What does it mean to be the Amazon HQ2 “winner”?
During the year-long Amazon HQ2 competition, I often wondered what it meant to be the “winner.” It seemed to mean that your city was potentially willing to provide more in incentives than any of the other 238 competing packages that were stretching to offer more and more. And if you were willing to bid higher than any of those other 238 aggressive cities and bid groups, would you really be a “winner”? To rise above that pack, just how much were you giving up?
It reminds me of the time we once bought a house, and then I came to the realization that we had just paid more than anyone else on Earth was willing to pay. That’s an uneasy feeling.
From what I understand of economics, this is referred to as the “winner’s curse.” That you are not quite as happy knowing that the other bidders may not have shared the extent of your bullish conviction.
To step back, it is equally true that had I bought $1,500 worth of shares of Amazon stock when it went public on May 15, 1997, and paid the highest price of anyone on Earth that day, my investment would still be valued at over $1 million today.
So what does it mean to be the “winner” of HQ2? I suppose the answer is yet to be seen.
Cargill | Business Intelligence & Analytics
6 年I'm conflicted. I don't see Amazon slowing down at all, but how much more growth can New York City & DC actually attain? Both cities already have established industry and infrastructure, but they both also have an overpriced housing issue, I don't think Amazon can help solve that. I'm sure there are cities that are better positioned geographically, economically, from a tax perspective, etc., as well as cities that seek the economic growth Amazon would've brought to them. It's easy to see other cities winning had they been selected, I'm not convinced New York & DC will come out as winners yet.?