The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Talk About Tulsa => Development & New Businesses => Topic started by: BKDotCom on September 07, 2017, 10:50:59 am



Title: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 07, 2017, 10:50:59 am
http://www.tulsaworld.com/ap/national/mayor-g-t-bynum-on-amazon-s-search-for-new/article_732029d7-11a7-5d95-9077-f5f150056be1.html

Quote
Bynum spoke to the Tulsa World on Thursday morning, saying leaders are "very much pursuing" getting Tulsa named as the next Amazon headquarters.

I'd say the odds of this are far better than Tulsa landing the Olympics (which has a 0% chance).



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Townsend on September 07, 2017, 11:00:27 am
Well considering all that Oklahoma has to offer...it's a can't miss

Edited to say, as long as he doesn't waste too much of his time, good for Bynum for reaching for the stars.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 07, 2017, 11:08:55 am
I assume he is courting them for Amazon's 2nd HQ. They will not be leaving Seattle, at least they are not planning on it. So I figure that helps Tulsa's case.

So let's see which state can hore itself up the most to get those 50,000 jobs they are promising.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-amazon-com-headquarters/amazon-scouts-for-second-headquarters-with-5-billion-price-tag-idUSKCN1BI1DM

Quote
The largest e-commerce company said it intended to create a headquarters that would be as important as its Seattle base. It wants a city of more than a million people with an international airport, good education and mass transit.

So my guess is Dallas.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 07, 2017, 12:00:56 pm
Quote
  It wants a city of more than a million people

Strictly speaking, that's a short list of 10.
Must be referring to "metro populations"?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Hoss on September 07, 2017, 12:07:50 pm
Strictly speaking, that's a short list of 10.
Must be referring to "metro populations"?

Tulsa would barely fit that as our metro just exceeded that number in the last two years or so.  It also depends on what you consider "Metro".


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 07, 2017, 01:02:26 pm
Amazon and QT could team up to take over the skies with drone-delivered roller dogs and
Amazon lockers (https://www.amazon.com/b?node=6442600011) on every corner


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on September 07, 2017, 01:16:56 pm
This is an amazing article on what Amazon has done to Seattle:
http://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/thanks-to-amazon-seattle-is-now-americas-biggest-company-town/

Truly astonishing:

8,100,000 square feet of office space (and building to hit 12 mil).   Occupies more office space than the next 40 largest Seattle employers combined.
- for comparison, City PLex total 2.2 million, BOK tower is 1.1 million feet, Williams I & II together are about 800k, First Place tower is 621k, 110 W. 7th is 522K, Warren place is 470k and 490k, 420k in the MId Con. Tower,  310 S.boston is 400k, BOA Tower is 288K.  So that's 7,311,000 square feet.  Lets throw in Devon Tower at 1.8mil...finally, we've added more space than Amazon currently occupies in Seattle.

40,000 current employees in Seattle, planning for 55,000 by 2020.

Really, it seems likely they need a second HQ because Seattle isn't big enough to support all of their needs for either infrastructure or manpower.


I highly doubt we can lure Amazon and I'm afraid it would be hard to support them if they came.  But I really do think a regional hub would be an awesome fit for Tulsa.  There are surely talented IT employees who would appreciate a smaller city with lots of character and a reasonable cost of living.  But I'm afraid the deck is stacked against us, notably in education.  But we may as well shoot the moon...just don't bet too big on landing. 




Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on September 07, 2017, 01:20:25 pm
This is the "short list" according to Market Watch:

(http://ei.marketwatch.com//Multimedia/2017/09/07/Photos/ZH/MW-FT842_amazon_20170907114108_ZH.jpg?uuid=f7beadfa-93e2-11e7-8c8b-9c8e992d421e)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on September 07, 2017, 01:32:18 pm
Amazon and QT could team up to take over the skies with drone-delivered roller dogs and
Amazon lockers (https://www.amazon.com/b?node=6442600011) on every corner

Yes, please deliver them right into my gullet!


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DowntownDan on September 07, 2017, 01:43:14 pm
My guess is it'll be Austin.  I like that Bynum will at least give it a pitch though.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 07, 2017, 01:57:39 pm
I don't get the "shooting for the kneecaps" instead of stars mentality of a lot of Tulsans.  Dare to dream.  Tulsa w/ Stillwater/OKC/Norman would be an ideal site for a summer Olympics. The theme would be "Native America" - the opening ceremony would be unforgettable. Atlanta's Olympics was spread out over a wider land area than an all-Oklahoma Olympics would be.  It seems like a lot of people who live here go on vacation to Colorado or have 2nd homes elsewhere and are happy to keep Tulsa as it is. Cozy and comfortable.  Why shouldn't we think we can do a hell of a lot more. Low self-esteem? Everybody thought Atlanta was a non-starter when some dedicated people who wouldn't take no for an answer made it happen.  If not for the 3 mayors of OKC plus Nichols, McClendon and a few others, nothing would have happened there probably.  I'll bet if Amazon was to build a massive facility here, we'd have international air travel. Too much thinking small here.  Shoot as high as possible and then maybe you'll get something better than shooting for the kneecaps.   


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cbs on September 07, 2017, 03:15:55 pm
Shoot for the stars! (Not a black hole like the Olympics bid)

I would be okay with Tulsa selling it's soul to land Amazon.

It's unlikely, but if any mayor in the past 2 decades could do it GT could.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: sgrizzle on September 07, 2017, 03:40:09 pm
They basically listed 10 cities where no amazon employee would be able to own a home within an hour of the office.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 07, 2017, 04:08:02 pm
Yeah, I agree, selling your sole for Amazon would have an infinitely better return than the Olympics could ever return.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: AdamsHall on September 07, 2017, 04:14:25 pm
I don't get the "shooting for the kneecaps" instead of stars mentality of a lot of Tulsans.  Dare to dream.  Tulsa w/ Stillwater/OKC/Norman would be an ideal site for a summer Olympics. The theme would be "Native America" - the opening ceremony would be unforgettable. Atlanta's Olympics was spread out over a wider land area than an all-Oklahoma Olympics would be.  It seems like a lot of people who live here go on vacation to Colorado or have 2nd homes elsewhere and are happy to keep Tulsa as it is. Cozy and comfortable.  Why shouldn't we think we can do a hell of a lot more. Low self-esteem? Everybody thought Atlanta was a non-starter when some dedicated people who wouldn't take no for an answer made it happen.  If not for the 3 mayors of OKC plus Nichols, McClendon and a few others, nothing would have happened there probably.  I'll bet if Amazon was to build a massive facility here, we'd have international air travel. Too much thinking small here.  Shoot as high as possible and then maybe you'll get something better than shooting for the kneecaps.   

Good post.  I suspect Tulsa would be a long-shot here, but sometimes you learn a lot by shooting for the stars.  Indeed, losing a large air maintenance base is what set Ron Norick, et al, in motion in OKC.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 07, 2017, 04:24:37 pm
Good to see him try.  Won't happen though.  Seattle people are all too aware of our national reputation for everything from lack of support for education to traffic inhibition with turnpikes.  And dozens more things in between.

Lack of infrastructure support in general - water in particular.  We are in a bind right now for water.  If our state population was to surge (we certainly don't have an extra 50,000 people sitting around waiting for Amazon to come to town), the influx of even a fraction of that number, with families, would put us in a bind that would take many years from which to recover.  And where are we gonna get $5 billion extra just to bring them in, especially since we can't even figure out how to fix a relatively tiny $500 million state budget problem.

It's not aiming for the kneecaps - it is a recognition of reality.

I am gonna guess Raleigh.  It's the other end of the country, letting them straddle the US.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on September 07, 2017, 06:47:11 pm
Maybe for once our parking crater can be a positive.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 07, 2017, 07:09:37 pm
Seattle people are all too aware of our national reputation ...

... something about taking their Sonics basketball team...


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on September 07, 2017, 10:59:15 pm
Good to see him try.  Won't happen though.  Seattle people are all too aware of our national reputation for everything from lack of support for education to traffic inhibition with turnpikes.  And dozens more things in between.

Lack of infrastructure support in general - water in particular.  We are in a bind right now for water.  If our state population was to surge (we certainly don't have an extra 50,000 people sitting around waiting for Amazon to come to town), the influx of even a fraction of that number, with families, would put us in a bind that would take many years from which to recover.  And where are we gonna get $5 billion extra just to bring them in, especially since we can't even figure out how to fix a relatively tiny $500 million state budget problem.

It's not aiming for the kneecaps - it is a recognition of reality.

I am gonna guess Raleigh.  It's the other end of the country, letting them straddle the US.



What's the issue with water? I wasn't aware there was a problem.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: guido911 on September 07, 2017, 11:29:51 pm
For God's sake please do not refer Amazon to this website. No one in their right mind would move to Oklahoma if they read what Oklahomans post about their own state.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 08, 2017, 08:29:57 am
... something about taking their Sonics basketball team...


That's just the smallest part of it.  I have family and quite a few friends there.  Several from here.  The 'good news' about Oklahoma has spread.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 08, 2017, 08:34:06 am
For God's sake please do not refer Amazon to this website. No one in their right mind would move to Oklahoma if they read what Oklahomans post about their own state.


They already know about Oklahoma.  They have had a large distribution center in Coffeyville, KS for many years!   That is only about 20 miles from Nowata.  Don't think for a second they didn't look here already and for whatever reason, went 20 miles away instead.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 08, 2017, 08:38:11 am

They already know about Oklahoma.  They have had a large distribution center in Coffeyville, KS for many years!   That is only about 20 miles from Nowata.  Don't think for a second they didn't look here already and for whatever reason, went 20 miles away instead.



You know that facility existed prior to Amazon right? And it's closed now. It was built for Golden Books in 78. There are several large facilities up there that go through a carousal of new ownership every so many years.  Kind of a non sequitur in my opinion as I don't think it really says anything about what Amazon thinks about Oklahoma.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 08, 2017, 08:39:33 am
What's the issue with water? I wasn't aware there was a problem.


Just the ongoing cycles of drought.  Aggravated by the long running fight by OKC to try to take the Native American water from southeast OK.  We have adequate water for the level of activity we have now, but if you suddenly add couple hundred thousand people and their 'stuff' to any area in OK, it's gonna be a problem.   Add to the mix the fact that many of the wells in central OK, exemplified by Norman, have become unusable, we are moving to a water problem rather quickly.  And if Baja Oklahoma (aka Tejas) keeps 'lawsuiting' us to get OK water, and succeed at some point, we are in deep caca.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 08, 2017, 08:40:06 am
You know that facility existed prior to Amazon right? It was built for Golden Books in 78. There are several large facilities up there that go through a carousal of new ownership every so many years.  Kind of a non sequitur in my opinion as I don't think it really says anything about what Amazon thinks about Oklahoma.


Yeah.  But Amazon chose to go there.  Instead of here.

Existing building is good, but not the biggest factor.  Especially for them.  Since they are gonna spend like drunken sailors on the new place.





Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 08, 2017, 08:42:56 am

Yeah.  But Amazon chose to go there.  Instead of here.




I still think it came down to availability, price, and location (being in this part of the country that is). I'm sure they were able to work out a pretty good deal as Coffeyville has been pretty desperate to fill that thing up with working people.

The fact that it was just outside of Oklahoma is a coincidence. It's in the region they were looking for logistics.

I know it is difficult for you not to degrade Oklahoma, but there are valid reasons, this just isn't one.

A little context as to how desperate the owners of that facility in Coffeyville might have been.

http://www.kansas.com/news/business/article138866273.html


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 08, 2017, 08:45:42 am
Just to add another thing, Amazon is currently constructing a 300,000 square foot "sorting center" in Oklahoma City.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 08, 2017, 09:20:20 am
Just to add another thing, Amazon is currently constructing a 300,000 square foot "sorting center" in Oklahoma City.


That is good news.   There has been something in OKC for a while - no idea exactly what - that the boy would haul freight to/from.  He would go from Coffeyville to OKC, drop trailers and then go back to Coffeyville for more.  Then another truck took some of the trailers to Dallas area.  That went on for years, until about 6 years ago.


May have to talk to Coffeyville.  They want $13 ft2 for that warehouse.  I could use that space.... 20 acres under roof would be pretty good place to have a little manufacturing facility....



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DowntownDan on September 08, 2017, 09:56:58 am
I don't get the "shooting for the kneecaps" instead of stars mentality of a lot of Tulsans.  Dare to dream.  Tulsa w/ Stillwater/OKC/Norman would be an ideal site for a summer Olympics. The theme would be "Native America" - the opening ceremony would be unforgettable. Atlanta's Olympics was spread out over a wider land area than an all-Oklahoma Olympics would be.  It seems like a lot of people who live here go on vacation to Colorado or have 2nd homes elsewhere and are happy to keep Tulsa as it is. Cozy and comfortable.  Why shouldn't we think we can do a hell of a lot more. Low self-esteem? Everybody thought Atlanta was a non-starter when some dedicated people who wouldn't take no for an answer made it happen.  If not for the 3 mayors of OKC plus Nichols, McClendon and a few others, nothing would have happened there probably.  I'll bet if Amazon was to build a massive facility here, we'd have international air travel. Too much thinking small here.  Shoot as high as possible and then maybe you'll get something better than shooting for the kneecaps.   

Amazon and the Olympics are polar opposites.  Amazon would be a massive economic boon.  Would add permanent long term jobs and facilities.  The Olympics are guaranteed economic losers and would leave us with unused facilities, like most Olympic cities in recent years.  The Olympics was a dumb idea because even if we had a chance, it would be a terrible thing for the city.  We have a slightly better chance at Amazon (.0001% vs. .001%) but Amazon would be transformative longterm for the city in a positive way.   


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DowntownDan on September 08, 2017, 10:02:19 am

Just the ongoing cycles of drought.  Aggravated by the long running fight by OKC to try to take the Native American water from southeast OK.  We have adequate water for the level of activity we have now, but if you suddenly add couple hundred thousand people and their 'stuff' to any area in OK, it's gonna be a problem.   Add to the mix the fact that many of the wells in central OK, exemplified by Norman, have become unusable, we are moving to a water problem rather quickly.  And if Baja Oklahoma (aka Tejas) keeps 'lawsuiting' us to get OK water, and succeed at some point, we are in deep caca.



I'm pretty sure the influx of new people (50K employees means 100K+ new people when accounting for families) is the reason they are looking only at metros of 1million+, and which takes us out of the running right off the bat.  It's not a transformative change for metros like Dallas, Atlanta, and even Denver, but it would be a huge change for Tulsa, and they don't want to take a chance that we can't handle it.  They want a "turnkey" city that doesn't require massive risky changes.  Same with our airport.  DFW and ATL can serve exactly what they need, TUL would require an overhaul in routes.   Too risky for them.  Again, Im all for making the bid though.  You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

The more I've read about this, I'm changing my prediction from Austin to D.C./Northern VA.  Austin has their own deficiencies, while D.C./Northern VA checks all of the boxes.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: hello on September 08, 2017, 10:37:24 am
For God's sake please do not refer Amazon to this website. No one in their right mind would move to Oklahoma if they read what Oklahomans post about their own state.

Go to a forum of any city/state and you'll see complaints about it from the people who live there.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 08, 2017, 10:52:42 am
I'm pretty sure the influx of new people (50K employees means 100K+ new people when accounting for families) is the reason they are looking only at metros of 1million+, and which takes us out of the running right off the bat.  It's not a transformative change for metros like Dallas, Atlanta, and even Denver, but it would be a huge change for Tulsa, and they don't want to take a chance that we can't handle it.  They want a "turnkey" city that doesn't require massive risky changes.  Same with our airport.  DFW and ATL can serve exactly what they need, TUL would require an overhaul in routes.   Too risky for them.  Again, Im all for making the bid though.  You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

The more I've read about this, I'm changing my prediction from Austin to D.C./Northern VA.  Austin has their own deficiencies, while D.C./Northern VA checks all of the boxes.


I think we have to make a pitch to them, even if there is no chance of it happening.  Just to keep our hand in the game for future efforts.  If you 'no-bid', then it means 'out of business'.

That's what I was getting at - easy 100k+ population increase.  We just couldn't build up that fast for that influx.  It will likely spread over a few years, but even a 5 year plan would be difficult if not impossible for northeast OK.  And if they did choose here, I suspect it would be over by the Google place in Pryor rather than very close to Tulsa.  Better shot at water...and plenty of electricity!   But then, the personnel issue is even bigger cause there aren't 50,000 around.  Imagine trying to build up that part of OK with all the necessary infrastructure...can't get there from here. 


Plus, Amazon has already left the Coffeyville area, so that is kind of a semi-No vote. 



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on September 08, 2017, 10:59:20 am
I'm pretty sure the influx of new people (50K employees means 100K+ new people when accounting for families) is the reason they are looking only at metros of 1million+, and which takes us out of the running right off the bat.  It's not a transformative change for metros like Dallas, Atlanta, and even Denver, but it would be a huge change for Tulsa, and they don't want to take a chance that we can't handle it.  They want a "turnkey" city that doesn't require massive risky changes.  Same with our airport.  DFW and ATL can serve exactly what they need, TUL would require an overhaul in routes.   Too risky for them.  Again, Im all for making the bid though.  You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

The more I've read about this, I'm changing my prediction from Austin to D.C./Northern VA.  Austin has their own deficiencies, while D.C./Northern VA checks all of the boxes.

The million people requirement shouldn’t remove us. The July 2016 estimate for Tulsa’s MSA was 987,201 and the CSA was 1,157,465 so our CSA is well over a million and by now our MSA probably is too.

I am guessing this goes to North Texas, Denver or somewhere in North Carolina.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DowntownDan on September 08, 2017, 11:21:15 am
I'd like to see the pitch include a large downtown campus where they can take over multiple square blocks of currently unused land (i.e., one of the many parking craters).  Maybe the Nordam site, or anywhere on the southern part of the IDL.  A bunch of buildings, none more than 10 stories, connected, with green spaces, and underground or otherwise concealed parking.  It would be preferable, in my opinion, than another boring sprawling suburban campus in north DFW.  I bet Tulsa could provide a cool urban campus for less than a bland suburban campus in a larger metro.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 08, 2017, 06:11:04 pm
While I respect and value most all opinions, I don't understand why some people live here.  Cyrus Avery wouldn't have A "not possible here" attitude.  It's like the people who said the BOK Center would be a failure, etc. Geographically there is nothing Dallas or Kansas City have over Tulsa. How smaller would OKC seem without nearly 84,000 taxpayer paid jobs (State Govt., Tinker, OU, FAA Center) The state legislature is changeable, not an insurmountable road block. Realism/skepticism is great. I live by it. But don'tt confuse realism with cynicism/negativity.  I almost guarantee people who don't dream big either never have much (as much as they could have) or inherited someone else's wealth and play defense with it. I'm sure there are exceptions.  Atlanta got billions in long-term impact from the Olympics --- other cities haven't because they didn't do it right.  Google how the IOC is working to make future bids more sustainable.  But I don't really care about the Olympics. Before it happened, how many would have said you were high to think the Seattle Supersonics would move to OKC? How many would have laughed in your face if told OKC would build a canal and turn a drainage ditch into a river/lake that's now an official Olympic training site?  How many would have laughed if told someobody was going to build the world's biggest vacation spot on 27,000 acres of unusable swampland in central Florida?  Water is an issue for Tulsa? You have to be kidding.  North Texas sued Oklahoma because it has few if any major water sources.  Has that impeded its growth? No.  Ever heard of Las Vegas or the state of California?  Water, really?  As a native, I think small-time thinking has not gotten us very far.  Our population is about the same in the city as it was in the 50s, isn't it? That would be more justifiable if the quality of life for most Tulsans was as good it has been in the past. KC, OKC, Dallas & NW Arkansas have grown because they've dreamed much bigger than we have. I think a lot of people are happy to keep it the way it is and go away when they want something more. We study everything to death and then often do nothing with the results.  It's like the study is the thing. Most of my contemporaries had to move away for opportunity.  I argue that it all starts with a defeatist attitude. Discouraging.           


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: guido911 on September 08, 2017, 11:34:55 pm
I'd like to see the pitch include a large downtown campus where they can take over multiple square blocks of currently unused land (i.e., one of the many parking craters).  Maybe the Nordam site, or anywhere on the southern part of the IDL.  A bunch of buildings, none more than 10 stories, connected, with green spaces, and underground or otherwise concealed parking.  It would be preferable, in my opinion, than another boring sprawling suburban campus in north DFW.  I bet Tulsa could provide a cool urban campus for less than a bland suburban campus in a larger metro.

Me too. In fact, let's not do anything else but develop downtown. Let's spend all of our money, focus all of our attention there. Better yet, let's pass some city ordinances that prohibit developing anywhere BUT downtown. Because that's where everybody hangs out. And our streets down there are wonderful. And this is the 1950s.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: guido911 on September 08, 2017, 11:41:20 pm
While I respect and value most all opinions, I don't understand why some people live here.  Cyrus Avery wouldn't have A "not possible here" attitude.

 

You are in the wrong place. This is not a place to make Tulsa better. This place is about whining about republicans, and lower to middle class people that have really no track record of individual accomplishment telling people that are accomplished what they should do.

Welcome though. And I look forward to reading your posts because you made a lot of good points.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 09, 2017, 07:31:38 am
This place is about whining about republicans, and lower to middle class people that have really no track record of individual accomplishment telling people that are accomplished what they should do.

Sounds like Trump's "I don't want poor people in my cabinet" comment


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TheArtist on September 09, 2017, 02:58:59 pm

I think we have to make a pitch to them, even if there is no chance of it happening.  Just to keep our hand in the game for future efforts.  If you 'no-bid', then it means 'out of business'.

That's what I was getting at - easy 100k+ population increase.  We just couldn't build up that fast for that influx.  It will likely spread over a few years, but even a 5 year plan would be difficult if not impossible for northeast OK.  And if they did choose here, I suspect it would be over by the Google place in Pryor rather than very close to Tulsa.  Better shot at water...and plenty of electricity!   But then, the personnel issue is even bigger cause there aren't 50,000 around.  Imagine trying to build up that part of OK with all the necessary infrastructure...can't get there from here. 


Plus, Amazon has already left the Coffeyville area, so that is kind of a semi-No vote. 



Let me make the pitch.  I could sell this city.  Oh and as for that kind of growth... we have done it before, we can do it again.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: guido911 on September 09, 2017, 03:17:22 pm
Sounds like Trump's "I don't want poor people in my cabinet" comment

Yeah. Sounds just like that.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on September 11, 2017, 07:50:41 am
Actually, most of the posts in this thread seem to be fairly pragmatic but also encouraging of the effort.    That would make a lousy sales pitch, but explain to me how that's so horrible when discussing the actual prospect of luring a major employer when the City doesn't check off the requirement boxes of the company?  This isn't raw negativity, there are pragmatic and identifiable issues that may preclude Amazon from choosing Tulsa as an HQ, by discussing them maybe we can find ways to address those issues now or in the future.

Look, cheerleaders are great.  When Tulsa is playing a top 10 Oklahoma State in football - I fully expect the cheerleaders, coaches, and players to 100% buy in and go for it. But from the perspective of a fan trying to look at the match up objectively, I have no problem admitting Tulsa probably won't win.  I still hope Tulsa wins, and if we don't win I hope we gain something anyway - exposure, experience, contacts, attitude, whatever.  Go play the game and do the best you can.

But just because not everyone is a cheerleader, doesn't mean they don't support the team.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DowntownDan on September 11, 2017, 08:07:55 am
Actually, most of the posts in this thread seem to be fairly pragmatic but also encouraging of the effort.    That would make a lousy sales pitch, but explain to me how that's so horrible when discussing the actual prospect of luring a major employer when the City doesn't check off the requirement boxes of the company?  This isn't raw negativity, there are pragmatic and identifiable issues that may preclude Amazon from choosing Tulsa as an HQ, by discussing them maybe we can find ways to address those issues now or in the future.

Look, cheerleaders are great.  When Tulsa is playing a top 10 Oklahoma State in football - I fully expect the cheerleaders, coaches, and players to 100% buy in and go for it. But from the perspective of a fan trying to look at the match up objectively, I have no problem admitting Tulsa probably won't win.  I still hope Tulsa wins, and if we don't win I hope we gain something anyway - exposure, experience, contacts, attitude, whatever.  Go play the game and do the best you can.

But just because not everyone is a cheerleader, doesn't mean they don't support the team.

Yep, everyone on here seems to be on board bur realize the reality that it won't happen.  And it's not "whining" or "complaining" to acknowledge the very real problems we have in attracting business to this state.  The opposite would be to ignore them, do nothing about it, and keep losing out while refusing to fix what is holding us back.  Unfortunately, our biggest problem--education funding--and the negative impact is has to outsiders, and the need for many companies to have a well educated local workforce, is a very real problem.  It's unfortunate that this issue is considered a left/right political issue, but it is a very real problem that needs to be fixed.  If it's not, we will not be attracting major employers, and will continue to be at risk of losing some we have.  Amazon won't happen for a number of reasons, but we have to put it out there and hopefully get some much needed feedback as a dose of reality to maybe spur change.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 11, 2017, 10:44:07 am
explain to me how that's so horrible ...

