Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 281 posts

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#161

Post by throwaway2048 »

manfredo wrote: post #159
throwaway2048 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a great example of how just building more housing isn't a complete solution, because all builders are going to target the top of the market if they at all can.

No. The price of housing is not determined by the builder. Like any good its price is driven by what people are willing to pay. Here in SF, even 230 square foot studios are considered "luxury housing" because the shortage of housing is that extreme. Any new construction commands a premium over old housing. In effect, restrictions on building more "luxury housing" restricts the construction of most new housing even if…

Tell that to china https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19171099

They have something like 65 MILLION excess, unused apartments, almost exclusively targeting the luxury market (because they are created and valued as investment first, housing second), and they still have extreme affordability issues.

Building more housing is absolutely not a complete solution.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#162

Post by bko »

cowmoo728 wrote: post #149
tfehring wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what sense is there an oversupply of luxury housing? Are there lots of vacant luxury units?

The number of vacant apartments and the number of apartments listed for sale/rent are both at an all time high. Despite this, most new construction is priced at the high end of the market. In addition, there's been a big boom in ultra-high-end multimillion dollar apartments. https://www.6sqft.com/nearly-250000-nyc-rental-apartments-si... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/16/realestate/brooklyn-devel...

New construction of expensive high end apartments help lower the prices on other units. Wealthy people will move there rather than driving up prices on dilapidated brown-stones. Its kind of how the average new car price is 30k, which is off limits for many Americans. But the new car inventory drives down the price of older models.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#163

Post by [deleted] »

whatok wrote: post #140
tfehring wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what sense is there an oversupply of luxury housing? Are there lots of vacant luxury units?

There are a lot of vacancies and nearly unheard of concessions being thrown out there. A ridiculous amount of construction as well. If there's prolonged weakness, concessions eventually turn into rent decreases. https://ny.curbed.com/2018/4/12/17227574/new-york-rent-marke...

[deleted]

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#164

Post by kerkeslager »

The question for me isn't the profit/loss equation, it's whether we should be giving subsidies to already highly-profitable companies.

You can argue all you want about whether Amazon would bring in more money for NYC, but the fact is that they would bring in MORE net money if they didn't receive the subsidies. Yes, you can argue that Amazon wouldn't come to NYC then, but that's only because American cities have allowed Amazon to set the rules by creating this competition for their HQ2 location. American cities need to present a united front that we won't be giving money to already extremely wealthy people. Otherwise any time a major company wants to start a new location they can play cities against each other and the people living in those cities will pay the price.

Jeff Bezos is the richest man in the world. If he wants a new HQ he can buy the real estate at full price. Americans need to stand up to the frankly disgusting idea that we should be giving him money.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#165

Post by whatok »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #161
manfredo wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The price of housing is not determined by the builder. Like any good its price is driven by what people are willing to pay. Here in SF, even 230 square foot studios are considered "luxury housing" because the shortage of housing is that extreme. Any new construction commands a premium over old housing. In effect, restrictions on building more "luxury housing" restricts the construction of most new housing even if…

Tell that to china https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19171099 They have something like 65 MILLION excess, unused apartments, almost exclusively targeting the luxury market (because they are created and valued as investment first, housing second), and they still have extreme affordability issues. Building more housing is absolutely not a complete solution.

I really don't think it's fair to compare China's housing policies to the United States' policies as they couldn't be more different.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#166

Post by Velchronus »

nihonde wrote: post #128
whatok wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should New York get rid of all business tax incentives? A majority of that $3bn was from existing programs available to any qualifying business.

The $500M exceptional credit was the issue. That’s a lot of money.

The 500M was for fixing up the eroding waterfront where they were building the campus. The alternative was allowing the damage to continue or fix it at a higher price themselves.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#167

Post by throwaway2048 »

whatok wrote: post #165
throwaway2048 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to china https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19171099 They have something like 65 MILLION excess, unused apartments, almost exclusively targeting the luxury market (because they are created and valued as investment first, housing second), and they still have extreme affordability issues. Building more housing is absolutely not a complete solution.

I really don't think it's fair to compare China's housing policies to the United States' policies as they couldn't be more different.

Of course there are differences, merely pointing out if building more housing, even building more housing to an almost comically absurd extent solved affordability issues by themselves, China wouldn't have them.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#168

Post by Tempest1981 »

leroy_masochist wrote: post #103

> The livability crisis that’s currently afflicting Seattle and San Francisco is evidence of how cities need to be careful what they wish for when it comes to the explosive growth of technology companies (and the attendant wealth that comes with it) in their metropolises. Let me get this straight, New Yorkers should view Seattle and SF as cautionary tales for what happens when high-paying jobs arrive in a metropolita…

Simply the rate of change/growth, and the pressure it places on cities and long-time residents, are valid reasons for caution.

You imply that these issues are easily solved, if people like NIMBYs "simply" change their mindset. But history shows that mindset-change is a slow and stressful process.

Cautionary tales are a chance to study such issues, and find solutions, or at least strategies -- something that govt is usually bad at. Not blame the victims.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#169

Post by whatok »

kingkawn wrote: post #97

This is 100% Cuomo’s fault for keeping everything secret, as he always does, and trying to bully all the stakeholders out of having any say. Local NYC politics is brutal, and nobody is gonna roll over their needs just cause someone else says it’s the right thing to do.

Deblasio was also involved in the negotiations but yes, this is the real reason why this didn't go through. I can't imagine how much additional red tape would be tacked on if state and city legislators got involved in the process so I can understand the want for secrecy.

Re: Did New York Lose Anything with Amazon’s Rejection? It’s Complicated

#170

Post by [deleted] »

maehwasu wrote: post #123
sys_64738 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter how much money Amazon got as it's the perception of the fact they are getting a tax break which is why it's shocking. Amazon isn't some two-bit startup which has no VC funding. It's the richest company in the world so why the heck do New Yorkers need to hand over their cash to bring them the Queens?

Because the United States is a very, very large country, and Amazon has lots of options as to where it takes its headquarters? Put another way--why should Amazon go to NYC? Do New Yorkers have a god-given right to the benefits of large tech companies?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN