Amazon HQ2 bid

[Atlanta3000]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

What scares me is the backlash that will ensue if Atlanta isn't selected, despite all of the tea leaf reading.

S-17 - You need to be like me because I could give 2 or THREE shits about the backlash. All I know is the media and Political folks in the DC area have set them up for a hard fall.

[scania]

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

S-17 - You need to be like me because I could give 2 or THREE shits about the backlash. All I know is the media and Political folks in the DC area have set them up for a hard fall.

Hmmmmmm, though it's not a NYC or LA, parse...DC has a lot going on. I know everyone aren't like just people that I know, but I don't think people in general in DC give a crap about Amazon coming there. Like its a big deal here in Atlanta if we get it or not.

[OTPandProud1974]

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

S-17 - You need to be like me because I could give 2 or THREE shits about the backlash. All I know is the media and Political folks in the DC area have set them up for a hard fall.

I think there are two ways to look at this: Would CIM Group really risk all of this on a maybe bet that Amazon would come to Atlanta? If you assume no, then, you're right, someone already has been given a word that ATL is the winner.

Or did CIM use the hype around Amazon to grab the opportunity for a bunch of incentives to redo the Gulch? If that's the case, the backlash will be massive,

[bart]

I felt pretty good about Atlanta's chances a week ago. But with the developments of the last week, I'm now pretty sure we aren't getting it. Here's why:

Let's imagine that Amazon has told Mayor Bottoms that Atlanta is the choice (pending final approval of various agreements). Why would she go public in her attempts to persuade members of the council? Wouldn't she discretely tell everyone who matters that they need to get in line because it's a done deal? And would there really be this much public discussion around it all? Isn't that completely inconsistent with how Amazon has handled this entire process?

I think the mayor's behavior this week is much more consistent with a different theory: 1) she either has no new information about Atlanta's chances or she's been told we probably aren't getting it, but she wants to use the hype and pressure of possibly getting it to pass a Gulch incentive package before they announce a decision. She knows this is her best chance at getting the site developed regardless of whether Amazon actually comes here, and wants to use this opportunity to pressure the council to actually do something. A personal note here: I don't mind this strategy at all and hope it works. Even without Amazon, it would be great for the city to have this development go through. Anything that helps is a good thing in my opinion.

The bottom line is that what we've seen from the mayor and council this week are not at all consistent with how I expect the process of Amazon making a decision to play out. It's been total amateur hour. Unfortunately, if you want to see what it will actually look like, take a look at DC, where just this week you have:

1) Bezos meeting with the entire board of Amazon for apparently no reason. Massive public companies don't have unannounced and informal board meetings for no reason.

2) Bezos speaking at an event sponsored by the lead development group vying for HQ2 in the area (JBG Smith).

3) The three most important politicians when it comes to HQ2 incentives in the area (Northam, Bowser, Hogan) all attending that same event.

These are the types of things I would expect to see prior to an announcement: high level meetings between the people who matter, and official silence from all involved.

I still think there's a small chance Atlanta gets this thing, but I don't see how anyone could bet against DC at this point. There are just too many signs pointing in that direction.

[(four 0 four)]

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

AlwaysDrinkin' - I want you to be the first in line to kiss my country @$$ when Amazon makes the announcement.

Who gets to be first in line to kick it if Amazon goes elsewhere?
Hopefully, we'll never know.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by OTPandProud1974

I think there are two ways to look at this: Would CIM Group really risk all of this on a maybe bet that Amazon would come to Atlanta? If you assume no, then, you're right, someone already has been given a word that ATL is the winner.

Or did CIM use the hype around Amazon to grab the opportunity for a bunch of incentives to redo the Gulch? If that's the case, the backlash will be massive,

To be clear, the backlash I'm referring to is the disappointment in Amazon selecting another city (if they do).

Because Atlanta is, overall, the best all-around candidate for HQ2 on paper, some have convinced themselves that there's no way they could pass us up. But just because Atlanta's the best candidate on paper doesn't necessarily mean Amazon wants to be here (for whatever reason), and it's possible they want to be in a place like DC or a Raleigh or a Dallas (for whatever reason), despite their flaws.

I think mostly everyone's all for the Gulch with or without Amazon, as long as the infrastructure for passenger rail is maintained (ripping up the rail lines and killing any shot at MMPT would be a deal breaker for me).

[Atlanta3000]

Originally Posted by OTPandProud1974

I think there are two ways to look at this: Would CIM Group really risk all of this on a maybe bet that Amazon would come to Atlanta? If you assume no, then, you're right, someone already has been given a word that ATL is the winner.

