Amazon HQ2 thread

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by glowrock

I know I'm generalizing here, as not everyone has been blatantly and continually promoting their own city as the best possible place for Amazon to put their highly tax-incentivized, massively subsidized behemoth of an office complex, but damn, people! Would it be possible to have at least a few less true homer comments in this thread? Pretty please???

Thank you.

Aaron (Glowrock)

I am less high on Boston now that it's being heavily reported in the local media that Amazon just secured an additional 1 million sq feet of office space in the Seaport District. And that they're still looking for another million. That's 2 million sq feet leased by Amazon in Boston / Cambridge in the past 2 years - 3 million if you count what they're still hunting.

I don't think Amazon would be actively adding 2 million sq feet of leased space now in a city they're looking to set up HQ2 in.

(although some local talking heads are taking the position that this is a sign Amazon already chose Boston and is getting the ball rolling sooner than later)

EDIT:

As someone who works with Amazon, here are my thoughts, stripped from Boston bias (as much as that's possible ).

- If HQ2 is being positioned as an R&D hub, Philly is the likely best choice over Boston due to lower cost of living.
- If HQ2 is being positioned as an EMEA-facing media services hub, Boston is hands-down the best choice.
- If HQ2 is being positioned as an East Coast logistics hub, Atlanta is the best choice.
- If HQ2 is being positioned as having all the responsibilities as Seattle, then either NYC or Chicago makes the most sense - slight edge to NYC for better East Coast integration, EMEA connections, and media agency / ad tech presence.

My gut tells me HQ2 will either be the EMEA-facing media services hub (and Seattle will be re-positioned as NA / APAC-facing for media services), or HQ2 will be a full replication of Seattle's functionalities: Chicago is cheaper, but less integrated into the larger ad tech ecosystem than NYC is. Lots of Amazon's most important global ad tech partners are out of NYC and Boston. AppNexus, Xaxis, the entire OMD media group (especially Hearts and Science), all of WPP's North American leadership, all of Publicis Groupe's North American leadership, all of Interpublic, all of Dentsu Aegis... it's all out of NYC and Boston. I know this doesn't seem relevant to most people here, but I cannot stress enough just how important the media component is to Amazon's profitability. Ad tech is Amazon's lifeblood, and relationships with media make that blood flow.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by chris08876

They could pick Albany, if they wanted to be squarely in the middle of that cloud of dots. Very cheap too.

[Marv95]

Originally Posted by Jasoncw

DC, Boston, and NYC are too expensive, and even though I don't understand it, Newark has an overwhelmingly negative reputation.

If reputation was the problem it wouldn't have made the top 20. Prudential would have left and Audible wouldn't have moved in and expanded. If Amazon moves in rep ain't gonna matter, because most of the stuff that contributes to it(poor ghetto people/retail, aesthetics, etc.) would be displaced from downtown.

People keep saying Philly(which doesn't have a nice rep either), yet it lacks a couple of things that appeals to Amazon: a large shipping hub(seaport) and a fast fiber optic network. Guess which cities that have those? Plus if I'm Amazon would I want that negative PR attached to them for making an affordable city like Philly unaffordable? Does it really need an Amazon like others?

Them moving to the DC area could backfire on them politically.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by lio45

They could pick Albany, if they wanted to be squarely in the middle of that cloud of dots. Very cheap too.

Plus Albany is "techie" (kinda) and has SUNY Albany and SUNY Polytechnic.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by skyscraper

I guess "near" is a relative term.
Refer to Schuylkill Yards, Philadelphia. *That* is "near" core city neighborhoods.

I agree, but as I said, there is a smaller, but still substantial site - the former Civic Arena site right next to downtown. Eight big city blocks - some of which are set aside for new mixed-income housing, but many of the ones closest to the CBD could theoretically have new skyscrapers, potentially housing tens of thousands of workers. Only a seven minute walk for what passes for a subway in Pittsburgh, and surrounded by bus routes.

I don't think Pittsburgh is going to get it, unless the following is true:

1. They want a low-cost metro.
2. They want a transit-friendly site immediately within the urban core.
3. They actually prefer setting up shop in a smaller metro over a larger one, as it would effectively allow them to capture the city due to sheer economic power, making it a "company town."

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Shawn

I am less high on Boston now that it's being heavily reported in the local media that Amazon just secured an additional 1 million sq feet of office space in the Seaport District. And that they're still looking for another million. That's 2 million sq feet leased by Amazon in Boston / Cambridge in the past 2 years - 3 million if you count what they're still hunting.

I don't think Amazon would be actively adding 2 million sq feet of leased space now in a city they're looking to set up HQ2 in.

