Amazon HQ2 thread

[The North One]

Can they just pick their sugar momma already and collect their handouts? Such a shitty company.

[Steely Dan]

keep in mind folks, if this thread devolves back into more chicago vs. atlanta stupidity, it will be swiftly re-locked, so post accordingly.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

1. I still think Toronto and Boston are the frontrunners.
2. Considering the feedback about the Arlington site, I think an NYC area site has more favorable odds than I previous thought. But it will be Newark or Brooklyn, not Manhattan.
3. I'd give Chicago a slight edge over Philadelphia because I sense Chicago has better stats on attracting and retaining talent.
4. I haven't seen anything that would lead me to believe that Atlanta or Dallas offer what they're looking for.
5. I also don't think D.C. is as much of a favorite as other people seem to believe.
6. Finally, I don't think it will go to any region that is smaller than Seattle.

Newark is my favorite now to snag it. The rest of the top 5, in no particular order:
Chicago
Boston
D.C.
Toronto

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

keep in mind folks, if this thread devolves back into more chicago vs. atlanta stupidity, it will be swiftly re-locked, so post accordingly.

What about New York/Newark vs Dallas [Plano]?

[suburbanite]

I'll eat my hat if it ends up going to Toronto. We put together a good package, and it would be cool to have someone immediately jumpstart the East Harbour development. That being said there are no real incentives beyond lower benefits costs from Government healthcare and easier immigration. I get the feeling most people stand by the city/province's decision to abstain from excessive corporate welfare.

I still think D.C. makes the most sense for Bezos's personal reasons. Would love to see Philly get it though.

[Sun Belt]

Let's say Amazon finally selects city X.

Don't the voters have to ultimately approve such large sums of public money in the billions, that would be directed towards an Amazon campus?

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

Let's say Amazon finally selects city X.

Don't the voters have to ultimately approve such large sums of public money in the billions, that would be directed towards an Amazon campus?

No. I can't even imagine if voters had to approve every large decision. Government would be even more gridlocked than it already is. That's why most places in the Western world are representative democracies and not direct ones.

[mhays]

I doubt Amazon would get themselves into that sort of situation. They'll pick an option with very few loose ends.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by emathias

No. I can't even imagine if voters had to approve every large decision. Government would be even more gridlocked than it already is. That's why most places in the Western world are representative democracies and not direct ones.

Billions of dollars?

Sports stadiums are on ballots and that's usually in the hundreds of millions.

[skyscraperpage17]

I'm completely indifferent about HQ2 at this point. The process has dragged on for so long that all of the fun's been taken out of it

If it comes here, then great. If not, then oh well.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

Billions of dollars?

Sports stadiums are on ballots and that's usually in the hundreds of millions.

Where has a sports stadium's funding been on a ballot? Not saying it hasn't happened, but I think it's unusual.

Referendums on public works projects are a super risky move if you actually want it built, and usually pushed as a way to kill the proposed project. See Nashville's transit proposal.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

Billions of dollars?

Sports stadiums are on ballots and that's usually in the hundreds of millions.

it probably depends on the jurisdiction, but when the bears got hundreds of millions of public dollars for their big soldier filed rebuild, there was no referendum on it.

the state and city powers that be decided the bears should get the money, so they got it. over and done with, end of story.

the only recourse for those who were upset about that decision was to vote against the politicians who gave the handout to the bears.

when boeing was given gobs of money/tax breaks/etc to move their HQ from seattle to chicago, there was no referendum on it either.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by emathias

No. I can't even imagine if voters had to approve every large decision. Government would be even more gridlocked than it already is. That's why most places in the Western world are representative democracies and not direct ones.

From what I've read, there are 16 states that require a super majority vote to increase taxes.

Cities often have a ballot initiative to pass bonds for schools, roads and other projects within the city limits. Does the public approve of going into debt to pay for things today? Yes or No vote.

It's state by state and city by city and it depends on how each state/city will come up with $1-5 billion in Amazon handouts.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

What about New York/Newark vs Dallas [Plano]?

I'd be more concerned about DC vs. Miami.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Sun Belt

From what I've read, there are 16 states that require a super majority vote to increase taxes.

Cities often have a ballot initiative to pass bonds for schools, roads and other projects within the city limits. Does the public approve of going into debt to pay for things today? Yes or No vote.

It's state by state and city by city and it depends on how each state/city will come up with $1-5 billion in Amazon handouts.

Not all of the subsidies have been released, but of the ones released, a lot of them are underpinned by tax credits or tax holidays, neither of which require new taxes to fund. In general, going into debt to attract a new business would be a very bad idea, but lightening their tax burden is much less risky, since if they don't fulfill their promises you're not out anything, and if they do, you're offsetting some of their corporate or property tax "opportunity costs" with personal and sales and residential property tax paid by new employees. I also find it difficult to believe that Amazon would give full consideration to something that required voter approval - why risk billions in investment based on the whims of voters. So if areas promised something that did require voter approval, I'd imagine Amazon would heavily discount that part of the offer.

[skyscraper]

my thought is, if DC/NOVA was such a slam dunk as many have reported, wouldn't they have announced it by now? Why drag it out?

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by skyscraper

my thought is, if DC/NOVA was such a slam dunk as many have reported, wouldn't they have announced it by now? Why drag it out?

I'm not sure if the RFP process was final, ie. what you submitted is the only thing that's being evaluated. If it's not than there's no reason to rush. Unless there is a pressing need for this HQ2 to go online, Amazon has all the leverage and might as well let the remaining participants squirm a little. Never know what someone might toss onto their bid in late-game desperation.

There's also the evaluation of the monumental logistics involved in setting up shop with tens of thousands of new employees.

[LA21st]

I'm pulling for Chicago. I used to live near Loudon County. I can't see the young workers excited to be in a place like that.

[toddguy]

I will be so glad when they finally announce it so we can all get forget about it except for the one city (likely one of the biggest ones like DC, Atlanta, etc.) that will get it.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

I'd be more concerned about DC vs. Miami.

Woah partner, you crossed a line. Chicago is often referred to the Miami of the north.