Amazon HQ2 thread

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

There's this part of me that wants Chicago to get it, but when people like bnk come along and start sounding like a chamber of commerce recording, I almost hope they don't get it.

Thank you! You've expressed in words what I've been too nice to say.

We get it, Chicago's a top candidate for HQ2. But we don't need to be reminded of it with the trivializing of other cities or rankings that don't place them near the top in every other post. That's why they've (Chicago booster) been the only ones posting in this thread as of late, other than those who've attempted to push back at their posts.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by mhays

They still did little beyond rolling out their standard measures, which might have very little to do with what this particular company wants.

And they did so with good reason.

Assumption can be made until we're blue in the face. But other than what Amazon listed in their RFP, none of us know for sure what they're looking for with HQ2.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

There's this part of me that wants Chicago to get it, but when people like bnk come along and start sounding like a chamber of commerce recording, I almost hope they don't get it.

He doesn’t represent all of us. Look at his Avatar. He’s still stuck on the idea that Chicago should get the Olympics

[JManc]

Amazon could see this thread and bnk's posts in particular and decide to remove Chicago from consideration.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

And they did so with good reason.

Assumption can be made until we're blue in the face. But other than what Amazon listed in their RFP, none of us know for sure what they're looking for with HQ2.

No, you can do waaay better. I've responded to 1000+ RFPs as a general contractor. Lesson #1 is to dig deeper and understand your client. That's just as true for a prognosticator as it is for a city trying to win.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by mhays

No, you can do waaay better. I've responded to 1000+ RFPs as a general contractor. Lesson #1 is to dig deeper and understand your client. That's just as true for a prognosticator as it is for a city trying to win.

How many did you win?

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

Thank you! You've expressed in words what I've been too nice to say.

We get it, Chicago's a top candidate for HQ2. But we don't need to be reminded of it with the trivializing of other cities or rankings that don't place them near the top in every other post. That's why they've (Chicago booster) been the only ones posting in this thread as of late, other than those who've attempted to push back at their posts.

Don't you have over 120 post in this thread?

Who is trivializing? Again, it sounds like sour grapes and I don't know why. I've seen nothing from bnk trivializing any place, especially in the posts that triggered this discussion.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

How many did you win?

That's off topic. But we do well. Of course it's a team effort to win anything, with the actual project team being in front, and Marketing (me and others) organizing and supporting.

[DMPHL]

Originally Posted by mhays

That's off topic. But we do well. Of course it's a team effort to win anything, with the actual project team being in front, and Marketing (me and others) organizing and supporting.

Anyways, I think the more important question is how many bids do firms who don't bother to look past the RFP win?

Looking past an RFP (whether for projects like this, or for grants, or for any other kind of business, or for a job application) is the smart thing to do, and is what puts you in a better position. It doesn't mean you always win, because of course it doesn't. But you still have to do it.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by mhays

No, you can do waaay better. I've responded to 1000+ RFPs as a general contractor. Lesson #1 is to dig deeper and understand your client. That's just as true for a prognosticator as it is for a city trying to win.

That's not the point. I'm in purchasing, so I know how the bidding process works.

My point is, us as posters on an internet form (and CNBC as a media outlet) have no way of knowing for certain what Amazon wants beyond the RFP, and they likely wouldn't disclose that information to us if we wanted to find out.

[mhays]

Procurement in commercial real estate?

Bid processes (if really bidding) are generally pretty by-the-book...I'm not experienced in that.

Negotiated contracts for construction are frequently the opposite unless they're for public agencies.

I imagine site selection is like the latter x10.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by mhays

That's off topic. But we do well. Of course it's a team effort to win anything, with the actual project team being in front, and Marketing (me and others) organizing and supporting.

I've also been involved in writing a few proposals. I can't ever recall participating on a bid that we lost for a criteria that was not listed on the RFP. Losses in my experience have boiled down to ) a competitor already having a relationship, or 2) we underestimated, or could not satisfactorily demonstrate, a criteria in the RFP.

[mhays]

I can think of many examples where "above and beyond" has won the job.

For example let's say it's a new office building. Maybe the RFP doesn't say anything about groundwater but we know it's an issue, and we think the client knows it's an issue. Acknowledging this and discussing experience and potential solutions might become a real advantage.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by mhays

Procurement in commercial real estate?

Bid processes (if really bidding) are generally pretty by-the-book...I'm not experienced in that.

Negotiated contracts for construction are frequently the opposite unless they're for public agencies.

I imagine site selection is like the latter x10.

Manufacturing, primarily the indirect side (which isn't quite as "by-the-book" as you think).

