and quite a few are fans.

Do I wish OKC had a Costco? I guess so. Sure. Why not? For OKC's sake and the quality of life, the more choices the better. And I do wish there were more high-end stores, Nordstrom, Saks and the like, for the benefit of those in OKC. But from a "national perception" issue, I bet at least some of the 57 others in my office probably assume OKC has those stores. If they ever think about it, which is highly unlikely. I'll take the Thunder and the GE Research Center and a revitalized downtown all day every day, thank you very much.

You want a true "national perception" problem? Try living 20 minutes from Ferguson, MO and spending your life under the erroneous blanket of the yearly "Most Dangerous City" rankings when the majority of this metro area is as safe as anywhere in central Oklahoma. That's a perception problem.

Nearly every home in metro Tulsa will be with 14 miles of their store. If they built on Memorial/Penn in OKC what percentage of metro-OKC addresses would be within 14 miles? The answer is sprawl. You make decisions and you live with it.

And you still don't know squat as to why they actually moved on to Tulsa. You reject everything that doesn't fit your pre-ordained narrative.

The term is actually "TOE the line," not "TOW the line." Sorry; couldn't help myself. It's a personal pet peeve. Now back to your regularly-scheduled programming.
:)

You want a true "national perception" problem? Try living 20 minutes from Ferguson, MO and spending your life under the erroneous blanket of the yearly "Most Dangerous City" rankings when the majority of this metro area is as safe as anywhere in central Oklahoma. That's a perception problem.

Very true. St Louis is such a great city that could be really awesome if it had the same kind of investment as an Austin , Charlotte or even OKC. But so many think it's a crime ridden place especially since Ferguson. The same goes for Little Rock which is also a great city that should be growing a lot faster than it is but has a bad reputation.

Completely agree. Costco belongs on Memorial Rd or NW Expressway plain and simple. If they tried to come into the core, I think that would be something to fight against unless they could find a way to make it urban.

While I don't completely disagree with your statement, Costco has developed in very dense urban locations. Check out this one in Vancouver, which is immediately adjacent to a subway station near their CBD, underneath several residential highrises; http://urbanworks.typepad.com/.a/6a010535998712970b0148c74e34e6970c-pi. Here is the entrance underneath Spectrum (http://wikimapia.org/1195689/Spectrum-and-Costco#/photo/683291) (highrise).

While this development isn't realistic for OKC - it does show they do adapt if they want to enter a market when forced to. We could encourage them to help densify OKC with an urban Costco on one of those vacant lots since Webb was so concerned. ..

It is, but that is a different subject.

Great, can't wait.

also, I think Pete's list above disproves the claim that Tulsa gets stores first.

There aren't more than a handful of people in St. Louis that have ever been to the NewsOk website to see those comments. People outside of OKC and Tulsa not only don't know this supposed "perception," they don't care. The only people that care are those in OKC that somehow see one store or another as some sort of validation and probably some misguided folks in Tulsa that see it the other way around.
While that is undoubtedly true the development community is tiny and the major retailer real estate people are only an even smaller segment of that community. They subscribe to ICSC and so do many others within the broader development community such as those in financing and leasing and so on.

I received at least one and maybe more copies of the ICSC article today and I'm an insignificant part of that community.

That article will be used by any number of competitors. They don't really intend to hurt Oklahoma City rather they want to win a particular development for their own benefit. So the article will be quoted as truth. It doesn't have to be widely read among the entire population but only noticed by the much smaller and very competitive industry that is competing for these relatively few projects.

Development is a take-no-prisoner kind of business.

While I don't completely disagree with your statement, Costco has developed in very dense urban locations. Check out this one in Vancouver, which is immediately adjacent to a subway station near their CBD, underneath several residential highrises; http://urbanworks.typepad.com/.a/6a010535998712970b0148c74e34e6970c-pi. Here is the entrance underneath Spectrum (http://wikimapia.org/1195689/Spectrum-and-Costco#/photo/683291) (highrise).

