Amazon HQ2

[KevinFromTexas]

I don't think it's arrogant at all for a city to ask Amazon or any other company what they can do for the city. In fact, it's smarter than what most cities do, which is to jump up and down and shake their money bags. The smarter applicant always asks questions.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I don't think it's arrogant at all for a city to ask Amazon or any other company what they can do for the city. In fact, it's smarter than what most cities do, which is to jump up and down and shake their money bags. The smarter applicant always asks questions.

Agreed

[urbancore]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Agreed

yep

[urbancore]

I'm putting this out there.

I got $50 bucks on Austin......any takers?

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

I'm putting this out there.

I got $50 bucks on Austin......any takers?

I'm in, but if I lose, you'll have to find me

[ahealy]

Originally Posted by Dcbrickley

I'm putting this out there.

I got $50 bucks on Austin......any takers?

Down. But you'll have to find me too

[masonh2479]

Originally Posted by ahealy

Down. But you'll have to find me too

One MILLION dollars on Austin

[brando]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I don't think it's arrogant at all for a city to ask Amazon or any other company what they can do for the city. In fact, it's smarter than what most cities do, which is to jump up and down and shake their money bags. The smarter applicant always asks questions.

Yes, in the 2nd half of a job interview. Not in a resume sent in with about 100 others.

[The ATX]

Austin is only going to get this if Amazon already wanted to put it here.

[lzppjb]

Originally Posted by Austin1971

Ultimately I think the location of HQ2 will boil down to power and politics nationally. I think Bezos can accomplish more in Texas than Georgia when it comes to political influence. I believe he wants to change and shape the future of Texas politics and he can best do that with HQ2 located in Texas. Also I find it very odd that there has been almost no chatter from the politicos here in Austin about HQ2. Something is brewing behind the scenes.

If so, Atlanta can have it.

[undergroundman]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

I don't think it's arrogant at all for a city to ask Amazon or any other company what they can do for the city. In fact, it's smarter than what most cities do, which is to jump up and down and shake their money bags. The smarter applicant always asks questions.

Remember, context is important. Yes, it is generally smart to ask questions. But when every credible bidder is putting their best foot forward by offering everything they possibly can; and then we half-ass it and have the nerve to ask in addition to the 50k jobs and the tens of billions of dollars you're going to pump into our economy, what else do you have to offer us.

To stay with your job applicant analogy, it's as if other equally qualified job applicants went out and bought a second hand suit from Goodwill, because that's all they can afford after stretching their finances in order to put their very best foot forward for the interview. Austin half-asses it and goes to the interview in shorts, t-shirt and thong sandals and says, "forget what I can do for you, what can you do for me?" I say "half-ass" because they offered Merck an incentive, yet there was nothing offered to Amazon. I understand there is a process, but they had over a month in order to hold emergency council meetings to put something together for this generational opportunity. Other cities took the effort, Austin chose not to.

If history has taught us anything it's that we can't be complacent in strengthening our economic health. I'm sure there were plenty people in Detroit in the 60's who had the same confidence in their city's economic future as some of you today about Austin's future. Detroit's auto industry in the post New Deal era was booming as the country's road infrastructure continued to grow. Motown music was at it's peak. Nowadays you can buy a median home there for just $40k.

Fact is outsourcing is a real threat to tech workers especially as India's tech companies and workers become more sophisticated in their development processes. It hasn't worked out for a lot of US companies in the past to outsource their development, but as the process is refined, Austin's economy could be left vulnerable as more and more work is sent overseas.

[StoOgE]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Austin is only going to get this if Amazon already wanted to put it here.

This is exactly what is going on. This isn't an open contest and the best bid wins.

This is a process. Amazon is a multi-billion dollar company and I guarantee they have already spent years selecting potential cities. This is leverage in a negotiation, and my guess is the cities that are in it already know who they are or at least have an idea that they are potentially on the short list.

Actual incentives, tax breaks, etc are going to be negotiated behind the scenes and my gut is there are 2-3 cities that will be pitted against one another. If Austin is one of them, then these questions are likely setting the stage for further negotiations. If we aren't one of the cities on the short-list than it doesn't matter. If we offered everything and we were already ruled out we wouldn't be put on the "oh, maybe we should include them" list.

[Labtec]

Originally Posted by paul78701

undergroundman's "not for any amount of money" comment came off as kind of rude, but it's not rude that you don't understand. Although, I don't get why you don't understand. I thought that I've explained well enough that their tech scene doesn't match that of top notch tech areas.

Can anyone find me a software engineer that looks to Atlanta for tech leadership? Or one that refutes my experience and is going to tell me that I'm full of it? I don't know of any. I've worked with engineers that have left Austin jobs for other jobs in the Bay Area, Seattle, Boston. I've never heard of ANY leaving for a job in Atlanta...NONE.
I've also spent enough time in Atlanta to know that there are other cities I would much prefer to be in.

