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.
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
13,073 posts, read 7,515,583 times
Reputation: 9798
I imagine the HQ2 will siphon off more mature and small/new ventures and possibly HQ. Lots of possibilities. Some growth breathing room is probably welcomed for the entire Sound area.
Eugene, my best answer is that the bottom line is "money". Amazon brings lot of jobs to Seattle, even if they are consider crappy by American IT job standards. To be honest, the jobs are not so horrible for entry level developers, many who struggle even with a nice college degree to get a position in a reputable software company. So, I cannot say Amazon is totally evil, but it's definitely not the kind of company you would want to be investing your future in. It serves its purpose for what it is.
Why should Seattle be licking AMazon's butt and not vice-versa? Very simple.. Amazon's headquarters are right in the city limits of Seattle and that is almost unheard for any mega-corporation in this day and age. I mean look where Microsoft, Wal-Mart, Google, Facebook and several other mega-corporations have made their headquarters. NOne of them have made their headquarters in the heart of an urban center, which is a major challenge. Many companies on purpose try to relocate to suburban areas (which is what made the Silicon Valley thrive) to save on the cost of real estate and labor, as well as be able to expand their campuses accordingly. The fact that Amazon centers itself right in the city and has a huge number of employees being paid over $80,000 a year makes it a very valuable resource for the city of Seattle, regardless of how mean and bad of a company Amazon is.
And, if the city of Seattle feels like AMazon is so immoral, they should not take any of their money and redistribute it, including to themselves with their crooked, 5% Administration fee that goes into the pockets of the city council members. I understand the city council members need nice vacations and such, but not with blood money! Rather, they should just boot Amazon out of the city and not take any of their so-called "blood money". If Amazon is just so unethical and bad of a company, they should not be allowed in Seattle if Seattle feels this way. THat is my belief, rather than reaping the benefits via extortion of all their success.
As far as Seattle not being a one company town, well Seattle metro area has a lot of businesses, but very few companies of Amazon's size have their headquarters in the city. And, of course, if Amazon leaves it also brings down several other businesses that depend on Amazon's financing. A company like Amazon helps also give a lot of money to everyone from construction companies, private contractors, janitorial and housekeeping businesses to chefs, dishwashers and many other service industry workers who depend on Amazon employees spending money at their establishments. It is a chain reaction.
No other company in Washington except Starbucks and Microsoft could come close to Amazon's $150 billion a year revenue. But, remember, Microsoft is headquartered in Redmond and has not even touched the city of Seattle. Rather, Microsoft has extended its business offices to downtown Bellevue and the Bellevue office is actually quite sizable and might be the second largest Microsoft office complex outside of Redmond. There is a reason why Microsoft didn't move into the city of Seattle with its corporate offices.
Also, with Amazon leaving I could guarantee you many tech firms will also pack their bags and follow. Tech companies like to congregate together. Another issue is that many tech companies function as parasites off of Amazon. They like being around Amazon, because of the high turn over rate and the large supply of quality engineers they provide after they get disgruntled or ready for better opportunities and leave Amazon.
The CEO of Starbucks is also quite infuriated with what Seattle is doing and I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon packs up that he will demand the tax be repealed or do the same.. I think Starbucks would probably relocate somewhere else in the Puget Sound outside of Seattle, which will also wreck havoc on Seattle's economy.
For example if Starbucks moves to Bellevue, more and more restaurants, bars, contractors and other businesses in Bellevue will reap the benefits and Seattle will lose quite a bit. It may seem small, but even a 10% loss of revenue in the city is a major hit.. That is more than this supposed tax was suppose to generate for the city to save the homeless.
That's the best answer I can give here on this issue.
Agree with this post.
I foresee Amazon and Starbucks, along with other companies and businesses, migrating over to Bellevue and Redmond.
Eugene, my best answer is that the bottom line is "money". Amazon brings lot of jobs to Seattle, even if they are consider crappy by American IT job standards. To be honest, the jobs are not so horrible for entry level developers, many who struggle even with a nice college degree to get a position in a reputable software company. So, I cannot say Amazon is totally evil, but it's definitely not the kind of company you would want to be investing your future in. It serves its purpose for what it is.
