Amazon HQ2

[elrodvt]

As I've said before and know many if not most here disagree or are even offended (sorry) ;-(  .. ...

My decision as a CEO would be to avoid the south east altogether.  Less educated work force along with lots of social & political time bombs. Unless you need the union busting (a whole nother topic!) or get a lot larger bribe than anywhere else why bother? Now we all know there are things that are located to geographic advantage and thus have no choice and in that case you just make the best pick you can. That is not the case with knowledge workers however. Said another way, high paying jobs. Now of course there will be plenty of outliers with companies run in a very conservative manner like Wall Mart but they're the minority and table scraps if you will.

Contradicting this viewpoint is all the banks here and their resultant co-located fintech businesses. What is the history of all the banks here? Was there a huge incentive at the time or did they need HQ in the region for some reason or ... Curious.

[krazeeboi]

10 minutes ago, elrodvt said:

As I've said before and know many if not most here disagree or are even offended (sorry) ;-(  .. ...

My decision as a CEO would be to avoid the south east altogether.  Less educated work force along with lots of social & political time bombs. Unless you need the union busting (a whole nother topic!) or get a lot larger bribe than anywhere else why bother? Now we all know there are things that are located to geographic advantage and thus have no choice and in that case you just make the best pick you can. That is not the case with knowledge workers however. Said another way, high paying jobs. Now of course there will be plenty of outliers with companies run in a very conservative manner like Wall Mart but they're the minority and table scraps if you will.

Contradicting this viewpoint is all the banks here and their resultant co-located fintech businesses. What is the history of all the banks here? Was there a huge incentive at the time or did they need HQ in the region for some reason or ... Curious.

https://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/bank_notes/2012/09/so-how-did-charlotte-become-a-banking.html

http://www.post-gazette.com/business/businessnews/2006/06/25/How-Charlotte-became-a-banking-giant-outpacing-Pittsburgh-s-banks/stories/200606250201

[videtur quam contuor]

I will take a shot at this. For much of our national history banks have been feared. In a rural or small town America, as much of America was, the bank controlled access to credit and thus access to success. Andrew Jackson killed the U. S. Bank, a national bank. Many (most?) states prohibited statewide banks as they concentrated wealth and decisions. This, again prohibited access to credit and opportunity in most other areas. One went to a banker with hat in hand to (nearly) beg for financial assistance to own a home and other financial opportunities, personal or business.  North Carolina, on the other hand, allowed state wide banking after the Civil War. This could be due to the poor, rural nature of much of the state and thus the limited opportunity for a county bank to be successful. Statewide banking allowed a resurgent North Carolina in the 1950's and afterward to place branches throughout the state and build large asset bases and uniform practices leading to a far larger institution than possible in other states who still required branches to remain in the county of the charter of the bank. Once mergers and purchases of banks across state lines began North Carolina banks were particularly well placed for this environment.

This gives a brief view of the history before our time:

https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1180&context=ncbi

[elrodvt]

Very interesting. Thanks for that.

[deleted]

2 hours ago, elrodvt said:

As I've said before and know many if not most here disagree or are even offended (sorry) ;-(  .. ...

My decision as a CEO would be to avoid the south east altogether.  Less educated work force along with lots of social & political time bombs. Unless you need the union busting (a whole nother topic!) or get a lot larger bribe than anywhere else why bother? Now we all know there are things that are located to geographic advantage and thus have no choice and in that case you just make the best pick you can. That is not the case with knowledge workers however. Said another way, high paying jobs. Now of course there will be plenty of outliers with companies run in a very conservative manner like Wall Mart but they're the minority and table scraps if you will.

Contradicting this viewpoint is all the banks here and their resultant co-located fintech businesses. What is the history of all the banks here? Was there a huge incentive at the time or did they need HQ in the region for some reason or ... Curious.

I am certainly not offended but I think you are ignoring a lot of obvious advantages to locating in the Southeast.  Corporate tax rates are much lower in the South.  Cost of living is lower.  Worker's Comp (my business) is exponentially lower compared to, say, California (literally a fifth of the cost in most instances).  Cheaper land and building costs.  Lower rents.  As mentioned, far less union.  All right to work states.  Moderate climate.  Less regulation.  And, the Southeast has some great schools (Duke, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Georgia Tech, UNC, Wake Forest to name a few).  If, like me, they happen to view the SE as a great place to live, that's gravy.  I think the question shouldn't be why would they locate in the SE...I would ask why wouldn't they?  Compared to the Northeast, the Midwest and the West, I think the SE is a reasonable choice for most businesses.  I lived in Philly and San Diego for roughly 18 years each.  I choose to live here as the best overall place based on cost and quality of life.  I think a lot of people feel similarly.