As far as the "not for any amount of money" comment, that's not what I said. I'm pretty sure I said that they couldn't pay me enough (to make a difference). i.e. The pay there is less than it is here. Nor will it become significantly higher than Austin.



Very true.

I knew someone from Austin who came to Atlanta to work at Yik Yak. Unfortunately, Yik Yak shut down 2 years after he moved.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by undergroundman

If history has taught us anything it's that we can't be complacent in strengthening our economic health. I'm sure there were plenty people in Detroit in the 60's who had the same confidence in their city's economic future as some of you today about Austin's future. Detroit's auto industry in the post New Deal era was booming as the country's road infrastructure continued to grow. Motown music was at it's peak. Nowadays you can buy a median home there for just $40k.

Exactly right. Austin should not be complacent. I think that Detroit is an extreme example though.

Originally Posted by undergroundman

Fact is outsourcing is a real threat to tech workers especially as India's tech companies and workers become more sophisticated in their development processes. It hasn't worked out for a lot of US companies in the past to outsource their development, but as the process is refined, Austin's economy could be left vulnerable as more and more work is sent overseas.

India is mostly a threat to tech support and QA/testing roles. It is still very difficult to find quality developers/engineers though (most of the best ones are in the US already). They have a long way to go in that respect.

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by Labtec

I knew someone from Austin who came to Atlanta to work at Yik Yak. Unfortunately, Yik Yak shut down 2 years after he moved.

That's exactly my argument as to why you want to be in a good tech scene. Tech companies shut down *all* the time. Or reinvent themselves and "change direction". Or whatever. As good as the jobs are, employees are frequently unaware when their positions are unstable. Most of my job changes have been involuntary (and unexpected). It is rare that one gets a decent severance. Most of the time, you are left with two weeks pay and a kick in the pants...and that's if you're lucky.

I know that there are at least some tech companies in Atlanta...just like any big ass city. It's possible that there is more than I realize. Even though I've never known anyone to go there for a tech position, I'm sure it happens on occasion. However, to date, I have not seen real evidence that it has much pull in comparison to others.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by paul78701

Exactly right. Austin should not be complacent. I think that Detroit is an extreme example though.

Yeah, Detroit's situation is unique. There was virtually a perfect storm of factors that came together at once. I don't foresee any other major city ever declining as much as it has (in terms of scale).

[undergroundman]

Originally Posted by paul78701

Exactly right. Austin should not be complacent. I think that Detroit is an extreme example though.

Yes it is an extreme but not the only example. But look at any city in the rust belt, or Ohio as a whole as more examples. Steel manufacturing went overseas and left a lot of cities without their major industry. Chicago might be on the way to being the next Detroit.

India is mostly a threat to tech support and QA/testing roles. It is still very difficult to find quality developers/engineers though (most of the best ones are in the US already). They have a long way to go in that respect.

I worked for a company about 8 years ago who found success in managing an offshore development group. So much so that they stopped hiring onshore developers and pared down the local group through attrition. I left the company because I felt they valued the onshore development staff much less than they used to.

[undergroundman]

Originally Posted by paul78701

India is mostly a threat to tech support and QA/testing roles. It is still very difficult to find quality developers/engineers though (most of the best ones are in the US already). They have a long way to go in that respect.

I might also add that real our long term threat is not India or eastern Europe, it's self-learning machines. Machines, when given a purpose/goal, will learn from its environment and "reprogram" itself to adapt/adjust to achieve its goal. No need for developers.

[ATXbowhunter]

This morning's WSJ had a front page discussion about what cities are best positioned for HQ2, and Austin was listed as a long shot. They ranked it as the 7th most likely choice behind Dallas, Boston, DC, Atlanta, Seattle, Chicago, Denver, NYC and Nashville. It claimed that it was using the same criteria that has put Austin at the top of the list. Also, not sure why Seattle was on it since they already have their HQ there (?). I would post the link but not tech-savvy enough for that

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by ATXbowhunter

This morning's WSJ had a front page discussion about what cities are best positioned for HQ2, and Austin was listed as a long shot. They ranked it as the 7th most likely choice behind Dallas, Boston, DC, Atlanta, Seattle, Chicago, Denver, NYC and Nashville. It claimed that it was using the same criteria that has put Austin at the top of the list. Also, not sure why Seattle was on it since they already have their HQ there (?). I would post the link but not tech-savvy enough for that

Having not seen the article, I'm guessing that their "evaluation" is like many others. They pick and choose their categories to evaluate on, assign an arbitrary weight for each, score each city per category, and then compile overall city scores.

I hardly think that this is the appropriate way to predict the winner.