My bet is on Toronto because they can pick up all the staff they need worldwide without the problems of trying to get US visas.

But non-Canadian staff still need to obtain Canadian visas. I'm not sure how much easier (or not) that process is compared to the TN or H1B lottery.

This assumes that politicians eager to get Amazon are not able to speed up and fix that process which they certainly would be motivated to do. [1]

[1] This is not 'your shitty startup with 10 employees'. It's Amazon and the brass ring.

While politicians may be motivated, there's no indication they would be motivated more by THIS business than by ANY OTHER business, all of which have the same concerns, have had the same concerns for years, and immigration has generally been avoided.

What US companies do in Canada is often have an office where people can work on a temp visa while waiting for their status in the US

But, it's an election year, so...

They don't even know where their stuff is made any more. Toyota makes cars in Kentucky, Texas, Indiana, Alabama, West Virgina and Mississippi, but they're an "import". Ford makes vehicles in Mexico and Canada but they're "domestic".

My point is people care more about where their cars are made, and they don't even really care about that.

Even if people wouldn't normally care, they will care now because of the publicity and bidding process that has taken place. People in cities who do not win will be upset when they lose, and people everywhere, including places that were never in the running, will be upset if they put the office in Canada. You must not have heard of the "America first" line of thinking that got trump elected, in part.

This will blow over in months and be totally forgotten.

But on the other hand, if they want to run a PR campaign on the basis of "we seriously considered many US cities, and Toronto was a better option", they're certainly putting in the groundwork for that.

The placement of the HQ in Toronto would be branded as a betrayal of America. I think the NFL/Papa Johns case could end up being similar --> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2017/12/21/p...

Meh. However you feel about Trump, confidence in the US economy among businesses has been really high since his election, and even higher after the tax bill got passed. Look at what’s happening with Apple and the hundreds of other companies giving out bonuses and increasing spending in the US. Your comment might have made more sense closer to the election when everyone was making those gloom and doom predictions and nobody was sure what might really happen, but I think right now the US is more attractive to businesses than it’s probably been in a very long time.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/06/0...

Forget about normal/reasonable, while trump's approval rating is abysmally low going by historical standards, it's still 30 something percent - a large number in absolute terms.

http://www.businessinsider.com/exit-polls-who-voted-for-trum...

Every income group over $50k voted Trump. If you scroll down you see that rural voters did indeed go for Trump, but they are much smaller proportion of the population than city folk or, the largest group, suburbanites (who went for Trump solidly as well).

I don't have a source handy for the poor being largely non-voters but I've seen hundreds over the years, it's well-established fact.

>Given that most people seem to attribute the swing state losses to the 'we need jobs' votes coming from the manufacturing and steel industries

Most people might make this attribution but it is not correct.

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls/ohio/pres...

The other responder to you has already done this for you, in fact, and the data there backs up my claims.

Plus, my main claim is that Trump voters are not the poor, they are middle-class suburbanites. My source absolutely backs that claim up.

Also, I'm not sure you understand the electoral landscape very well. Iowa is one of the more purple states, it was VERY blue for Obama and almost exactly dead even on Bush both times.

The makeup of Iowa is actually very similar to nearby Wisconsin and Michigan, which were the surprise red states that took the election for Trump.

The Republicans have less support nationally and in states almost every election and it is getting worse for them as time goes on, voter suppression and extreme gerrymandering are the only things keeping them in office.

I don't blame them, in this era of Trump hyper-nationalism there'd be a huge blow-back for choosing a Canadian city.

> I don't blame them, in this era of Trump hyper-nationalism there'd be a huge blow-back for choosing a Canadian city.

Ironically, one reason a Canadian city would offer such big advantages - immigration - is also the main reason for the Trump hyper-nationalism. That tension is interesting. I don't know to what extent politics plays into this but teaching American politicians a lesson about whether they really want to continue playing to the cheap seats on immigration might be a plus for Amazon.

Keep in mind Amazon is constantly looking for and hiring tons of tech workers. I live in Europe and I'd have a hard time taking their hiring events seriously if I could end up in Winnipeg (no offense). But the same is true for quite a few US cities on the list, though, and it makes me believe they probably aren't considering half of those locations seriously, like other people pointed out.

Honestly, I think Toronto is a huge dark horse. It's an incredibly attractive location to relocate candidates to and isn't subject to American visa laws. I think the main reason smaller Canadian cities didn't make the cut is because Amazon doesn't really want to go that far north. Toronto is already south of Seattle, for instance.

