Vy65

2 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Our restaurants are pretty well above the cities you mentioned. If more people aren't aware of that, we need to learn how to make them aware. There's an opera and ballet, yes, and there's also an art museum that is head and shoulders above anything in those other cities. Not all millennials are deaf and blind to any culture that was produced before they were born, even if that is the impression one gets sometimes. As for architecture, even if you aren't very knowledgeable about it, great architecture across a cityscape has an impact on anyone. And we have an impressive cityscape.

 

I really think some of us don't understand how great are the things we have. We've grown up reading these articles about how Houston has a bad image, etc., and it's kind of sunk in. If there is one thing we can legitimately learn from Dallas, it is the way they market themselves. You have the landscape of Oklahoma with a bunch of glitzy buildings, the culture of King of the Hill with a few garnishes, and they market it like it's a new Los Angeles, and actually convince people to go there. I'll never understand how they can be ahead of us in the image department, and it's really our own fault for letting them be.

Having lived in Dallas for a couple of years, you hit the nail on the head. 

3 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

What do Dallas, Atlanta, Nashville and Pittsburgh have that makes them more hip than Houston?

Nashville has an incredibly vibrant music industry. Atlanta does to, but to a lesser degree. 

Dallas has a larger fashion/design industry. If I can include Fort Worth, there is also a larger art scene there. 

Pittsburgh, I know less of and am going on reputation, but my understanding is that there’s been an urban revitalization there to make the city more in the mold of Portland. 

More to the point, each of those cities have the perception of being hipper than Houston. And while you’d expect Amazon to pierce through PR bs, they also have shareholders (who’ll go off perception) to appease. 

10 hours ago, H-Town Man said:

1. Houston is hipper than you and many people on here have convinced yourself it is. It certainly holds a candle to Portland. Our fine and performing arts, our cuisine, and our architecture are all in a different league than Portland, and nationally recognized as such. No, we aren't currently as much on the hip radar, but we certainly hold a candle.

 

2. Amazon is not looking for hipness. They don't want something as dull as Sacramento or Omaha, but hipness is not first priority. Their Seattle hq fulfills that for them. What they mainly want is meat and potatoes economics. Houston can provide that.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on what constitutes "hip." You're right that there is an opera and ballet here, but those don't really cater to the younger crowd. Restaurants are fine and all, but I don't see how they're any better or worse than what's in Portland (or Atlanta, or Nashville for that matter). I also don't see what architecture has to do with anything. In fact, the only thing that's been suggested as to why Houston is good for millennials (and thus a hip city) is that it's cheap -- not that it has much of anything else going on. 

As for your second point, I agree insofar as we don't know what Amazon wants exactly. You're right they don't want a Sacramento or Omaha, but I don't see why Houston is a better choice than say Dallas, or Atlanta, or Nashville, or Pittsburgh. Those cities can exceed (or at the very least match) what financial incentives we offer ("meat and potatoes") while also offering better PR (no hurricanes) and more hipness. 

Again, I think your point about the need to infuse more new economy businesses into Houston is on point. I just don't see the path forward with what this city has to offer currently.

1 hour ago, H-Town Man said:

I will just say this: the only real argument I hear for why Houston can't get this is that we don't have a high percentage of skilled workers. Not that we don't swamp most of the supposed frontrunner cities in sheer volume of skilled workers, but we don't have a high percentage.

 

I don't consider the flood scaring them away to be a serious argument. They are looking for economic advantages.

 

What scares me is that we have the attitude that it's hardly even worth trying to land a New Economy company. At some point, whether it's Amazon or somebody else, we're going to have to broaden our range. We had Compaq. We won NASA. We need to make something work.

First off, I would love nothing more than to land HQ2. Amazon could provide a much needed spur in helping this city become more urban, more fun, and more interesting. I know some people will disagree with this sentiment, but Houston doesn’t hold a candle to cities like NYC, Chicago, or even Portland because it’s more suburban. 

I think part of the issue issue is indirectly addressed in what I said. Houston doesn’t have the reputation (whether rightly or wrongly) of being a “hip” town. And that perception, mixed with the RFP’s request for entertainment creates a problem for Houston.

I think the bigger issue is a mix between the Hurricane, the perception of Houston still being a natural disaster zone, and the city’s inability to allocate enough money to create a financial package that would woo Amazon (that money going towards rebuilding efforts instead). The KBR site is intriguing, but privately owned — Midway isn’t just going to give the land to Amazon, is it?