(although some local talking heads are taking the position that this is a sign Amazon already chose Boston and is getting the ball rolling sooner than later)

EDIT:

As someone who works with Amazon, here are my thoughts, stripped from Boston bias (as much as that's possible ).

- If HQ2 is being positioned as an R&D hub, Philly is the likely best choice over Boston due to lower cost of living.
- If HQ2 is being positioned as an EMEA-facing media services hub, Boston is hands-down the best choice.
- If HQ2 is being positioned as an East Coast logistics hub, Atlanta is the best choice.
- If HQ2 is being positioned as having all the responsibilities as Seattle, then either NYC or Chicago makes the most sense - slight edge to NYC for better East Coast integration, EMEA connections, and media agency / ad tech presence.

My gut tells me HQ2 will either be the EMEA-facing media services hub (and Seattle will be re-positioned as NA / APAC-facing for media services), or HQ2 will be a full replication of Seattle's functionalities: Chicago is cheaper, but less integrated into the larger ad tech ecosystem than NYC is. Lots of Amazon's most important global ad tech partners are out of NYC and Boston. AppNexus, Xaxis, the entire OMD media group (especially Hearts and Science), all of WPP's North American leadership, all of Publicis Groupe's North American leadership, all of Interpublic, all of Dentsu Aegis... it's all out of NYC and Boston. I know this doesn't seem relevant to most people here, but I cannot stress enough just how important the media component is to Amazon's profitability. Ad tech is Amazon's lifeblood, and relationships with media make that blood flow.

If it's ad tech they want, Chicago has the capability to service that. As identity becomes the buzzword of choice for internet-based advertising, Chicago's Signal company is very well positioned to work with them if they'd like. Signal is one of few Chicago companies with a truly large-scale data system.

[3yonce]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I agree, but as I said, there is a smaller, but still substantial site - the former Civic Arena site right next to downtown. Eight big city blocks - some of which are set aside for new mixed-income housing, but many of the ones closest to the CBD could theoretically have new skyscrapers, potentially housing tens of thousands of workers. Only a seven minute walk for what passes for a subway in Pittsburgh, and surrounded by bus routes.

Didn't Bjarke Ingels propose a master plan for that area? Has that moved forward at all?

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by 3yonce

Didn't Bjarke Ingels propose a master plan for that area? Has that moved forward at all?

Not really. Being a cynic, I think that BIG's masterplan was designed for bad faith purposes. Essentially the city gave redevelopment rights to the local hockey team (which used to play in the Civic Arena, even though they didn't own it. There's been a lot of bad blood on how the Steelers have been slow-walking a similar agreement for the North Shore area, which has been underbuilt and still has no apartment buildings, so to win over skeptics the Penguins needed to up their game.

Very recently, the Penguins announced that development of the portion furthest away from downtown (which is slated to be all residential) will start within the next year. However, in the community presentations they didn't use BIG's master plan at all - just the crude site layouts which were distributed to the public before BIG was even announced as a contender.

The good news is the deck park over I-579 has had funding allocated, and will be built, so the connection to town will become much more pedestrian friendly very, very soon.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Marv95

If reputation was the problem it wouldn't have made the top 20. Prudential would have left and Audible wouldn't have moved in and expanded. If Amazon moves in rep ain't gonna matter, because most of the stuff that contributes to it(poor ghetto people/retail, aesthetics, etc.) would be displaced from downtown.

People keep saying Philly(which doesn't have a nice rep either), yet it lacks a couple of things that appeals to Amazon: a large shipping hub(seaport) and a fast fiber optic network. Guess which cities that have those? Plus if I'm Amazon would I want that negative PR attached to them for making an affordable city like Philly unaffordable? Does it really need an Amazon like others?

Them moving to the DC area could backfire on them politically.

I don't think Amazon mentioned a seaport in the RFP at all.

[10023]

Shawn, to what extent do you think that Amazon can, by virtue of its presence, elevate the right host city (like a Boston or Chicago) into the global top tier of ad tech centers (thereby rendering that question somewhat moot)?

Or is it more like the example of Charlotte, which is at best a third tier financial center despite having Bank of America's HQ?

In other words, how much does the addition of one of the biggest fish move the needle in that industry/ecosystem?

[James Bond Agent 007]

Originally Posted by Marv95

If reputation was the problem it wouldn't have made the top 20. Prudential would have left and Audible wouldn't have moved in and expanded. If Amazon moves in rep ain't gonna matter, because most of the stuff that contributes to it(poor ghetto people/retail, aesthetics, etc.) would be displaced from downtown.

People keep saying Philly(which doesn't have a nice rep either), yet it lacks a couple of things that appeals to Amazon: a large shipping hub(seaport) and a fast fiber optic network. Guess which cities that have those? Plus if I'm Amazon would I want that negative PR attached to them for making an affordable city like Philly unaffordable? Does it really need an Amazon like others?

