9 ms·

Amazon is playing cities like chump. I had a sense in the beginning of this process that Amazon doesn’t really want to build a HQ2. They just want to open anoth

by dmode 8y ago

Amazon is playing cities like chump. I had a sense in the beginning of this process that Amazon doesn’t really want to build a HQ2. They just want to open another office. Most large tech companies have large campuses across multiple cities. This exercise is no different than that. But Bezos branded it HQ2 to maximize handout. I also predict that they will end up hiring far less than the 25k projected. There is a recession coming in the near future, which could result in Amazon looking for cheaper developers globally.

rezashirazian 8y ago
Trying to find cheap engineering is not a last ditch effort Amazon is going to resort to because there is a recession. They have already expanded their engineering foot print in India and have continued to look beyond the US market when it comes to talent.
- dunpeal 8y ago
  Unimaginable that Amazon doesn't already do everything it absolutely can to reduce its engineering payroll, which is probably its biggest expense. Without knowing anything about them, one would assume they're already tapping global talent pools with maximum aggression. If anything, recession in the US may increase the supply and lower the cost (salaries) of American developers, thus making them more competitive against other countries.
standerman 8y ago
"There is a recession coming in the near future, which could result in Amazon looking for cheaper developers globally." It's dangerous to post speculative things with such certainty. The future is never guaranteed.
- sauwan 8y ago
  Well, I don't think it's speculative to say that a recession is coming. Predicting exactly when is hard, but isn't it a near virtual certainty that it will happen?
  - cbuq 8y ago
    Sure, but that's like saying Yellowstone is going to erupt.
    - dhosek 8y ago
      More like saying that a geyser at Yellowstone is going to erupt. If you believe that the timeframe for the next recession is on par with the timeframe for the eruption of the Yellowstone supervolcano, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
    - mikeash 8y ago
      I’ve lived through four or five recessions and there’s no indication this is any sort of anomaly. It’s more like saying that a hurricane is going to hit Florida. Predicting exactly when and how is nearly impossible, but we can say with almost complete certainty that it’s going to happen within a few years.
      - scarejunba 8y ago
        If few is three years or less time, you can make money on some options expiring Jan 2022. Have you bought them?
        mikeash 8y ago
        And if it’s three years and a month?
        scarejunba 8y ago
        Well, it's useful for me to know that your confidence of it happening in the next 3 years is low when you make your statement. I see that it is. That's enough for me.
        mikeash 8y ago
        Have you considered that maybe my concept of “few” is not “three”? Can I make the bet you describe for, say, seven years? I’d say five is highly likely to suffice but I’d rather play it safe.
- jimjansen 8y ago
  We're currently riding the longest bull market in history. Surely you don't think it will last forever and that we are closer to to it's end than it's beginning?
- imh 8y ago
  The more worried people are that there's a bubble, the less extreme the irrational exuberance. I love all the "shit, the bubble's about to pop" talk. If people weren't worried, it's just make the correction that much worse when it comes. And someday we'll have one, that's a given. It's just a question of when and how bad.
- rburhum 8y ago
  I am just going to leave you with this image here that shows the SP&500 since 1928: https://imgur.com/a/JCMbIvU https://imgur.com/a/JCMbIvU We have had 10 years of growth since the last recession (every gray line is a recession). If you take into account the market corrections that we have seen this year as a sign, most people in finance will agree that there will be a correction in the next three years. It is far from speculation. The charts was generated from here: https://www.macrotrends.net/2324/sp-500-historical-chart-data https://www.macrotrends.net/2324/sp-500-historical-chart-dat... Edit: FYI I did not imply that market corrections == recession. The reason I put the image is to show that there hasn't been a recession in 10 years and that we are due for one. We have had a few market corrections this year, but no recession yet.
  - jldugger 8y ago
    Now plot a expoential regression on it -- where _should_ we be?
  - andrestan 8y ago
    Stock market "correction" != recession. It's also not even remotely clear to me that a plot of 500 of the largest corporations in the US SHOULDN'T be growing extremely/exponentially fast.
  - zjaffee 8y ago
    Market corrections and recessions aren't the same thing, the chart you posted clearly shows Black Monday as not being a result of a recession. A rebalancing of the stock market at large doesn't necessarily result in mass unemployment, followed by mass foreclosure and so on.
  - 6502nerdface 8y ago
    That plot appears to show a 20-year-long bull market from 1980 to 2000, so with that precedent set, who's to say we aren't only half-way through the current bull run? (I don't actually have a strong view one way or the other; my point is just that it's hard to conclude anything by reading an S&P 500 price chart by itself.)
