Amazon HQ2 thread

[The North One]

That looks horrible, I'd rather drive a car.

[fleonzo]

Originally Posted by chris08876

I just hope the state gets involved more. Rail, and roads need to be upgraded. That BQE and Belt Parkway are parking lots. I know on SSP we advocate for rail, but let's not forget about the roads. The BQE expansion will take decades, and be built in segments. The thing is, I can't even imagine the traffic that this will cause, on an already gridlocked road.

Meanwhile, Penn Station is starting to resemble The Haj after 5pm during a workweek.

It will only get worse, until something is done.

Ughgh, I wish I were more confident, but the MTA or NYDOT is not a source of confidence to begin with.

You're so right on this! I live in LIC (50th and Center Blvd) and I was kind of shocked that they chose LIC frankly. Last night Jackson Ave was a standstill and a total mess! For those of you not too familiar with LIC, trying to drive on Jackson Ave under the over pass of the Queensboro Bridge- it is a disgrace! The corridor (driving) from Court Square to Queens Plaza is a joke that needs a major overhaul including possibly creating some kind of tunnel under pass or something. I'd be very interested to see what type of plans they have in mind for LIC to address what constitutes, or what will be, the heart of the business/ commercial district of LIC (and now possibly Queens)!

On a side note.... They're opening up a new location of Xi'an Famous Foods (pulled Chinese Noods and the best lamb burgers) in Court Square soon.

[BrownTown]

Does Amazon have any plans in improving the area? Bezos doesn't really strike me as the sort of person who cares about other people's problems. Sounds like the state is going to be paying for everything and likely not even going to get taxes back from Amazon. This whole thing is a bait and switch. Amazon promised 50k jobs, but these locations will be lucky to get 5k.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by fleonzo

You're so right on this! I live in LIC (50th and Center Blvd) and I was kind of shocked that they chose LIC frankly. Last night Jackson Ave was a standstill and a total mess!

I try to avoid driving in the area as much as I can. The worst are the roads under the elevated rail. And those damn pillars. Sometimes when you have to make a right, you have to weave in between the pillars. Roosevelt Ave is a nightmare and I believe its a truck route... so factor in the pillars, suicidal jaywalkers, and trucks with wide turning radius's, along with the light timing that always seems to turn red when you don't expect it. NOT to mention the double parked truck. O god... the double parked trucks that always seem to stop in front of you.

Northern Blvd isn't so bad. Its my go to road most of the time. Problem is the traffic light timings, but I found as long as you retain 32 mph when the light turns green, you should time it enough that as the light is turning yellow, you'll be right around the midpoint of the intersection.

I've had horror stories on some of these roads. I recall not just once, but 5+ times in the span of 6 months where I took the Van Wyck and got on the Belt Parkway (near JFK). To Staten Island, it has taken me 1.5 hours. Than via the SI Expressway, another hour to get to the Goethals. Traffic is very real.

I rarely do it, but if I'm frustrated enough, I'll hop on the HOV lane. Saved me an hour once.

I blame the merges on some of these highways. Because people are idiots, and don't understand the yield concept.

Traffic is bad, but the drivers are no better. If folks just understood simple...simple traffic rules and etiquette, a lot of delays would be avoided.

On a side note, as a public safety message, if you see a mini-van (most in NY have some sort of dents in them), drive past them, and steer clear. They are hazards to the world. IF you see a minivan doing 20 mph less than the speed limit and on the left, get behind that guy or gal, and high beam and honk the crap out of them. They belong on the right, or the shoulder, with the rest of the filth.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

I think you're significantly downplaying the potential impact HQ2 could have on a community.

