Musk’s threat to move to Texas was immediately discounted as empty, a mere hardball negotiation tactic with a state that has become notoriously anti-business.
That’s how @manch think. No biz will leave CA because of high tax/cost of doing biz, wrong.
Lastly, business analysts estimate that Telsa, and other firms, can save 32 percent of their operating costs by moving out of California, due to lower tax, land, labor, energy, and regulatory compliance costs.
32%
Any attempt by Travis County politicians to increase labor costs and rules in exchange for tax incentives to move to the Austin area may make Musk think twice—and then consider alternative sites in the more conservatively governed counties adjacent to Austin. Williamson, Hays and Caldwell Counties are prime candidates for their access to infrastructure, lower land costs, lower property taxes and affordable housing for workers.
Williamson, hmm… Travis is still in SIP. No SIP for Williamson since end Apr.
Tesla’s move to Texas would cement Austin’s status as America’s premier technology manufacturing region. The manufacturing jobs would likely pay about $35 an hour, or $65,000 to $75,000 a year while the supporting engineering, software and administrative jobs would pay far more.
What can I say. Apple is already manufacturing MacPro in Austin. May be manufacture Arm-ed Mac in the future?
I did not say that. What I said was this: any business moving their HQ out of CA for cost reason alone is on its death bed. No longer growing, no longer relevant. Someone should start a reverse ETF on those names.
I think once you pick one, then you’re unlikely to switch. SHOP seems to integrate with everything which is a huge advantage. I think their warehouse-as-a-service business will be huge. Square completely disrupted the credit card terminal business with a product that offered far more functionality and value then attached services to it that weren’t possible with legacy products. I think SHOP is doing the same for e-commerce.
I think in a easy traffic, a person can on average cover 1 mile a min on a highway. Mixed driving (some highways and some city streets) will be more like 2 mile a min . Bay area, it is twice or thrice that or even more on worst hit roads.
Reacting to Tulsa’s social media campaign late Wednesday afternoon, the CEO hinted that he could take a personal look at the city before making a decision.
“Wow, I’ve never seen this level of support!” Musk tweeted.
That’s why amazon should have done Detroit. A vast majority of residents were in favor of it vs NYC where they had to cancel due to idiotic residents. There’s a ton of universities within a 6 hour drive, and amazon would be the top choice for graduates. The hiring market is way more competitive in DC and NYC.
The power players were offering a lot. The main land owners in the city said they’d make any land available for amazon to buy. Quicken loans even said they’d vacate their current offices, so amazon could get setup faster.
With all the pressure on companies to support racial equality, what better city than Detroit? They could have created training programs for minorities to get jobs at amazon. They’d be hailed as heroes. Bezos seems to finally be getting concerned about his legacy. That could have been it.
Is about immediate benefits. What is in it for me? The immediate impact is those residents would be faced with a large property tax bill. Any price appreciation would accrue only when they sell their houses, can they? Price appreciation significant enough? Nobody care about benefits to others or future benefits which are uncertain.