Why should Seattle be licking AMazon's butt and not vice-versa? Very simple.. Amazon's headquarters are right in the city limits of Seattle and that is almost unheard for any mega-corporation in this day and age. I mean look where Microsoft, Wal-Mart, Google, Facebook and several other mega-corporations have made their headquarters. NOne of them have made their headquarters in the heart of an urban center, which is a major challenge. Many companies on purpose try to relocate to suburban areas (which is what made the Silicon Valley thrive) to save on the cost of real estate and labor, as well as be able to expand their campuses accordingly. The fact that Amazon centers itself right in the city and has a huge number of employees being paid over $80,000 a year makes it a very valuable resource for the city of Seattle, regardless of how mean and bad of a company Amazon is.
And, if the city of Seattle feels like AMazon is so immoral, they should not take any of their money and redistribute it, including to themselves with their crooked, 5% Administration fee that goes into the pockets of the city council members. I understand the city council members need nice vacations and such, but not with blood money! Rather, they should just boot Amazon out of the city and not take any of their so-called "blood money". If Amazon is just so unethical and bad of a company, they should not be allowed in Seattle if Seattle feels this way. THat is my belief, rather than reaping the benefits via extortion of all their success.
As far as Seattle not being a one company town, well Seattle metro area has a lot of businesses, but very few companies of Amazon's size have their headquarters in the city. And, of course, if Amazon leaves it also brings down several other businesses that depend on Amazon's financing. A company like Amazon helps also give a lot of money to everyone from construction companies, private contractors, janitorial and housekeeping businesses to chefs, dishwashers and many other service industry workers who depend on Amazon employees spending money at their establishments. It is a chain reaction.
No other company in Washington except Starbucks and Microsoft could come close to Amazon's $150 billion a year revenue. But, remember, Microsoft is headquartered in Redmond and has not even touched the city of Seattle. Rather, Microsoft has extended its business offices to downtown Bellevue and the Bellevue office is actually quite sizable and might be the second largest Microsoft office complex outside of Redmond. There is a reason why Microsoft didn't move into the city of Seattle with its corporate offices.
Also, with Amazon leaving I could guarantee you many tech firms will also pack their bags and follow. Tech companies like to congregate together. Another issue is that many tech companies function as parasites off of Amazon. They like being around Amazon, because of the high turn over rate and the large supply of quality engineers they provide after they get disgruntled or ready for better opportunities and leave Amazon.
The CEO of Starbucks is also quite infuriated with what Seattle is doing and I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon packs up that he will demand the tax be repealed or do the same.. I think Starbucks would probably relocate somewhere else in the Puget Sound outside of Seattle, which will also wreck havoc on Seattle's economy.
For example if Starbucks moves to Bellevue, more and more restaurants, bars, contractors and other businesses in Bellevue will reap the benefits and Seattle will lose quite a bit. It may seem small, but even a 10% loss of revenue in the city is a major hit.. That is more than this supposed tax was suppose to generate for the city to save the homeless.
That's the best answer I can give here on this issue.
Agree with you, head tax is not a solution and will discourage business , the city needs to be better utilize the existing revenue, especially the additional one they got due to Amazon expanding in town.
One point on Washington state companies though, Costco headquartered in Issaquah has an annual revenue of around 126 billion, very close to Amazon. Also, Boeing with a revenue of close to 100 billion and 75,000 employees in Puget sound is also a strong player in the region.
I read this morning, like I am sure many of you have , that now the head tax has passed they will now start on raising property taxes again . I just can't see how this is going to go well . People work so hard to try to have a place , whether you rent like me and are barely making it or live in a big gorgeous place downtown , and I am liberal too ,but if I cannot stay in my place because my rent ( or taxes ) have to be raised to take care of the camps then it's just going to make everyone really resentful .
I think that Amazon could expand the operation in Austin. There are lot of IT talents in Austin and the housing price is reasonable. It is the 11th largest city in US. Austin downtown is very nice and livable.