[kermit]

3 hours ago, tarhoosier said:

I will take a shot at this. For much of our national history banks have been feared. In a rural or small town America, as much of America was, the bank controlled access to credit and thus access to success. Andrew Jackson killed the U. S. Bank, a national bank. Many (most?) states prohibited statewide banks as they concentrated wealth and decisions. This, again prohibited access to credit and opportunity in most other areas. One went to a banker with hat in hand to (nearly) beg for financial assistance to own a home and other financial opportunities, personal or business.  North Carolina, on the other hand, allowed state wide banking after the Civil War. This could be due to the poor, rural nature of much of the state and thus the limited opportunity for a county bank to be successful. Statewide banking allowed a resurgent North Carolina in the 1950's and afterward to place branches throughout the state and build large asset bases and uniform practices leading to a far larger institution than possible in other states who still required branches to remain in the county of the charter of the bank. Once mergers and purchases of banks across state lines began North Carolina banks were particularly well placed for this environment.

This gives a brief view of the history before our time:

https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1180&context=ncbi

Thanks for the great summary. I'll add a few other pieces to the puzzle:

• Charlotte banking does not appear to have any roots from the gold rush era. It appears that textile mill owners in Charlotte realized that they could make more money lending money to other mill owners than they could from making cloth.
• NC's statewide banks made them politically powerful within NC. This resulted in the NC governor leading the way in the  formation of the SE Banking Compact in the mid 1980s. The agreement made it possible for SE banks to conduct interstate business by acquiring other SE banks, and the agreement also prohibited out of region banks from expanding into the South. Walling off the Southern banking market from competition gave NCNB, First Union, Wachovia and BB&T a huge advantage since they could expand without much competition (and the NC banks were a good bit larger than the other banks in the region).
•  Charlotte's banks were run by local guys and most of them grew up in mill towns. Hugh McColl has regularly talked about the difficulties that Southern business owners had in acquiring large amounts of capital for expansion in the pre-war days. He resented that Southern Industrialists (like his Dad) had to head up North with "hat in hand" to get big loans. He believed that the Southern Industrialists were treated poorly and this resulted in Hugh stating (on more than one occasion) that it he wanted to create a large Southern bank that could provide for all the capital needs of region.
• The mill town cultural that produced these CEOs also meant that they believed there was a corporate role in urban development (and redevelopment). This belief translated into BoA and First Union spending more than $2 billion of their shareholder's money on Charlotte's uptown redevelopment during the 80s and 90s (mostly subsidies for 4th Ward housing redevelopment, contributions to neighborhood organizations and legal services for projects such as the stadium and the First Ward Hope VI redevelopment). This money was spent with the purpose of making it easier for the banks to recruit new executives (most of whom were coming from very urban places)  by creating an alternative to sprawl. Charlotte's banks had plenty of opportunities to relocate to more urban places (e.g. Nationsbank 'merger of equals' with BankAmerica of San Francisco or First Union's acquisition of Corestates of Philadelphia), that they chose not to (and spend more money making Charlotte more urban) is a testament to the devotion these CEOs felt to the region.
• In combination,  this history created a huge cluster of experienced bankers in Charlotte. This supply of human capital cements Charlotte's position as a second-tier financial center.

Edited November 21, 2018 by kermit

[elrodvt]

37 minutes ago, JBS said:

I am certainly not offended but I think you are ignoring a lot of obvious advantages to locating in the Southeast.  Corporate tax rates are much lower in the South.  Cost of living is lower.  Worker's Comp (my business) is exponentially lower compared to, say, California (literally a fifth of the cost in most instances).  Cheaper land and building costs.  Lower rents.  As mentioned, far less union.  All right to work states.  Moderate climate.  Less regulation.  And, the Southeast has some great schools (Duke, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Georgia Tech, UNC, Wake Forest to name a few).  If, like me, they happen to view the SE as a great place to live, that's gravy.  I think the question shouldn't be why would they locate in the SE...I would ask why wouldn't they?  Compared to the Northeast, the Midwest and the West, I think the SE is a reasonable choice for most businesses.  I lived in Philly and San Diego for roughly 18 years each.  I choose to live here as the best overall place based on cost and quality of life.  I think a lot of people feel similarly.

