Los Angeles make top 20 list for Amazon HQ2 (living, cost)

[ryanms3030]

Originally Posted by majoun

DC while expensive has the advantage of the federal government being right there, which is convenient for any future political favors Amazon may need.

When you are worth over $100 billion like Jeff Bezos is, I don't think you need to be in any particular physical location to get political favors

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by ryanms3030

When you are worth over $100 billion like Jeff Bezos is, I don't think you need to be in any particular physical location to get political favors

Plus DC is a complete **** hole.

DC and California won't get HQ2.

[Xanathos]

Alright, this is a relatively simple affair to winnow down who's getting this rotten win (all taxes paid for by the workers, none by Amazon):

The 20:

-Atlanta: Infrastructure nightmare, horrendous commutes (and Amazon doesn't encourage WFH), small pipeline of tech talent relative to the area's size. Small pool of poachable talent. Cost of living not terrible. 5.5 hour flight SEA>ATL (way too long), infrequent flights between the two cities. No

-Austin: Infrastructure is bursting at the seams, but there are ways around it. Very strong tech hub (no. 6 in the nation). No state income tax, which will appeal to out of state workers and people looking to flee SLU. It's Texas, so you basically have unlimited land to expand out into. Little blue dot in an ocean of red, which will appeal to the perpetually triggered Millennials. "Nerd Bird" flight route already established and populated. Talent pipeline, starting w/ a strong CS program at UT. Tons of tech talent to poach from other established companies, which Amazon loves doing. Cost of living downright reasonable. Very strong possibility.

-Boston: Infrastructure is already terribly overburdened. Very strong tech hub (no. 7 in the nation). Regressive tax system. Cost of living positively through the roof, which won't alleviate Amazon's current problem as it relates to workers. Only 2 flights a day between SEA>BOS, 6 hour flight (way too long for executives to be out of band). Amazing talent pipeline thanks to Boston's many universities. Strong poachable talent pool, but most of them are with financial firms, not tech companies (yes, it matters). Not going to happen.

-Chicago: Infrastructure can handle whatever is thrown at it. Mediocre tech hub in relation to the city's overall size. Tax system a complete joke, and cost of living is on the higher end. Crime and quality of schools for workers' families also becomes a consideration. United owns O'Hare, has zero presence in Seattle, though flights exist. Small poachable talent pool. Seems unlikely.

-Columbus: No. Just, no. Columbus has scored some impressive longshot wins the last few years with regards to grants, but this isn't going to be one of them. The pool isn't there, the flight routes aren't there, the infrastructure isn't there, none of it is there. They don't even meet the minimum requirements Amazon initially laid out. They're here solely because Amazon wanted to hand out a "they tried really hard" award.

-Dallas: Infrastructure can handle anything you throw at it. Not a strong tech hub, but it's changing fast with major tech players starting to set up shop there, particularly in the Plano area. So there's a pipeline of importing talent that can be poached, but no university produced talent to speak of. No state income tax, which is appealing to Amazon workers. There's absolutely no shortage of land. SEA>DAL and SEA>DFW flight routes are inconsistent and on the longer end, but tolerable. Cost of living is pretty good. Part of the ocean of red, which will upset crazed SJW workers. One of the clear frontrunners

-Denver: The locals complain about the infrastructure, but it's fine and getting even better. Amazingly strong tech hub (very quietly became no. 3 in the nation!), all the major tech players are starting to pile in to the city. This gives Amazon both the ability to get in "early" as well as ensure that there will always be a pool of poachable talent. Decent but not great education pipeline. State income tax is reasonable. No shortage of land as long as you build east and south - fortunately for Amazon, the tech epicenter is in both of those places, centered around Centennial. Flight routes aren't great (much like Chicago, United owns DIA, and has no presence in Seattle), though Alaska does have a hardened route established, and would likely be willing to expand it. Flight time is dead reasonable at just over 3 hours. Cost of living feels high to locals, but is amazingly low by tech hub standards. Everybody and their brother is saying that Denver is "Seattle 10 years ago", which is probably true (especially since Denver just quietly took tech hub no. 3 from Seattle), and will be absolutely true if Amazon settles in. A lot of the perks of Seattle (scenic, legal weed, the "outdoorsy" stuff that people find so appealing about Seattle without the crappy weather, etc.) without being a political monoculture, which should make everybody except the crazed SJW types happy. This city has a *lot* going for it. If I had to make 1 guess, this would be the place; the clear frontrunner, in my opinion.

-Indianapolis: The little city that could. They're trying to re-brand themselves as a tech center, and I hope they succeed. But they're not ready for Amazon, and their government acknowledges it, claiming it was a win just to get this far and their name out there for other companies. About the only thing they have going is that Alaska recently created a SEA>IND route. One per day. Nope.

-Los Angeles: Do I even have to talk about the infrastructure? Most people don't know this, but we're actually the 2nd biggest tech hub in the nation behind Silicon Valley. So the poachable talent is there, as is the pipeline of universities. Flight time dead reasonable, and Alaska has something like 18 flights a day between SEA>LAX, with hubs in both cities. Unfortunately if you're rooting for LA, our cost of living is basically the same as Seattle's (we're actually slightly cheaper, believe it or not), the tax structure is positively abominable, and there's absolutely no reason for Amazon to consider us. We're here to help Amazon squeeze a better deal from someone else.