Compounding that issue is the lack of a good public transit system and the absence of a pipeline producing tech-inclined professionals. 

Ultimately, I don’t see a unique package from Houston that beats others. I think cities like Dallas and Atlanta have everything this city offers but with none of the attendant hurricane risks. And they likely can offer a better subsidy.

That all being said, if this city is to have a future, I totally agree with your assertion that something has to give. I just don’t see that being HQ2 — as much as I want it to be.

5 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Maybe Jeff Bezos could buy the Chronicle.  If we don't get HQ2, he could buy it as a consolation prize for us. I'm not sure what he's done with the Washington Post, but it's seriously hard to imagine his making the Chronicle worse than it already is.

He's not the only one expressing defeatism ... 

http://realtynewsreport.com/2017/10/17/amazon-hurricane-harvey-and-a-fairy-tale-that-probably-wont-come-true/

Submitted without comment: http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/article/A-Houston-headquarters-could-rank-low-on-Amazon-s-12282807.php

14 minutes ago, gmac said:

 

 

Maybe for rich people. None of these are accessible to anyone in the middle class.

Depends on what your definitions of rich and middle class are, along with what sort of development (if any) comes out post-Harvey.

With the rental market being what it is (and possible being a seller's market for some time), why not make this another residential tower? 

5 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Is there anything on Hillwood's website?

Not that I can see, but they've had DMN and others doing their work for them, so I don't think they have to. 

5 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Is there anything on Hillwood's website?

Not that I can see, but they've had DMN and others doing their work for them, so I don't think they have to. 

14 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Part of the reason for the relative black-out in Houston is that we have the most un-curious, incompetent press in the civilized world. (Just recently our daily newspaper had a story announcing a new CEO at Chevron.  It was a story they took from the New York Times.  The daily newspaper of the world's energy capital couldn't manage to write their own story about the new CEO at one of our largest employers.  Not only did they not write their own story, they didn't even edit it to add any Houston angles... has the new CEO spent any time in Houston?  what does this mean, if anything, for Houston?  Nothing.)  Sorry to go slightly off track.

I agree with much of this, and have no love for the local media, but you'd think that the private sector -- for example, Midway -- would be much better with the PR. There's not even anything on their website. 

That said, I'm a total outsider, and maybe they're keeping their proposal (if there even is one) confidential until the 18th. In any event, I find the discrepancy in publicity both stark and disconcerting. 

12 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

That is because we know we've got an inside bid and don't need to do all the theatrics. It's the same sort of eerie quiet you heard right before we got the Johnson Space Center.

 

...which, I will remind everyone, wasn't considered a "good fit" at the time, etc., etc.

 

Need to act confident, people.

 

At the very least, I dig the optimism ... 

One has to think that COH officials and/or those in the know have an inside track and/or inkling on what Amazon is thinking. I look at the full-own press assault being conducted by cities like Dallas, Philly, and D.C., compare that with the lack of movement, publicity-wise, from Houston, and think that the play is not altogether serious. If the east river or Astrodome or whatever else site du jour were really a serious contender, you'd imagine that there'd be more buzz associated with it. I mean, Hillwood has had several stories run on their Victory Park proposal -- why hasn't Midway done the same? All of this points to what I think several on here have already pointed out -- HQ2 is a long shot, particularly after Harvey.

Lawsuit is still pending. The Developer won a decent victory against the Cosmopolitan on an interlocutory appeal back in April (with the Cosmopolitan being forced to pay the Developer's appellate costs). There's a trial setting in November, but with Harvey and the recent vintage of this case (only 2016), chances of it going to trial are slim. However, the legal (as opposed to factual) nature of the claims makes this one ripe for resolution by the judge as opposed to the jury, which can expedite things. There's also always the possibility that this settles before trial.

http://realtynewsreport.com/2017/09/26/space-citys-appeal-three-sites-in-houston-for-amazons-massive-second-headquarters/

Although, I still don't see a way this happens.

The villages on Allen parkway really create a problem. You remove them and you have a nice corridor going from this project straight into downtown. That corridor would be ideal for similar, mixed-use type projects along these lines, and you'd have a nice green belt across the street. Seems like an ideal way to expand downtown/increase urbanization. I understand that the villages have been designated as a historic neighborhood, but my common sense tells me that, if this project gets off the ground, there would have to be a developer willing to work with the city and the villages to relocate the people there to another site by "buying out" (or whatever the appropriate legal term would be) the historic neighborhood qualifier. But I might be wrong. In any event, seems like a really ideal way to connect montrose with downtown.