Jump to content

Alabama Economic Development


kayman

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

alabama has other companies that may not make the list, but nonetheless have left an enormous mark on the business culture of the state. the 40-plus holdings of the EBSCO company range all over the map, from information services (their library database service, EBSCOHOST, is used in academic environments everywhere) to media services to paper materials to steel joists to packaging / materials handling to real estate to fishing lures. EBSCO is listed in the top 200 of privately owned U.S. businesses by forbes magazine (using revenues and number of employees as criteria); it has dunn & bradstreet's highest financial rating (5A1).

too, some of the state's biggest employers are not corporate, at least not in a legal sense: UAB is birmingham's largest employer and directly employs almost as many people as it teaches (16,000 vs. 17,000). UAB estimates its annual economic impact on the birmingham region at roughly $3 billion, a figure that many 500 companies can't hope to match in profit. mckesson, number 18 on the 2007 list, had an '06 profit of $751 million, while ford and GM, much higher on the list, had losses in billions (ford in the tens of billions).

i realize this is stretching (other states have powerhouse universities and multifaceted companies that aren't publicly traded), but i'm just trying to toot the horn on the AL forum, since i wouldn't dare do it elsewhere on UP. and, some states have neither the number of F500 companies nor the number & quality of academic research engines that we do. it's not exactly a bleak picture...but i do believe strongly in the worth of businesses that are owned and controlled by in-state interests, especially here in the deep south, where abundant resources and easy business practices have kept much of our wealth flowing northward time out of mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

well, today's the day. i feel like i'm waiting through a time out for the last play of a close football game (an appropriate comparison, since my interest in this thyssenkrupp project is about as vicarious as it is in sports). crazy, but i've been awake all night expecting to see updates on al.com or the times-picayune site after 3 a.m. so far, nothing.

. . . . . .

not sure where else to put this, so i put it here - i don't care about the rankings, but site selection magazine used one criteria - one that doesn't necessarily tell the whole story on a metro's economic development prowess - but that does offer as simple a statistical comparison as you can find, and that does not rely on a magazine's dubious methodology. the magazine looked at metros nationwide in three population tiers, and auburn-opelika topped the list for number of development projects commenced in the past year in the tier-3 metros. in a twist the irony of which could only hit home for an alabama resident, tuscaloosa's metro was #2. decatur was also in the top 10.

http://www.siteselection.com/issues/2007/m...Metros/pg04.htm

like i said, it doesn't tell much of a story in terms of 'rank,' but it does say that, for this year, these metros have a lot happening all at once relative to similarly-sized metros nationwide. in a couple of years, when projects get rounded out, they may not be anywhere near the top of such a list as this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, here it is. AL gets it! the AP is reporting the plant will cost $4.19 billion, way up from the $2.9 billion that was projected during the competition.

times-picayune article:

http://blog.nola.com/times-picayune/2007/0..._steel_mil.html

AP news flash with revised cost estimate (may not be a current link for long):

http://www.al.com/newsflash/regional/index...ist=alabamanews

thyssenkrupp press release:

http://www.thyssenkrupp.com/en/presse/art_...7679_1659377840

it was smart for thyssenkrupp to play the two sites against one another for many months - who's to say that the company's board had not decided long ago that the AL site was the only one under serious consideration? the announcement of two finalists certainly sent each states' govs and legislatures scurrying to outdo the other's with incentives packages. the whole negotiation could have been thyssenkrupp's way of getting an already-decided-upon candidate to pony up as much incentive as possible before announcing the decision and entering final negotiations. if that's true, it really wouldn't have mattered if louisiana had offered $3 billion in incentives, since the competitive phase, from TK's point of view, would have already been over.

again, who will ever know? i have no complaints.

ThyssenKrupp selects AL site for steel plant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations to Mobile, Mobile County, and the State of Alabama.

However, on a realistic standpoint this is whole incentive package get up is becoming more and more of a national embarrassment for this state than anything else. Something that a professor at the University of Georgia pointed out something that has been on my mind for a while:

"Each successive chase for a big plant, the subsidies get bigger and bigger," said James Cobb, a University of Georgia history professor and author of books on the South, including the region's industrial-recruitment efforts.

He said there's no doubt the plants bring jobs, which help local coffers. But he said the hefty incentives come without adequate thought as to who is going to pay for demands on infrastructure, education and health care brought on by the growth in communities.

