According to Market Watch these are the cities that best meet Amazon's criteria:

http://ei.marketwatch.com//Multimedia/2017/09/07/Photos/ZH/MW-FT842_amazon_20170907114108_ZH.jpg?uuid=f7beadfa-93e2-11e7-8c8b-9c8e992d421e

From this list I would rank Raleigh #1, Denver #2 and Austin #3 (they did just buy Whole Foods..)

My guess is it will be Austin or Denver. Those seem to be the darling cities these days and for good reason. I'd be surprised if they go to North Carolina.

I'm curious to know what future leaders OK has on the rise you would consider able to dream this big...

I don't know who the people are in Oklahoma who possess a vision of greatness for the State, but I suspect they may not come from within, because so many of the best and brightest leave the State. Oklahoma lacks a significant influx of new residents from other more progressive places that might over a couple of generations lead to more entrepreneurial, creative, risk taking populous. This lack of geographical diversity relegates the State to the overall mindset of native Oklahomans who historically are relatively poor (Per capita) economically, educationally deficient (percentage of college grads) and dependent on Oil and Gas. I have not heard of ONE major manufacturing or knowledge based enterprise looking to relocate or build that Oklahoma has even competed for. Saturn on TN, Mercedes in SC, NC where I live is considered a desirable place. Our legislature is full of criminal and deviant actors. We have an incompetent Governor. Not really sure we could put together a coalition of State leaders capable of competing against the TX's of the world.

Provo Utah? not even close to 1MM people... If that is one of the places that experts consider a front-runner. Then OKC could easily get over humps of airport proximity and mass transit.

I know it is still a pipe dream, but man it would suck if somewhere like Provo got it.

Now aren't you a ray of sunshine. lol

Hey, back in the day we scored GM. This past year or so we scored a General Electric Global Research Center (one of 8 in the world), lots of O&G and what is very overlooked is Boeing at TAFB, many high paying technical jobs. And I'm sure there are more I'm overlooking.

Please understand those are good jobs (Boeing) driven by Tinker (Government). I am referring more to private sector jobs. Be great to know what the "criteria" are, then we would have an idea where OKC and others fall short.

Provo Utah? not even close to 1MM people... If that is one of the places that experts consider a front-runner. Then OKC could easily get over humps of airport proximity and mass transit.

I know it is still a pipe dream, but man it would suck if somewhere like Provo got it.

Provo is in the Salt Lake City urban region.

I have my own hunches on why OKC usually gets passed up for corporate relocation consideration but I would be interested to see what the actual criteria is and what OKC is lacking. I would love to see OKC at least in the running more often.

I want to add that in my opinion, Amazon is a unique beast and its company culture may play a role in terms of where they go.

Please understand those are good jobs (Boeing) driven by Tinker (Government). I am referring more to private sector jobs. Be great to know what the "criteria" are, then we would have an idea where OKC and others fall short.

I don't understand the contempt for government jobs. The world is growing more and more insecure with each passing year. Tinker has continually avoided the BRAC commission, and it hosts a number of very strategic programs, including public-private partnerships. It and its 25,000+ jobs are not going anywhere. Discounting Tinker just because its jobs are "governmental" makes little sense.

And sure, the jobs at Tinker pay less than the jobs at Devon and Continental, but they are also arguably more secure on a long-term basis.

Be great to know what the "criteria" are, then we would have an idea where OKC and others fall short.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/Anything/test/images/usa/RFP_3._V516043504_.pdf

I don't understand the contempt for government jobs. The world is growing more and more insecure with each passing year. Tinker has continually avoided the BRAC commission, and it hosts a number of very strategic programs, including public-private partnerships. It and its 25,000+ jobs are not going anywhere. Discounting Tinker just because its jobs are "governmental" makes little sense.

And sure, the jobs at Tinker pay less than the jobs at Devon and Continental, but they are also arguably more secure on a long-term basis.

OKC's success with government jobs is VASTLY understated. But that said, it's a completely different animal from the corporate sector. Everything from funding to management to pace is different. I don't see that translating very well for an independent IT giant like Amazon.

