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.
The ATL always gets treated like the red-headed stepchild.
The constant blather about us being the "poster child for sprawl" that is "choking on traffic" doesn't help. That's on top of our huge lots in Cascade and Druid Hills that leave a million people pounding at the gates.
With those kinds of self-inflicted doomsday assessments, it's no wonder we stack up poorly next to enlightened urban nirvanas like Rochester and Omaha.
The New York-based real estate firm that authored that list clearly and obviously has a personal financial interest in downplaying Atlanta's status as the presumed frontrunner for Amazon's second headquarters while announcing New York City to be the frontrunner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57
The ATL always gets treated like the red-headed stepchild.
The constant blather about us being the "poster child for sprawl" that is "choking on traffic" doesn't help. That's on top of our huge lots in Cascade and Druid Hills that leave a million people pounding at the gates.
With those kinds of self-inflicted doomsday assessments, it's no wonder we stack up poorly next to enlightened urban nirvanas like Rochester and Omaha.
The "poster child for sprawl" and "choking on traffic" ("choking on growth") monikers actually seem to have been derisively applied to Atlanta by elites in the Northeastern establishment who frowned upon the way that the upstart Atlanta's metropolitan area was physically developing during its explosive spurt of extreme growth in the 1990's.
The "poster child for sprawl" label appears to have been applied by Northeastern urban real estate development expert Christopher Leinberger of George Washington University.
The "choking on traffic/choking on growth" moniker may have been applied during a series of articles about Atlanta's sprawling development patterns in the late 1990's by the New York Times.
The labels applied to Atlanta's notably transit-deficient, very low-density metropolitan and regional development and growth trends by elitist outside onlookers in the Northeastern establishment (whose partial motivation was likely to be condescending to an upstart large major metro area in a more provincial region of the country in the Southeast and the Sunbelt) likely were adopted by local activists across the political spectrum during a heated political battle over the Outer Perimeter with environmental and land-use implications that was ratcheting up in intensity at the time.
Atlanta was basically the "new kid on the block" as far as large major metro areas go at the time... And because Atlanta was just kind of coming into its own as a very high-profile commodity of both national and international influence after being awarded the '96 Summer Olympics in 1990, Atlanta was, both fairly and unfairly, going to receive large doses of stinging and biting criticism for its existence by the elites in the Northeastern establishment.
In the case of Atlanta being left out of the aforementioned list of 25 top metros in the running for Amazon's HQ2, I do not think it was a case of Atlanta being treated like a red-headed stepchild by elites in the Northeastern establishment. I think that it was a case of intense (if not cutthroat) competition by a regional (Eastern Seaboard) competing interest (a New York-based real estate firm) who is trying to boost their own local financial prospects to win a seemingly lucrative Amazon HQ2 by downplaying Atlanta's frontrunner status.
Atlanta was left off that list on purpose as a way for that New York real estate firm to attempt to woo Amazon executives at the expense of a competitor like Atlanta whom is widely presumed by many to be the frontrunner.
Putting smaller city/metros like Rochester, New York; Omaha, Nebraska; and Chattanooga (smaller metros who may not even be large enough to fit Amazon's criteria for a second headquarters with their significantly smaller talent bases and significantly smaller airports) in the Top-15 of the list was a not-so-subtle clear dig at national competitors like Atlanta (and Dallas, and Charlotte, and Los Angeles, etc).
A mega-sized large major city/metro and the financial and business capital of the world, one would and should expect an international urban power like New York to attempt to circle the wagons and throw its considerable weight around during an intense competition for such a seemingly lucrative prize as Amazon's second headquarters and its reported $5 billion, 50,000-job impact... A massive financial and economic impact that is something for many communities to kill for, including New York City which is already the business and financial capital of the world.
Atlantans should not take these attempts by a city like New York to throw its considerable weight around and attempt to bully its way to the very front of the field personally. That's because as they say, "it's not personal, it's just business"... Especially in this case of an intense national competition for the second headquarters of a major international corporation that is expected to have an impact of the construction of a $5 billion development that will create 50,000 new jobs.