I expect Montreal would be completely ruled out because of the language laws, incidentally. Fine for a branch office, unacceptable for a second HQ.

So, I'm not sure you're right about Toronto being a token candidate. I believe it's the best candidate in Canada.

But, moving to Canada is a big choice. So big you'd really want to consider only the top 1-2 candidates.

I do wonder what kept Vancouver off the list though.

But, I think it would be crazy for an american, anglophone company to place a second HQ here. It would dramatically cut the talent pool.

Also, apologies for the triple comment on this thread. It seems each edit of my top comment added a comment.

Housing crisis.

But I'm curious, have they actually publicly stated that they want a lot of geographical distance between the old and new HQ? It's an assumption that informs a lot of what's being said here.

I understand that rent is rising in your area. That is awful.

But you do realize that Portland's rent is comparable to the rent in many other US metros? In fact, it's cheaper than quite a few! With better infrastructure and poverty rates!

I'm from Chicago, and the rent in Portland is pretty comparable. You can find cheap rent in Chicago if you don't mind commuting 45-60 minutes each way and living in an (almost) literal war-zone. When was the last time you witnessed a drive by? Or had an active gang-shooter outside your house having a gun-fight with other bangers?

I understand that rent is rising in your area. That is awful.

Did you intend to post this as a reply to someone else? Someone from Portland?

Having HQ2 far away from Seattle reduces business risk from e.g. major earthquakes.

I expect Montreal would be completely ruled out because of the language laws, incidentally. Fine for a branch office, unacceptable for a second HQ.

So, I'm not sure you're right about Toronto being a token candidate. I believe it's the best candidate in Canada.

But, moving to Canada is a big choice. So big you'd really want to consider only the top candidate.

I expect Montreal would be completely ruled out because of the language laws, incidentally. Fine for a branch office, unacceptable for a second HQ.

So, I'm not sure you're right about Toronto being a token candidate.

- EWR close by, with public transportation connections

- Strong local universities, both in tech and business (Rutgers, NJIT, Stevens)

- Newark development is rising, downtown is still relatively sparse

- Audible is already in Newark

Skeptical it will actually happen though. Wouldn't even consider myself a fan of Newark (even though I go to school here), but it's interesting that it's the smallest city on the list population wise.

[1] https://www.flightera.net/airport/Denver/KDEN

[1]https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/denver-inte...

YYZ is a decent airport but it doesn't compare to ATL or ORD.

> - a strong existing tech workforce and universities

I'm not saying those of us who stayed North of the border aren't great but a large portion of our talent does head South for the opportunities. Funded technology companies in Canada are hard to come by. A good 80% of the jobs here are for digital agencies. Even Google and Microsoft keep most their technology jobs mostly South of the border despite all of the incentives they're courted with.

Immigration in Canada is a lot more friendly but I don't think that's going to out-weigh the benefits of the other cities listed. My money is on ATL or ORD.

update: 80% is just a rough guess

I'm sure a large portion of that (myself included) would strongly consider coming back if there were opportunities like HQ2 in Canada.

And fwiw I'm always pleasantly surprised by the TTC when I go back to visit.

I’d like for there to be more interesting opportunities and challenges here. Doing what I can.

[1] http://www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/2017/12/10_reasons_for_ama...

Given the headlines and buzz today, you'd think Amazon at this point would just create an Amazon Original reality show at this point where each week a new city gets voted off.

http://www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/2017/12/a_timeline_chartin...

The PATH is cheaper, runs more frequently, makes several more stops in Manhattan and NJ, so it would be a better option.

If you want to go downtown, for example, the PATH goes to WTC, as well as midtown.

https://www.wired.com/story/google-sidewalk-labs-toronto-qua...

https://gizmodo.com/nycs-free-wifi-service-is-turning-into-a...

Northern Virginia has a lot of land, an existing tech sector, a ton of data centers, one of the biggest Internet peering points in the world, and a big international airport (Dulles). It's not a cool place to live and work, though, the way the city is. It's family suburbs and strip malls, mostly.

- Currently has a large Amazon distribution center in the suburbs

- Strong tech workforce and universities in the area. Other Tech companies in the area Dell(formerly EDS), ATT. Regional centers of Verizon, IBM, Microsoft, Alcatel/Lucent

- Low property values and favorable tax structures. Plenty of areas to lease locations or to build in the suburbs or downtown.