While this development isn't realistic for OKC - it does show they do adapt if they want to enter a market when forced to. We could encourage them to help densify OKC with an urban Costco on one of those vacant lots since Webb was so concerned. ..
http://urbanworks.typepad.com/.a/6a010535998712970b0148c74e34e6970c-pi


That's awesome!

While I don't completely disagree with your statement, Costco has developed in very dense urban locations. Check out this one in Vancouver, which is immediately adjacent to a subway station near their CBD, underneath several residential highrises; http://urbanworks.typepad.com/.a/6a010535998712970b0148c74e34e6970c-pi. Here is the entrance underneath Spectrum (http://wikimapia.org/1195689/Spectrum-and-Costco#/photo/683291) (highrise).

While this development isn't realistic for OKC - it does show they do adapt if they want to enter a market when forced to. We could encourage them to help densify OKC with an urban Costco on one of those vacant lots since Webb was so concerned. ..

Costco has plenty of urban locations for sure, but the one being referenced here is anything but and neither was the location they wanted in OKC.

But either way, Costco has nothing, zero, to do with any city it is in being cosmopolitan. This idea that it's a basis for their location strategy is just ridiculous and saying they used it as a relative criterion for locating a store at 103rd and memorial in tulsa over penn and memorial in okc is just bizarre.

Honestly,, I would hate to see it be something used to "densify" our core neighborhoods. I don't want density for density's sake. I think we need places like memorial road and the I-240 corridor, but we don't need every retail area to be like them. And I don't just mean in how the stores look or function, but in the experience and products they offer. The emerging districts in the core are beginning to offer something okc hasn't had in a long time and I think they should continuing expanding on that, instead of trying to recreate shopping experiences we already have.

Let me guess - you are a Walmart shopper.

You probably mean this, and that's both sad and stupid.

Let me guess - you are a Walmart shopper.

For most food, yep. It's the closest store to where I live, and I like my grocery shopping to be a quick affair. Virtually none of my other shopping is done at Walmart, so you may rest easily tonight.

The comments on the Tulsa world are hilarious. Like this one
Costco are a bunch of liberal freaks. I'm shopping at Sams

I'm crying right now. So f'n funny. This guy must be hilarious to discuss President Obama with.

Direct link to The Tulsa World one, which is a carbon copy of NewsOk article: http://www.tulsaworld.com/businesshomepage2/major-retailers-are-choosing-tulsa-over-okc/article_81ceff7e-b2d0-52be-a255-c99c5484c665.html#user-comment-area

Very true. St Louis is such a great city that could be really awesome if it had the same kind of investment as an Austin , Charlotte or even OKC. But so many think it's a crime ridden place especially since Ferguson. The same goes for Little Rock which is also a great city that should be growing a lot faster than it is but has a bad reputation.

Lived in and loved STL for about ten years, but was always frustrated by the lack of redevelopment in the core. But, as someone who is in the know told me, STL has two big problems: race relations (which sadly came into an acute national spotlight this summer/fall) and political relations between the city and county governments. They have a unique city/county government set-up up there that has stalled investment and development in the city. Sorry, to go off topic here.

OKC is actually more cosmopolitan than Tulsa, both the city and metro have higher percentages of foreign born residents.

(2013 estimates)
OKC: 71,000 - 12.0% of population
Tulsa: 39,000 - 9.9% of population

(2013 estimates)
OKC metro: 101,000 - 7.9% of population
Tulsa metro: 55,000 - 5.8% of population

From the US Census

OKC is actually more cosmopolitan than Tulsa, both the city and metro have higher percentages of foreign born residents.

(2013 estimates)
OKC: 71,000 - 12.0% of population
Tulsa: 39,000 - 9.9% of population

(2013 estimates)
OKC metro: 101,000 - 7.9% of population
Tulsa metro: 55,000 - 5.8% of population

From the US Census

True. A lot of this idea of Tulsa being a superior city is based on dated information. The numbers, when you put them in perspective, are in OKC's favor on everything except high income rooftop density.

