CHICAGO | Economic & Business Development

[marothisu]

Yeah I doubt this is going to bring any jobs to Chicago (if so, then not more than a handful) though I'm sure there will be more business trips within CME between London and Chicago now. Anyway yeah it's totally about expanding business and bragging rights. I'm OK with that. CME Group continues to get more powerful which is cool.

And yes, I'd love to see mass jobs but in the grand scheme of any metro area, there's a lot of different forms of job growth/creation and business growth type of news.

[IrishIllini]

Too bad on the jobs. I'll gladly take the bragging rights.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by left of center

...
We were very close to having both exchanges bought out by out of town/country interests. ...

I don't think we were as close as you portray it. Locals had pretty much zero intent in allowing Chicago's trading history to be allowed to just disappear, but they had zero to gain by boastfully telegraphing their intent to maintain local control and potentially draw in additional bidders (locals with influence or not, the underlying exchanges as corporate entities did have a certain fiduciary duty to entertain dramatically different offers if they had materialized).

So the local money worked their influence, boosted heavy on civic pride, dissed the viability of a megaexchange to scare off other suitors, and waited for their moment. Trying to move even just the management of Chicago's exchanges would have been very difficult because I think many locals stay in Chicago because they love Chicago and consider their role here to be penultimate in the industry. If some London or NY exchange, maybe they could cherry pick the best from Chicago and pull them back to those cities. But some place from Frankfurt? Atlanta? Are you kidding me? No top exchange exec from Chicago was going to relocate to a second-tier city to serve a new master who didn't grow up on the South Side.

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

If Fulton Market ever gets a massive tech HQ, it will literally become the Loop equivalent for the tech industry

Only if it's as big as Amazon. Anything less and it still won't have the gravity to be a "Tech Loop." Plus, "The Loop" is what it is exclusively due to transportation. Until Chicago gets serious about extending our mass transportation with real, grade-separated rail, nothing will ever even partially compare to the Loop.

[IrishIllini]

^ Agreed on transit. Rahm's serious about the O'Hare express train, but I see no reason to not get started on the Clinton/Larrabee subway. At least south of North/Clybourn.

[left of center]

NYSE in talks to buy Chicago Stock Exchange
Source: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...stock-exchange

The Chicago Stock Exchange may have failed in its effort to sell itself to Chinese investors, but there's a potential buyer closer to home: the New York Stock Exchange.

NYSE is in talks to buy the Chicago Stock Exchange for $70 million, according to people familiar with the situation, the Wall Street Journal reported. A spokesman for the Chicago Stock Exchange, owned by Chicago-based CHX Holdings, declined to comment.

The report said negotiations on a deal could still collapse. If the report is accurate, that bid would easily eclipse the $27 million bid over the past two years by the North American Casin Holdings investment group, which ditched the effort this month when it couldn't overcome Securities and Exchange Commission opposition to Chinese investors taking part in the deal.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by emathias

I don't think we were as close as you portray it. Locals had pretty much zero intent in allowing Chicago's trading history to be allowed to just disappear, but they had zero to gain by boastfully telegraphing their intent to maintain local control and potentially draw in additional bidders (locals with influence or not, the underlying exchanges as corporate entities did have a certain fiduciary duty to entertain dramatically different offers if they had materialized).

So the local money worked their influence, boosted heavy on civic pride, dissed the viability of a megaexchange to scare off other suitors, and waited for their moment. Trying to move even just the management of Chicago's exchanges would have been very difficult because I think many locals stay in Chicago because they love Chicago and consider their role here to be penultimate in the industry. If some London or NY exchange, maybe they could cherry pick the best from Chicago and pull them back to those cities. But some place from Frankfurt? Atlanta? Are you kidding me? No top exchange exec from Chicago was going to relocate to a second-tier city to serve a new master who didn't grow up on the South Side.



Only if it's as big as Amazon. Anything less and it still won't have the gravity to be a "Tech Loop." Plus, "The Loop" is what it is exclusively due to transportation. Until Chicago gets serious about extending our mass transportation with real, grade-separated rail, nothing will ever even partially compare to the Loop.