Troll's gotta troll?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 11, 2017, 01:13:18 pm
http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/11/technology/amazon-cities/index.html

Quote
Mayors from Toronto to Tulsa, Oklahoma rushed out responses, calling their cities prime candidates...


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on September 11, 2017, 02:22:48 pm
Somewhat related: http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2017/09/10/new-corporate-recruitment-pool-workers-in-2.html (http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2017/09/10/new-corporate-recruitment-pool-workers-in-2.html)

Quote
In Tulsa, Okla., prospective employers usually cut to the chase and ask for estimates of the city's underemployed, the so-called hidden-labor market, said Brien Thorstenberg, the senior vice president of economic development for the Tulsa Regional Chamber of Commerce.

Tulsa based its talent-pool estimates on worker surveys distributed through local technical and community colleges that gathered information about income, age, skills and a desire for better opportunities.

The chamber in June released a survey showing a 13.5% underemployment rate, compared with an unemployment rate of between 4% and 5%. The analysis revealed a sizable group of people who have been working for three to five years but aren't using the full range of skills from their technical training.

"When it's a tight labor market, it's nice to know," Mr. Thorstenberg said.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 11, 2017, 02:59:14 pm
While I respect and value most all opinions, I don't understand why some people live here.  Cyrus Avery wouldn't have A "not possible here" attitude.  It's like the people who said the BOK Center would be a failure, etc. Geographically there is nothing Dallas or Kansas City have over Tulsa. How smaller would OKC seem without nearly 84,000 taxpayer paid jobs (State Govt., Tinker, OU, FAA Center) The state legislature is changeable, not an insurmountable road block. Realism/skepticism is great. I live by it. But don'tt confuse realism with cynicism/negativity.  I almost guarantee people who don't dream big either never have much (as much as they could have) or inherited someone else's wealth and play defense with it. I'm sure there are exceptions.  Atlanta got billions in long-term impact from the Olympics --- other cities haven't because they didn't do it right.  Google how the IOC is working to make future bids more sustainable.  But I don't really care about the Olympics. Before it happened, how many would have said you were high to think the Seattle Supersonics would move to OKC? How many would have laughed in your face if told OKC would build a canal and turn a drainage ditch into a river/lake that's now an official Olympic training site?  How many would have laughed if told someobody was going to build the world's biggest vacation spot on 27,000 acres of unusable swampland in central Florida?  Water is an issue for Tulsa? You have to be kidding.  North Texas sued Oklahoma because it has few if any major water sources.  Has that impeded its growth? No.  Ever heard of Las Vegas or the state of California?  Water, really?  As a native, I think small-time thinking has not gotten us very far.  Our population is about the same in the city as it was in the 50s, isn't it? That would be more justifiable if the quality of life for most Tulsans was as good it has been in the past. KC, OKC, Dallas & NW Arkansas have grown because they've dreamed much bigger than we have. I think a lot of people are happy to keep it the way it is and go away when they want something more. We study everything to death and then often do nothing with the results.  It's like the study is the thing. Most of my contemporaries had to move away for opportunity.  I argue that it all starts with a defeatist attitude. Discouraging.           



Welcome to the forum!  Enjoy!!

Some background stuff...

Tulsa population was a little over 140,000 in 1930.  By 1960, we had "grown" to about 160,000 - there used to be a sign with that number at the east city limit - 21st and Memorial.  We are at about 400,000 now.  With the metro area that should be a little over 1,000,000.

I and at least one other have talked about canals before - great idea that we should have started years ago.  And not that piddly little thing that OKC has - REAL, usable canals !

Water is a big issue here - as can be seen by the frequent calls for rationing.  And Texas wanting to force us to give them what we do have.  If somehow we managed to double our population in a short time by getting a bunch of big companies to move here, it would not work.  As for Vegas - false comparison.  First of all, we don't have anywhere near the size of the Colorado river basin.  Even though it dries out just south of the border, it is still a LOT of water!  And we don't have anywhere near the money that Vegas had to enable them to bribe the people who controlled the tap for water.  And CA?  Well, that has been ongoing for a hundred years.  Just like Colorado state - someone else owns the rain that lands on the roof of your house!

A couple decades ago we had a shot at getting a large semiconductor manufacturer (Micron Technology) to come to the state - a process that takes a lot of water.  This was one of the smallest issues to them, but it was on the list, even if at the bottom.  The really BIG things that got us out of the running - education and the one that they actually mentioned when talking about not choosing Oklahoma - it was like talking to kindergartners when discussing this with the state officials!  Their words, not mine.  Keating promised at the time that the state would make Chemical and Electrical engineering programs fi they came.  Like that wouldn't already be 6 to 10 years too late!  If they build plant they need the engineers BEFORE it's open!  Not a few years after!!   But Keating was (and still is) a d-bag clown show all his own.

As for moving the basketball team - we paid the owners enough so that they chose to come here.  

Geographically - yep, no difference from Dal or KC.  Politically, institutional emotional maturity, much different.  You do remember that GM had a really big plant in OKC.?  Gone since about 2005.  For "economic reasons" - it was the first of 12 plants they closed about that time.  First.  That means it was the worst for them for whatever reasons.  Given GM history, management blames labor, but management had at least as big a part in it.  It wasn't labor that made them go bankrupt a few years ago.

Atlanta was a mixed bag.  Some good.  Some bad.  Not a home run by any stretch of anyone's imagination.

As for the state legislature being changeable...well, when are you going to stop voting for the clown show that is in there now??  People who are intentionally hurting our kids.  Only change I have seen is for the worse.  


There is a critical mass thing going on, too.  From 1930 to today, we have gone from about 2.4 million to right at 4 million people - with a dip to 2 million by 1940.  Texas as comparison had a lot more than us at about 5.9 million in 1930.  They are right at 28 million today.  5 times growth while we not quite doubled.  Something very different happened there.  Education has been an emphasis in Texas - by my direct experience - since at least the 1950's.  They bite the bullet and build roads - their FM network is pretty decent.  They have been a very conservative state for a long time, so it is not just conservative versus liberal with them...they are truly looking forward to what is good for the people of the state.  Mostly.   Can't be liquor by the drink, cause they just got that in early 70's.  And some counties are still dry.

You touched on your contemporaries all moving away - all but 1 of our kids, and 16 out of 19 grand and great grand kids had to leave.  Just in the last 20 years.  Because we have NOT looked forward as a state.  We have not progressed to anywhere near our potential.  We have become obsessed with the alt-right BS about cutting taxes, cutting govt. spending, fixating on passing laws that we know are unconstitutional, letting someone else pay for our roads (turnpikes), and cutting education.  In other words, trying hard to dumb down the population so they will continue to vote more conservative and keep the Keatings and Failin's and the Sally Kerns and the majority currently in the State Clown Show in office.

When I was driving a truck I got to talk to a LOT of people about driving through OK.  Turnpikes by far the biggest single gripe right up there with horrible road surface quality...a lot like in New Jersey!   I talked and drove with dozens who literally would go out of their way just to avoid coming through here.  Even if it cost more to avoid the tolls!



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 11, 2017, 03:23:35 pm
Let me make the pitch.  I could sell this city.  Oh and as for that kind of growth... we have done it before, we can do it again.



I could make a case, too!  Have been doing it for years with people I know.  But the view people get from the self-inflicted stuff we do is just too much inertia to overcome - they see what we do and that is the end of it.  Anyone who thinks Amazon doesn't have contact with other places like GM, Hitachi, Micron Technology is just got there head in the sand...or some other dark, dreary place... and doesn't understand the real world.  Glassdoor is a recent development for people to go online and comment about a wide variety of company/job related things - corporate America has done that among their top people for decades.  Probably longer.  They already know who is NOT going to get this.

It's like when someone plans a big conference - unless it is law enforcement or education related groups - the budget limited groups - Tulsa and OKC just aren't gonna get the big events!!  Real stuff is going to the national playgrounds.  Disney, Vegas, other Disney, Chicago, New York, big cities with Pappadeaux's (Dallas and Houston).







Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 11, 2017, 11:13:56 pm
Hello heironymouspasparagus (& anyone else)

Thanks for the welcome. I appreciate it.

Realize my comments are coming from the cheap seats. I am not a newcomer to Tulsa. I was born here many decades ago - just a point of reference - doesn't mean a ton.  I've followed this type of chatter on Tulsa for years. This has not been a super-negative thread.  Somebody said it's pragmatic.  OK.

A few thoughts:

If Amazon has contact with GM, Hitachi, etc., it also has contact with Google, GE, Boeing, American Airlines, Macy's & others --- especially the ones that have recently moved here or expanded.    

Lack of entertainment may be a reason conventions don't come, but I know a little about that business and a primary reason is a lack of enough exhibit/meeting space and big blocks of hotel rooms. Oklahoma City is rectifying that some with a new convention center and Omni Hotel.  I'm not saying get a new one as they are often loss leaders, but they can bring a bunch of financial impact to a city.  Look at Music City Center in Nashville.

Speaking of Nashville, that city is on fire.  Growing exponentially.  It's ranked ***32nd*** among the states for quality of education in U.S. News report. Oklahoma is ***30th***.  https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings.  In fact, Tennessee, Texas, Georgia, Arizona, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina --- all rank lower than Oklahoma when it comes to education. If I read it properly, it looks like Oklahoma does a better job educating its kids than Texas as a whole. Sure wealthy DFW is a different story.  I just don't know if Oklahoma's poor education system is a best argument for a lack of growth. The poor education system has become religion to many.  Problem, yes. Need to be better, yes. Primary or biggest reason nothing happens? Don't see it ---  unless the drumbeat is all people in the other 49 have seen about us other than tornadoes.  

Massachusetts is #1 in education. Have you driven west from Boston?  Nothing but turnpike to the state line as I recall and it was way more expensive than driving across our state.

A lot of places in those states I cited are booming. I subscribe to a national business facilities/relocation publication and somebody is building a factory/warehouse or relocating a HQs/regional HQs every other week to Georgia, Texas, South Carolina or Tennessee.  I rarely see Oklahoma mentioned.

I'll give you the water.  But even there, from what I read, Utah, Nevada, California are worse.  Oregon, Colorado,Texas & Kansas also on "the lack of water" list.  Using just Utah, Salt Lake City is booming and has been for years.  I don't know that water is affecting any city's immediate growth - if not, probably should.  (Doesn't Google use a lot of water at its server farm - maybe not?  Kimberly-Clark? The label on the bottled water I drink says it comes from the Dallas municipal supply and from Ontario, CA. Who's letting water be an issue?)    

Those growth states are all offering incentives, I guess.  Not sure where the money comes from in all instances. It looked like incentives was the reason Macy's landed here. Why can't we compete on that level with at least Mississippi?

Here's what I think a part of the growth issue might be in Tulsa. Honestly believe it's a state of mind.  I grew up with a family whose dad was a teaching doctor.  Big family.  They had lived in two states by the time I met up with them in 6th grade.  They left when my friend in the family was a junior in high school.  They lived in 2 other places by the time I hit 25.  Now as adults and geriatrics they've all congregated in Phoenix, Scottsdale & Flagstaff.  Real down to earth.  We all talked about Tulsa at a Phoenix wedding 15 years ago.  Out of all the places they had lived, they said Tulsans were as publicly friendly as they come, generous, made lifelong friends and the city was gorgeous.  At the same time, most in the family also thought Tulsa was the most snobbish, country club-ish, click-ish, set-in-its-way cities of those they lived from Maine to Colorado to Iowa and Arizona.  I've heard similar from a couple of others too (one from OKC should be disqualified).  I never really thought so.  But, is there anything to it?  We like it the way it is for the most part - PERIOD. We're only going to try so hard to lure you. Silly?

Consider one thing that has, historically, made Tulsa great might be holding it back a little.  It seems like there are 5 or 6 last names that have had prominent roles in the development of  Tulsa since I've been alive.  Most all benevolent benefactors who have given huge chunks of their wealth --- many now are 3rd generation responsible wealth managers as opposed to fire-in-the-belly 1st generation gambler types.  Our current mayor seems like a good man and very competent - he's the 4th guy in his family to be Tulsa mayor.  Can 6-7 legacy families with great influence limit potential?  Limited diversity of control?  Inhibit creativity or civic ownership?  Or just shut up and be grateful these successful folks bother?   It could be totally off-base.  I think in addition to the many thoughtful benefactors we're fortunate to have, we also could benefit from a Jerry Jones or Mark Cuban type --- someone to be more of a bull in a china closet with some grand, ridiculous sounding initiatives that people never imagined. A high risk-reward type.  We need a Willy Wonka or a P.T. Barnum. We need people to be inspired and sometimes believe in the unbelievable.  Be a little less reasoned.  It often happens elsewhere, why couldn't it happen here?  Over recent years we see companies that are ready to takeoff being sold out-of-state with the owners staying here and  starting foundations. I am thankful.  I just wish more of these talented folks would build their businesses into powerhouses (like Larry Nichols at Devon in OKC/McClendon at Cheseapeake). That's as good or better a legacy than donating your money and being rewarded with a name on a building or a hospital.  All in my opinion which I really have no right to in this regard!  You build it. You do what you want with it. Many of these families are graciously doing both.  I know I'm welcome to get off my backside and put some hard earned skin in the game too.  

I'm willing to swallow the previous two paragraphs.  

You have to ask why other cities are growing way faster than we are. They all have issues.  They all have negatives - most as many or more than we do.  It's not about being an insipid "cheerleader." It's about focusing on and pushing the positive. It's about getting on a roll and expecting good things to happen. What is right instead of emphasizing what is wrong. Sure correct the problems, but I think we dwell on them.  It's often like an echo chamber - do other cities focus as much on their shortcomings as I think a lot of us Tulsans do?  Not so much in this forum, but when you talk with friends and people you've known --- it's almost like a citywide lack of self-esteem in as far as what Tulsa can be or wants to be.  It's about quality of living. If you're stagnant and not growing you're dying, right? We're not stagnant, but growth has been hard to come by the last couple of decades.  Could just be me!  OK no more book-length diatribes.      

  


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on September 12, 2017, 07:24:26 am
Thanks for the quality dissent!  Too often forums are either group thinkers or trolls.  Appreciate the different perspective.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 12, 2017, 09:22:36 am
Hello heironymouspasparagus (& anyone else)

Thanks for the welcome. I appreciate it.

Realize my comments are coming from the cheap seats. I am not a newcomer to Tulsa. I was born here many decades ago - just a point of reference - doesn't mean a ton.  I've followed this type of chatter on Tulsa for years. This has not been a super-negative thread.  Somebody said it's pragmatic.  OK.

A few thoughts:

If Amazon has contact with GM, Hitachi, etc., it also has contact with Google, GE, Boeing, American Airlines, Macy's & others --- especially the ones that have recently moved here or expanded.    

Lack of entertainment may be a reason conventions don't come, but I know a little about that business and a primary reason is a lack of enough exhibit/meeting space and big blocks of hotel rooms. Oklahoma City is rectifying that some with a new convention center and Omni Hotel.  I'm not saying get a new one as they are often loss leaders, but they can bring a bunch of financial impact to a city.  Look at Music City Center in Nashville.

Speaking of Nashville, that city is on fire.  Growing exponentially.  It's ranked ***32nd*** among the states for quality of education in U.S. News report. Oklahoma is ***30th***.  https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings.  In fact, Tennessee, Texas, Georgia, Arizona, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina --- all rank lower than Oklahoma when it comes to education. If I read it properly, it looks like Oklahoma does a better job educating its kids than Texas as a whole. Sure wealthy DFW is a different story.  I just don't know if Oklahoma's poor education system is a best argument for a lack of growth. The poor education system has become religion to many.  Problem, yes. Need to be better, yes. Primary or biggest reason nothing happens? Don't see it ---  unless the drumbeat is all people in the other 49 have seen about us other than tornadoes.  

Massachusetts is #1 in education. Have you driven west from Boston?  Nothing but turnpike to the state line as I recall and it was way more expensive than driving across our state.

A lot of places in those states I cited are booming. I subscribe to a national business facilities/relocation publication and somebody is building a factory/warehouse or relocating a HQs/regional HQs every other week to Georgia, Texas, South Carolina or Tennessee.  I rarely see Oklahoma mentioned.

I'll give you the water.  But even there, from what I read, Utah, Nevada, California are worse.  Oregon, Colorado,Texas & Kansas also on "the lack of water" list.  Using just Utah, Salt Lake City is booming and has been for years.  I don't know that water is affecting any city's immediate growth - if not, probably should.  (Doesn't Google use a lot of water at its server farm - maybe not?  Kimberly-Clark? The label on the bottled water I drink says it comes from the Dallas municipal supply and from Ontario, CA. Who's letting water be an issue?)    

Those growth states are all offering incentives, I guess.  Not sure where the money comes from in all instances. It looked like incentives was the reason Macy's landed here. Why can't we compete on that level with at least Mississippi?

Here's what I think a part of the growth issue might be in Tulsa. Honestly believe it's a state of mind.  I grew up with a family whose dad was a teaching doctor.  Big family.  They had lived in two states by the time I met up with them in 6th grade.  They left when my friend in the family was a junior in high school.  They lived in 2 other places by the time I hit 25.  Now as adults and geriatrics they've all congregated in Phoenix, Scottsdale & Flagstaff.  Real down to earth.  We all talked about Tulsa at a Phoenix wedding 15 years ago.  Out of all the places they had lived, they said Tulsans were as publicly friendly as they come, generous, made lifelong friends and the city was gorgeous.  At the same time, most in the family also thought Tulsa was the most snobbish, country club-ish, click-ish, set-in-its-way cities of those they lived from Maine to Colorado to Iowa and Arizona.  I've heard similar from a couple of others too (one from OKC should be disqualified).  I never really thought so.  But, is there anything to it?  We like it the way it is for the most part - PERIOD. We're only going to try so hard to lure you. Silly?

Consider one thing that has, historically, made Tulsa great might be holding it back a little.  It seems like there are 5 or 6 last names that have had prominent roles in the development of  Tulsa since I've been alive.  Most all benevolent benefactors who have given huge chunks of their wealth --- many now are 3rd generation responsible wealth managers as opposed to fire-in-the-belly 1st generation gambler types.  Our current mayor seems like a good man and very competent - he's the 4th guy in his family to be Tulsa mayor.  Can 6-7 legacy families with great influence limit potential?  Limited diversity of control?  Inhibit creativity or civic ownership?  Or just shut up and be grateful these successful folks bother?   It could be totally off-base.  I think in addition to the many thoughtful benefactors we're fortunate to have, we also could benefit from a Jerry Jones or Mark Cuban type --- someone to be more of a bull in a china closet with some grand, ridiculous sounding initiatives that people never imagined. A high risk-reward type.  We need a Willy Wonka or a P.T. Barnum. We need people to be inspired and sometimes believe in the unbelievable.  Be a little less reasoned.  It often happens elsewhere, why couldn't it happen here?  Over recent years we see companies that are ready to takeoff being sold out-of-state with the owners staying here and  starting foundations. I am thankful.  I just wish more of these talented folks would build their businesses into powerhouses (like Larry Nichols at Devon in OKC/McClendon at Cheseapeake). That's as good or better a legacy than donating your money and being rewarded with a name on a building or a hospital.  All in my opinion which I really have no right to in this regard!  You build it. You do what you want with it. Many of these families are graciously doing both.  I know I'm welcome to get off my backside and put some hard earned skin in the game too.  

I'm willing to swallow the previous two paragraphs.  

You have to ask why other cities are growing way faster than we are. They all have issues.  They all have negatives - most as many or more than we do.  It's not about being an insipid "cheerleader." It's about focusing on and pushing the positive. It's about getting on a roll and expecting good things to happen. What is right instead of emphasizing what is wrong. Sure correct the problems, but I think we dwell on them.  It's often like an echo chamber - do other cities focus as much on their shortcomings as I think a lot of us Tulsans do?  Not so much in this forum, but when you talk with friends and people you've known --- it's almost like a citywide lack of self-esteem in as far as what Tulsa can be or wants to be.  It's about quality of living. If you're stagnant and not growing you're dying, right? We're not stagnant, but growth has been hard to come by the last couple of decades.  Could just be me!  OK no more book-length diatribes.      

  



Nice!  I like it.  Always good to have thoughtful input to offset the "soundbite" patrol.

Google has moved here in recent years in a pretty big way for Oklahoma - they have a big server farm at Mid-America in Pryor.  They don't use that much water overall - as compared to a semiconductor manufacturing plant.  They use a LOT of electricity!!  They have also been VERY big on putting solar power on their facilities, which would be distasteful to many Okies.  And Pryor fit the bill with really cheap electricity and very cheap labor.  That has been one of the biggest characteristics of companies that have moved here in recent decades - cheap labor.  Whirlpool made a big deal out of it when they came.  Macy's - it is a big attraction.  Plus throwing tens of millions $$ at them doesn't hurt.

Education - I have family and friends in TN (and a few other states)  Have watched most of them grow up from birth and the education they get in rural TN is at least keeping up with OK.  Go to the cities and it is more nuanced.  And the whole state is so super-saturated in right wing extremism, it reminds me of OK with a southern accent.  They also have just recently gotten enough good sense to offer free tuition for community college level work.  Something we are soooo far behind on.  And they have not been cutting education budgets like we have.

Nashville area has grown a lot in the last couple decades - massively in the southeast near Smyrna/La Vergne/Murfreesboro.  And Franklin has become the location of choice for McMansions in mid-TN.  They even have a castle near Franklin at Alt-31 exit off 840!  But they still have Memphis!  Most in TN feel that should be handed over to Arkansas.  By force if necessary!  They could have a big canal project like the Panama canal to re-route the Mississippi river over to the east of Memphis - between there and say, Germantown.

Water here is ok for where we are today -we would have problems if we 'doubled' again, though.  Those western cities are on borrowed time, living in a fantasy world that will come crashing down.  The seniors who are there today look at it in a special way, too - "We got ours, won't live long enough to see the collapse, and don't care after dead and gone anyway."  

Tulsa is clique-ish.  Just like everywhere else.  Just try to fit in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan.  Minnesota has a 'feature' or characteristic called "Minnesota Nice".  Daughter saw that up close for a couple of years.  If you didn't grow up here, you don't count for at least the 2nd or 3rd generation.  If then.  East TN is like that.  When I first returned to the area it was with family who had been there a long time.  Turns out there is a street there named after one of my ancestors - from early 1900's.  Banker, Senator, big shot in town.  I still don't quite fit in yet after 35+ years, but getting close.  There are the same half dozen family names that run the show in that small pond and they are as corrupt as anything here or Louisiana.  And they have had some good industry over the years - hardwood floors, Wrangler, an automotive air bag company.  All left - the low wages weren't worth the parochial BS.  (See Micron and kindergartners elsewhere...)  They found other low wage places elsewhere.  It's a balancing act - keep people uneducated enough to stand the substandard pay, while not keeping them dumb enough so that the enterprise cannot be successful.  Getting them to buy into right wing extremist propaganda works well.

Don't swallow the 2 paragraphs!  Never walk back something if you aren't wrong about it - and your opinion isn't wrong until you decide to change it.  Good thoughts there.  I would take exception to the part about "you built it..."  None of them built it by themselves.  They built it with LOTS of help from many others.  So when it comes time to cash out, as I have talked about before, our tax system should take that into account and create a preferred method that encourages sale to employee groups first, if there is the desire to continue in place.  As you stated, there have been many sold out of state where the ultimate end game was moving away from here and leaving Tulsa without.   The first, most obvious method would be that if an employee group buys it out and keeps it here, the seller gets a break on capital gains taxes.  If they sell out of state, it is treated like an estate tax with no recourse to 'trust fund' status.  15 to 20% tax versus 55%.  I'm betting each seller would work very hard to make the sale to local
employee group.


Growth has been steady here for those couple of decades.  If you remember the 70's and 80's...that was slow/stagnant growth!


And curiosity piqued - one from OKC should be disqualified??  Anyone here on this site?






Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Oil Capital on September 12, 2017, 09:33:05 am


Welcome to the forum!  Enjoy!!

Some background stuff...

Tulsa population was a little over 140,000 in 1930.  By 1960, we had "grown" to about 160,000 - there used to be a sign with that number at the east city limit - 21st and Memorial.  We are at about 400,000 now.  With the metro area that should be a little over 1,000,000.


Tulsa's population in 1960 was a little over 261,000.  Metro area should be hitting 1 Million very soon; probably not there quite yet.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TeeDub on September 12, 2017, 10:05:27 am

Education - I have family and friends in TN (and a few other states)  Have watched most of them grow up from birth and the education they get in rural TN is at least keeping up with OK.  Go to the cities and it is more nuanced.  And the whole state is so super-saturated in right wing extremism, it reminds me of OK with a southern accent.  They also have just recently gotten enough good sense to offer free tuition for community college level work.  Something we are soooo far behind on.  And they have not been cutting education budgets like we have.


I agree with most of your points, but would like to point out that large chunks of Oklahoma do have free community college offerings. 

"Tulsa Community College started offering free tuition eight years ago, helping to inspire Tennessee's program...."
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/03/05/tulsa-community-colleges-free-tuition-program-has-paid-while-inspiring-others

The OKC-GO program, instituted a dozen years ago, allowed eligible high school graduates to attend OCCC tuition-free. The updated version of the program — called OKC-GO 2.0 — has all of the same benefits of the initial program, but also waives the fees and removes the time limit to graduation.
http://newsok.com/article/4748921

Other rural Oklahoma Community College offerings.
http://www.okhighered.org/okpromise/


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 12, 2017, 10:09:34 am
Tulsa's population in 1960 was a little over 261,000.  Metro area should be hitting 1 Million very soon; probably not there quite yet.