Having the 2nd largest and fastest growing tech company established in your city will lead to a ton of venture capital funds being injected into said community, which will pave the way for additional home grown startups to become successful. Other large tech companies will also want to be a part of that ecosystem Amazon would establish in order to poach talent (see Google's announcement to hire thoudands of tech employees in NYC following the HQ2 leak, for example). And that's not to mention the huge number of higher-end commercial establishments (hotels, restaurants, department stores, etc.) that cater to these high income individuals who will want to open in these communities, creating even more jobs and also boosting the quality of life of existing residents who will have a much better variety of establishments to spend money at.

I disagree with some of this.

1. Seattle isn't a major venture capital hotspot despite tremendous tech overflow from Amazon, Microsoft, Boeing, T-Mobile, Expedia, and so on. A relatively small percentage of funding is based here, and a relatively small volume of investments go here. There are efforts to address this of course, but it's not a natural outcome. That said, startups do happen at a good clip. And more importantly, due to the workforce ecosystem, (a) the local talent is good for turning a startup into a viable enterprise long-term, and (b) the talent is also good for any tech firm wanting to open or expand their satellite office.

2. Google's announcement would presumably have been in the works for a long time.

3. High-end stores and restaurants don't mix well with tech. This has been a lesson in the Amazon and Microsoft districts. Curated $25 lunches served with a singed wood backdrop don't do well (any two nouns...looking at my desk...call it Speaker & Glass). But $12 poke and $8 sandwiches will do great. The entire building will contain five suits on the average day, and those will be three vendors and two senior people heading for an interview about some sort of business partnership. High-end corporate hotels will do well with company accounts, but the workers (and visiting families) will look for cheaper options.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

Sure, but if we're talking about the HQ the question is how many employees there will be doing web services type of work and how many will be doing the same sort of logistics work WallMart does in Bentonville (obviously not a tech hub). I just don't see HQ2 as a tech hub the same way Apple or Google headquarters are.

They don't start most HQ1 people in the six figures for nothing. They're hiring tech people primarily. And an array of business, management, and creative types. HQ1/HQ2 will always have a logistics roles, but those are about designing and managing systems, not the work on the ground.

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by mhays

They don't start most HQ1 people in the six figures for nothing. They're hiring tech people primarily. And an array of business, management, and creative types. HQ1/HQ2 will always have a logistics roles, but those are about designing and managing systems, not the work on the ground.

Not to sound elitist, but "six figures" isn't necessarily a lot of money in a high cost metro. In a place like NYC you have people doing as pedestrian of jobs as garbage collection making that much (including overtime).

[chris08876]

Yeah in NY state, 100k salary flat, after taxes yields $2,660 dollars bi weekly or an annual income of about 69k.

Won't really take you that far in NYC. Upstate, sure, but the city is a different animal.

If your single, sure... but even than, lets say you have two folks making exactly 100k each, living together, at the end of the day, you still have to budget. Unless two people live in a studio or a 1 bedroom for 2k (which can vary and tend to be 2300-3200 on average in many of the new developments. Even than, your probally going to pay 2k on average for a unit somewhere desirable or close to a desirable neighborhood (studio or lower range price 1-bedroom. 2 bedrooms are expensive.

Factor that in with other living expenses, and 100k really won't take you as far.

YOur still looking at close to or exceeding 50% of monthly net income spent on housing alone. Which is not really that good, especially if you want to save effectively.

Throw kids in the mix, and you gotta make good money to live "comfortably". Duel income earners help, but raising a kid in NYC is very expensive. Daycare especially, unless you don't mind the guy who drinks beers at 8 am watching your kids.

But if living standards and conditions don't matter, NYC is very accessible. Its all about location! But if you want to be comfortable and live a luxurious life (a middle class luxury-type life), you'll pay for it.

[Mentallect]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

I just think it's very economically inefficient to have this level of inequality. The top few cities get all the good jobs and everywhere else gets the scraps. The country would be far better served if everywhere could benefit from economic growth instead of just a handful of cities.

