Amazon HQ2 selected - and not Boston

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

shmessy said:
I have no idea why you think I'm angry about this. No need to be touchy because I disagree with your point.

Your point is that governmental location is a major factor in this. It may be for an outpost of lobbyists. it isn't for an HQ. Simple as that.

The DC area may or may not be chosen for this (or a fraction) because of the government. That's not an important part of this particular equation. many other factors are far more integral.

Now if you're talking about Amazon's LOBBYIST office,then you would be on the right track.
Click to expand...

I'm not touchy, and yes you're angry. But as fat tony said, we will agree to disagree on this. Government influence was and is part of Bezos' equation, and not just as concerns "lobbyists."
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

odurandina said:
Wow.....

Dallas + DC??
Click to expand...

DC would get management of the Cloud. NYC would be my bet for Amazon media (vice LAX) and business partnerships, plus oversight of European / African operations.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

Congratulations and rest in peace Long Island City and Crystal City.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs (disappointment)

odurandina said:
a return to the dirty, parochial, lame, not ready for the big time, Flynn era Boston.....

Is it possible Boston ended up as bad as 5th behind

N. Va/DC
NYC
Chicago &
Dallas
despite having MIT, Harvard? wtf?

Thanks to those who warned about how this arrogant, crazy as a shithouse rat, preposterous proposal would be received. i was nearly shocked, and disappointed Marty Walsh could be party to something this abysmal and absurd.

It really seemed like a regression to the old, rancid thinking of 2nd rate City from a few decades ago. What an embarrassment.
Click to expand...

All the more reason for you to stay out west. Life's too short to live somewhere you dislike.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

(recomposted)

a return to the dirty, parochial, lame, not ready for the big time, Flynn era Boston.....

Is it possible Boston ended up as bad as 5th behind

N. Va/DC
NYC
Chicago &
Dallas
despite having MIT, Harvard? wtf?

Thanks to those who warned about how this preposterous, crazy as a shithouse rat, proposal would be received. Now we possess the evidence. =

i was optimistic; (hoped) we were distancing ourselves from the rancid, Flynn/Menino era thinking. What an embarrassment.
 
Last edited:
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

Seems like a great outcome for Boston if we could get a couple thousand more jobs in Kendall and/or in proximity to the Seaport as a third or fourth city on the list. I don't care about labels.... "headquarters" was always a bit of a marketing misnomer. And by comparison look at the GE "headquarters" 700 or so jobs is already less than many other companies in Boston including Amazon's already announced presence.

Anyway, 50,000 jobs in one location was always some aspirational stretch goal number for Amazon and that was clear if you read beyond the first few lines in the request for proposals. Some splitting up among the top cities always seemed more likely... because Amazon had already demonstrated that they wanted big presence in multiple cities. Amazon isn't like an Apple which has demonstrated an ideological preference for keeping most of their employees on one campus.

This has and always been about competing for a bigger slice of the pie.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

i would have thought

1. Boston
2. NYC/Jersey City area
3. Philly
4. DC/N. VA/ DC/MD
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

You kinda got to hand it to Amazon on this.

First they propose a grand "HQ2" with up to 50,000 (!) employees. This gets municipalities around the country all worked up, so everybody puts together their best possible incentive packages in order to land those 50,000 (!) employees at that exciting "HQ2." Then after all the bids are in and locked down, Amazon cuts the "HQ2" in half, meaning that those 50,000 (!) employees will never actually be hired in any bid city. But, crucially, while the "HQ2" as pitched will never actually happen and the 50,000 (!) employees will never actually be hired in any bid city, the incentives offered by each bid city in order to draw those 50,000 employees stay.

Then Amazon chooses the pretty much status quo options of NYC and the Beltway (the only more status quo option would have been SF). These are the locations they were always going to choose for their East Coast satellite offices (which is really what this is) from the start.

So in the end, Amazon gets "HQ2" incentive packages from both Northern VA and NYC, but neither region gets anything resembling the "HQ2" as originally pitched.

Make a huge and appealing pitch, get huge offers on generous terms in response, then deliver only half (at best) of your original pitch but still demand to receive the same offers on the same terms.

Half of HQ2 in LIC is basically Amazon taking up the space that Citi will leave in LIC as it downsizes through 2020. No way Amazon would have gotten the offers they did from NYC if they framed their expansion plans that way from the start.

Retailers have been getting steamrolled by Amazon's practices such as these for years; now NYC and Northern VA are getting in on that action.

----------------------------

ALSO: all of this recent conversation should move to the (locked) HQ2 thread. This is the problem with locking threads: discussion that belongs in the locked threads still happens, it just happens in places it doesn't belong.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

JumboBuc said:
You kinda got to hand it to Amazon on this.

.
Click to expand...

Nah-- more like how incompetent and corrupt our political officials have become when it comes to negotiations with the corporations.

They do not represent the people anymore.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

Yeah this was just a straight up shakedown from start to finish.

There was a time when this sort of thing would have been impossible, and there will probably be such a time again in the future - but for now its a perfect encapsulation of how we live in 2018.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

Well,

The point of view being expressed makes sense.

How much did Amazon talk to Boston?
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

TheRifleman said:
Nah-- more like how incompetent and corrupt our political officials have become when it comes to negotiations with the corporations.

They do not represent the people anymore.
Click to expand...

