Author Topic: Amazon Revisited  (Read 2455 times)

Offline jh35

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 312
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #15 on: July 26, 2019, 12:24:21 AM »

From TheRealDeal.com:

Amazon considers We Company’s HQ in New York office search
The technology giant is considering multiple sites across the city


July 25, 2019 04:10PM



From left: WeWork CEO Adam Neumann, 424 Fifth Avenue, and Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos (Credit: Getty Images)

The We Company may not actually occupy its own global headquarters after all.
The co-working firm has discussed leasing the entire 11-story buildingat 424 Fifth Avenue to Amazon, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The talks were part of a wider search Amazon is conducting to find office space in New York, the Journal reported. Amazon has also considered leasing portions of the building, though the current state of talks couldn’t be determined. One person familiar with talks told the Journal that Amazon had considered paying more than $110 a square foot for the space.

After a series of delays, the We Company closed on the historic Lord & Taylor building in February for $850 million. It quickly tapped its chief architect Bjarke Ingels to preserve and renovate the roughly 600,000-square-foot landmarked building. According to the design he submitted, the lower floors were to remain retail spaces while the upper floors would be occupied by the We Company.

The Journal report comes just months after the technology giant famously abandoned a plan to spend $2.5 billion on a new headquarters in Long Island City. Amazon has said it will continue to expand in New York City, where it has 5,000 employees. In June, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos spent $80 million on three units at 212 Fifth Avenue.

In addition to the Fifth Avenue building, Amazon has reportedly considered other office sites across the city, including the Farley Post Office. [WSJ] — Sylvia Varnham O’Regan
Tags: Amazon, commercial, We Company, WeWork

Short URL
http://bit.ly/2K53wWS

Offline Jhqns76

  • Tourist
  • **
  • Posts: 3
  • Lived here since: 2000
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #16 on: July 27, 2019, 09:08:57 PM »
How are new jobs bad for the neighborhood? I don’t get it

Online dssjh

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 4589
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #17 on: July 27, 2019, 09:24:21 PM »
How are new jobs bad for the neighborhood? I don’t get it

what new jobs?

Offline Shelby2

  • Global Moderator
  • Mayor
  • *****
  • Posts: 4993
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #18 on: July 27, 2019, 10:02:28 PM »
Here's a summary of the jobs that were lost when the Amazon Queens deal fell through:

Jobs
Amazon would have reportedly generated $27.5 billion in city and state revenue over 25 years—a 9:1 ratio of revenue to subsidies. This arrangement was predicated on Amazon creating at least 25,000 jobs over the next decade—and up to 40,000—with an average salary of $150,000, the memorandum said. Another 1,300 jobs were in the pipeline for construction and some 107,000 in total direct and indirect jobs were anticipated, according to state estimates.

Amazon, the city, and state initially planned to commit $5 million each toward workforce development. The deal also planned for a local nonprofit to open a training center on the HQ2 campus to mentor and recruit Long Island City locals, according to the city. A $10 million expansion of the city’s JobsPlus program into the Queensbridge Houses—the largest public housing complex in the country—was set to take shape. Additionally, the de Blasio administration planned to launch a $3-5 million program geared toward training NYCHA residents for careers in IT, cybersecurity, and web development.

https://ny.curbed.com/2019/2/14/18225029/amazon-hq2-nyc-deal-canceled

Offline abcdefghijk

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 962
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #19 on: July 27, 2019, 11:07:12 PM »
I'm still getting my head around how and why sex work jobs are being validated.
And these Amazon jobs denigrated.
It's like Bizarro world in DC comics.
Or from Macbeth..."Fair is foul and foul is fair"

Offline jh35

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 312
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #20 on: July 28, 2019, 02:37:28 AM »
from techcrunch.com:

Did New York lose anything with Amazon’s rejection? It’s complicated.

Jonathan Shieber@jshieber / 5 months ago

Now that Amazon has said that it’s taking its ball and going home rather than deal with mean, pushy New Yorkers, outside observers are giving off the sense that the city (and its local politicians) are losing out for their recalcitrance.

They’re wrong.