  - aquadrop 8y ago
- vernie 8y ago
  What's the danger?
- mratzloff 8y ago
  Thank goodness you said that. I thought we had a time traveler among us, but then I read your comment! Luckily I was able to cancel the sell order I issued in a panic.
cronix 8y ago
Don't just about all big corporations with some "weight" behind them do this though? A company employing tens of thousands floats the idea that they might leave the city/state due to some new proposed corporate tax legislation or something, and then the city/state exempts them from the increases to get them to stay since they're such a "big employer?" Isn't this just "negotiating from a position of strength?" This happens in Oregon all of the time with Intel. We don't have a sales tax - we have an income tax and property tax. Everytime we want to raise property taxes, Intel makes a big stink and we give them presents to appease them. https://www.oregonlive.com/hillsboro/index.ssf/2014/08/intels_tax_breaks_historic_30-.html https://www.oregonlive.com/hillsboro/index.ssf/2014/08/intel... https://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/09/us/fighting-sprawl-oregon-county-makes-deal-with-intel-to-limit-job-growth.html https://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/09/us/fighting-sprawl-oregon...
- hcg 8y ago
  Yeah, but just because this happens doesn't mean we shouldn't be upset about it. This is companies strongarming governments into giving them tax breaks. It's robbing society to enrich a few people at the top. Amazon is following the Boeing example. I fully expect Washington state to give away massive amounts of money the same way they did before.
  - cronix 8y ago
    I fully agree. Giving breaks in terms of property taxes directly affects our schools. So we're just shooting the upcoming generation in the foot to keep jobs here "today"
    - skookumchuck 8y ago
      Washington state schools get plenty of money.
      - hnmonkey 8y ago
        You're saying they get enough money so we should give large amounts of money to corporations? That seems wild and like corporate welfare for the sake of portioning out some money to corporations. Why give corporations a fast-lane to government money because school's are getting some money? To be clear, is your argument really that schools have lots of money so corporations deserve to get some too?
BonesJustice 8y ago
I was annoyed that New York was courting them. The last thing our already insane housing market needs is an influx of more highly-paid engineers. But at least we didn't offer them crazy tax incentives like some other cities.
rmason 8y ago
So are the two cities going to cut their economic package in half considering they're getting half the jobs? Bet you they're not. This is unfair to cities not making the list like Detroit. If Detroit was judged on only having to provide half the jobs would it not have been disqualified? Amazon changes the rules mid-stream.
- dunpeal 8y ago
  This is an internal Amazon decision that is not regulated in any way. They are not obliged to any notion of "fairness". Amazon just put some cities on a list and negotiated with them. Any city not on the list is not there because Amazon didn't want it there. I also doubt that existing talent pool size was such a major consideration. Crystal City VA doesn't strike me as an obvious tech hub, nor does Newark. Amazon is definitely counting on talent to relocate to its new offices, especially if they put them in such locations.
  - hnmonkey 8y ago
    Crystal City and Newark are next door to massive tech areas. In VA there are tons of DoD/Military tech organizations and NYC is right next door to Newark. It's probably cheaper to plant themselves next to those hubs than inside of them. * Added: Especially if you factor in all the people that would normally commute into NYC or DC/Arlington from the surrounding areas now commuting to a potentially closer office location. Could be really big for lots of people (and of course Amazon).
    - dunpeal 8y ago
      Maybe I'm thinking about this from the perspective of a young, single guy. I would not move to Crystal City for any job, definitely not with a horde of other young, single men. The number of young, college-graduate women there must be way too small.
      - hnmonkey 8y ago
        That's certainly a fair perspective that I can't argue with at all. I can't guess on specific #s but I'd bet there are lots of single men that would though at the chance of snagging an Amazon job. That number is probably relatively high and would make you a part of the outlier group. Working for Amazon might have stigma on HN but I think generally people have a great impression of them and would love to work for them.
juli1pb 8y ago
Recession secured
castratikron 8y ago
As with most things there's an rms quote for this: "State legislators in various states are starting to think about how to stop companies from playing one state against another for tax breaks and handouts. I suggested many years ago that the states should form a union to bargain collectively with these companies. We could call it 'The United States of America'." https://stallman.org/archives/2007-jul-oct.html#23%20July%202007%20(Companies%20playing%20one%20state%20against%20another) https://stallman.org/archives/2007-jul-oct.html#23%20July%20...

