Surprised SF is lower than LA, or even that it is as low as it is.
Besides movies, and p.ronronron, not sure what LA actually has. SF area has all the computing giants that bang the beat we all seem to dance to.
For a country that has had to deal with nigh on 12 years of Bush/Obama stupidity, US cities dominate the **** out of the world still. By a long, long way.
The Bay Area is focused on high tech, bio- medical, and medical research.
And very expensive.
LA on the other hand is not dependent on a single industry, but it's size, infrastructure and volume offers greater opportunities. It's also the second or third largest city for many nationalities outside of their home countries. Including Taiwan, Mexico, Iran, Armenia, Israel, Korea, Thailand, Argentina and El Salvador. You can take a direct flight anywhere from LAX including Istanbul, Lima, Dubai, Sydney, etc.
A pecuiliar statement, considering it's a ranking of clout.
What's peculiar is your reading comprehension. I wasn't questioning why they are in the top 10. I know what the ranking is of. I was lamenting the fact that they are in the top 10.
Neither of them are ranked highly because they are cities of great renown for being centers of business creativity, productive industry, great cultural experience or high human capital.
They are only there because of "political engagement". Yes, call it political clout, if you like, but that does not change the meaning of my comment.