Amazon planning second headquarters with 50,000 jobs

[nik-]

The thing is you think I'm arguing the points of your opinion, when I already stated I agree that it's probably not coming here. I'm saying the way you present your opinions is dickish, and consistently so. You clearly don't see it.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by New Era

Vitriolic? Stating Calgary has no serious chance at this? That ain't vitriol, that's reality. Take a look at the requirements. If there is a Canadian city in this mix, its Toronto. Great access to shipping, including water, air and land? Check. Great access to a million plus people? Check. Great access to good schools? Check. Room to accommodate 50,000 workers? Check. Infrastructure to support all of the above? Check. Calgary? None of the above. Be realistic in what you're suggesting.

The reason there was discussion in the first place is because Calgary does meet all the requirements (what does shipping have to do with it, BTW?) which is why it was fun to talk about.

Sure it doesn't have the best options for all the requirements, but checks the boxes nonetheless.

Calgary doesn't meet many of the requirements that Amazon is demanding, in any shape of form.

-Metropolitan areas with more than one million people (CHECK)
-A stable and business-friendly environment (CHECK)
-Urban or suburban locations with the potential to attract and retain strong technical talent (CHECK)
-Communities that think big and creatively when considering locations and real estate options (Did you say thinking 'world class?' CHECK)

-Proximity to population center 30 Miles (CHECK)
-Proximity to International airport Within approx. 45 Minutes (CHECK)
-Proximity to major highwaysand arterial roads Not more than 1-2 Miles (CHECK)
-Access to mass transit At site (CHECK)
-Initial Square Foot Requirement 500,000+ Sq. Ft. Phase I (2019) (CHECK AND CHECK)
-Total Square Foot Requirement Up to 8,000,000 Sq. Ft. Beyond 2027 (not many cities wouldn't make themselves be a CHECK with this)



Again, not blowing away the competition with what the city offers, but has the requirements to propose anyway.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by nik-

The thing is you think I'm arguing the points of your opinion, when I already stated I agree that it's probably not coming here. I'm saying the way you present your opinions is dickish, and consistently so. You clearly don't see it.

Really? Is that the best you have? I'm dickish? I guess that means you have no argument.

[nik-]

Dear god man.

[bizaro86]

If Calgary wins this, it will be because we loaded up a dump truck full of money. Free land, guaranteed permits, and net zero corporate taxes would probably be the minimum, and probably need to subsidize the rent a bunch too.

And of course the obligatory job creation slush fund.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by New Era

Calgary is not getting the next Amazon office. Get real people. What does Calgary have to offer Amazon that dozens of American cities cannot already offer, who already have the advantage of being American cities? Nothing.

A highly educated, underemployed workforce and a lot of vacant commercial real estate. How many American cities have both?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

The reason there was discussion in the first place is because Calgary does meet all the requirements (what does shipping have to do with it, BTW?) which is why it was fun to talk about.

Did you miss what Amazon does? Did you miss what several of the requirements are about?

Sure it doesn't have the best options for all the requirements, but checks the boxes nonetheless.

Okay, thank you for at least making an argument. Lets review.

-Metropolitan areas with more than one million people (CHECK)

Not in the top 50 metropolitan areas in North America. (STRIKE)

-A stable and business-friendly environment (CHECK)

Based on the slumping Calgary economy? Not really. Calgary's reliance on a single industry makes it subject to wild fluctuations in the economy and human resource availability.

-Urban or suburban locations with the potential to attract and retain strong technical talent (CHECK)

Okay, that's pretty generic, but I will give you a mark on that one. But how does Calgary differentiate itself from other metro centers in North America in this regard? Does Calgary make the top 10? The top 25? The top 50?

-Communities that think big and creatively when considering locations and real estate options (Did you say thinking 'world class?' CHECK)

Okay, again, that's pretty generic. But how does Calgary differentiate itself from other metro centers in North America in this regard? Does Calgary make the top 10? The top 25? The top 50?