However, perception is reality and Tulsa is perceived to be the more vibrant, cosmopolitan city by a lot of people. I was just talking to somebody last night about very thing. He moved to OKC from New York but takes regular trips to Tulsa and we telling me how much nicer it is and how it feels so much more like Austin up there. Why do people think that? What is Tulsa doing that is giving them that perception, even today? What can OKC do to improve? For the good of OKC and the direction it is going that is something that needs to be considered.

A lot of the attitude in OKC is "we have the Thunder so who cares what Tulsa has!" That kind of thinking will do nothing but hold OKC back. A true big league city has big league sports AND other amenities that go along with a vibrant, cosmopolitan city from cultural attractions to vibrant urban street life to live music to shopping.

As a reminder, people are going off on extreme tangents as the result of comments from one individual who:

1) First chose an OKC location
2) Is from Western Oklahoma
3) Lives in the Dallas area

Perhaps some of the perceptions as to why Tulsa has more of a urban, cosmopolitan feel to it could be the way Tulsa was settled. When oil struck big in Tulsa it created a lot of opportunities for people back east such as engineers and educated people to settle in Tulsa. Tulsa was known as a very clean, beautiful city and was once the "Oil capital of the World", and as a result of this, it brought in a influx of money and people that were not natives. OKC on the other hand, was founded overnight by the land run of 1889 and brought people who wanted a new life with a pioneering, frontier spirit. Many of these people most likely had very little and were searching for a new life. OKC atmosphere is more cowboy blue collar where as Tulsa is more urban, white collar. Again, this is just my perception!

Tulsa is more wealth concentrated and appealing to retailers than OKC perhaps because it's still starkly divided on racial and ses lines. The race massacre of '21 still hangs in the air. Isn't this actually a plus for OKC? other than being in the same state, there's not much to compare. OKC still at it's heart a gritty cowtown where you can smell the sweet putrifaction of the stockyards depending on the wind, and Tulsa a small clean city tucked in the hills. celebrate diversity.

Perhaps some of the perceptions as to why Tulsa has more of a urban, cosmopolitan feel to it could be the way Tulsa was settled. When oil struck big in Tulsa it created a lot of opportunities for people back east such as engineers and educated people to settle in Tulsa. Tulsa was known as a very clean, beautiful city and was once the "Oil capital of the World", and as a result of this, it brought in a influx of money and people that were not natives. OKC on the other hand, was founded overnight by the land run of 1889 and brought people who wanted a new life with a pioneering, frontier spirit. Many of these people most likely had very little and were searching for a new life. OKC atmosphere is more cowboy blue collar where as Tulsa is more urban, white collar. Again, this is just my perception!

Yes this is OKC's heritage, but I fail to see how what happened 100+ years ago has much of a bearing on current events. My father's family hometown in Mississippi had more millionaires than any other city outside NYC at one point before the civil war, and even today it has several blocks of beautiful antebellum mansions. That doesn't change the fact that the town today for the most part is an impoverished dump with little industry.

I really think this whole thing has become a bigger deal than it should. Some on here and in OKC are going to need some thicker skin going forward. Someone who has probably not lived in this state for some time says they like Tulsa more than OKC, and now people in OKC are going to have one less choice in getting their ketchup and toilet paper in bulk at least for another year or two. Is it really that much of a loss?

I will say I do laugh at the notion of Tulsa being cosmopolitan. That's not really the correct term to use (cosmopolitan is a measure of how international something is) and it makes me think this line was fed to him by Tulsa Chamber officials. This whole thing boils down to Tulsa having 2 or 3 denser, wealthier zip codes that marketing types can identify easier than in OKC. That is not what I would consider "cosmopolitan." I can't help but to think this person's higher ups at Costco's HQ are regretting his choice of words.

So which is it OKCtalk? Would you rather be in the city with $750 million in upcoming hi rise construction just on 2 blocks, several urban housing developments coming on board, against the backdrop of stronger job and population growth, or the city with none of these things but a Costco and Urban Outfitters?

Saying that Tulsa has "none of [those] things" is incorrect. Tulsa is experiencing very significant growth and development, especially in and around downtown. I don't know where you've gotten your information that Tulsa has no urban housing developments or job and population growth. If that were true, Tulsa would likely not be getting Costco or Urban Outfitters or any other major chains not already in Oklahoma.