Yeah.  I think the sign they had was just kind of out of date.  They may have been trying to keep a "small town feel" to it.  We had not doubled in 30 years...   Most of the growth we did see was in the 50's.  30's and 40's were dead quiet.   Maybe people still think of us as a dust bowl.

I see two kinds of metro area count.  One says 900+ k.  Other says 1.1 million.  About a million...




Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 12, 2017, 10:21:34 am
I agree with most of your points, but would like to point out that large chunks of Oklahoma do have free community college offerings. 

"Tulsa Community College started offering free tuition eight years ago, helping to inspire Tennessee's program...."
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/03/05/tulsa-community-colleges-free-tuition-program-has-paid-while-inspiring-others

The OKC-GO program, instituted a dozen years ago, allowed eligible high school graduates to attend OCCC tuition-free. The updated version of the program — called OKC-GO 2.0 — has all of the same benefits of the initial program, but also waives the fees and removes the time limit to graduation.
http://newsok.com/article/4748921

Other rural Oklahoma Community College offerings.
http://www.okhighered.org/okpromise/



Have two grandkids who tried to get that - the conditions were tough enough that it weeded out a lot of kids at that time (about 7 years ago).  We really weren't that serious about it - changes have come, it looks like.  Have a new crew coming up in the next couple of years - will be pushing them hard to get into that!

We need to be much more aggressive about it and include vo-tech training too!  There is much wringing of hands about not enough people going into the trades (at the same time we are whining about illegals taking "all the good jobs...")  We have a great vo-tech system in northeast OK!  I have participated in several topics over many years.  We just need to expand to get more kids in the system.



Now if we could just get the RWRE to quit saying their stupid stuff ridiculing free college tuition in CA and other places, maybe people would be able to understand how really good it is for society to invest like that.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TeeDub on September 12, 2017, 12:22:36 pm

I hadn't looked...   But apparently in 2014 Tulsa Tech offered something similar.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/finance/tulsa-tech-creates-free-tuition-scholarship-program/article_a05e7bfc-ee0b-580b-8585-d60ddba23fec.html


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 12, 2017, 01:40:24 pm
Good starts on both fronts!!

Finally, a little progressive thought getting into the Oklahoma psyche!!



I went to truck driving school at Central Tech quite a few years ago - excellent facility with some really great teachers!  There was one instructor there who could back a set of 53' doubles!  Much more than a couple dozen feet.  That is an amazing feat - there are not many who can do that.  Most the drivers on the road today have trouble with 1 trailer....!




Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on September 12, 2017, 02:06:01 pm

I see two kinds of metro area count.  One says 900+ k.  Other says 1.1 million.  About a million...

The MSA or metro area is 981,005 (2015) and includes Tulsa, Creek, Pawnee, Osage, Rogers, Wagoner and Okmulgee counties.  The CSA is 1,151,172 (2015) and also includes Washington, Cherokee and Muskogee counties. 

For comparison the OKC metro is 1,358,452 (2015) with a CSA of 1,430,327 (2015).  It's likely that Payne County with 80,000 people will get absorbed by either the OKC or Tulsa CSA at some point. 

Between OKC, Tulsa and Stillwater the "Oklahoma megalopolis" has a population of 2,661,499 or over 2/3 of the state population.  Why we don't have a rail system connecting the two cities still baffles me..


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TeeDub on September 12, 2017, 03:05:28 pm
Why we don't have a rail system connecting the two cities still baffles me..

Because once you got there, neither has a reliable or robust infrastructure to get you where you wanted to go.   Might as well drive the 2 hours and have your car to actually get somewhere.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 12, 2017, 03:41:08 pm
Because once you got there, neither has a reliable or robust infrastructure to get you where you wanted to go.   Might as well drive the 2 hours and have your car to actually get somewhere.


Some universal truths are just so sad...!!


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TeeDub on September 12, 2017, 03:58:23 pm

Some universal truths are just so sad...!!


It's true of most every big city that isn't on the east coast.  (And most of those states have decent park and rides, but still not enough to do away with a car all together.)    We aren't Europe.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 12, 2017, 07:08:09 pm
It's true of most every big city that isn't on the east coast.  (And most of those states have decent park and rides, but still not enough to do away with a car all together.)    We aren't Europe.

Consider Oklahoma wasn't a state until AFTER the automobile was invented, and only a year before the Model T went into production. Tulsa was incorporated in 1898, a good 250 years after some of the noteworthy cities on the eastern seaboard were founded.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on September 12, 2017, 07:15:57 pm
Rapid growth isn't all it's cracked up to be.  Who here has driven through Austin in the last few years?  There's a perfect example of what happens when you cannot keep up with the infrastructure to move people through the city.  Anecdotally, people are finding affordable housing impossible to find.  If I had owned a house in Austin I'd purchased 20-25 years ago, I think I'd cash out and go elsewhere.  It's unreal what people are paying there. 

In an ideal world, it would be best for a 50,000 person employer in our region to locate somewhere north of the city where there's still room to build and you could also count on Bartlesville, Owasso, and other areas north and east without over-taxing the infrastructure within Tulsa.

I admire GT, he gets that real economic growth happens when you land well-paying professional jobs not by luring a bunch of retailers which only serves the purpose of further diluting the tax base.  He might be from a legacy Tulsa family, but he's pretty progressive when it comes to development and he seems to have a better sense of economic sophistication than his predecessor did.  Give a few more administrations with similar vision as GT some time and I think Tulsa is going to look a lot more attractive to major employers.  Another ten years of renewal will make Tulsa look a whole lot better to potential employers as well. 

The last piece, in my mind, is a four year public university program, but Tulsa is stuck with what it has thanks to the Oklahoma Board of Regents.  With TU and the proximity of OSU, OU, and Arkansas as recruiting bases, I don't think it's too much of a handicap.

The most unfortunate aspect is that Tulsa is still located in Oklahoma and therefore, also a victim of a legislature which gives more to OKC, less to public education, and has the image of trying to create a theocracy.  More moderates need to find their way to the state house and into positions of leadership throughout the state.  In my mind, the bizarro far right legislature is the one thing which really makes Tulsa look bad when competing for a major employer.

Things which make an area more liveable are unfolding in front of you with the Gathering Place and the re-birth of the downtown area as well as other parts of "old Tulsa".  Tulsa is a very liveable city.  Had it not been for what I consider a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, I would still live there.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on September 13, 2017, 09:59:47 am
The most unfortunate aspect is that Tulsa is still located in Oklahoma and therefore, also a victim of a legislature which gives more to OKC, less to public education, and has the image of trying to create a theocracy.  More moderates need to find their way to the state house and into positions of leadership throughout the state.  In my mind, the bizarro far right legislature is the one thing which really makes Tulsa look bad when competing for a major employer.

This piece is, to me, the biggest obstacle.   The Tulsa area is an amazing place.   (I left and moved back because I liked it so much, hence my user name...)  And when you look at specifics, a very strong case can be made for locating a company here.  But overall, the emotional perception (right or wrong, but not without reason) is that OK is a backward, very religious fly-over state, and while they might listen to a pitch, they won't end up moving here.  It will take electing new leaders, with a new vision, to change these macro perceptions.  We've got the basics, but until we appreciate the need to manage public/National perception and actually "sell" the state, we won't see any major changes in how the rest of the country views us.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DTowner on September 13, 2017, 11:01:34 am
I’m not so sure the political environment is nearly the impediment many on here believe it to be.  The biggest obstacles we face in landing Amazon are the same we face in landing other businesses - the inability to compete with other states in the “incentives war” and our airport/direct flight limitations.  Simply put, we can’t afford the economic bribes that others offer and we lack direct flights to the major cities that companies want.

Every city on that shortlist will struggle to accommodate a sudden influx of 50,000+ people, but for differing reasons.  Given Austin’s current rapid growth and existing transportation and housing problems, such an influx might blow the lid off.  Same with DC, which already has an incredibly tight housing market and enormous traffic problems.
 
I also don’t understand the claim that growth that would come from landing Amazon would create a water problem in Tulsa.  In my 20 years here there has never been water rationing, and I think the last time that occurred was in the early 1980s.  Indeed, when Susan Savage was making a pitch for a semi-conductor plant one of our biggest selling points was our abundant supply of water.  Besides, how can we have a worse water problem than Dallas or Austin, and they seem to have no problem landing major employers and growing rapidly.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Townsend on September 13, 2017, 11:16:49 am
I’m not so sure the political environment is nearly the impediment many on here believe it to be. 

I don't believe it's just the idiots Oklahoma has in office.  It's the things they've done to hurt Oklahoma and thus Tulsa for almost anything.

We don't have a lot of what other states have.  No coastline, no mountains, no system for ease of travel.  No "holy smile, what a great idea!" ideas.

The education system after Pre-K to University has been enormously harmed by the cut in support.  Sadly, the pre-K system is feeling the harm.

We have outdated laws governing booze, gambling and cannabis.

We have hate speech and religious speech making it to law only to be shot down by the OK supreme court.

I can go on but what for?

The longer Oklahoma has a severe case of the stupids, the more of the open minded, fair minded, intelligent population will move to states with more to offer.

As this population moves, the worse the stupids will get.  It's a cycle that builds on itself.

It's too easy to see the negative in Oklahoma and too hard to see the positive.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 13, 2017, 11:21:05 am


We have hate speech and religious speech making it to law only to be shot down by the OK supreme court.

I can go on but what for?

The longer Oklahoma has a severe case of the stupids, the more of the open minded, fair minded, intelligent population will move to states with more to offer.

As this population moves, the worse the stupids will get.  It's a cycle that builds on itself.

It's too easy to see the negative in Oklahoma and too hard to see the positive.



I can see the positives, but the blinding glare of the negatives overloads the retina!  It's a lot like looking at the eclipse - all the stupids blasting your eyes, with the positives appearing just for a few minutes.  Every few dozen years....



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 13, 2017, 12:43:08 pm
Look, I think Tulsa is great also, but I'm not delusional. There are real hurdles that are pretty impossible to overcome in such a short time in order to entertain Amazon here in the near term. None of which deal with the perception of the state/city/area.

Mr. Cash (a BTW grad, and Stanford student) is apparently equally hyped about the prospect, all though not near as realistic.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/dear-mr-bezos-tulsa-is-the-best-candidate-for-amazon/article_7a4b3f80-7138-5f3f-a063-e991aaf5fcea.html

His first plus for Tulsa, central location. Look, we're looking to host a headquarters, not a warehouse. Proximity to the most customers don't count for much if anything in this case.

Next, low cost to develop. I will give him that one, but the reason it's so cheap to develop here is because pretty much no one else wants to develop here either, for a multitude of different reasons obviously.

Next, making it in Tulsa would be a statement move. Ok...

Next, Tulsa's philanthropic and educational resources. He mentions A Gathering Place. I guess I'm just not making the connection as to how this lures Amazon. He then goes on to tout our "World Class" universities. OU is a fine institution, but I think they just recently cracked the top 100 public universities. We have a ways to go. On that note, I will say that not having a major U in Tulsa is not that big of a deal in my opinion. OSU, Arkansas, OU, Kansas and Kansas State should do just fine in providing talent. Does the university really have to be footsteps away. You know that a campus of this magnitude is going to be recruiting from more than a dozen universities probably.

I can't go on after that.

You know the winner is going to be the one that can hore itself out the most. Bezzos knows what he is doing. I think Tulsa will loose because we can't pony up the dough, simple as that.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on September 13, 2017, 01:02:04 pm
Look, I think Tulsa is great also, but I'm not delusional. There are real hurdles that are pretty impossible to overcome in such a short time in order to entertain Amazon here in the near term. None of which deal with the perception of the state/city/area.

Mr. Cash (a BTW grad, and Stanford student) is apparently equally hyped about the prospect, all though not near as realistic.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/dear-mr-bezos-tulsa-is-the-best-candidate-for-amazon/article_7a4b3f80-7138-5f3f-a063-e991aaf5fcea.html

His first plus for Tulsa, central location. Look, we're looking to host a headquarters, not a warehouse. Proximity to the most customers don't count for much if anything in this case.

Next, low cost to develop. I will give him that one, but the reason it's so cheap to develop here is because pretty much no one else wants to develop here either, for a multitude of different reasons obviously.

Next, making it in Tulsa would be a statement move. Ok...

Next, Tulsa's philanthropic and educational resources. He mentions A Gathering Place. I guess I'm just not making the connection as to how this lures Amazon. He then goes on to tout our "World Class" universities. OU is a fine institution, but I think they just recently cracked the top 100 public universities. We have a ways to go. On that note, I will say that not having a major U in Tulsa is not that big of a deal in my opinion. OSU, Arkansas, OU, Kansas and Kansas State should do just fine in providing talent. Does the university really have to be footsteps away. You know that a campus of this magnitude is going to be recruiting from more than a dozen universities probably.

I can't go on after that.

You know the winner is going to be the one that can hore itself out the most. Bezzos knows what he is doing. I think Tulsa will loose because we can't pony up the dough, simple as that.

Tulsa biggest asset is lower wages. The average expected pay for these Job is $100k per year as reported, Tulsa is generally ~20% cheaper so the same job will pay ~$80k, with a probably higher standard of living as well due to lower cost of living.

That's a billion dollars a year in cost savings. Real money. That's the lead to the bid. Airport connections are easy to solve. We have good potential sites and can waive property taxes as incentives. Tulsa has overbuilt on infrastructure and can absorb lots of new people rather easily.

Our downfall I expect is lack of an large STEM educated workforce, poor secondary and public university education systems and lack of mass transit.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 13, 2017, 01:13:58 pm
Tulsa biggest asset is lower wages. The average expected pay for these Job is $100k per year as reported, Tulsa is generally ~20% cheaper so the same job will pay ~$80k, with a probably higher standard of living as well due to lower cost of living.

That's a billion dollars a year in cost savings. Real money. That's the lead to the bid. Airport connections are easy to solve. We have good potential sites and can waive property taxes as incentives. Tulsa has overbuilt on infrastructure and can absorb lots of new people rather easily.

Our downfall I expect is lack of an large STEM educated workforce, poor secondary and public university education systems and lack of mass transit.

For whatever reason that doesn't work with big time companies. Apparently companies like paying high wages.

At least it doesn't work for Bartlesville.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on September 13, 2017, 01:28:21 pm
For whatever reason that doesn't work with big time companies. Apparently companies like paying high wages.

At least it doesn't work for Bartlesville.

I work in the tech industry and if I wanted to move to our offices in San Jose or Philly I would get a 20% pay bump. And a much higher cost of living, unaffordable housing and in the case of San Jose, most likely a lovely 1.5 hour commute. My division also has an office in Plano, but I don't think that pays differently than Tulsa, or not much. Or I could move to Bangalore and make 20% of what I do here.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DTowner on September 13, 2017, 01:56:21 pm
I don't believe it's just the idiots Oklahoma has in office.  It's the things they've done to hurt Oklahoma and thus Tulsa for almost anything.

We don't have a lot of what other states have.  No coastline, no mountains, no system for ease of travel.  No "holy smile, what a great idea!" ideas.

The education system after Pre-K to University has been enormously harmed by the cut in support.  Sadly, the pre-K system is feeling the harm.

We have outdated laws governing booze, gambling and cannabis.

We have hate speech and religious speech making it to law only to be shot down by the OK supreme court.

I can go on but what for?

The longer Oklahoma has a severe case of the stupids, the more of the open minded, fair minded, intelligent population will move to states with more to offer.

As this population moves, the worse the stupids will get.  It's a cycle that builds on itself.

It's too easy to see the negative in Oklahoma and too hard to see the positive.

It’s not like Oklahoma has ever been known as a high spender on education.  It is easy to lay blame on the party in charge now (and there is blame due), but this state was basically a one-party state for decades before it transitioned to a one-party state of the other party.  Indeed, Oklahoma’s prohibition and many of its other backwards looking laws were put in place by the Democrats/progressives who ruled for decades.

You can argue that states on the coasts have moved away from those values about which many voters in Oklahoma still care about and vote on, but the same can be said for other states, like Texas, that are attracting many companies from those so-called progressive parts of the country.  I think too many on this board tend to try and jam their own dissatisfaction with Oklahoma politics into everything that does or does not happen to our state.
 
Undoubtedly Oklahoma’s negative national reputation in many areas hurt it when it comes to recruiting companies to relocate to here.  However, in the end I think these are primarily business decisions driven by business factors.




Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 13, 2017, 02:34:25 pm
Find myself agreeing, in large part, to the last two posts of DTowner.  I think a lot of the reasons we don't attract companies are well-worn excuses.

I looked at the "worst state legislatures" in the country and found a 5-year-old article in the uber-liberal Mother Jones.  Oklahoma was on the list of the worst of the worst, but so was North Carolina (uber-booming Charlotte, Raleigh, etc.), Georgia (booming), Florida (booming), Missouri (Kansas City has had exponential quality growth since I lived there in 2000), Tennessee (booming Nashville), New Hampshire.  So, I don't think the state legislature is the reason we don't attract businesses.

Education - I went to a school where we were taught in surplus Quonset huts from WWII. Guaranteed teachers made a fraction of what TPS teachers at the time made and still to this day. That school was honored by the White House several years after I left for being one of the nation's best.  Sure, parents took an active role in their kids' education, but the money issue can't be everything.  Yes, we need to get teacher raises. First, have McKinsey or somebody do a full statewide audit on the public education system. Surely they'd say start by consolidating 500+ school districts to 200 at least.  We have more school districts than Texas.  Why do we need a superintendent earning $80,000-120,000 to run 1-2 60-student schools? Any savings could go to teacher raises. They may find other areas of savings and other areas where we need to invest more. We still rank 30th best in the nation combined K-12 & Higher-Ed. That means 20 states and I think DC rank lower according to U.S. News & World Report.   I just think this is overblown as a reason we don't attract businesses. I also think people would be willing to invest more if they thought there was stringent accountability. 

Nobody has mentioned Health.  Ours isn't great but I don't see that being the problem either.

I agree other states pony up more money to lure companies.  What happened with Macy's is routine elsewhere.  It was a Herculean effort of many groups here.       

Our negative national reputation is driven by our own people.  We lack self-confidence when talking about ourselves. We have almost created the negative national reputation and fostered it. I can find significant negatives in about every state you can mention.  New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, etc.     


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 13, 2017, 02:50:02 pm
Tulsa biggest asset is lower wages. The average expected pay for these Job is $100k per year as reported, Tulsa is generally ~20% cheaper so the same job will pay ~$80k, with a probably higher standard of living as well due to lower cost of living.

That's a billion dollars a year in cost savings. Real money. That's the lead to the bid. Airport connections are easy to solve. We have good potential sites and can waive property taxes as incentives. Tulsa has overbuilt on infrastructure and can absorb lots of new people rather easily.

Our downfall I expect is lack of an large STEM educated workforce, poor secondary and public university education systems and lack of mass transit.


We have NO lack of STEM workforce!  We have a LOT of STEM workers around - and GOOD ones!!  Many looking for those 'good' jobs that the local RWRE is always slapping their jaws about.  And many, MANY, more who have had to leave to find work - brain drain is real here and is a problem, but I bet many would come back if they could.  I could supply a list of at least a dozen unemployed and underemployed, highly educated, massively experienced engineers and technicians (mostly electrical/electronics) who would love to get a good job in northeast Oklahoma!  (Me included).  Take one off that list - he just got a job here after having to move to St Louis and then Phoenix area for about the last 10 years!  He was hammered in one of those deals where local company sold out to national firm (Stanley) and then the place got shut down and moved out.  (The more informed, or locally tuned in, among us will be able to figure that one out easily.)

Usually, at least once a week, I get to talk with a couple of EE's who have been actively looking and haven't found anything better than the mediocre, mind-numbing, low satisfaction grunt work they have been doing for many years.  Working WAY below what I would have them do if could hire them.   One is the absolute "poster child" of what a company should be looking for - all the right boxes checked, flexibility to move pretty much anywhere, works well with others, is still young - mid 30's - and has reasonable salary expectations to the area.  Not happening.  Many of the "jobs" you see out there posted are just fishing expeditions.  They advertise on the job boards, may even occasionally interview someone - I have had a couple of those, but essentially none ever get hired...  There are a few out there, in Tulsa, ( I can list 5 without even having to look at notes) who have had the same "jobs" posted for anywhere from 1 to over 3 years.  If one is really looking for people, it doesn't take more than a few weeks tops to find a good choice here.  

Disclaimer;  I know that at least part of my problem is the age.  Have even had one admit it to the headhunter and they let it slip...in code, of course.  Too experienced - I would never be happy with the job.

When people talk about "can't find" <fill in the STEM blank>, especially in NE OK, they are lying!  Not just confused and befuddled - they are flat out lying!




Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 13, 2017, 02:53:59 pm

It’s not like Oklahoma has ever been known as a high spender on education.  It is easy to lay blame on the party in charge now (and there is blame due), but this state was basically a one-party state for decades before it transitioned to a one-party state of the other party.  Indeed, Oklahoma’s prohibition and many of its other backwards looking laws were put in place by the Democrats/progressives who ruled for decades.




In the last 6 years or so, funding has gone down about $400 million or about 35%.  That is WAY below the mostly inadequate funding we had before that.  Both parties had a miserable performance for a long time.  It IS the Republicans who have actively worked to destroy public education in this state in these last few years.  Just like Kansas - but Kansas FINALLY has started to pull their collective head out of the dark places, in spite of their deplorable Governor.





Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on September 13, 2017, 03:32:24 pm
Our negative national reputation is driven by our own people.  We lack self-confidence when talking about ourselves. We have almost created the negative national reputation and fostered it. I can find significant negatives in about every state you can mention.  New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, etc.     

I pondered this for a while and decided it was worth a comment.   "We have almost created the negative national reputation and fostered it"  is the piece I can't let go of.  There is a lot of truth to that.   OK has been a little strange from the start.  We are a state formed, for the most part, in land taken back from the various Indian tribes after we forcibly moved them here in the first place.  Then of course we had the boomers, then the Sooners, then the dust bowl.  Only the vast wealth, albeit limited to a select few, created by oil kept us from being generally forgotten by the rest of the US.  (I mean, hey, at least we aren't Kansas...)   Even being an "Okie" was still so derogatory in the 80's that California almost wouldn't let a restaurant have that word in the name.  ("Okie Girl" restaurant, look it up if you are interested...)

Growing up around Lawton, in SW OK,  we went on vacations to TX, NM, CO, NV, etc. But never Eastern OK.  My first trip to Tulsa was after my first year of college, at OSU.   I had no idea about the Talimena Drive, or Heavner Runstone, or Broken Bow, or any of the other cool places in Eastern OK.  And I lived in the state!    I travel on business basically every week (I'm sitting in the Tulsa airport as I type this) and regularly when I tell people that I am from Tulsa, they say something like "man, isn't it hot and dry there?", or I get some comment about it being so conservative, etc.   I think, seriously, that their mental picture of OK is somewhere along the line of Waco, TX. 

We have a great state.  The Tulsa area in particular has so much to offer.  But even internally we don't promote ourselves.  How do we expect to attract outsiders when don't even have a high mind share among the locals?







 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 13, 2017, 03:53:26 pm
I was at a work function recently sitting at a dinner table with a few people, mostly from the Orlando/Daytona area and Philadelphia. I explained where I lived (Bartlesville). They were vaguely aware of Tulsa. It's just not on anybodies radar.

When describing the amenities that Bartlesville had (for a town as small as it is) they were a bit shocked that such culture existed in "Indian country" (I imagined the word "savage" was going through their head that very moment). And surprised to learn that Phillips Petroleum (which they were all aware of) had been headquartered there for decades.

Heck most people IN TULSA barely comprehend the significance of the collection at Gilcrease.  Maybe we should start there and educate our own citizens about how remarkable some of the aspects of Tulsa really are.

The Brady district in particular is slowly turning into one of the best urban neighborhoods (albeit nobody lives there yet) in the country. Yes, I meant to say the country.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Dspike on September 13, 2017, 04:47:25 pm
What negative national reputation? The only polling I've ever seen about people's view of Oklahoma is overwhelmingly positive (40% positive; 16% negative = +24). We were the 14th most popular state. The most unpopular states were (in order) California, Illinois, NJ, Mississippi, and Utah. For those states, more people had an "unfavorable" view than "favorable." The most popular are Hawaii, Colorado, TN, SD, VA.

