Amazon Looking for a new HQ - Detroit-Windsor Bid Rejected

**aj3647** · October-19-17, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by DetroitNightLights

We wouldn't just give away or discount houses. We would have to renovate a couple of blocks and their commercial corridors at time. These would need to be part of Mayor Duggan's plan for 15 minute neighborhoods, be connected to transit lines, and be up to par with the quality of living we find in the suburbs.

The city already has a plan to ward off gentrification.

Why not just tear down "Old Detroit" and use Gilbert's money to build Delta City, then we'd REALLY have an attractive bid for Amazon! First we got to have Robocop clean up the streets though, before construction of Delta City can begin.

**wolverine** · October-19-17, 09:00 AM

I think some of the posts are starting to get dramatic and over thought. Many cities risk economic losses from some sort of calamity. If Atlanta's freeway collapse or Houston's hurricane floodwaters are episodic moments of economic loss, Detroit's crime and abandonment are chronic issues.

**aj3647** · October-19-17, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by wolverine

I think some of the posts are starting to get dramatic and over thought. Many cities risk economic losses from some sort of calamity. If Atlanta's freeway collapse or Houston's hurricane floodwaters are episodic moments of economic loss, Detroit's crime and abandonment are chronic issues.

I think some of these posts are firmly in the realm of pure fantasy. Makes me wonder how some here are going to rationalize it to themselves when Detroit doesn't get picked. Maybe they'll convince themselves that Detroit was "a close second place" or that there must be some kind of bribery or malfeasance involved since clearly Detroit is far and away the #1 best and most obvious choice.

**masterblaster** · October-19-17, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by aj3647

I think some of these posts are firmly in the realm of pure fantasy. Makes me wonder how some here are going to rationalize it to themselves when Detroit doesn't get picked. Maybe they'll convince themselves that Detroit was "a close second place" or that there must be some kind of bribery or malfeasance involved since clearly Detroit is far and away the #1 best and most obvious choice.

Yes, some people on here are not based in reality. The lack of rapid transit, as well as crime, blight, stigma, and abandonment make Detroit a long-shot.

**DetroitSoldier** · October-19-17, 10:32 AM

Interesting take here. I think it is a little heavy on the automotive front. But I like the direction of the pitch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO4J_PC1b5M

**iheartthed** · October-19-17, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by wolverine

I think some of the posts are starting to get dramatic and over thought. Many cities risk economic losses from some sort of calamity. If Atlanta's freeway collapse or Houston's hurricane floodwaters are episodic moments of economic loss, Detroit's crime and abandonment are chronic issues.

I think Houston's being prone to natural disasters has eliminated it as a contender. Why would a company like Amazon choose to go to a place that will experience periodic disruption if they don't have to?

**Lowell** · October-19-17, 10:45 AM

I posted this as part of a new thread about a spin-off benefit of the Amazon bid, but it belongs in this thread too.

One of the benefits of the Amazon bid is that it has caused Detroit and the Detroit-Metro Detroit-Windsor region to polish its image. Whether or not we get Amazon, and I highly doubt it, the process has united us and given rise to the Move Here, Move the World campaign, preparing us to lure others.

**bust** · October-19-17, 10:51 AM

I think it will come down to whether or not Amazon thinks they can recruit the kind of talent they need. In Seattle that meant they wanted to be in a walkable, vibrant downtown location, easily accessible by a variety of transportation modes. Everything indicates they want they same qualities for their second location. They don't yet exist in Detroit. But neither did they in South Lake Union when they moved there. If somehow they can be be convinced those qualities would quickly materialize, Detroit has a chance. They'd have to trust the people and politicians would join them to get behind that vision. I'm not going to say what I believe are the chances of that. But wouldn't that be great?!

**emu steve** · October-19-17, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by masterblaster

Yes, some people on here are not based in reality. The lack of rapid transit, as well as crime, blight, stigma, and abandonment make Detroit a long-shot.

True, but the ultimate question is:

Will the decision be essentially a decision based on metrics [[something measurable).

What I mean:

Will they come up with say 10 - 15 factors, give each factor a 'weight', have someone [[a team) score each city based on those factors and add up the scores.

For example, let's assume mass transportation is 10%. Cities are scored on a 10 point scale. Cities can get 1 to 10 points.

Maybe access to intl airport, flights to D.C., etc. is worth another 10%. Cities are scored 1 to 10 points.

And so on...

A perfect score equals 100 and the worst possible score equal 10.

All cities then ranked on their overall score. The final four [[or whatever) make the first cut.

Then it becomes essentially subjective as they are all likely to be in the same tier with similar scores.

**Richard** · October-19-17, 11:23 AM

In Tampa the local Fox news this morning,while doing their little chat with the main headquarters were talking about what cities for Amazon.

They mentioned Denver and a couple of other cities were thought to be top contenders,but in the end all three agreed that Detroit would be the best fit and they hoped it would go there.

It was not on their list but still brought up.

You guys really do have a lot of supporters outside of your circle,although it may not always seem like it.

**clubboss** · October-19-17, 12:08 PM

College Football Coaches Help Detroit Make Push For Second Amazon Headquarters | CNBC

**aj3647** · October-19-17, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by Lowell

I posted this as part of a new thread about a spin-off benefit of the Amazon bid, but it belongs in this thread too.

One of the benefits of the Amazon bid is that it has caused Detroit and the Detroit-Metro Detroit-Windsor region to polish its image. Whether or not we get Amazon, and I highly doubt it, the process has united us and given rise to the Move Here, Move the World campaign, preparing us to lure others.

