Amazon HQ2 thread

[C.]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

If it goes in the heartland then Oklahoma City would be an ideal pick.

Really? Availability of mass transit is a strong rating factor... Denver easily over OKC.

[bnk]

In reality very few cities in America could meet all of their needs.

Esp on the transit issue. I eliminated cities in CA that make no since and NY due to costs. These are the cities that have a chance at the bid. Some near the bottom of the list are less likely. Talking about any other one is a waste of breath. Going into Canada would lock out millions of Americans that could move otherwise to other regions in the US. I personally think its going to be one of top 5 in the list below.

Metro area
State
Population
Percent with bachelor's degree


Chicago-Naperville-Elgin
 IL
9,512,999
36.00

Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington
 TX
7,233,323
33.40

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria
 DC
6,131,977
49.30

Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington
 PA
6,070,500
36.00

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell
 GA
5,789,700
37.00

Boston-Cambridge-Newton
 MA
4,794,447
46.00

Detroit
MI
4,292,060

Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington
 MN
3,551,036
40.30

Denver-Aurora-Lakewood
 CO
2,853,077
41.80

Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia
 NC
2,474,314
33.50

Pittsburgh
 PA
2,342,299
33.00

Austin-Round Rock
 TX
2,056,405
42.60

Columbus
 OH
2,041,520
35.10

[JManc]

The Nazis store frozen alien bodies in bunkers underneath DIA so I doubt Jeff Bezos would settle on Denver unless those alien corpses were Prime members.

[seaskyfan]

I wouldn't be surprised to see it go to Denver, Austin, or Dallas. I think they're looking for somewhere cheaper than Seattle with the capacity to handle the growth and they're pretty serious about the "business friendly" thing. For the Texas cities Austin would have the lifestyle/liberal buzz but Dallas would beat it on capacity. I don't see them picking someplace in the northeast.

Living in Seattle their growth has been pretty overwhelming - I think it's a good decision to spread things around. Amazon is generally considered a shitty place to work, by the way. The joke in Seattle is that no recruiter will ever ask why someone is leaving Amazon.

[themaguffin]

Well it's clear. The city that is the very best place for Amazon is the city that you live in.

The actual RFP criteria don't even matter.

[subterranean]

Map of local governments who have released statements saying they are a good location for the Amazon HQ:



.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by subterranean

Map of local governments who have released statements saying they are a good location for the Amazon HQ:



.

and what's even more impresive, each and every single one of them is the absolute perfect ideal location for HQ2, with qualities and attributes so perfectly suited for Amazon that can be found nowhere else in this, or any other, universe.

Amazon would have to be stupid NOT to pick all 1,200 red dots on the map as their new second home. they're all just so, so, so perfect!

[bnk]

There is some very thoughtful intelligent dialog on this topic in this thread.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=225033&page=24

[ocman]

Originally Posted by subterranean

Map of local governments who have released statements saying they are a good location for the Amazon HQ:



.

Pretty much, yeah. For all this talk of what city is the favorite or top contender or most likely, no one knows sh$t. Amazon could do whatever it wants regardless of it's own criteria list. it's not a merit prize.

[Chef]

It seems like a lot of people in Minneapolis don't want it here. 50,000 more yuppies would change the culture of the city, bid up the cost of housing for the rest of us, and increase congestion. Politicians in Minneapolis are lining up to put a proposal together, but there is going to be a lot of push back from their constituents. The people who live here now don't want to be displaced by a bunch of tech workers as has happened in Seattle and the Bay Area.

Minneapolis is already fine. When I look at how Seattle has changed over the last 20 years, that isn't a road I want to go down.

[ocman]

Originally Posted by Chef

It seems like a lot of people in Minneapolis don't want it here. 50,000 more yuppies would change the culture of the city, bid up the cost of housing for the rest of us, and increase congestion.

Minneapolis is already fine. When I look at how Seattle has changed over the last 20 years, that isn't a road I want to go down.

They're being defensive. If Amazon announces they're coming to Minneapolis, I doubt they won't change their tune and be proud about it.

[Chef]

Originally Posted by ocman

They're being defensive.

Not necessarily. The boom that happened in Seattle and the Bay Area over the last 25 years was of no benefit to the working class or non-tech middle class workers who lived there. It made everything more expensive, and as a result they are now worse off or have left. Cities that were once bohemian and interesting are now tech monocultures. It is now happening in Austin too. The main beneficiaries are people who moved in from the outside. The people who already lived there get mostly negative impacts. We have watched that phenomenon here from afar and can see how it plays out. Why should the potentially displaced endorse the process that is going to displace them?

Minneapolis already has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country. People here worry more about gentrification and the increasing cost of living than they do about finding a job.

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by bnk

[
Going into Canada would lock out millions of Americans that could move otherwise to other regions in the US.

Why would it do this?

There are over 100,000 Americans living in Toronto right now.

And over 200,000 in Vancouver.

We have a much easier process for coming here for work temporarily; or permanently if your a skilled worker and speak English or French.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Yes, many people conveniently missed that

NYC, DC, Bay Area and Seattle are not being considered.

It doesnt say that at all. LOL.

To me that just means Amazon places a premium on air access to those cities, which all already have numerous daily flights to each other--so if you want to be considered, know that it's important to them.

[bnk]

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/07/here-are...sh-list-for-its-second-headquarters.html


Here are the cities that match Amazon's wish list for its second headquarters
Amazon wants to build a second HQ and offered a checklist of what it's looking for.