I think far too many folks think we have a reputation that we do not.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/02/state-favorability-poll.html

Additionally, when the Chamber studied what people think about Tulsa, the result was "beige." See page 4 under "notable successes" in https://di26aiwl9i0hv.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/VT-Annual-Report-2012-13_Final-Web.pdf

Most people don't think about Tulsa or Oklahoma much. The few who have an opinion are mostly positive. There are many reasons Amazon will not likely put a HQ in Tulsa, but national reputation is not one of them.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 13, 2017, 05:13:23 pm
Totally agree w/ rebound's last post.  Been like this my entire life.  Part of it may be people seem to be more humble here and maybe self-deprecating?  But if you don't toot your own horn, nobody will.  Think of this, Tulsa does not have many tributes to famous/noteworthy Tulsans.  Other cities name things after their favorite sons.  If anything, it's about marketing the city to natives and the outside world - not so much to honor the person!.  Charlotte has Billy Graham Parkway.  Oklahoma City has co-opted famous Green Country names to use to its advantage.  Will Rogers World Airport, Mickey Mantle Blvd., etc.  We name streets after other cities.  Think there's a Tulsa street in Boston?  Tulsa Ave. in Cheyenne, Wyoming?  Paul Harvey is said to be the single most listened to voice in radio history (don't quote me on that), yet there is ZERO, ZIP to honor him anywhere.  You could unfurl a list of people.  Steve Largent is a bigger legend in Seattle than he is here and he lives here.  Garth Brooks was born here.  OKPOP may help with a little of this.

At some point, when we think we've got our stuff together, we should consider an ad campaign (at least on national cable news and/or financial networks targeting thought leaders) that shows a nameless cosmopolitan city, great nearby lakes --- all the great things around here --- then revealing to the viewer at the end that it's Tulsa and where to get more info.  Have Garth Brooks, Kristin Chenoweth, Jeanne Tripplehorn, Steve Largent - types voice them and show up at end to reveal it's Tulsa.  Just a thought.  Back in the day they did that train tour of big cities promoting Tulsa.  We need a salesman.    


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 13, 2017, 05:30:13 pm
Another couple of things - do you think the majority of people commenting in this forum actually live in Tulsa?  I see some don't, but used to live here.

Also, another positive for Tulsa when it comes to Amazon.  Walmart is headquartered 100 miles from here.  Tulsa is the biggest nearby city.  The labor pool is similar in some regards. I think Walmart's digital offering is still based in Silicon Valley - not sure, but retail knowledge is a major part of the mix.  You could raid Walmart if you wanted.   

Brings up another thing.  I recall being upset Phillips moved to Houston with the Conoco merger.  I had the opportunity to talk with a Phillips PR guy.  He said you simply can't operate a world-class corporation from a small town like Bartlesville and that oil companies are all headquartered in Houston.  I pointed out Chevron (San Ramon, CA), ExxonMobil (Irving, TX), and Walmart in Bentonville --- the largest corporation in the world.  It's usually about where the execs and their wives want to live, isn't it? Phillips CEO Jim Mulva was a UT grad, Conoco CEO Archie Dunham (a native Oklahoman) was on the board of the opera or similar in Houston. A man about town.  Those guys got $15 million a piece just for doing that deal between themselves - "change in control" clause in their individual work contracts.  Now, Dunham has given money for a new dorm at OU and likely more.  The Mulvas have a foundation that gives money - probably some in Bartlesville, but I don't know.  Leaving the headquarters in Bartlesville would have been better than a dorm at OU.       


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 13, 2017, 05:31:23 pm
Totally agree w/ rebound's last post.  Been like this my entire life.  Part of it may be people seem to be more humble here and maybe self-deprecating?  But if you don't toot your own horn, nobody will.  Think of this, Tulsa does not have many tributes tofamous/noteworthy Tulsans.  Other cities name things after their favorite sons.  If anything, it's about marketing the city to natives and the outside world - not so much to honor the person!.  Charlotte has Billy Graham Parkway.  Oklahoma City has co-opted famous Green Country names to use to its advantage.  Will Rogers World Airport, Mickey Mantle Blvd., etc.  We name streets after other cities.  Think there's a Tulsa street in Boston?  Tulsa Ave. in Cheyenne, Wyoming?  Paul Harvey is said to be the single most listened to voice in radio history (don't quote me on that), yet there is ZERO, ZIP to honor him anywhere.  You could unfurl a list of people.  Steve Largent is a bigger legend in Seattle than he is here and he lives here.  Garth Brooks was born here.  OKPOP may help with a little of this.

At some point, when we think we've got our stuff together, we should consider an ad campaign (at least on national cable news and/or financial networks targeting thought leaders) that shows a nameless cosmopolitan city, great nearby lakes --- all the great things around here --- then revealing to the viewer at the end that it's Tulsa and where to get more info.  Have Garth Brooks, Kristin Chenoweth, Jeanne Tripplehorn, Steve Largent - types voice them and show up at end to reveal it's Tulsa.  Just a thought.  Back in the day they did that train tour of big cities promoting Tulsa.  We need a salesman.    


We have a stunning array of famous people from here.  BIG names in music, cinema, etc.  And virtually no recognition by the state or better yet, local groups.  Probably the one most visual recently has been Woody Guthrie, and in my mind, he is a giant in the music/poetry world.  Up there close to Dylan.  And most people here don't know anything about him.

Some others - and nowhere near an exhaustive list;

Jim Thorpe
Leon Russell
Anita Bryant (not my favorite, but there seems to be residual fan base)
Reba   (seriously, you need a last name...??)
James Garner
Clark Gable
Johnny Bench
Paul Harvey
Mickey Mantle
Chuck Norris
Ted Shackleford
And even though it makes me gag a little, and get some stomach acid in my mouth when I say it, Toby Keith.

Even a place like Memphis sells their celebrities better than we do with the Elvis mansion, but that is probably more a function of the family rather than the town.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 13, 2017, 05:37:03 pm
What negative national reputation? The only polling I've ever seen about people's view of Oklahoma is overwhelmingly positive (40% positive; 16% negative = +24). We were the 14th most popular state. The most unpopular states were (in order) California, Illinois, NJ, Mississippi, and Utah. For those states, more people had an "unfavorable" view than "favorable." The most popular are Hawaii, Colorado, TN, SD, VA.

I think far too many folks think we have a reputation that we do not.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/02/state-favorability-poll.html

Additionally, when the Chamber studied what people think about Tulsa, the result was "beige." See page 4 under "notable successes" in https://di26aiwl9i0hv.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/VT-Annual-Report-2012-13_Final-Web.pdf

Most people don't think about Tulsa or Oklahoma much. The few who have an opinion are mostly positive. There are many reasons Amazon will not likely put a HQ in Tulsa, but national reputation is not one of them.




Just shows you how unreliable polling can be.  I have told the story about friends in New York who were afraid to come here due to Indian trouble possibilities.  I told them it was ok in big cities, but might get an occasional arrow in the car as you traveled the turnpike.  That was their reality before the story (and after) as well as dozens, if not hundreds I have talked to about OK over the years.  Talk to real people to see how they really feel.

The biggest reason most of them think about us now is when one of our stupid laws gets passed that is blatantly and obviously unconstitutional.  We look like 'hicks from the sticks', and our actions reinforce it to much of the outside world.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on September 13, 2017, 06:38:30 pm
Another couple of things - do you think the majority of people commenting in this forum actually live in Tulsa?  I see some don't, but used to live here.

Also, another positive for Tulsa when it comes to Amazon.  Walmart is headquartered 100 miles from here.  Tulsa is the biggest nearby city.  The labor pool is similar in some regards. I think Walmart's digital offering is still based in Silicon Valley - not sure, but retail knowledge is a major part of the mix.  You could raid Walmart if you wanted.   

Brings up another thing.  I recall being upset Phillips moved to Houston with the Conoco merger.  I had the opportunity to talk with a Phillips PR guy.  He said you simply can't operate a world-class corporation from a small town like Bartlesville and that oil companies are all headquartered in Houston.  I pointed out Chevron (San Ramon, CA), ExxonMobil (Irving, TX), and Walmart in Bentonville --- the largest corporation in the world.  It's usually about where the execs and their wives want to live, isn't it? Phillips CEO Jim Mulva was a UT grad, Conoco CEO Archie Dunham (a native Oklahoman) was on the board of the opera or similar in Houston. A man about town.  Those guys got $15 million a piece just for doing that deal between themselves - "change in control" clause in their individual work contracts.  Now, Dunham has given money for a new dorm at OU and likely more.  The Mulvas have a foundation that gives money - probably some in Bartlesville, but I don't know.  Leaving the headquarters in Bartlesville would have been better than a dorm at OU.       

Point well taken on Wal-Mart and with every possible American vendor with offices within a two hour drive that can be a plus. But San Ramon is part of a metro of 8.8 million people that is the center of the tech universe and Irving is is part of a metro with 7.7 million. They aren't small towns, they are suburbs of two world class cities.

My money again would be on this HQ going to Denver or Dallas. And by Dallas I mean most likely Plano, Allen or Frisco


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: bluelake on September 13, 2017, 07:30:36 pm
*raises hand*

I've got an idea!

Seattle's mayor, Ed Murray, just resigned effective today September 13 after a fifth accuser (his cousin) came forward with a claim of sexual abuse.  Since he's now looking for a job, why doesn't he come to Oklahoma, change his D to an R, take Shortey's place at the capital and help us to try and lure Amazon to Oklahoma?  Seems like his experience as mayor of Amazon Town would come in handy in getting Amazon to Oklahoma/Tulsa.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 13, 2017, 09:20:31 pm
swake - see what you mean. I was referring to the Phillips 66 guy saying all oil companies needed to be headquartered in Houston. The two biggest are not.  I realize they have the majority of their workers in Houston, but the C-Suite is not there.  Walmart - I was talking about being in a small town.  I could have worded it better.

Mr. Murray?  Wow. No thank you. Thank you, very much!


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Red Arrow on September 13, 2017, 09:26:40 pm
Another couple of things - do you think the majority of people commenting in this forum actually live in Tulsa?  I see some don't, but used to live here.

I expect most live in the area.  I actually live in Bixby near 111th and Memorial.  I have walked to Lowe's, Reasor's and Walmart.

Edit:
But then I have also walked to the Bixby BBQ and Jazz festival a few times at almost 3 miles each way.  Several reasons for walking, I don't want to subject my car to the parking situation,  with traffic walking is almost as fast and I hate the idea of paying $10 for parking.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Townsend on September 14, 2017, 11:10:55 am
I can find significant negatives in about every state you can mention.  New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, etc.     

Sure you can.  Me too.  But can you do a Ben Franklin close and match the positives?

Does Oklahoma have as many reasonable positives that would make the Amazon workers want to live here?

Could you imagine trying to head hunt someone who lives in NY, MA, or CT and say "Oklahoma...it has a musical."?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 14, 2017, 01:48:47 pm
I imagine if Amazon put its headquarters here, Amazon workers would want to live here if they wanted to be Amazon workers.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on September 14, 2017, 04:00:55 pm
I imagine if Amazon put its headquarters here, Amazon workers would want to live here if they wanted to be Amazon workers.

Ever read "Tipping Point"?  It's all about how major changes occur along the margins, and are often due to seemingly very small day-to-day differences.

The fear from Amazon, and from any major employer, is that they will lose top talent on the margins if they don't locate in a desirable area/city.  So, they don't get their first choice for job XX because that person wouldn't want to move to a certain city, etc.   For any one single position that would not be a big deal, but across the board it can cause an overall diminishment of the class of worker they get. 

At least that's the theory/fear.   Debate at will whether it has merit.

 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 14, 2017, 04:32:28 pm
Ever read "Tipping Point"?  It's all about how major changes occur along the margins, and are often due to seemingly very small day-to-day differences.

The fear from Amazon, and from any major employer, is that they will lose top talent on the margins if they don't locate in a desirable area/city.  So, they don't get their first choice for job XX because that person wouldn't want to move to a certain city, etc.   For any one single position that would not be a big deal, but across the board it can cause an overall diminishment of the class of worker they get.  

At least that's the theory/fear.   Debate at will whether it has merit.

  

Sure it has merit. Probably something to not being able to recruit here as opposed to San Jose, CA.  But, I'll mention Walmart again.  I've never heard of them having trouble attracting quality people for their jobs in NW Arkansas because that's where Walmart is.    

As I recall, the vast majority of Dollar-Thrifty employees offered jobs with Hertz in Florida refused to go.  So if you get people here they tend to like it.  If you're into family lifestyle, etc.  Jet-setting senior executive climber-types, maybe not.   Garmin opened a place here because it couldn't get a handful of former Lowrance creative-types to move to Kansas City.  I think this place is competitively desirable --- you have to sell it as such.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Red Arrow on September 14, 2017, 05:26:28 pm
As I recall, the vast majority of Dollar-Thrifty employees offered jobs with Hertz in Florida refused to go.  So if you get people here they tend to like it.  

Dad investigated a few job opportunities before accepting a transfer to here in 1971.  It's been mostly OK.  Mom and dad didn't retire to FL as they originally planned because by then we all had enough connections here to stay here.  I came back to Tulsa/Bixby after getting out of the Navy as an inexpensive place to stay while going back to school at TU.  Then I had enough connections to stay.

It can be tough to leave the Tulsa area since the cost of living and wages are generally lower than the "more desirable" places to go, school teachers excepted.  Moving to a higher cost area takes a lot of desire to leave.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 14, 2017, 10:04:14 pm

As I recall, the vast majority of Dollar-Thrifty employees offered jobs with Hertz in Florida refused to go.  So if you get people here they tend to like it.  If you're into family lifestyle, etc.  Jet-setting senior executive climber-types, maybe not.   Garmin opened a place here because it couldn't get a handful of former Lowrance creative-types to move to Kansas City.  I think this place is competitively desirable --- you have to sell it as such.



Seems like I remember at least a few of them went to Olathe for a while first, then came back here.  I think Garmin thought it might be easier to recruit some more from Lowrance if they were here.  They have intermittently been one of those that runs ads for extended periods of time without action.


I have been looking for a fish locator for a little while and online shows a really nice selection of Garmin stuff.  Then when you go to the store, there is severely limited selection compared to Lowrance and even Hummingbird.  They seem to be struggling to get shelf space.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on September 14, 2017, 10:54:34 pm
swake made a valid point about how with our cost of living in Tulsa that there is an incentive of lower payroll costs which could be attractive on the workforce scale that Amazon is looking at. Wal-Mart has probably saved billions as well by having their HQ in NW Arkansas all these years.

I think our culture is simply so far removed from that of Seattle that we would seem like an oddity to Amazon management.  Either we need to support the sort of entrepreneurship which will eventually grow into a huge global concern and stay in Tulsa or pursue more 500-1000 job expansions and then start going after progressively larger ones from there.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on September 15, 2017, 07:21:27 am
Ignoring everything else, metro areas the size of Tulsa would make it exceedingly difficult to find 5k+ new employees, let alone 10 times that.  We are taking Amazon hiring 1 out of every 3 college graduates in from Bville to Tahlequah , to Okmulgee and all parts in between.  Or attract 10s of thousands of college graduates and as many as a hundred thousand
"multiplier" employees in short order.  One of the reasons Amazon is leaving Seattle is because the area isn't large enough to handle more rapid growth - with 4 times the Tulsa metro population and demographics more amenable to Amazon's needs.

If Amazon is serious about a large corporate HQ with rapid growth, the metro area realistically has to be much larger than 1 mil.  That isn't a knock on Tulsa, Salt Lake City, Richmond, Louisville, Memphis, OKC, Raleigh, etc.  It simply doesn't make sense to split apart from the city you were founded in to seek easier recruitment, only to end up in a location with an amplified problem.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 15, 2017, 07:39:46 am
Ignoring everything else, metro areas the size of Tulsa would make it exceedingly difficult to find 5k+ new employees, let alone 10 times that.

You think Amazon's Seattle workforce was born and raised in Seattle?
I'm guessing the vast majority relocated from far and wide to work for Amazon.   How many Tulsans moved to Seattle to work at Amazon?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 15, 2017, 08:01:17 am
You think Amazon's Seattle workforce was born and raised in Seattle?
I'm guessing the vast majority relocated from far and wide to work for Amazon.   How many Tulsans moved to Seattle to work at Amazon?


I know about half a dozen who moved there before Amazon.  And their kids have stayed to work in the video game industry.  Some at Microsoft.  None at Amazon, yet.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 15, 2017, 08:27:23 am
You think Amazon's Seattle workforce was born and raised in Seattle?
I'm guessing the vast majority relocated from far and wide to work for Amazon.   How many Tulsans moved to Seattle to work at Amazon?

Similar to Bartlesville. The vast majority of employees at the big oil company are not native Bartians. That being said, CoP bitches and moans all the time about how difficult it is to recruit here.

I think it really just comes down to where does upper management think it they want to live (see Continental Resources and ConocoPhillips for examples of this).


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 15, 2017, 09:38:36 am
Similar to Bartlesville. The vast majority of employees at the big oil company are not native Bartians. That being said, CoP bitches and moans all the time about how difficult it is to recruit here.

I think it really just comes down to where does upper management think it they want to live (see Continental Resources and ConocoPhillips for examples of this).


The end of the sentence about difficulties recruiting is always left off.    Difficult to recruit here for half price wages.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DTowner on September 15, 2017, 12:32:29 pm
To get a sense of the “incentive” war we face with other states, note that Wisconsin just voted to give FoxConn a $2.85 BILLION incentive to locate its new plant there.  And that plant is supposed to create only 13,000 jobs.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DTowner on September 15, 2017, 12:41:41 pm
No city in America has 50,000+ qualified employees sitting around waiting for Amazon to move in and throw up a “Now Hiring” sign.  Where ever this new Amazon headquarters II ends up, it is going to distort the labor market, housing, transportation, etc.  It is simply too big not to do so.  Also keep in mind, not only will the bulk of those 50,000+ people be moving in from somewhere else, but that a lot of cities around the country are going to be losing people to the chosen city.  That may not matter to the really big cities, but what would the effect be on Tulsa if it lost 500 or 1000 of its brightest up and comers?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 15, 2017, 01:30:49 pm
Didn't Amazon say it would be a relatively gradual buildup to 50,000.  It's not a 1-3 year process to get to 50,000. 

Also, look what State Farm is doing with it's 3 regional superhubs in Richardson, Atlanta and Phoenix.  They're consolidating a dozen regional offices including the one in Tulsa.  That place started at around 2,000 and whittled down over the years as they were transfered to DFW.  Tulsa could also draw on the DFW market for workers if need be and Kansas City and Oklahoma City.

Have you seen State Farm's massive operation in Bloomington, IL?  It's loaded with young workers.  How do they attract people to stay and live in Bloomington? 

Unrelated - what happened to MetLife?  They've abandoned the big regional office at 51st & 129th E. Ave.  Been vacant this entire year.  Somebody said they moved into Tulsa City Hall.  Anybody know details?  Tulsa Chamber still lists them at 51st & 129th.  I know they recently separated their businesses.  Are they still here with any significant number of employees?   


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on September 15, 2017, 02:13:38 pm
State Farm employs 15k in Bloomington, IL, a workforce they have been growing there since 1922, they started there and grew up there.   They have no plans to expand in Bloomington.  Instead, they are growing new hubs in major metro areas (10k in Dallas, Phoenix, and Atlanta). So that seems like a bad example.

Amazon started in Seattle.  They started by drawing from the metro, then the region, then recruiting nationally.  They have now hit a mark where it is difficult to draw on any significant local labor pool and their size is creating issues in their current home (50k+ Amazon employees is stressing out a metro of 4.5 million).  Recruiting nationally is more expensive, more difficult, and makes it a much slower process (and again, recruiting that many people to Seattle is proving difficult for the City to cope with).  Which is why they want to help alleviate the issue. One reason why energy firms move to Houston, why State Farm is opening hubs - there's a starter supply of labor with the skill sets they want and an area that can handle the growth.

Yes... in any area it will have to recruit to grow.  It is simply a matter of proportions.  I hate to be that pragmatic jerk,  but the metrics aren't good as we roll down their checklist.  I'm not saying I hope they don't come or that they shouldn't come to Tulsa, I'm offering a likely reason their analysis will look elsewhere unless they anticipate a much more organic (slow) growth pattern.  This isn't pointing something out to Amazon analysts they aren't considering (hey, this person on the internet in Tulsa said they aren't big enough. Scratch them off the list).

The entire Tulsa CSA, from Bvill to Okmulgee to Tahlequah is just over 1 mil people.  About half of those are in the work force (500k).  About a third have a degree above HS diploma (166k).  Nearly all are employed.  If Amazon wanted to hire 50k people in 5 years, with an employment multiplier certainly over 2 - there'd be at least 150k new jobs.  With a 50% labor force participation that's 300k new people in ~5 years.  A 30% growth rate is possible, and it sure would be interesting to me (that's 50% faster growth rate than Austin in the last 6 years).  But why would Amazon want to take on a challenge and an unknown like that, essentially multiplying the problems it's trying to escape?  Amazon reportedly has thousands of job openings in Seattle it cannot fill because they are growing faster than they can recruit people to Seattle.  It seems doubtful they would want to start off with a similar problem from day 1 in their new location.  

Again - go get 'em Bynum.  I can live anywhere I want and I choose Tulsa.  I'm not surprised that more people are choosing Tulsa all the time.  But it seems unlikely that an analysis by Amazon will decide we can match their needs if what they want is to setup tens of thousands of tech jobs in a few years.  Hopefully, the search reveals that several regional offices are the way to go - with one in a great community called Tulsa.  And hopefully we don't have to give them billions of dollars to make it happen...   ;)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 15, 2017, 02:46:41 pm
State Farm employs 15k in Bloomington, IL, a workforce they have been growing there since 1922, they started there and grew up there.   They have no plans to expand in Bloomington.  Instead, they are growing new hubs in major metro areas (10k in Dallas, Phoenix, and Atlanta). So that seems like a bad example.

Amazon started in Seattle.  They started by drawing from the metro, then the region, then recruiting nationally.  They have now hit a mark where it is difficult to draw on any significant local labor pool and their size is creating issues in their current home (50k+ Amazon employees is stressing out a metro of 4.5 million).  Recruiting nationally is more expensive, more difficult, and makes it a much slower process (and again, recruiting that many people to Seattle is proving difficult for the City to cope with).  Which is why they want to help alleviate the issue. One reason why energy firms move to Houston, why State Farm is opening hubs - there's a starter supply of labor with the skill sets they want and an area that can handle the growth.

Yes... in any area it will have to recruit to grow.  It is simply a matter of proportions.  I hate to be that pragmatic jerk,  but the metrics aren't good as we roll down their checklist.  I'm not saying I hope they don't come or that they shouldn't come to Tulsa, I'm offering a likely reason their analysis will look elsewhere unless they anticipate a much more organic (slow) growth pattern.  This isn't pointing something out to Amazon analysts they aren't considering (hey, this person on the internet in Tulsa said they aren't big enough. Scratch them off the list).

The entire Tulsa CSA, from Bvill to Okmulgee to Tahlequah is just over 1 mil people.  About half of those are in the work force (500k).  About a third have a degree above HS diploma (166k).  Nearly all are employed.  If Amazon wanted to hire 50k people in 5 years, with an employment multiplier certainly over 2 - there'd be at least 150k new jobs.  With a 50% labor force participation that's 300k new people in ~5 years.  A 30% growth rate is possible, and it sure would be interesting to me (that's 50% faster growth rate than Austin in the last 6 years).  But why would Amazon want to take on a challenge and an unknown like that, essentially multiplying the problems it's trying to escape?  Amazon reportedly has thousands of job openings in Seattle it cannot fill because they are growing faster than they can recruit people to Seattle.  It seems doubtful they would want to start off with a similar problem from day 1 in their new location.  

Again - go get 'em Bynum.  I can live anywhere I want and I choose Tulsa.  I'm not surprised that more people are choosing Tulsa all the time.  But it seems unlikely that an analysis by Amazon will decide we can match their needs if what they want is to setup tens of thousands of tech jobs in a few years.  Hopefully, the search reveals that several regional offices are the way to go - with one in a great community called Tulsa.  And hopefully we don't have to give them billions of dollars to make it happen...   ;)

According to news reports, State Farm is expanding its workforce in Bloomington as part of closing its regional offices and opening the hubs  http://www.pantagraph.com/business/state-farm-closing-facilities-some-jobs-expected-to-move-to/article_d5653995-3432-5805-9fc8-1a10de032e7d.html

I don't disagree with much else you say.  Why did all these companies remain in the cities where they started?  In Tulsa, we seem to get a promising company and then the owners cash out - it moves.  What keeps State Farm in Bloomington.  What keeps Walmart in Bentonville?  What keeps Quicken Loans or anything in Detroit (I like Detroit, but...)?   


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: MostSeriousness on September 18, 2017, 06:46:27 am
Unrelated - what happened to MetLife?  They've abandoned the big regional office at 51st & 129th E. Ave.  Been vacant this entire year.  Somebody said they moved into Tulsa City Hall.  Anybody know details?  Tulsa Chamber still lists them at 51st & 129th.  I know they recently separated their businesses.  Are they still here with any significant number of employees?   

Don't know about their whole operations, but I have a friend who just recently started with MetLife and does work in the City Hall building. So they have at least part of a floor if not a whole one?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on September 18, 2017, 07:47:33 am
All I know is I'm pretty sure our mayor out here in Cimarron, NM has NOT sent a proposal to Amazon.  ;D


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on September 18, 2017, 08:15:30 am
According to news reports, State Farm is expanding its workforce in Bloomington as part of closing its regional offices and opening the hubs  http://www.pantagraph.com/business/state-farm-closing-facilities-some-jobs-expected-to-move-to/article_d5653995-3432-5805-9fc8-1a10de032e7d.html

I don't disagree with much else you say.  Why did all these companies remain in the cities where they started?  In Tulsa, we seem to get a promising company and then the owners cash out - it moves.  What keeps State Farm in Bloomington.  What keeps Walmart in Bentonville?  What keeps Quicken Loans or anything in Detroit (I like Detroit, but...)?   

