Metro areas with better growth prospects next year are the ones, mostly in the South and West, that attract workers from other parts of the country. St. Louis, in most years, has more people moving out than moving in.
That quote is completely accurate. In most years, St. Louis does have more people moving out than moving in.
From 2010 to 2016, St. Louis had a net total of -32,609 for migration. Domestic migration was a net of -57,902 while international migration was +25,293. We had 53,414 more births than deaths so there was a total population change of +19,243.
I looked back to the 90s and our migration numbers always appear to be negative.
The article may state facts but realistically the article is very condescending and suggest St.Louis isn't even worth investing.. Most of his articles are usually very negative and nothing ever positive comes of it.
Good thing that our unemployment rate is at 3.3 just think if it were at 8.3 on how more negative his article would be no matter St.Louis is in a no win situation.
I agree, a lot of the way we think in St. Louis is self-fulfilling prophecy. We say the city will never change, so it doesn't. We say people will move, so they do. We say we are the most violent city in America, so it is.
Hmmm. Maybe vote out the decades-long Democrat, snowflake, low-energy, appease-the-criminals leadership that has haunted this city for decades and..I don't know, vote for a pro-business, conservative, tough-on-crime, OPTIMISTIC, brand of leadership.
Because the CRAP we have now and have had for 40 years is not ***** working. Can anyone see that?
Hmmm. Maybe vote out the decades-long Democrat, snowflake, low-energy, appease-the-criminals leadership that has haunted this city for decades and..I don't know, vote for a pro-business, conservative, tough-on-crime, OPTIMISTIC, brand of leadership.
Because the CRAP we have now and have had for 40 years is not f***ing working. Can anyone see that?
R or D is such a bad descriptor at a local level. Do you think Slay or Krewson are Anti-Business? Do you find them particularly Pessimistic? Cause I have found them both to be pretty pro-business and I have no idea why they would run for Mayor if they weren't optimistic for the future?
Metro areas with better growth prospects next year are the ones, mostly in the South and West, that attract workers from other parts of the country. St. Louis, in most years, has more people moving out than moving in.
this is just blatantly false and it takes seconds to check. since 1840 there has been only ONE decadal census in which Greater St. Louis did not show growth, and that was 1980. if "in most years... more people moving out than moving in" you would not see consistent growth in the census, for f*ck's sake.
Here is STL metro data. Is more revealing to look at the domestic/international net migration data outside birth/death rate, the last two columns. Since the 80s, the growth STL has had is only due to birth rate being a bit higher than net migration.
David Nicolaus' article has valid points: the STL Metro Area's workforce can certainly increase its talent sets to match the emerging needs of new companies. Further, we are looking to new company development, from Arch Grants and T-Rex to Cortex, to foster the development of the future corporate champions of STL, with the hopes of a unicorn company starting here. We want the next Twitter to stay here rather than have to relocate to the Bay Area.
Same time, it does not change my understanding of how Amazon will draw its employee base for HQ2, regardless of where it ends up. Amazon will hire the best talent on a nationwide basis to work at HQ2, not based on a locality's specific and pre-existent talent pool. The opportunity to work at Amazon will spur the best workers out there to relocate to wherever they set up shop. This especially notes that Amazon will most likely draw workers who are young and mobile.
Basically, wherever they build it, employees will follow. If they build HQ2 in STL, then people will move to STL. Or to Providence, or Austin, or Saskatoon. Their Seattle HQ isn't just filled with people originally from Seattle, but with people who moved there.
The STL region's relative lack of high-tech talent can in this case be an opportunity. I've thought before that STL has a competitive advantage specifically because we don't have the big talent draw that would have already brought in other major operations for the big tech companies like Google/Alphabet, Facebook, Apple, etc. If there were these big operations already here, then they'd compete with a future HQ2 location to siphon away their employees once it was built. It's easier to keep your employees working in your offices when, for them to switch jobs, they'd have to relocate to another city. After all, the majority of scientists at Monsanto aren't from STL but moved here for the opportunity to work at Monsanto. Plus, if the new employees are also new to the HQ2 city, then they'll have more identity ties to Amazon and remain more loyal. They don't want to hire Cardinal fans; they want to hire Amazon fans. Finally, if there isn't a pre-existing base of this employment sector in the HQ2 city, then wages will be comparably lower while remaining competitive, especially if there's a decreased Cost-Of-Living Allowance that must be allocated to the new talent base.
Now, STL does have clusters of STEM talent, including biotech, financial services, logistics management, and advanced manufacturing. We even have one of the largest clusters of cartographers with NGA. This all demonstrates that the region can foster advanced employee populaces. If comparable talent pools can thrive here, the argument goes, then so can those Amazon will seek out should they choose to operate here.
All this contends that the real fight for HQ2 will rely on the location itself more than on the site's existing hire-able talent base. I continue to think STL should make the first cuts and has around a 20% chance of getting HQ2; considering 238 proposals have been submitted, that's not too shabby.
