And then there's this from ABC News.

Quote

Chevron moving 800 workers from San Ramon to TX

More to follow?

Wow..... I think you should both have your funny bone licenses taken away. Sometimes its better to resist the temptation. No encore performances..... please.

Williams Tower may not fit your definition of a "masterpiece", but does fit mine. It is easily one of the most recognizable buildings in the Houston landscape, as it clearly defines the part of town that it resides in. It also sets Houston apart from other major cities, allowing us to boast of its dominance in the category of 'Largest Building outside of a CBD in the US', and makes the city easily distinguishable from other cities from a photo. I could also add the Bank of America building as it also makes the Houston skyline easily recognizable.

On ‎12‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 0:05 AM, Houston19514 said:

Enough with the straw man arguments.  There was NEVER a plan to create a UT Houston.  They really could not have been more clear on that point.

If you believe that, then I have  some swamp land to sell you. 

I couldn't say it any better than nyc_tex. However, correct me if I'm wrong. I believe New York City has both the City University of New York (CUNY), and State University of New York (SUNY), which are both public university systems. Both have campuses in Brooklyn.

We always seem to return to these stupid conversations centered around the question "what're you scared of a little competition", when UT sympathizers try to justify the idea of a UT Houston. If "more competition" is so great when referring to tertiary education, then everyone should be ok with an announcement by A&M to build a campus in Austin. Of course, you would all say "no big deal" to that notion, knowing full well it would never be seriously considered nor tolerated, in addition to the enormous pushback by UT. UH is a large public school system. UH shouldn't have to "face competition" and be forced to persevere in order to survive. Most cities do not have two large school systems. Notice I used the word Most. Instead it should be well funded so it could realize its true potential. Having two state funded schools in a city does not improve the level of education, since each school sets its admissions standards independently, based on specific targets. A UT Houston will never be comparable to UT Austin in prestige. If that were the case then a degree from UT Dallas, UT Arlington or UTSA, etc, would be worth the same as that of UT Austin. Not every student is accepted into UT Austin, hence the alternatives in parts of Texas that are underserved by tertiary institutions.  Houston is not underserved. The Houston area has more undergrad students than any other metro area in Texas, plus UH is growing tremendously, as are the other schools in Houston. A UT Houston will only target the same students as UH and then there would be two publicly funded schools cannibalizing each other. That is not the best use of public funds. UH is not and may never be on the same tier as UT Austin, but a UT Houston will also be "second rate" in comparison.

Wow. This is awesome news. Ever since the work to improve the front façade of the GRB was announced, I've wished that the same would be done to the "back side". This is even better than what I hoped for. This should add even more appeal to Houston as a convention destination, with convention planners that have overlooked Htown in the past.

According to the Uptown Houston website, this article corroborates what twinsanity02 stated. Link and quote below.

http://www.uptown-houston.com/about/page/market-information

"With more than 26 million square feet of commercial office space, Uptown Houston is one of the nation’s largest business districts."

On ‎9‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 0:09 AM, HNathoo said:

Came across this article and didn’t know what project to tie this to. Maybe some HAIFers can get to the bottom of this.

 

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/editorial/editorial-council-drops-ball-crowne-plaza

Is the intent of inserting this article here to suggest you 'think' that Operadora de Servicio Para Hoteles de Lujo is involved in the hotel component of Museo Plaza? Or did you truly not know where to place this info? If the latter is the case then perhaps we should create a separate thread for this. However, if the former is true, then please share what makes you think the two are connected, other than the fact that both names are rooted in Spanish.

On ‎9‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 0:45 PM, Timoric said:

What is the difference between a Waffle House and a Waffle Bus?

Wheels.

Even thought I've been a haifer for many, many years, I seldom post. But I feel compelled to jump into the fray. I'm not going to pretend to know what the future will look like years from now, if UT establishes a campus here or not. Being a UH alum makes me biased in favor of UH. So naturally, any competition for UH makes me squeamish, especially given the fact that UH has had to claw and fight for its current status, not being able to benefit from the PUF like many other Texas schools. But lets be clear about one thing, for those making the argument that other cities have more variety than Houston, and Houston should be comparable, are forgetting that none of those situations can come close to what UH would face.

