KCRag Forum

FYI - here is the STL proposal. Not sure how feasible but I really dig it. Proposes using the empty AT&T building downtown for phase 1. And eventually...gondolas!

https://stlouishustle.com/

https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10762641 ... e-open.pdf

Are we anticipating being able to view the KC proposal as well?

I think the issue here is less that our cities "failed", and more that the cards are stacked so heavily against smaller and older midwestern cities today. Economic and population growth is generally occurring on/near the coasts or a handful of boomtowns. Don't think these places really ever had a shot at an Amazon in this environment. Growth will have to come from within.

tower wrote:

beautyfromashes wrote:I hear everyone talk about universities and don’t understand that knock on us as a candidate. We are the largest metro area to:
KState, KU, Nebraska, MU, MSU, ISU, etc. not count MS&T and other smaller universities.

I'm not saying those are bad schools at all, I'm just saying that almost every city/area that made the list had at least one university that was much more highly ranked located within the city, with the exception of Denver and Indianapolis. In fact, having a University in the metro that ranks higher than 60 in the U.S. News and World reports rankings is probably the closest thing to a unifying factor that these cities have, even higher than rail transit. KU is 115. UMKC is 216.

Not that lower ranked schools give a worse education, I'm just saying that that is a metric that Amazon seems to have used.

What's worse is that KU and especially MU have really fallen in the rankings over the past few years. Both were once top 100 schools with MU slightly better than KU and now KU is ranked slightly higher than MU. Both states want to cut taxes to the point that little budget is available to support the the state's public universities (this has become a problem for KU). That said, I suspect airport and location were critical factors as well. My guess is that this will end up somewhere on the east coast and probably Boston or Washington.

Would think DC makes top 3 on short list. Given AMZ likely to be a top 5 most valuable tech company long term they'll eventually have a DC area office tower filled with lobbyists anyway. And Bezos owns WaPo. Seems DC has a great shot and for Apple HQ2 too as the US heads towards Corporatocracy - Google, AMZ, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, etc running the country in DC. With the masses now so easily willing to give up freedom/privacy for 'convenience' or 'perceived safety' (airport body scanners are literally 'guilty until proven innocent machines'), big tech/govt monitoring citizens as one unified entity is realistic at some point.

I hope I'm overstating this but we are already heading down that path. NSA can monitor you w/out a warrant now and has direct taps into telcom companies. Just a matter of time that govt/big tech blur the lines as same entity.

Betting on Raleigh.

I think any location chosen will be in a state that is tolerant of minority populations and welcoming to immigrants, and has demonstrated equality through laws, city ordinances. etc.

That will probably rule out many cities in conservative states that keep trying to pass bathroom bills, and undercut any LGBTQ advances.

That could rule out cities in Texas, and others like Atlanta, Columbus, Nashville, Miami, Raleigh, and Indianapolis. If Amazon choses the DC Metro, it will be inside the District itself, or Maryland, which have more protective laws than Virginia does.

Newsweek:

AMAZON'S 2ND HQ: DOES A LACK OF LGBT ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAWS PUT THESE STATES AT A DISADVANTAGE?

https://tinyurl.com/ybaumz39

Wonder how many of those cities/states would implement those LGBTQ protections if that was a condition of securing this project or Apple's?

I agree that the recent stance of the NC legislature on equal protection issues is a problem for Raleigh - maybe their biggest problem.

If it was a big problem, Amazon would've made a statement by not even including them in the top 20. Amazon will only pretend to be moral for as long as it is convenient to them. Laws on immigration are probably a big deal to them, the other stuff, maybe less so. I'm sure it all factors in, but less than some things.

Tower, I'm tempted to feel the same way about rapid transit. I can see that an excellent system coupled with a prime location with reference to it, could reduce the need for parking space. But I wonder if part of the purpose in including it was just culture posturing.

How Kansas City can win the next Amazon HQ2 http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/reade ... 52004.html

What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

The debate over Amazon’s HQ2 obscures the company’s rapid expansion of warehouses in low-income areas.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/ar ... es/552020/

LGBTQ+ Activists Call on Jeff Bezos to Choose Queer-Friendly State for New Headquarters

...
Eleven of the locations are in Florida, Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee, Texas, Ohio, Georgia, and Pennsylvania, all of which do not have legal protections for people based on gender and sexuality. Some also have banned trans people from using the bathroom of their choice or have restricted gay couples from adopting kids.

