Evidence is mounting that Apple has picked a location for its new campus

[The North One]

^ it's interesting that Amazon's offices seems a bit more diverse than Apple's which doesn't even have an office in Minneapolis (which I find ridiculous).

[mhays]

Google has a number of buildings in Seattle too, and will apparently have about 1,200,000 sf by next year. That's a mix of urban core and semi-urban suburban complexes.

As for location type, Seattle's tech is very concentrated on the urban core aside from Microsoft, which is densifying its main campus (which has a 60% SOV commute rate) and has some towers in Downtown Bellevue. Otherwise everyone either has a mix of urban/suburban (Facebook is the big one, Google and Tableau are others), or is all urban (Apple, Indeed, Adobe, Oracle, Expedia, Zillow).

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by BG918

With Google opening up a second HQ in NYC are they also going to split up their operations and expand in cities around the U.S.?

It looks like there is a common theme that the cities these companies are expanding in are already tech-heavy and for the most part large (Boulder being the exception but is part of the Denver metro). Some cities that are noticeably absent are Raleigh/Durham, Nashville, Philadelphia and Houston.

The objective in every case seems to be to enlarge the pool of talent from which they can hire and to reduce the competition with other employers as much as possible.

Obviously the competition is great in the Bay Area and with Microsoft also present, in Seattle as well. So they are going to relatively untapped sources. Seems inevitable.

And they can't hope to attract people from these sources to their existing campuses because those places already have housing shortages and high housing costs--so they are going to where the people are.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by mhays

Google has a number of buildings in Seattle too, and will apparently have about 1,200,000 sf by next year. That's a mix of urban core and semi-urban suburban complexes.

As for location type, Seattle's tech is very concentrated on the urban core aside from Microsoft, which is densifying its main campus (which has a 60% SOV commute rate) and has some towers in Downtown Bellevue. Otherwise everyone either has a mix of urban/suburban (Facebook is the big one, Google and Tableau are others), or is all urban (Apple, Indeed, Adobe, Oracle, Expedia, Zillow).

Nobody outside of San Francisco seems to notice, but Salesforce.com, which is not a household name because it sells to business mainly, not consumers, is in the process of snapping up much of the office space that becomes available in downtown SF.

Having leased all of SF's new tallest building (now known as the Salesforce Tower) and leased entire buildings on 2 of the other 4 corners of the same interesection, they have recently entered into an agreement to lease a new 800 ft tower in development on the opposite side (but also connected to) the Salesforce (formerly TransBay) Transit Center.


https://www.sfgate.com/business/arti...p?t=bb152445c7

When finished, buildings 1 and 4 will be Salesforce offices.

[austlar1]

Well, Apple's decision to expand in Austin certainly wasn't based on any strong desire to locate in the urban core. The new campus, which is somewhat adjacent to their existing campus, will be entirely located on undeveloped land in suburban Williamson County. There is a small portion of Austin located in Williamson, but I think this new campus is completely outside of Austin's city limits. https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/...valley/578122/

[10023]

^ Apple is a suburban company in Cupertino, too. Why would anyone expect them to build an urban campus?

[mhays]

For one, some companies specifically try to contrast with their existing HQs to add to their attractiveness to other types of employees.