Amazon HQ2

[papertowelroll]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

Amazon is a business that relies on keeping things cheap.

Why would you place 50k people in the most expensive cities in America? The cost of building 8M sqft of space, then hiring all those people with salaries commanded in NYC (and all those other expensive ass cities) will knock those cities out asap.

Amazon already has their Flagship city, we will be their cost alternative and in turn they can basically make a HUGE difference in what Austin becomes in the next 50 years. Austin could be Bezos' legacy, even more than Amazon.

I'm just sayin, we are the obvious choice.

I don't really agree about that. Amazon's market cap vs employee ratio is absolutely massive. They need their operations to be streamlined of course, but I think they can afford to spend on the best employee talent.

[freerover]

Here is the REIS ranking document: https://www.reis.com/hubfs/Amazon%20HQ%2...on%20and%20Scoring%20Analysis%202017.pdf


The point here is that this is a data driven analysis based on the RFP. It's not a, "I don't know how that sounds." It's a blind overall ranking and designed to eliminate subjectivity. That doesn't mean Austin isn't being considered. It means that Austin does not rank well in the data metrics and will have to rely on intangibles.

Originally Posted by the Genral

They lost me at Rochester and Suburban Virginia being in their top 10.

Suburban Virginia are the D.C. suburbs. Many people live in Virginia and work in DC so offices in Virginia is not crazy at all.

Originally Posted by mumu

New Orleans, too. A place that could go under water at any time!

Again, it's a data driven ranking. This is a good point but the fact that NO is included is a testament to how little subjectivity there is in this ranking.

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

Amazon is a business that relies on keeping things cheap.

Why would you place 50k people in the most expensive cities in America? The cost of building 8M sqft of space, then hiring all those people with salaries commanded in NYC (and all those other expensive ass cities) will knock those cities out asap. Amazon already has their Flagship city, we will be their cost alternative and in turn they can basically make a HUGE difference in what Austin becomes in the next 50 years. Austin could be Bezos' legacy, even more than Amazon.

I'm just sayin, we are the obvious choice.

Yes, the cost of living in Austin is relatively low but housing costs is high which is a major problem they are facing in Seattle. This makes moving to the north east where states are getting less dense might be more appealing.

This is indicative of what really bothers me about people and politicians in Austin that this proposal is exposing. There is this expectation that Austin is amazing and everyone wants to be here so we don't need to try. The fact is that a lot of the businesses that create the current tech structure were heavily recruited. These companies didn't just decide to move here because it's cool. There is just a lot of denial in Austin about real problems facing the city.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

Here is the REIS ranking document: https://www.reis.com/hubfs/Amazon%20HQ%2...on%20and%20Scoring%20Analysis%202017.pdf


The point here is that this is a data driven analysis based on the RFP. It's not a, "I don't know how that sounds." It's a blind overall ranking and designed to eliminate subjectivity. That doesn't mean Austin isn't being considered. It means that Austin does not rank well in the data metrics and will have to rely on intangibles.

Okay, what are Austin's numbers on that ranking? I'll wait.



There's 0 indication on that "study" that they even looked at more than the 25 cities they list.

Or are you really claiming that in a "data driven analysis" Austin is >25 and Chatta-fucking-nooga is better? *


*A city which doesn't even meet the minimum population criteria of the RFP, by half.

[lzppjb]

Preface: This is not a political post.


The current administration wants to spread the gov't offices around the country, and not have them all in the D.C. area. This was done once before by FDR when he moved 30,000 workers to the Midwest.

How do you think this could affect that area's Amazon bid?

[Novacek]

You seem to fail to recognize that there's an inherent bias and subjectivity in the selection of proxy measures.

Where in the RFC does it ask for "high employment in museums and zoos"? It's not there. Instead, someone said "sure that sounds good".

Then there's the explicit bias in the REIS "study", of them pushing their data.

Why apartment rents as a proxy for cost of living, instead of an actual full cost of living measure? Because REIS wants to push their proprietary apartment data.

Why office rents, even though Amazon is building, not leasing? Because REIS wants to push their proprietary office data.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Novacek

There's 0 indication on that "study" that they even looked at more than the 25 cities they list.

You're seriously suggesting that they just forgot or decided to ignore Austin?

