• 0
  • Home
  • About Us
  • What We Do

Shopping Cart

GPAM
  • Home
  • About Us
  • What We Do

Amazon insiders: HQ2 campaign driven by Bezos’ ego, subsidy envy

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and Tesla CEO Elon Musk with Long Island City (Credit: Getty Images, Wikipedia)
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and Tesla CEO Elon Musk with Long Island City (Credit: Getty Images, Wikipedia)

Early in Amazon’s search for a second headquarters location, the company had a list of 25 cities that could support 20,000 new employees. But instead of narrowing it down, CEO Jeff Bezos decided to go big and brash — with unfortunate results, Bloomberg reported Monday.

A year after Amazon’s Valentine’s Day breakup with Long Island City amid opposition by local politicians, Bloomberg’s in-depth examination revealed that much of the HQ2 selection process was driven by envy of incentives handed out to other big companies, as well a misguided belief that the internet retailer would be welcomed anywhere.

“This entire thing was an ego exercise that blew up in Jeff Bezos’s face,” said one of the 12 sources interviewed.

In particular, a $1.3 billion incentive package that Nevada provided to Elon Musk in 2014, after Tesla pitted five Western states against each other in a competition to host a gigantic battery plant, was frequently on Bezos’ mind. So was the $8.7 billion that Amazon’s home state of Washington handed to Boeing in 2013.

Some employees expressed concerns that openly demanding tax breaks — when local governments were often already happy to hand out such incentives — would expose the company to criticism. The dissenters were soon reassigned to other projects.

Besides incentives for HQ2, Amazon reportedly also targeted another $1 billion in tax breaks for other projects, although the company disputes this.

The scope of Amazon’s HQ2 search eventually ballooned to 238 bids from cities across North America, then was trimmed back to 20 finalists which largely overlapped with the original 25-city list, plus a few smaller cities like Indianapolis and Columbus for appearances’ sake. The scale of the search ultimately compromised efforts to build relationships with local stakeholders.

In addition to a politically oblivious approach to negotiations — described within the firm as “F*** you. We’re Amazon” — an emphasis on secrecy further alienated communities.

“I was angry because something so massively important had been decided and no one had bothered to tell local elected officials or anyone else who had a big stake in this,” Long Island City Council member Jimmy Van Bramer said. “We had been excluded from the process.”

Mayor Bill de Blasio and Gov. Andrew Cuomo also came under fire for underestimating opposition to the proposed Amazon campus in Queens, although polls showed a modest majority of New Yorkers supported it.

Amazon has defended its record of working with local governments, noting that it has invested $270 billion in 40 states and created more than 500,000 jobs.

“We partner with hundreds of communities across the country to bring them new jobs and investment,” the company said in a statement. “Like many other companies, we are eligible to access incentive programs created and regulated by cities and states to attract new investors.” [Bloomberg] — Kevin Sun

The post Amazon insiders: HQ2 campaign driven by Bezos’ ego, subsidy envy appeared first on The Real Deal Los Angeles.

Powered by WPeMatico

  • 04 February 2020
  • The Real Deal
  • Uncategorized
  •  Like
Macy’s to close 125 stores, slash 2K jobs →← Here’s why Zillow is getting brokerage licenses
  • Recent Posts

    • Hoteliers sound the alarm on looming distress  May 24, 2025
    • Growth markets see retail boom even with tariff uncertainty May 24, 2025
    • Westchester resi project gets city OK after union drops objection May 23, 2025
    • WATCH: ‘Father of CMBS’ Ethan Penner to run for governor of California May 23, 2025
    • Fashion Island office fetches $756 psf May 23, 2025
  • Recent Comments

    • Archives

      • May 2025
      • April 2025
      • March 2025
      • February 2025
      • January 2025
      • December 2024
      • November 2024
      • October 2024
      • September 2024
      • August 2024
      • July 2024
      • June 2024
      • May 2024
      • April 2024
      • March 2024
      • February 2024
      • January 2024
      • December 2023
      • February 2023
      • January 2023
      • December 2022
      • November 2022
      • October 2022
      • September 2022
      • August 2022
      • July 2022
      • June 2022
      • May 2022
      • April 2022
      • March 2022
      • February 2022
      • January 2022
      • December 2021
      • November 2021
      • October 2021
      • September 2021
      • August 2021
      • July 2021
      • June 2021
      • May 2021
      • April 2021
      • March 2021
      • February 2021
      • January 2021
      • December 2020
      • November 2020
      • October 2020
      • September 2020
      • August 2020
      • July 2020
      • June 2020
      • May 2020
      • April 2020
      • March 2020
      • February 2020
      • January 2020
      • December 2019
      • November 2019
      • October 2019
      • September 2019
      • August 2019
      • July 2019
      • June 2019
      • May 2019
      • April 2019
      • March 2019
      • February 2019
      • January 2019
      • December 2018
      • November 2018
      • October 2018
      • September 2018
      • August 2018
      • July 2018
      • June 2018
      • May 2018
      • April 2018
      • March 2018
      • February 2018
      • January 2018
      • December 2017
    • Global Property and Asset Mangement, Inc.
      137 North Larchmont
      Los Angeles, California 90010
      +1 213-427-1127

    © 2025 GPAM