Apple buying land for $304M expansion in Austin, Tex.
Plans for Apple's $304 million campus expansion in Austin, Tex., are now in motion, as the company recently bought three tracts of land in the city.
The purchase discovered by Austin Business Journal was finalized on June 20, though the exact acreage and the price remain unknown. The deal between Apple and McShane Development Co., LLC, was for three tracts of land in the Milwood Section 20 subdivision near Parmer Lane and Delcour Drive.
The land is adjacent to Apple's current campus in Austin, found at 12545 Riata Vista Circle. The iPhone maker plans to create 3,600 new jobs, doubling the size of its workforce in Texas with the $304 million expansion.
The company's functions in the region are primarily related to customer support, sales and accounting. The state of Texas plans to award Apple $21 million over 10 years through the Texas Enterprise Fund in return for the new jobs and economic stimulus.
The city of Austin has also approved an $8.6 million grant to Apple to expand its offices, while Travis County also granted Apple $5.4 million in tax rebates in return for minimum salary requirements. Apple has pledged an average salary of $35,000 for the bottom 10 percent of its own employees, as well as a minimum of $11-per-hour for contractors.
The bulk of Apple's money will be invested in a $226 million 800,000-square-foot office located in North Austin. There, Apple will have a total of 3,665 new jobs created by 2025.
Local officials initially chose to be aggressive in courting Apple and offering incentives because the company was looking at other potential locations for the facility. It was said that Phoenix, Ariz., was another city Apple was considering.
The purchase discovered by Austin Business Journal was finalized on June 20, though the exact acreage and the price remain unknown. The deal between Apple and McShane Development Co., LLC, was for three tracts of land in the Milwood Section 20 subdivision near Parmer Lane and Delcour Drive.
The land is adjacent to Apple's current campus in Austin, found at 12545 Riata Vista Circle. The iPhone maker plans to create 3,600 new jobs, doubling the size of its workforce in Texas with the $304 million expansion.
The company's functions in the region are primarily related to customer support, sales and accounting. The state of Texas plans to award Apple $21 million over 10 years through the Texas Enterprise Fund in return for the new jobs and economic stimulus.
The city of Austin has also approved an $8.6 million grant to Apple to expand its offices, while Travis County also granted Apple $5.4 million in tax rebates in return for minimum salary requirements. Apple has pledged an average salary of $35,000 for the bottom 10 percent of its own employees, as well as a minimum of $11-per-hour for contractors.
The bulk of Apple's money will be invested in a $226 million 800,000-square-foot office located in North Austin. There, Apple will have a total of 3,665 new jobs created by 2025.
Local officials initially chose to be aggressive in courting Apple and offering incentives because the company was looking at other potential locations for the facility. It was said that Phoenix, Ariz., was another city Apple was considering.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Plans for Apple's $304 million campus expansion in Austin, Tex., are now in motion, as the company recently bought three tracks of land in the city.
Do you mean tracts of land...?
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianfrick
Do you mean tracts of land...?
Obligatory Python Quote:
"We live in a bloody swamp. We need all the land we can get."
"But I don't like her."
"Don't like her? What's wrong with her? She's beautiful, she's rich, she's got huge... tracts of land."
Sorry - couldn't help it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveMcM76
"We live in a bloody swamp. We need all the land we can get."
"But I don't like her."
"Don't like her? What's wrong with her? She's beautiful, she's rich, she's got huge... tracts of land."
Sorry - couldn't help it...
No apologies needed. My thoughts exactly.
Huge!
3,600 more jobs. What are they all going to do? I think Apple is doing just fine as far as teams go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges
3,600 more jobs. What are they all going to do? I think Apple is doing just fine as far as teams go.
Seeing it's a support center, maybe support for as yet unannounced products? Expanded support staff for the existing products?
A 7" iPad has the potential to add a lot of customers so does an Apple TV (not to be confused with AppleTV).
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog
No apologies needed. My thoughts exactly.
Huge!
Probably a lot of peoples thoughts... And yes, the same thought ran through my mind as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianfrick
Do you mean tracts of land...?
Spell checkers and editors have different jobs. AI has only one of them. They need to keep better tract of these things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog
No apologies needed. My thoughts exactly.
Huge!
It was the first thing that popped into my mind - even when I saw that Apple planned to buy "tracks" of land...
My mind went to the same place.
"Siri, what's the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?"
Siri - "About 25 mph for a European swallow."
I'da felt better if she asked me what type. I was looking for the African variety.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb
Sadly, the state of California would never give out incentives like that for businesses to expand and create new jobs. All they know how to do is tax businesses to death and encouraging them to flee the west coast.
They could build a bullet train from Fresno to Bakersfield for a mere $8 billion. Makes sense...NOT!
