Quote:
Originally Posted by edale
Macy's is the classic example of an HQ that was really meaningless, though. Cincinnati was the official HQ, sure, but all of the C-Suite, creatives, etc. were based out of NYC. I think maybe some HR, accounting, and back office type of operations were in Cincy. When they moved the HQ, it wasn't a big deal to the economy because there were minimal jobs there to begin with, and Macy's wasn't exactly a pillar of the community when it came to investing in local institutions and what not.
Quite a different scenario than if P&G or Kroger was to leave the city. The departure of either of those giants would devastate Cincinnati. Those companies have giant local workforces, including many very high-income earners that in turn support local causes. Plus, both companies prop up scores of other businesses, so there's a multiplier effect. I don't believe Macy's did much of anything for Cincy other than have a couple hundred jobs, if that. Hell, having the HQ downtown wasn't even enough for them to keep their downtown store open! Housing is probably a more productive use for the Macy's HQ building compared to how the company was using it, tbh.
|
That's because Macy's merged with Federated stores in 1994, and moved its HQs to Cincy where Federated was based. But Macys was founded in NYC and its strongest base was the NYC metro, so it seems that much of the HQ staff stayed there. (all from Wiki). Like you say, HQs really matter if they employ thousands and leave or wither away if the company becomes irrelevant, like Kodak in Rochester has. Sure, the HQs can be bragging rights, but the number of high income employees they have is probably more important, especially for a small or mid-size metro area. I read a few years ago that Neeham, Wisconsin felt devastated when Kimberly Clark moved its HQs to Irving TX in the 1980s but a few years later employed more in Neeham than when it left, even though the CEOs and senior staff were no longer in Neeham.
Threaded Mode