Look out the bright side Rifleman, Mass refused to play ball.

PS - Sorry about your buddy Whitey. I know you guys were close.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

JumboBuc said:
You kinda got to hand it to Amazon on this.
Click to expand...

Jumbo, I think your analysis is spot on. But it doesn't change the fact that it profoundly saddens me (and not in a way that has to do with Boston "losing out" whatsoever).

Why does it have to be Amazon trying to get the better of the cities? Why can't it be a mutually beneficial partnership? Why can't there be such a thing as great corporate-community relations, responsibility, and stewardship?

I agree with your analysis, but I won't be cheering Amazon on.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

JumboBuc said:
You kinda got to hand it to Amazon on this.

First they propose a grand "HQ2" with up to 50,000 (!) employees. This gets municipalities around the country all worked up, so everybody puts together their best possible incentive packages in order to land those 50,000 (!) employees at that exciting "HQ2." Then after all the bids are in and locked down, Amazon cuts the "HQ2" in half, meaning that those 50,000 (!) employees will never actually be hired in any bid city. But, crucially, while the "HQ2" as pitched will never actually happen and the 50,000 (!) employees will never actually be hired in any bid city, the incentives offered by each bid city in order to draw those 50,000 employees stay.

Then Amazon chooses the pretty much status quo options of NYC and the Beltway (the only more status quo option would have been SF). These are the locations they were always going to choose for their East Coast satellite offices (which is really what this is) from the start.

So in the end, Amazon gets "HQ2" incentive packages from both Northern VA and NYC, but neither region gets anything resembling the "HQ2" as originally pitched.

Make a huge and appealing pitch, get huge offers on generous terms in response, then deliver only half (at best) of your original pitch but still demand to receive the same offers on the same terms.

Half of HQ2 in LIC is basically Amazon taking up the space that Citi will leave in LIC as it downsizes through 2020. No way Amazon would have gotten the offers they did from NYC if they framed their expansion plans that way from the start.

Retailers have been getting steamrolled by Amazon's practices such as these for years; now NYC and Northern VA are getting in on that action.

----------------------------

ALSO: all of this recent conversation should move to the (locked) HQ2 thread. This is the problem with locking threads: discussion that belongs in the locked threads still happens, it just happens in places it doesn't belong.
Click to expand...

Exactly, thats why f em. Not a loss at all and we don't have to cater to their whims when were one of the hottest markets right now and everybody wants to come here. When were this hot right now why should we have to bend to anybody, they should have to bend to us. We barely have the room to even fit everybody that wants to come, so no concessions. The way they demanded cities offer them a golden platter then cut their employee count to HALF is ridiculous. Let DC have fun with this crap, no loss at all. We already have Amazon employees renting here anyways, no big deal.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

JumboBuc said:
You kinda got to hand it to Amazon on this.

First they propose a grand "HQ2" with up to 50,000 (!) employees. This gets municipalities around the country all worked up, so everybody puts together their best possible incentive packages in order to land those 50,000 (!) employees at that exciting "HQ2." Then after all the bids are in and locked down, Amazon cuts the "HQ2" in half, meaning that those 50,000 (!) employees will never actually be hired in any bid city. But, crucially, while the "HQ2" as pitched will never actually happen and the 50,000 (!) employees will never actually be hired in any bid city, the incentives offered by each bid city in order to draw those 50,000 employees stay.

Then Amazon chooses the pretty much status quo options of NYC and the Beltway (the only more status quo option would have been SF). These are the locations they were always going to choose for their East Coast satellite offices (which is really what this is) from the start.

So in the end, Amazon gets "HQ2" incentive packages from both Northern VA and NYC, but neither region gets anything resembling the "HQ2" as originally pitched.

Make a huge and appealing pitch, get huge offers on generous terms in response, then deliver only half (at best) of your original pitch but still demand to receive the same offers on the same terms.

Half of HQ2 in LIC is basically Amazon taking up the space that Citi will leave in LIC as it downsizes through 2020. No way Amazon would have gotten the offers they did from NYC if they framed their expansion plans that way from the start.

Retailers have been getting steamrolled by Amazon's practices such as these for years; now NYC and Northern VA are getting in on that action.

----------------------------

ALSO: all of this recent conversation should move to the (locked) HQ2 thread. This is the problem with locking threads: discussion that belongs in the locked threads still happens, it just happens in places it doesn't belong.
Click to expand...


I think if Amazon had said we are looking to locate 5,000 to 10,000 jobs in or around 3 or 4 major cities they would have gotten as big of a response also. Those are still huge numbers and a big win for any city. Heck Boston rolled out the red carpet for just hundreds of jobs at GE.

I take it at face value that Amazon actually did want everything they said they wanted and if the reports of HQ2a and HQ2b and some other expansion in some other cities are true then I simply take it that they concluded that no one city could really meet all the requirements at a high enough quality location so they are going to go with expansions in multiple cities to get the best they can get in multiple locations.

Which might have been somewhat obvious in the beginning of this that making room for 50,000 people in any single city would either be prohibitively expensive or require less desirable locations or both. I gather though they will spin this as HQ2 plus and try to make this a positive result for each city that is getting some jobs out of this.
 
Re: Suffolk Downs Redevelopment

Amazon was always looking to extort someone and at the end of the day it probably was these 2 cities from day one and they used everyone else as leverage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top