I think they may place HQ2 in Austin. Texas is business friendly and has no state income taxes. There is a large IT pool and Austin has the "hip" factor that is likely to entice younger workers. I wouldn't surprise me if they placed HQ2 here, slowed/stopped Seattle hiring, and slowly moved operations to the HQ2.
I fully support the new headcount tax. More jobs will move to the burbs where I live and I will have a nice 15 min commute instead of a 1h pilgrimage every morning just for the privilege of paying $500/mo to park my car at work after spending $300 on gas, and then getting a small sandwich for lunch for $15 at a local overpriced coffee shop.
On a more serious note, Amazon moving away would be piece of cake compared to what Boeing did. Boeing has manufacturing plants that simply cannot be moved, including some architectural marvel one-of-a-kind buildings specifically designed to assemble the big jets that would be hard to replicate. Amazon has a bunch of cubicles and a cafeteria, easy peasy to move wherever. Facebook just moved their entire building a couple years ago over a weekend without a hiccup when they needed more room. For digital companies like that, where most of their assets are IP, moving across the street or outside city limits is the same thing (workers will just suck it up and for some it will even improve commute -> see the Expedia move or the Microsoft move). Even moving out of state isn't that big of a deal if they do it gradually over time. Companies like Amazon, Facebook hire something like a 100 new employees weekly, they got it streamlined to perfection. Most of them are 20-somethings without a mortgage and school aged kids, so they will move wherever, as long as it's a "cool" place. Seattle is just one of many. The only thing they cannot move is their data centers and those are not located in Seattle anyway.
The funniest thing that makes me giggle, is that the city council will never be accountable for the income lost due to this decision, that may even outweigh the stupid $75 mil they want to milk out of businesses. It cannot even be calculated. Even if Amazon stays in Seattle, who knows how much they will reduce hiring based on this decision in favor of HQ2? Who knows how many companies that were considering Seattle will now go elsewhere? These numbers will never exist, so they can sleep peacefully knowing nobody can prove them stupid with real, hard numbers.
I read this morning, like I am sure many of you have , that now the head tax has passed they will now start on raising property taxes again . I just can't see how this is going to go well . People work so hard to try to have a place , whether you rent like me and are barely making it or live in a big gorgeous place downtown , and I am liberal too ,but if I cannot stay in my place because my rent ( or taxes ) have to be raised to take care of the camps then it's just going to make everyone really resentful .
Liberal politics at work here. Now it's pure liberal socialism attacking capitalism. Taxing businesses and residents up the arse and to death. I guess Seattle city council feels that those who are able to pay their rent on time are "privileged" and should be penalized. Ridiculous.
This is kind of an amazing thread. A toxic mix of political positions vis a vis the head tax, a misinformed binary understanding of how companies get 'sticky' in a place, and a severe misunderstanding of what's happened in Seattle with regards to developer talent.
Forget the head tax. It's stupid, it's great, it's suicidal, whatever. It's a big, ugly, draconian move by the city council that I personally don't agree with but that many do.
The Seattle metro is home to as robust an ecosystem of developer talent as you'll find outside of the SF metro. Yes, a lot of it comes from elsewhere, but I've seen posts here indicating that it's all transient. That's false. UW is a massive factor in this, and further, a ton of that talent actually wants to be here. Not just because Seattle is a unicorn - clearly there are threads on this forum showing how much disillusionment exists - but because it remains appealing despite all of the warts and that the opportunities continue to grow.
Boeing's bust was because of a single company facing a dire future, and the city's fortunes being directly and nearly solely tied to it. With a dev ecosystem, it's a battle BETWEEN companies. They all are ravenous for the talent, and they set up shop in absurd conditions to get it.
Yes, there will be a reckoning, but it's not going to result in South Lake Union having tumble weeds blowing through it, though the nightlife there is pathetic. More likely, it will result in Amazon flattening based on whatever HQ2 ends up being, but its peer companies poaching (and paying) the folks who want to stay here, which will be many. See your local State Parks this weekend if you need an indicator.
A downturn is approaching, and it's going to hurt, but this hysteria over Amazon "leaving" is ridiculous. Frothiness normalizes over time. Race to the Bottom thinking is awful, but there is a reason that the coastal cities remain robust. It's not all tied to the tax rate.
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.