There was another thread discussing the possibility of a big consulting firm like Accenture opening an office here. I think the same negatives apply here. Oklahoma's overall quality of education is well below average. That plus the lack of STEM programs creates a pretty shallow local talent pool.

Also, Amazon is pretty well known for working their people to the bone, and being on call 24/7. That's pretty common in high priced, high hustle cities like NY or SF. Not sure if that would jive so well here.

I don't understand the contempt for government jobs. The world is growing more and more insecure with each passing year. Tinker has continually avoided the BRAC commission, and it hosts a number of very strategic programs, including public-private partnerships. It and its 25,000+ jobs are not going anywhere. Discounting Tinker just because its jobs are "governmental" makes little sense.

And sure, the jobs at Tinker pay less than the jobs at Devon and Continental, but they are also arguably more secure on a long-term basis.

I retired from the Federal Government in 2014 with 34 yrs of military and civilian service. I certainly was not disparaging government, I am a beneficiary.

Oklahoma does not have the leadership on any level to pull something like this off. They never try for automobile, R&D or anything else. 2-300 jobs is a big deal to them and a major headquarters out of the question. You expect too much from the leadership in the State.

Heck, I agree with DCSooner for once. Our leadership is so abysmal, they wouldn't know how to pursue this if they were handed a picture instruction manual.

We've under-invested in education. One of Amazon's main requirements is a workforce that has software development and coding ability. Our education system is barely preparing the workforce to read--and too many people are okay with that. To be competitive for opportunities in the future, there needs to be massive investment in education and a restructuring of the entire system to ensure it's preparing us for the future.

We have a virtually non-existent mass transit system. Another of Amazon's requirements is access to mass transit. They want their workers to be able to easily travel the city. The streetcar is limited to downtown and expansion to other areas won't happen for a very long time. Embark is a half-assed system and there is no functioning mass transit between the major cities in the metro. If we had leaders with a vision, expanding the streetcar and ensuring Embark is a successfully-run system would be a priority now--for NEXT year, not for 10 years from now.

None of our state leaders have vision of where this state is going. That is, ultimately, why we won't get the Amazon HQ2. Fortunately, we can change that. Let's hope we do.

I'm curious to know what future leaders OK has on the rise you would consider able to dream this big...

I would say Mick Cornett, Matt Pinnell, Ken Miller, Leslie Osborn, David Holt, Nathaniel Harding, Jason Dunnington...

I would say Mick Cornett, Matt Pinnell, Ken Miller, Leslie Osborn, David Holt, Nathaniel Harding, Jason Dunnington...

For each one of those guys, there are 20 legislators who think Oklahoma's only problems are Mexicans and gays.

It's really hard to grasp 50,000 employees. If 60% of the okc metro is in the workforce, that's 845,000 people. That means post amazon 6% of the city would work there. Hell I think Chesapeake at its peak was what 7500 people on its campus? This is almost 7 times bigger than that.

Going deeper if the okc metro unemployment rate is 4%. 4% of 840,000 means 34,000 people are unemployed who want to be employed. and 4% is considered full employment because at any given time 4% are changing jobs, moving etc. The 50k would mostly be coming from somewhere else.

Those 50,000 coming in would likely bring a spouse or kids with them. The city would grow by 100,000 overnight. The strain on everything that would put is simply unfathomable.

All politics and self moaning about okc aside, we simply don't have the sheer number of people for this.

Not that we shouldn't try. We should treat this like we're trying to attract an olympics or something and offer $10 billion in incentives or something insane. Competing is fun but we're likely out of our league here

I get the sense that people don't understand the scale of what Amazon is wanting to build. GE research and Boeing doesnt even come close for comparison. We would have better luck getting some kind of Boeing military division headquarters.

Boeing just moved its defense headquarters to Washington DC. Close to the Pentagon.

I've been monitoring the St. Louis and Kansas City urban forum sites, both of which have pages and pages of discussions on this topic, as you can imagine. I think a comment from someone at the KC site below as a counter-argument to hand-wringing about how KC could never get this project, is constructive for OKC:


You're right, lets not even try. Bidding on moon shot projects like this teach you nothing about yourself. There is nothing learned from the introspection involved in self-promotion, or the analytics you run in self-evaluation. Always better not to dream because then you will never be disappointed. And if the worst thing is that if you come close to winning, like making a semi-final round, you will never gain the attention of any other possible companies that might not have considered you in the past.