New York City is running at about a 4.3 percent unemployment rate — higher than the national average of 3.9 percent, but a respectable number for jobs. Amazon’s promise of 25,000 jobs (high-paying jobs) may have reduced that number, but there’s no guarantee that those jobs would be filled by New Yorkers or Queens residents more specifically — and every indication that they would have gone to Amazon employees coming from somewhere else.

Remember, Amazon employees were buying real estate in Queens before the deal was even announced.

The response that New Yorkers are idiots for not giving Amazon (one of the most valuable companies in the world) billions in tax incentives to build an office tower in one of its boroughs is another sign of how the country privileges business interests above civic ones.

“new york city is such a valuable and desirable place to do business that literally no company on earth can resist coming here which is why we were forced to bribe amazon” is a curious argument for the governor to keep making

— tc (@chillmage) February 14, 2019


There are things that New York can do to boost its local economy without giving away the store to Amazon. There are incentives that could go to businesses already in New York to establish offices in Queens.

More importantly, local Queens residents had legitimate concerns about how their neighborhood would be transformed by Amazon’s entrance into the borough.

That’s not to say that local politicians may not have overplayed their hand. New York local politics is no stranger to graft, corruption, shakedowns or funny business (I wasn’t in the room for the negotiations), but it’s safe to say that “mistakes were made” on both sides.

In the long run, Amazon would have been a benefit to the New York economy — and had the company’s executives made a good-faith effort to listen to the concerns of local residents, perhaps it could have come out looking like a winner.

Because there are legitimate reasons to expect Amazon to be a benefit to the New York economy. As Noah Smith wrote in Bloomberg after the deal was announced:

Amazon will pay property tax on its new Long Island City offices. It will pay corporate tax — not just on its profits, but on its capital base. Its employees, especially highly paid ones, will pay the city’s personal income tax. Those taxes, of course, will be somewhat offset by the incentives that the city has promised the company — up to $2 billion, depending on how many people the company hires and how many facilities it builds. Those incentives were a wasteful way to attract corporate investment. But in the long run, the tax revenue New York City gets from HQ2 will probably far exceed the cost.

And that’s not even taking into account Amazon’s effect on surrounding businesses and property values. Other technology companies will want to move to Queens now that Amazon is there. Their employees will spend their money locally, buying everything from lattes to MRIs. Some estimates place HQ2’s local economic boost at $17 billion a year. Even dividing that in half, and even assuming that the estimate is optimistic by a factor of 2 or 3, it seems likely that the economic benefit Queens reaps from HQ2 will quickly exceed the upfront cost — unlike, say, Wisconsin’s ill-advised Foxconn factory.

Those benefits are true, but harder to quantify for a city like New York when taken against the impact those jobs and spending would have on the fabric of the local economy and the housing, transit and government services that new residents would demand.

The livability crisis that’s currently afflicting Seattle and San Francisco is evidence of how cities need to be careful what they wish for when it comes to the explosive growth of technology companies (and the attendant wealth that comes with it) in their metropolises.

In any event, the urban landscape of the U.S. is being radically reshaped by technology companies — creating cities that are haves and have-nots much as technology has bifurcated the national economy into digital haves and have nots.

As Mark Muro and Robert Maxim of the Brookings Institute noted in this piece for US News and World Report:

Scholars have for years suspected that tech might alter the hierarchy of cities, given its bias toward skilled workers. More than a decade ago, researchers Paul Beaudry, Mark Doms and Ethan G. Lewis showed cities that adopted personal computers earliest and fastest saw their relative wages increase the quickest. Now, there is more evidence – including in our own work – that digital technologies are contributing heavily to the divergence of metro economies and the pull away of superstar cities like Boston and San Francisco from more ordinary ones, with painful impacts.

Recently, Princeton economist Elisa Giannone demonstrated that the divergence of cities’ wages since 1980 – after decades of convergence – reflects a mix of technology’s increased rewards to highly skilled tech workers and tech-driven industry clustering. Likewise, Brookings research has shown that a short list of highly digital, often coastal tech hubs is growing even more digital and pulling farther away from the pack on measures of growth and income. What we call the “digitization of everything” is in this way exacerbating the unevenness of America’s economic landscape.