I read an article that said they do not intend to grow the workforce in Bloomington. 
http://www.pantagraph.com/news/tipsord-bloomington-workforce-to-remain-largest-for-state-farm/article_6dd743a8-4b15-56c2-bed7-65ec72616076.html

Ironically, your article states that State Farm may add some jobs in Bloomington (most will be going to their new hubs), including jobs when they shut down their Tulsa, Oklahoma facility.   >:(
http://www.pantagraph.com/business/state-farm-closing-facilities-some-jobs-expected-to-move-to/article_d5653995-3432-5805-9fc8-1a10de032e7d.html

But I think I agree with your major premise:  companies seem much more likely to have loyalty to a place if they were founded there:  Bank of Oklahoma.  Williams. OneOK.   If their infrastructure doesn't readily transfer:  refineries, hospitals, some production facilities.  Or if their people really want to stay put.

Most of the places that are booming are not booming because they have the lowest taxes, least regulation, cheap labor, or a low cost of living.  Most of the places that are booming are booming because talented people  want to be there.  Its all about quality of life and energy.  Tulsa has made great strides in spite of a large amount of internal push back, but we need to really keep it up.  We need to get away from the "we are blessed that XYZ big box store wants to come" or "this employer will only come and offer marginal jobs if we bribe them" mentality and demand excellence.   No one wins in a race to the bottom.

I think our current administration understands this, I know plenty of people on here do...


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 19, 2017, 12:16:12 pm
Cities Are Competing to Give Amazon the ‘Mother of All Civic Giveaways’
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/43aw8q/cities-are-competing-to-give-amazon-the-mother-of-all-civic-giveaways


Quote
"It's an intoxicating proposition to detonate an Amazon prosperity bomb in the center of their city," Scott Galloway, a marketing professor at New York University and the author of The Four: The Hidden DNA of Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google, told me on a phone call. But "this has the potential to be destructive on the wrong terms for the local municipality."


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 21, 2017, 07:50:41 am
Okrahoma made the New York Times!  In a bad way again....

Anyone out there still "deaf" enough to think we have a chance with Amazon??

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/20/us/oklahoma-city-police-shooting-deaf.html?mcubz=3



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TeeDub on September 21, 2017, 07:58:16 am

You make waving a pipe at the cops sound strangely acceptable.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on September 21, 2017, 09:23:45 am
You make waving a pipe at the cops sound strangely acceptable.

Don't bring a pipe to a gun fight.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Moderator on September 21, 2017, 10:21:40 am
Focus.

Not every thread needs to descend into a political discussion.  We get that just about anything can be related to a topic if you try, but lets not.  Drifting everything towards blatant politics drives many people away from the topic at hand.

Thank you.

- Moderator


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on September 21, 2017, 11:04:48 am
Focus.

Not every thread needs to descend into a political discussion.  We get that just about anything can be related to a topic if you try, but lets not.  Drifting everything towards blatant politics drives many people away from the topic at hand.

Thank you.

- Moderator

Thank you


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 21, 2017, 01:12:34 pm
You make waving a pipe at the cops sound strangely acceptable.




No.  Not at all.  What is significant is NOT just the one little sound bite portion you bring up, but the totality also involved many people yelling to get attention WELL before the guy got even close to the two cops.  And only one saw fit to start shooting - rather than following the taser example of the other.  It is a horrible lack of judgement.  And just highlights the known, ongoing problems with police actions across the country.  

Shelby again.  Only worse.


And this is very directly related to the national reputation we have not just with policing, but education, infrastructure, and just a general perception from areas outside of 'fly over land' that we are simply hicks from the sticks.  It is sad.  I would love to have Amazon here - I bet I could get hired on with them - but cannot see a path to that happening.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaBeMore on September 21, 2017, 06:58:19 pm
Let's see...negative headlines in Charlotte, Atlanta, etc...don't seem to keep down job development there.  ConAgra & McDonald's are OK with Chicago...on pace to have more homicides than NY and LA combined. Don't think the OKC thing would impact anything.

While the moderator is around, does the home page get updated much?  I got on here a few weeks ago and thought the site was abandoned till I found the forums...just asking. Realize its volunteer thing.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on September 22, 2017, 09:05:29 am
Let's see...negative headlines in Charlotte, Atlanta, etc...don't seem to keep down job development there.  ConAgra & McDonald's are OK with Chicago...on pace to have more homicides than NY and LA combined. Don't think the OKC thing would impact anything.

While the moderator is around, does the home page get updated much?  I got on here a few weeks ago and thought the site was abandoned till I found the forums...just asking. Realize its volunteer thing.



So ALL those dozens of new companies moving into Oklahoma in recent years just came here in spite of perceptions...  but what about those that have left?


Don't forget Boeing - they like Chicago, too - moved there from Seattle.




Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on September 29, 2017, 01:57:52 pm
It's already been mentioned but one way to boost Tulsa's profile for attracting technology companies is to create more home-grown talent at the local universities.  In 2008, the mayor of NYC Michael Bloomberg led an initiative to look at how NYC can keep up with global economic trends, and one of the ways was to have an existing university build a new applied sciences campus in the city with a focus on STEM programs.  Cornell won the competition and built Cornell Tech which acts as a branch of the main campus in upstate NY but with a STEM focus in an urban setting.  The same could be applied to the Tulsa campuses of OSU, OU or both. 

Houston is already looking at Cornell as a model for an urban branch of the UT system but, like in Oklahoma, is running into political issues:

"A focus group for the Houston land purchased by the University of Texas System evaluated the Cornell campus as a possible model for its operations. The Cornell campus touts private work spaces and open-plan offices that are modeled after tech companies’ workspaces, and The Wall Street Journal says the campus buildings “set a new bar for architecture.”

“High-tech companies and new, small companies that will be the next big companies, they tend to be created where the founders go to school. You see that in Silicon Valley. Here was a chance to get a bunch of people educated and create the economy of the future for New York City.” 

If Chancellor William McRaven hadn’t called off the Houston plans, the task force would have proposed an idea for an institute for data science, saying it would bolster Houston's energy and health sectors and would allow UT to collaborate with industry and national laboratories.

That operation, of course, was called off in March amid growing criticism from lawmakers, regents and Houston campuses – before the system or task force unveiled publicly any vision for the property. McRaven said he couldn’t develop a “shared vision” for UT’s use of the land. The project cost him political capital in Austin, and he pledged to sell the land.

But in his annual State of the City address, Mayor Sylvester Turner asked the University of Houston, Rice University and Texas A&M to work with UT to take on a task force's recommendations for how to use the 300-plus acres near the Texas Medical Center.

"If Houston wants to remain a global leader in energy, aeronautics, health care and education, we also need to be a leader in data science. And the world's premiere data science center needs to be and must be right here in the city of Houston," Turner said.

http://www.chron.com/local/education/campus-chronicles/article/Cornell-Tech-campus-once-a-model-for-UT-in-12205042.php (http://www.chron.com/local/education/campus-chronicles/article/Cornell-Tech-campus-once-a-model-for-UT-in-12205042.php)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TheArtist on September 30, 2017, 08:39:57 am
Few angles that I hope they would not overlook when approaching Amazon.  

1. Best of both worlds, small city with big city amenities (and they could be a big partner and influence in shaping a brighter future, essentially helping to create an ideal city).  Imagine a bustling urban setting, but without the terrible traffic you find in places like Austin and Denver. Beautiful neighborhoods, world class parks, museums, arts, arena, etc.   In a way we have been working for a while now essentially to "set the stage and create a place for them".  There is more to be done, but a big company like them, in a smaller city like ours, they would be in the position here to help shape the future into something great.  Show them what we have done, show them what we are doing to improve our city, show them some of our hopes and dreams. Get them to think of partnering and having a voice and adding something positive to that.

2.  Our story.  Stories are important, they can create a positive sense of connection.  I would have someone like Kelly Gibson from "Tours of Tulsa" take them on a historic tour of downtown, show them the architecture and tell them of our incredible history, the amazing Boomtown growth, the oil barons, flappers and gangster aspect. The great wealth and companies that started here.  Tell them about and show them our great Native American history, etc.  Yes, even tell them about the Race Riot/Massacre.  Show them how the arts came about in Tulsa and how they still play an important part.  That kind of thing helps the city stand out and stick in the mind, creates something to "connect" to and understand.  Its not just another place and a bunch of statistics.  Not everyone "gets" this sort of thing, but for those who find this stuff interesting and important, Tulsa can make a BIG impact.  For a young city we have some incredible history and stories to tell!  If I were at a table with others and they laid out a bunch of cities on it and there was one that stood out because you knew so many interesting things about it and had that sort of connection.  That puts that city up a notch.

3.  Sex sells.  I know this sound tacky but truth be told... we all know its damned well true.  Every time you meet with them, when they come into the airport, meet with them in an office, or whatever, make sure there is some eye candy in the room (male and female) to greet them or be a representative for some group or another. Its another thing that will stick in the mind and that they will remember and possibly even talk about. And thats what you want.  If you really want this company, no detail should be overlooked.  We all know that, all things being equal, the good looking person will have an advantage over the average person.  Its not right, don't like it, but there it is.   The second part to this is (Great personalities sell)  Bring in those people who have stand out, positive personalities.  That is another important aspect to not overlook.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: sgrizzle on September 30, 2017, 10:07:55 am
3.  Sex sells.  I know this sound tacky but truth be told... we all know its damned well true.  Every time you meet with them, when they come into the airport, meet with them in an office, or whatever, make sure there is some eye candy in the room (male and female) to greet them or be a representative for some group or another. Its another thing that will stick in the mind and that they will remember and possibly even talk about. And thats what you want.  If you really want this company, no detail should be overlooked.  We all know that, all things being equal, the good looking person will have an advantage over the average person.  Its not right, don't like it, but there it is.   The second part to this is (Great personalities sell)  Bring in those people who have stand out, positive personalities.  That is another important aspect to not overlook.

Now I want to see the Decopolis business plan.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TheArtist on September 30, 2017, 12:18:51 pm
Now I want to see the Decopolis business plan.

Can you handle it?  ;)
https://i2.wp.com/www.decopolis.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Tulsa-Skyport-black-e1486497884588.jpg?fit=4800%2C3999

http://www.decopolis.net/product/goddess-of-oil-11x14-matted-print/

Couple of best sellers!

And lest we go too crazy here thinking those 3 things would be my main approach.  NO.  I hope it was understood that I am assuming that any positive "numbers stuff", listing off whatever positive attributes the city has along with any "financial goodies" we can offer, and putting forth a good assortment of our "best and brightest" creative folk, famous people, smart people, doing research on anyone involved with the selection process (finding out what their likes, hobbies and interests are to play off those, finding out who we know that they know in order to influence,) etc.  will obviously be done as a matter of course.  I was just trying to put out some additional details that could perhaps make a difference.  If we really want this, every legitimate possible angle should be considered along with trying some creative off the wall stuff.   Tulsa is at best a "Wild Card" option so our hand will have to be played to the max with attention to every possible detail.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on October 05, 2017, 04:10:24 pm
The down-side of landing an Amazon:

https://www.texasmonthly.com/the-daily-post/texas-cities-amazon-headquarters-hq2/


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on October 05, 2017, 04:26:22 pm
I can't fathom Austin if something added to the boom.  The area of that city that is in any way "weird" has remained the same as the city doubled and double again.  Most of it is already just Anytown, USA, add another level of boom and it's just Dallas with a cooler downtown area.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 06, 2017, 07:49:32 am
Was in Dallas last week.  Looks like the area out south of Denton would be pretty good for Amazon.  Easy access to the BIG and getting bigger airport.




And if anyone thinks they have better roads than we do hasn't driven there before.  Was all over the area and there are many more orange barrels.  And the roads waiting their turn at the barrel are at least as bad as anything here.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Oil Capital on October 18, 2017, 12:15:36 pm
So... does anyone know anything about our Amazon bid?  Are we actually submitting a proposal?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: MostSeriousness on October 18, 2017, 12:31:03 pm
It's in the works from what I've heard, but no details on it at all. There was some coverage today/yesterday about proposals (both by OKC and Tulsa)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: MostSeriousness on October 18, 2017, 12:42:14 pm
https://www.fox23.com/news/tulsa-mayor-to-share-info-on-amazon-headquarters-proposal/626478410

And there it is. Proposal brief incoming - probably just rehashing the original bullet points from the first news cycle


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cbs on October 18, 2017, 03:14:58 pm
"I don't want to go into specifics about the exact site we've picked out....in the interest of not tipping our hand" - G.T.

SPECULATION TIME!

Fairgrounds? Across the river from TGP? River West Park? Mohawk Park? Tulsa County Club?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 18, 2017, 05:35:12 pm
"I don't want to go into specifics about the exact site we've picked out....in the interest of not tipping our hand" - G.T.

SPECULATION TIME!

Fairgrounds? Across the river from TGP? River West Park? Mohawk Park? Tulsa County Club?


Bartlesville - up near the Walmart DC would be good.   (JK...I don't really believe that...)



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on October 18, 2017, 07:55:57 pm

Bartlesville - up near the Walmart DC would be good.   (JK...I don't really believe that...)



Actually, that would make the most sense as you could draw talent from Bartlesville and southern Kansas and it wouldn't overload the infrastructure in Tulsa.  It's not like a major employer like that is going to pay any net property taxes for the foreseeable future due to corporate welfare so who cares where it is physically built?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Laramie on October 18, 2017, 08:49:36 pm
Here's a new twist: Oklahoma City-Tulsa

    More than 100 cities have expressed interest in making a run for Amazon's HQ2, based on previous reports.

(https://i.imgur.com/UDq3WkN.png)

CNBC link:  https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/18/amazon-h2q-whos-in-the-running.html?recirc=taboolainternal (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/18/amazon-h2q-whos-in-the-running.html?recirc=taboolainternal)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Hoss on October 18, 2017, 09:05:04 pm
Here's a new twist: Oklahoma City-Tulsa

    More than 100 cities have expressed interest in making a run for Amazon's HQ2, based on previous reports.

(https://i.imgur.com/UDq3WkN.png)

CNBC link:  https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/18/amazon-h2q-whos-in-the-running.html?recirc=taboolainternal (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/18/amazon-h2q-whos-in-the-running.html?recirc=taboolainternal)

They do have that big ole empty outlet mall pad in Stroud.  :)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on October 18, 2017, 09:46:10 pm
They do have that big ole empty outlet mall pad in Stroud.  :)

Hmmm, maybe that would usher in a high speed train from TUL to OKC...


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Red Arrow on October 18, 2017, 10:13:25 pm
Hmmm, maybe that would usher in a high speed train from TUL to OKC...

And there is a nearby airport with apparent room to expand:
https://goo.gl/maps/wzQorPaZ2pS2



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on October 18, 2017, 10:36:12 pm
And there is a nearby airport with apparent room to expand:
https://goo.gl/maps/wzQorPaZ2pS2



Ahhhh, Stroud International Airport!


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on October 19, 2017, 05:53:26 am
Ahhhh, Stroud International Airport!

Speaking of, what exactly makes an airport "international". TUL doesn't exactly have daily flights to ANY destination outside the lower 48. Is it just the capability to handle flights internationally?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Hoss on October 19, 2017, 06:58:43 am
Speaking of, what exactly makes an airport "international". TUL doesn't exactly have daily flights to ANY destination outside the lower 48. Is it just the capability to handle flights internationally?

International airports have customs and immigration services.  They may or may not have flights to direct destinations outside of the country.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: In_Tulsa on October 19, 2017, 08:32:30 am
Speaking of, what exactly makes an airport "international". TUL doesn't exactly have daily flights to ANY destination outside the lower 48. Is it just the capability to handle flights internationally?

In Tulsa’s case it’s the taxi drivers!!


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 19, 2017, 08:50:49 am
They do have that big ole empty outlet mall pad in Stroud.  :)


Turnpike will eliminate that.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 19, 2017, 08:52:06 am
Speaking of, what exactly makes an airport "international". TUL doesn't exactly have daily flights to ANY destination outside the lower 48. Is it just the capability to handle flights internationally?


We used to have international flights and customs/immigration stuff.  Long gone now.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: MostSeriousness on October 19, 2017, 09:16:48 am
Mayor Bynum on Fox: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ambtEGGXU1Q


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Laramie on October 19, 2017, 09:30:50 am
The competition to get the Amazon HQ2 may involve more than just one city; notice that combination of cities teamed like Dallas-Fort Worth, Minneapolis-St. Paul & Oklahoma City-Tulsa .

With the effects of Amazon's online business success; you have more vacant space available throughout the country. Anchor tenants have affected the success of the malls throughout the country; many tenants are pulling out of the malls.  Shepherd Mall, OKC's 1st mall is structured toward commercial & business use. Heritage Park Mall (Midwest City) is vacant.   Crossroad Mall on I-35 (recently catered to the Hispanic community) in Oklahoma City is closing soon.

As far as International Flights out of Tulsa International & OKC Will Rogers World, one or both of these airports could position itself to handle some  international flights where Wichita, Tulsa & Oklahoma City flyers don't have to go thru DFW for international flights. 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on October 19, 2017, 11:57:02 am
Mayor Bynum on Fox: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ambtEGGXU1Q

Can you imagine Dewey even putting our hat in the ring?  
Or how he'd do in an interview like this?
Tulsa has stuff!

I think Bynum did a great job.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TheArtist on October 19, 2017, 01:33:37 pm
Mayor Bynum on Fox: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ambtEGGXU1Q

Omg, I would have expected better from him.  He did not sell it.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on October 19, 2017, 01:49:30 pm
I believe this has been mentioned elsewhere, but do we really want a company that is essentially slumming itself out to the highest bidder. Is Amazon a guaranteed permanent addition? The biggest company in the state (based on Fortune 500 rank) left the state a little over 15 years ago. Just saying it could happen. Then what are we left with?

I think it's great for whoever does get it, and mayors have to try, but part of me is like they are going to be asking for more "favors" just about the time the first ones run out, kind of like needing a new stadium to keep up.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 19, 2017, 03:25:10 pm
"The culture of our city matches Amazon's very closely..."  


O M G !!   I HAVE to get some of what he has been smoking!!!!  That is some goooooooood stuff!!



Danbury guy almost had me nodding my head - and then I heard 85,000 population!  Ouch!  He is smooth, though.  And he is gonna make Connecticut great again!!






Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Oil Capital on October 19, 2017, 04:10:48 pm

We used to have international flights and customs/immigration stuff.  Long gone now.


When was that?  To/From where?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 19, 2017, 04:18:26 pm
When was that?  To/From where?


In the 70's IIRC.  I started doing quite a bit of travel about 1978 and it was winding down by then.  We just never reached critical mass to go full international.  I have no clue how many flights there were or where they went.  Don't think it amounted to much.






Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on October 19, 2017, 04:55:34 pm
Finally watched the video from from G.T.'s interview on Fox. My take was that he came off about the same as those over confident college kids do. You know, prior to them realizing they will be graduating without a job and with 100k in debt. Yeah. He just struck me as over his head or delusional. I know Tulsa has lots of reasons to talk itself up, he just didn't do a good job of it. And if I heard "quality of life" with no qualifiers one more time, I was about to quit watching before it was over.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Oil Capital on October 19, 2017, 05:08:20 pm

In the 70's IIRC.  I started doing quite a bit of travel about 1978 and it was winding down by then.  We just never reached critical mass to go full international.  I have no clue how many flights there were or where they went.  Don't think it amounted to much.



I think you are misremembering.  I doubt Tulsa has ever had international flights or customs and immigration facilities.  But if so, I'd be interested in hearing details about it.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Red Arrow on October 19, 2017, 05:36:19 pm
I think you are misremembering.  I doubt Tulsa has ever had international flights or customs and immigration facilities.  But if so, I'd be interested in hearing details about it.

I believe this is current:
https://www.tulsaairports.com/airport-information/cargo/customs/



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Hoss on October 19, 2017, 05:46:13 pm
I believe this is current:
https://www.tulsaairports.com/airport-information/cargo/customs/



Customs for Intl airports doesn't necessarily mean customs for physical entry.  It could mean customs for shipping also.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Red Arrow on October 19, 2017, 06:19:03 pm
Customs for Intl airports doesn't necessarily mean customs for physical entry.  It could mean customs for shipping also.

From the link, I think customs is available for business and charter flights.  Sparks Aviation appears to have customs for passengers, up  to 25 at a time.  See about half way down the page on the left side.
http://www.fltplan.com/Airport.cgi?TUL



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Hoss on October 19, 2017, 07:08:55 pm
From the link, I think customs is available for business and charter flights.  Sparks Aviation appears to have customs for passengers, up  to 25 at a time.  See about half way down the page on the left side.
http://www.fltplan.com/Airport.cgi?TUL



So in that instance, yes, we are an international airport.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Oil Capital on October 19, 2017, 09:07:02 pm
Yes, Tulsa has customs available.  The question I was asking was whether there have ever been scheduled international flights with customs and immigration clearance facilities for commercial common carrier flights as claimed by ...asparagus


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on October 19, 2017, 10:01:52 pm
Yes, Tulsa has customs available.  The question I was asking was whether there have ever been scheduled international flights with customs and immigration clearance facilities for commercial common carrier flights as claimed by ...asparagus

I know some of the vacation flights used to fly semi-direct out of Tulsa, but they did a quick stop in Houston or Dallas for customs. I don't think large international commercial flights ever had customs in Tulsa.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on October 19, 2017, 10:41:15 pm
Finally watched the video from from G.T.'s interview on Fox. My take was that he came off about the same as those over confident college kids do. You know, prior to them realizing they will be graduating without a job and with 100k in debt. Yeah. He just struck me as over his head or delusional. I know Tulsa has lots of reasons to talk itself up, he just didn't do a good job of it. And if I heard "quality of life" with no qualifiers one more time, I was about to quit watching before it was over.

I guess I'm not seeing where Mayor Bynum did a bad job with the interview.  Tulsa's quality of life items were illustrated in the video which rolled near the start of the news segment this was featured on.  He mentioned the $300M new park and other amenities.

Personally, I didn't see him as coming off as far-fetched as we all thought this was a month ago.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 20, 2017, 08:07:50 am
I think you are misremembering.  I doubt Tulsa has ever had international flights or customs and immigration facilities.  But if so, I'd be interested in hearing details about it.


Could well be.  I never took any direct flights myself - except it seems like I was able to fly to Toronto on American one time, but after that had to fly through Detroit, then Toronto.... will have to look around and see if I can find any old expense reports with itinerary.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DTowner on October 20, 2017, 08:39:55 am
I guess I'm not seeing where Mayor Bynum did a bad job with the interview.  Tulsa's quality of life items were illustrated in the video which rolled near the start of the news segment this was featured on.  He mentioned the $300M new park and other amenities.

Personally, I didn't see him as coming off as far-fetched as we all thought this was a month ago.

That was my take as well.  I think we have a compelling story and a lot of positives to sell.  Our biggest weakness is our ability to compete in the bidding war with incentives/inducements/”bribes”.  Anyone now wish we had adopted that closing fund a few years back?

On that note, I’ve read several analysts who are usually critical of taxpayer inducements for headquarters/factories, etc. say this is such a potential game changer for the winning city that the inducements will pay long-term dividends. 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Townsend on October 20, 2017, 11:08:29 am
Bynum's doing a fair job getting himself in front of people like us as he talks up Tulsa's fit for Amazon.

He knows it's a snowball's chance but this is a good podium from which to speak.  He gets folks like us to say "Look at Bynum go.  He's really trying to get us somewhere."

This will come in handy as he runs for whichever public office is coming next.

The FOX interviewer's earpiece was most likely telling her to "get that kid off the screen."


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Tulsa Zephyr on October 21, 2017, 09:18:31 am
I think you are misremembering.  I doubt Tulsa has ever had international flights or customs and immigration facilities.  But if so, I'd be interested in hearing details about it.

In 1930, Tulsa had the busiest airport in the world.  "The first terminal building was a one-story wood and tar paper structure that looked like a warehouse. The landing strips and taxiways were simply mown grass. Still, it handled enough passengers in 1930 for Tulsa to claim that it had the busiest airport in the world." (Wikipedia)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: BKDotCom on January 18, 2018, 08:44:19 am
And the finalists are:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=176060&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2327285

Quote
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Austin, TX
  • Boston, MA
  • Chicago, IL
  • Columbus, OH
  • Dallas, TX
  • Denver, CO
  • Indianapolis, IN
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Miami, FL
  • Montgomery County, MD
  • Nashville, TN
  • Newark, NJ
  • New York City, NY
  • Northern Virginia, VA
  • Philadelphia, PA
  • Pittsburgh, PA
  • Raleigh, NC
  • Toronto, ON
  • Washington D.C.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on January 18, 2018, 09:03:14 am
And the finalists are:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=176060&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2327285


So D.C. is essentially on the list three times. Perfect location for taking over the country...