Both cities are seeing incredible amounts of growth and redevelopment in their urban cores, as well as their suburbs. Retail wise, what comes to one will arrive in the other soon after. No need to stress and worry about who got what first. Businesses will go where they can make money. One executive's opinion of a city likely holds little weight in Costco's assessment of whether or not they can make money in a market.

If you compare these cities by (density, Culture, Income) or (Urban Sprawl , culture and Income) with Texas Cities to get an idea. Tulsa=Austin and OKC= San Antonio

Saying that Tulsa has "none of [those] things" is incorrect. Tulsa is experiencing very significant growth and development, especially in and around downtown. I don't know where you've gotten your information that Tulsa has no urban housing developments or job and population growth. If that were true, Tulsa would likely not be getting Costco or Urban Outfitters or any other major chains not already in Oklahoma.


Tulsa's CSA grew at at a rate of 2.26% between 2010-13. That is slower than both the state and national growth rate and less than half of what OKC has grown in the same period. Also, Tulsa has not even recovered all the jobs lost in the recession as of Q3 2014. Its one of the few places in this part of the country that has not. FWIW, OKC is running at about 107% of its total jobs since the recession, the nation as a whole is just a little over 100%.

I am glad the Tulsa's downtown is starting to see some housing development now, but lets face it not only is it way behind OKC, it is behind similar sized cities like Little Rock or Omaha.

You can disagree with my wording, but I stand by what I say. That fact remains the economic performance of Tulsa the past few years leaves A LOT to be desired.

You can disagree with my wording, but I stand by what I say. That fact remains the economic performance of Tulsa the past few years leaves A LOT to be desired.

I agree, and a large part of that is due to ineffective city leadership compared to what OKC has had for many years now and the absence of a huge university medical complex like the OUHSC. Having OU 20 miles away also helps tremendously. Both cities have large energy sectors but Tulsa doesn't have the civic giant that is Devon or the jobs machines that are Continental, CHK and AEP. OKC getting the GE research center, a big part due to proximity to OU, was a huge win. Both cities have large aerospace sectors but while OKC has been growing jobs at Boeing Tulsa has seen job losses with American Airlines and Spirit Aerosystems. One of Tulsa's biggest economic stories last year was 1500 new jobs at a distribution center, hardly the tech/engineering/energy jobs that are needed to really jumpstart the local economy.

Tulsa had a dynamic economy in the mid to late 90's with the telecom boom. Whether that can happen again is anyone's guess. I would say it has a lot of potential but something is holding it back that doesn't exist in OKC.

Tulsa is more wealth concentrated and appealing to retailers than OKC perhaps because it's still starkly divided on racial and ses lines. The race massacre of '21 still hangs in the air. Isn't this actually a plus for OKC? other than being in the same state, there's not much to compare. OKC still at it's heart a gritty cowtown where you can smell the sweet putrifaction of the stockyards depending on the wind, and Tulsa a small clean city tucked in the hills. celebrate diversity.

I work for a company that has offices in most every major city in the US. Even Tulsa had an office where OKC does not that was closed in the 90's. I asked someone who was in the know about opening branch offices years ago about why there was not an office in OKC and was told at that time that the Daily Oklahoman was the primary reason. At that time, add rates for the Oklahoman were more expensive than any other comparable city and my company used to advertise a lot in the paper so it was simply not worthwhile.

I don't know what add rates are in the Oklahoman now with the ownership change but when I ask why Tulsa just got an office of my company and OKC has not, I am being told it is because of the lack of wealth concentration in any part of the city. I believe there is also some carryover of the newspaper add rate issue but this was not mentioned. OKC is now, by far, the largest city in the country without a branch office of my firm - with the exception of New Orleans.

I figured I would try to stay away from these topics, but a friend from LA and NYC just forwarded me the same ICSC (International Council of Shopping Centers) newsletter that had this story in it.

