Hacker News Reader

I think FAANG-type is defined a bit further down, he's talking about companies that have enough power and/or hype that they drive real estate demand in their surrounding areas.

>“The Netflix, Google and Amazons of the world are not going to their service providers,” he said. “Their service providers are going to them.”

It all seems pretty meaningless though. This is just a PR piece for CBRE, not any sort of journalism.

You can add Boeing and Seattle to that list.

Eh, Boeing has huge scale, but they havw a worse version of Amazon's recruiting problem. Terrible work environment for most employees (unless you like knuckledragger drivel), poor quality work by other teams being swept under the rug by managers, and large relocation/sign on bonuses being dangled in front of potential employees for year long commitments post-move.

> Later the article refers to "FAANG-type tenants". FAANG is an acronym referring to 5 specific companies. What is a "FAANG-type tenant"? One of those five companies? Any tech company?

obviously any of those large high growth innovative tech companies of the content-creating variety

partially sarcasm. it should be further defined

Bit off tangent but how is Netflix similar to the rest of the acronym?

Well, netflix hosts content partially created by itself and partially by others. Facebook hosts content made entirely by others (I think).

So it's... kind of similar to at least that one?

But I do wonder why netflix and not microsoft. MSFT seems to be closer to the FAAG part.

EDIT: A quick search on DDG revealed it's because of the value of their stock.

A quick search on DDG revealed it's because of the value of their stock.

That doesn't make sense because the value of Microsoft's stock is a lot closer to the other four than Netflix's stock is. It is just because FAANG is a cooler-sounding acronym than FAAMG.

It really is just to spell "FAANG" which sounds a bit nefarious. Netflix is by far the smallest of the five; Microsoft is a lot larger than Netflix by market cap.

High growth, tech heavy focus

Netflix does very innovative things to get to where it is. Its not that innovate anymore since a lot of the infrastructure is 'easily' replicable, but it is still the only well capitalized and large solo content streamer. All the other ones are #metoo's from incumbent organizations

I think it's because they're all publicly traded tech companies worth over a certain market value

We've been spoiled by Bay Area news sites that actually know what they're talking about when it comes to software companies.

It might be because these companies are investing in movies, tv shows and games because movies, tv shows and games can bring home those sweet, disproportionate billion dollar paydays.

I take "FAANG-type tenants" to mean "Companies that aspire to FAANG levels of prestige" in an implicitly negative way, as in companies that are chasing the visible adornments of very successful companies such as open offices, micro kitchens, interns trying and failing to stay upright on Hoverboards, etc, instead of the things that actually made those companies successful. FAANG offices all have a particular "look" and that look is currently very trendy.

YouTube has a space in LA already, it's pretty huge. Maybe they're expanding it

West side pavilion is going to supersede the Venice/Sahara Monica R&D office I’ve heard, not sure if YouTube would, though it isn’t that far from their Venice beach office already.

My understanding is that YouTube is staying in the newer offices in Playa Vista and it's the Venice offices that are moving over to Westside Pavilion. This is still a couple years away.

yup, more info on that: https://urbanize.la/post/google-lease-entirety-westside-pavi...

and amazon is moving into culver city: https://urbanize.la/post/fresh-renderings-amazons-future-cul...

I'm super glad to hear that, its crazy to have a deadmall like that in LA.

It wasn’t dead when I was living there in 2016. It failed really quickly, actually.

Google is not typically known as a "content creator" business.

Google is trying to get into gaming.[1][2][3] More from the infrastructure/back end side than the user-facing side, but they at least produce some demo games to show off the infrastructure.

[1] https://cloud.google.com/maps-platform/gaming/

[2] https://improbable.io/blog/google-partnership-pr

[3] https://developers.google.com/games/

A couple demo games for their gaming infrastructure ambitions are basically irrelevant. You can make a demo game with 100 man-hours.

The point is that Google has buildings in LA full of people working on their gaming infrastructure. So they look like a content creator from a real estate perspective.

Why does working on gaming infrastructure make them look like a content creator, moreso than working on their compute cloud or their search engine?

Random guess, but I would assume the majority is Amazon. They are purchasing land in urban centers and repurposing them as shipping hubs. Both to expand their Network, and to improve their last mile delivery. The others afaik are simply buying office space in urban areas.

Since when are these companies "content creators"? They operate platforms such as Twitch and YouTube that the content creators use, but you wouldn't call Wal-Mart an "electronics manufacturer".

YouTube's studios are in LA. I imagine Netflix and Amazon have studios there as well.

They probably mean YouTube, which is part of Google.