I guess what I mean by posting that is this: of course the odds of OKC winning this site are pretty much nil for several reasons. But by running through the exercise of putting in a proposal and putting our best foot forward, the city will be flexing its muscles a bit...probably learning something about how to compete...and perhaps showing the business world that we belong in the company of those that are making the effort. If OKC were to make it past a first round into a group of 10 or 15, which is probably not out of the realm of possibility, we would garner attention. Anything that puts us even in the league of "big league cities" is worth trying. It doesn't cost anything to try, what, some people's time over the course of a month?

One other thing...a topic of conversation on the STL site is that Amazon seems to like urban areas but also likes the opportunity to build brand-new digs...so there is much back and forth about where in urban St. Louis could there be land assembled that is not currently owned by dozens of different people, or environmentally compromised.

Can you say "Producers Coop" site? Yes, I know it was recently bought and there's going to be shopping center maybe...blah blah...but really, OKC's city leaders ought to contact the new owner and explore a way to offer that site, ready to go, lock, stock and barrel, can you imagine 5 million square feet of offices built there and connected in with Bricktown and the park...run the canal through the site...seems like it would be right up Jeff Bezos' alley!

I understand what you are saying, and agree with a large amount of it. However, I want to maybe build on it a bit.

Why are people saying there's no chance OKC will get it? Are they just Debbie Downers, or are there problems that would prevent Amazon from building here (and this goes for KC and St Louis as well)? If they're just being negative, then to Hell with them. Make that proposal and grab for that brass ring.

But if there are problems that would prevent Amazon from building here (or KC, or St Louis, or anywhere), then use the money you would have spent on the proposal to address those issues. Let's say the problem is lack of fresh water (I'm trying to pick an example that doesn't hit too close to home for any city, sorry Flint Michigan). No way Amazon is going to come to you because of that lack of fresh water. So if you were going to offer Amazon X dollars as an incentive, then do what you should have already done, use that X dollars to clean up the water, and then maybe you'll be in the running for the NEXT brass ring.

All that said, I don't think people are being Debbie Downers here. There are some really good reasons for Amazon to build in OKC. And there are some really good reasons for them not to build in OKC. Rather than sticking our heads in the clouds and dreaming about Amazon, while at the same time sticking our heads in the sand and ignoring the very real problems, we need to spend the time, money, and energy we would throw at Amazon and address at the very least some of the issues. Had we done this a couple years ago, maybe we could attract Amazon, but we didn't and we can't. So do it now, and maybe when Facebook starts yapping about needing an HQ in the heartland, OKC might be a viable candidate. Make the pros list longer than the cons list. Make it so Facebook (or whatever form the next brass ring takes) would be stupid to not at the very least put OKC on the short list. Make it so whatever Atlanta, or Denver, or whatever other city is on the short list comes up with looks like a joke in comparison to the option of OKC.

This is obviously a much better option than doing nothing and hoping the cons list for the other cities is somehow longer.

The funny thing? This has already happened. United Airlines. What did Oklahoma City do after not getting the maintenance center? MAPS. The Oklahoma Quality Jobs Program. This isn't a new concept.

I'm pretty certain that the city literally throws the kitchen sink at any major company that even mentions relocation, regardless of the opinions on OKC Talk.

However, the reality is that Oklahoma City really does not currently have enough to offer outside of legal tax evasion. We don't have the infrastructure or talent pool to support this massive of an operation. With our leadership's go-to move being giving everything away for free for life, I'd rather take that money and actually invest long term in organic growth and development. They would be better served funding a startup culture like Austin, then going after the Amazons of the world in 5 or 10 years.

The Olympic analogy is fitting. Everyone thinks they want it, but really it only feasible for top 10 cities and generally lays waste to the rest.

The only way we'd ever get a big HQ is if we invest in education and have a highly skilled and well-educated work force.

But we continue to do the opposite.

Stile99 and Mike_M,

I take your points and agree with them. Actually the MAPS issue is a perfect analogy for what the city ought to be doing. Address the quality of life issues, make this the kind of place people want to live and that is the best possible first step. We have laid the groundwork with the urban development of the last 20 years. The absolute next step is improving educational outcomes and a startup culture where we are growing entrepreneurship and organically helping companies grow. That really is the best long term strategy.