...Bezos has a track record of defending LGBTQ+ rights. He donated 2.5 million dollars in support of same-sex marriage in the state of Washington in 2012.
...

https://www.out.com/news-opinion/2018/3 ... adquarters

I have a feeling that Amazon won't pick any of the states listed above. I don't think they want to deal with any controversy that might affect any of their employees, so that will rule out a lot of places. I think it will mean that Arlington, Virginia won't be considered if Amazon picks the DC area. If there is no likely site in the District, it is more likely that it will go in Maryland.

And in addition to the lack of LGBTQ protections, I think Georgia just screwed itself out of Atlanta being selected because of what the Georgia legislature just did to Delta Airlines over the NRA. I don't think Amazon is going to pick any state that punishes its' largest employers over political stands.

The other thing that occurred to me is that Toronto might be moving into more favor with each passing day. The Trump Administration's changes to family chain migration policy could affect Amazon employees who want to bring their parents to live in the USA (like Melania Trump did). An example is an Indian systems analyst who is now a US citizen, and wants to bring their aging parents over to help raise small children/and be able to oversee them as they get older. Canada might simply provide better immigration policy. Or at least a more predictable, stable policy. Our federal government can't seem to get anything done on immigration. Corporations want predictability more than anything.

Atlanta
Austin, Texas
Boston
Chicago
Columbus, Ohio
Dallas
Denver
Indianapolis
Los Angeles
Miami
Montgomery County, Md.
Nashville, Tenn.
Newark, N.J.
New York City
Northern Virginia
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Raleigh, N.C.
Toronto
Washington, D.C.

FangKC wrote:And in addition to the lack of LGBTQ protections, I think Georgia just screwed itself out of Atlanta being selected because of what the Georgia legislature just did to Delta Airlines over the NRA. I don't think Amazon is going to pick any state that punishes its' largest employers over political stands.

I think Georgia hurt the chances of all conservative states, honestly. It underscores the importance of locating in a state that has the same values as your company.

I think in this case Georgia probably helped Delta because giving up the NRA discount was barely news (Gun nuts are hardly a coveted demographic for airlines) but standing up to the Georgia legislature? That scores them some points.

Is Amazon Too Big to Tax?

The e-commerce giant paid zero federal taxes in 2017. And it's being rewarded with further tax breaks at the state and local level.

...
Amazon received these generous bids because it would have been political malfeasance for mayors, governors, and other civic leaders to avoid playing ball—no one wants to be blamed for losing out on a chance at hosting Amazon’s headquarters. But, as Amazon’s federal tax avoidance schemes show, it’s not clear that cities and states will benefit. Yes, some economic development will follow Amazon. Yes, there will be an infusion of well-paid, non–tax-avoiding Amazon employees. But by effectively paying hundreds of thousands of dollars per employee, those benefits may be cancelled out. It’s quite literally a zero-sum game.
...

https://newrepublic.com/article/147249/amazon-big-tax

So they don't pay taxes and its 3rd party sellers are not very well regulated. Sounds like a winning economic model!!!

Seriously though, my amazon shopping has slowly been declining year in and year out because of rising prices and the rise of 3rd party counterfeiting/scams

You could be buying an expensive bottle of shampoo or a bottle dr bronner soap and there is a good chance the stuff is going to be diluted with something cheaper, amazon does not monitor or regulate the 3rd party sellers very well.

I guess I get more joy in saving as much money as I possibly can over ease of ordering and quick shipping.

Yeah Amazon's core biz has essentially become another Walmart. They are now putting warehouses in every city with the rock bottom wages, which is essentially no different than having Walmart Supercenters but with delivery instead (and Walmart pays better). Kudos to Amazon for doing things more efficiently than anyone else (and partly due to economies of scale) but they shouldn't do it at the expense of what some call near slave labor (edit: using the tool of fear). Am reluctant to renew Prime next year.

Near slave labor...really? Hyperbole much?

Yes, hyperbole intended (term used by AMZ warehouse employees). More specifically AMZ warehouses pay about $12/hour and have strict quotas that must be met or threat of losing job. Walmart warehouses pay about $17-$18/hr avg. AMZ benefits additionally from not having to operate retail stores yet still pay warehouse workers less with a strict, always concerned about losing job environment.

Wow, its funny how at one time Walmart was labeled the bad guys. Walmart pays fairly well if you work your way up, Store Managers can make 80-120k a year but they can also bonus up to 100k a year. Even the middle managements can average a salary of 45-75k and bonus 1-20k.

Walmart really wasn't even that bad of a company until after Sam Walton. I think at one time stores were closed Sunday and the company had fairly humble roots.

I feel like that is the complete opposite of Bezos who seems to be trying to achieve world domination and he is getting his hands in every single thing, could you imagine if Walmart opened its own TV/Movie studio, I really think people would ignore and laugh about it.