I agree that the guys in charge did not want their place in history to be the people who sold out Chicago's financial heritage, and it was their civic pride that kept the exchanges in Chicago. However, if they weren't there at that exact time and place, and instead there were other heads in charge that only cared about maximizing shareholder equity, the outcome could have been very different. Thankfully that was not the case!

[the urban politician]

Maybe Chicago doesn't need Amazon's HQ2

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.for...azons-hq2/amp/

[Vlajos]

^nice article. Still think we could use 10,000 plus high paying jobs.

[marothisu]

I think this is being stated for like the fifth time, but nobody has stated that Chicago needs Amazon. In fact, a few of the cities that felt like Amazon would be their savior (Detroit, Baltimore, etc) didn't get chosen for the top 20 meaning that Amazon believes that Chicago doesn't *need* Amazon (I think Amazon stated that they don't want to be solely responsible for what "saves" a city) - which jibes with 99.9% of people's opinions who understand the entire picture.

No, Chicago doesn't need Amazon, but the influx of tens of thousands of these jobs could be one part of the entire picture that helps Chicago grow again population wise and have a ripple effect. No, it doesn't need it for this, but it would definitely help. Having this attitude of "Chicago doesn't need Amazon so I don't want it here" is complete and utter BS. That would be like rooting for the Cubs around the trade deadline and you know they're going to make the playoffs, and realize they're about to trade for the best hitter in baseball, guaranteed to propel them further - but then you say you don't want them because you don't need them since you'll make the playoffs anyway regardless of them being on the team or not. Of course you don't need them for the playoffs, but they could help you go further in the playoffs and maybe even push you over the edge to get a championship. Just because you don't think you need that player to make the playoffs doesn't mean you should be against them coming onto your team to better your chances of a championship.

[left of center]

^ This. Anytime someone accuses me of being an Amazon worshiper/fanboy (which I don't believe myself to be, but I could see why others might objectively come to that conclusion) simply because I get excited at the possibility of HQ2 coming to Chicago, I would like to reference this post.

Chicago doesn't *need* Amazon, but Amazon will help propel Chicago to where the city *needs* to go, faster than it otherwise would on its own.

Plain and simple.

[the urban politician]

You guys are getting a bit carried away. The point of that article isn't to state that we don't want Amazon. It's to attest to the growing strength of Chicago's VC/tech industry and talent pool.

It's an appreciation of Chicago's virtues in a way that too many national and locals fail to do. Chicago is a huge, urban, affordable city that has excellent Universities and several other hard to replicate features that's simply going about its business. It has faced some demographic headwinds of late, but even that, when the book is opened, reveals hidden treasures (less people but richer and more educated--and happening fast!). It's a story of a city that looks like it needs a huge infusion of jobs or it's doomed, but actually to people in the know, that's not really the case!

I think it's a great read.

[marothisu]

^ I understand exactly what the article is saying and if you've remembered my posts, I totally agree with the CEO here as that's what I've been stating for numerous months now. At the same time though, there's a difference in saying "I don't want Amazon here because we will be fine without them" and "We'll be fine without Amazon, but it certainly won't hurt." Yes, Chicago is going to be fine with or without Amazon, but Chicago with Amazon is going to propel it much further faster than without it - EASILY.

Personally, if Amazon doesn't pick Chicago I wouldn't be concerned or sad about it but if they did pick Chicago then damn ..it would be the start of a potentially fun ride. Also, as you are a real estate investor (I think), I would think that it would be of interest to you.

Also, the amount of startups and home grown companies would easily kick into high gear probably a year later. When you have thousands of workers coming in for something like this, you bet your ass that there will be numerous who leave to start their own companies. Many of which possibly wouldn't have started if those people would have never been lured to Chicago in the first place and been set up around whomever. There's a reason why areas like Boston, Seattle, etc have so much of this at the end of the day - a lot of people were lured by large companies like Amazon, Microsoft, Nintendo, etc and ultimately formed their own stuff. If not for those companies luring them there, they could have formed a company elsewhere.

[the urban politician]

Obviously I'd be thrilled if Amazon chose Chicago. But I'm just prepared for it not happening.

Hence I don't put a lot of stock in the whole thing.