A city like New York may be able (and likely should be expected) to use its establishment business and media resources to attempt to create the perception that it is the frontrunner for Amazon's second headquarters
But the challenge for a city like New York is that it (even with all of its considerable advantages and amenities) may be too pricey and be perceived as being too business-unfriendly to be at the very front of the pack for consideration for Amazon's HQ2... Which is likely why New York was given 14-1 odds of landing the Amazon HQ2 by the betting site Paddy Power while a metro like Atlanta which is perceived to be more business-friendly in most respects was given 3-1 odds of landing the Amazon HQ2 and is perceived to be the actual frontrunner by many onlookers.
Atlanta also has the advantage of having a thriving entertainment production scene of rising international influence (particularly in the realms of Atlanta's exploding television and film production scene and Atlanta's dominant Hip-Hop music production scene)... An advantage that most legitimate contenders for Amazon's HQ2 (outside of Los Angeles and New York) do not seem to have.
Along with such intangibles as the world's busiest passenger airport, a very large talent base, a centralized location at a nexus of multiple transcontinental superhighways in the Southeastern U.S., a location in a generally business-friendly Sunbelt state in the Eastern Time Zone on the Eastern Seaboard and a direct Heavy Rail Transit connection to said world's busiest passenger airport from major central business districts like Downtown, Midtown and Buckhead, it is Atlanta's fast-growing and exploding television/film production scene and Atlanta's currently very-dominant Hip-Hop music production scene (along with a slew of other very high-profile corporate headquarters relocations) that has created a robust level of cultural and entertainment buzz for the city that not too many other competing cities can currently match... Something that seems to be happening at just the right time for a city like Atlanta during the competition for Amazon's seemingly very lucrative second headquarters.
The perception of the Atlanta area as a large and growing technology hub for the Southeastern U.S. also likely helps in Atlanta's quest to land something as major (and as massive) as Amazon's second headquarters.
Along with the logistical and workforce intangibles, it is Atlanta's very high-profile entertainment production scene component and the buzz surrounding it that is the likely reason why it is the apparent frontrunner in the competition to land Amazon's seemingly lucrative second headquarters.
That's does not mean that Atlanta is a shoo-in to win the Amazon HQ2 by any stretch in such a tough contest with so many competing factions. But it does mean that Atlanta does seem to have something that is very unique and very appealing that appears to make it stand out over other cities in such a tough competition.
In the case of Atlanta being left out of the aforementioned list of 25 top metros in the running for Amazon's HQ2, I do not think it was a case of Atlanta being treated like a red-headed stepchild by elites in the Northeastern establishment. I think that it was a case of intense (if not cutthroat) competition by a regional (Eastern Seaboard) competing interest (a New York-based real estate firm) who is trying to boost their own local financial prospects to win a seemingly lucrative Amazon HQ2 by downplaying Atlanta's frontrunner status.
Atlanta was left off that list on purpose as a way for that New York real estate firm to attempt to woo Amazon executives at the expense of a competitor like Atlanta whom is widely presumed by many to be the frontrunner.
Putting smaller city/metros like Rochester, New York; Omaha, Nebraska; and Chattanooga (smaller metros who may not even be large enough to fit Amazon's criteria for a second headquarters with their significantly smaller talent bases and significantly smaller airports) in the Top-15 of the list was a not-so-subtle clear dig at national competitors like Atlanta (and Dallas, and Charlotte, and Los Angeles, etc).
A mega-sized large major city/metro and the financial and business capital of the world, one would and should expect an international urban power like New York to attempt to circle the wagons and throw its considerable weight around during an intense competition for such a seemingly lucrative prize as Amazon's second headquarters and its reported $5 billion, 50,000-job impact... A massive financial and economic impact that is something for many communities to kill for, including New York City which is already the business and financial capital of the world.
Atlantans should not take these attempts by a city like New York to throw its considerable weight around and attempt to bully its way to the very front of the field personally. That's because as they say, "it's not personal, it's just business"... Especially in this case of an intense national competition for the second headquarters of a major international corporation that is expected to have an impact of the construction of a $5 billion development that will create 50,000 new jobs.
A city like New York may be able (and likely should be expected) to use its establishment business and media resources to attempt to create the perception that it is the frontrunner for Amazon's second headquarters
But the challenge for a city like New York is that it (even with all of its considerable advantages and amenities) may be too pricey and be perceived as being too business-unfriendly to be at the very front of the pack for consideration for Amazon's HQ2... Which is likely why New York was given 14-1 odds of landing the Amazon HQ2 by the betting site Paddy Power while a metro like Atlanta which is perceived to be more business-friendly in most respects was given 3-1 odds of landing the Amazon HQ2 and is perceived to be the actual frontrunner by many onlookers.
