Amazon HQ2 thread

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Parkway

Just a guess but Michigan probably wasn't willing to play ball on the financial incentives. It could be that simple.

If anything, probably the opposite. Michigan's incentives were probably so generous that Amazon probably feared that choosing it would make the company a political target.

Under Detroit-Windsor's 242-page offer, Amazon would be able to keep all of the state income taxes paid by its HQ2 workers for the first 10 years and then half of those taxes over the next 10 years. It would also be able to operate in Detroit for 30 years without incurring real estate, personal property, city income, or utility users taxes. The documents redact the value of the tax incentives, so it's unclear how much they'd be worth.

http://www.businessinsider.com/detro...ntives-2017-12

[C.]

Originally Posted by The North One

Thanks for the two cents, good thing your perception and opinion has no bearing on reality.

Well, they're not on the shortlist so someone at Amazon has the same perception and opinion.

[Marv95]

If a couple of their priorities are mass transit and distance to the airport than you can knock off at least 5 off the list, even if one of them makes sense for that type of company (Raleigh).

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Parkway

Just a guess but Michigan probably wasn't willing to play ball on the financial incentives. It could be that simple.

Detroit's incentive package was pretty competitive (30 year abatement on property taxes). But I guess in combination of the problems they would inherit, it wasn't worth it.

Admittingly, Michigan in many ways leaves a lot to be desired. All of its "urban centers" have high crime and high poverty, they struggle to maintain their infrastructure, they can't seem to invest the necessary money to fix their schools or improve transit, they have no problem poisoning their citizens, etc.

So I can't blame Amazon for not wanting to deal with that.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

Raleigh, or the greater 'Triangle' region is not surprising given all of the colleges and the Research Triangle Park there.

It is very hard for me to see how Raleigh would absorb this if they indeed grow as expected.

[C.]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

It's sad though that's the perception, because *Metro* Detroit is no worse or better than the metro area of any other decent-size city.

Most metro areas don't have a central city that's losing population. Or has the City of Detroit recently been able to stop the hemorrhaging?

[C.]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

It is very hard for me to see how Raleigh would absorb this if they indeed grow as expected.

I can see the Research Triangle absorbing the growth. The region has the capacity to grow faster.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

It is very hard for me to see how Raleigh would absorb this if they indeed grow as expected.

Raleigh is not a huge city, but the state of NC has demonstrated that it can accommodate millions of newcomers, it's a high growth area.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by CIA

Most metro areas don't have a central city that's losing population. Or has the City of Detroit recently been able to stop the hemorrhaging?

That true's, and no, it hasn't.

Even with downtown Detroit's "comeback," the rest of the city has emptied out quite a bit since the 2010 census.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by CIA

Well, they're not on the shortlist so someone at Amazon has the same perception and opinion.

Oh, yes, you know know what an Amazon exec is thinking? Just like everyone else in the thread, cool.

Keep trolling.

[C.]

Is Detroit on the short list? Get real.

[nature's calling]

I just bought ebooks from Amazon for uni, hope that helps Atlanta’s chances a bit

[The North One]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

That true, and no, it hasn't.

Even with downtown Detroit's "comeback," the rest of the city has emptied out quite a bit since the 2010 census.

lol you always hijack every thread, bravo.

And it has actually, population loss is slowing to nothing, metro region have has gains for awhile

I don't see how this is relevant when a city like Chicago that has both regional and city accelerated losses and yet managed to make the pony list.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by The North One

lol you always hijack every thread, bravo.

And it has actually, population loss is slowing to nothing, metro region have has gains for awhile

I don't see how this is relevant when a city like Chicago that has both regional and city accelerated losses and yet managed to make the pony list.

Detroit MSA
1970 4,490,902 11.9%
1980 4,387,783 −2.3%
1990 4,266,654 −2.8%
2000 4,441,551 4.1%
2010 4,296,250 −3.3%
2016 4,297,617 0.0%

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by The North One

lol you always hijack every thread, bravo.

And it has actually, population loss is slowing to nothing, metro region have has gains for awhile

I don't see how this is relevant when a city like Chicago that has both regional and city accelerated losses and yet managed to make the pony list.

As the 2009 Census estimate showed that suggested Detroit still had 900,000 people, Census estimates are useless.

As far as Chicago, the Loop is booming (at a rate downtown Detroit will never come close to) and they still have all of the things Amazon desires (including mass transit).

[The North One]

Originally Posted by CIA

Is Detroit on the short list? Get real.

Gee, gain some knowledge, the Detroit region has many talented employees (no shit it's one of America's economic pillars) and continues to gain them, you have no idea of the kind of relocation that happens. The universities could have been easy to farm from as well. "Talent" however you define it wouldn't have been a problem. But keep acting like you know something.

[C.]

Chicago is vastly different than the situation in Detroit. Chicago is not going to have trouble attracting top talent to the city. Most people on this forum would love to live in Chicago, for example.

For the record, I think the fiscal issues in Illinois and Chicago may ultimately doom their bid. It's certainty a risk as fiscal health was one of the rating factors in the RFQ. But at least Chicago is still in the running.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by CIA

Chicago is vastly different than the situation in Detroit. Chicago is not going to have trouble attracting top talent to the city. Most people on this forum would love to live in Chicago, for example.

For the record, I think the fiscal issues in Illinois and Chicago may ultimately doom their bid. It's certainty a risk as fiscal health was one of the rating factors in the RFQ. But at least Chicago is still in the running.

Agreed on all points.

[C.]

Originally Posted by The North One

Gee, gain some knowledge, the Detroit region has many talented employees (no shit it's one of America's economic pillars) and continues to gain them, you have no idea of the kind of relocation that happens. The universities could have been easy to farm from as well. "Talent" however you define it wouldn't have been a problem. But keep acting like you know something.

Could Detroit attract and maintain up to 50,000 Amazon employees? A number that would be challenging for most metros. I guess we'll never know for sure.

Much better metros in the country IMO for Amazon based on the RFQ criteria. -But my opinion doesn't matter so ignore me.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by CIA

Chicago is vastly different than the situation in Detroit. Chicago is not going to have trouble attracting top talent to the city. Most people on this forum would love to live in Chicago, for example.

Your personal anecdote on who you believe has no problem moving somewhere is irrelevant, you claimed it couldn't attract talent which implies it doesn't have it. Both false, both wrong. Move on now. https://detroit.curbed.com/2017/8/4/...lenial-detroit