> I don't see any reason for dual HQs unless A huge one: Seattle is starting to feel a bit like a company town. This has all sorts of practical considerations,

> I don't see any reason for dual HQs unless A huge one: Seattle is starting to feel a bit like a company town. This has all sorts of practical considerations, like labor cost and real estate availability. For example, from https://www.geekwire.com/2017/how-seattles-office-market-became-a-modern-day-gold-rush-thanks-to-amazon-and-a-deep-roster-of-out-of-town-tech-companies/ https://www.geekwire.com/2017/how-seattles-office-market-bec...: Amazon "takes up approximately 20 percent of Seattle’s office inventory, one of the highest concentrations in the country by a single corporate entity," and Amazon anticipates 50% growth in square footage between 2016 and 2020. tl;dr: the strongest reasons for 2 HQs aren't political.