That said, the general principles are the same. From an ethical standpoint (and potentially a legal standpoint), the client should not be expressing additional requirements outside of their formal RFP/RFQ with one supplier/vendor without sharing the same information with all of the suppliers/vendors.

[SpawnOfVulcan]

Originally Posted by bnk

And to let people know what they are up against and redirect the national mindset of Chicago since Obama became POTUS. I like to post facts. Andy anyone think Amazon already doesn't have a short list of less than 5 cities and likely already know who and where it will be is clueless. An to refute "the oh transit isn't that important, any big city has an airport good enough, shovel ready doesn't really mean shovel ready, and the many other talking points" poo pooing on the Amazon Bid requirements.

Those articles were from Atlanta based siteselection national magazine.
http://siteselection.com/issues/2017/nov/amazon-hq2-welcome-to-the-amazon-games.cfm

bnk, in the past I've been a shameless producer of boosterism of the various places in which I've lived, and I find your motivation to be of... the boosterism kind.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

Manufacturing, primarily the indirect side (which isn't quite as "by-the-book" as you think).

That said, the general principles are the same. From an ethical standpoint (and potentially a legal standpoint), the client should not be expressing additional requirements outside of their formal RFP/RFQ with one supplier/vendor without sharing the same information with all of the suppliers/vendors.

That's how it works with public agencies, and with private sector clients that run general contractors through in-house procurement divisions. Developers can be cowboys. Work for corporate end-users can be anywhere in that spectrum, which is often governed by who runs things.

Many RFPs are very clear about being able to do whatever they want, whenever they want...those with legal departments are good at this. That avoids any risk. Others leave it implied.

I forget how Amazon worded it in the RFP, but there are no rules here.

[Shawn]

When it comes to major brands fielding RFPs for their media advertising business, "above and beyond" is the only way to win a Tier 1 pitch. The RFP itself is treated as a test for agencies: provide the bare minimum in terms of requirements and KPIs and then see how insightful or expertly-demonstrated the returns are.

I work with Amazon on the publisher side and spend a whole damn lot on the advertiser side - I've submitted Amazon RFPs before myself (obviously not on this scale). "Above and beyond" is par for course for them as an organization, and they only want to work with vendors / partners who understand this and can deliver.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by mhays

That's how it works with public agencies, and with private sector clients that run general contractors through in-house procurement divisions. Developers can be cowboys. Work for corporate end-users can be anywhere in that spectrum, which is often governed by who runs things.

Many RFPs are very clear about being able to do whatever they want, whenever they want...those with legal departments are good at this. That avoids any risk. Others leave it implied.

I forget how Amazon worded it in the RFP, but there are no rules here.

Amazon did encourage participants to be creative with their proposals, but that could mean "creative" within the confines of their requirements listed in the RFP.

But again, like I said, we're all still guessing with Amazon.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by mhays

I can think of many examples where "above and beyond" has won the job.

For example let's say it's a new office building. Maybe the RFP doesn't say anything about groundwater but we know it's an issue, and we think the client knows it's an issue. Acknowledging this and discussing experience and potential solutions might become a real advantage.

Exactly, however I've never seen someone win an RFP where they are lacking on one or more of the main components listed in the RFP, but went above and beyond so that didn't matter.

There are a lot of people in this thread going on and on about "well my city could offer X to show Amazon how great we are. X isn't in the RFP, but that's above and beyond." Meanwhile their city is lacking some factor Y that is very much in the RFP and that's somehow written off as not important because "we don't really know what Amazon wants"...

No, we do know what they want, they freaking wrote it down for a reason. What we don't know is the calculus by which they are weighing these factors and we don't know what other "above and beyond" type ideas might be out there to lure Amazon in. What we do know is that it is probably very unlikely that any city that seriously fails on any of the main points of the RFP will win it. An example would be all these smaller tech cities that are basically Seattle clones in terms of housing prices, shortage of workers, etc. Why would Amazon jump out of the Fire (TM) in Seattle and into the frying pan of an even smaller metro like Austin which already is suffering from some of the problems Amazon is fleeing? Yeah I get Austin is the hot hand in the tech industry outside of the traditional suspects like SF or Seattle, but it fails on some key points of the RFP. No amount of "going above and beyond" will make up for that.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by tascalisa

bnk, in the past I've been a shameless producer of boosterism of the various places in which I've lived, and I find your motivation to be of... the boosterism kind.

Because he shared an article that contradicts the narrative some have been pushing in this thread? The article bnk shared is just an interesting tidbit about Chicago's strengths and business owners have continued to take notice of what the city has to offer. Sharing that in a thread about a major corporate office is not "boosterism" IMO. The fact that it has triggered such strong emotions is interesting...