It's hard to discuss this with you because you are clearly not objective. You deny all reports and metrics that highlight decencies with the Austin bid. All of them. You try to spin every little thing. I'm not saying that you are wrong in every single issue however nothing is black and white and the fact that you can't acknowledge any real decencies in the city highlight your defensiveness in this matter.

I'm sorry if that feels like a personal issue but it's more than I don't see the value in spending the time in replying when I don't feel like you are actively listening so there is no discussion. It's just never-ending arguing about the same thing. If you feel like this is me avoiding your points then that's fine. I just don't want to take the time to argue for the sake of arguing.

Originally Posted by lzppjb

Preface: This is not a political post.
The current administration wants to spread the gov't offices around the country, and not have them all in the D.C. area. This was done once before by FDR when he moved 30,000 workers to the Midwest.

How do you think this could affect that area's Amazon bid?

I'm not sure what you mean. Could you clarify? I don't think Trump will have any power in this matter at all and I'm not sure he will care if its around DC since it's private but who knows. He associates Amazon with liberals and the Washington post so he could tweet about it.

I think the politics that comes into play are state and city politics. The current council is not easy for anyone to work with and they don't seem to see the value in job creation. With Texas, Greg Abbot has promised to give Amazon a big PR problem when they try (and likely pass) a bathroom bill which will put a lot of pressure on amazon considering they are making Texas a 2nd home. It's worth mentioning that Georgia passed a bathroom bill a few years ago but the Governor vetoed it and I doubt they will consider it again after what happened to North Carolina. I honestly think this is going to eliminate all Texas cities but I don't want to get into a big political argument. The fact that the two guys that basically blocked the bathroom bill from passing in 2017 are retiring, it makes this issue that much more damning. Anyway, let's just assume that no one at Amazon cares about having their HQ in a state with a bathroom bill because that's depressing and kills the discussion.

[lzppjb]

I didn't say anything about Trump having an opinion on the Amazon HQ.

I'm just pointing out that it's possible in the near future that a lot of the money/power/influence/whatever could be leaving D.C. Probably not a lot of crossover between federal employees and tech jobs. I've never been to D.C. - are the offices used by feds leased or owned by the govt? If leased, there could be a lot of vacant offices available.

Just spit-balling.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

I didn't say anything about Trump having an opinion on the Amazon HQ.

I'm just pointing out that it's possible in the near future that a lot of the money/power/influence/whatever could be leaving D.C. Probably not a lot of crossover between federal employees and tech jobs. I've never been to D.C. - are the offices used by feds leased or owned by the govt? If leased, there could be a lot of vacant offices available.

Just spit-balling.

Gotcha. Not sure. It's worth noting that Northern Virginia and DC are considered in the same metro as Baltimore so the strengths of the area are pretty diverse. The distance between DC and Washington is the same as the distance between Round Rock and Kyle.

Here is some info on Baltimore and DC if you are interested:

What you see is that there is a HUGE amount of office space under construction in DC (at least compared to Baltimore and Austin). I don't know if more vacancies will move the needle with this much construction.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

You're seriously suggesting that they just forgot or decided to ignore Austin?

I'm suggesting this "study" couldn't even be bothered to look at the single most objective, numeric requirement from Amazon. A metro population >1M.

They obviously didn't do a serious study. Did they forget about Austin, or did they just not have data to sell on Austin, who knows.

Originally Posted by freerover

It's hard to discuss this with you because you are clearly not objective.

This from the guy who is so anti-Austin he thinks Austin will need to try and rely on "intangibles" to come out over Chattanooga.

It's a BS study. Just accept it. Even though it pushes your biases, the fact that you support it just undermines your arguments.

[freerover]

double post

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Novacek

]

This from the guy who is so anti-Austin he thinks Austin will need to try and rely on "intangibles" to come out over Chattanooga.

How am I anti-austin? I've been here for almost 15 years and I still really enjoy it. I've also repeatedly said that I hope Austin gets the HQ2, I've posted articles that suggest positives about Austin's chances but that I can't ignore what I see as problems because I like and support Austin.

It's like saying you aren't patriotic or you don't like America if you are critical of the foreign policy. I love Austin and that's why I care about people being honest with themselves and acknowledging these problems in order to improve the city and get opportunities in the future.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by freerover

How am I anti-austin? I've been here for almost 15 years and I still really enjoy it. I've also repeatedly said that I hope Austin gets the HQ2, I've posted articles that suggest positives about Austin's chances but that I can't ignore what I see as problems because I like and support Austin.