(https://media.giphy.com/media/13B1WmJg7HwjGU/giphy.gif)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on January 18, 2018, 09:05:38 am
In all seriousness though. Columbus, Raleigh, and Indy seem like the only outliers in this group (and Toronto I suppose). The rest of basically the same as every biggest city/fastest growing city list you ever see. Wonder how legitimate of a shot they have.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 18, 2018, 09:09:33 am
And the finalists are:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=176060&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2327285


Almost all northern/NE cities. Only 4 finalists west of the Mississippi. I guess we should root for Dallas, Denver Austin or Nashville, hoping it's at least somewhat regional. Good chance it will lure away and provide jobs to some people we know.

With 3 finalists in the area, my guess is it will be in DC region and that is where they truly want to be. It's just a matter of which state/district will provide the best incentives. I'm guessing places like Chicago and LA made it just because they provided ludicrous incentives and they want them to raise the ante. Why even announce such a large list of finalists like this if they aren't going to be pitting the cities against each other. As many predicted, this is a massive penny-pinching corporation looking for huge corporate welfare, which might end up being the largest for a single entity in the history of the US.

I'm guessing when it comes out how large of a tax cut/free land they receive, most will be shocked. The preliminary offers are already shocking: NJ offered $7 billion! https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-19/bids-are-amazon-offered-7-billion-tax-breaks-140k-employee-second-us-hq (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-19/bids-are-amazon-offered-7-billion-tax-breaks-140k-employee-second-us-hq)
Now if they can get the places they actually want to locate to offer that kind of cash.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on January 18, 2018, 09:43:10 am
Almost all northern/NE cities. Only 4 finalists west of the Mississippi. I guess we should root for Dallas, Denver Austin or Nashville, hoping it's at least somewhat regional. Good chance it will lure away and provide jobs to some people we know.

With 3 finalists in the area, my guess is it will be in DC region and that is where they truly want to be. It's just a matter of which state/district will provide the best incentives. I'm guessing places like Chicago and LA made it just because they provided ludicrous incentives and they want them to raise the ante. Why even announce such a large list of finalists like this if they aren't going to be pitting the cities against each other. As many predicted, this is a massive penny-pinching corporation looking for huge corporate welfare, which might end up being the largest for a single entity in the history of the US.

I'm guessing when it comes out how large of a tax cut/free land they receive, most will be shocked. The preliminary offers are already shocking: NJ offered $7 billion! https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-19/bids-are-amazon-offered-7-billion-tax-breaks-140k-employee-second-us-hq (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-19/bids-are-amazon-offered-7-billion-tax-breaks-140k-employee-second-us-hq)
Now if they can get the places they actually want to locate to offer that kind of cash.

DC is a logical choice.  Seattle and DC are two of the most prosperous and booming metros in the country right now. 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 18, 2018, 09:50:40 am
Dallas or Nashville would be top of the list choices - probably in top 5.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on January 18, 2018, 10:49:21 am
In all seriousness though. Columbus, Raleigh, and Indy seem like the only outliers in this group (and Toronto I suppose). The rest of basically the same as every biggest city/fastest growing city list you ever see. Wonder how legitimate of a shot they have.

Agreed.  And Pittsburgh.  Don't see that one happening, either.   And why would they do West Coast?  Strategically that would not make any sense.  East Coast somewhere is best bet, assuming incentives work out, etc.   Austin, as cool as it is, is going to be hurt by lack of direct flights in/out.   Dallas, maybe, but East just seems to make more sense for them.

I've said Atlanta from the start, and they are still in there.  I'll add DC area, and Raleigh as options.  But it will all come down to who  makes the best offer among the real 3-4 choices they want.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on January 18, 2018, 11:42:55 am
Austin has the hip factor and all, but I think people will be really sorry about burdening their already insufficient infrastructure if Amazon chose ATX.

DFW could likely handle that sort of influx.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Hoss on January 18, 2018, 12:00:59 pm
Austin has the hip factor and all, but I think people will be really sorry about burdening their already insufficient infrastructure if Amazon chose ATX.

DFW could likely handle that sort of influx.

Given that they have a large airport also.  However, don't put Atlanta out of the running.  Hartsfield is a huge airport (busiest in the world actually) and tax incentives in Georgia have driven the film industry there (many Marvel films get filmed there now).


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 18, 2018, 12:11:01 pm
Agreed.  And Pittsburgh.  Don't see that one happening, either.   And why would they do West Coast?  Strategically that would not make any sense.  East Coast somewhere is best bet, assuming incentives work out, etc.   Austin, as cool as it is, is going to be hurt by lack of direct flights in/out.   Dallas, maybe, but East just seems to make more sense for them.

I've said Atlanta from the start, and they are still in there.  I'll add DC area, and Raleigh as options.  But it will all come down to who  makes the best offer among the real 3-4 choices they want.

Yeah, I'm putting my money on the east coast city with best incentives. I'd double down on a DC-area place to win. They have the jobs and train rides to all the major metros in the NE. They are going to waste a lot of cities' time with this and I doubt they will really consider those outside the few they really want outside some deals they can't refuse. The $7B NJ break is pretty ludicrous so I wouldn't be surprised if they take that or use it to force a DC area city to match it.

The DC location is perfect for Amazon because they have 3 separate state/district governments vying to provide the best tax incentives and when all is said and done, they might be able to put major centers in all 3 to take advantage of different incentives (discounts/corporate tax breaks/"personal income tax diversion"/free land/etc).

Bezos just bought the Washington Post and the largest house in DC so that seems like a pretty significant vote for DC area.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on January 18, 2018, 12:20:18 pm
Bezos just bought the Washington Post and the largest house in DC so that seems like a pretty significant vote for DC area.

Did not know that.  I change my vote.  DC area for the win.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 18, 2018, 12:35:48 pm
In all seriousness though. Columbus, Raleigh, and Indy seem like the only outliers in this group (and Toronto I suppose). The rest of basically the same as every biggest city/fastest growing city list you ever see. Wonder how legitimate of a shot they have.

In all seriousness though. Columbus, Raleigh, and Indy seem like the only outliers in this group (and Toronto I suppose). The rest of basically the same as every biggest city/fastest growing city list you ever see. Wonder how legitimate of a shot they have.

I bet they included Toronto just to give the US a scare. They may be able to offer "cheaper labor" (their claim is about 30% less than other places), but I'm guessing almost everything else would be worse long-term (Far smaller workforce of Canadians; Canada can't out Corporate-Welfare the US! And the costs of building or land there are bound to be more than the US). Think of all the VISAs and issues for such a huge company sending employees and shipping stuff to and from Canada that frequently (where shipping is often much more expensive). That would be a pretty sour move to make Americans far more likely to shop Walmart or others.

Plus Toronto is north of Buffalo which is known for terrible extremely-snowy winters where a 6 foot snow storm can unexpectedly shut down the entire area for many days. That would be asinine to move their HQ2 there. DC is in the same climate zone as Oklahoma. While they do get much more snow than Tulsa, the 15 inches DC gets is much lower than the average US city and nothing compared to the 4 feet toronto gets on average.

So in conclusion Toronto is most likely on the list for leverage with the US federal government and to see how far the Canadians will go with incentives so they can make their real targets pay up. I'm guessing the DC-area cities know they're at the top and so it will be interesting to see how it pans out.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on January 18, 2018, 05:01:34 pm
Yeah, I'm putting my money on the east coast city with best incentives. I'd double down on a DC-area place to win. They have the jobs and train rides to all the major metros in the NE. They are going to waste a lot of cities' time with this and I doubt they will really consider those outside the few they really want outside some deals they can't refuse. The $7B NJ break is pretty ludicrous so I wouldn't be surprised if they take that or use it to force a DC area city to match it.

The DC location is perfect for Amazon because they have 3 separate state/district governments vying to provide the best tax incentives and when all is said and done, they might be able to put major centers in all 3 to take advantage of different incentives (discounts/corporate tax breaks/"personal income tax diversion"/free land/etc).

Bezos just bought the Washington Post and the largest house in DC so that seems like a pretty significant vote for DC area.

Don't they also have three or four airports within an hour or 1.5 hour train ride from DC?  Seems to match up with all their stated transit needs/desires.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Red Arrow on January 18, 2018, 05:46:42 pm
Don't they also have three or four airports within an hour or 1.5 hour train ride from DC?  Seems to match up with all their stated transit needs/desires.

!.5 hrs is probably optimistic.  Baltimore to Dulles is only about 40 air miles away but still over 2 hrs by train. (Airport to airport)

https://goo.gl/maps/UKjtXY5novt
http://vfrmap.com/?type=vfrc&lat=38.947&lon=-77.460&zoom=10

Downtown Washington to Baltimore is a lot better (32 or 42 miles by car)
https://goo.gl/maps/FVg6fgskAcM2

Dulles Int'l is over an hour  (27 mi by car)
https://goo.gl/maps/D5gxPra7HYQ2

Reagan National is about 1/2 hr
https://goo.gl/maps/88EbaVbLqtC2





Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on January 18, 2018, 06:08:09 pm
Too good not to share. I didn't link to the Twitter feed (cause it was 20 posts). From the incomparable David Burge:

Handicapping the Amazon HQ2 Final 20 (1/21)

Atlanta
Pros: access to megachurches, pro & college sports, unlimited willingness to whore itself out
Cons: lack of building space due to 50 new taxpayer sports stadiums
Odds: 4-1

Austin
Pros: access to beards, Barvarian-Korean taco trucks, insipid singer-songwriters
Cons: Elderly Maoist city council will vote to nationalize Amazon for the proletariat
Odds: 4-1

Boston
Pros: major universities, Bellichek, the beautiful melliflouous Boston accent
Cons: major university grads can neither drive or lift more than 40 pounds
Odds: 10-1

Chicago
Pros: beautiful mid September to late mid September weather, deathbed-level desperation
Cons: Building costs 5x national average due to bribery and kevlar
Odds: 20-1

Columbus OH
Pros: The Excitement City of central Ohio; chance to meet Big Nut and dot the "i" at the Horseshoe
Cons: Will have to change name to Aazon
Odds: 40-1

Dallas
Pros: central location, palatial high school football stadiums, most Chili's and Applebee's per capita in the world
Cons: local oil family dynasties full of conniving murderers
Odds: 19-1

Denver
Pros: microbrews, weed, snow sports
Cons: drunk/high employees keep smashing into trees
Odds: 30-1

Indianapolis
Pros: chance to watch high school basketball and cars go round and round
Cons: Overshadowed by Indiana's glamour city, Fort Wayne
Odds: 50-1

Los Angeles
Pros: weather, chic Hollywood celebrity rapists, vibrant hordes of roving schizophrenic garbage pickers
Cons: eventual apocalyptic destruction by wrathful biblical god
Odds 100-1

Miami
Pros: U of Miami's prestigious School of Tanning, exciting nightlife with lummoxes from New Jersey in rental Lambos
Cons: 87% of Floridians die from humorous causes
Odds 100-1
Montgomery County MD
Pros: chance to share cul-de-sac with Assistant Undersecretary for Mohair Price Supports
Cons: If DC is Hollywood For Ugly People, this is Encino For Ugly People
Odds: 250-1
Newark
Pros: tax package includes 3 free murders per employee clause; Chris Christie now available for motivational speeches
Cons: for God’s sake I only have 280 characters here
Odds: 200-1

Nashville
Pros: bargain basement Austin
Cons: lured by the bright lights of Music City, Amazon tragically dies face down in the back seat of a Cadillac, clutching a gun and bottle of whiskey in a rhinestone suit
Odds: 20-1

New York
Pros: Spider-Man the Musical, go-getting Stalinist mayor willing to kill any groundhogs or illegal cigarette vendors in Amazon’s way
Cons: lack of affordable heating grates
Odds: 40-1

Northern Virginia
Pros: friendly neighborhoods of CIA spooks always willing to lend you cyanide or strangling wire
Cons: no market for Alexa as all homes are already bugged
Odds: 20-1

Philadelphia
Pros: birthplace of American government, American Bandstand, city of brotherly love
Cons: constant contusions from battery-laced snowballs thrown by angry drunks
Odds: 25-1

Pittsburgh
Pros: access to Carnegie-Mellon’s secret Invincible Self-Aware Flying Deathbot laboratory
Cons: Amazon engineers begin moonlighting as flash dancers
Odds: 15-1

Raleigh
Pros: cheap smokes, moonshine, nearby universities with topnotch douchebag basketball programs
Cons: Folksy local sheriff won't fire nervous trigger-happy deputy
Odds: 20-1

Toronto
Pros: Tim Horton's, poutine, 10% longer football fields, constant entertainment from Prime Minister Zoolander
Cons: lack of professional hockey team
Odds: 12-1

Washington DC
Pros: vast hordes of slimy corrupt weasels willing to use the power of the state to crush any obstacles to Amazon's corporate mission
Cons: for a $500 campaign donation
Odds: 10-1


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on January 18, 2018, 10:54:26 pm
Sounds like the city offered Amazon the city-owned property at 23rd & Jackson.  The Parking Lot District (7th/8th & Main/Boston) would’ve been a better location IMO.

It would involve some work assembling the land but I think the 41st & Union area would be perfect for an advanced manufacturing or engineering/R&D campus.  It has river frontage, highway access, a future direct rail line connection to downtown and could be linked to Midtown with a new bridge at 41st. 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on January 19, 2018, 09:34:10 am
Sounds like the city offered Amazon the city-owned property at 23rd & Jackson.  The Parking Lot District (7th/8th & Main/Boston) would’ve been a better location IMO.

It would involve some work assembling the land but I think the 41st & Union area would be perfect for an advanced manufacturing or engineering/R&D campus.  It has river frontage, highway access, a future direct rail line connection to downtown and could be linked to Midtown with a new bridge at 41st.  

Dang, I know Tulsa likely only had about a 0.0000000000001% chance anyway, but we offered 23rd and Jackson. This is a company that currently has made it's home in the center of one of the most vibrant cities in America, and we offer them land with scenic views of some really sad looking low income apartments and a tank farm? Not to mention being smack dab between two oil refineries? For real?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on January 19, 2018, 10:26:19 am
Dang, I know Tulsa likely only had about a 0.0000000000001% chance anyway, but we offered 23rd and Jackson. This is a company that currently has made it's home in the center of one of the most vibrant cities in America, and we offer them land with scenic views of some really sad looking low income apartments and a tank farm? Not to mention being smack dab between two oil refineries? For real?

Exactly what I thought when I read that.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Townsend on January 19, 2018, 11:26:38 am
Dang, I know Tulsa likely only had about a 0.0000000000001% chance anyway, but we offered 23rd and Jackson. This is a company that currently has made it's home in the center of one of the most vibrant cities in America, and we offer them land with scenic views of some really sad looking low income apartments and a tank farm? Not to mention being smack dab between two oil refineries? For real?

When you're desperate and surrounded by a state like Oklahoma and all you have to offer is land with scenic views of some really sad looking low income apartments and a tank farm smack dab between two oil refineries...You offer land with scenic views of some really sad looking low income apartments and a tank farm smack dab between two oil refineries.

Then you pocket the attempt, run for Senate or Governor stating "I tried to get Amazon to Oklahoma!"


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on January 19, 2018, 11:46:37 am
So the "Finalist" list is basically every city or region that fit the original criteria? How dramatic...


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on January 19, 2018, 12:27:02 pm
So the "Finalist" list is basically every city or region that fit the original criteria? How dramatic...

Except for the international airport part.  Austin is may go direct to Mexico and points South, but that's about it.  I'm assuming by "International" they mean mainly EMEA (because they can cover APAC out of Seattle), and that points towards one of the major East Coast hubs.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 19, 2018, 12:33:11 pm
Too good not to share. I didn't link to the Twitter feed (cause it was 20 posts). From the incomparable David Burge:


Washington DC
Pros: vast hordes of slimy corrupt weasels willing to use the power of the state to crush any obstacles to Amazon's corporate mission
Cons: for a $500 campaign donation
Odds: 10-1



That is great!!  Thanks for sharing it.


As for the last one, well as soon as Trump and his Swamp Dwellers are gone, it will clean up dramatically again and get back to previous levels.

Odds should improve at that point....



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on January 19, 2018, 12:51:44 pm
Except for the international airport part.  Austin is may go direct to Mexico and points South, but that's about it.  I'm assuming by "International" they mean mainly EMEA (because they can cover APAC out of Seattle), and that points towards one of the major East Coast hubs.

Actually AUS now has non-stops to London Heathrow (via British Airways), London Gatwick (via Norwegian) and Frankfurt (via Condor), with Delta offering service to Amsterdam during SXSW.  In addition to daily nonstop service to Toronto on Air Canada and several Mexican cities including Mexico City.  

Every other city on the list has international flights with Columbus and Indianapolis the only ones without trans-Atlantic service though Indianapolis is getting a nonstop to Paris on Delta that starts this year.  Columbus has daily nonstops to Toronto and Cancun.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on January 19, 2018, 01:41:33 pm
Actually AUS now has non-stops to London Heathrow (via British Airways), London Gatwick (via Norwegian) and Frankfurt (via Condor), with Delta offering service to Amsterdam during SXSW.  In addition to daily nonstop service to Toronto on Air Canada and several Mexican cities including Mexico City.  

Every other city on the list has international flights with Columbus and Indianapolis the only ones without trans-Atlantic service though Indianapolis is getting a nonstop to Paris on Delta that starts this year.  Columbus has daily nonstops to Toronto and Cancun.

Did not know AUS had non-stops to Europe.  Pretty cool.  But, still fairly limited.  I don't think you can count the SXSW flights, as those are event driven, and CA/MX, while technically international, aren't what they are talking about.   But, I think its fair to say that is Amazon did come to AUS, those international flights could easily be added.

My money is still on the DC area now, with my original pick of Atlanta as my fall back guess.





Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Oil Capital on January 19, 2018, 05:50:43 pm
So the "Finalist" list is basically every city or region that fit the original criteria? How dramatic...

Not really.  There are cities in that top 20 that are lacking any serious mass transit and significant international air service, among other things.
And there are cities not in the final 20 that seemingly met all the original criteria.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on January 19, 2018, 07:05:11 pm
Sounds like the city offered Amazon the city-owned property at 23rd & Jackson.  The Parking Lot District (7th/8th & Main/Boston) would’ve been a better location IMO.

It would involve some work assembling the land but I think the 41st & Union area would be perfect for an advanced manufacturing or engineering/R&D campus.  It has river frontage, highway access, a future direct rail line connection to downtown and could be linked to Midtown with a new bridge at 41st. 

I think you mean 41st & Elwood.  The river is about a mile east of Union at that point.  The only aesthetic problem is being sandwiched between a sh!t processing plant to the south and a power plant to the north and many smaller local companies who dot the landscape in the area.  Other than that, what a smoking deal we could create!


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on January 20, 2018, 12:13:25 am
I think you mean 41st & Elwood.  The river is about a mile east of Union at that point.  The only aesthetic problem is being sandwiched between a sh!t processing plant to the south and a power plant to the north and many smaller local companies who dot the landscape in the area.  Other than that, what a smoking deal we could create!

Yes 41st & Elwood.  It’s an industrial area that is also one of the best locations in the city but needs a bridge.  Not ideal for an office type setup but more some type of advanced manufacturing or R&D.  Something like what Woodward has done in Fort Collins, CO:
(http://www.thefamilyride.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/bilde.jpg)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: AngieB on January 22, 2018, 10:25:36 am
Yes 41st & Elwood.  It’s an industrial area that is also one of the best locations in the city but needs a bridge.  Not ideal for an office type setup but more some type of advanced manufacturing or R&D.  Something like what Woodward has done in Fort Collins, CO:
(http://www.thefamilyride.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/bilde.jpg)

A bridge at 41st is my dream. It would actually CONNECT the westside with the rest of the city. The 23rd street bridge is too far north and the Arkansas River bridge at I-44 bypasses the westside for all intents and purposes. A bridge with bike lanes, please. The QT park puts a wrench in the idea though.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on January 22, 2018, 11:26:51 am
A bridge at 41st is my dream. It would actually CONNECT the westside with the rest of the city. The 23rd street bridge is too far north and the Arkansas River bridge at I-44 bypasses the westside for all intents and purposes. A bridge with bike lanes, please. The QT park puts a wrench in the idea though.

By the time a 41st St bridge is actually built QT Park will need a refresh anyway.   ;)

There is a TW article today about the challenges the west bank presents, all of which are not unknown to anyone familiar with Tulsa.  Honestly park and industrial space is really the best use for most of it except for possibly the area north of 23rd St.  Focus residential in existing neighborhoods east of the river.  Specifically Riverview which could support higher densities, along with redevelopment of the Crow Creek apartments.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/michael-overall-if-amazon-doesn-t-want-it-what-can/article_fa010b36-6346-5a0e-8cba-e7375bfa89c2.html (http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/michael-overall-if-amazon-doesn-t-want-it-what-can/article_fa010b36-6346-5a0e-8cba-e7375bfa89c2.html)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on January 22, 2018, 11:27:33 am
A bridge at 41st is my dream. It would actually CONNECT the westside with the rest of the city. The 23rd street bridge is too far north and the Arkansas River bridge at I-44 bypasses the westside for all intents and purposes. A bridge with bike lanes, please. The QT park puts a wrench in the idea though.

Will that still be the case when the highway is reconstructed? Do the new plans improve access?



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: bacjz00 on January 22, 2018, 12:19:16 pm
Will that still be the case when the highway is reconstructed? Do the new plans improve access?

*IS* there a new plan?  Would love to see a link if so.  I-44 west of the River all the way to 244 is a joke (including the US-75 interchange which is something even worse than a joke)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on January 22, 2018, 01:34:56 pm
*IS* there a new plan?  Would love to see a link if so.  I-44 west of the River all the way to 244 is a joke (including the US-75 interchange which is something even worse than a joke)

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/meeting-to-discuss-i--improvements-in-west-tulsa-set/article_670f1582-cef1-50f3-9499-4e37aa99baf9.html


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on January 22, 2018, 01:57:52 pm
here's the actual plan itself:

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2017/171102/Presentation.pdf


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Hoss on January 22, 2018, 02:26:09 pm
here's the actual plan itself:

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2017/171102/Presentation.pdf

I like the flyover ramps.  They alleviate congestion by increasing the exit speed.  Lived in Houston for four years in the nineties and I never saw a clover leaf ramp in the freeway system there.  Most of the interchanges were more like the 169/Creek Tpk interchange where it splits off for Broken Arrow.  They really need to look at redesigning interchanges at I-44 and 169 as well as 169 and the BA.  Clover leaf interchanges are old and busted.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on January 22, 2018, 04:09:27 pm
Clover leaf interchanges are old and busted.

They were a great design for traffic of 50+ years ago.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 22, 2018, 04:13:53 pm
A bridge at 41st is my dream. It would actually CONNECT the westside with the rest of the city. The 23rd street bridge is too far north and the Arkansas River bridge at I-44 bypasses the westside for all intents and purposes. A bridge with bike lanes, please. The QT park puts a wrench in the idea though.


Decades past due!! 

Shameful we haven't had that long ago...


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: patric on January 22, 2018, 09:57:38 pm
I like the flyover ramps.  They alleviate congestion by increasing the exit speed.  Lived in Houston for four years in the nineties and I never saw a clover leaf ramp in the freeway system there.  Most of the interchanges were more like the 169/Creek Tpk interchange where it splits off for Broken Arrow.  They really need to look at redesigning interchanges at I-44 and 169 as well as 169 and the BA.  Clover leaf interchanges are old and busted.

(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--TJ775a73--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/xoohd0vw2d7hpzfbdvlj.jpg)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: bacjz00 on January 22, 2018, 10:12:37 pm
here's the actual plan itself:

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2017/171102/Presentation.pdf

Thanks for posting!  This is a great first step.  Not sure how/when this is all going to be feasible from a budgetary standpoint but it is needed desperately.  My only nitpick is that when it's done, I'm hoping there will be no need for one flyover ramp to COMPLETELY yield to another (i.e. EB I-44 to SB 75 meets WB I-44 to SB 75).  Hopefully there will be plenty of merging room to allow cars to continue to move at reasonable speeds.

Welcome to the 21st Century Oklahoma! (17 years later)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on January 23, 2018, 08:24:13 am
How would a bridge over 41st street encourage development of the west side of the river by 41st st?   The manufacturing that is there is already just a few blocks from a highway, manufacturing has very little interest in being connected to Brookside etc. or seeing more development. And being right next to the power plant and refinery (as well as highways and zoning, etc.) would make it difficult to sell that area as a redevelopment area for residential or an outlet mall.   Plus, I thought the power plant and refinery has been buying up property north of that area specifically to prevent development?  I get that it would add convenience to few hundred residence, but we are talking about a hundred million dollars for a bridge.

On the interchanges -

Clover leafs were a great design for a certain amount of traffic.  Economical, relatively compact, and efficient.  But when you try to push their limits on traffic count they fail rapidly.  44 and hwy 75, 44 and the BA, you see it all over.  When I'm in Texas those giant fly over bridges are very efficient, but I can't help but think they take up a ton of space and have to be very expensive... when they start having to pay to replace them I wonder if an alternative will emerge.  Or maybe I'm wrong on the expense...


