Amazon looking to spend Apple Park-like $5 billion on 'second headquarters' in US

Posted:
in General Discussion edited September 2017
Following in the footsteps of Apple and Google, Amazon appears ready to start the process to build a massive headquarters in North America -- but for Amazon it will serve as a second base of operations to supplement its existing headquarters in Seattle, Wash.




First spotted by Reuters on Thursday, Amazon made the declaration that it would spend more than $5 billion on a new facility. In a statement, the company announced that it would serve up to 50,000 employees.

Amazon has not declared any locations that it prefers, or has ruled out. The company says that he location it chooses be a "stable and business-friendly environment" and have "communities that think big and creatively when considering locations and real estate options."

Amazon has requested that local and state governments contact the company with proposals. The company notes that Amazon delivered $38 billion to Seattle's economy since 2010.

At present, Amazon occupies part or all of 33 buildings in Seattle, spanning 8.1 million square feet. It has spent $3.7 billion on capital investments in the facilities.

"We expect HQ2 to be a full equal to our Seattle headquarters," said Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. "Amazon HQ2 will bring billions of dollars in up-front and ongoing investments, and tens of thousands of high-paying jobs. We're excited to find a second home."

As of yet, there is no timetable for completion, or a deadline for the proposals from assorted governments.

Amazon's investment in the headquarters appears similar to Apple Park's. While exact figures are not known, Apple Park is said to have taken north of $5 billion to construct -- and has gone over schedule.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 30
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,040member
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 
    jbdragonSolineil andersonpatchythepiratelkrupp
  • Reply 2 of 30
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,292member
    Apple: "We're a very profitable company and we're going to spend $5 billion on a new HQ."
    Pundits: "Apple is foolishly wasting money because they're out of ideas! Sell! Sell! Sell!"

    Amazon: "We're lucky to break even in a given quarter and we're going to spend $5 billion on a new HQ."
    Pundits: "Amazon is investing in their future. Buy! Buy! Buy!"
    radarthekatmike1wreighvenjdgazRayz2016slprescottStrangeDayspotatoleeksoupanton zuykovmacseeker
  • Reply 3 of 30
    slurpy said:
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 
    And why do you think they would do that?
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 4 of 30
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 1,870member
    Amazon makes some profit and loses some profit year after year. They're not actually making a TON of money. Not even close. Not even remotely close to Apple. Now they want to copy what Apple did and make some huge fancy place with which will cost a bundle which Amazon really doesn't have. It's mostly smoke and mirrors and yet it's been working for them.

    Now they're basically getting city's to fight over them building in their City which I'm going to assume be Tax breaks and what not to get them to come to them. I think what little money they actually have should go into paying debt or at least something better them a big fancy office space. Apple's UFO was like pocket change to Apple. If they wanted to, they could build them all over the U.S. That would be silly, but they could do it and still not go into debt.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmarkman/2017/05/23/the-amazon-era-no-profits-no-problem/2/#31a6e95f437a
    edited September 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 30
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,227member
    sog35 said:
    slurpy said:
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 
    I don't remember saying Apple Park was a waste of money.
    You also don't seem to remember saying that Tim Cook should be fired. 
    Solipscooter63eightzerowatto_cobramacxpress
  • Reply 6 of 30
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,292member
    jbdragon said:
    Amazon makes some profit and loses some profit year after year. They're not actually making a TON of money. Not even close. Not even remotely close to Apple. Now they want to copy what Apple did and make some huge fancy place with which will cost a bundle which Amazon really doesn't have. It's mostly smoke and mirrors and yet it's been working for them.

    Now they're basically getting city's to fight over them building in their City which I'm going to assume be Tax breaks and what not to get them to come to them. I think what little money they actually have should go into paying debt or at least something better them a big fancy office space. Apple's UFO was like pocket change to Apple. If they wanted to, they could build them all over the U.S. That would be silly, but they could do it and still not go into debt.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmarkman/2017/05/23/the-amazon-era-no-profits-no-problem/2/#31a6e95f437a
    1) This isn't copying Apple.

    2) Amazon isn't a "break even" company because they can't figure out how to make their business successful, they just plan really well—really fucking well—with reinvesting their profits into growth. This is actually a good thing.

