Amazon HQ2: Vancouver as a candidate?

[cornholio]

One also must remember this is a second global headquarter, not a regional one. Locating across the border doesn't make sense as it complicates operations and adds tremendous risk over the coming decades as regulations change. Canada is not particularly stable in their relation ship to the US and its why companies generally move from Canada to the US, not the other way around. Really it makes no sense to operate in Canada if you don't have to and I don't see why they would have to. (keep in mind this is their headquarters and different from their distribution and outsourced development offices that try to tap workers but can be shut down on a moments notice without disrupting the company..the Amazon offices in Vancouver are temporary and any sort of restructure or downsize / ramp down can mean they close doors overnight)

[Pinion]

Trump is nothing but pro-Trump. These supposed pro-business politicians always tank the economy.

[nds88]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Trump is nothing but pro-Trump. These supposed pro-business politicians always tank the economy.

I couldn't care less if Trump is pro-Trump...as long as more money is put in my pocket and my wealth goes up. North America is dying while Asia rises. I'm fearful of a return to the dark ages when the NDP (and that mentality in general is taking over) was in power over 15 years ago.

Amazon won't touch Vancouver for HQ2 now. I can just image the insane demands the Vancouver proposal will want of Amazon. We can't even build a tower without them trying to extort ridiculousness out of developers....which just results in costs being passed on to buyers. Vancouver is attractive as a satellite site by taking over existing space. If Amazon were to locate here and get a foothold with the intention of building a comparable HQ, the City will be nothing but a hinderance of bureaucracy (at least under Gregor and Horgan) and Amazon will want to expand and get things done quickly.

I wonder how difficult it was for Hootsuite to get their new campus? Amazon HQ2 would be over 10 times that.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by nds88

I couldn't care less if Trump is pro-Trump...as long as more money is put in my pocket and my wealth goes up.

Well that ain't happening due to Trump's decisions.

Vancouver is a lost cause due to unchecked global "free market" capitalism, not the two-faced, fake environmentalists on Vancouver city council. If we had regulated housing we'd still be a relatively happy little town with a normal, healthy economy.

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Well that ain't happening due to Trump's decisions.

Vancouver is a lost cause due to unchecked global "free market" capitalism, not the two-faced, fake environmentalists on Vancouver city council. If we had regulated housing we'd still be a relatively happy little town with a normal, healthy economy.

Actually Vancouver is the subject of unchecked Globalism, which is a Liberal ideology. If "free market" capitalism ran its course with no money laundering or wealth parking, you wouldn't see bid wars above fair market value. In other words, acquisition of property exceeding its free market price in Vancouver is not the fault of "capitalism", but globalism (i.e. open borders for money and open bank accounts to allow money from overseas through). I am sure Amazon and most corporations know this, because Vancouver is nothing more than a bedroom community with empty condos whose local grassroots population actually can't afford to live there.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Well that ain't happening due to Trump's decisions.

Vancouver is a lost cause due to unchecked global "free market" capitalism, not the two-faced, fake environmentalists on Vancouver city council. If we had regulated housing we'd still be a relatively happy little town with a normal, healthy economy.

This is a question of curiosity, not a criticism in any way: Could you please tell me how housing in Vancouver could / would be regulated? It's a critical issue and any ideas are appreciated.
I have only vague, general ideas how this could be done, and they're probably inaccurate, but if you could specify points and and ways to regulate housing here, that'd be great. Thanx

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

This is a question of curiosity, not a criticism in any way: Could you please tell me how housing in Vancouver could / would be regulated? It's a critical issue and any ideas are appreciated.
I have only vague, general ideas how this could be done, and they're probably inaccurate, but if you could specify points and and ways to regulate housing here, that'd be great. Thanx

I don't know why you're asking a forumer for suggestions to regulate housing market as there have already been a few recommendations made by tax regulators:

1)Houses selling for more than $750K no longer are qualify for principle residence exemption. As such, the whole property would be subject to capital gains instead of current tax free system (i.e. wealth family uses son/daughter in Canada who is attending UBC, for example, to buy a wealthy home in affluent neighborhood using family wealth, for son/daughter to live in; son/daughter sells property later as a principle residence and repatriates to home country with no taxation paid).
2)Secondary use property should be subject to capital gains inclusion rate of 75% instead of 50%.
3)No vacation homes in Vancouver - secondary property must be used for rental (Mayor Moonbeam).
4)No more allowing corporations to acquire residential real estate unless to rent it out or redevelop under a bona fide business. Current system has corporations being used to avoid foreign buyers tax and taxes. Generally, these corporations were owned by non-residents where the corporation buys the property, then flips the property later for capital appreciation. The non-residents sell shares of the corporation equal to the fair value of the corporation (i.e. its cash after selling the home above cost) to other non-residents, experiencing capital gains on their shares but no taxes paid to Canada (done willfully). Corporation still owns property but shares owned by new non-residents who repeat the process.