- International airport that is the hub of American Airlines

- Toyota (North America HQ) recently moved to Dallas suburbs. Google HQ2 is rumored to be looking at Dallas.

Do you mean Apple?

Dallas should be a very credible option, even if it might be #2 in Texas, behind Austin.

Austin is a very popular "2nd Campus" for tech companies, but it's not a great "HQ".

1) Poor airport connectivity 2) Seriously bad traffic options, with limited ability for build out 3) Not a lot of great public transit options 4) Limited ability for free land/property tax abatements/government handouts

Austin is a strong candidate because of UT Austin, but UT Austin students primarily come from Austin or Dallas (not like they are trapped on an island) unwilling to move out.

Dallas isn't a tech hub? It's called the "Silicon Prairie". There's more tech jobs in Dallas than there are in Austin. TI? TI's headquarters are Dallas. IBM, Oracle, McAfee, HP, Intuit, Microsoft, Match.com, Nokia, RIM, Alcatel-Lucent, AT&T, Cisco, EMC, vmware....

Amazon has a substantial AWS office in Dallas as well.

>Austin is the fastest growing major city in the U.S

And Dallas is just behind them, 3rd fastest.

It could very well be Austin, but Dallas is actually a bigger tech hub than Austin is.

Texas has no state income tax which wouldn’t be a public reason for the choice but is obviously going to be a factor.

Austin is also a good culture fit with Seattle and is a startup hub.

Building a grocery store is far different than building a corporate campus. The interesting thing is that Amazon already has a presence in a lot of these cities, so they're intimately familiar with the day to day workings. There's not going to be any "sugar coating" by city officials.

1) Austin - Whole Foods 2) Newark - Audible 3) Dallas - HUGE Amazon logistics hub 4) NoVa - AWS location

and on, and on, and on.

Austin has horrible traffic issues right now - look at the other guys on this thread that are from Austin. None of them are eager to have Amazon move there. I would welcome Amazon with open arms.

Over the years they’ve bought real estate based on the number of college graduates who live nearby. Having started in Austin decades ago they most certainly own a lot of land there in prime locations.

So, now that Amazon owns Whole Foods, it might already own a lot of the land it needs to build its new campus. If it builds elsewhere it might be much more costly.

Hmmm.

Amazon doesn't require it all be contiguous space - they have buildings all over Seattle.

Downtown has a lot of parking lots that could become buildings, Exposition Park could fit the whole thing, Victory Park submitted a proposal, and Midtown near the Galleria also submitted one, with a few others.

635/DNT would probably be a decent place for it, now that I think about it...

I hope it goes anywhere but Dallas! I live in Dallas.

It's a reclaimed airforce base with new facilities and better service ratings than LAX or JFK.

I mean, I definitely hope it is, because Dallas doesn't need Amazon setting up shop here. But Chicago and Dallas seem like they have more infrastructure to support a major project like Amazon's HQ2.

It makes almost no impact on things like traffic or social services at a population scale. (In reality, even a HQ1 type facility is just another +0.3% for DFW or +1% for ATX, which is equivalent to hastening net growth by a few months at most.)

Because of those assumptions, I'm not thinking of an influx of employees being mixed among the millions of existing residents. I think it's much more likely that the HQ2 would be built in a northern suburb of Dallas, like Frisco. There are roughly 160k people in Frisco right now[0], and it's already dramatically driven up property values, commute times, restaurant wait times, and construction delays.

I might be letting my skepticism of the entire concept of an "HQ2" color my impressions of the economic impact of an HQ2, but a history of sports stadium construction in this country, and the various incentives cities have paid for them combined with the never-quite-what-was-promised results suggests to me whichever city ends up giving away a pile of money for Amazon's HQ2 will likely someday regret it.

[0] http://www.friscotexas.gov/578/Population-Estimates-Projecti...

Amazon currently has EIGHT large distribution centers in the DFW area, actually.

And I think that they might be building a #9 and #10 within the next couple of years.

Hate to say it, but Northern Virginia and Raleigh have Toronto beat on this

But Toronto has perennially top 25 world ranked universities, Waterloo and Toronto.

Toronto may not be the best of these 20 cities for workforce and universities but they can more than hold their own in this regard.

