[HN Gopher] Amazon builds property empire, quietly buying land a... ___________________________________________________________________ Amazon builds property empire, quietly buying land across the US Author : jbredeche Score : 223 points Date : 2022-06-14 17:58 UTC (5 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.bloomberg.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.bloomberg.com) | zip1234 wrote: | Nothing wrong with buying property that they plan on using | productively. | fortyseven wrote: | criddell wrote: | What's good for Amazon isn't necessarily good for the rest of | us. Maybe that land they are going to build a warehouse on | should be reserved for agriculture or reforested. | googlryas wrote: | Zoning laws already take care of that. | zdragnar wrote: | So zone the land as non-commercial. Don't finger amazon as | the problem when it was going to go to one commercial entity | or another anyway. | dymk wrote: | taylorius wrote: | Yeah, that Blue Origin, man - just a LEO taxi eh? Sure | Jeff, sure... | samstave wrote: | nonrandomstring wrote: | It's just a wise way to store capital in a volatile investment | ecosystem. Property rarely falls in the long run. If anything it | shows that Amazon don't have much confidence in other areas. | abnerhorn wrote: | Could they be thinking about building charging and landing | stations for future flying cars / drones? | lprd wrote: | I'll go ahead and say it: Amazon is frighteningly large. Any time | I visit a UPS store, the lines are out the door and most of the | people are there to make amazon returns. I see amazon delivery | trucks throughout my town - its incredible what Bezos has | achieved but I fear its just gone too far. | | I'm only 32 and I've seen so many companies shutting down; partly | due to consumer shifts, but also by amazon pushing them out of | the market. The pandemic also caused a few big players to get | thrown under, but it seems that amazon only grew bigger. | | The future looks strange. | theklub wrote: | Sadly our government doesn't protect us, I think there should | have been an antitrust case a long time ago. | babelfish wrote: | Why is this scarier than Target or Walmart, each of which have | a higher market share than Amazon? | BbzzbB wrote: | For what it's worth, neither Target nor Walmart have a wholly | unrelated cash cow (AWS) to subsidize ventures into new | markets at huge losses until market dominance is established. | lprd wrote: | Its scarier because there is no competition for amazon. The | closest company that comes to mind is Alibaba/Aliexpress, but | even they haven't had an affect on the US market to the | extent that amazon has. | | The stores you mentioned are physical department stores, | which have been competing in their own space for many, many | years. Amazon originally disrupted the book market...now look | at the amount of markets it dominates. | collaborative wrote: | We will never know the number of small businesses that had to | shut down because unlike Amazon, they couldn't nor wouldn't | indebt themselves to grow indefinitely (aka survive) | | The amount of talent and efficiency in the economy that Amazon | has crushed.. | shadowgovt wrote: | This implies competitors couldn't just go work for Amazon. | I'd say "crushed" is more than a bit of an exaggeration. | iamsomewalrus wrote: | i think this is too pessimistic. via FBA they've also enabled | thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of small businesses and a | cottage industry of others that have formed around them. | onphonenow wrote: | The "efficiency" that amazon has "crushed". Is this serious? | | They offered at home COVID PCR tests. The normal timeline was | you'd take it and drop it off at 5PM at your UPS store. By | 10AM-11AM (Pacific) the next day they had results. Along the | way you had full tracking. In transit, at lab etc. | Registering the thing was a photo of the barcode. | | We had major medical providers getting paid major money that | would take a WEEK (!!) to get results back. I saw on my | insurance they were charging something like $289 per test | because the person that picked them up was a "medical | professional". So despite millions / billions, I was getting | better service from my $39 amazon test. | | This test included 2 day delivery (free) to me, it included | priority overnight delivery back to amazon + lab work + web | tools etc. They must have (smartly) located the lab near UPS | worldship. | | Same with shipping and logistics. The USPS, with a guaranteed | nationwide monopoly on certain services struggles to get me | stuff on time. Fedex is even worse for some reason. Amazon is | an absolute machine where I am. We have same day, next day | and two day delivery that is HIGHLY reliable and efficient. | We can drop stuff off back at Kohls etc without even packing | it. We can pickup from Amazon