[nds88]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Well that ain't happening due to Trump's decisions.

Vancouver is a lost cause due to unchecked global "free market" capitalism, not the two-faced, fake environmentalists on Vancouver city council. If we had regulated housing we'd still be a relatively happy little town with a normal, healthy economy.

I'm referring to the hypothetical if I were a business owner in the US. If Trump lowers my taxes and reduces regulation so its easier for me to conduct my business, then he has my vote and he can Tweet whatever he wants.

Getting slightly off topic from Amazon HQ. Vancouver has the same global "free market" capitalism as any other North American city. We do not offer any favourable laws to buy Vancouver real estate over any other city. Its a great city to live in, I can't deny that. We should be encouraging high income jobs (tech and resources) to increase incomes to better sustain the global competition for our housing. To do this, our leaders need to start building our infrastructure better (rapid transit), more density, tax incentive, less micro managing, better night life etc to attract companies like Amazon setting up shop here. Purposely crashing/regulating the market is stealing wealth from property owners and won't solve anything.

We have low supply (land and zoning constraints) and the "most livable city" in North America = high demand...therefore price increases. We have no special incentives for any one from any where to buy here. Calgary, Winnipeg, Montreal, Seattle, San Diego, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta etc anyone can buy a home there. One can claim money laundering and wealth parking etc is behind Van real estate....but this can be done in any city. Why should Vancouver be the only regulated city with regard to housing?

In fact, American cities are more favorable to invest in real estate. I can sell a rental property in the US, and roll the profits into something more expensive and I DON'T PAY TAXES on the gains from property one. In Canada, I need to pay capital gains taxes...two steps forward one step back. In the US, I can compound my money in real estate without having to take a step back. You can also write off the interest portion of a mortgage. This can be argued that our real estate is already relatively regulated. Any more regulation then I might as well be in Venezuela.

Regulating housing will be very dangerous. Eventually things will cool, and when that happens and we need the growth in housing to sustain (it will be a gong show because people borrow from equity), the regulations will be in place and good luck getting our leaders to undo it at that time. When a recession hits and we need capital coming back in, those that invested before won't dare to touch us again after bending them over once.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by nds88

I'm referring to the hypothetical if I were a business owner in the US. If Trump lowers my taxes and reduces regulation so its easier for me to conduct my business, then he has my vote and he can Tweet whatever he wants.

Getting slightly off topic from Amazon HQ. Vancouver has the same global "free market" capitalism as any other North American city. We do not offer any favourable laws to buy Vancouver real estate over any other city. Its a great city to live in, I can't deny that. We should be encouraging high income jobs (tech and resources) to increase incomes to better sustain the global competition for our housing. To do this, our leaders need to start building our infrastructure better (rapid transit), more density, tax incentive, less micro managing, better night life etc to attract companies like Amazon setting up shop here. Purposely crashing/regulating the market is stealing wealth from property owners and won't solve anything.

We have low supply (land and zoning constraints) and the "most livable city" in North America = high demand...therefore price increases. We have no special incentives for any one from any where to buy here. Calgary, Winnipeg, Montreal, Seattle, San Diego, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta etc anyone can buy a home there. One can claim money laundering and wealth parking etc is behind Van real estate....but this can be done in any city. Why should Vancouver be the only regulated city with regard to housing?

In fact, American cities are more favorable to invest in real estate. I can sell a rental property in the US, and roll the profits into something more expensive and I DON'T PAY TAXES on the gains from property one. In Canada, I need to pay capital gains taxes...two steps forward one step back. In the US, I can compound my money in real estate without having to take a step back. You can also write off the interest portion of a mortgage. This can be argued that our real estate is already relatively regulated. Any more regulation then I might as well be in Venezuela.

Regulating housing will be very dangerous. Eventually things will cool, and when that happens and we need the growth in housing to sustain (it will be a gong show because people borrow from equity), the regulations will be in place and good luck getting our leaders to undo it at that time. When a recession hits and we need capital coming back in, those that invested before won't dare to touch us again after bending them over once.

Good ideas in principle - one thing I would like to clarify though.

This idea of bringing "high earning" jobs is a bit of a fallacy.

Let me preface this by saying, I am absolutely in favour of fostering growth in industries of the future, this is not a vote against that.

The issue is the actual level of pricing vs income.

Our costs have gotten so astronomical that no legal industry is capable of supporting our market.

Specifically - you have 2 high income earners, say a household pre-tax income of $240,000. These two will be living in a one bedroom condo, possibly 2 bedroom at best (assuming new transplants without ridiculous equity from previous Van RE), if they have a kid and a car, they are going to be scraping by, when accounted for daycare, cost of living, and taxes.