The article may state facts but realistically the article is very condescending and suggest St.Louis isn't even worth investing.. Most of his articles are usually very negative and nothing ever positive comes of it.
Good thing that our unemployment rate is at 3.3 just think if it were at 8.3 on how more negative his article would be no matter St.Louis is in a no win situation.
I agree, a lot of the way we think in St. Louis is self-fulfilling prophecy. We say the city will never change, so it doesn't. We say people will move, so they do. We say we are the most violent city in America, so it is.
Hmmm. Maybe vote out the decades-long Democrat, snowflake, low-energy, appease-the-criminals leadership that has haunted this city for decades and..I don't know, vote for a pro-business, conservative, tough-on-crime, OPTIMISTIC, brand of leadership.
Because the CRAP we have now and have had for 40 years is not f***ing working. Can anyone see that?
Yep, the same party has been in control for far too long without a challenge. Therefore STL Dems have little incentive to accomplish anything.
A Republican mayor is not the answer - Democrats and Republicans are just two sides of the same coin, ergo many of the same issues will persist regardless of the mayor's political affiliation.
In fact, I'd venture to say that the last thing St. Louis needs is another mayor beholden to party lines. It needs one with drive, a vision for STL's future, and the wherewithal to get it done.
These workforce concerns bandied about make zero difference. There is no tech shortage, either here or anywhere else really, despite what the large tech companies want you to think. Lots of people have had to leave the industry over the last few years due to being unable to find employment. I was almost one of them. St. Louis is particularly bad at this.
In addition, Amazon will hire and bring in people from around the country and the world to work.....wherever they are. You think Seattle has produced Amazon's workforce? Nah. That's not how they roll.
I believe we can decrease the likelihood, or out and out remove, Atlanta from the candidate cities. We may also see Charlotte and the Research Triangle decrease in likelihood.
Background: I believe that Amazon’s HQ2 efforts strongly take into consideration acquiring a company based in the candidate HQ2 city. This is part of an effort to increase total offerings through horizontal expansion. I look to how they’ve recently acquired Whole Foods (Austin), which expanded their operations into high-end grocers and created nationwide physical retail presence. Alexa can be found in Whole Foods now (and in the process increasing pressure on major grocers to increase home delivery).
Most cities are protective of their major corporations as regional assets. They provide economic stability, streams of tax revenues, and employment, including talent clusters. They also generally have strong political sway and are major contributors to regional philanthropic efforts. Cities will fight to keep what they have if they are threatened with losing their corporate leaders. As part of this, cities don’t like to see their biggest corporate champions directly challenged because it disrupts the stability of the existing business environment. It’s not in a city’s interest to be dis-loyal to its best companies; instead, cities fight for the interests of their best companies. Just think about how hard it was for STL when Anheuser-Busch was acquired by InBev.
Consider that Minneapolis didn’t do a big pitch for HQ2. Why? Because Minneapolis is home to the retailer Target, with which Amazon directly competes. The opportunity to pursue HQ2 with any real proactive effort there was not worth the risk of destabilizing Target, their corporate champion, by bringing in a company that could directly compete for revenues and retail-specific employees. Only if Target wasn’t threatened by Amazon, or had wanted to incorporate their business with Amazon, would they have been in favor of HQ2 in Minneapolis.
Today: Financial news reports are coming out on Amazon looking to enter the home improvement market, directly taking on Home Depot (Atlanta) and Lowe’s (suburbs of Charlotte). Apparently, the threat is serious enough that HD is considering a $9BB acquisition of a logistics company (XPO) to acquire last-mile delivery capabilities, an innovation that Amazon has been pursuing with its new warehouses around the country’s biggest cities. It’s becoming evident that home improvement retailers, which have long been considered “Amazon-proof”, are very much at risk of losing their market strength.
This comes as recent news stories have positioned Atlanta as a major contender for HQ2, from the company getting a Georgia state lobbyist to a tract of land outside the central business district being further positioned as a site for HQ2. However, should the risks to Home Depot be too great, I see the company and its leadership (including Falcons owner Arthur Blank) pushing back on Atlanta against HQ2. If Atlanta isn’t loyal to Home Depot, then Home Depot may become less loyal to Atlanta, maybe even seeing HQ2 being there as such a threat to the company that they’re forced to relocate. Atlanta may end up seeing this as a bird in the hand being worth more than two in the bush.
Basically, if Home Depot doesn’t want to partner with, or be acquired by, Amazon, then I doubt HQ2 will go to Atlanta. Same with Charlotte and/or the Research Triangle; if Lowe’s isn’t a likely partner or acquisition target, then HQ2 isn’t likely there, either.
That brings me back to STL, where Express Scripts (our largest public company) is on record discussing how they’re seeking a partnership with Amazon. This comes as Amazon is also seeking to further itself in the healthcare industry as a product distributor. As well, the Chairman of Express Scripts is on the region’s HQ2 task force. I do believe that the lure of furthering horizontal expansion by working with (or maybe even acquiring) Express Scripts strongly furthers the case for HQ2 being in STL.