[marothisu]

I don't think you should put any stock into it. Unless you have a ton of money, it's not like you should go out and buy speculative property somewhere solely based on it. However, I do believe that Chicago does have a legit top 6 chance at this point so we'll see what happens. No matter what the outcome, it's nothing to be sad about. If they don't pick Chicago then it's not a big deal IMO. The fact that Chicago made it to the top 20 but other large metro areas that are doing more than just OK economically (i.e. Houston, Minneapolis, etc) did not is actually fairly positive news for Chicago.

[the urban politician]

The reason I'm so irritated by the Amazon HQ2 thing is kind of described here:

http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/28/tech...hq2/index.html

[marothisu]

^ Oh yeah. I don't think Amazon is "innocent" in all of this. But the thing is that they didn't really tell these governments what they want, I don't think, in the form of breaks. At the same time, they didn't say directly "this is too ridiculous." Though I think they will have some morals when it comes to this. A multi billionaire told them that if they built in Irvine, CA then he would fund their entire construction - they still declined even though that offer is worth more than most governments are offering in the form of tax breaks.

[the urban politician]

Some more:

http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/29/inve...ebt/index.html

[Justin_Chicago]

U of C startup that targets migraines gets seed money

A University of Chicago researcher who has developed a new treatment for migraines has raised $750,000 for his startup.

Seurat Therapeutics treats migraines with a nasal spray of an insulin-like hormone called Growth Factor 1. The treatment is based on research by Dr. Richard Kraig, a neurologist. The company is headed by Yuan Zhang, who received her doctorate in molecular medicine from U of C.

Investors include Scott Meadow, who teaches entrepreneurship at Booth; Dr. Martin Sanders, a serial biotech entrepreneur who chairs Seurat's board; Sharon Lew, who frequently co-invests with Sanders and is Seurat's chief financial officer, and the Polsky Innovation Fund.

The company will use the money to progress toward human clinical trials. The drug, when tested in rats, has stopped the underlying cause of migraines. Seurat represents part of a broader effort by U of C, begun several years ago, to help staff and students at the university to start companies.

Article: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...s-seed-funding

[Halsted & Villagio]

Originally Posted by marothisu

I think this is being stated for like the fifth time, but nobody has stated that Chicago needs Amazon. In fact, a few of the cities that felt like Amazon would be their savior (Detroit, Baltimore, etc) didn't get chosen for the top 20 meaning that Amazon believes that Chicago doesn't *need* Amazon (I think Amazon stated that they don't want to be solely responsible for what "saves" a city) - which jibes with 99.9% of people's opinions who understand the entire picture.

No, Chicago doesn't need Amazon, but the influx of tens of thousands of these jobs could be one part of the entire picture that helps Chicago grow again population wise and have a ripple effect. No, it doesn't need it for this, but it would definitely help. Having this attitude of "Chicago doesn't need Amazon so I don't want it here" is complete and utter BS. That would be like rooting for the Cubs around the trade deadline and you know they're going to make the playoffs, and realize they're about to trade for the best hitter in baseball, guaranteed to propel them further - but then you say you don't want them because you don't need them since you'll make the playoffs anyway regardless of them being on the team or not. Of course you don't need them for the playoffs, but they could help you go further in the playoffs and maybe even push you over the edge to get a championship. Just because you don't think you need that player to make the playoffs doesn't mean you should be against them coming onto your team to better your chances of a championship.

I nominate this for post of the year

I love analogies... and this was the best one that I have seen on this board in quite a while. Kudos to you on this post.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

The reason I'm so irritated by the Amazon HQ2 thing is kind of described here:

http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/28/tech...hq2/index.html

In that same interview, Cook indicated he had no problem with cities and states competing for these jobs. Companies aren't turning down handouts.

Though I think there are all kinds of problems with how communities now have to compete to attract (buy?) jobs and would agree Amazon probably created work for too many cities (perhaps it can be argued some of that exercise is useful for them), I can see value to the more transparent process versus whatever secretive dealing Apple is engaged in. At least the public is getting a lesson in how companies make decisions and what communities may pay. And some interesting discussion is taking place about the merits of communities taking on so many jobs, effects on costs, housing, infrastructure, etc. As well as the merits of acquiring jobs vs. organic job growth. I think it is good to have the public in on the conversation.