The earnings would have to be in the very high six figures to get an appreciably better lifestyle than that.

I suspect that most people given the choice would still choose an alternative option.

We have already seen this with many senior positions - recently, Telus CEO choosing to not relocated to Vancouver due to cost.

And certainly no shortage of recent articles of hourly workers leaving the Lower Mainland for elsewhere BC due to wages being similar, but costs of living dramatically lower.

In the recent example I'm thinking of, Mechanics earning $35-40hr are impossible to come by locally, they rather earn the same elsewhere.

Even I been having the same though lately - why not sell my condo and trade it for a fixer upper in Anywhere that's not Lower Mainland, BC, without need for a mortgage or a tiny one most.

Even if I take a 25% pay cut in my somewhat specialised career - net/net I would be way ahead.

[djmk]

How is Vancouver's link to Asia compared to Seattle? And if there is a difference, would it matter to Amazon?

[LeftCoaster]

The Amazon offices being opened in Vancouver are not temporary and are not immigration staging grounds.

I don't know why everyone think that's what the tech scene in Vancouver is just because Microsoft tried this 10 years ago. Even more so I don't know why they say it with such certainty when they have no involvement with the deal and no particular insider insight.

Believe it or not American technology firms want to locate and operate in Vancouver, its really not that hard to believe given this country's liberal attitudes, immigration policies and favourable employment costs.

But those on this forum who just can't find a single positive thing to say will keep finding reasons to be negative and complain.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

The Amazon offices being opened in Vancouver are not temporary and are not immigration staging grounds.

I don't know why everyone think that's what the tech scene in Vancouver is just because Microsoft tried this 10 years ago. Even more so I don't know why they say it with such certainty when they have no involvement with the deal and no particular insider insight.

Believe it or not American technology firms want to locate and operate in Vancouver, its really not that hard to believe given this country's liberal attitudes, immigration policies and favourable employment costs.

But those on this forum who just can't find a single positive thing to say will keep finding reasons to be negative and complain.

I agree with you, but the sentiment is there because is has been done before. Facebook operated here for a temporary period as well.

Even if these companies are using this to hire from outside of North America because our immigration rules are different, it's still a bonus. What is the limit on high paid professional immigrants we want here?

[whatnext]

According to a study Vancouver ranks dead last in a list of 64 possible cities for Amazon HQ2:

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vanco...on-hq2-ranking

[LowerLonsdaleMike]

Originally Posted by whatnext

According to a study Vancouver ranks dead last in a list of 64 possible cities for Amazon HQ2:

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vanco...on-hq2-ranking

The key word here is a "study". It's quite amusing seeing folks comments on social media about this study. I don't think Vancouver will win the HQ, but I'm pretty sure it won't end up dead last. This is someones interpretation of Amazon's decision process, not a definitive roster.

[WarrenC12]

If Vancouver really gets the ~1000 jobs promised a few weeks back, we made out better than 62 other cities on that list.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

If Vancouver really gets the ~1000 jobs promised a few weeks back, we made out better than 62 other cities on that list.

We'll get much more than that. Not 50,000, but Amazon will still be the largest occupier of office space in downtown Vancouver within a decade.

[Sheba]

Amazon May Have Dropped a Clue About a Likely HQ2 Location

Amazon announced in September that it was searching North America for a site for a second major headquarters, dubbed HQ2, in addition to its massive Seattle base. But the e-commerce giant may have given a clue about a region it likes in recently uncovered plans to expand in one city.

Amazon is in talks to lease 500,000 square feet of offices in Boston’s Fort Point Channel neighborhood, a hot destination for tech companies, with an option to double the amount of space also being discussed, the Boston Globe reported on Thursday. The search started before Amazon publicly disclosed its HQ2 search, the paper said.

That sounds a lot like the first stage of the plan Amazon laid out for HQ2. Though the second headquarters is ultimately projected to house 50,000 workers in a $5 billion, 8-million square foot campus by 2027, Amazon said the first phase of the project would be to open about 500,000 square feet of space in 2019 in the new city.

[Klazu]

Sounds like they had made their mind way before the competition, which was only put up for additional tax rebates. Big companies doing what they do best...

I am not sure if the presense of MIT and Harvard really factored in it, as most Silicon Valley hiring is these days based diversity. Or is it just Google?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Sounds like they had made their mind way before the competition, which was only put up for additional tax rebates. Big companies doing what they do best...

I am not sure if the presense of MIT and Harvard really factored in it, as most Silicon Valley hiring is these days based diversity. Or is it just Google?

Yes, all of the government officials seemed to fall for the trap too.

As for MIT, no, it could be totally unrelated. It all depends what they are doing at this 2nd HQ.

[WarrenC12]

East coast? Home of MIT and Cambridge? Shocking!