Except: I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing to walk and chew gum at the same time. There is no reason we can't do all of the things we know we need to do, while at the same time going through the process with someone like Amazon. Who knows? Perhaps we do that, and fail, and someone at City Hall gets to have a nice long conversation with someone in Seattle about the pros and cons of our bid (isn't that what happened with Ron Norick and United Airlines?) Perhaps they give us pointers, perhaps we learn something from the effort that informs us the next time we take something on.

It's like my mother said once upon a time about marriage and children: "Yes, by all means make sure you have all your ducks in a row, but at some point, you go for it, because if you wait until you're 100% sure you're ready, you'll never be ready." There will always be a reason that OKC isn't ready for Amazon. Other cities will continue to grow and innovate right along with us. We're not going to be the 10th biggest city in America in any of our lifetimes. That's all I was trying to say.

The Olympic analogy is fitting. Everyone thinks they want it, but really it only feasible for top 10 cities and generally lays waste to the rest.

I don't think this is entirely true. Look at the Millennial magnets. Places like Austin, Denver, Portland, etc and to a lesser extent places like Nashville, Charlotte, and Columbus. Those are places that are highly sought out by educated young people and are also places that tend to be high on the list for corporate relocations. Those cities, in terms of population, are only a single tier up from OKC with most of them being in the 2-3 million MSA range. A good question to ask is what are those places doing that OKC isn't?

You just have to wonder if the location has been Austin all along, ever since Amazon announced the Whole Foods deal. They probably aren't interested in relocating the Whole Foods headquarters from Austin, but they likely need way more people in Austin to properly integrate WF into the Amazon platform.

But quietly moving/hiring more people in Austin won't create a bidding war with lavish tax abatements, subsidies and the like. This announcement for "proposals" just makes you wonder if Amazon is trying to leverage all of the crazy offers to force Austin's hand. And there's going to be some insane offers if Foxconn's Wisconsin deal is any guide.

The funny thing? This has already happened. United Airlines. What did Oklahoma City do after not getting the maintenance center? MAPS. The Oklahoma Quality Jobs Program. This isn't a new concept.

Heh, that's what I've been thinking about for the last two pages of this thread.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/mayor-g-t-bynum-ready-to-do-whatever-it-takes/article_b8a38168-a4c9-5521-a17e-57d8f8fbe035.html

I don't think this is entirely true. Look at the Millennial magnets. Places like Austin, Denver, Portland, etc and to a lesser extent places like Nashville, Charlotte, and Columbus. Those are places that are highly sought out by educated young people and are also places that tend to be high on the list for corporate relocations. Those cities, in terms of population, are only a single tier up from OKC with most of them being in the 2-3 million MSA range. A good question to ask is what are those places doing that OKC isn't?

Marijuana for a couple of them. Denver has the 'Weed Boom' going on.

I get the sense that people don't understand the scale of what Amazon is wanting to build. GE research and Boeing doesnt even come close for comparison. We would have better luck getting some kind of Boeing military division headquarters.

+1

And putting aside the size of the workforce, the campus itself will be absolutely massive. For reference, their 8,000,000 sq. ft. figure is over 3 times the size of the Producers Coop site. One of OKC's biggest positives for corporate relocation/expansion is cheap land near downtown (a la GE), but even we don't have the space for something of this size in the core without ripping out an existing neighborhood.

I don't think this is entirely true. Look at the Millennial magnets. Places like Austin, Denver, Portland, etc and to a lesser extent places like Nashville, Charlotte, and Columbus. Those are places that are highly sought out by educated young people and are also places that tend to be high on the list for corporate relocations. Those cities, in terms of population, are only a single tier up from OKC with most of them being in the 2-3 million MSA range. A good question to ask is what are those places doing that OKC isn't?

You do realize they (CSA's) are at least 50 freaking percent larger than okc? You're trying to make it sound like an extra million people is just "a tier" larger. Austin Denver Portland were substantially larger than okc for decades before the millennial boom.