lockers, or have them deliver | inside our house if we want. | | When folks talk about how inefficient amazon is I want to | know what they are comparing them to. Fedex? Some walmart | warehouse? | dan_quixote wrote: | Consider that some of Amazon's more recent ventures into | automation (namely PrimeAir) are driven by the long-standing | knowledge that they would exhaust the labor pool in many | markets. They knew their growth and labor practices would | hurtle us toward dystopia years ago. | [deleted] | noja wrote: | Nobody saw it coming, the world's next theme park: Amazon World. | oblio wrote: | They could call it... Amazonia. | xlix wrote: | It'd be a real shame if they didn't call it _The_ Amazon | Animats wrote: | Amazon has some flexibility here. They've been pushing some of | their vendors to handle their own shipments, resulting in a whole | Amazon reseller industry. Amazon can pull as much of that in- | house as they want. | nimbius wrote: | many may be too young to remember but Eddie Lampert did this with | Sears in the 80s and 90s as a thinly veiled attempt to turn the | company into some kind of obscure land broker. It did not end | well, and serves to this day as a textbook example of ideology | eclipsing principled, well researched business decisions. | | in the article Bloomberg attempts to invent reasons this practice | is dicey for Amazon that dont involve "you arent a real estate | company" but fall short. the regulatory landscape they paint | simply doesnt exist in the places (texas) they want to buy land. | | the real reason is likely to prevent competitors from setting up | their own warehouses, as Lampert frequently did the same thing by | buying out anchors and real estate in an attempt to funnel | customers back into sears during its declining era as it was | being bled dry by VC style profit chicanery that doesnt involve | store refreshes or new markets. | zeruch wrote: | "serves to this day as a textbook example of ideology eclipsing | principled, well researched business decisions." ...sounds | satirically like a lesson the Vatican is learning harshly right | now. | TuringNYC wrote: | ...or like a business intelligence and reporting software | vendor buying up Bitcoin | jkaptur wrote: | Is this a reference to something? I don't see how they're | similar. | madars wrote: | Reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MicroStrategy | rootsudo wrote: | Meanwhile, every grocery chain does it, Walmart does it | (Successfully!), Mcdonalds does it, and more. | | The later is more interesting because it's a franchise model, | and if a franchisee is successful, there's usually nothing in | the franchise agreement to stop corporate from setting up shop | nearby. Maybe not across the street or a block down the road, | but yes. | | Also quite common w/ lapsing leases with walmart and such, they | take out 15-25 year leases, and if it fits their margins, they | will build nearby and ride the lease out. | dudus wrote: | As a counter argument McDonald's does the same thing and is | quite successful at it. When you open a franchise you have to | build on the main corp land and pay for rent on it in | perpetuity, on top of franchise fees . | bluGill wrote: | McDonalds is also careful to ensure all their franchises are | in locations that will make the owner a ton of money (if they | run the business well) and so it is a good deal. Not all | companies work this way though. | FredPret wrote: | Win-win - corporate ends up with prime RE and reliable | rents; franchisor ends up with business pumping cash | TrueSlacker0 wrote: | I wouldn't say a ton of money. This article [1] says it | averages 150k/yr profit but it costs between 1-2mil to | start. | | [1] https://www.mashed.com/178309/how-much-mcdonalds- | franchise-o... | roflyear wrote: | That's pretty good. | rednerrus wrote: | I'll take a 10 cap any day of the week right now. | lumost wrote: | Take 5 million in loans, start 3 and then you have 450k - | .05*5 million = 250k free cash flow. Not a bad deal at | all in an inflationary environment, but a rough deal in | an environment with rising rates. | hef19898 wrote: | That's what, ten percent in profits? Sounds pretty good | to me! | nsxwolf wrote: | That's why a lot of people own 2 or 3. | RicoElectrico wrote: | Can someone explain why McD bothers to franchise their | restaurants? | | Usually franchise contracts are set up in order to transfer | most risk onto the franchisee. But the risk is marginal | because of due diligence McD does before launching a new | venue. | | Is this some sort of accounting/tax trick that enhances McD | financial figures on paper? Does this allow them to raise | more capital for expansion somehow? | TechBro8615 wrote: | Surely any successful company, and even most any failing | company, has a system for identifying and quantifying | optimal locations for new