OT*-Who do you think should get the Amazon headquarters?

[Seramount]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

My prediction is Austin,TX. But it will come down to who can bribe them with the most tax breaks. That being said, the municipality will still need to build more schools/infrastructure/etc. And if there is no incoming Amazon tax base, the current townspeople will foot the bill.

hoping that our lack of mass transit will be a deal-killer for AUS.

but, the city council LOVES to offer huge tax breaks to rich mega-companies that don't need them.

[William]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

... But it will come down to who can bribe them with the most tax breaks.

In Mass Worcester is throwing in as well as Boston...

The city of Worcester submitted a bid Tuesday that offers up to $500 million in local real estate tax savings, a 100 percent personal property tax exemption over 20 years, an investment tax credit through the state, and research and development tax credits. The bid proposed nearly 100 acres along Route 20 as the potential site where Amazon should build its second headquarters.

The state publicly released its bid Friday, touting the state as a whole. Rather than focusing on one site, it lists 26 sites from Suffolk Downs in Boston, to New Bedford, to Pittsfield, where Amazon could build.

The Governor of RI threw out a pitch as well but they aren't disclosing what that bid was yet. RI will probably end up with a satellite office for about 30 people that the State will have pitched a couple hundred million in tax breaks for. Just commenting on the track recored here.







William

[bicycletricycle]

Boston is at close to 100% capacity already

They should go to someplace that could "really use" the jobs.

[Ken Robb]

I wonder if Detroit got into this contest. Way before the auto companies went bust it was a beautiful city with many recreation/arts opportunities. Since the crash many lovely homes are available at pennies on the dollar and there are areas of abandoned homes that could be rehabbed or bulldozed. In the latter case there would be lots of inexpensive now-vacant land where new housing could be built. While many people who lost jobs moved away I'll bet there are still quite a few locals who would make good employees.

[likebikes]

i can't imagine boston is seriously in the running. it's got high real estate prices, hardly any free land area to build a giant hq. (i think i heard it would be 2x the size of the pentagon)
also not a particularly cheap place to do business (high taxes). i also can't imagine the state/city giving them significant tax breaks to make it worthwhile as there are some cities seriously bending over backwards and then some to try to land amazon.

[sg8357]

Originally Posted by Ken Robb

I wonder if Detroit got into this contest.[snip]

Now there is a good idea, free land, nearly free homes if you are DIY type.

A deluxe version of "This Old House", "This Old City"
Lots of old giant fortress like plants to turn into data centers.

[OtayBW]

Baltimore threw in as well, but for the traffic where the want to place it, I can't see anyone getting anything delivered on time.....
I'm guessing Austin will get it as well....

[Bradford]

Originally Posted by Ken Robb

I wonder if Detroit got into this contest...

A friend of mine is a VP at Amazon. We spoke about this when it first came out and Detroit was his best guess, so at least some people there have considered it. I think it would be too hard to draw top talent to Detroit, so I would pick a more attractive place if it were me.

[texbike]

PLEASE, not Austin!

DFW seems like it would be the perfect place for it - lots of infrastructure, multiple local universities cranking out educated folks, LOTS of land for development, big business/development-friendly local government, affordable housing, close to a major IA, in the middle of the Country, great logistics capabilities, AND multiple major sports arenas for Amazon to sponsor.

Texbike

[soulspinner]

Rochester NY. Just because i live there.

[Ralph]

Our Florida Governor is always trying to give big incentives to get companies to move here.....always touting how it benefits our state. I haven't figured out how it benefits most of us.....but most of us pay for those incentives. You have to build roads, schools, medical facilities, etc, way in advance of any economic benefit. I'm not so sure most of those Amazon jobs will be "hi paying" either, whatever that means. And that makes the local burden even greater. Politicians just want to brag about these "wins" in their next run for election. I like Colorado's approach.

[Dude]

Maybe I'm biased but Philadelphia is always overlooked. Easy location to most other major cities on the east coast, lots of universities and lots of land that can be developed/repurposed.

My guess is Raleigh/durham area (cheaper land) still a good system of universities.

[FlashUNC]

Whichever city and state debases themselves enough.

[BobO]

We've got it locked up,... we sent them a cactus, who could say no to that?

[1centaur]

Re: Boston - that race track is on a very busy commuting road which would be horrendous if an Amazon HQ were located there. Also, not a nice location for the workers.

I also think Raleigh/Durham would be a natural spot. Politics edging in Amazon's direction, really nice quality of life, lots of universities, very good road transportation, and an international airport that could become more so with new demand. Near Research Triangle. Not the best Internet infrastructure, but Google fiber is in Raleigh.