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.
It wasn't until I got on this board that I saw all these people mentioning Texas... On the east coast, or at least in DC, no one ever mentions Texas. Nothing against Texas but... yeah. Austin seems like a nice place but none of the major cities in Texas (Austin, Dallas, Houston) can compete with Boston, NYC, Chicago or DC.
In terms of corporate relocations and expansions, they absolutely do. You'd have to be living under a rock to think otherwise.
This is also an interesting read from the NY Times that ties into this HQ2. I have always suspected this move was talent driven and it would appear that having access to AI talent will be a must.
This is also an interesting read from the NY Times that ties into this HQ2. I have always suspected this move was talent driven and it would appear that having access to AI talent will be a must.
Hmmm...I am not sure I totally agree about AI focus. I think HQ2 is talent-driven in the sense that they want to attract people to an environment that is different from Seattle and that they have a need for more [very heavily incentivized] space than they currently have there. I'm certain HQ2 will include units overseeing certain R&D ventures, but head office work primarily focuses on enterprise-wide needed support and services like strategic planning, law, marketing, accounts/finance, human resources, IT, etc., needed to make sure that the company runs smoothly as a whole. Amazon doesn't strike me as so particularly centralized, already having offices around the country tackling certain aspects of the business they're trying develop. They could easily put an AI center in Boston if they want to. But while AI is great and all, very few will be focused on that specific area at any time or location, and I doubt that it is the primary driving force behind locating or developing HQ2.
Austin is just a strange choice in the fact that they could easily choose Denver which has some of the same hype as Austin, yet seems more equipped to handle growth than Austin.
If it's in the Austin burbs, the land is much cheaper than Denver and the COL is much lower than Denver, if we're talking burbs.
Still, I don't believe Austin is the choice, though I would be happy with it.
As per other news reports, the decision won't be made until sometime in 2018. Before that, the list of proposals will be narrowed down and then there will be site visits and in-city interviews.
The Chicago bid is too awesome, the supertall tower in it is spectacular. Just the kind of building the city needs to put a remarkable 21st Century stamp on its skyline (Chicago's skyline looks aged to me, especially compared to the Persian Gulf cities and Asia-Pacific cities).
Appears to be the city's new tallest if Chicago is chosen and Amazon selects that site and goes forward with carrying out the city's developmental plans (lots of "ifs" to it).
However, betting odds have Atlanta and Austin comfortably leading the field for the places that are "most likely" to get HQ2 according to betters outside of North America:
NEW YORK (AP) — Amazon said Monday that it received 238 proposals from cities and regions in the United States, Canada and Mexico hoping to be the home of the company's second headquarters.
The online retailer kicked off its hunt for a second home base in September, promising to bring 50,000 new jobs and spend more than $5 billion on construction. Proposals were due last week, and Amazon made clear that tax breaks and grants would be a big deciding factor on where it chooses to land.
Amazon.com Inc. did not list which cities or metro areas applied, but said the proposals came from 43 U.S. states, as well as Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico, three Mexican states and six Canadian provinces. In a tweet, the company said it was "excited to review each of them."
Besides looking for financial incentives, Amazon had stipulated that it was seeking to be near a metropolitan area with more than a million people; be able to attract top technical talent; be within 45 minutes of an international airport; have direct access to mass transit; and be able to expand that headquarters to as much as 8 million square feet in the next decade.
Generous tax breaks and other incentives can erode a city's tax base. For the winner, it could be worth it, since an Amazon headquarters could draw other tech businesses and their well-educated, highly paid employees.
The seven U.S. states that Amazon said did not apply were: Arkansas, Hawaii, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming.
In bold and underlined are important tidbits. Everything else can just simply be glossed over.
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.
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.