UT is only one of the most influential and wealthiest publicly funded schools. UT Austin's budget for instance is $2.8 billion, compared to UH's $1.1 billion. And unlike what Urbanize713 said, the state isn't always looking to cut their budget. The budget was cut in 1991 by about a quarter due to a decrease in the PUF's oil revenue from $262 million in 1981 to $57 million in 1995. However, the PUF's distribution to the AUF has increased beyond its initial cuts, since its oil revenues has led to growth of about 10% annually. The PUF is worth about $15 billion.

UH's struggles may very well worsen if and when access to UT is made easier. UH does not draw its students in large numbers like UT from around the globe, getting most of its students from Houston's own diverse population. Students are not going to choose "UT Houston" over UT Austin because the drive is shorter. "UT Houston" will get its students from UH's pool. If a provision is made to offer degrees not currently offered by UH, then "UT Houston" will get its students from UHD or TSU. Understand that I am always for more development, so this is very conflicting for me. However, those of you who try to paint a rosy picture of any potential coexistence, seem to be ignoring the history of the schools. The possibility is there for potential deleterious effects to UH's ambitions. Don't get me wrong, UH isn't going anywhere and will survive. It may just have to take two steps back before being able to take one step forward.

Very few of them have the life skills to handle having a job that requires showing up everyday on time, not doing drugs and getting along with others. If they had these skills there is a good chance they wouldn't be homeless. Putting them through some class isn't going to solve these problems. It's very difficult finding dependable people even among the population that isn't homeless.

I couldn't have said this any better.

On the other hand, I hear the oil industry and the chemicals people are trying to fill almost 300,000 job vacancies in the next three years, and they're not sure they have people with the skills to take them. Why not teach these street people welding and stick them out on a rig for $80K a year?

Why would an oil company, or any company for that matter, want to spend the money required for homeless people to learn the skills needed to get one of these jobs. Assuming the homeless person wants a job is risky by any measure, especially when you consider the various reasons why they became homeless. There are a number of studies who's research place the percentage of homeless people with some form of mental illness between 20-30%. Already you're playing against a stacked deck. But if you believe the remaining 70-80% all have normal mental capacities, then the question becomes what percentage of them can be dependable. Given that "addicts constitute a higher proportion of the homeless than do the mentally ill or other identifiable subgroups" as reported in a New York Times article some time ago, it would seem as though the problem with the homeless couldn't easily be solved by trying to get them jobs. That article went on to claim that 75% of all homeless people are addicted to drugs, as well as 70% of all homeless held jobs within the past year. Only 1% of the homeless had never had a job. This brings me back as to why it wouldn't be feasible for any company to tackle this problem, but it would be nice.

Fortunately, ROI isn't calculated based on what Rice students think of things.  One of the things that really pumps up ROI is having the Investment portion of that be small, something that UH excels at.

 

Well said. I'm a UH graduate working for one of the largest energy companies in the world, earning well into the six figure range. Without comparing it to anyone else's, I would say that my return on investment was beyond any expectation I could have had while pursuing my degree. I work with many graduates from Ivy League schools where the level of education they received is second to none. I'm sometimes envious of the schools they attended since they are among some of the schools I myself would have liked to attend or that I would like for my son to eventually attend. I benefited from UH's open enrollment policy. Although I was always a good student in high school I didn't become serious about my education until after I got to college and excelled at UH, earning a spot in the top 1% of college students in my classification during my sophomore and junior years, which qualified me for a few scholarships. The point of this diatribe is that I now work together with people that graduated from these Ivy League schools, earning the same as or more than many of them, and my career path is still leading me up the ladder unencumbered by my UH education. So for anyone who still believes that there isn't any real value in a degree from UH, explain it to me again so that I may understand better since I don't get it.

After re-reading previous posts it would appear that this diatribe is not responding to any actual question of the value of a UH education or ROI. Wish I had returned to the previous page to see what the on going conversation was about. My bad.