-Proximity to population center 30 Miles (CHECK)

Okay, again, that's pretty generic. But how does Calgary differentiate itself from other metro centers in North America in this regard? Does Calgary make the top 10? The top 25? The top 50? Seriously, you have to start finding something that Calgary is top of the charts in. So far the city is well down the list.

-Proximity to International airport Within approx. 45 Minutes (CHECK)

And Calgary International is not a very good airport. Does it compare to the big cargo handlers?

-Proximity to major highwaysand arterial roads Not more than 1-2 Miles (CHECK)

Most importantly, how close is it to the main arteries that service most of Amazon's customers? It's hundreds of miles away from a main artery that services any of Amazon's primary market.

-Access to mass transit At site (CHECK)

What site? Calgary doesn't meet the minimum requirements for the site.

-Initial Square Foot Requirement 500,000+ Sq. Ft. Phase I (2019) (CHECK AND CHECK)

Calgary falls short here. In fact, Walmart had to build a 400,000 sq ft space in Balzac to meet their warehouse needs.

-Total Square Foot Requirement Up to 8,000,000 Sq. Ft. Beyond 2027 (not many cities wouldn't make themselves be a CHECK with this)

You have this one right. Not many industrial parks have this much space available. This is a select few, and probably limited to New York/New Jersey, Houston, Los Angeles, Memphis, and a couple deep water ports on the east coast.

Again, not blowing away the competition with what the city offers, but has the requirements to propose anyway.

And that's just it, Calgary is not blowing away the competition, not even the Canadian competition. There are dozens of sites better south of the border and not needing to deal with the hassle of crossing the border with goods.

When I first heard about this I initially thought of Calgary and hoped they would throw their hat in the ring, just because of where my heart is. But then I started thinking pragmatically about it, and it just didn't add up. I live in one of the largest metropolitan areas on the continent, and even it is unprepared to meet the expectations of Amazon. We service a ton of goods as a hub, but we don't meet the needs of the Amazon reqs. This will likely go east, and go someplace that has similar capacity as Seattle. If it is in Canada, I would say Toronto. Even with the advantages Toronto has, I think it goes to an eastern port city with growth potential, like Jacksonville or Charleston, or an established site like Philadelphia or Newark.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by SebC

A highly educated, underemployed workforce and a lot of vacant commercial real estate. How many American cities have both?

...Zero requirement to provide 50,000 people with medical insurance and parental leave benefits - massively more valuable than a simple local or state tax abatement. No need for employees to feel the need to spend 20k a year on private school for their kids because the public school system is dysfunctional. Also, international workers not at risk of being deported at a whim. Should I keep going?

[4X4]

Pretty in depth post, New Era. Riveting stuff, except that every single thing you said has already been said in this thread, so thanks for that. Everyone was simply waiting for you to kick down the door like a dbag, and then regurgitate it all in your own words.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by New Era

Not in the top 50 metropolitan areas in North America. (STRIKE)

The criteria on that one was "Metropolitan areas with more than one million people", not "Must be in the top 50 largest metro areas". Not sure how you can say it meets the criteria, but not by largest margin so now that's a strike.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Pretty in depth post, New Era. Riveting stuff, except that every single thing you said has already been said in this thread, so thanks for that. Everyone was simply waiting for you to kick down the door like a dbag, and then regurgitate it all in your own words.

Also of note - this is a head office project primarily. Issues housing 400k of a walmart distribution centre is not relevant. They want 500k office space in 2019 - downtown or suburbs - hen expand that into the future.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by New Era

Did you miss what Amazon does? Did you miss what several of the requirements are about?

They're building a second HEADQUARTERS. They aren't building a warehouse. They're looking for access to transportation to move people around that run the global business.

What do they need shipping for when web servicing is their most profitable and probably most important branch?

Not in the top 50 metropolitan areas in North America. (STRIKE)

Where was that a requirement? If they wanted to cap requirements at a Top 50 metro they would have made the minimum 2 million people.

