Stadium Discussion

[413Blue]

I don’t know why I care because I’m convinced the Revolution will get a stadium before we do, but Amazon is no longer building in LIC.

This has to be good for us, less competition for any site that becomes viable. During this process, the City collectively said "stay the fuck away" to any business interested in developing large projects in the City outside of Manhattan. A stadium and related development doesn't create all that many permanent full time jobs compared to a corporate office park. Since jobs are evil and just about everyone will put up a fight in this city, I'm sure many executives have just crossed off the outer-boroughs. Taxes, real estate, energy, wages required etc make it viable for so few companies without incentives.
This is an unfortunate day for the City though.

 

[Ulrich]

I don’t know why I care because I’m convinced the Revolution will get a stadium before we do, but Amazon is no longer building in LIC.

Liked simply because the idea of Amazon getting $3B in subsidies and their army of employees destroying the “norm” of the housing market was horrendous.

 

[Gotham Gator]

I think this is bad for us. This was a big win for both the Nimbys and those who oppose corporate subsidies*. It's now going to be that much harder for any project that involves either.



* - I think this affects us whether or not our stadium involves substantial subsidies, because any opposition will twist the facts around to make it seem like the stadium is getting them.

 

[adam]

I immediately thought of Fresh Direct

Funny, it just sold again 3 weeks ago for $75mm by IPG (http://innovopg.com) after being purchased for $48mm in 2016 by Atlas Capital (http://www.atlas-cap.com). Anyone know how to track any links between IPG and CFG?

 

[Ulrich]

Funny, it just sold again 3 weeks ago for $75mm by IPG (http://innovopg.com) after being purchased for $48mm in 2016 by Atlas Capital (http://www.atlas-cap.com). Anyone know how to track any links between IPG and CFG?

That’s a solid ROI for two years.

 

[Kjbert]

This has to be good for us, less competition for any site that becomes viable. During this process, the City collectively said "stay the fuck away" to any business interested in developing large projects in the City outside of Manhattan. A stadium and related development doesn't create all that many permanent full time jobs compared to a corporate office park. Since jobs are evil and just about everyone will put up a fight in this city, I'm sure many executives have just crossed off the outer-boroughs. Taxes, real estate, energy, wages required etc make it viable for so few companies without incentives.
This is an unfortunate day for the City though.

Why is it an unfortunate day for the city? NYC created almost 65,000 jobs last year. Unemployment is at a 50 year low.

 

[Ulrich]

This has to be good for us, less competition for any site that becomes viable. During this process, the City collectively said "stay the fuck away" to any business interested in developing large projects in the City outside of Manhattan. A stadium and related development doesn't create all that many permanent full time jobs compared to a corporate office park. Since jobs are evil and just about everyone will put up a fight in this city, I'm sure many executives have just crossed off the outer-boroughs. Taxes, real estate, energy, wages required etc make it viable for so few companies without incentives.
This is an unfortunate day for the City though.

Not sure if you know this, but NYC is in the middle of a construction renaissance that’s been going on for a number of years with no foreseeable end in site. The city absolutely did not need Amazon and the City/State didn’t need to sink another $3B considering the State has a $2.5B deficit and the Subway has no plan to fix itself without breaking the bank.

 

[Gotham Gator]

Not sure if you know this, but NYC is in the middle of a construction renaissance that’s been going on for a number of years with no foreseeable end in site. The city absolutely did not need Amazon and the City/State didn’t need to sink another $3B considering the State has a $2.5B deficit and the Subway has no plan to fix itself without breaking the bank.

Andrew Ross Sorkin reports that the tax benefits to the City/State from the deal were several times that of the subsidy. Not sure the degree to which that's true, but he's certainly a good source.

 

[413Blue]

Not sure if you know this, but NYC is in the middle of a construction renaissance that’s been going on for a number of years with no foreseeable end in site. The city absolutely did not need Amazon and the City/State didn’t need to sink another $3B considering the State has a $2.5B deficit and the Subway has no plan to fix itself without breaking the bank.

Very little of that $3b was cash, most of it was rebates toward a portion of the major tax bills Amazon would pay, so the net impact would have reduced the deficit. Expanding the tax base, and of course paid Subway ridership, are kind of a good way to reduce deficits, at least I think.

The real question is what happens with this land now? How long will development take? How many jobs will be created? These questions will be the ultimate vindication for the opposition, if the answers are positive.
I can't think of any development that will generate more net revenue and salary.

If you want to make the argument that housing, be it market rate, affordable, or mixed is a better use for the land, I can understand that, but that would have a significantly different impact on the state and local budgets.

 

[Ulrich]

Andrew Ross Sorkin reports that the tax benefits to the City/State from the deal were several times that of the subsidy. Not sure the degree to which that's true, but he's certainly a good source.

