U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Where?
New York City 16 3.10%
Greater Boston 32 6.20%
Philly 38 7.36%
DC/N. Virginia 50 9.69%
Raleigh/NC Research Triangle 32 6.20%
Austin 48 9.30%
San Francisco/Bay Area/Silicon Valley 13 2.52%
Baltimore 11 2.13%
Toronto 33 6.40%
Pittsburgh 35 6.78%
Chicago 99 19.19%
Atlanta 109 21.12%
Voters: 516. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-13-2017, 09:23 AM
 
Location: Clemson, SC by way of Tyler,TX
4,857 posts, read 2,989,000 times
Reputation: 3399

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by edwardsyzzurphands View Post
Good points on all cities. One issue though is the corporate tax rate is less of a concern than you stated to a company like Amazon. Amazon basically pays an average tax rate of 13% not the typical 35% Fed rate or the 26.9% S&P rate.

From what I have read and heard this move is basically centered around talent retention and hiring. Amazon needs to be assured by any city it chooses that it can graduate and retain enough workers locally to fuel their growth ambitions.

This really makes the Boston rumors carry some weight. The amount of local talent that funnels through the education system in the metro is incredible and the quality of it quite high considering the schools they are attached to. Yes a decent amount of those grads already stay in the Boston area, but an incredible amount end up elsewhere in the country and world. That is where a company like Amazon would come in and benefit greatly as a result.
To me, Boston is like the east coast version of Seattle, but with better colleges and 4 seasons. Also, more developed, better transit and walkable. But maybe Bezos wants a city that is the opposite of Seattle?

 
Old 09-13-2017, 09:38 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
6,580 posts, read 3,670,806 times
Reputation: 12384
I don't think we have anything to worry about but I'm hoping my city is keeping it's head down. At first I thought it would be a good deal but we've been suckered before. Something this size will change the nature of the city...almost become a company town unless it is one of the top 3 or 4 metros in the country.
 
Old 09-13-2017, 09:38 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis
2,532 posts, read 2,498,815 times
Reputation: 4250
Aside from other criteria, I suspect that Amazon is looking for a location in which the company can have a dominant, if not transformative presence. While I wouldn’t argue that Amazon and Seattle are synonymous, I expect that for most Americans the term “Seattle” and the term “Amazon” are very closely connected. I think Amazon wants to create a similar relationship with its second HQ.

If I’m right, and I certainly might not be, I would think they would pass on the best established cities. In New York, for example, Amazon, as a brand, would be lost among Wall Street, the city’s numerous cultural institutions, The United Nations, The Statue of Liberty, etc. What I mean is that when people think of New York, Amazon would be pretty far down on the list of things that are associated with the city. Washington DC might present the same issue given that city’s innumerable political components.

My guess is that Amazon will look for a mid-sized city that has no dominant corporate entities or other institutions/attractions that automatically “brand” the city.
 
Old 09-13-2017, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Clemson, SC by way of Tyler,TX
4,857 posts, read 2,989,000 times
Reputation: 3399
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogead View Post
Aside from other criteria, I suspect that Amazon is looking for a location in which the company can have a dominant, if not transformative presence. While I wouldn’t argue that Amazon and Seattle are synonymous, I expect that for most Americans the term “Seattle” and the term “Amazon” are very closely connected. I think Amazon wants to create a similar relationship with its second HQ.

If I’m right, and I certainly might not be, I would think they would pass on the best established cities. In New York, for example, Amazon, as a brand, would be lost among Wall Street, the city’s numerous cultural institutions, The United Nations, The Statue of Liberty, etc. What I mean is that when people think of New York, Amazon would be pretty far down on the list of things that are associated with the city. Washington DC might present the same issue given that city’s innumerable political components.

My guess is that Amazon will look for a mid-sized city that has no dominant corporate entities or other institutions/attractions that automatically “brand” the city.
That sounds like Denver to me. Somebody mentioned how Chicago's tallest building was the Sears Tower, representing the old way of doing business. Would it be amazing if Amazon built a taller building there?
 
Old 09-13-2017, 09:54 AM
 
Location: London, UK
3,458 posts, read 4,009,760 times
Reputation: 2661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duderino View Post
Thing about Boston is that it has largely become a victim of its own success (very similar to Seattle--which is precisely why Amazon is looking elsewhere for massive expansion; it's hit a wall with large-scale growth there on a number of levels).