We matched some of the retailer's key criteria to cities and states for comparison.

Based on those results, Amazon might want to give New York, Atlanta, Chicago, San Francisco and Boston a close look.

John W. Schoen
| Updated 17 Hours Ago


To measure how prospective cities stack up, we looked at the list of cities with at least 1 million people and then ranked them in five categories: local airport traffic, mass transit ridership, the number of accredited higher educational institutions, the share of the workforce with at least a college degree and the pace of job growth over the last 12 months.



....


graphs in link.

[summersm343]

Taking this list, and comparing it with the RFP

Chicago - offers everything they're looking for
Dallas - lacking in Public transit, and walkability
Washington - offers everything they're looking for, but may be too costly
Philadelphia - offers everything they're looking for
Atlanta - offers everything they're looking for
Boston - offers everything they're looking for, but may be too costly
Detroit - lacking in Public transit
Minneapolis - lacking in Public transit
Denver - lacking in Public transit
Charlotte - lacking in Public transit and walkability
Pittsburgh - lacking in Public transit and airport
Kansas City - lacking in Public transit and airport
Austin - lacking in Public transit, walkability and airport
Columbus - lacking in Public transit, walkability and airport

[k1052]

Originally Posted by Chef

Not necessarily. The boom that happened in Seattle and the Bay Area over the last 25 years was of no benefit to the working class or non-tech middle class workers who lived there. It made everything more expensive, and as a result they are now worse off or have left. Cities that were once bohemian and interesting are now tech monocultures. It is now happening in Austin too. The main beneficiaries are people who moved in from the outside. The people who already lived there get mostly negative impacts. We have watched that phenomenon here from afar and can see how it plays out. Why should the potentially displaced endorse the process that is going to displace them?

Minneapolis already has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country. People here worry more about gentrification and the increasing cost of living than they do about finding a job.

Having done business in Minneapolis for many years I easily could see the populace saying "Don't Come". Same goes for Boston double.

[themaguffin]

To measure how prospective cities stack up, we looked at the list of cities with at least 1 million people and then ranked them in five categories: local airport traffic, mass transit ridership, the number of accredited higher educational institutions, the share of the workforce with at least a college degree and the pace of job growth over the last 12 months.

They left out the most rigid criteria in reality - available land - a massive chunk at that and the land just can't be anywhere because it has to be close to other criteria, main transit.

Chicago - offers everything they're looking for
Dallas - lacking in Public transit, and walkability
Washington - offers everything they're looking for, but may be too costly
Philadelphia - offers everything they're looking for
Atlanta - offers everything they're looking for
Boston - offers everything they're looking for, but may be too costly
Detroit - lacking in Public transit
Minneapolis - lacking in Public transit
Denver - lacking in Public transit
Charlotte - lacking in Public transit and walkability
Pittsburgh - lacking in Public transit and airport
Kansas City - lacking in Public transit and airport
Austin - lacking in Public transit, walkability and airport
Columbus - lacking in Public transit, walkability and airport

Pittsburgh and Charlotte are not lacking in public transit unless the only site(s) available are not near it.

Most airport on that list will be fine. The move would create demand for whatever flights that are needed and would be added.

If a hub were necessary, they would have stated it.

[CherryCreek]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Taking this list, and comparing it with the RFP

Chicago - offers everything they're looking for
Dallas - lacking in Public transit, and walkability
Washington - offers everything they're looking for, but may be too costly
Philadelphia - offers everything they're looking for
Atlanta - offers everything they're looking for
Boston - offers everything they're looking for, but may be too costly
Detroit - lacking in Public transit
Minneapolis - lacking in Public transit
Denver - lacking in Public transit
Charlotte - lacking in Public transit and walkability
Pittsburgh - lacking in Public transit and airport
Kansas City - lacking in Public transit and airport
Austin - lacking in Public transit, walkability and airport
Columbus - lacking in Public transit, walkability and airport

Denver has huge, prime parcel of real estate available directly adjacent to downtown (few blocks away) with existing direct light rail access (right through the center of the property), next to the Interstate, with airport train right next door (4 blocks away). It's owned by a single owner - real estate investor Stan Kroenke (who also owns the LA Rams and Denver Nuggets and Avs). Though not as well developed transit as eastern cities, it is comparable to what Amazon is used to in Seattle. It's also a very large hub with good connections to all of the listed cities, and direct connections to the major Canadian cities as well as London, Paris, Frankfurt and Tokyo.

[CharmCity1]

The RFP specifies that Amazon is looking at 500,000 square feet of office space or 100 acres of greenfields for phase 1. Ultimately, the site will need to accommodate 8 million square feet of office space.

Baltimore has an advantage that it already has a site and project ready-to-go that meet those requirements. Port Covington a 235 acre redevelopment project already approved with a $500 million tax incentive has already been given to build the infrastructure for Under Armour's new global headquarters.

I'm on a Facebook Group with other local publishers around the country and its amazing to see people from Northern Virginia, Boston, and Austin act like something like this would be a hassle that would bring too many people and drive up real estate prices further. Similarly, I have seen reactions from people in Seattle who are thankful that Amazon may turn its attention elsewhere for a little while and give them a respite from the housing market pressures. Though, I wouldn't be especially confident that there would be much respite.

What a different perspective there is somewhere like Baltimore where unemployment and underemployment is still a huge problem.