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: dsjeffries on January 23, 2018, 09:49:42 am
On the interchanges -

Clover leafs were a great design for a certain amount of traffic.  Economical, relatively compact, and efficient.  But when you try to push their limits on traffic count they fail rapidly.  44 and hwy 75, 44 and the BA, you see it all over.  When I'm in Texas those giant fly over bridges are very efficient, but I can't help but think they take up a ton of space and have to be very expensive... when they start having to pay to replace them I wonder if an alternative will emerge.  Or maybe I'm wrong on the expense...

No, you're right. They're extremely expensive and require significant chunks of land.

Let's not turn everything here into a Dallas-style nightmare.
(http://www.brianharness.com/images/portfolio/architecture-1/high-five-interchange-dallas.jpg)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Hoss on January 23, 2018, 11:22:49 am
No, you're right. They're extremely expensive and require significant chunks of land.

Let's not turn everything here into a Dallas-style nightmare.
(http://www.brianharness.com/images/portfolio/architecture-1/high-five-interchange-dallas.jpg)

To be fair, alot of that roadway is service roads.

Yes, it will take land, but you can also make a hybrid that's partial clover/partial flyover.  Point I was making is the same as others...clover leafs work for a finite amount of traffic, of which all the interchanges I mentioned are likely pushing over.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 23, 2018, 12:10:50 pm
How would a bridge over 41st street encourage development of the west side of the river by 41st st?   The manufacturing that is there is already just a few blocks from a highway, manufacturing has very little interest in being connected to Brookside etc. or seeing more development. And being right next to the power plant and refinery (as well as highways and zoning, etc.) would make it difficult to sell that area as a redevelopment area for residential or an outlet mall.   Plus, I thought the power plant and refinery has been buying up property north of that area specifically to prevent development?  I get that it would add convenience to few hundred residence, but we are talking about a hundred million dollars for a bridge.


A bridge at W 41st street is a ridiculous idea. It would be a monumental waste of money. There is nothing wrong with crossing at I44 or W 23rd. You're right, only a few hundred would really benefit.

I've made that trip many times (from W 41st to midtown Tulsa), and I would continue to use the highways or W 23rd even if there was a bridge. It wouldn't even save time on that trip. More importantly, as you said, it's not an area that will be develop-able into much more than industrial/commercial area any time soon, not even with a slightly more convenient drive to Brookside. And I guarantee you those in the Brookside area would be strongly opposed to a bridge right there! Those who live on the east side of the river near 21st aren't even happy with the existing bridge and the criminal activity that comes along with it.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on January 23, 2018, 12:15:50 pm
No, you're right. They're extremely expensive and require significant chunks of land.

Let's not turn everything here into a Dallas-style nightmare.
(http://www.brianharness.com/images/portfolio/architecture-1/high-five-interchange-dallas.jpg)

That almost has to be the interchange of US 75 and the LBJ.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 23, 2018, 12:16:02 pm

Decades past due!! 

Shameful we haven't had that long ago...


Really? Shameful?

There will never be a bridge there and it never has and never will be needed. We shouldn't spend $100 million to slightly benefit a few (mostly any developers who would potentially try to make cheap housing/rental developments there "close to the gathering place"). That sounds like the kind of thing Bartlett would want to get pushed through for his cronies to benefit from.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 23, 2018, 12:18:24 pm
How would a bridge over 41st street encourage development of the west side of the river by 41st st?   The manufacturing that is there is already just a few blocks from a highway, manufacturing has very little interest in being connected to Brookside etc. or seeing more development. And being right next to the power plant and refinery (as well as highways and zoning, etc.) would make it difficult to sell that area as a redevelopment area for residential or an outlet mall.   Plus, I thought the power plant and refinery has been buying up property north of that area specifically to prevent development?  I get that it would add convenience to few hundred residence, but we are talking about a hundred million dollars for a bridge.



The same thing could be said about 23rd St bridge.  We put a lot of money into an area that is also much better served by expressways.

 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 23, 2018, 12:19:03 pm
Really? Shameful?

There will never be a bridge there and it never has and never will be needed. We shouldn't spend $100 million to slightly benefit a few (mostly any developers who would potentially try to make cheap housing/rental developments there "close to the gathering place"). That sounds like the kind of thing Bartlett would want to get pushed through for his cronies to benefit from.


Repeating;


The same thing could be said about 23rd St bridge.  We put a lot of money into an area that is also much better served by expressways.

As for benefiting developers...isn't that what we do to the exclusion of benefiting the people?   Same could be said about 71st st bridge, too.   Edit:  we already had a Jenks bridge.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 23, 2018, 12:43:42 pm

Repeating;


The same thing could be said about 23rd St bridge.  We put a lot of money into an area that is also much better served by expressways.

As for benefiting developers...isn't that what we do to the exclusion of benefiting the people?   Same could be said about 71st st bridge, too.   Edit:  we already had a Jenks bridge.


No the 71st street bridge is an extremely heavily used bridge and is very much needed. The Jenks Bridge doesn't come close to serving that need.

You're right, the 23rd street bridge really isn't necessary. SW boulevard, I244 bridge and I44 serve that area well enough the vast majority of the time. 23rd bridge is pretty sparsely used (4,200 traffic count per day, less than 5,500 at SW blvd and far less than 29k over 71st). That is the lowest used Arkansas River bridge we have data for, even lower than the one way out near Wagoner, but it's already there so might as well leave it as it's a good  backup and is used for big festivals and fireworks.

Considering of all of Tulsa's deficiencies in traffic and infrastructure, I wouldn't put 41st bridge on a wish list.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: RecycleMichael on January 23, 2018, 12:54:46 pm
A bridge at W 41st street is a ridiculous idea. It would be a monumental waste of money.

I disagree. I think it would be brilliant and open up development with beautiful views of the skyline and river.

My daughter plays on the west bank soccer fields and I just think that that part of west Tulsa could be a gold mine.

Just think what it would do for the whole area.

Webster High School would become closer than Edison High School for Maple Ridgers.

Just imagine the land conversion.
 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: patric on January 23, 2018, 03:00:43 pm
Dang, I know Tulsa likely only had about a 0.0000000000001% chance anyway, but we offered 23rd and Jackson. This is a company that currently has made it's home in the center of one of the most vibrant cities in America, and we offer them land with scenic views of some really sad looking low income apartments and a tank farm? Not to mention being smack dab between two oil refineries? For real?

Did everyone enjoy all that "industry" in the air last night?  Midtown smelled like a wet dog in a car fire.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 23, 2018, 03:11:28 pm
Did everyone enjoy all that "industry" in the air last night?  Midtown smelled like a wet dog in a car fire.

That was apparently due to the natural gas drilling rig explosion about 110 miles south of Tulsa. Hard to believe it would blow that far and smell that strong but that is what was reported on the news.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 23, 2018, 03:19:32 pm
That was apparently due to the natural gas drilling rig explosion about 110 miles south of Tulsa. Hard to believe it would blow that far and smell that strong but that is what was reported on the news.


Saw a clip this morning that showed it still burning, but I  think it was from yesterday.  I think they got the fire out, but then ya got a whole bunch of well vapors coming out...at least for a while.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 23, 2018, 03:22:07 pm

Webster High School would become closer than Edison High School for Maple Ridgers.


No it wouldn't? Maple Ridge is from 15th to 31st. The closest bridge is 23rd and adding a 41st bridge would put them no closer. Parts of it are already closer to Webster than Edison. That doesn't change the district boundary and residents there wouldn't want that. Parts of Florence Park are closer to Nathan Hale than to Edison but I don't see residents there trying to switch HS affiliation.

Did you mean Brookside neighborhood?



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 23, 2018, 03:33:11 pm
I disagree. I think it would be brilliant and open up development with beautiful views of the skyline and river.

My daughter plays on the west bank soccer fields and I just think that that part of west Tulsa could be a gold mine.

Just think what it would do for the whole area.

Just imagine the land conversion.
 

I can't imagine it doing much more than the existing 2 bridges within a mile or two of there haven't done already. As I said, I can only imagine something happening with a corrupt mayor trying to get their buddies a sweet contract to build on free land and it ends up being subpar apartments.

Bridges don't magically produce development. The area around the 23rd street bridge is still a terrible wasteland where no one wants to live while just across the river is mansions and beautiful areas. If a bridge will help so much, why hasn't it helped at all at 23rd? Surely some investor would've come in and taken advantage by now.

The best thing that stretch has going for it on the west side is that it remains mostly trees.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 23, 2018, 03:52:49 pm

Bridges don't magically produce development. The area around the 23rd street bridge is still a terrible wasteland where no one wants to live while just across the river is mansions and beautiful areas. If a bridge will help so much, why hasn't it helped at all at 23rd? Surely some investor would've come in and taken advantage by now.

The best thing that stretch has going for it on the west side is that it remains mostly trees.


Then why did we build 71st street bridge if it wasn't to produce development? 

And industrial development IS development.  There is already a sizable industrial area on west 41st that would be impacted by a bridge/road going through.  Not sure if it would be a good impact on those places...   And I think Angie's wish would quite possibly be one of those "careful what you wish for" things...Redfork is a nice little area - I have spent a lot of time there over the years, both working and visiting friends and I like the 'comfortable' feel of the place.  I think a bridge would change it and not for the better for the people who live there now.


We took a drive over the weekend, starting at Ollie's and going west on 41st as far as we could, through Prattville, then on to Campbell Creek Rd, and Coyote Trail.  Ended up east of Mannford, stopped for a bit to look at the lake on 263rd W Ave, then saw an eagle sitting in a tree on the way back.  Beautiful ride and when you get past Redfork, it feels like you have traveled to another place and time...another state?  Or what Oklahoma used to be...   There is a lot of room for "development" out there, and I think it would be unfortunate if it happened.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on January 23, 2018, 05:31:00 pm

Then why did we build 71st street bridge if it wasn't to produce development? 

And industrial development IS development.  There is already a sizable industrial area on west 41st that would be impacted by a bridge/road going through.  Not sure if it would be a good impact on those places...   And I think Angie's wish would quite possibly be one of those "careful what you wish for" things...Redfork is a nice little area - I have spent a lot of time there over the years, both working and visiting friends and I like the 'comfortable' feel of the place.  I think a bridge would change it and not for the better for the people who live there now.


We took a drive over the weekend, starting at Ollie's and going west on 41st as far as we could, through Prattville, then on to Campbell Creek Rd, and Coyote Trail.  Ended up east of Mannford, stopped for a bit to look at the lake on 263rd W Ave, then saw an eagle sitting in a tree on the way back.  Beautiful ride and when you get past Redfork, it feels like you have traveled to another place and time...another state?  Or what Oklahoma used to be...   There is a lot of room for "development" out there, and I think it would be unfortunate if it happened.



Having officed at 41st & Jackson for 12 or so years, my best guess is there are perhaps 500-700 workers in the industrial area from Elwood to US 75, Cherry Creek on the south to the refinery grounds to the north.  It's not that densely populated.  I could see a benefit to it and I would have used it rather than the expressways as I never cared much for hopping on the BA or I-44 to get to work.  In the scheme of existing infrastructure which has long been ignored an investment in this bridge would be rather extravagant at this point.  I get Angie's point and other's that west siders have long felt like they have been cut off from the rest of Tulsa forever and this would lend a sense of connectedness to the east side.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TheArtist on January 23, 2018, 11:25:42 pm
I think it would help to connect the West side to the rest of Tulsa more than any other thing.  I find myself lost and disoriented when taking the highway over there. 71st ends into a neighborhood or you end up on highway 75 which is not "connected" to the west side of Tulsa but whisks you past Jenks or towards Downtown.  There just needs to be a connection to a more familiar, "Tulsa grid" that goes somewhere. 41st would go straight on through for quite a ways and easily lead to a lot of development potential over there.  Seems like many of the other east-west roads end or curve around and lead you to lord only knows where in rather short order, and you then start thinking "I don't know where I am, don't know where I am going and the only way to get back is to find an on ramp to some gawd awful highway that will lead me back to the other side!" 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Red Arrow on January 23, 2018, 11:33:35 pm
I anticipate the folks on 41st Street east of the river fighting a bridge as much as the folks on south Yale fighting the bridge to Bixby.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 24, 2018, 08:55:31 am
I think it would help to connect the West side to the rest of Tulsa more than any other thing.  I find myself lost and disoriented when taking the highway over there. 71st ends into a neighborhood or you end up on highway 75 which is not "connected" to the west side of Tulsa but whisks you past Jenks or towards Downtown.  There just needs to be a connection to a more familiar, "Tulsa grid" that goes somewhere. 41st would go straight on through for quite a ways and easily lead to a lot of development potential over there.  Seems like many of the other east-west roads end or curve around and lead you to lord only knows where in rather short order, and you then start thinking "I don't know where I am, don't know where I am going and the only way to get back is to find an on ramp to some gawd awful highway that will lead me back to the other side!" 


This disorientation was kinda what I was talking about with my comment above about feeling like another time/place. 

And that may not be a bad thing - I worked in Redfork as a teenager doing some commercial construction work, then a few decades later in the same building doing some engineering work.  The tile I laid in about 1967 was still there and good shape and the concrete floor section I replaced wasn't even cracked or anything!  Used every day!   

Leading to... it can be a little confusing getting around there if you don't go through every day.  Not a bad thing - change has been slower there.   There is a shell across from Ollie's that I would love to have to rebuild into a little wood shop!  Being close to Tulsa Stove Hospital wouldn't be too bad either.  I like going in there just to look around some...
 



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DowntownDan on January 24, 2018, 09:07:18 am
I disagree. I think it would be brilliant and open up development with beautiful views of the skyline and river.

My daughter plays on the west bank soccer fields and I just think that that part of west Tulsa could be a gold mine.

Just think what it would do for the whole area.

Webster High School would become closer than Edison High School for Maple Ridgers.

Just imagine the land conversion.
 

Why does that land need to be converted?  It's doing fine as an industrial area.  What would be the purpose of a multi-million dollar shortcut to Riverside Drive?  I suspect access to US75 is more important to them.  Not every area needs restaurants apartments and retail.  The west bank on 23rd Street has immensely more potential, with better views of both the downtown skyline and the Gathering Place, and still sits undeveloped.  There is so much to be done around existing infrastructure.   A multi-million dollar bridge at 41st is the last thing we need.  If there is extra money, lets improve on the plan to rebuild the pedestrian bridge or convert the old Route 66 bridge to a "Highline" type park.  


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: AngieB on January 24, 2018, 09:22:03 am
Why does that land need to be converted?  It's doing fine as an industrial area.  What would be the purpose of a multi-million dollar shortcut to Riverside Drive?  I suspect access to US75 is more important to them.  Not every area needs restaurants apartments and retail.  The west bank on 23rd Street has immensely more potential, with better views of both the downtown skyline and the Gathering Place, and still sits undeveloped.  There is so much to be done around existing infrastructure.   A multi-million dollar bridge at 41st is the last thing we need.  If there is extra money, lets improve on the plan to rebuild the pedestrian bridge or convert the old Route 66 bridge to a "Highline" type park.  

I wonder how your opinion might change if you lived on the westside. Hmm?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 24, 2018, 09:25:57 am
Why does that land need to be converted?  It's doing fine as an industrial area.  What would be the purpose of a multi-million dollar shortcut to Riverside Drive?  I suspect access to US75 is more important to them.  Not every area needs restaurants apartments and retail.  The west bank on 23rd Street has immensely more potential, with better views of both the downtown skyline and the Gathering Place, and still sits undeveloped.  There is so much to be done around existing infrastructure.   A multi-million dollar bridge at 41st is the last thing we need.  If there is extra money, lets improve on the plan to rebuild the pedestrian bridge or convert the old Route 66 bridge to a "Highline" type park.  



Big problem with 23rd is the huge toxic waste "dump" surrounding the place from the 100 years of oil refineries and heavy metal industrial.   The ground is loaded with 100 years of spills, messes, leaks, and intentional pouring of oil on the ground.  Not gonna be easy or cheap to clean it up.  And if ya just pave it over, as we are wont to do as a species, the problem is just hidden till the concrete breaks up and needs replacing.

There was a time for quite a few years when Sun Oil and it's predecessors were actually pouring oil on large areas of there facility as experiment to see if it could be used as fertilizer, without further processing.  Eventually that does decay and degrade and does have some small fertilizing effect.  Well, except for any heavy metals left behind...

And the dark color did help the soil warm up a little earlier in the spring, getting the plants to start growing sooner.  



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 24, 2018, 09:26:31 am
I wonder how your opinion might change if you lived on the westside. Hmm?


He wouldn't do that...too undeveloped...



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DowntownDan on January 24, 2018, 10:24:46 am

He wouldn't do that...too undeveloped...



I certainly wouldn't live off of 41st on the west side because it's industrial without housing.  If I lived on the west side between 21st and 51st, I would use the 23rd or I-44 bridge to get across, like people have for decades.  Neither is onerous to get to since nobody lives more than a mile or two from those crossings.  A bridge at 41st would be a shortcut, and an extraordinarily expensive one, that isn't necessary.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on January 24, 2018, 11:57:36 am
That's not true, there is actually a cool old neighborhood on W 41st once you get west of Hwy 75.  There is a wide range of housing, like the $35k to $135k range, and that pocket has its school, park, etc. and easy access to everywhere else.  Built up in the 1930s as a part of blue collar Red Fork - it used to have corner stores and everything else.   It's a fairly large pocket of housing, probably the largest on the West Side, with 41st cutting directly through it.  When I've been over there its pretty quiet.

Of course, the 41st St. bridge would only be a minor short cut to that area. Even if you were going to Riverside & 41st it might save 5 minutes.  Probably a break even to Brookside etc.  or just about anywhere else.  And it seems unlikely that the bridge would encourage redevelopment or reinvestment in the area.  

I'd guess if it was connected 80 years ago when the neighborhood was developing the entire development pattern might have been very different. The industry and waste water plants might not have built up along the river at this spot.   But at this point in time redevelopment of the chunk of land between the refinery/PSO, HWY 75, and Cherry Creek/44 would be a very tall order for a long list of reasons.  Least among them is a bridge at 41st.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 24, 2018, 01:35:19 pm
I certainly wouldn't live off of 41st on the west side because it's industrial without housing.  If I lived on the west side between 21st and 51st, I would use the 23rd or I-44 bridge to get across, like people have for decades.  Neither is onerous to get to since nobody lives more than a mile or two from those crossings.  A bridge at 41st would be a shortcut, and an extraordinarily expensive one, that isn't necessary.


I think the people of Redfork would be just a little bit surprised to hear that.  

Webster is tucked up in the north wedge formed by 244 and 75.  South for quite a ways are neighborhoods.  And then just west of 244, there are more.   Google Earth is your friend.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 24, 2018, 01:47:35 pm
I wonder how your opinion might change if you lived on the westside. Hmm?

Very few people live in that section that is by the River that would benefit from the 41st bridge. The rest wouldn't benefit from it much. If I lived on the west side, I wouldn't care to add a bridge at that point. It wouldn't cut down on my drive to Brookside or anywhere else really. If I lived in that section like the other 50 people that do, I'd be up for a bridge but might not be happy if they turned all the woods into generic looking suburbs or apartments.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 24, 2018, 02:19:24 pm
I wonder how your opinion might change if you lived on the westside. Hmm?


All the people who don't live there think it would not be of benefit.... I agree with you.

I guess since there are only 50 people in Redfork, they must be right!  (Deep sarcasm for anyone who didn't get it.)



Edit; there are about 20,000 people living in Redfork.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DowntownDan on January 24, 2018, 02:39:45 pm
That's not true, there is actually a cool old neighborhood on W 41st once you get west of Hwy 75.  There is a wide range of housing, like the $35k to $135k range, and that pocket has its school, park, etc. and easy access to everywhere else.  Built up in the 1930s as a part of blue collar Red Fork - it used to have corner stores and everything else.   It's a fairly large pocket of housing, probably the largest on the West Side, with 41st cutting directly through it.  When I've been over there its pretty quiet.

Of course, the 41st St. bridge would only be a minor short cut to that area. Even if you were going to Riverside & 41st it might save 5 minutes.  Probably a break even to Brookside etc.  or just about anywhere else.  And it seems unlikely that the bridge would encourage redevelopment or reinvestment in the area.  

I'd guess if it was connected 80 years ago when the neighborhood was developing the entire development pattern might have been very different. The industry and waste water plants might not have built up along the river at this spot.   But at this point in time redevelopment of the chunk of land between the refinery/PSO, HWY 75, and Cherry Creek/44 would be a very tall order for a long list of reasons.  Least among them is a bridge at 41st.



That's my basic point.  It would result in nothing more than a minor short cut, but would cost several millions of dollars.  I don't think crossing the river is a big problem for Red Fork residents.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: AngieB on January 24, 2018, 02:56:55 pm
Very few people live in that section that is by the River that would benefit from the 41st bridge. The rest wouldn't benefit from it much. If I lived on the west side, I wouldn't care to add a bridge at that point. It wouldn't cut down on my drive to Brookside or anywhere else really. If I lived in that section like the other 50 people that do, I'd be up for a bridge but might not be happy if they turned all the woods into generic looking suburbs or apartments.

You seriously need to get out more.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: guido911 on January 24, 2018, 08:33:43 pm
That's my basic point.  It would result in nothing more than a minor short cut, but would cost several millions of dollars.  I don't think crossing the river is a big problem for Red Fork residents.

Wait a minute. People still live in Red Fork?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: D-TownTulsan on January 25, 2018, 08:30:25 am
As cool as it would be to say that Amazon would have a Tulsa presence, and I know this is a completely different case, I can't help but think about how cities have reacted while hosting the Olympics. A sudden surge of people coming to the city in what can be seen as a sort of synthetic growth would cripple infrastructure. The city would most likely adjust though. What had me skeptical with the whole Amazon in Tulsa conversation is that "tech" isn't really sewn into the fabric of Tulsa.

Having lived in San Francisco for a couple years right out of college, and seeing that completely different mindset of "disruption" in Silicon Valley was a complete eye opener for me. Sure the stuff happening out there is incredibly innovative, but what all these tech companies did to the cities they operate in was actually quite sad. The people that were born and raised there simply cant afford to live there anymore! People weren't happy living there (including myself) when you see kids come right out of college, work for a tech company giving them a couple hundred thousand a year, and force you out of the place you grew up in. I could picture Tulsans (as stubborn as we are) adjusting to this type of situation by running to the hills in BA.

Now I know that Amazon isn't a start up, and it's massive success looks highly attractive, but I'm assuming Tulsans wouldn't really appreciate the sudden hike in the cost of living, traffic, and (what I experienced with tech) a collective snooty attitude coming to the city. 50,000 is A LOT of people for a city the size of Tulsa, so I don't think that we could say that these changes wouldn't be noticeable.

That being said, I am probably just ranting, but do think we might have dodged some sort of a bullet here. If anything I'm damn proud of Tulsa for actually putting itself out there for something as ambitious as this. Living in Dallas now, I have to just wait it out and see what happens (I'm rooting for DC!).

 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DowntownDan on January 25, 2018, 08:39:53 am
Wait a minute. People still live in Red Fork?

Yes, several actually.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on January 25, 2018, 09:34:35 am
As cool as it would be to say that Amazon would have a Tulsa presence

Tulsa never stood a chance - we checked almost none of the requirement boxes (major airport, population, stable government, availability of tech workers, transit, education),  and can't afford to bribe them with billions of dollars in hand outs.  This was obvious, though we were shouted down as "nay sayers" for speaking about the facts.  I' m not upset we gave it a shot, I don't think it was an embarrassment and as the mayor said, it certainly was good practice.

However, I think this editorial in Minneapolis really hits the nail on the head:


http://www.startribune.com/why-would-amazon-snub-the-twin-cities-in-headquarters-contest/470588523/

MSP checks all of the requirement boxes of Amazon.  Large metro area, solid mass transit & commuter options, major hub airport, tons of tech workers, high standard of living, excellent education, great urban environment, ranks well for business friendly (#3) and ranked as the best run state government...in fact it beat out many of the finalists in all of those criteria.  What they didn't have was huge corporate subsidies held out on a silver platter.  They offered to discuss the issue but did not make a billion+ dollar commitment at this early stage.

The conclusion the editorial reaches:   

Quote
After all there has only been one approach to landing big private employers that has ever really worked in Minnesota: That’s building them from scratch.

OneOK
BOK
QT
Samson
Helmerich & Payne
Bama Pie
Williams
Nordam
WPX
Webco
Cimarex
Aaon
SemGroup
Explorer Pipeline
Omni Air
Magellan Midstream
Unit Corp
St. Francis &  St. John's hospitals
U Tulsa
Numerous pipe builders, heat exchangers, and other manufacturing companies that employ hundreds of people... and you've never heard of.
(a notable exception is AA, which was lured in 1946 after AA moved training to Ardmore & Tulsa's bomber manufacturing lines were shut down after WWII.  it offered a trained workforce and 4 unused hangers)


Build a city that encourages entrepreneurs, that enables them to thrive, attracts and retains the best workers by providing a great place to live.  Nashville, Austin, Portland, Salt Lake, or Minneapolis didn't get where they are by handing out incentives to draw in major employers.  Success starts at home.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DTowner on January 25, 2018, 10:20:50 am
Tulsa never stood a chance - we checked almost none of the requirement boxes (major airport, population, stable government, availability of tech workers, transit, education),  and can't afford to bribe them with billions of dollars in hand outs.  This was obvious, though we were shouted down as "nay sayers" for speaking about the facts.  I' m not upset we gave it a shot, I don't think it was an embarrassment and as the mayor said, it certainly was good practice.