    Apple obviously invests in their future, but they've been more conservative about it; and why wouldn't they be when they almost went under. Now they kinda* have more money than they know what to do with and have dramatically increased R&D, marketing, lobbying, and a new HQ, so of which were long overdue and others that are still a fraction of what other companies do compared to their revenue and profits—and, yet they are still very conservative when you look at them as a whole. You just have to look at what Apple has paid for acquiring companies to see how they're still not very loose with their money. Or, look at all the companies that forum members here wish Apple bough many years ago. Zuckerberg bought Instagram for $1 billion overnight without even getting board approval, as I recall.


    * I say kinda, because of how funds are held in other countries and why it still behooves them to borrow money at low interest rates over being heavily taxed or lose a higher interest rate to use funds held in certain accounts.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 7 of 30
    The main difference would be that in place of the stylistic high quality design and maniatic perfection to the detail of Apple Park… …it would be themed as a sweat-type warehouse stile with cardboard desks and furnitures.
    SoliSpamSandwichwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 30
    Soli said:
    jbdragon said:
    Amazon makes some profit and loses some profit year after year. They're not actually making a TON of money. Not even close. Not even remotely close to Apple. Now they want to copy what Apple did and make some huge fancy place with which will cost a bundle which Amazon really doesn't have. It's mostly smoke and mirrors and yet it's been working for them.

    Now they're basically getting city's to fight over them building in their City which I'm going to assume be Tax breaks and what not to get them to come to them. I think what little money they actually have should go into paying debt or at least something better them a big fancy office space. Apple's UFO was like pocket change to Apple. If they wanted to, they could build them all over the U.S. That would be silly, but they could do it and still not go into debt.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmarkman/2017/05/23/the-amazon-era-no-profits-no-problem/2/#31a6e95f437a
    1) This isn't copying Apple.

    2) Amazon isn't a "break even" company because they can't figure out how to make their business successful, they just plan really well—really fucking well—with reinvesting their profits into growth. This is actually a good thing.

    Apple obviously invests in their future, but they've been more conservative about it
    One should be conservative with "investing" into crap like Instagram, especially if you need to spend 1B on it.
    THAT is why Facebook does not have 200B dollar pile of cash and has A LOT of fake accounts to prop up stats on users, while Apple does have the moneyz, and no need to inflate their results that are already good enough.
    What you call conservative, should have been called wise and smart.
  • Reply 9 of 30
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,329member
    I think eventually Amazon is going to discover that all of their real-estate is killing them.   They have massive warehouses all over the country to hold products, most of which never sell.  Like many businesses, while the marketing approach is that Amazon has everything, the reality is that it's a hit-driven business, especially when it comes to media.   And now, with the opening of physical stores and the acquisition of Whole Foods, they're embracing all of the negatives of physical retail.   And they're doing all this when the only part of the business that really makes money is the services business.   

    $5 billion for 50,000 employees?  That's $100K per employee.   It had better be really nice.   At a 10% net margin (and Amazon's is much lower), they'd have to sell $50 billion to pay for the place. 

    And yes, I bet they'll be asking for huge tax breaks and the idiot politicians will give it to them because then they can run a campaign that says, "I created jobs."   Which would be fine if the State wasn't in essence, paying the salaries via the tax breaks.   

    50,000 employees?   That's far more than Apple Park is going to hold.   This is basically building a new town, which would also mean it would need new roads, housing, schools and other services, which localities just might not want to provide, even if it did put 50,000 taxpayers in the community.   But maybe they should build it in some devastated part of Texas to help the rebuilding process.  


  • Reply 10 of 30

    First spotted by Reuters on Thursday, Amazon made the declaration that it would spend more than $5 billion on a new facility. In a statement, the company announced that it would serve up to 50,000 employees.

    Don't you mean ...

    serve up to 50,000 <b>ROBOTS</b>

    By 2022, amazon will just be Bezos, an AI and a gazillion Robots and Drones none of whom will pay a penny in any sort of Tax anywhere on the planet.

    edited September 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 30
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,292member
    Soli said:
    jbdragon said:
    Amazon makes some profit and loses some profit year after year. They're not actually making a TON of money. Not even close. Not even remotely close to Apple. Now they want to copy what Apple did and make some huge fancy place with which will cost a bundle which Amazon really doesn't have. It's mostly smoke and mirrors and yet it's been working for them.

