Amazon HQ2 thread

[James Bond Agent 007]

I don't see that any of the requirements say it has to be a "progressive" government.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

However, it seems clear one of Amazon's main reasons for not doing it in Seattle is because Seattle is getting expensive. That being the case, another city even more expensive than Seattle probably isn't in the cards. For that reason, just about anywhere in California is probably not going to be considered either.

If we still had Bloomberg as mayor, it would be a high chance this HQ would go to NYC, even despite the cost you outlined. However, with our current admin. I am VERY skeptical.

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by k1052

I think it's Phllly if east coast. Otherwise Atlanta/Chicago versus TX.

I was pretty much thinking the same thing. Though I'll also throw Toronto into the mix. Offers Amazon the ability to attract talent in both the US and Canada. Granted I'm sure they have no problem attracting talented Canadians now, but it would give them an opportunity to do so with potentially less need for work visas. Also would healthcare costs be lower for Amazon if they built in Toronto since Canadians already have government healthcare?

[The North One]

Everyone is focused on American cities but what about Canada? Montreal would be great for them.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

I was pretty much thinking the same thing. Though I'll also throw Toronto into the mix. Offers Amazon the ability to attract talent in both the US and Canada. Granted I'm sure they have no problem attracting talented Canadians now, but it would give them an opportunity to do so with potentially less need for work visas. Also would healthcare costs be lower for Amazon if they built in Toronto since Canadians already have government healthcare?

An outside chance but not impossible.

[RC14]

In the Salt Lake City Development thread we are discussing a site downtown between 400 and 500 South on Main ST.

One of the lines that stood out to me about what Amazon wants is "a business friendly environment." Salt Lake City is consistently ranked as one of the most business friendly cities.
We are also a growing tech market.

The site we are talking about is a whole block, undeveloped parking lot that sits squarely at a light rail station serving lines that go to the airport (about 30min by train), the University of Utah, downtown, Amtrak and into much of the suburbs. It is 8 min from the airport by car and bordered by two arterial roads: 400 South (with direct access to the University of Utah) and 500 South (a wide, one way street spilling onto I-15 and I-80 which are both less than a mile away.)



I know this is a long shot, especially because we are so close to Seattle but I think Amazon is looking for a low cost, large metropolitan area. Something along the lines of Austin, Salt Lake City or the research triangle.

[Private Dick]

Pittsburgh has been readying the site for Amazon for a few years now.

Uber ATC is already there. The CMU-led Advanced Robotics Institute (over 200 major universities, corporations, govt agencies, and orgs) is moving in, with a focus on development of versatile, multi-tasking robotics and deployments for the logistics sector.

http://i.picresize.com/images/2017/09/07/S2OL.jpg

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by The North One

Everyone is focused on American cities but what about Canada? Montreal would be great for them.

Would communication between the Seattle HQ (English) and a Montreal HQ (French) be a potential issue?

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by The North One

Everyone is focused on American cities but what about Canada? Montreal would be great for them.

Maybe Toronto.

Montreal still suffers from political instability, real or perceived. Risk is too high. Corporatists don't quite gel with secessionists.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

I don't see that any of the requirements say it has to be a "progressive" government.

I think you may be right. I guess I misread the announcement. They are looking for a local government that is willing to provide incentives, which certainly includes many places in Texas. Amazon has a big presence already in the Austin area, but the transit options on site (wherever that site would be in the Austin area) just don't exist. We are choking in traffic here and cannot get it together to upgrade mass transit options.

[James Bond Agent 007]

Originally Posted by RC14

In the Salt Lake City Development thread we are discussing a site downtown between 400 and 500 South on Main ST.

...

The site we are talking about is a whole block, undeveloped parking lot that sits squarely at a light rail station serving lines that go to the airport (about 30min by train), the University of Utah, downtown, Amtrak and into much of the suburbs. It is 8 min from the airport by car and bordered by two arterial roads: 400 South (with direct access to the University of Utah) and 500 South (a wide, one way street spilling onto I-15 and I-80 which are both less than a mile away.)

There is no way one block is going to be big enough to potentially support 8 million square feet, even if the block is large.

[bnk]

I have a suspicion the decision is almost pretty much made up.

Cities need their plans in mid October. That's not a lot of time.

Just the wrinkles need to be worked out.





http://siteselection.com/issues/2017...ns-of-2016.cfm






The Windy City keeps coming up.

There are reasons for that, says Matthew T. McGuire, who served under President Obama ...

World Business Chicago worked with more than 180 companies in 2016, in coordination with the City, bringing nearly 9,000 jobs to Chicago. McGuire says Chicago is a great example of a competitive global city, due to such factors as its central location, a strong cadre of universities, hard-wired digital economy infrastructure ...

...

No wonder investment research firm PitchBook found early this year that the city led even the Bay Area and New York when measured by percentage of profitable startups.

Diversified and Dependable

In remarks at last year’s TrustBelt conference in his city, Mayor Rahm Emanuel offered ballast for those remarks, noting not only the metro area’s 16 four-year schools (more than any city but Boston) but its steady flow of talent from Big 10 universities throughout the Upper Midwest. “Every year and summer, like clockwork, around 140,000 freshly minted four-year degrees land in Chicago to start their career,” he said. Moreover, the city’s community colleges, which have about 115,000 enrolled, have been revamped to add more industry-sector specialization — for example, healthcare at Malcolm X, transportation and logistics at Harvey — to keep companies of all sizes supplied with the workforce they need.