Based on the slumping Calgary economy? Not really. Calgary's reliance on a single industry makes it subject to wild fluctuations in the economy and human resource availability.

Still pretty business friendly and despite the significant of the downturn is still pretty stable even without double-meat subs being tossed around.

Okay, that's pretty generic, but I will give you a mark on that one. But how does Calgary differentiate itself from other metro centers in North America in this regard? Does Calgary make the top 10? The top 25? The top 50?




Okay, again, that's pretty generic. But how does Calgary differentiate itself from other metro centers in North America in this regard? Does Calgary make the top 10? The top 25? The top 50?


Okay, again, that's pretty generic. But how does Calgary differentiate itself from other metro centers in North America in this regard? Does Calgary make the top 10? The top 25? The top 50? Seriously, you have to start finding something that Calgary is top of the charts in. So far the city is well down the list.

So we've gone from 'not having any of the requirements' to 'not in the top NA cities' which is pretty much what people have been saying before you came in on your high, salty horse telling people to read the requirements when you seem surprised about how generic they are?

Did you even read them?

And Calgary International is not a very good airport. Does it compare to the big cargo handlers?

Again, they're not building a distribution centre.

Guess what other airport is conspicuously missing from the list yet managed to be a suitable site: Seattle.

Most importantly, how close is it to the main arteries that service most of Amazon's customers? It's hundreds of miles away from a main artery that services any of Amazon's primary market.

For the love of...

What site? Calgary doesn't meet the minimum requirements for the site.

Downtown vacancy rate has loads of options to provide them the square footage they need to get started. A downtown multi-building campus is what they have in Seattle (again, where they aren't a distribution centre and don't care about shipping and cargo capacity).

Calgary falls short here. In fact, Walmart had to build a 400,000 sq ft space in Balzac to meet their warehouse needs.

I don't know if I mentioned it, but they aren't building a warehouse, they don't need a warehouse, this isn't meant to be a distribution hub.

Do you think they're advertising for 50,000 $100K+ jobs for people working in a warehouse?

Did you actually read the requirements for the RFP?

Do you have anything constructive to bring to the discussion at all?

-Total Square Foot Requirement Up to 8,000,000 Sq. Ft. Beyond 2027 (not many cities wouldn't make themselves be a CHECK with this)

You have this one right. Not many industrial parks have this much space available. This is a select few, and probably limited to New York/New Jersey, Houston, Los Angeles, Memphis, and a couple deep water ports on the east coast.

New York would likely be a city not in the running due to their development costs to provide the space required.

And that's just it, Calgary is not blowing away the competition, not even the Canadian competition. There are dozens of sites better south of the border and not needing to deal with the hassle of crossing the border with goods.

You don't even know what they're building and you came roaring into the thread telling other people to stop talking about it.

Just go away.

[afc wimbledon]

First and foremost for Amazon this is a political decision, they are a company desperately fighting to keep their almost non existent tax paying status in most jurisdictions, Amazon is the poster child for why the developed economies should get together to tax tech companies who avoid paying the kinds of taxes most companies get stuck with.
As such much as Bezos may despise Trump he isn't going to do anything overt to lose the US's support of the companies fight against getting taxed in the EU etc, therefore the choice will be in the US.

Secondly the company is not looking to rent offices, this is a new build massive city within a city, so other than a large amount of available land with decent transportation, it doesn't even have to be cheap, just available, then any city that has the space will do.

I personally cant see any reason the company would have two massive campuses on the west coast, logically one on either coast makes sense or one massive one in Seattle.
The main thing a Canadian city has going against them, other than being in Canada and so politically stupid for the company, is that we don't have the concentration of colleges and University's in one City that feeding a 50,000 employees tech company really needs, these kind of operations tend to like being in education hubs with 2 or 3 large colleges within close proximity to recruit from endlessly

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

First and foremost for Amazon this is a political decision, they are a company desperately fighting to keep their almost non existent tax paying status in most jurisdictions, Amazon is the poster child for why the developed economies should get together to tax tech companies who avoid paying the kinds of taxes most companies get stuck with.
As such much as Bezos may despise Trump he isn't going to do anything overt to lose the US's support of the companies fight against getting taxed in the EU etc, therefore the choice will be in the US.