    Now they're basically getting city's to fight over them building in their City which I'm going to assume be Tax breaks and what not to get them to come to them. I think what little money they actually have should go into paying debt or at least something better them a big fancy office space. Apple's UFO was like pocket change to Apple. If they wanted to, they could build them all over the U.S. That would be silly, but they could do it and still not go into debt.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmarkman/2017/05/23/the-amazon-era-no-profits-no-problem/2/#31a6e95f437a
    1) This isn't copying Apple.

    2) Amazon isn't a "break even" company because they can't figure out how to make their business successful, they just plan really well—really fucking well—with reinvesting their profits into growth. This is actually a good thing.

    Apple obviously invests in their future, but they've been more conservative about it
    What you call conservative, should have been called wise and smart.
    These aren’t mutually exclusive. In fact, it's an odd statement to make at all because wisdom and intelligence have nothing to with your subjective notion of when it's right and wrong to take action. For instance, many on this forum bitched and moaned when Apple paid $2.6 billion for Beats. Of course, any rebuttal in 2017 is that Apple can afford it without risking being able to pay the electric bill, but risk is rarely about an extreme of going all-in—it's about whether the investment will yield a return, hence the bellyaching of buying a crappy headphone company from a non-talent "thug." I don't see many people today questioning Apple's decision to take a chance on their largest actuation by about 6.5 fold*.

    * NeXT was the next largest at only $404 million and inarguably more important for Apple's survival.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 12 of 30
    slurpy said:
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 

    Trust me - This could have been avoided, so that we discuss only about points related to this thread. Why incite someone and then take the thread in a different direction unnecessarily? There was absolutely NO need to put Sog's name there.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 13 of 30
    1. This story has nothing to do with Apple whatsoever.

    2. Apple and Amazon are not competitors in any true sense beyond streaming music (which Amazon entered first), tablets (where Amazon is a minor player), set top boxes (where Apple is a minor player) and media rentals/sales (where Amazon's subscription Prime offerings for TV, movies, music and books and business model is vastly different from Apple's, and unlike Apple's has evolved considerably from originally being very similar to iTunes). If anything Apple and Amazon have a mutually beneficial relationship: Amazon is one of Apple's biggest vendors, Apple products are among their most popular and Apple customers are among the most loyal. This is in contrast with Amazon's far more antagonistic relationship with Google (who as a result is forced to use Best Buy as their primary retail partner ... even though Best Buy similarly makes far more off Apple than Google) similar to the bad blood between Google and Microsoft.

    3. This has nothing to do with Apple Park. Apple Park was a new headquarters in an existing city. This will be a second headquarters in a new city that Amazon will leverage for logistics and tech talent. Amazon would be smart to put it in Texas, which has the second highest concentration of tech jobs and workers after California (despite the media's doing their best to make you think that Texas only has oil companies ... and yes it is for political reasons).

    4, Pretty much no one criticized Apple for building a new headquarters building - which is something that companies do all the time - other than the very small chorus who criticizes Apple for anything and everything that does. While such people do exist, it is MUCH SMALLER than the people who despise Google, Amazon, Comcast and Facebook - you can't go 30 minutes before a new article demanding that they be fined, taxed, regulated and sued into oblivion for instance - and who hated Microsoft and AT&T back in the day. I really don't get the victimization complex that so many Apple fans are determined to have. Especially considering that others reserve the same right to hate Apple as many of you obviously exercise to hate Samsung, Google, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Nokia, Intel, IBM, Amazon. That is what really bugs me about some corners of the Apple fandom: the hypocrisy. They live for hating and bashing every other real or imagined competitor and enemy but are hair trigger sensitive when Apple is criticized: talk about being willing and able to take it but not dish it out.

