5 ms·

Should we dispense with competitive processes completely? When we're talking about pitting strapped local governments against each other in corporate welfare b

Should we dispense with competitive processes completely? When we're talking about pitting strapped local governments against each other in corporate welfare bidding wars, the answer is, absolutely, unequivocally, yes.

throwaway5752 8y ago
What we're talking about is the time spent putting together a report and emailing it to Amazon in this case. I'm not talking about jurisdiction shopping (which is gross whether it's corporate domiciles in DE, lawsuits in east TX, or if you want to make the case that's what HQ 2's process amounted to). What was asked, and what I answered, was how to account for the time of municipalities that answered the RFP. Since they do not have to actually offer any of the proposed subsidies since they lost, then I think it's fair to assign no value to the cost. If you disagree, please feel free to tell me what price they paid instead of downvoting.
- cepth 8y ago
  Cities actually spent quite a bit of money on hiring consultants, site planners, doing impact studies, etc. I don't think it's unreasonable to say mid to high 7 figures. -https://www.consulting.us/news/290/consulting-firms-recruited-as-us-cities-battle-for-amazons-hq2 https://www.consulting.us/news/290/consulting-firms-recruite... -https://technical.ly/philly/2017/09/13/site-selection-consultant-amazon-hq2-generation-opportunity/ https://technical.ly/philly/2017/09/13/site-selection-consul... This is not to mention that cities likely had to hand over demographic data that would've otherwise been very expensive to collect: https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-hq2-search-data-2018-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-hq2-search-data-2018-.... Look at some of the cities that made the finalist list: -Columbus (population ~880k) -Denver (population ~700k) -Indianapolis (population ~870k) -Nashville (population ~667k) -Newark (population ~285k) For these cities, an additional 25k jobs would have been huge. Scott Galloway has advanced the theory that a large goal of the HQ2 search was to secure competing bids, which Amazon then took back to NYC and DC in an attempt to secure better terms. If these "finalist" cities were simply used as stalking horses with ~0% chances of actually winning, I can't help but feel it was a little wrong to induce them to spend the necessary fees on consultants and planners to put together a decent bid.
  - tmd83 8y ago
    If it was actually their plan which it very well seems like from the way everyone is talking about, wouldn't this actually be fraud rather than just unfair?
    - Apocryphon 8y ago
      It sounds like the sort of casual fraud that megacorps routinely get away with.
    - lotsofpulp 8y ago
      There was no commitment, and there was no false information. How can there be fraud? I do the same thing Amazon does all the time, to get the best price. I don’t need to be honest and tell the seller I’m using them to get someone else’s price down. Maybe I do go with the new seller if their price is good, maybe it’s not good enough to sway me from the other seller. It’s just business.
      - tmd83 8y ago
        I am of course not a lawyer. But there's a whole lot of difference between casually asking a seller a price or haggle vs. asking for a formal bid for something. I think in a formal bid the expectation is that you have a reasonable chance to win given the expense needed to answer a bid.

throwaway5752 8y ago

What we're talking about is the time spent putting together a report and emailing it to Amazon in this case. I'm not talking about jurisdiction shopping (which is gross whether it's corporate domiciles in DE, lawsuits in east TX, or if you want to make the case that's what HQ 2's process amounted to). What was asked, and what I answered, was how to account for the time of municipalities that answered the RFP. Since they do not have to actually offer any of the proposed subsidies since they lost, then I think it's fair to assign no value to the cost. If you disagree, please feel free to tell me what price they paid instead of downvoting.

cepth 8y ago
Cities actually spent quite a bit of money on hiring consultants, site planners, doing impact studies, etc. I don't think it's unreasonable to say mid to high 7 figures. -https://www.consulting.us/news/290/consulting-firms-recruited-as-us-cities-battle-for-amazons-hq2 https://www.consulting.us/news/290/consulting-firms-recruite... -https://technical.ly/philly/2017/09/13/site-selection-consultant-amazon-hq2-generation-opportunity/ https://technical.ly/philly/2017/09/13/site-selection-consul... This is not to mention that cities likely had to hand over demographic data that would've otherwise been very expensive to collect: https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-hq2-search-data-2018-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-hq2-search-data-2018-.... Look at some of the cities that made the finalist list: -Columbus (population ~880k) -Denver (population ~700k) -Indianapolis (population ~870k) -Nashville (population ~667k) -Newark (population ~285k) For these cities, an additional 25k jobs would have been huge. Scott Galloway has advanced the theory that a large goal of the HQ2 search was to secure competing bids, which Amazon then took back to NYC and DC in an attempt to secure better terms. If these "finalist" cities were simply used as stalking horses with ~0% chances of actually winning, I can't help but feel it was a little wrong to induce them to spend the necessary fees on consultants and planners to put together a decent bid.
- tmd83 8y ago
  If it was actually their plan which it very well seems like from the way everyone is talking about, wouldn't this actually be fraud rather than just unfair?
  - Apocryphon 8y ago
    It sounds like the sort of casual fraud that megacorps routinely get away with.
  - lotsofpulp 8y ago
    There was no commitment, and there was no false information. How can there be fraud? I do the same thing Amazon does all the time, to get the best price. I don’t need to be honest and tell the seller I’m using them to get someone else’s price down. Maybe I do go with the new seller if their price is good, maybe it’s not good enough to sway me from the other seller. It’s just business.
    - tmd83 8y ago
      I am of course not a lawyer. But there's a whole lot of difference between casually asking a seller a price or haggle vs. asking for a formal bid for something. I think in a formal bid the expectation is that you have a reasonable chance to win given the expense needed to answer a bid.