Why Don’t the 20 Cities on Amazon's HQ2 Shortlist Collectively Bargain?

Because the cities are rivals in a competition for Amazon's HQ, not colleagues who all stand to benefit from a collective bargain. In this case, there will be one winner so the incentive to cooperate is greatly diminished.

Re: Why Don’t the 20 Cities on Amazon's HQ2 Shortlist Collectively Bargain?

#6

Post by bryanlarsen » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 6:05 PM UTC

kodablah wrote: post #4

Because the non-collusive city will come out ahead in this prisoner dilemma.

This isn't a prisoner's dilemma, the cities are allowed to talk to each other, and to gang up to punish those who break ranks.

Re: Why Don’t the 20 Cities on Amazon's HQ2 Shortlist Collectively Bargain?

#7

Post by dnautics » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 6:06 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #6

kodablah wrote: post #4

Because the non-collusive city will come out ahead in this prisoner dilemma.

This isn't a prisoner's dilemma, the cities are allowed to talk to each other, and to gang up to punish those who break ranks.

Punish how?

Re: Why Don’t the 20 Cities on Amazon's HQ2 Shortlist Collectively Bargain?

#8

Post by guyzero » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 6:08 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #6

kodablah wrote: post #4

Because the non-collusive city will come out ahead in this prisoner dilemma.

This isn't a prisoner's dilemma, the cities are allowed to talk to each other, and to gang up to punish those who break ranks.

What possible penalty could one city impose on another?

Re: Why Don’t the 20 Cities on Amazon's HQ2 Shortlist Collectively Bargain?

#9

Post by tzahola » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 6:13 PM UTC

guyzero wrote: post #8

bryanlarsen wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a prisoner's dilemma, the cities are allowed to talk to each other, and to gang up to punish those who break ranks.

What possible penalty could one city impose on another?

Revival of medieval city-state wars!

Re: Why Don’t the 20 Cities on Amazon's HQ2 Shortlist Collectively Bargain?

#10

Post by optimuspaul » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 6:14 PM UTC

nordsieck wrote: post #2

Seems like a pretty dumb idea. Amazon is limiting its self to those 20 cities. It can always back out and choose another if it wants.

I tend to agree that this is a dumb idea... but think about this. There are a few clusters on the east coast, the clusters could work together to push amazon to one of the other cities in exchange for deals that help the others out.

If I'm being totally honest though I don't think there is much advantage to any of the cities to give Amazon incentives to picking them. I also think that Amazon has already decided.