Or did CIM use the hype around Amazon to grab the opportunity for a bunch of incentives to redo the Gulch? If that's the case, the backlash will be massive,

Option #3: If CIM Group knows Amazon is not coming here, yet their Executives put company on the hook for $500 Million in infrastructure improvements in the Gulch, as well as, they have to develop a minimum of 4 Million sqft. above street level then these people have to be the dumbest mofo's West of the Mississippi.

[Atlanta3000]

Originally Posted by (four 0 four)

Who gets to be first in line to kick it if Amazon goes elsewhere?
Hopefully, we'll never know.

4o4 - you will be second in line after AlwaysDrinkin' to kiss it....after I have several Code Browns!

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

Option #3: If CIM Group knows Amazon is not coming here, yet their Executives put company on the hook for $500 Million in infrastructure improvements in the Gulch, as well as, they have to develop a minimum of 4 Million sqft. above street level then these people have to be the dumbest mofo's West of the Mississippi.

So let's say this was the option.

Why would building 4 million sq. ft. worth of office space in the CBD of the 3rd fastest growing city in the country be a bad thing or a poor investment?

I doubt it's all going to be spec or built at once, but rather in phases and likely with tenants lined up.

[Atlanta3000]

Originally Posted by bart

Let's imagine that Amazon has told Mayor Bottoms that Atlanta is the choice (pending final approval of various agreements). Why would she go public in her attempts to persuade members of the council? Wouldn't she discretely tell everyone who matters that they need to get in line because it's a done deal? And would there really be this much public discussion around it all? Isn't that completely inconsistent with how Amazon has handled this entire process?

I think the mayor's behavior this week is much more consistent with a different theory: 1) she either has no new information about Atlanta's chances or she's been told we probably aren't getting it, but she wants to use the hype and pressure of possibly getting it to pass a Gulch incentive package before they announce a decision. She knows this is her best chance at getting the site developed regardless of whether Amazon actually comes here, and wants to use this opportunity to pressure the council to actually do something. A personal note here: I don't mind this strategy at all and hope it works. Even without Amazon, it would be great for the city to have this development go through. Anything that helps is a good thing in my opinion.

The bottom line is that what we've seen from the mayor and council this week are not at all consistent with how I expect the process of Amazon making a decision to play out. It's been total amateur hour. Unfortunately, if you want to see what it will actually look like, take a look at DC, where just this week you have:

1) Bezos meeting with the entire board of Amazon for apparently no reason. Massive public companies don't have unannounced and informal board meetings for no reason.

2) Bezos speaking at an event sponsored by the lead development group vying for HQ2 in the area (JBG Smith).

3) The three most important politicians when it comes to HQ2 incentives in the area (Northam, Bowser, Hogan) all attending that same event.

These are the types of things I would expect to see prior to an announcement: high level meetings between the people who matter, and official silence from all involved.

I still think there's a small chance Atlanta gets this thing, but I don't see how anyone could bet against DC at this point. There are just too many signs pointing in that direction.

Bart - I don't know about other cities, but in Atlanta friggin GA our City Council meetings are PUBLIC. Not only are they open to the Public to attend, but they are recorded online, as well as, meeting minutes are available online too.

Mayor Bottom's attendance Tuesday if you watched the video I posted SHE SAID WAS AT THE REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR OF STATE OF GEORGIA BECAUSE IF THE AGREEMENT IS NOT SIGNED MONDAY IT COULD IMPACT THE RELOCATION OF A FORTUNE 500 COMPANY.

[Artemis]

[QUOTE=Atlanta3000;8313317]Help me understand why you don't see this as a good thing?

Do you really believe the Mayor and the Governor are so desperate for a Gulch development they are ready to hand over $1.2 Billion in incentives to CIM Group without the promise of any jobs?

CIM Group has to make a $500 Million investment out of pocket to cover the cost of the infrastructure to bring the project to street level. Do you think they are doing this so they can build apartments, retail and hotels? Also per the Agreement, CIM Group is legally bound to spend a minimum of $4 Billion on the development. Do you think they would make this commitment without Amazon?

The only question I have about CIM is that they said they don't need Amazon or at least don't need Amazon for their project, no? Was CIM bluffing? Just something that didn't connect...dots.

[Atlanta3000]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

So let's say this was the option.

Why would building 4 million sq. ft. worth of office space in the CBD of the 3rd fastest growing city in the country be a bad thing or a poor investment?

I doubt it's all going to be spec or built at once, but rather in phases and likely with tenants lined up.

Let's see - we have just gone through the biggest economic period in the history of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and Midtown and the rest of the city have seen significant office and multifamily development - Yet Downtown has only seen a couple apartments and small hotels break ground. Does that answer your question?

Furthermore, there are only 2 or 3 cities in the US that have anything approaching the size of the Gulch development. Remember when the owner of the Hawks first discussed the project it was billed as an "Entertainment District". So today we have morphed from an "Entertainment District" to a 40 acre multi-Billion dollar project. Why did it morph.....AMAZON!

Note - The Battery at Suntrust Park if a "Entertainment District" and it cost $600 Million

[wonshirim]

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

Let's see - we have just gone through the biggest economic period in the history of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and Midtown and the rest of the city have seen significant office and multifamily development - Yet Downtown has only seen a couple apartments and small hotels break ground. Does that answer your question?

Furthermore, there are only 2 or 3 cities in the US that have anything approaching the size of the Gulch development. Remember when the owner of the Hawks first discussed the project it was billed as an "Entertainment District". So today we have morphed from an "Entertainment District" to a 40 acre multi-Billion dollar project. Why did it morph.....AMAZON!

Note - The Battery at Suntrust Park if a "Entertainment District" and it cost $600 Million

Doesn't look like anybody's doubting the City Council affair to be Amazon-related at this point. But the fact that Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms described the current state of affairs in such conditional terms seems to indicate we may not be the final candidate in the race.

The fact that all 3 DC area mayors are showing up to Bezos' speech at the Economic Club of Washington shows that those 3 candidates aren't ruled out of the race yet. There were probably a handful of rejections among the 20 on the shortlist, but I think the DC 3 + Atlanta are all still in the race. You probably wouldn't show up if you were ruled out. Maryland Governor Hogan even said he's looking forward to the event and said that is all he can share.

How are you so absolutely certain that Atlanta has won? You should share more!

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

Let's see - we have just gone through the biggest economic period in the history of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and Midtown and the rest of the city have seen significant office and multifamily development - Yet Downtown has only seen a couple apartments and small hotels break ground. Does that answer your question?

Furthermore, there are only 2 or 3 cities in the US that have anything approaching the size of the Gulch development. Remember when the owner of the Hawks first discussed the project it was billed as an "Entertainment District". So today we have morphed from an "Entertainment District" to a 40 acre multi-Billion dollar project. Why did it morph.....AMAZON!

Note - The Battery at Suntrust Park if a "Entertainment District" and it cost $600 Million

So a few things:

1. We're actually in the *2nd LONGEST* economic expansion period in the history of the US. The late 1990s / early 2000s expansion was the longest, as well as the *BIGGEST* if measured in GDP growth.

2. Yes, I get that much of the development has been going to Midtown and wherever else. But that's exactly it. We'll now have an extremely experienced developer with deep pockets who can go out and sell downtown Atlanta to the world because they're going to have a ton of money on the line if they don't.

3. Wasn't there an article recently stating that there's enough pent-up demand for an additional 4 million sq. ft. in office space in the near future (without Amazon)? I know Atlanta isn't as big as NYC or Chicago, but with the metro area expected to grow by over 2.5 million people by 2040, I find it hard to believe that CIM won't be able the fill the space they're building out over the span of a decade.

4. Yes, recessions are inevitable, but business always cycles up and down. This is a long-term investment by CIM and there will be plenty of opportunities for them to go after in future economic expansion periods, even if this one's running out of steam.

[Khantilever]

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

To catch you up to speed since you are from Chicago - OUR MAYOR ON TUESDAY IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL SAID SHE NEEDED THIS SIGNED BY MONDAY BECAUSE IT COULD IMPACT A FORTUNE 500 RELOCATION. I even provided a link to the video of the City Council meeting - did you watch it? So your,

is not an apples to apples comparison to what is happening right now in Atlanta.

Normally I don't mind folks from other cities coming here, but at this conjecture to come here without reading the Agreement in full or watching the City Council meeting (I posted), you are disrupting the conversation because you don't have all the facts.

Sometimes it might be useful to have an outside opinion to avoid getting caught in an echo chamber.

Nothing I said suggests that this isn't at all related to Amazon. Of course the Mayor claims it can impact a major relocation (though, as a Chicagoan, I can tell you that politicians' talk is cheap, and Rahm used Amazon to push things through that have actually been in the works for years).