Every big metropolitan area and up-and-coming city has one of these types of marketing campaigns.

**iheartthed** · October-19-17, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by aj3647

Every big metropolitan area and up-and-coming city has one of these types of marketing campaigns.

Pittsburgh's sounds very similar to Detroit's:

**313WX** · October-19-17, 01:30 PM

In somewhat related news, it was revealed today that Michigan's incentives for Foxconn were actually the most generous at face value, totaling over $7 Billion. The problem is, in actual cash value that Michigan offered was less than what Wisconsin offers.

If we offer a similarly generous incentive package to Amazon, then maybe all hope is not lost [[despite Snyder's cryptic words).

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...ves/106792156/

**wolverine** · October-19-17, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think Houston's being prone to natural disasters has eliminated it as a contender. Why would a company like Amazon choose to go to a place that will experience periodic disruption if they don't have to?

Plenty of places are prone disaster. Yes, Detroit not so much, but with that logic the downtown should be booming with relocations out of state. It's not...actually dead last place in the nation in the number of residential and commercial highrise construction.

It's also HQ2, not THE HQ, so there's redundancy if there is disruption in one city.

**Canadian Visitor** · October-19-17, 01:53 PM

Normally I wouldn't post something Toronto-centric, for the obvious reason that's not what this forum is about.

But since folks are posting various city's bid books.

Here's Toronto's

https://s3.ca-central-1.amazonaws.co...nHQ2RFP_PD.pdf

No incentive package; straight pitch.

**emu steve** · October-19-17, 02:38 PM

Here is another very well written article by land use and development writer at WaPo.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...=.b1b08e0308e3

These two paragraphs provide a lot of context for what the writer suggests will be the decision-making process:

"Landing the second headquarters would be a legacy-defining achievement for nearly any governor or mayor, but lessons from Seattle’s Amazon experience have bidders scrambling to show how they can meet Amazon’s insistence on speed, low costs, transportation and inclusion — particularly if they didn’t focus on them ahead of time.

East Coast cities such as Boston, New York and Washington may need to answer for their own runaway real estate and housing prices. Governors, including Chris Christie of New Jersey, Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Larry Hogan of Maryland, may have to explain why they canceled major transit projects. Charlotte and Indianapolis are bidding, but Amazon may want to know the effect of state laws there affecting the rights of gay or transgender employees."

**iheartthed** · October-19-17, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by wolverine

Plenty of places are prone disaster. Yes, Detroit not so much, but with that logic the downtown should be booming with relocations out of state. It's not...actually dead last place in the nation in the number of residential and commercial highrise construction.

It's also HQ2, not THE HQ, so there's redundancy if there is disruption in one city.

The point is that of all the places in the entire continent to move your company, why would you move it to a place that will get disrupted by extreme weather events on a regular basis? There are plenty of other cities that can offer everything Houston would offer and without the threat of being pummeled by a hurricane every 5 years. Houston isn't even the front runner of cities located in that same state.

**iheartthed** · October-19-17, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

Normally I wouldn't post something Toronto-centric, for the obvious reason that's not what this forum is about.

But since folks are posting various city's bid books.

Here's Toronto's

https://s3.ca-central-1.amazonaws.co...nHQ2RFP_PD.pdf

No incentive package; straight pitch.

It's interesting to see who TO thinks the competition is... and isn't. Check out the cities that they measured TO against on page 18. All of those cities are mentioned roughly 30 times in the proposal, but Detroit isn't mentioned once [["Michigan" is mentioned once in a quote).

**aj3647** · October-19-17, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

In somewhat related news, it was revealed today that Michigan's incentives for Foxconn were actually the most generous at face value, totaling over $7 Billion. The problem is, in actual cash value that Michigan offered was less than what Wisconsin offers.

If we offer a similarly generous incentive package to Amazon, then maybe all hope is not lost [[despite Snyder's cryptic words).

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...ves/106792156/

It doesn't make financial sense to offer more in incentives than you will reap in revenue from economic growth and increased tax revenue.

At $7 billion for Foxconn, the state of Michigan almost assuredly would have LOST money on that deal. As it is, with their $3 billion sweetheart deal from Wisconsin, each job created by Foxconn is subsidized to the tune of $231,000 in taxpayer dollars. That's 231K per job. The state of Wisconsin, if it's lucky, might break even on that deal by mid-century.

Amazon, seeing what Foxconn got, will certainly seek a far better deal than that and they will certainly get it. I've seen some estimates that any city/state that lands HQ2 may end up having to subsidize those jobs at a cost of over $500,000 per job.

**DetroiterOnTheWestCoast** · October-19-17, 06:51 PM

Originally Posted by aj3647

It doesn't make financial sense to offer more in incentives than you will reap in revenue from economic growth and increased tax revenue.

At $7 billion for Foxconn, the state of Michigan almost assuredly would have LOST money on that deal. As it is, with their $3 billion sweetheart deal from Wisconsin, each job created by Foxconn is subsidized to the tune of $231,000 in taxpayer dollars. That's 231K per job. The state of Wisconsin, if it's lucky, might break even on that deal by mid-century.

Amazon, seeing what Foxconn got, will certainly seek a far better deal than that and they will certainly get it. I've seen some estimates that any city/state that lands HQ2 may end up having to subsidize those jobs at a cost of over $500,000 per job.

The Wisconsin Foxconn deal was really a "conn" job. How many of these jobs will really be around by mid-century, and how many might go to Illinois residents? I think Mt. Pleasant WI is less than 25 miles from the state line. But Walker et.al. do love their trickle up economics.