I think the over-reaction to this piece is just that, an over-reaction. I know it has been stated that Costco had the OKC piece of land under contract first, truth is they were working on both deals at the same time. Again, the fact that they dragged their feet on the OKC property is the reason they aren't opening one yet. I'm a bit surprised they didn't go for another section of the Chisholm Creek development, which I would bet they probably end up doing.

Urban Outfitter was looking at Tulsa solely. They are looking for only free-standing construction only (no malls), which is the same as retailers like American Apparel. OKC doesn't currently have an area outside of Bricktown that has decent foot traffic, and they weren't interested in that area due to the touristy feeling. Mark my word, in the next 5 years they'll probably be opening a store in Midtown/Automobile Alley.

Frankly the people on here bad mouthing the Tulsa Chamber should be ashamed of themselves. I know many of these people, and when they are talking to any retailers or businesses looking at Tulsa there is a collective effort to talk about how great the entire state is. In fact, a big selling point for Tulsa is how close OKC and NWA is, and that regional tourism is growing across the nation makes talking about how many great things are going on in the region a good thing, not a bad thing. Anyone who has said any chamber person has said negative things about OKC is straight up lying, and those posted should be deleted or edited. If they are doing it, prove it. Where are the quotes?

The only people bad mouthing anyone is the people on here, and it's a vile stream of hate towards Tulsa. Go look at TulsaNow, this isn't even a topic on there, because guess what - no one in Tulsa cares if OKC got something before us. Really, the list on this thread is laughable too at how slanted it is toward OKC. It's not objectable what so ever.

Here's a few that are missing. Tulsa had the first Coach store, first Michael Kors, first LuLu Lemon (this is the best example of how when one opens in either city it is a good thing for the other. If this had failed in Tulsa, OKC would not have gotten the first "full" store in the state), Oakley opened in Tulsa first, and could name others but will stop here.

Noah's - What is this? Are you all talking about the "events" center off Memorial? You really are going to brag about having a 10,000th place to book a weeding? There's also one in Tulsa just FYI, a simple google search and you could figure that out.

Half Priced Books - Really? Another great retailer to brag about... You can add BooksaMillion to a Tulsa exclusive then

Tilly's - Again, wrong. There is a Tulsa location at Woodland Hills. If we're going to count cheap crap clothing stores you can add Garage as an exclusive to Oklahoma for Tulsa.

Hemisphere's - Really? This is not a national brand. This would be like Kansas City bragging they got a Mathis Brothers before St. Louis... come on. If you are going to use that standard to define "exclusive" to Oklahoma where are the limits?

Kendra Scott - Wrong, yet again. Has a location in Utica Square under construction, so it is not exclusive to OKC.

How can the Garage be exclusive to Tulsa when I just saw one at the Penn Square mall?

Looks like google failed me on that one at least. There is one in both now. The point was, is it really something to brag about? It's a bunch of $10 crappy shirts, big deal.

I agree with LandArchPoke.

Trendy stores like Costco, Trader Joe's, H&M, Urban Outfitters, etc are in a different category than your low-end mall stores like Tilly's and the Garage or outdoor enthusiast stores like Cabela's and Bass Pro. While it's true that OKC doesn't lose out every time, enough of the trendy retailers do go to Tulsa first that this question is legitimate and it isn't pure misconception like a few have said that it is.

If you want to include low-end stores and regional chains, I am sure there are MANY that Tulsa has that OKC doesn't and many that OKC has that haven't made this list. For instance, if Hemisphere's can be listed for OKC then Reasor's should be listed for Tulsa.

Tulsa gets big time bragging rights for Costco, especially as Wal-Mart dominated as this state is. Urban Outfitters would have been a much bigger deal five years ago when it was at the peak of its popularity but they still get bragging rights for it. Trader Joe's will also be a big deal and currently all rumors point to them going to Tulsa first. H&M will be a huge deal for whatever city gets it first.

OKC gets bragging rights for TopGolf, Main Event, and Pappadeaux.

I figured I would try to stay away from these topics, but a friend from LA and NYC just forwarded me the same ICSC (International Council of Shopping Centers) newsletter that had this story in it.

