We don’t want Amazon in Tahoe… Stay away …
wuqijun - Move fast and grab a beachhead in Austin. Myo and I have done so, what are you waiting for? Don’t drag on your feet… still got time. The fight over HQ2 reveals the potential of Austin. Go for the NW Austin and Northern suburbs, that’s where most of the high paying tech folks live. If don’t want to compete with myo and me, go for South and SW Austin… if you want to deal with ahem… go for East Austin suburbs.
If Austin gets the HQ2, I will report how I get screwed by the property tax increase that is much higher than increase in rent.
If you are willing to invest in Concord then I might consider Austin. Otherwise no way.
If you’re willing to property manage for me at a low low low fee, I will consider. Otherwise, no way.
Wait… the whole beauty of investing in Bay Area is no property managers needed because you are local…
San Jose isn’t one of them.
Yeah, I saw something in reference to that yet I wasn’t able to find anything reported about it. I am sure the details will come out as to why. It is a long shot for the Bay Area to get it but worth a shot, no? I mean, if you are big on meeting the criteria the requester has set forth, we kill it no doubt…
Best article written on HQ2 so far!
Amazon is a company where it is always Day 1. Amongst other things that means it tends to pursue disruptive ideas, such as using drones for deliveries. Amazon would want HQ2 to be in a location that is supportive of a Day 1 company, if not outright still in Day 1 itself. What I needed was a simple test for Day 1 type disruptions, and the last decade presented us with a perfect one. Ride Sharing, and more specifically Uber.
His idea is to see how cities treated Uber to gauge their appetite for disruption. Some rolled out their red carpets, some fought it tooth and nail.
So I did a search on Memphis and Uber and discovered that in 2013 the city of Memphis has sent its police force to arrest Uber drivers. That seemed like a pretty extreme case of being unfriendly to Day 1 type disruptions, and played that back to my friend. He pointed out that was 2013, so I did a search on Denver and Uber and discovered that in 2013 the Colorado Legislature became the first in the country to explicitly legalize ride-sharing. What Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper said at the time was “Colorado is once again in the vanguard in promoting innovation and competition while protecting consumers and public safety.” And when there was some friction in the city of Denver after that, the Police Chief acted quickly to resolve it. Which makes more sense to locate the HQ of a Day 1 company in, a place that sent the police to arrest Uber drivers or one that acted quickly to accept and encourage the disruption?
So how does Austin do under the Uber test?
Both Uber and Lyft left Austin, and only came back after the state government intervened. Hmm…
Soooo, the Bay Area is back as your pick then???
Bay Area never left the game. We own tech innovations.
God (Bezos) can then be near all the lobbyists and movers and shakers…
Everybody rushing to add new criteria to the Amazon’s official requirements
- Largest corporate workforce
- Friendliness to tech innovations
- Must go non-stop to China
- Priority construction of buildings
What else? Ease of finding trophy wives? Strip clubs? Nudists’ beaches? Bald heads are ubiquitous?