Ah, you're probably right. The tweet is among other residential/hospitality comments/tweets.

 

But I still fail to see how a weeks worth of full occupancy and exposure justifies building a multi million dollar tower.

Perhaps the expectation is that the entire country, and the world for that matter, will see Houston in a new light with all the projects taking place, including the improvements to the GRB Convention Center, Avenida de las Americas, and all the shiny new buildings. These buildings will include approximately 2400 additional hotel rooms, most likely 5000 plus new residential units and the population to fill them by the date of the Superbowl, plus additional retail/restaurants. These improvements can and most likely will entice more convention planners to consider Houston as their convention city. So the hotels will fill up for the Superbowl, which will then highlight Houston and, in a symbiotic manner, keep the rooms full thereafter.  At least that's my opinion as to where the confidence may be coming from.

Huh!!!!!!! Please say it ain't so...... Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Elizabeth, I'm coming to see you baby.

Of course in some cosmic sense there is some fixed amount of oil in total but that isn't a practical way to understand this issue because no one knows exactly how much that is because of a simple economic reality.

 

There are vastly different amounts of oil available based on the cost of retrieving that oil.

 

Oil won't be searched for and brought to market if producing it costs $20 a barrel and it will only sell for $10 a barrel - AKA 1987 in Texas. 

 

Whereas when producing it at say $60 a barrel and selling it at $100 will cover your costs then that will yeild more oil being sold that wasn't worth going after when the price was only $10.

 

Therefore, the amount of oil that may "run out" isn't really known in any practical sense since it changes all the time based on prices. I don't think anyone knows that we have peaked in oil production since big oil discoveries are happening all the time and places we think there is oil are off limits in some cases.

 

If someone takes a snapshot of proven reserves they read someplace then divide that by how much oil is consumed every day and comes up with a number they are promoting an economic fallacy because the proven reserves could be twice that much 10 years later depending on technology, access to untapped resources, and new discoveries and prices.

 

The fallacy is that the number "proven reserves' never changes or is final and we are taking from a known fixed pie right now and will run out.

Great take on the subject of oil reserves. I agree with 99% of your posting and the only reason it isn't 100% is because the last sentence is a bit confusing, and perhaps its just my inability to comprehend fully what you mean by it.

There is a "known" amount of "proven reserves". This known amount tends to change due to discoveries from exploratory efforts by Big Oil. As technology improves, which happens rapidly today compared to even 10 years ago, it becomes increasingly more cost effective to explore. We have only just begun to explore ultra deep water fields, meaning 20k to 25k feet of water, for instance. There is a goldmine there, and when technological advancements allow us to efficiently drill in deeper waters, we'll explore there as well.

What is also true is that there is a finite amount of black gold in the earth. These reserves will not be depleted in our lifetime, but it doesn't mean that Big Oil hasn't already begun to prepare for the inevitable. I work at XOM and am privy to some of the preparation already underway. I'm sure our competitors are doing the same. Those buildings at the campus will be filled for a long time to come. XOM has the ability to pay some of the smartest people in the world very well to ensure that it will continue to be at the top of the food chain.

Link isnt working for me..

It's not working for me either.

Ashby Highrise Will Go Up ‘Without Delay,’ Developers Say

Article from Swamplot dated 5/02/2014

Sun peaking through clouds.bmp

This is how I felt when I saw this rendering. If you listen carefully you can even here the choir singing....... LOVE IT.

I've always heard it was for more administrative and back office functions.

That is correct. That is the answer as to 'what' will be housed there. However, the answer as to 'why' its separated from the remaining campus is what my answer adresses

Nice info. Thanks. Any clue on why they are putting a bunch of people in The Woodlands instead of on tge new campus?

ExxonMobil made a strategic decision not to place all there eggs in one basket, so to speak. If I remember the briefing made available to all XOM employees via the company intranet correctly, it had something to do with the company's ability to continue functioning as such from a central location, given a massive debilitating event at one location or another. I'll search the archives to find that briefing so I can correctly communicate the proper intention, without posting any direct quotes from the intranet (company rules).