Secondly the company is not looking to rent offices, this is a new build massive city within a city, so other than a large amount of available land with decent transportation, it doesn't even have to be cheap, just available, then any city that has the space will do.

I personally cant see any reason the company would have two massive campuses on the west coast, logically one on either coast makes sense or one massive one in Seattle.
The main thing a Canadian city has going against them, other than being in Canada and so politically stupid for the company, is that we don't have the concentration of colleges and University's in one City that feeding a 50,000 employees tech company really needs, these kind of operations tend to like being in education hubs with 2 or 3 large colleges within close proximity to recruit from endlessly

Good post. This issue plays way too heavily on heart strings and very few are willing to look past their hopes and dreams and focus on the reality of the situation.

A Canadian city is highly unlikely to begin with, then a second tier Canadian city is even less likely. You can eliminate the cities on the west coast, so Vancouver is out. You can eliminate the cities where taxes are ridiculously high, or have regulations that increase the cost of doing business, so Montreal is out. Leave Toronto IMO. Calgary can't compete with Toronto.

Can Toronto compete with American cities? That is the question. To me, there are a number of east coast cities that meet the needs Amazon identifies, and does so in a way Toronto cannot compete. I stand by my assessment that Amazon will go where they can replicate the Seattle operation, except in the eastern time zone. I believe that the reason Amazon wants to build a new office is to work off the AWS model and provide redundancy and service the largest chunk of their market.

NYT takes a look at it.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...arters-be.html

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by New Era

I stand by my assessment that Amazon will go where they can replicate the Seattle operation, except in the eastern time zone. I believe that the reason Amazon wants to build a new office is to work off the AWS model and provide redundancy and service the largest chunk of their market.

By this do you mean that you thought they were building a distribution hub and would go where they could get warehouse space and have cargo connectivity?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

By this do you mean that you thought they were building a distribution hub and would go where they could get warehouse space and have cargo connectivity?

I believe they are going for the whole shooting match. The goal appears to be to replicate operations in Seattle, not just from a technological and business perspective, but also from a logistical perspective. They will go where they can meet as many of their business needs as possible. If they weren't going do that road, they wouldn't have the logistic components in their minimum requirements.

Here's a list of some of the cities who have already stated they would toss their hat in the ring.

https://www.recode.net/2017/9/9/1627...d-headquarters

Here's an interesting look at the demands Amazon has, and how few can actually meet the demands.

http://www.slate.com/articles/busine..._s_new_hq.html

An interesting point made in this article, is if Amazon hired 50,000 employees, that would be 1 in 20 people for a city that has 1 million jobs. Calgary employs around 707,000 people, so that should put things in perspective.

[Roughneck]

So Denver and Austin are popular choices even though they don't have great access to Amazon's major market, are landlocked, and don't stack up in the air cargo department, and are on the wrong half of the top 50 Metro populations.

It's almost like the logistical requirements you think they're looking for aren't the ones they're actually looking for.

[SebC]

This is pretty funny: one of New Era's links says this...

According to Zillow’s Gudell, “Given our current immigration policy, especially on the tech side, it might be smart to consider Canada.”

... and another says that the best choice is Denver (a city frequently cited as similar to Calgary).

[Bunk]

If they absolutely only were considering American cities, the RFP would have only been for American cities. They clearly think Canada is worth looking at as an option.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bunk

If they absolutely only were considering American cities, the RFP would have only been for American cities. They clearly think Canada is worth looking at as an option.

They clearly don't want Canada to think they don't give a s*** about us as, again, this is a political decision.

Beyond that you cant say