I think the over-reaction to this piece is just that, an over-reaction. I know it has been stated that Costco had the OKC piece of land under contract first, truth is they were working on both deals at the same time. Again, the fact that they dragged their feet on the OKC property is the reason they aren't opening one yet. I'm a bit surprised they didn't go for another section of the Chisholm Creek development, which I would bet they probably end up doing.

Urban Outfitter was looking at Tulsa solely. They are looking for only free-standing construction only (no malls), which is the same as retailers like American Apparel. OKC doesn't currently have an area outside of Bricktown that has decent foot traffic, and they weren't interested in that area due to the touristy feeling. Mark my word, in the next 5 years they'll probably be opening a store in Midtown/Automobile Alley.

Frankly the people on here bad mouthing the Tulsa Chamber should be ashamed of themselves. I know many of these people, and when they are talking to any retailers or businesses looking at Tulsa there is a collective effort to talk about how great the entire state is. In fact, a big selling point for Tulsa is how close OKC and NWA is, and that regional tourism is growing across the nation makes talking about how many great things are going on in the region a good thing, not a bad thing. Anyone who has said any chamber person has said negative things about OKC is straight up lying, and those posted should be deleted or edited. If they are doing it, prove it. Where are the quotes?

The only people bad mouthing anyone is the people on here, and it's a vile stream of hate towards Tulsa. Go look at TulsaNow, this isn't even a topic on there, because guess what - no one in Tulsa cares if OKC got something before us. Really, the list on this thread is laughable too at how slanted it is toward OKC. It's not objectable what so ever.

Here's a few that are missing. Tulsa had the first Coach store, first Michael Kors, first LuLu Lemon (this is the best example of how when one opens in either city it is a good thing for the other. If this had failed in Tulsa, OKC would not have gotten the first "full" store in the state), Oakley opened in Tulsa first, and could name others but will stop here.

Noah's - What is this? Are you all talking about the "events" center off Memorial? You really are going to brag about having a 10,000th place to book a weeding? There's also one in Tulsa just FYI, a simple google search and you could figure that out.

Half Priced Books - Really? Another great retailer to brag about... You can add BooksaMillion to a Tulsa exclusive then

Tilly's - Again, wrong. There is a Tulsa location at Woodland Hills. If we're going to count cheap crap clothing stores you can add Garage as an exclusive to Oklahoma for Tulsa.

Hemisphere's - Really? This is not a national brand. This would be like Kansas City bragging they got a Mathis Brothers before St. Louis... come on. If you are going to use that standard to define "exclusive" to Oklahoma where are the limits?

Kendra Scott - Wrong, yet again. Has a location in Utica Square under construction, so it is not exclusive to OKC.

The list isn't meant as a "brag", it's just a list.

Really don't appreciate the tone and attitude. Some of the Tulsa locations probably happened after the list was made and no one posted about it.

We've asked multiple time for additions and corrections.

Who cares? We've got some amazing local shopping in OKC now. Like restaurants, as far as I'm concerned, I don't really care about the chains. I want unique, and I can get that here now.

Trendy stores like Costco, Trader Joe's, H&M, Urban Outfitters, etc are in a different category

You just want to keep creating and redefining arbitrary criteria to get the answer you want; then that is dis-proven then you change it once again.

It gets really, really old.

The list isn't meant as a "brag", it's just a list.

Really don't appreciate the tone and attitude. Some of the Tulsa locations probably happened after the list was made and no one posted about it.

We've asked multiple time for additions and corrections.

Well Pete, I don't appreciate the fact people here are able to attack Chamber member's and put out right lie's in this thread. Many of whom are close friends of mine, and it's not ok to attack peoples character like that without any sort of proof.

Well Pete, I don't appreciate the fact people here are able to attack Chamber member's and put out right lie's in this thread. Many of whom are close friends of mine, and it's not ok to attack people character like that without any sort of proof.

Completely separate issue.

Completely separate issue.

Well my tone carries through the post for that very reason. It upsets me to read things like that.

Well my tone carries through the post for that very reason. It upsets me to read things like that.

Fair enough.

I'll make the changes to the list. It's meant to be a way to track all this in an objective manner and cut through the constant rhetoic and mis-information.