Atlanta also has the advantage of having a thriving entertainment production scene of rising international influence (particularly in the realms of Atlanta's exploding television and film production scene and Atlanta's dominant Hip-Hop music production scene)... An advantage that most legitimate contenders for Amazon's HQ2 (outside of Los Angeles and New York) do not seem to have.
Along with such intangibles as the world's busiest passenger airport, a very large talent base, a centralized location at a nexus of multiple transcontinental superhighways in the Southeastern U.S., a location in a generally business-friendly Sunbelt state in the Eastern Time Zone on the Eastern Seaboard and a direct Heavy Rail Transit connection to said world's busiest passenger airport from major central business districts like Downtown, Midtown and Buckhead, it is Atlanta's fast-growing and exploding television/film production scene and Atlanta's currently very-dominant Hip-Hop music production scene (along with a slew of other very high-profile corporate headquarters relocations) that has created a robust level of cultural and entertainment buzz for the city that not too many other competing cities can currently match... Something that seems to be happening at just the right time for a city like Atlanta during the competition for Amazon's seemingly very lucrative second headquarters.
The perception of the Atlanta area as a large and growing technology hub for the Southeastern U.S. also likely helps in Atlanta's quest to land something as major (and as massive) as Amazon's second headquarters.
Along with the logistical and workforce intangibles, it is Atlanta's very high-profile entertainment production scene component and the buzz surrounding it that is the likely reason why it is the apparent frontrunner in the competition to land Amazon's seemingly lucrative second headquarters.
That's does not mean that Atlanta is a shoo-in to win the Amazon HQ2 by any stretch in such a tough contest with so many competing factions. But it does mean that Atlanta does seem to have something that is very unique and very appealing that appears to make it stand out over other cities in such a tough competition.
Great analysis B2R. I took a look at the REIS report, available here.
According to the two authors of the report, "the analysis was purely data driven but it covers nearly every decision driver mentioned in Amazon's RFP and objectively sums a set of values that measures every indicator by metro as a percentage better or worse than the U.S. average for that indicator."
However, their objectivity seems doubtful, and I'm not sure about the quality of their data & analysis. I have to think NYC's ranking is skewed by the public transportation category alone (NY gets a whopping 593% grade for that one). It seems, though, that Atlanta still should have fared better based on several of the categories (which also include cost of doing business and business taxes) than some of the other cities that ranked in the top 25. It's also notable that they don't include international airport/access to non-stop flights as one of their variables. And their amenities/quality of life category boils down to "museum and cultural employment" (huh?). Not a very impressive report...
"The filing, known as an impact fee assessment, described the project as having more than 9 million square feet of office space, 1 million square feet of commercial space, 1,500 hotel rooms and 2,100 apartments or condos...
Amazon has said it requires up to 8 million square feet of office space on property with direct transit connections that also is within 45 minutes of an airport.
The Gulch property would fulfill all those requirements."
Great analysis B2R. I took a look at the REIS report, available here.
According to the two authors of the report, "the analysis was purely data driven but it covers nearly every decision driver mentioned in Amazon's RFP and objectively sums a set of values that measures every indicator by metro as a percentage better or worse than the U.S. average for that indicator."
However, their objectivity seems doubtful, and I'm not sure about the quality of their data & analysis. I have to think NYC's ranking is skewed by the public transportation category alone (NY gets a whopping 593% grade for that one). It seems, though, that Atlanta still should have fared better based on several of the categories (which also include cost of doing business and business taxes) than some of the other cities that ranked in the top 25. It's also notable that they don't include international airport/access to non-stop flights as one of their variables. And their amenities/quality of life category boils down to "museum and cultural employment" (huh?). Not a very impressive report...
I just wanted to throw in my two cents at attacking such a biased "study" that arrogantly went out of their way to discuss subjectivity.
I know these types of brief papers never meet the written quality of something that would be peer reviewed, much less peer reviewed in the academic realm of economics.
However, it is so poorly written... or strategically written to hide some bias.