Why is anyone surprised by Amazon's choice? Rural "heartland" communities don't believe in science and technology. They'd rather teach creationism and deny climate change. Red state voters have gutted their education systems for the last 30 years (see OK, KS and WV) in favor of lower taxes, while ignoring the fact the rest of the world was hurtling towards an information, knowledge based economy. Now they're filled with "angry white men" who are bitter that there are no "good jobs" for them. Facts matter, reality matters. Bravo for Amazon to keep moving towards the future. Amazon was built on innovation, why should it compromise now?

[10023]

^ I don’t think anyone was expecting them to go to a rural red state. But a well-located large metro like Philly or Chicago would have given them a large and lower-cost labor pool.

[Mentallect]

Originally Posted by JAYNYC

LIC + Austin would make sense on every applicable level, including (but not limited to) geographic strategy/logistics, regional appeal/city desirability, educated/diverse workforce, etc.

Crystal City makes no sense aside from Bezos living nearby in D.C. and owning the local newspaper (i.e., not good enough reasons to locate a company somewhere).

Of all the places in consideration in the USA after NYC, Crystal City had the best location. Close to the Bezos home. Closest to airport. Close to 2 metro lines. 1 developer to deal with. Not too close to SFH neighborhoods that have long term residents that would backslash. And centrally located enough to pull talent from VA, DC, and Montgomery County, MD. After Boston and NYC, NVA has the 3rd most tech workers in America.

NVA has another advantage. Young people simply want to live here. It's exciting for them in part because so many other young people are already here, and they are all attracted by the variety of neighborhoods with restaurants, stores, bars, movie theaters, clubs, museums and the ability to simply walk to so many places that are culturally appealing.

[Mentallect]

Originally Posted by 10023

This is sort of how the world works. And it’s not unique to tech, it’s true of sectors like finance and medical research as well. Any knowledge based industry relies on virtuous cycles of more and more talent being in one place.

The idea that location no longer matters because of communications technology, etc is a complete myth. It’s just based on where people want to live, not natural resources, navigable rivers, etc as it might have been in the industrial economy.

This actually leads to more concentration of economic prosperity rather than less. Natural resources are scattered all over the place, and they aren’t necessarily in the places where people would choose to live for reasons other than their jobs, etc. The more it becomes just a matter of a mobile work force of more highly-educated and highly-compensated individuals deciding where they want to be, the fewer places will be successful.

London is a classic example. Other places in England once thrived because of mills or ports or whatever. But now London is the biggest city, the capital, the financial centre, the media centre, the technology centre, with the best connectivity to the rest of the world, the best restaurants and culture, the most wealth, and actually (bearing in mind this is all relative) the best weather in the UK. For the UK it’s basically NYC, DC, SF, LA, Boston, Houston and Miami all rolled into one.

The US is much too large for the same dynamic to ever exist, but you’ll still see the “cream” of society and the economy concentrating itself more and more, as other places die. Even regionally, Chicago has been sucking the life force from other Midwestern cities for decades.

Translation: mono-cultured, church-heavy, Republican strongholds overrun with historically powerful white men seeking to control women's bodies, disenfranchise black and brown people, and trying to make gay people disappear should not get their hopes up about attracting industry dependent on attracting young, progressive, educated and open-minded employees.

If those non-superstar cities want to attract the Amazons of the business world, then they ought to (1) educate their children (2) stop proselytizing and evangelizing (3) believe in science and climate change (4) change gun laws and (5) vote Democrat.

Red state folks have chosen tax breaks over investment, intolerance over diversity, cars over public transit, football over theater, and ultimately the past over the future.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

Not to sound elitist, but "six figures" isn't necessarily a lot of money in a high cost metro. In a place like NYC you have people doing as pedestrian of jobs as garbage collection making that much (including overtime).

My point is they're hiring tech positions.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by 10023

^ I don’t think anyone was expecting them to go to a rural red state. But a well-located large metro like Philly or Chicago would have given them a large and lower-cost labor pool.

I continue to wonder why the size of the existing labor pool matters. They try to hire the world's best, not the city's best, at least for the tech and leadership positions.