I think I'm with Betts...who cares? Separate cities have different attractions.

Fair enough.

I'll make the changes to the list. It's meant to be a way to track all this in an objective manner and cut through the constant rhetoic and mis-information.

Ok well here's a few to add then, since the Tulsa list didn't get updated.

Tulsa - First in Oklahoma - Coach, White House Black Market, Michael Kors, Pottery Barn, Dick's Sporting Goods, Garage, Oakley, Aeropostale, Pandora Jewelry, Williams Sonoma, Dave & Busters - to name a few

Tulsa - Exclusive to Oklahoma - Gander Mountain, Lifetime Fitness (LA Fitness added for OKC), Fleet Feet - to name a few

What are the exact perimeters of this list, anyways?

Who cares? We've got some amazing local shopping in OKC now. Like restaurants, as far as I'm concerned, I don't really care about the chains. I want unique, and I can get that here now.

It matter because of WHY OKC is getting passed over. As I have been saying, and LandArchPoke made more succinctly, urban sprawl in OKC has resulted in a near total absence of pedestrian areas. If OKC doesn't fix this situation soon OKC is going to be even further behind the 8 ball (which is why projects like 499 Sheridan, Clayco, the Boulevard, and Cox Center redeployment are so darn important). Auto Alley might have good bones but unless they can get all of the available space under common management it is going to be very difficult to attract national retailers. I know some people are fine with not attracting national retailers but the reality is they can deliver foot traffic that local business can then thrive on (unless of course all the potential customers are in skywalks and tunnels). The Park Ave study should be done sometime in the near future and don't be surprised if they suggest common management and closing the concourse in the area. I wonder if Devon will be interested in giving up control of their fake retail space (spoiler alert - I doubt it).

I'm with the who even cares crowd - went to an Urban Outfitters 9 years ago in San Diego, and was wondering wtf was I even doing in there.

$3.9 billion in annual sales; I am sure someone cares. I wonder how many of the people who "don't care" would all of a sudden be the biggest supports of Urban Outfitters if they came here asking for a few million to build their store (ala Cabela's and Bass Pro). I bet they would change their tune and start saying things like - they will be a regional draw, they will attract other retailers, they provide jobs, they will expand the tax base, etc...

Funny how that works.

$3.9 billion in annual sales; I am sure someone cares. I wonder how many of the people who "don't care" would all of a sudden be the biggest supports of Urban Outfitters if they came here asking for a few million to build their store (ala Cabela's and Bass Pro). I bet they would change their tune and start saying things like - they will be a regional draw, they will attract other retailers, they provide jobs, they will expand the tax base, etc...

Funny how that works.

Who cares is the 14 to 18 year old crowd, and that I am not.

It matter because of WHY OKC is getting passed over. As I have been saying, and LandArchPoke made more succinctly, urban sprawl in OKC has resulted in a near total absence of pedestrian areas. If OKC doesn't fix this situation soon OKC is going to be even further behind the 8 ball (which is why projects like 499 Sheridan, Clayco, the Boulevard, and Cox Center redeployment are so darn important). Auto Alley might have good bones but unless they can get all of the available space under common management it is going to be very difficult to attract national retailers. I know some people are fine with not attracting national retailers but the reality is they can deliver foot traffic that local business can then thrive on (unless of course all the potential customers are in skywalks and tunnels). The Park Ave study should be done sometime in the near future and don't be surprised if they suggest common management and closing the concourse in the area. I wonder if Devon will be interested in giving up control of their fake retail space (spoiler alert - I doubt it).

OKC losing out on retail has little to do with built environment, with the exception of the perception issue if that does in fact play a role. The reason is the OKC metro has four completely separate concentrations of high income: Nichols Hills, North Edmond, Far NW/Gaillardia, and SW OKC/Westmoore. None of those areas, by itself, is large enough to pull a lot of weight in the eyes of retailers. If everything was concentrated near Nichols Hills, OKC would probably have Costco, Louis Vuitton and Tiffany and Co by now, regardless of whether urban principles were used or not when creating the built environment.