What was noteworthy to me is there were no simple explanation of the population and/or sample in their short methodology. They had to touch on a justification for their unfair use of splitting up of metrolitan areas, but they never actually stated this was of all metropolitan areas, all metropolitan areas meeting x & y qualifications, or how they came up with 25 places for comparison. People quoting this article are blindly assuming those are the top 25 and the others are missing, but that wasn't actually stated and they have provided no data, charts, or evidence of the rest.
More troubling to me is the splitting up of narrowed down suburbs and central cities, especially mixed with analyzing the percentage or tech workers and white collar workers (But not aggregate numbers!). This is methodology unfair and extremely biased and any real academic would question the merits of this.
To better explain... Take Atlanta, because we all know it better.
Let's say instead of using Metro Atlanta as the data. I split it up to 3 groups. The city (alone), North metro area (better yet... lets just define this as N. Fulton + Dunwoody), and the rest of the metro area (which is conveniently left out of the top 25).
When they analyzed employment... They were looking at jobs in those areas, not the jobs the -residents- of those areas.
This would remove many of the region's top industrial markets, while only looking at the white collar core areas. It also conveniently removes citizens residing in those areas working in peripheral industrial districts out of the metric.
In this case Atlanta (city) would have a higher % of white collar workers and a higher % of tech. workers than the whole metro. Of course the fact that Atlanta city doesn't even have the majority of the regions white collar or tech workers doesn't matter. It has an extremely low industrial base and an extremely high white collar base and likely the highest percentage of that job type within its borders.
The north Atlanta area will have a larger industrial base, but it has a much stronger white collar/tech base than the rest of the region. The remainder of the region will have fewer of the white collar core areas and a large amount of the core industrial areas (ie. South Atlanta/Airport, Fulton Industrial. I-20 E & W and even what is found in Gwinnett and Cobb).
This can also apply to other measurements, like % of workers in cultural institutions.
It is a horrible statistical trick.
Even for NYC that has a metro area with jobs and population heavily weighted to the city, it ends up being a statistical manipulation to remove outlying areas with broader types of job bases and boosting numbers and these are cities that don't even need a huge boost. This isn't slightly suspect... It is highly suspect.
When I was in undergrad and graduate school I studied both geography and economics to influence my studies largely to parse to out statistical manipulations using geographic boundaries and alarm bells are ringing here. There are often times you end up relying on imperfect data, because you can't get it any other way. However, this simply doesn't pass the test.... even then a researcher with any credibility to state this weakness.
There are other oddities here, like the % of total state and private college employment being used as a measure of the academic merits of the area. This would include colleges that area able to hire a higher ratio of teachers to students and would include the region's weaker regional colleges. We all know that was not the core of looking for the academic achievement most companies are looking for alone. We all know NYC and DC do not needs this type of bias, but perhaps some of their smaller cities and suburbs do?
Even more importantly the merits of examining business taxes needs to be examined.
The authors need to operationally explain this better:
"(8) Tax Foundation; state tax statutes; Commerce Clearinghouse. The state tax rates were doubled and subtracted from the totals. Many local tax rates are deductible from state taxes."
This is suspicious for a variety of reasons. First, it isn't perfectly explained what the number actually is. It is ignoring local taxes (only the deductible from state taxes), which is very important in a city like NYC. They aren't explaining and defending the doubling of state taxes for a tax subtraction of state tax totals?
Maybe someone else can read into this statement better than I can. Something isn't clear here and I'm highly suspicious given the lack of regard to their geographic based data.
The ABC and others shouldn't bother re-publishing this type of click-bait that has very low credibility.
I just wanted to throw in my two cents at attacking such a biased "study" that arrogantly went out of their way to discuss subjectivity.
I know these types of brief papers never meet the written quality of something that would be peer reviewed, much less peer reviewed in the academic realm of economics.
However, it is so poorly written... or strategically written to hide some bias.
***Elided for brevity***
The ABC and others shouldn't bother re-publishing this type of click-bait that has very low credibility.
The anti-Sunbelt bias that's so obvious in these so-called "studies" could be very detrimental to the ATL's bid for the Amazon HQ. Hopefully Amazon's decision makers will be able to see through the baloney and give our fine city a fair shake.
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.
