Hacker News Reader

Comment by femto113 | Hacker News Reader

My money is on one of Nashville, Indianapolis or Columbus with Pittsburgh as a dark horse.

Amazon is going to be looking to build a major campus (say 5-10 big buildings) right in the center of town (as they've done here in Seattle) and that's just not feasible in expensive cities like LA, Boston, NYC, Chicago or DC. Denver is too far west, Miami, Atlanta and Raleigh too far southeast. Newark and Philadelphia don't have a sufficiently developed tech scene and as satellites of NYC have a price premium. There's no way Seattle and Dallas are going to form a family, Austin looks great on paper but I doubt they're hungry enough to offer sufficient incentives. Don't know why Montgomery County or Northern Virginia are even on this list.

View on HN

I don't think Amazon is going to pick Chicago, but there are underdeveloped areas in/near the center of the city in Chicago. There are parts of Chicago that are quite expensive (like West Loop, where McDonalds is moving its campus), but Chicago is really big.

Why not? It ticks all the boxes: tax breaks, good airport, transit, large metropolitan area, good schools, talent pool, etc.

My suspicion is that Amazon has known all along where they want to put HQ2, and that this whole exercise is a negotiating tactic. Illinois would be a particularly rough choice, due to state finances.

Nashville does not stand a chance. It is growing rapidly, but the infrastructure is not keeping up. It is a car-centric city with almost nonexistent public transportation. As a result there is a citywide gridlock twice a day during rush hours. And not a single alternative. "It's a village that grew too big" is what my SO says about Nashville.

Nashville makes the most sense to me. Centrally located for the midwest and Atlantic seaboard. Great central roadway hub. Airline flights can be increased easily with demand. Relatively low-cost of living, cheap land and cheap labor. Moderate weather. Very low likelihood of terrorist attack.

>There's no way Seattle and Dallas are going to form a family

What does that mean? My top five (unordered) guesses are Raleigh, Dallas, Pittsburgh, Toronto and Columbus.

I also am curious what he meant by that? I have 4 friends in Dallas from Seattle, they love it and have no intention of moving back.

Boeing contemplated it but decided on Chicago instead. I think it's a cultural thing, the cities have very different and not particularly compatible personalities. Anecdotally in I've never known anyone choose to leave Seattle for Dallas, and Amazon is going to have to convince hundreds if not thousands to do just that.

>the cities have very different and not particularly compatible personalities

That was my read of the GP post as well, but it strikes me as odd. I have lived in both cities, and while I agree they have differences, I don't see that being fatal flaw to a business having a headquarters in each?

One could make same "different personality from Seattle" point for about half of the cities on the list. Consequently my interpretation is that it is one of the factors they are looking for, not one they are avoiding.

Northern Virgina has quite a few areas including Tysons that would 'fit' (it is HQ to "Intelsat, Gannett, Hilton Worldwide, Freddie Mac, Capital One and Booz Allen Hamilton") [1]. Montgomery County, on the other hand, is definitely a weird choice.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tysons,_Virginia

Too far southeast?

There really has been some prejudiced undertones in this thread that belittle the southeast.

Texas is one bad election from making it legal to discriminate against LGBT communities and racial minorities. North Carolina is already there.

That's a nonstarter.

Your comment is ignorant of both the past and future trajectories of the voting populations for both Texas and North Carolina. NC has only become "far right" since 2010. Prior to that it's legislature was controlled by democrats since 1990. Increases in hispanic and latino populations within Texas could turn it blue within the next 20 years.

It is very short sighted thinking to think this won't change.

I know plenty well about Southern politics, having worked as a staffer on multiple Southern campaigns.

As an alternative, Amazon can choose states that don't currently discriminate against potential employees.

Both of those states have positive trajectories (as well as Georgia!) But one bird in the hand is worth... Well, one bird in the bush.

And I live here and it's clear you're extremely ignorant on what the culture is actually like in the Raleigh-Durham region.

Question: do you even recognize that the bathroom law is offensive and discriminatory?

If you don't, we are simply not going to see eye to eye on this.

Of course I do. I consider myself liberal.

An increasing Hispanic and Latino population won't turn Texas blue all by itself. The turnout among that population at the voting booth is really low in Texas. This was also true in California until proposition 187 gave a lot of motivation for people to starting getting in the habit of using their vote. Without a precipitating event of the Texas GOP shooting itself in the foot with an equivalent to proposition 187, its going to take longer than 20 years. Old caucasian people are very reliable voters and as we saw in the recent special election in Alabama, will the vast majority of the them vote GOP no matter what candidate. https://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/latinos-wont-turn-te...

I'm guessing this will be a significant issue because of travel to/from Seattle. With 5+ hour flight times and a 3 hour timezone shift it will be nearly impossible to get from Seattle to the southeast on the day of a meeting, whereas you can be in Nashville by 2PM.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com