Most of those CoL items they would be better off in MS or AL rather than NC right?  "Right to work" - what a nice euphemism for lower pay and benefits. ;-)

Personally, and I've harped on this before, my taxes almost doubled moving here from CO. Lower business taxes = higher personal taxes AND lower level of services (schools for example). Less regulation is great until hogs and coal ash float by your house. ;-)  

Anyhow, What I'm trying to say is that I don't think many of those items are necessarily a positive in the long term. 

I hear you on SD though. I would not buy into that and turned down a job there after a housing survey trip. Philly we looked at hard but could not get past the fact the city is racing towards bankruptcy. Thus Denver was our choice. I think the mountain states are a sweet spot in the country right now.

But we diverge.

[KJHburg]

These 1500 jobs with Amazon are coming to Charlotte.  Their new multistory 2 million sq ft warehouse underway near the airport and 85/485.  Today. 

[SgtCampsalot]

In other Amazon news, New Yorkers are protesting their city for a $3 billion deal for the other half of their Amazon HQ expansion in Long Island.

Link:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/12/13/youre-worth-1-trillion-why-do-you-need-our-3-billion-angry-new-yorkers-confront?fbclid=IwAR3DDOF7KzNlTNOUNlErarMZaj_v0X0K4BN_X193LbS4HRJhPO-OiYJCPMw

Edited December 15, 2018 by SgtCampsalot

[Dale]

4 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

In other Amazon news, New Yorkers are protesting their city for a $3 billion deal for the other half of their Amazon HQ expansion in Long Island.

Link:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/12/13/youre-worth-1-trillion-why-do-you-need-our-3-billion-angry-new-yorkers-confront?fbclid=IwAR3DDOF7KzNlTNOUNlErarMZaj_v0X0K4BN_X193LbS4HRJhPO-OiYJCPMw

LOL, I love it. Even if they can get past the angry horde, Amazon is in no hurry to fill jobs in Queens. At last check, the build out might take decades. In terms of short-term impact, Nashville was the real winner.

[SgtCampsalot]

Just for some fun flavor, I like anecdotal takes:

 

Edited December 15, 2018 by SgtCampsalot

[SydneyCarton]

23 minutes ago, Dale said:

LOL, I love it. Even if they can get past the angry horde, Amazon is in no hurry to fill jobs in Queens. At last check, the build out might take decades. In terms of short-term impact, Nashville was the real winner.

Not really.  NY has the tech talent.  Nashville does not.  Amazon has already leased 1m sf in NY and plans to bring employees there ASAP.

NY is the financial, corporate, and media capital of the world, and this is not lost on Amazon.

[Dale]

12 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Not really.  NY has the tech talent.  Nashville does not.  Amazon has already leased 1m sf in NY and plans to bring employees there ASAP.

NY is the financial, corporate, and media capital of the world, and this is not lost on Amazon.

IF they get that far, a paltry 700 jobs in an existing building, these being worker drones who will probably live three to a studio. By contrast, higher income workers and over a billion in new (and rapid) construction in downtown Nashville ...

https://therealdeal.com/2018/12/13/amazon-is-in-no-rush-to-add-workers-in-lic-and-arlington/

[SydneyCarton]

M

39 minutes ago, Dale said:

IF they get that far, a paltry 700 jobs in an existing building, these being worker drones who will probably live three to a studio. By contrast, higher income workers and over a billion in new (and rapid) construction in downtown Nashville ...

https://therealdeal.com/2018/12/13/amazon-is-in-no-rush-to-add-workers-in-lic-and-arlington/

You have some bias.  NY is the best city in America by a very wide margin.  Its only peer globally is London.

We moved to Charlotte and then Chapel Hill for my wife’s medical career.  They’re both great places and I love both.  However, NY is ineffably better.

Jeff Bezos, among with scores of other billionaires around the world, bought condos in Manhattan — not Charlotte or Nashville — for a reason. 

Edited December 15, 2018 by SydneyCarton

[Dale]

10 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

M

You have some bias.  NY is the best city in America by a very wide margin.  Its only peer globally is London.

We moved to Charlotte and then Chapel Hill for my wife’s medical career.  They’re both great places and I love both.  However, NY is ineffably better.

Jeff Bezos, among with scores of other billionaires around the world, bought condos in Manhattan — not Charlotte or Nashville — for a reason. 

