Toyota driven out of California? Not so fast says Toyota (Los Angeles: middle-class, 2013)

[slo1318]

Originally Posted by TVC15

I only copied and pasted from the two page article. Yes I saw the redundancies but who am I to change the original article?

I did read it and it also says this:

"I don't think it is a big secret that outside of the IT and entertainment industry, that California is too much of an overregulated, high-cost place of doing business," said Sean McAlinden, chief economist for the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich. "But it's not just about insulting California. [Toyota] had too many different organizations operating at the same time not operating as the same entity."

So it seems to be both factors for why they are leaving. To say money had little influence in this decision is just not accurate. That's all I am saying.

Oh and to answer you question in the other forum. I am visiting and I look forward to it! Friends and family all eager for my arrival!

You aren't even trying to acknowledge the point I made which is straight from Toyota. The ridiculous quote is from some automotive consultant chiming in on the issue not from Toyota. The incentives are a factor but not the reason. The reason is exactly what I said.

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by slo1318

. The incentives are a factor but not the reason. .

This is what I have been saying.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by TVC15

Hummm does anyone here dispute that moving the company to Texas will result in at least a 40% savings to the company?

Yes, I dispute that. The savings, if it existed at all, would be no where near 40%.

A few years ago I did the math to see how much cheaper it would be to run my business in Texas and, in fact, it wouldn't have been cheaper at all. Some of the regulatory costs would have been less, but these were all minor costs. What killed it were the rates for commercial property in any area I'd want to live in and the cost to cool a large warehouse that requires continuous ventilation with fresh air in the brutal Texas heat.

I would imagine the only businesses that would have a meaningful cost savings are those with a big need for low-skill labor and heavy polluters.

[TVC15]

We already know what you think.

Apparently Texas is not interested in offering you a State Incentive to move your business there.

Just move on since your imagination is lacking.

[Tulemutt]

I didn't know what he thought. And I did find his comment interesting.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by TVC15

Apparently Texas is not interested in offering you a State Incentive to move your business there.

Considering I own a small business that is only natural, but if Texas is only cheaper because the state is handing out money then Texas is going to be in trouble.

The idea that its 40% cheaper to run a business in Texas is outlandish. Real business isn't that simplistic, each business has different needs and the pros and cons of being in a particular state are going to be unique for each business.

[thelopez2]

Originally Posted by TVC15

Hummm does anyone here dispute that moving the company to Texas will result in at least a 40% savings to the company?

Nissan retained under 40% of their staff, Toyota is consolidating at least 4 business units, between golden parachutes, consolidation, there is definite long term savings. Would Toyota be happier if 100% of the people moved, I doubt it.

After they outsourced some of the IT to people who drive significantly different than local LA drivers, I don't know how much they plan on saving on that side. Is outsourcing in Texas different than California?

I bet only managers are getting relocation packages. It makes sense for their Parts Distribution Center to stay here, but I bet after the next port shut down, there will be some serious reconsiderations.

Providing more jobs in Texas will probably also increase their truck sales and profitability too.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by slo1318

You aren't even trying to acknowledge the point I made which is straight from Toyota. The ridiculous quote is from some automotive consultant chiming in on the issue not from Toyota. The incentives are a factor but not the reason. The reason is exactly what I said.

More to support your point:

cost is just one of the factors businesses consider when deciding where to locate (or stay). Another is proximity to suppliers and customers.

Think California is bad for business? Think again. - latimes.com

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by thelopez2

I bet only managers are getting relocation packages. It makes sense for their Parts Distribution Center to stay here, but I bet after the next port shut down, there will be some serious reconsiderations.

From the article that I posted in post #19 it states this:

"Mr. Lentz said Toyota is determined to retain current employees, and is offering company-paid trips to Texas or Michigan, and relocation packages to anyone who wants to move, not just to higher level employees."

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by user_id

Considering I own a small business that is only natural, but if Texas is only cheaper because the state is handing out money then Texas is going to be in trouble.

The idea that its 40% cheaper to run a business in Texas is outlandish. Real business isn't that simplistic, each business has different needs and the pros and cons of being in a particular state are going to be unique for each business.

Texas is not in going to run into any trouble by creating businesses and jobs. They have been a business friendly state for a long time.

This is a very good link to compare how Texas does it vs. the other states.

State by State Incentives Guide | Business Facilities (BF) | The Source for Corporate Site Selectors