    5. Even if Apple had been roundly criticized (they weren't) and Amazon isn't it doesn't matter ... the two situations aren't comparable. Apple was replacing their existing headquarters with another facility one mile away. Amazon is building a second headquarters in another city that will be at least half a continent away and possibly on the opposite coast. You can make the case that Apple should have expanded their existing facility rather than building a new one. I don't know who would or why, but you can. But making the case that Amazon, whose business is totally different from Apple and is becoming less like Apple or even less of a pure tech company with each passing year, doesn't need a second headquarters to deal with their mission creep is silly. Lots of conglomerates have multiple headquarters to manage separate divisions of the company. Example: Sony Electronics is headquartered in Tokyo, obviously. But Sony ENTERTAINMENT is headquartered in Culver City - near Hollywood - again obviously, and the two units have entirely different teams and cultures that have nothing to do with each other except at annual board meetings. You can make the argument that Sony Entertainment should be relocated to Tokyo because why not, the world is full of bad arguments. (Such as the ones down the page over how Apple should invest more in becoming a top OLED manufacturer than they would save in buying OLED from Samsung.) If Amazon wants their existing Seattle unit to focus on their original core business of being an online retailer but wants a second campus to focus on the new businesses that they have branched out into the past 5-10 years and will go into in the future, that makes a lot of sense. This isn't to say that Apple's new headquarters also didn't make a lot of sense - I read that it will result in lower tax bills and energy costs that will have the new facility pay for itself within 10 years - but the bottom line is that a person can oppose one and support the other without being a hypocrite ... or at least no more of a hypocrite than is so much of the Apple fandom.
  • Reply 14 of 30
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,903member
    Rayz2016 said:
    sog35 said:
    slurpy said:
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 
    I don't remember saying Apple Park was a waste of money.
    You also don't seem to remember saying that Tim Cook should be fired. 
    Lol. He remembers Tim Cook is great CEO...NOW.
    watto_cobraRayz2016
  • Reply 15 of 30
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,292member
     Apple and Amazon are not competitors in any true sense beyond [rattles of a crapload of things in which they are clear competitors in the true sense of the word].
    :facepalm:
    watto_cobraRayz2016
  • Reply 16 of 30
    That is what really bugs me about some corners of the Apple fandom: the hypocrisy. They live for hating and bashing every other real or imagined competitor and enemy but are hair trigger sensitive when Apple is criticized: talk about being willing and able to take it but not dish it out.
    I don't think hypocrisy is exclusive to Apple fandom.  You've pretty much described any group that is a rabid fan of anything.
    lkruppwatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 30
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,040member
    sog35 said:
    slurpy said:
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 
    I don't remember saying Apple Park was a waste of money.
    Yeah, you don't remember a lot of things. Conveniently. 
    sog35 said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    sog35 said:
    slurpy said:
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 
    I don't remember saying Apple Park was a waste of money.
    You also don't seem to remember saying that Tim Cook should be fired. 
    I remember saying Cook should be fired IF he didn't improve:

    1. Give Mac/iPad attention it needs

    2. Improve Watch user interface

    3. Improve iPhone design

    4. Grow services

    5. Stop being so reliant on China

    In the past 12 months Cook has done all these things.
    You're absolutely full of it, and this is nothing but revisionist history. You have hundreds upon hundreds of rants demanding Cook's head for one reason, and one reason alone: stock price. There wasn't an "if" in there. You basically fucked up every single thread for a year, by going in to rant and rave about how Cook needs to be fired. And now suddenly, after the stock price shot up (from Cook continuing to do exactly what he was doing) you invented all this bullshit to pretend that Cook suddenly "changed" and met your standards. Horse-shit. Apple was (and still is) undervalued- and instead of trusting Apple instead of Wall street, you shat on Cook at every conceivable opportunity. Glad your portfolio is doing better, but nobody here will forget your small-mindedness and the fact that you'll turn on Apple in a second again when the stock price doesn't suit you, no matter how good the products are.  Cook's Apple has made you a fuckload of money, but that didn't stop you from shrieking over and over about how he should be sacked instead of having even a modicum of trust in him and the company. 