builds. It's not like Amazon is | just taking whatever real estate it can get. There are at | least _some_ parameters. | nceasy wrote: | in my city we had the first closed store of McDonald's in | the world! great achievement | SoftTalker wrote: | Yes it is very rare. In most cases it is probably due to | general economic decline of the area, but every once in a | while they were just wrong about the potential of the | location. | hamburglar wrote: | What town, and when was this? I remember noting that two | closed in seattle in the early 2000's and thinking that | was pretty unusual. | EGreg wrote: | Bill Gates bought tons of farmland in the USA and he's doing | just fine | | https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/05/bill-g... | | Also, McDonalds became a real estate play long ago | | https://www.wallstreetsurvivor.com/mcdonalds-beyond-the-burg... | R0b0t1 wrote: | What happened with Sears is very different. Somehow, Eddie | Lampert got Sears to divest itself of its real assets and was | then going to lease them. Some other company of Eddie Lampert's | ended up owning the real estate. That company never had issues. | Judgmentality wrote: | > being bled dry by VC style profit chicanery | | Don't you mean PE, not VC? | nimbius wrote: | correct! PE was more of a fever dream at sears as well. capex | and opex was the most visible and agonizing part of his | "vision" but certainly the 5bn in stock buyback he instituted | makes harley davidson look like a food truck in comparison. | under Eddie, sears made money by selling the idea and concept | of sears on paper, not tangible products at the malls it | occupied. | | the whole thing devolved from a value trap to many people | outright calling Lampert a thief who orchestrated the | downfall of Sears intentionally. three years ago he even | threatened to stop payment of sears and kmart pensions during | bankruptcy proceedings. | Spooky23 wrote: | I recall and interview where they spoke of returns as a | profit center. I'm sure there was some sort of accounting | bullshit that make 1+1=5, but in the end it's bullshit. | motbob wrote: | Amazon is buying land piecemeal, lot by lot--probably roughly | at market value, then. I don't think it's really comparable to | someone buying Sears because they think Sears's land holdings | are undervalued. | | At worst, they're exposing themselves to the whims of the | commercial real estate market as a whole. Not like Sears, where | the value of their holdings depended on a pretty niche market-- | the value of malls. | supertrope wrote: | A lot of businesses sell and lease back their real estate. | That way their capital isn't tied down in non core | competencies. Also they can insulate themselves from real | estate booms and busts. | bradleyjg wrote: | Another advantage is real estate investment trusts have | favorable taxation so it makes sense to disaggregate. | Closi wrote: | Eh, if you are cash rich you might as well. | | Owning land isn't something that requires a great deal of | skill/competence compared to leasing land - in fact if you | want to stay in a property for a long time, there is more | complexity in managing a lease if you have capital tied to | it once the lease period is up and you are forced to | renegotiate the deal. | | IMO this idea that a giant logistics operation shouldn't | own it's own warehouses just because owning warehouses | isn't a "core competency" is questionable. In reality this | decision just depends on your corporate perspective on the | cost of capital (eg the WACC). | jethro_tell wrote: | lol, most of amazon's money comes from things that | weren't the core competency that they figured out how to | do at scale. | | The 'focus on your core competency' is for small | companies on tight budgets with tight human resource | capacity. When you have a few mil employees, email is a | core competency, when you have a dozen, it's a pain in | the ass. The same goes for AWS. def wasn't a core | competency, but a huge part of the reason we can tell | businesses to focus on core competencies is because | amazon made SaaS, IaaS, PaaS a thing. | | IDK about real estate. It probably makes sense to own | your office buildings and warehouses at scale. They | probably have a real estate team that's bigger than most | companies that are 'focusing on core competencies' and it | probably doesn't look too different than any super | focused brokerage. | | Once you hit scale, the money is in doing it in house. | When you're paying by seat, it becomes a core competency | about the time the cost to run a team of pros to do the | same job is <= to paying per seat. | | This may have been a misstep assuming that their pandemic | growth would continue. I believe that's what they said in | their last earnings call, something to the effect that | they scaled quickly to address additional market capacity | that was short lived. | | Would assume they'll be just fine. Probably read the tea | leaves wrong but I don't think this is getting off track | and forgetting what they do to make money. | cryptica wrote: | A couple of years ago, my stance was that the growth of mega- | corporations would lead to economic inefficiencies which were 'as | bad' as a centrally planned communist economy. But now my belief | is that it will be worse because at least, in a centrally planned | communist economy, there is some degree of socially beneficial | collaboration between different industries... Here we have a | handful of massive megacorps with distinct financial interests | which are all trying to extract as much value from society by | whatever means or excuses they can get away with... Won't this | just lead us to China-style 'ghost cities'? | | Amazon knows how to build warehouses, so they will just build | ghost warehouses so long as government money printers will | subsidize it; they can keep monetizing warehouses regardless of | whether or not the market needs them. The entire economy is | turning into some kind of Bitcoin-like mining scheme except | instead of wasting electricity, Amazon will waste mostly | concrete, steel and workers' time... It's incredible that while | most people can't afford houses to live in, Amazon seems to be | building more and more warehouses... | | Megacorps are merely following the streams of currency from the | money printers instead of following real consumer needs... | Unfortunately, they have a lot of control over the money printers | via their relationships with governments so they can make sure | that they end up pointing towards wherever is convenient for | them... They can turn a profit regardless of whether or not | people need what they're offering. | | Just look at big weapon manufacturers; they wanted some big juicy | government contracts (funded straight from the money printers) | and look at what they got; another war! Governments are all too | happy to hand out all that free, freshly printed money to their | buddies. Plenty of profits generated from destroying net economic | value. | | Vaccine manufacturers... Bill governments for billions of doses | and then let governments worry about how to sell it to the | public. Governments are systematically monetizing waste for the | benefit of their corporate overlords with 0 concern for common | social interests. | johng wrote: | McDonald's isn't much different. | ajb wrote: | I was much more shocked when I came across this: | https://www.amazon.co.uk/b?node=26247109031 | | TLDR: Amazon has a hair salon | [deleted] | heyflyguy wrote: | Jeff Bezos owns a ton of land personally in and around Van Horn | as well. Between him and Gates, it's staggering how much land | these billionaires are buying. | ilrwbwrkhv wrote: | That's why these companies must be broken down and nobody | should be a billionaire. | tiborsaas wrote: | How do you imagine this happening? What would happen is that | they would still own everything they have today, but in a | more complex legal form. | WarOnPrivacy wrote: | https://archive.ph/4TpWD | thr0wawayf00 wrote: | This is interesting given that Amazon was recently reported to be | trying to sublet 10M sqft of excess warehouse space[0]. | | If both of these stories are true, it makes me wonder why they're | acquiring so much real estate. | | 0: https://www.techradar.com/news/amazon-now-has-too-much- | wareh... | raverbashing wrote: | Probably because Bezos can see through the short-sightedness of | modern "opex-only" "best practices" | | Because for their purposes, it's better to have self-managed | real-estate than depending on what might be on the market at a | given time | | Does it make sense to rent a warehouse then get hit with a rent | hike after 10yrs or something? No | syntheweave wrote: | They can achieve a faster last-mile experience if their | facilities are closer, and this space is now in contention with | Walmart already beating them to the punch on drone delivery. To | compete with big-box retailers they increasingly have to act | like one, which is a very deep change to their e-commerce | business. There is a strong chance here that they get | outcompeted. | bombcar wrote: | Exactly, the tables have turned and suddenly those large | Walmart and Target stores are basically customer-manned | warehouses that they can also ship from. Best Buy is in on | it, too - order from them and half the time the product will | ship from some Best Buy store somewhere instead of from a | warehouse. | treesknees wrote: | I bought a device from Best Buy and it arrived on my porch | within 3 hours of my purchase. It was quick enough that | even if I don't always receive orders that fast, I'm more | inclined to check their website now instead of just | defaulting to Amazon 2-day shipping. | arrosenberg wrote: | > If