Disclosure: I’m an investment advisor with a long position in Express Scripts.
I continue to believe that STL will make the final cuts for HQ2, that the region has a 20% chance of getting the whole thing. I also believe our biggest competition will be Austin, Baltimore, Cincinnati, and Detroit.
I have seen the idea that Amazon would be interested in being the Alpha dog in a city they would put HQ2 in and they would have no issue with that here, which would be an issue elsewhere. Another is the theory if Jeff Bezos wants to have a legacy of transforming a place, if that is a factor then here could really be in play of it due to representing many of the overall national challenges of our times.
Do think with the Express Scripts angle that regardless of what Amazon does with HQ2 they will likely have more of a presence locally due to this partnership.
Over the holidays I caught up with a friend who moved to Seattle in 2011 and purchased a 1 bed/1bath condo in 2013 for $407k near the space needle and the Amazon campus. They were expecting a baby In December so in November he and his wife listed their 1bed/1bath condo for $599k. It sold in less than a month after a bidding war for l $675k.
Another good friend, a residential real estate broker in Seattle, told me yesterday that properties are appreciating at about 1-1.5% per month right now.
Some may scream gentrification but tens of thousands of property owners around St. Louis should see dollar signs in their eyes if Amazon comes calling.
Just thought I'd share this example of the Amazon HQ effect.
Has this "something" occurred yet or fallen through? Anything we need to be watching for shortly?
My eyes are on Express Scripts working directly with Amazon, possibly as a partner and possibly as an acquisition target, and that this could be a harbinger for HQ2 coming to STL. Check out the video in the earlier post from Moorlander:
Another good friend, a residential real estate broker in Seattle, told me yesterday that properties are appreciating at about 1-1.5% per month right now.
Another good friend, a residential real estate broker in Seattle, told me yesterday that properties are appreciating at about 1-1.5% per month right now.
That's scary.
It's hard to fathom. I think my friend who put no money down on a 400k property and 3 years later sold and walked away with ~$225k in the bank is pretty happy with it.
Another good friend, a residential real estate broker in Seattle, told me yesterday that properties are appreciating at about 1-1.5% per month right now.
That's scary.
It's hard to fathom. I think my friend who put no money down on a 400k property and 3 years later sold and walked away with ~$225k in the bank is pretty happy with it.
No money down! Where do I get such a loan!?
Redfin did a Top 20 most competitive neighborhoods in the country. Like 12 were in Seattle.
^Seriously. Did he have a 850 credit score, no debt, and make like 10 million a year or something?! We'd give up a kidney to get approved for a decent loan of even $250k here in STL.
It's hard to fathom. I think my friend who put no money down on a 400k property and 3 years later sold and walked away with ~$225k in the bank is pretty happy with it.
No money down! Where do I get such a loan!?
In 2007 my dog qualified for a $300K mortgage loan and she didn't even have a job... Sccccccaaaaarrrrrrryyyyy
An acquisition of Target could be a huge blow to the Twin Cities economy if it would go the way typical acquisitions have gone.
\
or a huge win if it becomes H2Q and takes over North America while Seattle takes on world. Target has Walmart on one end and Amazon on the other. Amazon could essentially buy a ready made H2Q workforce, infrastructure, in a metro area with a progressing transit plan & Delta hub in place.
If there was any place else in the midwest that i'd choose outside of St.Louis, Minneapolis would be number 1 however i wouldn't disappointed if Amazon landed in Cincinnati though i do have a soft spot for Detroit.
In my humble opinion Minneapolis is a very well governed city that i wish St.Louis would take queue's/lesson's/advice from sadly we're stuck in Missourah & Illinois would never be an option
I’ve had a very strong, positive opinion of Loup Ventures’ Gene Munster for years. He was one of the very first analysts to truly get the strength of Apple back around 2006-07 and how a technology company can transform an industry. Gene’s definitely one of the smartest guys on Wall Street.
Still, I don’t think Amazon is going to buy Target, at least not in 2018. Right off the bat, I’d be concerned with antitrust, especially as Amazon would be merging similar consumer staple retail companies. I’d also be less inclined to acquire another physical retailer as Amazon’s still getting its commercial real estate footing with Whole Foods. Finally, this would most likely be a hostile takeover, definitely not a merger of equals, with the emerging Amazon taking on the still-strong but weakening Target fearful of being swallowed whole. They’ve also shown no sign of wanting to be acquired by anyone. If they’re approached, Target’s executive leadership and directors will justifiably seek a very strong premium to their stock price, I’d think at least by 50% to the current price. If I was Jeff Bezos, I’d want to see Target in a weaker position to better facilitate a takeover at a more reasonable premium with full support of Target’s Board of Directors. Maybe they’ll buy them by 2025, but not in 2018. I still wonder if Macy’s would be a better fit for their retail strategy.
As for Minneapolis and HQ2, I'll point out that the Twin Cities' leadership has already stated they're not aggressively pursuing it.