Boston is in a very similar position not only with labor but real estate that in central areas rival Manhattan and SF in terms of cost (for commercial and residential), which leads to higher compensation demands. This was a recent article about the Mass. economy:

"The unemployment rate in the state now stands below 4 percent. While this is good news for workers and signals a healthy state economy, employers may be facing difficulties in finding qualified workers to hire. The downside of a “hot” labor market can be shortages of available qualified workers."

https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/n...shortages.html


That's the irony of a HQ search in this case--everyone tends to direct their attention to the "very best" tech cities, but to a large degree they're "tapped out" in a number of ways (real estate bubbles and tight labor markets are NOT good for expanding businesses).

This is why large, still-attractive/dynamic cities, with large talent pools, but aren't quite "white hot" tech markets (nor astronomically-priced), like Chicago, Atlanta and Philly, are most logical.
Good post and a concern that the people pitching Boston will have to find an answer to.

One thing you need to factor in though is how many of these grads the Boston area loses each year. It is well known how heavily Amazon, Apple, Google, etc.. recruit MIT Sloan and Haas grads. Being up close and personal with them in a city like Boston or SF really cuts out alot of the legwork involved in trying to recruit in separate area. They release great surveys from area grads each year and the majority of them say they would love to stay in the Boston area if those blue chip companies were located there (Like if they didnt lose a place like facebook for example)

I think this move is less about cost than people are thinking. This is a talent retention and acquisition fueled move if Ive ever seen one. They are tapped out of Seattle and know that they need to look elsewhere to continue to fuel their growth intentions.

Also keep in mind that in order to recruit grads with global options and ambitions you cannot possibly be the only game in town. Clustering talent in one area happens for a reason. It happens because of an exchange of ideas, funding and of course talent. When you recruit a top grad they are not only thinking of the immediate job but also thinking of their options down the line. There is alot less risk involved for them moving to an area with multiple options rather than one where they would feel stuck and married to one or two employers.
 
Old 09-13-2017, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
3,945 posts, read 2,220,538 times
Reputation: 2611
probably wont happen, but the suburbs/satellite cities of Seattle (Tacoma, Everett, and Bothell) are trying to get Amazon to built their HQ2 there.
Does Tacoma or Bothell-Everett have what it takes to be Amazon’s 2nd headquarters site? | Q13 FOX News
 
Old 09-13-2017, 10:05 AM
 
Location: The City
22,331 posts, read 32,171,331 times
Reputation: 7739
some interesting stats


New Central Business District Employment and Transit Commuting Data | Newgeography.com
 
Old 09-13-2017, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
8,702 posts, read 11,936,340 times
Reputation: 3574
Where should Amazon build HQ2? We let the data decide

Quote:
After crunching the numbers, here are the top 10 metro areas for Amazon’s HQ2:

Toronto
Ottawa, Ont.
Boston
Philadelphia
Chicago
Atlanta
Washington, D.C.
Charlotte, N.C.
Montréal
Vancouver, B.C.
https://www.geekwire.com/2017/amazon...t-data-decide/
 
Old 09-13-2017, 10:43 AM
 
7,707 posts, read 4,572,099 times
Reputation: 8423
Quote:
Originally Posted by RightonWalnut View Post
Where should Amazon build HQ2? We let the data decide



https://www.geekwire.com/2017/amazon...t-data-decide/
Removing the four Canadian cities puts Denver, Pittsburgh, Austin and Raleigh in the top 10
 
Old 09-13-2017, 10:52 AM
 
Location: Boston Metrowest (via the Philly area)
4,460 posts, read 7,526,734 times
Reputation: 4352
Quote:
Originally Posted by edwardsyzzurphands View Post
Also keep in mind that in order to recruit grads with global options and ambitions you cannot possibly be the only game in town. Clustering talent in one area happens for a reason. It happens because of an exchange of ideas, funding and of course talent. When you recruit a top grad they are not only thinking of the immediate job but also thinking of their options down the line. There is alot less risk involved for them moving to an area with multiple options rather than one where they would feel stuck and married to one or two employers.
Valid points--certainly there's no shortage of talent being churned out of local Boston universities, but being that much of the student population is so global to begin with, I think there's always going to be only so many students that want to stick around locally long-term (for Harvard and MIT grads, in particular, the world is their oyster). Also complicating matters is that idea of staying in any one city forever is an increasingly foreign concept in our global economy.

You're absolutely right that long-term employment prospects do matter, but there are a number of cities where that isn't necessarily an issue (even if not every city is either SF, or to a lesser extent Boston, with multiple large tech HQs, there are still many other large cities with satellite offices and/or remote work options for large companies).

I'll also just drive the point home that issues such as transit access and housing costs will definitely play a role, as they all are crucial quality-of-life considerations for potential employees. That's to say nothing of the very difficult task of finding copious, reasonably-priced and shovel-ready real estate in economically competitive areas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top