Miami: The talent pool isn't there, and the one flight a day comes in at 6 hours down, 6.5 back. That sinks it right there. The lack of an income tax won't matter because cost of living is too high, the infrastructure isn't really there, and there's no real pipeline of talent. No

Nashville: "The next big tech thing". Denver's currently the new hotness, but Nashville is going to be right behind them once Denver hits critical mass. Cost of living and tax structure positively amazing, talent pool has very quietly been assembled, though there's no educational pipeline to speak of. I believe they're currently the number 9 tech hub. Since they're currently early in their re-branding, the infrastructure is capable of taking on 50,000 new people with ease. Lots of things that will appeal to the Millennial workers. The only downside is getting to BNA from SEA is a chore, with only 2 flights a day. The 4 hour flight down is probably the upper limit of what is tolerable for inter-HQ travel. Still, they've got a great shot. I'd put them in the frontrunner category.

Newark/New York City: There are a million reasons why it's not happening. It's pretty much all "wrong" It's just not happening. Maybe HQ3

Philadelphia: They've got almost all of the pieces. A fantastic infrastructure. Reasonable cost of living. A strong talent pool and, being so close to so many other major cities, it'd be easier for Amazon to import talent. It's all there...except the pipeline to Seattle. The flights are too long, and there isn't a strong route infrastructure. They'd win if they were closer to Seattle.

Pittsburgh: Almost the same as Philadelphia, except they have CMU for an educational pipeline. They have the unfortunate circumstance of having no direct routes between SEA>PIT, which is a pity because if there was, their flight times would be on the outer edge of OK. Close but no cigar.

Raleigh/Durham: The infrastructure is unburdened. The cost of living is fantastic. The tax structure is good. Duke, UNC, and NC State for an educational pipeline, poachable talent pool, though a lot of it comes from biotech. Land to expand. The weather is going to be a major turn-off for workers, especially the SLU ones. There's precisely one direct flight a day, and it's over 5 hours there and almost 6 back. That last bit is a killer. Plus, the perpetually triggered Millennials will rage over building in a state with a bathroom law, and Seattle locals will protest, vandalize and riot around the SLU campus in a fit of uncontrolled rage. Outlook not so good.

Toronto: Beautiful city, strong tech pool by Canadian standards. Infrastructure thoughtfully designed, and Canada is one of those countries everybody just likes. Expansion could be problematic. Tax structure is terrible, but that's part of living in that country. Strong IT talent pool. Strong talent pipeline, plenty of poachable talent. A Canadian HQ would make it easier for Amazon to replace expensive workers with cheap Indian talent at the expense of the local economy. This will appeal to them, as the H1b program in the US at least offers some mild resistance, and that would be gone. But there's only one flight a day between the 2 cities, and you'd have to go through customs every time, which people are not going to be OK with. I don't see it.

The 3 DC area sites: Well, King Bezos owns a home there. Government is there, which will be helpful for when Amazon needs to start defending against anti-monopoly legislation. The infrastructure is positively bursting and commute times anywhere are a nightmare. The cost of living is positively terrible, taxes are downright criminal. Very strong tech hub (no. 5), but most of it is coming from government. Still, lots of poachable talent and a decent educational pipeline. A fair flight route established between the 2 cities, coming in at 5 hours, which seems to be at the extreme edges of the long end. Possible, but I doubt it.

So, in the end we have 4 strong frontrunners: Denver, Dallas, Austin, Nashville (I'd put them in that order). Chicago as a darkhorse. DC a wildcard just because of the unique situation it presents, but they don't need 50,000 workers to establish their world domination goals there. The other 14 are really unlikely.

[jm1982]

Are they taking bets on who will win ?

[majoun]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Are they taking bets on who will win ?

Where will Amazon build their Second Headquarters? Betting from Paddy Power

Boston's surprisingly in first place.

While an expensive city with high taxes it is a very nice city with plenty of amenities, a well educated population, good public transportation, and a tech infrastructure. That's part of the reason why GE moved there from CT.

(Amazon is not taking the large number of highly annoying sports fans into consideration for where it locates its headquarters, of course. )

Not surprising L.A. is tied for last.

I'm surprised NoVa is so far down the list. There's more room there than in the District itself.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by ryanms3030

When you are worth over $100 billion like Jeff Bezos is, I don't think you need to be in any particular physical location to get political favors

I'm guessing he's got access to a private jet or two as well.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by jm1982

I'm guessing he's got access to a private jet or two as well.

Yes but there's nothing like being right next to the action.

Why do you think Northrop Grumman moved their HQ from L.A. to Arlington, VA?

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by majoun

Yes but there's nothing like being right next to the action.

Why do you think Northrop Grumman moved their HQ from L.A. to Arlington, VA?

Yeah I hear you .

Like tech companies being based mostly in SF Bay Area since that's where the venture money mostly is .

[Californiaguy2007]

Well I meant the Winter Conditions are not as severe as in the Midwest and Northeast.

Originally Posted by majoun

Florida has reliable weather conditions?

[gomason]

One problem: Amazon said they are looking for a place that is walkable and transit accessible. So how the hell did LA even make this top 20 list? I know, i know its walkable for sheltered Angelenos that have never left the state...

I feel like this list is just a ransom for cities theyre actually interested in on the east coast that are walkable and well-educated (NOT LA), to give lots of incentives and tax cuts.

Lets be honest, half these small town places have no chance (I would include LA w that).