It’s far easier to make the case that Amazon’s decision to set up regional offices in Nashville will have far more positive outcomes for that city.

But making American cities compete beauty pageant-style and bend over backwards to appease a multi-billion-dollar corporation is pretty gross — and a poor read of national sentiment around the roles that technology companies play in modern American society.

As an example of how to expand in a city without invoking the wrath of the local community, observers need only look at how Google is expanding in New York. The company is planning to add 14,000 jobs in the city and has committed to $1 billion in spending to upgrade its West side campuses.

Ostensibly, Google is expanding its presence in New York to compete for the talent it sees coming from the city (or coming to the city) and because New York is strategically important. Amazon’s decision to forsake New York means that it’s losing access to that talent and creating opportunities for other tech companies to come in and take its place — or for local companies to retain their edge.

Here’s hoping that New York’s local tech community can supply Queens with those 25,000 jobs by building the next Amazon — and working with the community to do it.

These days it seems like Democracy is a religion that’s replaced God with money. The pushback against Amazon shows that New York at least is adding civic responsibility into that equation somewhere.

Offline abcdefghijk

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 962
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #21 on: July 28, 2019, 09:55:49 AM »
I have no doubt that New York will continue to attract high paying tech jobs.  This is New York, after all.

But if I were a kid in a Queens High School, my takeaway would be...Tech jobs bad. Sex worker jobs good.

And because life can be where your dreams take you, dreams of sex work are being reinforced. While those of tech jobs dismissed.

It's a crazy world here in Queens!

Offline JHMNY

  • Global Moderator
  • Council Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 419
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #22 on: July 29, 2019, 01:27:29 PM »
Daily News:

After Amazon left, silence: A public housing resident says politicians and others who claimed to care about jobs have done nothing since

About six months ago, one of the biggest companies in the world was set to move in across the street from the public housing development where I live, bringing up to 40,000 quality jobs and billions in investment — investment in job training and workforce development, in infrastructure and in the lives of a community long overlooked by many of our elected leaders.

Then, just like that, the deal was off, as politicians railed against a supposed government “giveaway” that wasn’t. We’re still angry about it.

As president of the Queensbridge Houses Tenant Association, I represent the residents of the largest public housing complex in America. And while we heard it over and over that Amazon didn’t care about the local community, I knew otherwise.

That’s because I, along with others in the neighborhood, had a seat at the table. We had meetings. They listened. We were making progress. Under discussion: a job-training center to provide skills that last a career, a workforce development initiative with LaGuardia Community College, modern vocational after-school programs similar to the new high school at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, internships for our children — all just 10 minutes away. Not to mention thousands of union construction and building service jobs.

This was a genuine opportunity. It would have made a real difference in the lives of my neighbors. And we had a voice. Now, when we see articles claiming that New York City is doing just fine, thank you, when it comes to adding tech companies regardless of what happened at Anable Basin, we feel that same sense of neglect we’ve felt for decades.

What irks me most of all is that since Amazon pulled the plug on Valentine’s Day, we haven’t heard a word from the people who claimed to care about us. Not a word about the potential for new jobs and workforce opportunities, no sign of new parks or affordable housing along the waterfront. And if something is being planned, this time we — unlike in the Amazon discussions — are getting left out.


Full article at above link.



Offline abcdefghijk

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 962
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #23 on: July 29, 2019, 02:41:20 PM »
Daily News:

After Amazon left, silence: A public housing resident says politicians and others who claimed to care about jobs have done nothing since

About six months ago, one of the biggest companies in the world was set to move in across the street from the public housing development where I live, bringing up to 40,000 quality jobs and billions in investment — investment in job training and workforce development, in infrastructure and in the lives of a community long overlooked by many of our elected leaders.

Then, just like that, the deal was off, as politicians railed against a supposed government “giveaway” that wasn’t. We’re still angry about it.

As president of the Queensbridge Houses Tenant Association, I represent the residents of the largest public housing complex in America. And while we heard it over and over that Amazon didn’t care about the local community, I knew otherwise.