There's this thought process that those cities got large overnight because they became the hot new town for millennials. That's ridiculous, they've been larger for decades.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/mayor-g-t-bynum-ready-to-do-whatever-it-takes/article_b8a38168-a4c9-5521-a17e-57d8f8fbe035.html

A Leader!

You do realize they (CSA's) are at least 50 freaking percent larger than okc? You're trying to make it sound like an extra million people is just "a tier" larger. Austin Denver Portland were substantially larger than okc for decades before the millennial boom.

There's this thought process that those cities got large overnight because they became the hot new town for millennials. That's ridiculous, they've been larger for decades.

Not Austin

25 years ago OKC was larger than Austin. 35 years ago Tulsa was too.

Not Austin

25 years ago OKC was larger than Austin. 35 years ago Tulsa was too.

Similar deal with Charlotte. Charlotte in 2000 was roughly the same size as OKC. It's metro has doubled in size since the new millennium and it has become a second-tier major city. It's astounding.

+1

And putting aside the size of the workforce, the campus itself will be absolutely massive. For reference, their 8,000,000 sq. ft. figure is over 3 times the size of the Producers Coop site. One of OKC's biggest positives for corporate relocation/expansion is cheap land near downtown (a la GE), but even we don't have the space for something of this size in the core without ripping out an existing neighborhood.

Also equal to 5.7 Devon Towers.

Also equal to 5.7 Devon Towers.

Yes for sq foot, but Amazon's tallest building in Seattle is 38 floors. Much shorter than Devon. That's why they have 33 buildings in Seattle.

I support Amazon moving here and building 6 towers :-P

Thinking about this, I think OKC should definitely pursue this. Will Amazon choose OKC? Highly unlikely, but OKC should definitely throw its hat in the ring.

I also think the Olympics isn't a good analogy here. The Olympics are a one-time event and are very expensive to host. Something like an Amazon HQ that employs 50,000 would be a permanent fixture in the community and could propel OKC into boomtown status.

Not to be Donny Downer, but OKC has a snowball's chance in landing Amazon's HQ. 1) No international flights, a prerequisite. 2) Dreadful state government. 3) International reputation as being the state most hostile to public education and higher education, with low college education attainment.

If people want something other than oil and gas and government / military industries, we are going to need to have an electoral bloodbath at the legislature. Given the choice of locating your company in OKC or Denver, where would you go? Kansas City? Austin? Hell, Des Moines, Iowa?

This is not a progressive state. It is a regressive state. It is also suffering from a collapse of funding to core government services, which affects literally everything. Nothing is worse, though, than our reputation of abhorring investment in education.

Smart companies do not choose to locate in dumb states. Oklahoma needs to be less dumb if it wants to compete.

boomtown status.
That was my emo band's name in middle school

Your City Will Lose the Contest for Amazon’s New HQ (http://www.slate.com/articles/business/metropolis/2017/09/your_city_will_lose_the_contest_for_amazon_s_new_h q.html)

I don't think this is entirely true. Look at the Millennial magnets. Places like Austin, Denver, Portland, etc and to a lesser extent places like Nashville, Charlotte, and Columbus. Those are places that are highly sought out by educated young people and are also places that tend to be high on the list for corporate relocations. Those cities, in terms of population, are only a single tier up from OKC with most of them being in the 2-3 million MSA range. A good question to ask is what are those places doing that OKC isn't?

Well with Oklahoma fighting Mississippi to have the worst public Education in the US, I would venture that all of these other cities are ahead in that regard alone.

Honestly, most of us are not even touching the issue of OKC being a big league city. The city has come a long way as far as housing and amenities, and that's fine. The issue is that if Amazon chose to come here, they would be choosing to setup shop in a place significantly short of adequate resources, and our city and state leadership would gladly have us foot the bill to make up for the discrepancy.

It would be a huge resource drain just to support an Amazon HQ operation right now. It would probably take a decade for the housing market and infrastructure to catch up to the influx of people. If Amazon had a major layoff or lost it's dominance within a decade of moving, there isn't anywhere for that many people to continue to work. It could totally devastate the local market.

Again, invest locally. Grow organically. Pursue the big guys in 5-10 years.