Them moving to the DC area could backfire on them politically.

There is absolutely no reason Amazon would need a seaport for this.

[UrbanRevival]

Originally Posted by Marv95

People keep saying Philly(which doesn't have a nice rep either), yet it lacks a couple of things that appeals to Amazon: a large shipping hub(seaport) and a fast fiber optic network. Guess which cities that have those? Plus if I'm Amazon would I want that negative PR attached to them for making an affordable city like Philly unaffordable? Does it really need an Amazon like others?

Philly's rep is a continuous "work in progress," but there's no doubt that it's showing marked progress, particularly in the business sector (and with all due respect to Newark, which has loads of potential, Philly's simply on a different level, particularly as it anchors its own metro area).

I also don't believe that a seaport is relevant here--this project isn't about a logistical/shipping headquarters, it's for corporate functions/operations that support the "heavy lifting" activities. That can literally be done anywhere. And even if a seaport/shipping infrastructure was relevant, Philly still has a pretty substantial seaport, ranking 7th in the US in terms of container capacity (and this is from 2009; Philly is currently completing a major dredging project that will allow "mega" shipping traffic to compete precisely with ports like Newark):



https://www.statista.com/statistics/183950/us-container-ports-based-on-vessel-type-capacity/

But again, if this were an important factor, then wouldn't Seattle have to be tops?

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by Marv95

People keep saying Philly(which doesn't have a nice rep either), yet it lacks a couple of things that appeals to Amazon: a large shipping hub(seaport) and a fast fiber optic network.

Except that's not really true. If you combine Philly's port with Marcus Hook (just down the River) it's a top-20 US Seaport. As an aside, you really think Amazon cares about Seaport size? What is this 1874?

And you are aware that the country's largest fiber operator is based in Philly right? According to Philly's bid it leads the 10 Largest US Cities in both fiber accessibility and Fiber speeds.

Check it out here, jump to page 45
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4334657-PHL-AMAZON-FINAL-Public-Opt.html

As is constantly reported, Amazon is really eyeing a jump to Pharma delivery. Philly's unique position amidst a massive pharma cluster (GSK, Merck, AZ, Shire, Bristol-Myers, Pfizer, Teva etc.) is certainly a potential feather in its cap, too.

[Vlajos]

Amazon did not mention a seaport in the RFP criteria. Virtually certain this is a non issue.

[Pedestrian]

LOIS WEISS: The HQ2 Search Is A Sham. Jeff Bezos Already Knows The Winner.
January 25, 2018 Lois Weiss, Special Columnist

I think the search for Amazon’s HQ2 has been a sham from the start and the other 17 locations on the shortlist might as well fold up, go home and realize they were conned. The triumvirate of Washington, D.C., Montgomery County, Maryland, and Northern Virginia already have a lock on Amazon HQ2, and likely one of those spots has already been chosen, with the other two out there for competition and cover, and perhaps other Amazon future uses.

What makes these sites different from all other sites? Amazon’s founder and CEO, Jeff Bezos, who bought the Washington Post in 2013, is now building a second home in D.C. Montgomery County and Northern Virginia are connected to D.C. by the Metro system, and are closer to the District than Westchester is to Manhattan.

Now, Amazon certainly knew all this when they sent out the requests. I mean, what a great public relations ploy! Not only do they get the three jurisdictions’ best suggestions, but they tricked them into thinking they were going to have to compete with most of North America. And those other cities? Well, Amazon does need distribution centers and other offices. Why not see what’s available and what each government is willing to hand out? They may not get HQ2, but in a great bait-and-switch, could get a warehouse or fulfillment center, or even other tech offices.

Getting back to the D.C. area, Bezos is currently restoring two side-by-side mansions that most recently housed the former 27K SF Textile Museum. He purchased the buildings for $23M in cash in October 2016 — a year almost to the day when the HQ2 RFPs were due — and there’s no way he wants to travel far to visit his second major headquarters.

The mansion and chauffeur’s residence at 2320-2330 S St. NW is described as the largest in Washington and is in the favored Kalorama Heights neighborhood in northwest D.C., near Georgetown and Dupont Circle, where Barack Obama and Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner also recently bought homes. On a 34K SF plot, it has private, formal gardens and a “sweeping lawn with views” . . . .

Read more at: https://www.bisnow.com/new-york/news/eco...?utm_source=CopyShare&utm_medium=Browser

I think there's an excellent chane this is right on.

Re the seaport issue, I agree it is almost irrelevant but it so happens Alexandria used to be a seaport and the Potomac is navigable to Great Falls, upstream of Washington.