Best in what way ? It’s not even the best for tech talent. But we’re getting off subject. Build out in LIC is going to be grinding, arduous, slow ... and relatively less impacting than what is happening in Nashville.

[Tennessine]

1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

Not really.  NY has the tech talent.  Nashville does not.

Well, Amazon seems to think Nashville has an existing tech base sufficient enough to support 5,000 new jobs. Nothing compared to NYC, but I wouldn't marginalize Nashville either.

[Dale]

12 minutes ago, nativetenn said:

Well, Amazon seems to think Nashville has an existing tech base sufficient enough to support 5,000 new jobs. Nothing compared to NYC, but I wouldn't marginalize Nashville either.

And like I said, NYC will be beanbag compared to the salaries of Nashville workers.

[SydneyCarton]

 

First, LIC was booming before Amazon and is bigger than Uptown.  Second, Amazon will build on empty land.

As far as why NY is the best:

A.  It’s the cultural capital.   For instance:

1.  Metropolitan Museum of Art

2.  Museum of Modern Art

3.  Museum of Natural History

4.  BROADWAY

5.  Frick

6. Guggenheim

7.  Neue Gallery

8.  Hispanic Society (which has works by Goya, Velasquez, and El Greco)

9. Morgan Museum

10. New York Public Library Museum.....

11.  Metropolitan Opera

B.  It’s the home to the United Nations.

C.  It’s the financial capital

D.  It’s the corporate capital with over 80 Fortune 500s

E. It’s the media capital and is the HQ to:

 1. NBC

2. ABC

3. CBS

4. Fox

5.  Warner Media

5. NFL 

6. NBA

7. MLB

8. NHL

9. Largest PR and Ad firms in the world, which is why the whole industry is called “Madison Avenue.”

F.  It’s the home to more billionaires than any other city in the world.

G.  I can go on and on.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 15, 2018 by SydneyCarton

[Tennessine]

You really can't compare Charlotte or Nashville to NYC or London. NYC and London are world-class Alpha++ cities home to every ethnic group in the world, and basically have everything that exists. For instance, if you desire (x), you are guaranteed to find (x) in NYC.

But I don't believe New York is the best for those reasons. Nashville and Charlotte are livable, affordable, and offer a different pace of life. That makes those cities better for a lot of people, hence is why so many Americans are moving to Charlotte and Nashville. New Yorkers are pouring into Charlotte. Apparently, a lot of those folks up north didn't think NYC was the best city for them. 

Sure, Jeff Bezos has a home in New York and not Charlotte or Nashville. But so what? Because billionaire elites are more likely to pick New York to live in, that makes that city better? I don't bite. 

Edited December 15, 2018 by nativetenn
Edited to add more content and remove bad grammar

[SydneyCarton]

I love Charlotte, Nashville, and many other places because, among other things, they’re nice, cheap, offer easy commutes, etc.

 

[Tennessine]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I love Charlotte, Nashville, and many other places because, among other things, they’re nice, cheap, offer easy commutes, etc.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree about what characteristics make a city the best- we've all got our opinions! After all, we share a mutual love for our booming mid-South metropolises.

[SydneyCarton]

3 minutes ago, nativetenn said:

We'll have to agree to disagree about what characteristics make a city the best- we've all got our opinions! After all, we share a mutual love for our booming mid-South metropolises.

That’s true!

[urbanlover568]

Amazon chose a city nobody wants to move to anymore. They are actually loosing people by the day...This was a near-sighed decision on their end IMO. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-14/chicago-exodus-sees-city-shrink-by-156-daily-demographic-trends?cmpid=socialflow-facebook-business&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_content=business&utm_medium=social

[kermit]

^ sure, but it’s actually lower and middle income people who are leaving. Today’s WSJ tells us that those cities are getting much wealthier than the places where these people are going.

Which is better for a city, more people or more money?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/where-you-should-move-to-make-the-most-money-americas-superstar-cities-11544850010

[urbanlover568]

Just now, kermit said:

^ sure, but it’s actually lower and middle income people who are leaving. Today’s WSJ tells us that those cities are getting much wealthier than the places where these people are going.

Which is better for a city, more people or more money?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/where-you-should-move-to-make-the-most-money-americas-superstar-cities-11544850010

From personal experience. I'm a DBA and in the middle class.  There are more of me that would choose to live in a city with a better standard of living. Should a company go to where there is rich people or where the future talent growth is? Nobody wants to pay the insane taxes New York has....