To the extent the labor pool matters, I suspect the primary concern is the labor pool for specific types of roles. Philly and Chicago aren't full of software developers etc.

[Mentallect]

Originally Posted by mhays

I continue to wonder why the size of the existing labor pool matters. They try to hire the world's best, not the city's best, at least for the tech and leadership positions.

To the extent the labor pool matters, I suspect the primary concern is the labor pool for specific types of roles. Philly and Chicago aren't full of software developers etc.

Actually Chicago is filled with enough tech workers to suit Amazon's needs.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by mhays

I continue to wonder why the size of the existing labor pool matters. They try to hire the world's best, not the city's best, at least for the tech and leadership positions.

To the extent the labor pool matters, I suspect the primary concern is the labor pool for specific types of roles. Philly and Chicago aren't full of software developers etc.

If that was the case than Toronto would be the best option.

[Mentallect]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

Does Amazon have any plans in improving the area? Bezos doesn't really strike me as the sort of person who cares about other people's problems. Sounds like the state is going to be paying for everything and likely not even going to get taxes back from Amazon. This whole thing is a bait and switch. Amazon promised 50k jobs, but these locations will be lucky to get 5k.

It is not Amazon's job to improve an area, but their local politicians. Sadly, residemts want low taxes, not good schools and metrorail. Why place the burden of common good initiatives on private insustry?

[Gordo]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

Unrelated: why do people consider Amazon a tech company? I know they have the web services and such, but the core business (and the VAST majority of the employees) is just online WallMart. There's nothing really innovative about them. TBH I don't think I've used Anazon since I was in college and bought a few textbooks there.

The vast majority of their Seattle employees (and any in a new set of office buildings in any city where they have opened or planned to open) are tech workers.

It also depends on what you mean by "core" business. Their high valuation is based on the businesses that have high margins, which are all tech - cloud, advertising, logistics, etc.

[The North One]

lol logistics is tech now? I guess Mobile Alabama is actually a tech hub.

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by Mentallect

Why is anyone surprised by Amazon's choice? Rural "heartland" communities don't believe in science and technology. They'd rather teach creationism and deny climate change. Red state voters have gutted their education systems for the last 30 years (see OK, KS and WV) in favor of lower taxes, while ignoring the fact the rest of the world was hurtling towards an information, knowledge based economy. Now they're filled with "angry white men" who are bitter that there are no "good jobs" for them. Facts matter, reality matters. Bravo for Amazon to keep moving towards the future. Amazon was built on innovation, why should it compromise now?

Cool rant dude, but it has nothing to do with the actual thread and just makes you look ignorant as hell. Of course Amazon isn't going to put a HQ in a rural area, but that has nothing to do with politics. Nobody with even the slightest semblance of a brain though they were going to just plop their HQ in the middle of a corn field or something, that doesn't even make sense.

Originally Posted by Mentallect

If those non-superstar cities want to attract the Amazons of the business world, then they ought to (1) educate their children

Most people who attend top colleges or get jobs at top tech firms aren't actually from the local community. People come from literally the entire world to attend top colleges and work at top jobs. The ranking of the local high school doesn't really play into that.

Originally Posted by Mentallect

Red state folks have chosen tax breaks over investment.

Hate to break it to you, but these blue states are going to give Amazon massive tax breaks too.

Originally Posted by Mentallect

It is not Amazon's job to improve an area, but their local politicians. Sadly, residemts want low taxes, not good schools and metrorail. Why place the burden of common good initiatives on private insustry?

Well, if the state of New York is going to give them Billions of tax pay dollars to relocate then you'd hope they see some return on their investment. I was simply pointing out that historically this sort of, "trickle down" economics where these states give big corporations massive handouts actually tend to cost the state more than it gets back in return.

At any rate, here's a good article about how economically inefficient it is to place HQ2 in these locations:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/...-2-new-york-virginia-dc-lic-crystal-city