Amazon HQ2 RFP

[KentXie]

See this? This is more trolling. You actually used an analogy ABOUT bullying to insult people. Are you going for some kind of meta-trolling merit badge?

Ask yourself before posting - how is this a positive contribution?

When people don't have facts, they use opinions as arguments. That is rover's only contribution.

As stated earlier, high crime rate doesn't necessarily disqualify a city. It's something that a company may decide to look more closely at but upon closer investigation the fact remains that each city have their seedy pockets and the only factor it plays is deciding which part of the city it should relocate.

 

[KentXie]

On the flip side.
A cigar is sometimes just a cigar, the same as a dump is just a dump.

This is the type of low level analysis that results in failed projects. Much like when Rhode Island wooed Curt Schilling thinking he knew what he was doing because he is famous and a wealthy athlete.

For example, having a base near Baltimore gives it closer access to DC which can result in more lobbying power, not to mention being within a 4 hour drive of 3 major cities excluding Baltimore itself (DC, Philly, and NYC). It's more than just the high-level factors.

 

[Jouhou]

Gotta disagree. As we can walk and chew gum at the same time, so too can we admire some other cities and bash some others. That's half the fun frankly and some of you need to lighten up. Unless you're from Philly or Baltimore, who gives a $%^what somebody else thinks of it? Go vacation there if you'd like.

As far as "better cities than Boston" not sure how we'd judge that but there's a lot of be said for places like SF, NY, DC, New Orleans, Denver, etc etc over Boston. The problem is some of you are clinging to either boring or crappy places like you're defending the fat kid in gym class who always gets picked last to play on the team. Trolling would be saying something about a place that I don't actually believe. Truth be told, I wouldn't have expected to "get a rise" out of anybody out here by blasting these places as I wouldn't have thought anybody cared that much about them

You're like a caricature of an old school Bostonian.

Honestly, if amazon thought everyone in Boston was like this they'd probably NOPE right out of Boston's proposal. Just sayin

 

[SeamusMcFly]

This is the type of low level analysis that results in failed projects. Much like when Rhode Island wooed Curt Schilling thinking he knew what he was doing because he is famous and a wealthy athlete.

For example, having a base near Baltimore gives it closer access to DC which can result in more lobbying power, not to mention being within a 4 hour drive of 3 major cities excluding Baltimore itself (DC, Philly, and NYC). It's more than just the high-level factors.

It's not low level.
It's high level.
10,000 to 100,000 ft.

I'd love to see Detroit continue it's slow comeback. But, at first blush, it's not attractive to many.

Amazon wouldn't be taking the risk of the little guy to move into a fixer upper, and they'd continue to be successful as a company. But, the rate that they bring a down and out locale up, would likely not be equal to their needs, or much more of a struggle.

It's not about filling the first 500,000 SF, it's about the next 7.5M SF.

This isn't being dismissive, it's taking a big picture view of things. And, since I do not have inside info into what Amazon might really want or accept in a location, I speculate.

Weathermen and stock analysts go to school and pay big bucks to become the professionals and experts in their fields. They are still wrong nearly as much as they are right. So all your supposed deep analytics are way overkill for something you don't know much about. This isn't randomly picking one marble out of a bag of 300, where each marble is statistically as likely as any other to be picked. Many of those 300 cities have a chance of much less than a .33% of landing the HQ2 sweepstakes, and it doesn't take some deep deep thinking to 'dismiss' many of them.

 

[stellarfun]

I will take Austin down a couple of rungs. Amazon already has 9,000 employees there, about 2/3rds of them working for Whole Foods at its HQ.

If Amazon is concerned that at 40,000-50,000 employees, Seattle has become too much of a 'company town', Austin would be 60,000 with HQ2 on a smaller population base, and offering less job mobility for Amazon employees. Amazon's typical employee tenure is so short they not only aren't staying for the gold watch, but aren't around for the five year pin.

 

[dwash59]

Going with the old standby of a house costing 3x your salary.