Because everyone else saw that ranking and called bullshit on it.

You supported it, defended it against other posters, and called it objective, data driven truth.

You did so because it supported your biases.

Originally Posted by freerover

I thought Austin was a non-starter when they made the announcement

You grasped onto the anti-Austin report even though it made literally no sense (including cities that simply don't qualify by Amazon's objective requirements).



Everyone else recognizes that all potential cities (including Austin) have both pros and cons, but you seem to be the only one taking every opportunity to bash Austin, including with claims that are simply not true ("no meaningful public transit", "worse data metrics than Chattanooga, Syracuse, and Rochester", "no matching state incentives", "Austin has a budget deficit", "Austin is in the middle of a pension crisis", etc.)

[freerover]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Because everyone else saw that ranking and called bullshit on it.
You supported it, defended it against other posters, and called it objective, data driven truth.
You did so because it supported your biases.

You grasped onto the anti-Austin report even though it made literally no sense (including cities that simply don't qualify by Amazon's objective requirements).

Everyone else recognizes that all potential cities (including Austin) have both pros and cons, but you seem to be the only one taking every opportunity to bash Austin, including with claims that are simply not true ("no meaningful public transit", "worse data metrics than Chattanooga, Syracuse, and Rochester", "no matching state incentives", "Austin has a budget deficit", "Austin is in the middle of a pension crisis", etc.)

Whatever man. You're right about everything. I must hate Austin. This argument isn't worth having.

[freerover]

New article in the ABJ about an online tool that allows you to compare the tech scene with different cities. It pretty much mirrors the screenshots I posted earlier from a different study. It's still cool to play along with.

Online Tool: http://www.cyberstates.org
Full Report: http://www.cyberstates.org/pdf/CompTIA%20Cyberstates%202017.pdf

How Austin stacks up nationally for tech talent amid Amazon HQ2 search
https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/...tionally-for-tech-talent.html#i/10104194

By most accounts, Austin ranks highly as a possible location for the second headquarters of Amazon.com Inc.

But would the area be able to supply enough tech workers — or enough room to house the thousands who move here — if it wins the contest and up to 50,000 jobs? That is easier to answer thanks to a handy new tool from information technology association CompTIA that allows for metro-to-metro comparisons.

Using the CompTIA breakdown, Austin has a good case to make for its worthiness. But another Texas metro has far and away more tech talent on hand.

Fast-growing Amazon (Nasdaq: AMZN) said it could spend up to $5 billion on HQ2 and build 8 million square feet. The company's request for proposal, released in September, asked for metro areas with at least one million residents, close proximity to an international airport, mass transit, quality higher education, an educated workforce, high quality of life and a business-friendly environment, among other factors.

Amazon hasn’t specified what job functions, divisions or departments it plans to house at HQ2, but it’s likely that it would include many from its cloud computing unit, Amazon Web Services, according to the Seattle Times.

Tech workers also staff the teams that keep Amazon’s retail site running, build the tools that route goods between the company’s warehouses, and handle many other tasks for one of the world’s fastest growing companies. Austin is home to many of them already with about 900 employees at offices at The Domain.

The city that Amazon chooses for its HQ2 will need to have or train about 17,000 software engineers, according to a CBinsights report.

This comes at a time when roughly 250,000 job openings for software developers in the United States remain unfilled.

The 17,000 software engineers will have to be hired from the ranks of the unemployed — slim pickings with the unemployment rate as low as it is — or they'll be be recruited from outside the area, hired upon college graduation or lured away from another company.

That means that metros that already have a critical mass of software and web developers and other tech workers have a clear edge in the race to land Amazon.

So, let’s how does Austin compare on that front? Dallas-Fort Worth has 209,600 tech sector jobs, according to CompTIA. That far exceeds other Texas metro areas including Houston with 136,000, Austin-Round Rock with 113,200, and San Antonio-New Braunfels with 35,200.

Breaking it down further into software and web developer positions, DFW has 39,183, Houston has 21,542, Austin has 20,389, and San Antonio, which bowed out of the running for Amazon’s HQ2, has 6,981 software and web developers.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the nation’s biggest metro, the New York-Newark area, has the most tech workers with 392,400. An impressive 96,068 of those are software and web developers.