by dmode 8y ago

rezashirazian 8y ago

Trying to find cheap engineering is not a last ditch effort Amazon is going to resort to because there is a recession. They have already expanded their engineering foot print in India and have continued to look beyond the US market when it comes to talent.

dunpeal 8y ago
Unimaginable that Amazon doesn't already do everything it absolutely can to reduce its engineering payroll, which is probably its biggest expense. Without knowing anything about them, one would assume they're already tapping global talent pools with maximum aggression. If anything, recession in the US may increase the supply and lower the cost (salaries) of American developers, thus making them more competitive against other countries.

standerman 8y ago

"There is a recession coming in the near future, which could result in Amazon looking for cheaper developers globally." It's dangerous to post speculative things with such certainty. The future is never guaranteed.

sauwan 8y ago
Well, I don't think it's speculative to say that a recession is coming. Predicting exactly when is hard, but isn't it a near virtual certainty that it will happen?
- cbuq 8y ago
  Sure, but that's like saying Yellowstone is going to erupt.
  - dhosek 8y ago
    More like saying that a geyser at Yellowstone is going to erupt. If you believe that the timeframe for the next recession is on par with the timeframe for the eruption of the Yellowstone supervolcano, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    I’ve lived through four or five recessions and there’s no indication this is any sort of anomaly. It’s more like saying that a hurricane is going to hit Florida. Predicting exactly when and how is nearly impossible, but we can say with almost complete certainty that it’s going to happen within a few years.
    - scarejunba 8y ago
      If few is three years or less time, you can make money on some options expiring Jan 2022. Have you bought them?
      - mikeash 8y ago
        And if it’s three years and a month?
        scarejunba 8y ago
        Well, it's useful for me to know that your confidence of it happening in the next 3 years is low when you make your statement. I see that it is. That's enough for me.
        mikeash 8y ago
        Have you considered that maybe my concept of “few” is not “three”? Can I make the bet you describe for, say, seven years? I’d say five is highly likely to suffice but I’d rather play it safe.
jimjansen 8y ago
We're currently riding the longest bull market in history. Surely you don't think it will last forever and that we are closer to to it's end than it's beginning?
imh 8y ago
The more worried people are that there's a bubble, the less extreme the irrational exuberance. I love all the "shit, the bubble's about to pop" talk. If people weren't worried, it's just make the correction that much worse when it comes. And someday we'll have one, that's a given. It's just a question of when and how bad.
rburhum 8y ago
I am just going to leave you with this image here that shows the SP&500 since 1928: https://imgur.com/a/JCMbIvU https://imgur.com/a/JCMbIvU We have had 10 years of growth since the last recession (every gray line is a recession). If you take into account the market corrections that we have seen this year as a sign, most people in finance will agree that there will be a correction in the next three years. It is far from speculation. The charts was generated from here: https://www.macrotrends.net/2324/sp-500-historical-chart-data https://www.macrotrends.net/2324/sp-500-historical-chart-dat... Edit: FYI I did not imply that market corrections == recession. The reason I put the image is to show that there hasn't been a recession in 10 years and that we are due for one. We have had a few market corrections this year, but no recession yet.
- jldugger 8y ago
  Now plot a expoential regression on it -- where _should_ we be?
- andrestan 8y ago
  Stock market "correction" != recession. It's also not even remotely clear to me that a plot of 500 of the largest corporations in the US SHOULDN'T be growing extremely/exponentially fast.
- zjaffee 8y ago
  Market corrections and recessions aren't the same thing, the chart you posted clearly shows Black Monday as not being a result of a recession. A rebalancing of the stock market at large doesn't necessarily result in mass unemployment, followed by mass foreclosure and so on.
- 6502nerdface 8y ago
  That plot appears to show a 20-year-long bull market from 1980 to 2000, so with that precedent set, who's to say we aren't only half-way through the current bull run? (I don't actually have a strong view one way or the other; my point is just that it's hard to conclude anything by reading an S&P 500 price chart by itself.)
- aquadrop 8y ago
vernie 8y ago
What's the danger?
mratzloff 8y ago
Thank goodness you said that. I thought we had a time traveler among us, but then I read your comment! Luckily I was able to cancel the sell order I issued in a panic.