I have some new information on the Chevron deal. I have a source who's family is part of the limited finance partnership for the 58-story Energy Tower project in Midland. They are exceedingly wealthy and pretty clandestine on the details but here's what I have. His dad is a very well known businessman, philanthropist and investor. Take it for what it's worth:

 

Chevron's downtown tower is in jeopardy and might be scrapped all together.

 

Chevron has recently shopped Tower 1 and 2 (former Enron) to Texas Pacific. By recently, he means very recently (wasn't specific).

 

Exxon, according to my source, has set the example and both Shell and Chevron have taken notice. According to 'him', Exxon has shown that it is cheaper to build in the burbs, with the ability to spread out and own adjacent parcels of land for later expansion than it is to build in the CBD. His words, not mine. This makes sense that Chevron would be looking for cheaper capital investment projects since they're Australian project is running way over budget.

 

Btw, he also said the HQ of Exxon will relocate to the new campus in the next few years. He said this campus was built and designed strictly for that purpose. He also mentioned that a new high-rise of some sort will be erected near the campus as an "architectural marvel" when the HQ is relocated.

 

Chevron appears to be far more interested in the Camp Strake parcel than what we are being lead on to believe. He couldn't give me much information due to the sensitivity of the discussions taking place. When asked on a scale of 1 to 10 how serious they are of abandoning both downtown buildings and scrapping the third, my source said "8." 

 

He had no details on a Shell relocation to Montgomery County. The info. might seem vague but it was like pulling teeth to get the aforementioned out of him. If you have any specific questions, perhaps you can send them over and I can ask him but there's no guarantee I can get you an answer.

 

This is about as close to the horses mouth as you can get. Will try and dig for more info. later on. I just don't really know what probing questions to ask.

Hadn't read the Chevron post in a couple weeks so I missed this. This is truly a gem. While I find the entire posting hilarious I specifically want to address wxman's reference to ExxonMobil building an "architectural marvel" whenever HQ relocates to the campus. I've posted on the ExxonMobil post regarding this topic. I am an employee of ExxonMobil, and it has been communicated to us that there are currently no plans to relocate HQ. Having said that, plans can always change as we know. However, our current CEO has no desire to relocate. The commute via private jet is a short one to the campus from Irving. Also, HQ's staff is relatively small. There would be no need to build a tower when and if the decision is made to relocate HQ. The new campus is being built with enough additional space to accommodate the number of employees that would be relocating, again, WHEN and IF. Infact the new campus is being built with the forthought that we will be expanding, which means hiring new employees. The campus was designed with this in mind.

I find this, if not sarcastic, then totally unreasonable.

I have been accused of being unreasonable a time or two in my lifetime. However, my comment in post #447 was an attempt at subtle humor, with the use of both conspicuous and inconspicuous sarcasm. The conspicuous sarcasm is obvious since H-Town Man's comments were comically absurd. The reference to Houston's reputed traffic would be the part that was inconspicuous since my comment indicated I didn't have a problem with the absurd assertion but chose instead to challenge his ability to get to the golf course due to traffic, on a morning that Houston was also inundated by heavy rainfall and strong winds.

I find this, if not sarcastic, then totally unreasonable.

I have been accused of being unreasonable a time or two in my lifetime. However, my comment in post #447 was an attempt at subtle humor, with the use of both conspicuous and inconspicuous sarcasm. The conspicuous sarcasm is obvious since H-Town Man's comments were comically absurd. The reference to Houston's reputed traffic would be the part that was inconspicuous since my comment indicated I didn't have a problem with the absurd assertion but chose instead to challenge his ability to get to the golf course due to traffic, on a morning that Houston was also inundated by heavy rainfall and strong winds.

oops

H-Town Man your story of the Chevron CEO telling you of the construction in a secret location in the Arctic, then flying the building in to Houston is totally believable. However, I gotta call BS on the playing golf this morning part. There's no way you could have made it to the golf course........ with all the traffic and all.