That was the standby when interest rates were much higher, I mean, buying a house at 3x your salary in the mid-90's (at 8% interest) resulted in an equivalent payment to today's 4.5x your salary. And in the 80's at 13-17% interest, 5x your salary would be well below what 3x your salary got you then.

Important figure is what portion of your income is going towards housing. That is a factor of the interest rates at any given time. And allows you to better deal with things like taxes and HOA/condo fees, which can change your yearly expense by thousands for the same home price.

 

[SeamusMcFly]

That was the standby when interest rates were much higher, I mean, buying a house at 3x your salary in the mid-90's (at 8% interest) resulted in an equivalent payment to today's 4.5x your salary. And in the 80's at 13-17% interest, 5x your salary would be well below what 3x your salary got you then.

Important figure is what portion of your income is going towards housing. That is a factor of the interest rates at any given time. And allows you to better deal with things like taxes and HOA/condo fees, which can change your yearly expense by thousands for the same home price.

Obviously, and I think I referenced that. Not everyone is in the same boat.
The person making $100k, may very well stretch that to buy $400-450k house. The $150k couple may stretch to $675k (which is using your 4.5x multiplier), which is still under the $700-800k number mentioned above.

I stand by my math seems way off for many people statement.

 

[bigpicture7]

Income inequality doesn't necessarily mean no meritocracy.

Income inequality can mean that, within a meritocracy, the standard of living between work classes is drifting apart - even for doing exactly the same work.

Case in point:
30-years ago, entry-level engineer and CEO could both afford houses within 30-min commute...but the CEO's house was a lot nicer. No prob.
Now, entry-level engineer cannot even afford house within 30-min commute...and yet CEO's house was even nicer than it was 30-years ago.
Obviously this is more pronounced if you extend the discussion down to even lower work classes and underprivileged groups.

So yea, I think there's an issue at the $100k salary level relative to Amazon's potential new facility...in a place like Boston...but potentially in all of their top contender cities.

 

[jklo]

^^

That's not Amazon's problem though.

What is Amazon's problem is workers being able to get housing close to the office... which is the biggest problem with Boston's bid. Even a 30 minute commute isn't going to very popular when they are working 80+ hours a week.

 

[Ruairi]

The workforce earning $100k are going to be mostly new grad tech types, anywhere between 20 and 30 years old. They will most likely only work at Amazon for 2 to 5 years, none of these people will be looking to buy in greater Boston. Most will want to live with room mates or in smaller apartments near where they went to college, JP/Allston/Brighton/Camb/Somerville. They'll have no problem affording what they're looking for.
Anyone looking to buy will be on a far more substantial wage and will have no problem buying.
I'd be concerned for contractors, there'll be a lot of contract workers employed to keep their campus running who'll make far less than 100k.

 

[lexicon506]

What is Amazon's problem is workers being able to get housing close to the office... which is the biggest problem with Boston's bid. Even a 30 minute commute isn't going to very popular when they are working 80+ hours a week.

IMO that's the real beauty of picking Suffolk Downs as the proposed HQ2 site. It might be the only spot within Boston and its inner-ring suburbs that is surrounded by high density, relatively affordable housing. Revere may not be particularly appealing now, but put in a few thousand Amazon tech workers and before long you'll have a hipster beach haven.

 

[fattony]

The workforce earning $100k are going to be mostly new grad tech types, anywhere between 20 and 30 years old. They will most likely only work at Amazon for 2 to 5 years, none of these people will be looking to buy in greater Boston. Most will want to live with room mates or in smaller apartments near where they went to college, JP/Allston/Brighton/Camb/Somerville. They'll have no problem affording what they're looking for.
Anyone looking to buy will be on a far more substantial wage and will have no problem buying.
I'd be concerned for contractors, there'll be a lot of contract workers employed to keep their campus running who'll make far less than 100k.

Great points. I totally agree.