It bears mention, however, that tech workers in and around the Big Apple earn $131,000 on average, compared with $108,000 in the Austin area. Plus New York has a state income tax and generally higher housing and other costs of living compared to Texas.


The Atlanta metro area, a frequently mentioned front-runner with Austin for HQ2, has 155,600 tech sector workers. Of those, 32,722 are software and web developers.

The Denver area, another presumed front-runner, has 114,500 tech sector workers, including 24,476 software and web developers.

The Seattle area, where Amazon is based now, has 178,800 tech workers. Some 63,037 are software and web developers, and many of them work for Amazon already.

Moving down the West Coast, the San Jose, Calif., area has 310,900 tech sector workers — the second-biggest supply in the country after New York City. Of those, 74,051 are software and web developers.

The nearby San Francisco-Oakland area has 262,500 tech sector jobs, including 58,971 in software and web development.

In Southern California, Los Angeles-Long Beach has 287,600 tech sector jobs, with 52,185 for web and software developers, the CompTIA tool shows.

Moving west to east for the country's other major metro areas, the number of tech workers and the number of software and web developers are as follows:

Chicago: 190,500 tech jobs; 34,985 software and web developers
Washington, D.C.: 297,900 tech jobs; 64,704 software and web developers
Boston, 263,500 tech jobs; 52,588 software and web developers
Meanwhile, Amazon has cut back on hiring at its Seattle headquarters as the company searches for its location for HQ2.

Amazon received HQ2 bids from 238 locales. A few of the 50-plus sites that were in Austin's bid have been identified, including the Broadmoor campus in North Austin.

[papertowelroll]

Originally Posted by freerover

New article in the ABJ about an online tool that allows you to compare the tech scene with different cities. It pretty much mirrors the screenshots I posted earlier from a different study. It's still cool to play along with.

Online Tool: http://www.cyberstates.org
Full Report: http://www.cyberstates.org/pdf/CompTIA%20Cyberstates%202017.pdf

How Austin stacks up nationally for tech talent amid Amazon HQ2 search
https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/...tionally-for-tech-talent.html#i/10104194

DFW and Houston are both much larger cities that span massive geographies, so it's not really fair to compare raw numbers like that. I would argue that the fact that Austin has almost as many developers as Houston and > 50% of Dallas shows just how tech-centric the city is.

Frankly I believe that a lot of the Dallas tech workers are in companies where software development is a cost-center rather than profit-generator as well, but I don't have data on that. That matters if you want the best talent in my opinion.

[OKTX]

Amazon seems to be taking steps that would suggest HQ2 will be in Atlanta:
http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-move-hints-about-its-new-headquarters-2017-12

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by OKTX

Amazon seems to be taking steps that would suggest HQ2 will be in Atlanta:
http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-move-hints-about-its-new-headquarters-2017-12

well shit....

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by OKTX

Amazon seems to be taking steps that would suggest HQ2 will be in Atlanta:
http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-move-hints-about-its-new-headquarters-2017-12

Heck, I can beat that.

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/cityclerk/lobbyist/index.cfm

An Amazon lobbyist registered with the CoA in August.


Again, it very well might end up in Atlanta (there's a lot of benefits there), but I'd be surprised if a final decision has been made yet. At least from what Amazon is signaling, they're still asking for clarifications from submissions.

There's also the fact Amazon is going to have lobbyists in Georgia just for standard business reasons.

Just like one was already registered for Texas.

https://www.ethics.state.tx.us/tedd/2016LobbyistGroupByClient.pdf

[The ATX]

The CoA lobbyist registered only about a week before the HQ2 search announcement.

[Atlanta3000]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Heck, I can beat that.

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/cityclerk/lobbyist/index.cfm

An Amazon lobbyist registered with the CoA in August.


Again, it very well might end up in Atlanta (there's a lot of benefits there), but I'd be surprised if a final decision has been made yet. At least from what Amazon is signaling, they're still asking for clarifications from submissions.

There's also the fact Amazon is going to have lobbyists in Georgia just for standard business reasons.

Just like one was already registered for Texas.

https://www.ethics.state.tx.us/tedd/2016LobbyistGroupByClient.pdf

Could Amazon registering a lobbyist in August have to do with their purchase of Whole Foods? The deal closed August 24th.