Melbourne’s greatest fortune is the fact it experienced a major Gold Rush at a critical stage of its development. The Gold Rush propelled Melbourne forward and enabled it to build a solid foundation and grow to become for a time the largest city in Australia and reputedly the “richest in the world”. A title Sydney has never held.

Sydney’s greatest virtue is of course its harbour. While there is nothing quite like striking it rich, the bounty of the harbour never ran out, it’s like the gift that keeps on giving.

How Sydney must have felt when Melbourne raced passed it. That resentment still survives today. If it wasn’t for gold Melbourne would be no competition for Sydney and would be in the pack with the other 3 large capitals. Sydney would likely be even bigger and host most of the events and institutions it covets in Melbourne.

Melbourne is frustrated because no matter what it does or how hard it tries, Sydney will still have “The Harbour”, (and the rest of the geographical package), and all that comes with it. Even Sydney’s milder climate relates to geography, though it isn’t the advantage Sydney says it is unless you believe it.

There are of course other virtues Sydney holds over Melbourne but nothing so significant as its geography. In fact if you were to compare each city just in terms of their human activity, environment and legacy and not for what nature has provided then Melbourne looks far more attractive.

As the two cities grow the geographical advantage of Sydney may not be so strong. For example, the appeal of the world’s alpha cities has little to do with their natural beauty and much to do with their human element.

Melbourne’s geography while not as beautiful as Sydney’s has proven to be more practical. Melbourne’s sewage treatment has been much better largely due to geography. Melbourne is a much better city for bikes, Melbourne’s geography is better when building roads and other infrastructure and that saves money or gets you more for your dollar and so it goes. Every cloud has a silver lining.

The other thing about Melbourne’s geography is that its potential has often been understated and under realized. There is room for improvement and growth. Port Phillip Bay is like a pair of big shoes that Melbourne’s feet were too small for but the way Melbourne uses its bay will change a lot this century. While Sydney’s beautiful harbour is shrinking relative to the city around it.

If you were to put Melbourne in Sydney’s setting you would create a city better than either of them. That’s what I think…

You are fairly typical of the type of Sydneysider who tries too hard to justify Sydney’s shortcomings while expressing an attitude of superiority toward other cities.

You claim that Sydney lacks planning because it is so much older than Melbourne and there was not the technology to plan better back then. San Francisco, Washington and even Parramatta are the same age as Sydney and they are properly planned. You will even find older cities like Philadelphia, Baltimore and New York, just to name a few, that have better planning than Sydney. As for Australian state capitals, Hobart is only 15 years younger than Sydney and it was planned. In fact Sydney is the only capital not properly planned. If there is a reason for this it might be because Sydney was not settled with the intent of founding a city unlike Melbourne. I don’t know if the other penal colonies in Australia were intended to become cities or not but in any case they still executed a plan, unlike Sydney…

Melbourne was founded nearly 50 years after Sydney and within 30 years it was larger and richer. That rapid growth is something Sydney has never known and yet Melbourne was able to cope with it and plan as it grew, though there would have been stresses.

You also said that Sydney’s transport system was established well before Melbourne’s and that is the excuse for its problems. Melbourne had the first steam train in Australia and its rail network also developed faster than Sydney’s. Melbourne’s network was also electrified first. Sydney did have a tram before Melbourne but it had tracks that protruded from the road and damaged the wheels of other road users and was closed after 5 years. Great plan that one. After the trains Sydney’s tram network did develop a little earlier and faster than Melbourne’s trams. Part of the reason Sydney’s trains were slower to develop was because the tram network was working well. Sydney did eventually have a tram network larger than Melbourne’s is even today, but then Sydney ripped it up…??? How sad it is that we can no longer enjoy the beauty of Sydney Harbour from the window of a tram? It must have been a great ride.

You mentioned how Perth’s transport network is great but joked that it doesn’t have to handle many people, “36” people in fact. Perth’s network is good and much of it built recently. Perth is currently leading the way with public transport in Australia. Of course Perth does have healthy finances but it still shows good planning and while its network doesn’t have to handle as many people as Sydney’s, it’s is all to scale. Just like Sydney’s network doesn’t have to handle as many people as New York’s, London’s, Hong Kong’s, Paris’s, Tokyo’s… etc, but theirs work better than Sydney’s and probably Melbourne’s too.

You mentioned Melbourne’s sporting calendar and bar scene but said if you wanted that kind of thing you would move to Europe where it is done right. Is it not done right in Melbourne? A London based company rates Melbourne the best city in the world to hold a sports event and while I don’t have figures, by all accounts our bars are comparable to the some of the best.
Why is it that in the 90’s the MotoGP is left Victoria for Sydney over tobacco sponsorship but soon returned again to Victoria where it remains? Is that because you did it right and we didn’t?

As for dazzling skylines and tall buildings, Sydney may have more buildings higher than 90m but according to skyscraperpage.com Sydney’s tallest building is only the 11th tallest in Australia including 2 under construction. I personally don’t mind tall skylines but they are becoming quite common, just like shopping centers, they don’t same appeal they used to have.

Melbourne… please, don’t try so hard, you don’t do Sydney any favors in the eyes of those who know the facts. I write this because there are obviously people who read all this and might be tempted to believe what you say. You don’t want to sound like Paul Keating when he said, “If you don’t live in Sydney, you’re just camping out”. No other Australian likes that kind of attitude and foreigners can see it for what it is.

You live in a beautiful city; it doesn’t have to be perfect…

Thanks again!

Sydney, is the oldest, very busy and covers 3 times (a guess) the size of paris and london, the views are spectacular, if you like bushwalking there are endless of national parks nearby, beaches are only 15mins away, if you like the adventure and chaotic scene then “sydney” is for you. Sydney is very much alive and events around the city are endless, alot of my friends from around the world have loved sydney so much that they cant get enough of it, a few have actually immirgrated to syd and enjoying what the city has to offer.
Public transport in and around the city is relatively great and improving to cater for everyone. I stayed for only 1week but decided to stay for an extra 2months to get the real feel of sydney and i must say it was an excellent decision.

Hope this piece of info helps you out “melsyd” and good luck with your travels.