 

[tangent]

If Amazon wants an HQ2 in Boston I have to think that they are going to go with this for the main address (or they are going to buy an existing tower):

One Congress:

Or possibly this South Station tower:

 

[Rover]

Lets get back on topic here. My opinion of certain cities is mine and mine alone. If you don't like my colorful language to describe them, just move on to the next comment. As we now already know how I feel about certain places, no need to rehash all that.

But, lets take Chicago for example. I'm not saying a sky high murder rate is a disqualifier. But, I do think its a factor. Again, stripping out the human cost as ghoulish as that may be, but an inability to get a handle on crime speaks to a dysfunctional city and poor leadership. LA and NY to name two cities have made strides in this area across different mayoral administrations and the like. Other places have not.

Likewise, say you locate in a city or state that's an economic basket case from a budgetary standpoint (KS, IL, and CT come to mind). Yes, they could offer you boatloads of tax breaks, but that means you immediately have a target on your back and eventually a different administration could come back looking for a pound of flesh. As the old quote goes when a robber was asked why he robbed banks, his response was "cause that's where the money is". Sorta why GE and Aetna are no longer HQ'd in Connecticut.

 

[FenwayResident]

Lets get back on topic here. My opinion of certain cities is mine and mine alone. If you don't like my colorful language to describe them, just move on to the next comment. As we now already know how I feel about certain places, no need to rehash all that.

But, lets take Chicago for example. I'm not saying a sky high murder rate is a disqualifier. But, I do think its a factor. Again, stripping out the human cost as ghoulish as that may be, but an inability to get a handle on crime speaks to a dysfunctional city and poor leadership. LA and NY to name two cities have made strides in this area across different mayoral administrations and the like. Other places have not.

Likewise, say you locate in a city or state that's an economic basket case from a budgetary standpoint (KS, IL, and CT come to mind). Yes, they could offer you boatloads of tax breaks, but that means you immediately have a target on your back and eventually a different administration could come back looking for a pound of flesh. As the old quote goes when a robber was asked why he robbed banks, his response was "cause that's where the money is". Sorta why GE and Aetna are no longer HQ'd in Connecticut.

I also think whether it's justified or not, people's opinions of a city are relevant. If many people think of Baltimore, Detroit, etc. as dumps then they will not want to live there. That would cause Amazon to have a harder time recruiting talent.

If a recent college grad is talented and has multiple offers in cities like SF, LA, NYC or Boston, would they really want to live in Baltimore or Detroit or Philly instead? Some would move because of personal connections and some would be attracted to the cheaper living, but I think a lot would be turned off by their perception of those cities whether it's justified or not.

 

[fattony]

I also think whether it's justified or not, people's opinions of a city are relevant. If many people think of Baltimore, Detroit, etc. as dumps then they will not want to live there. That would cause Amazon to have a harder time recruiting talent.

If a recent college grad is talented and has multiple offers in cities like SF, LA, NYC or Boston, would they really want to live in Baltimore or Detroit or Philly instead? Some would move because of personal connections and some would be attracted to the cheaper living, but I think a lot would be turned off by their perception of those cities whether it's justified or not.

I think you are saying "some people make uninformed, snap judgments," which is true, of course.

However, the opinions of other people are irrelevant to the thousands of people who DO relocate to Philly and Baltimore every year. They have the same building booms and massive influx as Boston and all the "good" cities. Half of Americans think ALL cities are dumps and that anything other than single family detached homes are ghettos. Many Californians, in particular, think it is fundamentally impossible to be happy in a place where water sometimes freezes. People are idiots.

The people who run Amazon aren't idiots. They will have ZERO trouble moving talent to Philly. Baltimore is more of an uphill battle reputation-wise, but I know people who hesitantly moved there for work and now love the place and constantly evangelize for it. Baltimore is on a huge up-swing and Amazon may see it as a great time to catch the wave. Heck, Amazon more or less created the wave in Seattle.

 

[shmessy]

There will be plenty of housing for $100K Amazonians anywhere they go. The problem will be housing for everyone else.

Actually, no. There won't be "plenty of housing" anywhere they go.

Local SUPPLY counts.

.