"I don't think any state in the union has done it more recklessly than Alabama has," Cobb said. "The problem for any state is, until everybody agrees to stop it, none of them feel as though they can cut back."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations to Mobile, Mobile County, and the State of Alabama.

However, on a realistic standpoint this is whole incentive package get up is becoming more and more of a national embarrassment for this state than anything else. Something that a professor at the University of Georgia pointed out something that has been on my mind for a while:

This is very true because the state hasn't really done anything for its current education and health care system. It is good to see more jobs be brought to this state, but something is going to have to give. We should be trying to fix our state infastructure first before we decide to throw every kind of tax incentives towards any old major industrial development when our education system is still joke.

A voice of reason and foresight has to be realized because numerous states in the Midwest made similar mistakes, and now are in more trouble economically than ever due to the "Brain Drain" and young people leaving their state for more progressive states. Honestly speaking, if the State of Alabama can spare $2.9B for a steel plant then why is it that we are constantly falling into the hole called "proration" every few years because their claim is there isn't enough revenue to adequately fund a quality education. I mean seriously our priorities are in the wrong place when you think about about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree 100% But, I think the state was more focused on getting this because, as mentioned, the jobs. Let's not forget that this plant is going to be built near some of the most poverty ridden parts of America. But, even that doesn't excuse the fact that we threw sooo much money at it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy that the state "won" the plant, but, I think that no matter what, Alabama was always at the top of the list. No offense towards LA, cause, they are a wonderful state, no matter what statistics say, but, I think Alabama always had more to offer, without the incentives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alabama and Mississippi received a joint $15 million federal grant to train workers in 37 counties on both sides of the state line. Under the grant, workers would be trained by four two-year colleges in Alabama and four in Mississippi.

Governors Bob Riley of Alabama and Haley Barbour of Mississippi spoke at a workforce development conference in Monroeville Monday to discuss how to train people that make $15,000 to $20,000 a year so they can make as much as $70,000 per year. Both governors warned that if the two states don't get serious about training workers, many of the employees of new industries, such as automotive-related plants and the ThyssenKrupp steel mill, would come from other states.

Montgomery Advertiser: Governors: Trained work force key to success in poor region

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alabama and Mississippi received a joint $15 million federal grant to train workers in 37 counties on both sides of the state line. Under the grant, workers would be trained by four two-year colleges in Alabama and four in Mississippi.

Governors Bob Riley of Alabama and Haley Barbour of Mississippi spoke at a workforce development conference in Monroeville Monday to discuss how to train people that make $15,000 to $20,000 a year so they can make as much as $70,000 per year. Both governors warned that if the two states don't get serious about training workers, many of the employees of new industries, such as automotive-related plants and the ThyssenKrupp steel mill, would come from other states.

Montgomery Advertiser: Governors: Trained work force key to success in poor region

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 Southern universities form automotive research alliance

Seven Southern universities in states with automotive plants and suppliers -- Tennessee, Auburn, Clemson, Mississippi State, Alabama, Alabama at Birmingham and Kentucky -- joined Wednesday to form an automotive research alliance. The alliance was organized by the National Transportation Research Center Inc., along with Oak Ridge National Laboratory and TVA, to be a resource for the industry and for the region to compete for research jobs.

Goals include acting as a source of information on research and technology resources in the region; helping to link industry, researchers and funding organizations interested in automotive issues; and linking top graduates of all the participating universities with automotive employers.

Montgomery Advertiser article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 Southern universities form automotive research alliance

Seven Southern universities in states with automotive plants and suppliers -- Tennessee, Auburn, Clemson, Mississippi State, Alabama, Alabama at Birmingham and Kentucky -- joined Wednesday to form an automotive research alliance. The alliance was organized by the National Transportation Research Center Inc., along with Oak Ridge National Laboratory and TVA, to be a resource for the industry and for the region to compete for research jobs.

Goals include acting as a source of information on research and technology resources in the region; helping to link industry, researchers and funding organizations interested in automotive issues; and linking top graduates of all the participating universities with automotive employers.

Montgomery Advertiser article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

The study done by Atlanta consulting firm, Boyette Levy, and funded in part by Metropolitan Development Board of Birmingham has shown that Alabama's economic incentives package is heavily against white collar and knowledge-based jobs. However, the study does show the state is perfectly positioned on a hotbed of massive economic potential that could excel the state's economic outlook if acted upon with the proper legislation.

Across the state, economic developers and elected leaders are aware of the need to keep pace with Alabama's changing economy and the large volume of opportunities arising from the state's economic development success, said Brian Hilson, president of the Chamber of Commerce of Huntsville/Madison County and president of the Economic Development Association of Alabama.