While it is fair to say Tulsa was never a serious contender, I think the final list (with a few exceptions) shows how utterly predictable and inside-the-box Amazon is being in its selection.  Nearly all the cities on there are pretty much the identical top 20 finalists you would find for any large corporate headquarters selection contest.  Nashville, Austin and Raleigh are the hip smaller booming city outliers, and Columbus and Indianapolis are probably the most surprising selections.  Otherwise, it is just mostly a list of safe bets and says Amazon is not likely to be daring or innovative in its selection. 


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 25, 2018, 11:05:53 am
You seriously need to get out more.

That is rude.

I said "Very few people live in that section that is by the River that would benefit from the 41st bridge."

That is the section bound by highway 75 to the west, I44 to the south, the river to the east and Holly Refinery to the north. It does not include Red Fork. For one thing, I was being facetious when I said about 50 people live there. There are only about 100 homes in that entire area so it's really a few hundred that live there. If that area were to be redeveloped, there is a good chance most of those properties would be bought up or sold. If you're on the west side of I75, it would be much faster to take I44 to get across the river, even with a bridge at 41st street.

You seriously need to work on your reading comprehension.  And you need to wake up to the reality that there will never be a bridge at 41st street and all of the Brookside residents would strongly oppose opening the door for much more crime to their neighborhood. They are far more numerous than the folks in that small section I mentioned and so they would win.

Furthermore, I grew up near the Red Fork area. I know it very well. We never considered that little section by the river Red Fork and we had no desire or need for another bridge to access Brookside.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 25, 2018, 11:10:52 am

All the people who don't live there think it would not be of benefit.... I agree with you.

I guess since there are only 50 people in Redfork, they must be right!  (Deep sarcasm for anyone who didn't get it.)

Edit; there are about 20,000 people living in Redfork.


I said "Very few people live in that section that is by the River that would benefit from the 41st bridge."

That is the section bound by highway 75 to the west, I44 to the south, the river to the east and Holly Refinery to the north. It does not include Red Fork. For one thing, I was being facetious when I said about 50 people live there. There are only about 100 homes in that entire area so it's really a few hundred that live there.

I know Red Fork very well and spent quite a few years in that area. They wouldn't really benefit from the bridge. It would still be much faster to take either highway to access Tulsa.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 25, 2018, 11:15:34 am
That is rude.

You seriously need to work on your reading comprehension.  And you need to wake up to the reality that there will never be a bridge at 41st street and all of the Brookside residents would strongly oppose opening the door for much more crime to their neighborhood. They are far more numerous than the folks in that small section I mentioned and so they would win.

Furthermore, I grew up near the Red Fork area. I know it very well. We never considered that little section by the river Red Fork and we had no desire or need for another bridge to access Brookside.



Rude?   Her comment was just glib.   She has no expectation that a bridge would ever be built - just expressing some wishful thinking.


Rude is the blanket statement that a bridge would open the door to Brookside for much more crime to their neighborhood....

From all those westside 'criminals' that would immediately flood into Brookside area...


Is that really the message you wanted to convey??

Maybe a little writing comprehension development is in order.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 25, 2018, 11:23:59 am

Rude?   Her comment was just glib.   She has no expectation that a bridge would ever be built - just expressing some wishful thinking.


Rude is the blanket statement that a bridge would open the door to Brookside for much more crime to their neighborhood....

From all those westside 'criminals' that would immediately flood into Brookside area...


Is that really the message you wanted to convey??

Maybe a little writing comprehension development is in order.



What was rude was her saying I need to get out more when she misinterpreted my comment thinking I was referring to Red Fork when it was obvious I was specifically referring to the small neighborhood by the river which we were discussing.

And it is just a fact of life that building a bridge from a higher crime area/poorer area to a richer area will bring in some more crime.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 25, 2018, 11:34:48 am
What was rude was her saying I need to get out more when she misinterpreted my comment thinking I was referring to Red Fork when it was obvious I was specifically referring to the small neighborhood by the river which we were discussing.

And it is just a fact of life that building a bridge from a higher crime area/poorer area to a richer area will bring in some more crime.



Sounds like maybe we just need a wall around that area then, huh?



Just for a quick side note as to the size of that area.  Since you did not bother to verify what you were talking about, I counted.  There are not 100 houses there.

Between houses and mobile homes, there are about 450 - 500 units.  There are also small apartment complexes (maybe 3?) there that appears to have in excess of a few hundred units in several buildings.




Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: TulsaGoldenHurriCAN on January 25, 2018, 12:16:51 pm

Sounds like maybe we just need a wall around that area then, huh?



Just for a quick side note as to the size of that area.  Since you did not bother to verify what you were talking about, I counted.  There are not 100 houses there.

Between houses and mobile homes, there are about 450 - 500 units.  There are also small apartment complexes (maybe 3?) there that appears to have in excess of a few hundred units in several buildings.



The lack of bridges is a natural wall. Just saying the Brookside area residents would argue that if it ever came to it. And there's more residents in one tiny section of Brookside than in all of that area on the west side. True I didn't look up exact numbers, just estimated based on the neighborhoods with houses. There's actually around 700 in that area. Still a tiny fraction of the residents in West Tulsa and far less than the same area on the other side of the river (Around 7,000 residents populating a similarly sized area on the east).

And the vast majority of people living in that west section are clustered near 51st street/I44/highway 75 so it would still be faster for them to take I44. Only a couple hundred live in the area in "Garden City" which would save time with a new bridge. And I'm guessing the kind of people that live there wouldn't want the area being gentrified as it is a high-percentage rent area and most wouldn't benefit and eventually forced out.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on January 25, 2018, 07:09:29 pm
That is rude.

I said "Very few people live in that section that is by the River that would benefit from the 41st bridge."

That is the section bound by highway 75 to the west, I44 to the south, the river to the east and Holly Refinery to the north. It does not include Red Fork. For one thing, I was being facetious when I said about 50 people live there. There are only about 100 homes in that entire area so it's really a few hundred that live there. If that area were to be redeveloped, there is a good chance most of those properties would be bought up or sold. If you're on the west side of I75, it would be much faster to take I44 to get across the river, even with a bridge at 41st street.

You seriously need to work on your reading comprehension.  And you need to wake up to the reality that there will never be a bridge at 41st street and all of the Brookside residents would strongly oppose opening the door for much more crime to their neighborhood. They are far more numerous than the folks in that small section I mentioned and so they would win.

Furthermore, I grew up near the Red Fork area. I know it very well. We never considered that little section by the river Red Fork and we had no desire or need for another bridge to access Brookside.

The area you speak of is called "Garden City" which is a misnomer if there ever was one.  It's slowly falling apart house-by-house and trailer-by-trailer.  I'm willing to bet at some point in the next 30 years all that area will be either green space purchased up by the refinery to the north or further industrialized from operations to the south.

AngieB is a life-long west-sider.  I have had family who lived there and I worked there for 13 years and maintained many friendships with people who lived "over there" literally my entire life.

I put "over there" in quotes for a reason:

The west side enjoys it's own identity and sense of community but it's often been treated as a lesser part of Tulsa much like areas of north Tulsa and the barrio in east Tulsa.  Some people enjoy the sense of isolation and some feel as if they are cut off from the rest of the city in a way.  Don't take it personal, but your comments would seem a bit condescending to a true west-sider.  I'm not trying to speak for Angie, but just explaining the cultural thought as I know it.

And I get your point about the bridge, in terms of "structural needs" it's pretty far down the list of priorities.  In terms of feeling connected to the rest of the community, I can see why people would like to have it.  JMO, it's a want not a need.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on January 25, 2018, 10:00:13 pm
A bridge at 41st makes no sense. Asking the state to configure the new highway, service roads and interchange so there is better access to the area from the I-44 bridge is reasonable.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on January 25, 2018, 10:12:02 pm
A bridge at 41st makes no sense. Asking the state to configure the new highway, service roads and interchange so there is better access to the area from the I-44 bridge is reasonable.

Tone it down man.  Your inner conservative is showing.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 26, 2018, 09:44:32 am
The area you speak of is called "Garden City" which is a misnomer if there ever was one.  It's slowly falling apart house-by-house and trailer-by-trailer.  I'm willing to bet at some point in the next 30 years all that area will be either green space purchased up by the refinery to the north or further industrialized from operations to the south.

AngieB is a life-long west-sider.  I have had family who lived there and I worked there for 13 years and maintained many friendships with people who lived "over there" literally my entire life.

I put "over there" in quotes for a reason:

The west side enjoys it's own identity and sense of community but it's often been treated as a lesser part of Tulsa much like areas of north Tulsa and the barrio in east Tulsa.  Some people enjoy the sense of isolation and some feel as if they are cut off from the rest of the city in a way.  Don't take it personal, but your comments would seem a bit condescending to a true west-sider.  I'm not trying to speak for Angie, but just explaining the cultural thought as I know it.

And I get your point about the bridge, in terms of "structural needs" it's pretty far down the list of priorities.  In terms of feeling connected to the rest of the community, I can see why people would like to have it.  JMO, it's a want not a need.


Has been that way since 1965 and before.  There have been many changes and a lot of places are gone - especially that section on Southwest Blvd between Billie Ray's and Ollie's.   I suspect it will be a slow ongoing slide just because so many are too poor to rehab their houses and mobiles are just tissue paper waiting to get wet and disintegrate anyway....

I did notice last weekend when we went through that there were some houses being worked over.  Don't know if it is new people moving in to re-gentrify or if the  same owners doing some work on their place.  Was nice to see - there is some interesting architecture there.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: SXSW on January 26, 2018, 10:12:08 am
When I brought up the 41st St bridge I meant it as a long term goal/idea for creating an advanced manufacturing/R&D cluster in the area of 41st & Elwood.  It's an industrial/warehouse area but is directly across the river from midtown with easy access to I-44 and Hwy 75 as well as a rail line.  If a company needed a large area for that type of operation it could be an option and would be made more desirable by a link across the river.

BTW the bridge is part of the river master plan http://riverprojectstulsa.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/REV2-SectionB-Full%20Size-Base-1.jpg (http://riverprojectstulsa.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/REV2-SectionB-Full%20Size-Base-1.jpg)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on January 26, 2018, 01:58:57 pm
When I brought up the 41st St bridge I meant it as a long term goal/idea for creating an advanced manufacturing/R&D cluster in the area of 41st & Elwood.  It's an industrial/warehouse area but is directly across the river from midtown with easy access to I-44 and Hwy 75 as well as a rail line.  If a company needed a large area for that type of operation it could be an option and would be made more desirable by a link across the river.

BTW the bridge is part of the river master plan http://riverprojectstulsa.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/REV2-SectionB-Full%20Size-Base-1.jpg (http://riverprojectstulsa.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/REV2-SectionB-Full%20Size-Base-1.jpg)



Whoa...!!    We got a PLAN???   How did THAT happen...???



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on January 29, 2018, 11:01:17 am
If we build it, they will come.

Basically, that's the idea.  We build a bridge and then hope it attracts "advanced manufacturers" to the area.  But there are hundreds of acres in Tulsa that could be home to advanced manufacturing that don't require a new bridge.  Why would adding a bridge here convince someone to build a plant or open a manufacturing facility they otherwise wouldn't build in Tulsa? It's purely speculative.  I'm not vehemently opposed, I just don't see the infrastructure investment returning much to the City and we already can't afford what we have.

It's like the magic freeway that will open up development before the previous magic freeway has filled in its development zone. Shall we count the empty industrial lots within a mile of the Gilcrease Expressway?  Or 44 to the east?  Or south of 412 in Sand Springs?   Along the Creek Turnpike?  I'm confident we can find more than 10 square miles of land with easy access and is available for advance manufacturing.  But this new turnpike out west/new bridge/whatever else, it will totally open up land for development. 

Quote
But if we build this bridge, they will come.  People will come. They'll come to Tulsa for reasons they can't even fathom. They'll turn up in your lobby not knowing for sure why they're doing it. They'll arrive at your door as innocent as children, longing for somewhere to develop.  "Of course, we won't mind if you build here," you'll say. "Tax incentives for every company". We'll pass over the money without even thinking about it, for it is money we have and money they want. And they'll walk out to the press conference; and present pretty plans while making all kinds of promises, jobs for everyone and tax revenue galore. They'll find promises are easy to make and designs are always pretty. And they'll watch the game and it'll be as if they dipped themselves in magic waters. The memories will be so thick they'll have to brush them away from their faces.

I'm truly sorry, I couldn't help myself.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: AngieB on January 29, 2018, 02:25:16 pm
The area you speak of is called "Garden City" which is a misnomer if there ever was one.  It's slowly falling apart house-by-house and trailer-by-trailer.  I'm willing to bet at some point in the next 30 years all that area will be either green space purchased up by the refinery to the north or further industrialized from operations to the south.

AngieB is a life-long west-sider.  I have had family who lived there and I worked there for 13 years and maintained many friendships with people who lived "over there" literally my entire life.

I put "over there" in quotes for a reason:

The west side enjoys it's own identity and sense of community but it's often been treated as a lesser part of Tulsa much like areas of north Tulsa and the barrio in east Tulsa.  Some people enjoy the sense of isolation and some feel as if they are cut off from the rest of the city in a way.  Don't take it personal, but your comments would seem a bit condescending to a true west-sider.  I'm not trying to speak for Angie, but just explaining the cultural thought as I know it.

And I get your point about the bridge, in terms of "structural needs" it's pretty far down the list of priorities.  In terms of feeling connected to the rest of the community, I can see why people would like to have it.  JMO, it's a want not a need.

You can speak for me anytime, Conan!


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: patric on February 26, 2018, 07:10:56 pm
Georgia may have taken themselves out of the HQ2 contest.

Georgia Lt. Governor Threatens to Block Tax Cut for Delta Over NRA Split
http://time.com/5176731/casey-cagle-delta-tax-cut-nra/



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on February 27, 2018, 08:52:34 am
Wait, you mean politicians overtly trying to punish and reward companies based on politics might be considered a negative thing?  So if a company refuses to support a donor of yours, you shouldn't punish the company?  I'm just not getting it.  Let me try again, you're telling me that politicians shouldn't use their power and State resources to pick winners and losers in the economy based on whether or not that corporation is willing to tow the political line?

Crazy talk.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Hoss on February 27, 2018, 08:54:07 am
Wait, you mean politicians overtly trying to punish and reward companies based on politics might be considered a negative thing?  So if a company refuses to support a donor of yours, you shouldn't punish the company?  I'm just not getting it.  Let me try again, you're telling me that politicians shouldn't use their power and State resources to pick winners and losers in the economy based on whether or not that corporation is willing to tow the political line?

Crazy talk.

Yeah, and considering how many people Delta employs in Georgia...might not be the most prudent thing to do.  I mean, who's to say they wouldn't pack up and move to some other state?  Anyone remember GE and Connecticut?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on February 27, 2018, 11:23:41 am
Yeah, and considering how many people Delta employs in Georgia...might not be the most prudent thing to do.  I mean, who's to say they wouldn't pack up and move to some other state?  Anyone remember GE and Connecticut?

If they simply did it because Georgia refused to give in to corporate extortion, I'd say good for Georgia and bemoan the company.  But if the company is denied something because they did not go along with the politics of the governor... that's inappropriate. 

I'd actually be in favor of a law at the Federal level or an agreement among the states setting guidelines for what and when it is proper for governments to give their people's money to corporations.  In the current game, its a race to the bottom as far as the tax payers are concerned as whoever gives away the most "wins."  On a national or even regional scale, it's not beneficial to the state or the people.  Nor is it good for the small business who cannot extort welfare from the taxpayers. Heck, its not even good for big businesses that are already established in the area (unless they choose to threaten to leave).

There is a perceived benefit to the "winner" locale of the incentive race, but if we changed the game we could all still play it in a way that is less destructive to the tax payers, small businesses, and the competitive market.  I don't know, maybe try to attract them with solid education, low crime, good infrastructure, reliable transit, and a skilled workforce.  Some incentives do make sense, but the current climate seems to be a nonproductive market irregularity we could do without.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Ed W on February 27, 2018, 11:39:51 am
When politicians give money to business, it's an incentive. When business give money to politicians, it's a bribe?


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on February 27, 2018, 12:36:09 pm
Georgia may have taken themselves out of the HQ2 contest.

Georgia Lt. Governor Threatens to Block Tax Cut for Delta Over NRA Split
http://time.com/5176731/casey-cagle-delta-tax-cut-nra/




I started to avoid Delta long, long ago...first when they slid so badly on service, then even more so when they started sending their Gestapo to beat passengers.  Who needs that carp...?



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Conan71 on February 27, 2018, 01:01:15 pm
If they simply did it because Georgia refused to give in to corporate extortion, I'd say good for Georgia and bemoan the company.  But if the company is denied something because they did not go along with the politics of the governor... that's inappropriate.  

I'd actually be in favor of a law at the Federal level or an agreement among the states setting guidelines for what and when it is proper for governments to give their people's money to corporations.  In the current game, its a race to the bottom as far as the tax payers are concerned as whoever gives away the most "wins."  On a national or even regional scale, it's not beneficial to the state or the people.  Nor is it good for the small business who cannot extort welfare from the taxpayers. Heck, its not even good for big businesses that are already established in the area (unless they choose to threaten to leave).

There is a perceived benefit to the "winner" locale of the incentive race, but if we changed the game we could all still play it in a way that is less destructive to the tax payers, small businesses, and the competitive market.  I don't know, maybe try to attract them with solid education, low crime, good infrastructure, reliable transit, and a skilled workforce.  Some incentives do make sense, but the current climate seems to be a nonproductive market irregularity we could do without.

I'm generally in agreement with your statement but it is beneficial to the people who end up with high paying jobs with full benefits even though they may be shafted as a taxpayer by the corporate welfare.  I doubt that is on their mind when they are going through the hiring process and I doubt many people fail to apply because it offends their civic principles.

In my day job (I'm not quite sure which one that is anymore since I have so many titles now) I have to mentally balance what is good for business and my obligations to the company I represent vs. when I think a project is sticking it to the tax payers because of unnecessary items put into bid packages or when I think the government is pissing money into infrastructure it doesn't need to or putting it in the right places.  I have direct orders to respond to every inquiry and to try and close as many of them as possible.  I suppose someday when I'm retired I can stick 100% to my principles as a tax payer.  Until then, I can just hold my nose and make the deal happen.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on February 27, 2018, 02:10:31 pm
Yeah, and considering how many people Delta employs in Georgia...might not be the most prudent thing to do.  I mean, who's to say they wouldn't pack up and move to some other state?  Anyone remember GE and Connecticut?

Can you imagine the bidding war for the Delta HQ and hub? Beyond the jobs, overnight a city would have connections to every major market in the world for all their other companies, and future companies. The bidding war would be immense.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on February 27, 2018, 02:24:04 pm
Can you imagine the bidding war for the Delta HQ and hub? Beyond the jobs, overnight a city would have connections to every major market in the world for all their other companies, and future companies. The bidding war would be immense.

The wooing has already started...

Atlanta Journal:  Birmingham, New York woo Delta headquarters amid NRA-tax break fight in Georgia

https://www.ajc.com/business/birmingham-and-new-york-woo-delta-headquarters-airline-faces-political-turmoil-georgia-over-nra/Minv2ROyNVzcGItY7yE1OI/ (https://www.ajc.com/business/birmingham-and-new-york-woo-delta-headquarters-airline-faces-political-turmoil-georgia-over-nra/Minv2ROyNVzcGItY7yE1OI/)





Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: patric on February 27, 2018, 02:35:00 pm

The wooing has already started...


Lets send G.T.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on February 27, 2018, 03:07:03 pm
Can you imagine the bidding war for the Delta HQ and hub? Beyond the jobs, overnight a city would have connections to every major market in the world for all their other companies, and future companies. The bidding war would be immense.

See the mid cities area of Dallas for a prime example of what happens.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: swake on February 27, 2018, 04:49:51 pm
Phoenix, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Columbus and even cities like Tulsa and OKC would go all out to get Delta. 

And there are cities like Memphis, Nashville and St Louis that have airports that USED to be major hubs and easily could be again and badly want to be again.

Georgia is playing with fire to win points with gun nuts.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: rebound on February 27, 2018, 06:14:13 pm
Phoenix, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Columbus and even cities like Tulsa and OKC would go all out to get Delta. 

And there are cities like Memphis, Nashville and St Louis that have airports that USED to be major hubs and easily could be again and badly want to be again.

Georgia is playing with fire to win points with gun nuts.


Memphis would be a perfect relocation.   Delta started in Monroe, LA (Not quite the Mississippi Delta, but more fitting than Atlanta).    I was doing some work for ASA several years ago in Monroe, and was in one of the original hangers.



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: cannon_fodder on February 28, 2018, 08:32:53 am
I'm generally in agreement with your statement but it is beneficial to the people who end up with high paying jobs with full benefits even though they may be shafted as a taxpayer by the corporate welfare.  I doubt that is on their mind when they are going through the hiring process and I doubt many people fail to apply because it offends their civic principles.

In my day job (I'm not quite sure which one that is anymore since I have so many titles now) I have to mentally balance what is good for business and my obligations to the company I represent vs. when I think a project is sticking it to the tax payers because of unnecessary items put into bid packages or when I think the government is pissing money into infrastructure it doesn't need to or putting it in the right places.

I cannot really blame the company actors (let alone employees), they are acting in their best interest according to the rules laid out. If the government ever decided to give me piles of cash to help towards making myself wealthier, I'd take it.  I'd then demand more in a few years (out of gratitude).

And of course the people who get a solid job out of the deal are happy about it., but that doesn't make it an economically productive venture in a micro or macro sense.  A bank robbery is very profitable for the crook, but that doesn't make it a productive activity overall.   

Companies are generally rational actors motivated by the prospect of making money.  If producing more widget will make them more money, then they need a new or larger widget factory.  That factory will be built where it is economically advantageous and convenient.    Handing over tax payer money might change the math on where the plant will be located (studies suggest it doesn't have the impact we assume), but it rarely decides IF a plant will be built.  As a whole, the economy loses out by inefficiently transferring wealth from the masses to areas of concentration (generally large companies).  Every city that doesn't "win" loses out, the vast majority of tax payers in the "winning" city also lose, business in competition with the recipient of tax payer money lose out, and small businesses that don't have the political muscle to extort cash from governments lose out.  Many, many small losers - and a few very vocal, happy, and wealthy winners who want to do everything they can to keep the benefits flowing to them.

So it's hard for individual governments so stop playing the game. It's the prisoners dilemma of economics... we all win if we all stop playing.  Instead it is getting worse and billions more each year are handed over.  If we don't act together, then those willing to sell out the hardest might "win" and we all lose.  Hence, an agreement or rule to stop the game would be a good idea.

https://www.citylab.com/life/2017/03/business-tax-incentives-waste/518754/


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: Oil Capital on February 28, 2018, 09:35:48 am
Can you imagine the bidding war for the Delta HQ and hub? Beyond the jobs, overnight a city would have connections to every major market in the world for all their other companies, and future companies. The bidding war would be immense.

Or not.  Even IF Delta were to move its HQ, their Atlanta hub is not going anywhere.  (and of course, the chances of a HQ move are about the same as Tulsa's chances in the Amazon sweepstakes.)


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: patric on March 01, 2018, 04:25:38 pm
Or not.  Even IF Delta were to move its HQ, their Atlanta hub is not going anywhere.  (and of course, the chances of a HQ move are about the same as Tulsa's chances in the Amazon sweepstakes.)

How the NRA fight between Delta and Georgia could roil Atlanta's Amazon headquarters bid
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/03/01/amazon-second-headquarters-atlanta-nra-georgia-delta-airlines-gun-control/382331002/


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: patric on March 02, 2018, 11:30:38 am
“Corporations cannot attack conservatives and expect us not to fight back.” (Notice how he defines an attack: no longer offering a special discount.)

Cagle... sought to punish a business for declining to associate with a political organization, and he did so by changing his position on a tax bill. He abused his power and decided policy based on factors other than the public interest, in order to help the NRA. It’s a disturbing precedent—and if he’s rewarded for it politically, others may follow his lead.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/03/a-georgia-republicans-unethical-revenge-plot/554711/



Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: erfalf on March 15, 2018, 09:08:57 am
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/15/not-welcome-here-amazon-faces-growing-resistance-to-its-second-home

Figured it was a matter of time before this line of thought got some traction. Particularly after everyone has actually had to fairly assess what comes with all those glorious jobs Amazon will be bringing.


Title: Re: Amazon
Post by: DTowner on March 15, 2018, 11:03:21 am
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/15/not-welcome-here-amazon-faces-growing-resistance-to-its-second-home

Figured it was a matter of time before this line of thought got some traction. Particularly after everyone has actually had to fairly assess what comes with all those glorious jobs Amazon will be bringing.

That is an interesting article, but here is the money quote on the likely effect of this small movement:

"Despite the breadth of the opposition to Amazon among academics and community activists, however, just four elected officials from finalist cities have signed on to the non-aggression pact."

Maybe Richard Florida is correct and that politicians who support all those tax incentives in the winning city will pay an electoral price, but I think it is highly unlikely except maybe in a unique city like D.C.