cronix 8y ago

Don't just about all big corporations with some "weight" behind them do this though? A company employing tens of thousands floats the idea that they might leave the city/state due to some new proposed corporate tax legislation or something, and then the city/state exempts them from the increases to get them to stay since they're such a "big employer?" Isn't this just "negotiating from a position of strength?" This happens in Oregon all of the time with Intel. We don't have a sales tax - we have an income tax and property tax. Everytime we want to raise property taxes, Intel makes a big stink and we give them presents to appease them. https://www.oregonlive.com/hillsboro/index.ssf/2014/08/intels_tax_breaks_historic_30-.html https://www.oregonlive.com/hillsboro/index.ssf/2014/08/intel... https://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/09/us/fighting-sprawl-oregon-county-makes-deal-with-intel-to-limit-job-growth.html https://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/09/us/fighting-sprawl-oregon...

hcg 8y ago
Yeah, but just because this happens doesn't mean we shouldn't be upset about it. This is companies strongarming governments into giving them tax breaks. It's robbing society to enrich a few people at the top. Amazon is following the Boeing example. I fully expect Washington state to give away massive amounts of money the same way they did before.
- cronix 8y ago
  I fully agree. Giving breaks in terms of property taxes directly affects our schools. So we're just shooting the upcoming generation in the foot to keep jobs here "today"
  - skookumchuck 8y ago
    Washington state schools get plenty of money.
    - hnmonkey 8y ago
      You're saying they get enough money so we should give large amounts of money to corporations? That seems wild and like corporate welfare for the sake of portioning out some money to corporations. Why give corporations a fast-lane to government money because school's are getting some money? To be clear, is your argument really that schools have lots of money so corporations deserve to get some too?

BonesJustice 8y ago

I was annoyed that New York was courting them. The last thing our already insane housing market needs is an influx of more highly-paid engineers. But at least we didn't offer them crazy tax incentives like some other cities.

rmason 8y ago

So are the two cities going to cut their economic package in half considering they're getting half the jobs? Bet you they're not. This is unfair to cities not making the list like Detroit. If Detroit was judged on only having to provide half the jobs would it not have been disqualified? Amazon changes the rules mid-stream.

dunpeal 8y ago
This is an internal Amazon decision that is not regulated in any way. They are not obliged to any notion of "fairness". Amazon just put some cities on a list and negotiated with them. Any city not on the list is not there because Amazon didn't want it there. I also doubt that existing talent pool size was such a major consideration. Crystal City VA doesn't strike me as an obvious tech hub, nor does Newark. Amazon is definitely counting on talent to relocate to its new offices, especially if they put them in such locations.
- hnmonkey 8y ago
  Crystal City and Newark are next door to massive tech areas. In VA there are tons of DoD/Military tech organizations and NYC is right next door to Newark. It's probably cheaper to plant themselves next to those hubs than inside of them. * Added: Especially if you factor in all the people that would normally commute into NYC or DC/Arlington from the surrounding areas now commuting to a potentially closer office location. Could be really big for lots of people (and of course Amazon).
  - dunpeal 8y ago
    Maybe I'm thinking about this from the perspective of a young, single guy. I would not move to Crystal City for any job, definitely not with a horde of other young, single men. The number of young, college-graduate women there must be way too small.
    - hnmonkey 8y ago
      That's certainly a fair perspective that I can't argue with at all. I can't guess on specific #s but I'd bet there are lots of single men that would though at the chance of snagging an Amazon job. That number is probably relatively high and would make you a part of the outlier group. Working for Amazon might have stigma on HN but I think generally people have a great impression of them and would love to work for them.

juli1pb 8y ago

Recession secured

castratikron 8y ago

As with most things there's an rms quote for this: "State legislators in various states are starting to think about how to stop companies from playing one state against another for tax breaks and handouts. I suggested many years ago that the states should form a union to bargain collectively with these companies. We could call it 'The United States of America'." https://stallman.org/archives/2007-jul-oct.html#23%20July%202007%20(Companies%20playing%20one%20state%20against%20another) https://stallman.org/archives/2007-jul-oct.html#23%20July%20...