"All of our incentives capabilities need a fresh look to be consistent with the recruitment and expansion targets we have," he said. "Obviously, it makes no sense to have the ability to incentivize a minimum-wage manufacturing job, although we don't have as many of those anymore, and not be able to do the same thing for both recruitment and expansion in industry sectors that pay as much as six-figure annual salaries."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The study done by Atlanta consulting firm, Boyette Levy, and funded in part by Metropolitan Development Board of Birmingham has shown that Alabama's economic incentives package is heavily against white collar and knowledge-based jobs. However, the study does show the state is perfectly positioned on a hotbed of massive economic potential that could excel the state's economic outlook if acted upon with the proper legislation.

Alabama is home to the South's largest automotive sector, but it is almost non-existant in the automotive research and development industry unlike South Carolina who is booming with their ICAR development in Greenville. The state taxation and incentives laws are prohibitive towards aiding their industries that we could easily grow upon with our growing automotive sector nearby.

The study also showed that Alabama has a huge pool of potential recruits for the financial industry and great reputation in the banking industry:

In other words, Alabama needs to stop just only recruiting manufacturing jobs when we are sitting on a goldmind of massive potential under our very noses (centralize location, hotbed of knowledge and research universities, automotive industry, financial, and rapidly growing engineering sector).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

The opening of the Mercedes-Benz plant near Tuscaloosa opened doors to a multibillion-dollar business relationship between Alabama and Germany. Alabama's trade with Germany last year was $5.17 billion, second only to the $5.66 billion in trade with Mexico. Alabama companies exported $3.62 billion to Germany in 2006, the most to any single country and 26 percent of state export totals.

The relationship is expected to grow stronger after ThyssenKrupp opens a giant steel facility near Mobile. ThyssenKrupp is a long-time Mercedes supplier in Germany, and the relationship between the two companies may have been a key reason ThyssenKrupp chose Alabama over Louisiana.

Montgomery Advertiser: Alabama, Germany work together for international business success

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

A Forbes article about America's fastest growing metros mentions Mobile and Huntsville.

It's no secret that the Southeast and Western United States are booming. The costs of living and doing business there are often cheaper there than in big coastal cities. But where and how much those cities are thriving might surprise you.

Take Alabama. The state has some of the fastest growing metro areas in the country, including Mobile, which is projected to have the greatest change in "gross metropolitan product (GMP)," 34% between 2007-2012, according to research forecasts done for us by Moody's Economy.com.

http://www.forbes.com/business/2008/01/30/...econcities.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to break it to you but Forbes usually comes out with these kinds of articles numerous times/year. As does Money, and several other grocery store rags. They do it to sell issues.

A bigger question to ask and which will not be covered in these magazines is that much of this growth comes from the exploitation of cheap land, cheap uneducated labor, and business processes and lax regulations that mean most of this growth is unsustainable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to break it to you but Forbes usually comes out with these kinds of articles numerous times/year. As does Money, and several other grocery store rags. They do it to sell issues.

A bigger question to ask and which will not be covered in these magazines is that much of this growth comes from the exploitation of cheap land, cheap uneducated labor, and business processes and lax regulations that mean most of this growth is unsustainable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From that al.com article :

Between 2000 and 2006, the Birmingham area's population grew 4.6 percent, behind Huntsville's 10 percent and Auburn-Opelika's 9.3 percent but ahead of Mobile's 1.1 percent, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures.

Mobile, which is benefiting from expanded economic activity at the Alabama State Docks and from Retirement Systems of Alabama investments such as the new RSA office tower and the Battle House Hotel, still faces challenges, Trent said.

"The challenge is to grow jobs that provide higher wages, as the (Mobile) area's wages have been historically low," she said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to break it to you but Forbes usually comes out with these kinds of articles numerous times/year. As does Money, and several other grocery store rags. They do it to sell issues.

A bigger question to ask and which will not be covered in these magazines is that much of this growth comes from the exploitation of cheap land, cheap uneducated labor, and business processes and lax regulations that mean most of this growth is unsustainable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to break it to you but Forbes usually comes out with these kinds of articles numerous times/year. As does Money, and several other grocery store rags. They do it to sell issues.

A bigger question to ask and which will not be covered in these magazines is that much of this growth comes from the exploitation of cheap land, cheap uneducated labor, and business processes and lax regulations that mean most of this growth is unsustainable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.