Analysis released in February by Peter Bernstein, vice president at RCF Economic & Financial Consulting, Inc., shows that the Chicago area and the rest of Illinois both suffered substantial job losses during the Great Recession, but only the Chicago area has recovered its lost jobs, and in fact the area reached an all-time high in employment in 2016. Greater Chicago accounts for 85 percent of all private sector jobs added in the state of Illinois since the Great Recession.

...


https://siteselection.com/issues/201...top-metros.cfm


http://siteselection.com/issues/2014/mar/metros.cfm

[RC14]

Nevermind

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

However, it seems clear one of Amazon's main reasons for not doing it in Seattle is because Seattle is getting expensive. That being the case, another city even more expensive than Seattle probably isn't in the cards. For that reason, just about anywhere in California is probably not going to be considered either.

Amazon has already estabished its California footprint which I think is all it has in mind for the state. Also, it seems to be looking for tax or other incentives like free land and I doubt CA would offer much (because it doesn't need to--its economy is doing fine as things are).

Amazon signs 180,000-square-foot lease in downtown San Francisco
BY BROCK KEELING@BROCKKEELING
AUG 2, 2017, 9:33AM PDT

The San Francisco Business Times reports that Amazon just inked a major San Francisco lease. The digital retailer signed a 180,000-square-foot deal at 525 Market, the circa 1973 concrete-and-steel high-rise block at First Street.

This isn’t Amazon’s only presence in the Bay Area. In addition to two office leases in East Palo Alto and Sunnyvale, the company also has space at 188 Spear and 475 Sansome.

Presently the retailer has 1,083 jobs open in the Bay Area alone.

According to Geek Wire, “Amazon employs more than 30,000 people in California, which represents Amazon’s second-biggest market in the country, behind Washington state. That includes employees at Amazon’s warehouses — it has 11 in California, along with 17 sortation/delivery centers and 11 Prime Now hubs.”

https://sf.curbed.com/2017/8/2/16084...-san-francisco

[James Bond Agent 007]

Yeah, that's 180K square feet, not much. They're talking about eventually needing 8 million.

[CherryCreek]

Colorado announces they are ready to go!

https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017...?partner=IFTTT


Given short time fuse, I got to think that Amazon has been in discussions "informally" behind the scenes. Here's arial view of one potential site -light rail on site, airport train 1/4 mile away, central business district immediately adjacent (blocks away). Currently has Pepsi Center and Elitch's amusement park. All owned by single owner - Stan Kroenke (owner of Nuggets, Avalanche, and LA Rams) who purportedly acquired the Elitch's parcel (the other half was already owned by Kroenke) a couple years ago for potential future development.

http://denverinfill.com/images/blog/...south_base.jpg

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

I don't see that any of the requirements say it has to be a "progressive" government.

I really doubt Bezos would pick a place where there will be "bathroom law" and other LGBTQ-hostile issues recurrently coming up. It's not so much about political "progressivity" on the national level (in other words, opposition to Trump) but local since nearly all prominent tech CEOs, not just Bezos, have recently been taking outspoken stands on these local laws because, among other reasons, they want to make hiring and retaining employees who may be diverse in all ways except talent in their job area easier.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

Yeah, that's 180K square feet, not much. They're talking about eventually needing 8 million.

8 million sq ft and $5 billion. That's clearly a new campus, probably near a small city or a large brownfields site in a larger one.

This, of course, is another reason SF is off the table--Uber has just taken about the last suitable piece of land in the city (which it bought from Salesforce when that company decided to go high rise, not midrise). There are places in the metro but not in the city itself.

[SLO]

They will get everything thrown at them as far as incentives in places like Dallas/Plano, Denver, Atlanta maybe Chicago. Heck even a place like Westlake/Keller Texas by Perots Alliance Airport corridor.
I kind of expect it to be non coastal.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I really doubt Bezos would pick a place where there will be "bathroom law" and other LGBTQ-hostile issues recurrently coming up. It's not so much about political "progressivity" on the national level (in other words, opposition to Trump) but local since nearly all prominent tech CEOs, not just Bezos, have recently been taking outspoken stands on these local laws because, among other reasons, they want to make hiring and retaining employees who may be diverse in all ways except talent in their job area easier.

Texas bathroom law thankfully got sidelined in the last special session. I think it is dead until the next regular session which gives some breathing room. The Austin local government (and most local governments in other Texas cities) would be considered progressive and LGBTQ friendly. The problem is state government which seems eager to over rule progressive local ordinances.

I would love to see Amazon do this deal in Austin, but I don't think we are ready to make a cohesive bid. There are a few sites that might work outside of downtown, but transit options are few other than already traffic choked freeways. Also, our airport has only two scheduled overseas flights, both of them to Europe. There is talk of a Tokyo or Seoul flight coming soon, but so far it has not happened. Amazon now owns Whole Foods with HQ in Austin. They also have a huge distribution center in nearby San Marcos, but the distribution centers seem to be sprouting up all over the country. I think the DFW area has a better shot at getting this project because they know how to move fast to accommodate the needs of prospective new business projects, and there is a pretty well developed light rail and commuter rail network either completed or under construction. Cost of living there is reasonable and there is a pool of talent in place or willing to relocate there.

I just read up on Bezos and his Texas roots. His family owned a large ranch near Cotula (wherever that may be in Texas) and he attended school for part of his youth in the River Oaks area of Houston. He currently is one of the two or three largest landowners in the state with massive holdings in West Texas. Will any of that factor into his decision? He may rightly believe that a huge investment in this state might somehow influence the direction of state government. He seems to be a centrist in his politics for the most part, but his Washington Post is on a mission to take down Trump.