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by Shawn

I am less high on Boston now that it's being heavily reported in the local media that Amazon just secured an additional 1 million sq feet of office space in the Seaport District. And that they're still looking for another million. That's 2 million sq feet leased by Amazon in Boston / Cambridge in the past 2 years - 3 million if you count what they're still hunting.

I agree with this. My issue with Boston's proposal - and I think Boston is an incredibly worthy candidate - was that their main site choice was Suffolk Downs. I mean do people really want to work in a fabricated new complex - effectively in the middle of a marshland - with zero intrinsic amenities and a 25 minute T ride from Gov't Center? If, as some recent articles have stated, Amazon wants to build and develop its HQ in a dense, urban area, I think this selection is really going to hurt them.

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I think there's an excellent chane this is right on.

Re the seaport issue, I agree it is almost irrelevant but it so happens Alexandria used to be a seaport and the Potomac is navigable to Great Falls, upstream of Washington.

Dude also owns a home in Manhattan, LA, and a ranch in Texas - all 3 made the Top 20 list too. He's a global jet-setter, they don't really have "homes" in the traditional sense. The notion that he'd choose DC solely b/c he's placing "roots" - such as they are - in the area is silly.

[Khantilever]

C’mon, this stuff about Bezos buying a house there predicting HQ2 is a little ridiculous. It suggests that’s either they made up their minds a long time ago, despite there honestly being strong arguments for many cities; if DC is such an obvious choice that we can ignore incentives and specific site proposals, how come there isn’t already consensus that DC will win? What are we all missing?

Alternatively, Bezos could just be personally in love with DC - which is an even more ridiculous idea. He’s a shrewd businessman running a public company.

To put things in perspective, according to a 60 Minutes episode on Amazon that aired during the tech bubble, Bezos was torn between multiple cities on where to start Amazon and had real estate agents in multiple cities on hold while he decided at the very last minute to go to Seattle. It seems obvious now that Seattle was a great choice, but this story actually proves how it’s rare for any city to have an overwhelming advantage over all others.

And if this DC home is his family’s primary residence, maybe that suggests DC *wont* have HQ2. Bezos can’t show favoritism toward one of the HQs over the other, or they’re not really co-HQs, are they?

[Nexis4Jersey]

Originally Posted by Marv95

The same can be said for all cities on the list. At least the transit is there. Murphy to his credit said that he wants to invest more in NJT. And PATH is supposed to be extending to the South Ward near EWR which would include a transit village and parking. The city subway and light rail aren't that crowded anyways, and the reverse commute on the PATH and NJT has low ridership.

You can free up some of that gridlock with HOV lanes on 280 and or 21 with express buses from the north and western burbs(ie Houston). Or lure those commuters downtown into the market rate housing that would result from Amazon. The city population was 400K before and its downtown population was much larger than it is now.

That PATH Extension is the biggest boondoogle in this region 2 billion for a half mile extension without a station at South Street...someone must have gotten paided nicely... NJT low Ridership lines are the Main / Bergen / PVL/PJ which account for 45,000 the rest of the 300,000 is on the lines feeding into Newark...which operate at standing room only during rush hr. Some of that can shifted onto the various LRT extensions that have been shelved...but the system will need a half a billion in upgrades to handle anymore passengers... Upgraded Platforms , EMUs , new signals , overhauled problem bridges...etc

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by Khantilever

C’mon, this stuff about Bezos buying a house there predicting HQ2 is a little ridiculous. It suggests that’s either they made up their minds a long time ago, despite there honestly being strong arguments for many cities; if DC is such an obvious choice that we can ignore incentives and specific site proposals, how come there isn’t already consensus that DC will win? What are we all missing?

Alternatively, Bezos could just be personally in love with DC - which is an even more ridiculous idea. He’s a shrewd businessman running a public company.

To put things in perspective, according to a 60 Minutes episode on Amazon that aired during the tech bubble, Bezos was torn between multiple cities on where to start Amazon and had real estate agents in multiple cities on hold while he decided at the very last minute to go to Seattle. It seems obvious now that Seattle was a great choice, but this story actually proves how it’s rare for any city to have an overwhelming advantage over all others.

And if this DC home is his family’s primary residence, maybe that suggests DC *wont* have HQ2. Bezos can’t show favoritism toward one of the HQs over the other, or they’re not really co-HQs, are they?

Bezos is probably interested in having a home in DC because he now owns the Washington Post, and he wants to have an impact on national affairs. It might be convenient for him to locate HQ2 in DC area, but I don't think it is the primary thing being considered with regards to selecting a location. There are many reasons why this behemoth company might not want to be too closely associated with Washington, DC in the public eye. Public relations would be well served with Amazon seen to be showering blessings on some lucky metro far away from the pampered Beltway region.