And the area is already known as a strong tech hub, with companies like IBM, Cisco, Microsoft, EMC, and many others having a long-time established presence here.

I can't really compare to Toronto since I don't know much about that area, but I'd say one of the strongest reasons to consider the Triangle relates to the workforce and the education scene.

Big tech workforce that's almost purely finance... but the talent is there.

Proximity to one of the largest airports in the world.

Chicago is a major city with lots of culture, food, attractions, etc.

The proposed sites are absolutely enormous and perfect for a huge mega-complex like Amazon would want to build.

Relatively short flights to both coasts, since you're smack in the center of the country.

Personally I love Chicago, and it's one of my favorite cities to visit in the US. And that's at least in part due to the food scene: Au Cheval, Cantina Laredo, Lao Sze Chuan, Petterino's, Wishbone, Star of Siam, Sushi Pink, etc. But... personally speaking I would not want to live and work in Chicago full-time for one big reason: the weather. It's just way too damn cold there for me in the winters.

Now obviously a lot of people do choose to live there, but I can't help but think a warm weather city would be more favorable in some regards, as far as attracting talent goes. But maybe other people don't weight weather as much as I do, or just enjoy cold. Who's to say...

Oh? How so?

On a related (sad) note, at least two restaurants in Chicago that I used to love are closed now: Bombay Spice, and Dragon Ranch Moonshine & BBQ. That and the Resa's location near River North. :-(

Petterino's... I like them a lot in general, but one thing in particular about them stands out to me: the Midwest Corn Chowder. Funny thing to fixate on I guess, but I fell in love with that the first time I was there.

Food taste is pretty subjective though... and also consider that while I've spent a lot of time in Chicago for work, I never lived there, and there are a lot of local restaurants there that I haven't eaten at. More than the ones I have, I'm sure. Which to me, is just more proof of just how awesome the food scene there is. :-)

I'll always try and visit Chicago when I can, and if I ever got "IPO exit rich" maybe I'd maintain a second home there. I just can't do the winters or maybe I'd consider moving permanently. :-(

Granted, I think the Chinese food here by and large sucks.

Oh yeah, I remember hearing they got raided and had their records seized, but I never heard what the actual outcome was. So Tony Hu went to jail huh? That's too bad. At least last time I was there (2013?) Lao Sze Chuan was amazing.

Workforce? Arguable. You may have a point.

But universities?

The Research Triangle has 2 really good schools: Duke and UNC. State is OK.

The Greater Toronto Area has the University of Toronto, Waterloo, McMaster, all of which outrank State. Waterloo and Toronto are especially strong, and beats Duke and UNC in technical disciplines.

I saw one analysis that said New York could easily handle Amazon's space requirements with existing Class A vacancies. The problem is that it's not contiguous. But then, neither are Amazon's offices in Seattle.

http://michiganradio.org/post/who-owns-downtown-detroit

[1] https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-care-...

Amazon already has a strong and diverse tech force, in fact, they have so many tech workers that it has affected Seattle's housing crises.

I highly doubt HQ2 will have that many tech workers. If anything, Amazon wants to pay less for non-tech workers because they can't write off those salaries, which implies that the location for HQ2 should be favorable for non-tech roles.

>>We are looking for a location with strong local and regional talent—particularly in software development and related fields

Amazon recently released Amazon Chime, a videoconferencing system. Maybe this was prioritized so that they'll have a homegrown thing when it comes time for a lot of your meetings to be with remote participants.

Wages would be significantly lower in Canada and would be in Canadian dollars. That's a pretty big financial win for Amazon.

They could rent out the space in One World Trade Center.

Curious what specifically would be different between Canada and USA polices towards amazon.

Canada welcomes immigrant workers. Even fast-tracks their applications (within 2 weeks) to work in Canada.

This way Amazon can hire anyone, anywhere in the world (within reason) and they'll be able to move to Canada without any immigration issues.

vs

In the United States, about two-thirds of permanent residents are admitted because they are closely related to a U.S. citizen or a permanent resident. Less than 15 percent of permanent residents, including accompanying dependents, are admitted on the basis of employment.

Immigrants in the United States are three times as likely as natives to have not completed high school; in Canada, immigrants and natives are equally likely to have not completed high school.

So depends on type of workers they are looking for hq2. If they need mostly high skilled then canada might be better option.

I doubt a 4 year administration worries them as much as you think.