 

[Rover]

I think you are saying "some people make uninformed, snap judgments," which is true, of course.

However, the opinions of other people are irrelevant to the thousands of people who DO relocate to Philly and Baltimore every year. They have the same building booms and massive influx as Boston and all the "good" cities. Half of Americans think ALL cities are dumps and that anything other than single family detached homes are ghettos. Many Californians, in particular, think it is fundamentally impossible to be happy in a place where water sometimes freezes. People are idiots.

The people who run Amazon aren't idiots. They will have ZERO trouble moving talent to Philly. Baltimore is more of an uphill battle reputation-wise, but I know people who hesitantly moved there for work and now love the place and constantly evangelize for it. Baltimore is on a huge up-swing and Amazon may see it as a great time to catch the wave. Heck, Amazon more or less created the wave in Seattle.

So, it is a fact that Baltimore is depopulating...

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...ore-population-loss-jumps-20170322-story.html

Why am I getting roasted for giving an opinion, even though my opinion might be an explanation for what's actually happening in real life (people are departing Baltimore). Yet you claim Baltimore in on a huge up-swing? Am I trolling if I ask how a city on a huge up-swing (your quote, not mine) can at the same time continue to hemorrhage residents?

 

[boston85]

I also think whether it's justified or not, people's opinions of a city are relevant. If many people think of Baltimore, Detroit, etc. as dumps then they will not want to live there. That would cause Amazon to have a harder time recruiting talent.

If a recent college grad is talented and has multiple offers in cities like SF, LA, NYC or Boston, would they really want to live in Baltimore or Detroit or Philly instead? Some would move because of personal connections and some would be attracted to the cheaper living, but I think a lot would be turned off by their perception of those cities whether it's justified or not.

Exactly, HQ2 is almost entirely about being able tap into a talent pool and retain their workforce to drive growth in their current and future markets. Look at everything in the RFP, and you can drill down to the "so what" behind their requirements. Almost all are workforce centric. So the perception of a particular location will matter substantially. Also, I doubt incentives will matter much unless they are tied to providing a benefit to the workforce (i.e. better commute times).

 

[shmessy]

So, it is a fact that Baltimore is depopulating...

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...ore-population-loss-jumps-20170322-story.html

Why am I getting roasted for giving an opinion, even though my opinion might be an explanation for what's actually happening in real life (people are departing Baltimore). Yet you claim Baltimore in on a huge up-swing? Am I trolling if I ask how a city on a huge up-swing (your quote, not mine) can at the same time continue to hemorrhage residents?

Cities do not move in the same direction forever. If that were true, Boston would be smaller than Dubuque today.

Someone once asked Wayne Gretzky why he scored more goals than any other player. He said something to the effect of 'The rest of those jamokes are skating to the puck. I skate to where the puck will be in 10 seconds'.

Catalysts can change a city's trajectory (especially if that city has "sleeping giant" type of advantages - - i.e. 1960's Boston with the universities, or 1970's Austin with the flagship state university and oil prices about to rise).

In the case of Baltimore, the sleeping giant advantages are Johns Hopkins, Univ. MD and others, along with proximity to DC, and a VERY easy to use International Airport, not to mention one of the U.S.' busiest Atlantic Ocean shipping ports (far busier than Boston and the rest of Massachusetts COMBINED).

Meanwhile, let's examine for a moment, if you will, how to increase housing in the burbs for Amazon?
-Boston area - - you must go community by community and endure the town/city meetings of HOW many different communities? each with their OWN, unique development bylaws?
-Baltimore's jurisdictions are COUNTY, not town. Logistics count. How many thousands of prodcutivity man and womanhours does that difference mean to Amazon? Folks, this is a BUSINESS decision, not a beauty contest.

The catalyst, meanwhile, is single, local developer of a waterfront tract of land that is 235 acres and is building a mini city for his own company (Kevin Plank of Under Armour). My guess is that Plank's motivation and vision is going to be more attractive than HYM's Tom O'Brien. This is Plank's baby. For O'Brien, it's just another project.

.