As long as we are intent on spending money on idealistic transportation projects why not spend the it on building a hydrogen refueling infrastructure and electric car charging outlets in the major metropolitan areas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
They could build a bullet train from Fresno to Bakersfield for a mere $8 billion. Makes sense...NOT!
As long as we are intent on spending money on idealistic transportation projects why not spend the it on building a hydrogen refueling infrastructure and electric car charging outlets in the major metropolitan areas?
It might make sense to do both. Keep in mind that the government subsidized highways might cost more per passenger mile than government subsidized mass transportation, however.
The US Interstate Highway System costs billions of dollars to build and maintain. In general, it is free to use. Trucking companies, while they pay taxes intended to offset some costs, are heavily subsidized by gaining access to the highways.
In general, trains cost less than trucks, In general, trains cost less than airplanes, but take longer. In general, trains should be subsidized to at least the level of the trucking companies and the airlines. This might include government-built tracks, much like the government builds highways and airports.
I'm not confident on any of this, but it strikes me when people oppose subsidies for more efficient transportation while not examining subsidies for highway-dependent businesses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveMcM76
Obligatory Python Quote:
"We live in a bloody swamp. We need all the land we can get."
"But I don't like her."
"Don't like her? What's wrong with her? She's beautiful, she's rich, she's got huge... tracts of land."
Sorry - couldn't help it...
Yea, I immediately went there too. Webster's Dictionary should have a reference to Monty Python in the definition of "Tract" because it appears everyone just goes there.
Alright, we'll call it a draw
Outside of Silicon Valley, Austin is easily the most technologically effluent city in the US. Someday the rest of the population will realize that Texas isn't just a bunch of rednecks raising cattle and riding horses, and for that matter- that not all californians are hippies or gay. But alas- what would the world be without stereotypes. Moves like this make me happy and make Texas that more awesome (as if being top 5 cost of living index wasn't enough). :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26
It might make sense to do both. Keep in mind that the government subsidized highways might cost more per passenger mile than government subsidized mass transportation, however.
The US Interstate Highway System costs billions of dollars to build and maintain. In general, it is free to use. Trucking companies, while they pay taxes intended to offset some costs, are heavily subsidized by gaining access to the highways.
In general, trains cost less than trucks, In general, trains cost less than airplanes, but take longer. In general, trains should be subsidized to at least the level of the trucking companies and the airlines. This might include government-built tracks, much like the government builds highways and airports.
I'm not confident on any of this, but it strikes me when people oppose subsidies for more efficient transportation while not examining subsidies for highway-dependent businesses.
Yes - and lets not forget the difference in the environmental impact of the construction and use of highways compared to railways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26
It might make sense to do both. Keep in mind that the government subsidized highways might cost more per passenger mile than government subsidized mass transportation, however.
The US Interstate Highway System costs billions of dollars to build and maintain. In general, it is free to use. Trucking companies, while they pay taxes intended to offset some costs, are heavily subsidized by gaining access to the highways.
In general, trains cost less than trucks, In general, trains cost less than airplanes, but take longer. In general, trains should be subsidized to at least the level of the trucking companies and the airlines. This might include government-built tracks, much like the government builds highways and airports.
I'm not confident on any of this, but it strikes me when people oppose subsidies for more efficient transportation while not examining subsidies for highway-dependent businesses.
The bill passed to build the train is for a passenger bullet train and has nothing to do with cargo. Have you ever been to Fresno or Bakersfield? I don't want to spend a dime out there. The population centers are on the coast.
Highways are not free to use - gas taxes are 67 cents per gallon of gasoline & 75.9 cents for diesel in CA (as of 1/1/12).
http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes/upload/gasoline-diesel-summary.pdf
Instead of building trains that do not go where people live, why not expand the bus routes. It's a lot easier to move a bus stop than to move a train station.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Sukalewski
Instead of building trains that do not go where people live, why not expand the bus routes. It's a lot easier to move a bus stop than to move a train station.
Makes a lot of sense. I ride the bus everyday and it is standing room only. The bullet train is such an ill-conceived concept out in Bakersfield. It would be a great idea if it connected SF-LA-SD but there is no right of way to build it. They would have to use the same space the Amtrak and Metro link currently use and those services are pretty good already. Not super fast but definitely serviceable. The bus idea is a good one. We need people to start using mass transit for 5-10 mile trips instead of taking their car. People who own cars seem to never consider using mass transit for some reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
The bulk of Apple's money will be invested in a $226 million 800,000-square-foot office located in North Austin.
Welcome to the daughtership.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella
Welcome to the daughtership.
Exactly my thoughts
When did Austin, TX become part of China? After all, Apple outsourced all its jobs to China (according to the media).