Not to be Donny Downer, but OKC has a snowball's chance in landing Amazon's HQ. 1) No international flights, a prerequisite. 2) Dreadful state government. 3) International reputation as being the state most hostile to public education and higher education, with low college education attainment.

If people want something other than oil and gas and government / military industries, we are going to need to have an electoral bloodbath at the legislature. Given the choice of locating your company in OKC or Denver, where would you go? Kansas City? Austin? Hell, Des Moines, Iowa?

This is not a progressive state. It is a regressive state. It is also suffering from a collapse of funding to core government services, which affects literally everything. Nothing is worse, though, than our reputation of abhorring investment in education.

Smart companies do not choose to locate in dumb states. Oklahoma needs to be less dumb if it wants to compete.

I'm on board with this

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-09-07/few-cities-could-accommodate-amazon-s-new-headquarters

I'm on board with this

Agree.

Smart companies do not choose to locate in dumb states. Oklahoma needs to be less dumb if it wants to compete.

This pretty well sums it up.

Amazon got 238 proposals. The only States that did not have a city submit anything were North and South Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, Hawaii, Vermont, Arkansas.

I must say, looking @ the proposal that Chicago leaked, it is extremely impressive. Complete with breakdowns of the various incentives (totaling near $2 billion!). Various site locations, renderings, how pedestrians and vehicle access each location...

https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/10/23/16512138/chicago-amazon-hq2-bid

Just looking @ it, makes me want to pick Chicago as the winner. But my gut is saying Austin or Denver - because hip.

I would think at the rate Austin has grown and outgrown its highway systems it would be a hard sell due to traffic concerns. but ya never know.

Amazon donated $15,000 to the Oklahoma School of Science and Mathematics. Interesting? I think so.

http://www.koco.com/article/amazon-makes-15-000-donation-to-metro-school/13081038

I think Austin already withdrew their application which I found interesting.

Good stuff, I am glad we submitted a proposal. Now we can get feedback and press forward.

You do realize they (CSA's) are at least 50 freaking percent larger than okc? You're trying to make it sound like an extra million people is just "a tier" larger. Austin Denver Portland were substantially larger than okc for decades before the millennial boom.

There's this thought process that those cities got large overnight because they became the hot new town for millennials. That's ridiculous, they've been larger for decades.

Austin used to be much smaller than OKC. It was about the size of Tulsa at one point. It has lapped OKC.

I would think at the rate Austin has grown and outgrown its highway systems it would be a hard sell due to traffic concerns. but ya never know.

One of Amazon's requirements is access to public transit. Austin has abysmal public transit, just like us. Traffic there is a nightmare. They are trying to rectify it, but it's going to be a long time before they do.

Good stuff, I am glad we submitted a proposal. Now we can get feedback and press forward.

Are we going to get feedback or is Amazon just going to say "Here's the winner (or top 10 we're narrowing it down to), thanks to the rest for playing"?

Are we going to get feedback or is Amazon just going to say "Here's the winner (or top 10 we're narrowing it down to), thanks to the rest for playing"?

If there is any question why we didn't get it, that itself is the reason why we didn't get it.

Facility opened today:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/amazon102417.jpg

Anyone seen OKC's bid, by chance?

I've read the same articles everyone else has about the 'screening times' for workers leaving the floor, but that sign is just flat out ridiculous. You can't carry keys? I can see why the might ban keychains and make you just carry them on a key ring, (certain places ban keychains because they can have cameras and/or memory sticks in them), and even more ban cell phones on the work floor, but you can't wear a belt? SERIOUSLY? How is not wearing a belt going to help with screening time, you planning on asking people to drop trou so you can check where the sun don't shine?

I thought this was going to be a "sorting facility" and not an outright fulfillment center?

If they are using a metal detector the belt would cause a delay due to taking it off to clear the detector. They make Velcro belts though, that’s what I wear to work.

Are we going to get feedback or is Amazon just going to say "Here's the winner (or top 10 we're narrowing it down to), thanks to the rest for playing"?

Good question. I was actually hoping we would. I'm not certain either way.

Well if it means we have to give them some massive tax breaks and lick their butt for them to come here, then i'd rather not have them. We've given away enough to big business and haven't gotten our dollar back on them.