    Again, you're full of shit, and this entire forum knows it. You were wrong, and Cook was right, but you're too much of a coward (as well as sociopath) to admit it. 
    edited September 2017 watto_cobraRayz2016
  • Reply 18 of 30
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,292member
    slurpy said:
    sog35 said:
    slurpy said:
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 
    I don't remember saying Apple Park was a waste of money.
    Yeah, you don't remember a lot of things. Conveniently. 
    sog35 said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    sog35 said:
    slurpy said:
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 
    I don't remember saying Apple Park was a waste of money.
    You also don't seem to remember saying that Tim Cook should be fired. 
    I remember saying Cook should be fired IF he didn't improve:

    1. Give Mac/iPad attention it needs

    2. Improve Watch user interface

    3. Improve iPhone design

    4. Grow services

    5. Stop being so reliant on China

    In the past 12 months Cook has done all these things.
    You're absolutely full of it, and this is nothing but revisionist history. You have hundreds upon hundreds of rants demanding Cook's head for one reason, and one reason alone: stock price. There wasn't an "if" in there. You basically fucked up every single thread for a year, by going in to rant and rave about how Cook needs to be fired. And now suddenly, after the stock price shot up (from Cook continuing to do exactly what he was doing) you invented all this bullshit to pretend that Cook suddenly "changed" and met your standards. Horse-shit. Apple was (and still is) undervalued- and instead of trusting Apple instead of Wall street, you shat on Cook at every conceivable opportunity. Glad your portfolio is doing better, but nobody here will forget your small-mindedness and the fact that you'll turn on Apple in a second again when the stock price doesn't suit you, no matter how good the products are.  Cook's Apple has made you a fuckload of money, but that didn't stop you from shrieking over and over about how he should be sacked instead of having even a modicum of trust in him and the company. 

    Again, you're full of shit, and this entire forum knows it. You were wrong, and Cook was right, but you're too much of a coward (as well as sociopath) to admit it. 
    I love how all he was requesting was for Cook to improve things, like the Watch UI and iPhone design, as if these things don't happen anyway. As for China, they stopped being as reliant on Apple products, not the other way around, which is the reason for the quarterly drops that caused him to say the sky is falling and call for Cook's head in the first place.
    watto_cobraRayz2016
  • Reply 19 of 30
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,292member
    Let's Play…. Name that Forum Member!
    1. "That's the way I see Cook. A weak CEO who was lucky to be given the CEO job without earning it at all."
    2. "I wish Bezo's was Apple's CEO."
    3. "Drop the car program immediately.  Apple does not need to get into a risky car program."
    4. "The smartphone has pretty much peaked. […] Services need to replace iPhone revenue."
    5. And, for a bonus round regarding Apple Park, "Another bone head move by Tim "Edward II" Cook," to which he replied when informed that the new campus was Steve's vision, "Still does not make it right. […] Anyone with half a brain knows building a $5 billion building in Cali would cause problems.
    watto_cobraRayz2016
  • Reply 20 of 30
    slurpy said:
    ..and I bet the same people that called Apple Park an "insane" expense for Apple, the richest company on the world, "careless, irresponsible" spending (lol sog35), and shit on the project when Apple's stock price was a bit lower, claiming they should "scrap" or "delay" it, will be the same people cheering on this project, even though Amazon does not even make a tiny fraction of Apple's profits. 
    You are so right about Wall Street praising Amazon for everything it does. I don't understand it but there must be a lot of Amazon pumpers in high places or Jeff Bezos is using his newspaper to make sure there are always people cheering whatever projects he has going for him. Amazon is always getting a free pass when it comes to NOT making profits. All Wall Street ever says is how Amazon is putting all of their money into revenue boosting projects. That can go on forever if that's the case. It's amazing that there are so many people counting on that pot of gold at the end of the Amazon rainbow but with Apple, there are always clouds of doom in its future.  People are still complaining about Apple spending $3B on Beats, Inc. and that amount was peanuts to Apple.

     I've read some articles recently that are saying Apple is as good as dead in 2020 and Amazon will likely pass Apple in market cap by then. It's just freaking unbelievable how Amazon can do no wrong and Apple supposedly can't do anything right. It makes me want to puke.  I can't wait until Apple gets its hands on that overseas cash hoard at a fair repatriation tax rate.  I hope Apple rams it down all the naysayer's throats.  If Amazon wants to spend $5B on a headquarters, good for them.  I'm sure Jeff Bezos will be happy in his new tower of power when he passes Bill Gates in wealth.
    edited September 2017 neil anderson
Sign In or Register to comment.