How’s the massive subsidies working out for Wisconsin with the Foxconn deal? Always skeptical of these rosy projections issued when controversial subsidies are being debated - different but similar, just look at the current tax law that’s gone sideways (for those that supported it) with the “promised” refund benefits.

 

[413Blue]

Andrew Ross Sorkin reports that the tax benefits to the City/State from the deal were several times that of the subsidy. Not sure the degree to which that's true, but he's certainly a good source.

I was surprised to see even him being hostile to Gianaris during their interview. He is correct, the incentives/subsidies were much less than the new revenue that would have been generated.
Can they attract this new revenue and jobs without subsidies? Who knows.

 

[413Blue]

How’s the massive subsidies working out for Wisconsin with the Foxconn deal? Always skeptical of these rosy projections issued when controversial subsidies are being debated - different but similar, just look at the current tax law that’s gone sideways (for those that supported it) with the “promised” refund benefits.

The Foxconn deal was outrageous and is absolutely nothing like the Amazon deal.

 

[Ulrich]

The Foxconn deal was outrageous and is absolutely nothing like the Amazon deal.

Pretty similar in that foxconn is getting $220k per employee and Amazon $120k - both are outrageous figures. There’s zero reason a corporate giant like amazon should get any tax subsidy- if they want to leverage proximity to NYC talent and VC, let them do it on their dime. Apple is quietly expanding in Austin with 10k new employees and not asking for a cent.

 

[LionNYC]

Andrew Ross Sorkin reports that the tax benefits to the City/State from the deal were several times that of the subsidy. Not sure the degree to which that's true, but he's certainly a good source.

Unfortunately the people protesting the Amazon deal don't know who Andrew Ross Sorkin is, can understand the report he provided, or understand basic economics.

 

[413Blue]

Pretty similar in that foxconn is getting $220k per employee and Amazon $120k - both are outrageous figures. There’s zero reason a corporate giant like amazon should get any tax subsidy- if they want to leverage proximity to NYC talent and VC, let them do it on their dime. Apple is quietly expanding in Austin with 10k new employees and not asking for a cent.

So the billions they would have spent to develop their campus,plus the billions in taxes and wages would not have been "on their own dime"
Doesn't matter, they decided NYC was not right for them.

 

[Ulrich]

Unfortunately the people protesting the Amazon deal don't know who Andrew Ross Sorkin is, can understand the report he provided, or understand basic economics.

That’s a broad statement.

 

[Ulrich]

So the billions they would have spent to develop their campus,plus the billions in taxes and wages would not have been "on their own dime"
Doesn't matter, they decided NYC was not right for them.

Not the same as a company doing that while also paying taxes.

 

[Christopher Jee]

Unfortunately the people protesting the Amazon deal don't know who Andrew Ross Sorkin is, can understand the report he provided, or understand basic economics.

That’s a broad statement.

I agree. I see that the projections for tax revenue >>> the size of the subsidies, but there's no guarantee that that "windfall" is going to be uniformly distributed (quite the opposite, in fact), or that the people most adversely effected by Amazon's presence and the fallout will be compensated by that windfall. So yeah, they have reason to protest the deal beyond not understanding basic economics. That's not to say that they do understand basic economics (I feel like 95% of the population doesn't), but it also means that their protesting the Amazon deal isn't necessarily proof that they don't.

 

[The Toe]

Outside of other political reasons, Amazon would have been smarter to get the Willets Point location. Reverse commute for workers and less strain on already-shit 7 line; site desperate for a consistent/daily people who will spend their money around workplace, invest in surrounding area; gives option for workers to live in the City/suburbs easily - transit options; cheaper, easier to sell to public since space was useless as-is; less congested area means housing costs won't double (again) like they had already done/would have in LIC.

 

[413Blue]

Not the same as a company doing that while also paying taxes.

They would have paid many many dollars in taxes.

My wife went Christmas shopping at Kohl's. They have super high regular prices on everything they sell, much higher than just about anywhere else. Her total would have been like $350, with coupons, sales, and other silly discounts she paid $250 and got "Kohl's cash", which are rebates towards future Kohl's purchases based on how much she spent already. We could afford to have paid $350, but would have simply gone elsewhere because it was not worth $350. Kohl's appears to be a profitable company, so this apparently works for them.

NYC has very high costs for everything, from taxes, to real estate, to construction to cost of living. Other places have much lower costs for all of those things. Sure Kohl's may have nice looking stores with associates that are more qualified than Amazon's app, but it's not worth paying so much more at Kohl's when Amazon is the better value proposition. This is NYC's problem and always will be, but scuttling a huge revenue positive development because "they can afford it without subsidies" is just silly.