That’s because I, along with others in the neighborhood, had a seat at the table. We had meetings. They listened. We were making progress. Under discussion: a job-training center to provide skills that last a career, a workforce development initiative with LaGuardia Community College, modern vocational after-school programs similar to the new high school at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, internships for our children — all just 10 minutes away. Not to mention thousands of union construction and building service jobs.

This was a genuine opportunity. It would have made a real difference in the lives of my neighbors. And we had a voice. Now, when we see articles claiming that New York City is doing just fine, thank you, when it comes to adding tech companies regardless of what happened at Anable Basin, we feel that same sense of neglect we’ve felt for decades.

What irks me most of all is that since Amazon pulled the plug on Valentine’s Day, we haven’t heard a word from the people who claimed to care about us. Not a word about the potential for new jobs and workforce opportunities, no sign of new parks or affordable housing along the waterfront. And if something is being planned, this time we — unlike in the Amazon discussions — are getting left out.


Full article at above link.

Predictable. After a political "feel good" action against "the rich" Amazon...Nothing.
That's the reality of these situations.

As for what's being created @ Anable Basin where Queensboro Houses now have no say...Of course they have no say.
Because what's being built now is luxury condos. For the rich.

And, ironically, not a peep from those who peeped loudly before...

But, also, where was this person's voice when the fracas was happening? Drowned out? Silent? Silenced?




« Last Edit: July 29, 2019, 02:47:44 PM by abcdefghijk »

Online JH3525

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 384
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #24 on: July 29, 2019, 05:12:54 PM »
abcdefghijk:  JHMNY wrote this incredibly written message and how the Queensbridge Houses Tenants have lost an incredibly opportunity for its residents who would have benefited significantly from an Amazon Headquarters in Long Island City and you post this highly irresponsible message that only the rich would have benefited by purchasing luxury high rise condos.  Your message is an insult and disgrace to the President of Queensbridge Houses and its residents who looked forward to the many opportunities Amazon would have brought to the their community especially the many programs Amazon would have had for the many disadvantaged youth living in Queensbridge which are mostly Black. 

Offline abcdefghijk

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 962
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #25 on: July 29, 2019, 05:18:12 PM »
abcdefghijk:  JHMNY wrote this incredibly written message and how the Queensbridge Houses Tenants have lost an incredibly opportunity for its residents who would have benefited significantly from an Amazon Headquarters in Long Island City and you post this highly irresponsible message that only the rich would have benefited by purchasing luxury high rise condos.  Your message is an insult and disgrace to the President of Queensbridge Houses and its residents who looked forward to the many opportunities Amazon would have brought to the their community especially the many programs Amazon would have had for the many disadvantaged youth living in Queensbridge which are mostly Black.

Interesting. You have completely misread my message. Please reread it again...Because I agree with you.  And so reread it through that lens. But I still wonder where this voice was when the fracas was happening. The Amazon deal could have done with some positive angle from Queensboro houses!

Offline jeanette

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 1004
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #26 on: July 29, 2019, 05:23:28 PM »
JHMNY wrote this incredibly written message and how the Queensbridge Houses Tenants have lost an incredibly opportunity for its residents who would have benefited significantly from an Amazon Headquarters in Long Island City....

JHMNY is April Simpson?

Online JH3525

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 384
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #27 on: July 29, 2019, 05:51:46 PM »
abcdefghijk:  If I did misread your confusing written message then I certainly owe you an apology. 

Offline JHMNY

  • Global Moderator
  • Council Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 419
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #28 on: July 29, 2019, 05:58:07 PM »
JHMNY wrote this incredibly written message and how the Queensbridge Houses Tenants have lost an incredibly opportunity for its residents who would have benefited significantly from an Amazon Headquarters in Long Island City....

JHMNY is April Simpson?

No... lol.  I just shared the link from the Daily News.

Offline abcdefghijk

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 962
Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #29 on: July 29, 2019, 06:18:48 PM »
abcdefghijk:  If I did misread your confusing written message then I certainly owe you an apology.

Apology accepted.

Jackson Heights Life

Re: Amazon Revisited
« Reply #29 on: July 29, 2019, 06:18:48 PM »