Via Architectural Record July Issue
14.7.11
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
writer's pages
Contributors
Architecture
Posts
archive
- Apr 21 (1)
- Feb 17 (1)
- Feb 26 (1)
- Jan 22 (1)
- Oct 23 (1)
- Jul 10 (1)
- Jun 19 (1)
- May 29 (1)
- May 22 (1)
- May 1 (1)
- Apr 17 (3)
- Apr 10 (1)
- Feb 20 (1)
- Feb 13 (1)
- Feb 6 (4)
- Jan 30 (4)
- Jan 23 (6)
- Jan 9 (1)
- Dec 19 (2)
- Dec 5 (1)
- Nov 28 (1)
- Nov 14 (1)
- Oct 17 (1)
- Sep 26 (1)
- Sep 5 (1)
- Aug 29 (1)
- Aug 22 (1)
- Aug 15 (1)
- Aug 1 (1)
- Jul 25 (1)
- Jul 11 (1)
- Jun 20 (2)
- Jun 13 (1)
- May 30 (1)
- May 2 (1)
- Apr 25 (1)
- Apr 18 (1)
- Apr 11 (1)
- Apr 4 (1)
- Mar 28 (1)
- Mar 21 (1)
- Feb 14 (1)
- Jan 24 (2)
- Jan 17 (3)
- Jan 10 (1)
- Dec 20 (1)
- Dec 13 (1)
- Dec 6 (1)
- Nov 29 (1)
- Nov 22 (3)
- Nov 15 (2)
- Nov 8 (1)
- Oct 25 (4)
- Oct 18 (1)
- Oct 11 (2)
- Oct 4 (1)
- Sep 13 (3)
- Sep 6 (1)
- Aug 30 (2)
- Aug 23 (1)
- Aug 9 (6)
- Aug 2 (2)
- Jul 26 (1)
- Jul 12 (4)
- Jul 5 (3)
- Jun 21 (2)
- Jun 14 (5)
- Jun 7 (5)
- May 31 (3)
- May 24 (2)
- May 10 (3)
- May 3 (6)
- Apr 26 (5)
- Apr 19 (2)
- Apr 12 (3)
- Apr 5 (6)
- Mar 29 (9)
- Mar 22 (9)
Granted this is based on revenue and an odd post to come after the previous. But still a post none the less.
ReplyDeleteyes, 'profit' not 'quality'...
ReplyDeletevery true. this list does not show the number of people working for the firm, the actual profit from the revenue listed nor does it value the quality of the work. however, many of the firms listed are top design firms with exceptional work. it's likely due to the amount of work they are able to create. the one thing that can be said from this list is that firms that generate this much in sales are doing well despite the economic stresses. they are also able to take on very large scale projects that smaller firms cannot.
ReplyDelete