Couldn't this also be interpreted as desperation? If Amazon has indeed chosen Atlanta, isn't quickly pushing incentives through in a purposely opaque manner an unnecessary political risk?

And why the focus on developer incentives? That only emphasizes the fact that this site needs a lot of work. Real estate subsidies have incomplete pass-through to tenants. If it's all about Amazon, $1 given directly to Amazon would have a bigger marginal impact on their decision than a dollar given to the developer.

[DNR]

First of all...I would love for Atlanta to win, but....

There is a definite up-tick in back-to-back headlines about DC being the inevitable choice.

Can all these successive events & proceedings regarding DC really be coincidental on such a scale?

Also, if Washington doesn’t get the nod, it seems like even Jeff Bezos would fear the white-hot back-lash from Washington. Especially given all this unbridled confidence from the media (and the citizens) that the DC is destine to win. Just add in the fact that the DC area was represented 3 times in the final selection process. If they lost, they would lose out by a factor of three. It’s kind of a triple insult to Washington.

Even if Atlanta looks perfect on paper, does Jeff Bezos really want to tick that many people off in Washington given the fact that he wants them on his side. Just seems self-defeating in a way.

[scania]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

Because Atlanta is, overall, the best all-around candidate for HQ2 on paper, some have convinced themselves that there's no way they could pass us up. But just because Atlanta's the best candidate on paper doesn't necessarily mean Amazon wants to be here (for whatever reason), and it's possible they want to be in a place like DC or a Raleigh or a Dallas (for whatever reason), despite their flaws.

I totally disagree. As much as I would like for Atlanta to land Amazon for personal reasons. I definitely don't think Atlanta is the best on paper. And to say despite the other cities flaws...we have just as many flaws here. As far Mayor Bottoms, it would've been nice if we had the same Mayor during the start of the process. This would still be a huge win for Atlanta's first woman Mayor to land this deal with an Amazon.

[bart]

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

Bart - I don't know about other cities, but in Atlanta friggin GA our City Council meetings are PUBLIC. Not only are they open to the Public to attend, but they are recorded online, as well as, meeting minutes are available online too.

Mayor Bottom's attendance Tuesday if you watched the video I posted SHE SAID WAS AT THE REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR OF STATE OF GEORGIA BECAUSE IF THE AGREEMENT IS NOT SIGNED MONDAY IT COULD IMPACT THE RELOCATION OF A FORTUNE 500 COMPANY.

This is exactly my point. If she had been told that Amazon had made a decision, she wouldn't be making these over-the-top statements in public. She would be sitting down with the council in private and laying out the case for the incentives. The governor would be there, too, working on making sure everything came together. And, most importantly, there would be no Monday deadline for getting this all sorted out. It's absurd to think that Amazon would make the decision to come to Atlanta, only to then demand such a short timeline for getting an incentives package worked out. Amazon has plenty of time to make sure they get this right.

Everything about the mayor's behavior this week feels like a desperate appeal to try to get incentives for CIM before Amazon announces they are going elsewhere.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by scania

I totally disagree. As much as I would like for Atlanta to land Amazon for personal reasons. I definitely don't think Atlanta is the best on paper. And to say despite the other cities flaws...we have just as many flaws here. As far Mayor Bottoms, it would've been nice if we had the same Mayor during the start of the process. This would still be a huge win for Atlanta's first woman Mayor to land this deal with an Amazon.

I disagree.

*IF* Amazon is in fact concerned about housing affordability, business-friendliness and having an east coast HQ, Atlanta's about as good as it gets when combined with their desire for an advanced urban setting, mass transit and a talent pipeline.

And sure, Atlanta has its flaws too with traffic and politics, but the other IMO top candidates (Chicago, Philadelphia and Dallas) aren't slouches when it comes to bad traffic and in the case of Illinois and Pennsylvania, they aren't necessarily the best-run states in the country either.

[Mentallect]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

I disagree.

*IF* Amazon is in fact concerned about housing affordability, business-friendliness and having an east coast HQ, Atlanta's about as good as it gets when combined with their desire for an advanced urban setting, mass transit and a talent pipeline.

And sure, Atlanta has its flaws too with traffic and politics, but the other IMO top candidates (Chicago, Philadelphia and Dallas) aren't slouches when it comes to bad traffic and in the case of Illinois and Pennsylvania, they aren't necessarily the best-run states in the country either.

*IF*Amazon was actually worried about those things...yes, but they are not. Amazon is worried about attracting top millennial talent and DC influence peddling.