both of these stories are true, it makes me wonder why | they're acquiring so much real estate. | | Same reason as the Catholic Church. They aren't making more | land any time in the foreseeable future. | supertrope wrote: | Land is finite but the desirability of the land can change. | Detroit used to be a tier 1 American city. | beauzero wrote: | So did Butte and Anaconda, MT. | vidanay wrote: | For a corporation that is flush with cash, Detroit is | potentially a good buy with long term potential. A 50 year | timeline is not unrealistic. | Spooky23 wrote: | Little different- the church doesn't pay property taxes. | Amazon does, unless they have a religious investment arm. | | If I had to guess, I'd say land purchases are some sort of | vehicle to filter profits for tax purposes. There's a million | rules that benefit property owners for that purpose. | SoftTalker wrote: | Perhaps they are getting tax abatements by bamboozling the | local county officials into thinking that there is going to | be some huge local economic benefit from their land | purchase. | hinkley wrote: | Part of King Henry VIII's fight with the Catholic Church was | due to the amount of rent-seeking that was going on in | England. They were such a ridiculously massive land owner by | that point that they threatened the Crown. | iLoveOncall wrote: | What I've heard internally (well, it's Blind rumors...) is that | Dave Clark screwed up and way over estimated the need for new | warehouses last year. | [deleted] | gideon_b wrote: | This has always been Amazon's strategy. Amazon is not a server | company, an ecommerce company, a grocer, or any of the other | seemingly random things they do. | | The common thread running though all of their lines of business | is to create businesses with complex problems, solve those | problems incredibly well, then sell those solutions to other | companies. Amazon uses themselves as their first-and-best | customer [1]. AWS, Prime and all of their best solutions work | in this way. The whole company is organized to support this | strategy. | | The fact that Amazon is expanding their warehouse capabilities | beyond their needs and building deeper into the stack by | getting into real estate development is a natural continuation | of this strategy. | | [1] https://stratechery.com/2016/the-amazon-tax/ | deanCommie wrote: | An extremely relevant recent update: | https://stratechery.com/2022/beyond-aggregation-amazon- | as-a-... | Spooky23 wrote: | I'd love to see Ben partner with a smart tax/finance guy. | | His analysis is interesting, but very slanted with the tech | business viewpoint. The cringy canonization of Uber back in | the day is a great example. IMO, these machinations by | Amazon are probably more about financial engineering than | anything else. | | Amazon has a good distribution network, but Shopify, | Walmart and Target seem to have found and are competing | successfully at Amazon's weak points. Many people I know | pivoted to Target for consumer staples vs Amazon. You can | have anything they carry in about 30m. Shopify seems to be | the place for sellers who want to protect their brand and | avoid being ripped off within days. | | Not sure why Ben cares about an Amazon truck vs UPS | delivering stuff he's probably alone in that. | gregwebs wrote: | Amazon thinks long-term. They have a glut of warehouse space at | the moment, and it is costing them dearly, but they probably | hope to grow back into it when the upcoming recession is over. | If Amazon successfully launches their program to buy with Prime | from other stores, they could probably fill up their extra | warehouse space pretty quickly. Think of Amazon handling | logistics for every small retailer and even some big ones, | regardless of whether they sell on amazon.com. | hrgiger wrote: | First thing comes to my mind turning cash to asset to stay | stronger against economy, maybe Elons twitter bet was the same | idea | olkingcole wrote: | Even if online sales are slowing overall maybe it is still | growing in some areas, requiring more capacity. As for the land | purchasing, maybe it is partly an investment to get cash off | the books and/or positioning for some long term strategy (this | is just a guess, I don't know much about how large businesses | operate). | newaccount2021 wrote: | curiousllama wrote: | They could just be leasing out space in locations where they | overbought relative to short term needs, but expect to need the | capacity later. E.g. project out steady 10% YoY volume growth | with a 5-year real estate cycle for warehouse space, and you'd | def get some medium-term regional overcapacity/shortfalls. | jgalt212 wrote: | I'm old enough to remember when Amazon had an "advantage" over | bricks and mortar operations because it was much less capital | intensive. However, under ZIRP, having a capital intensive | business (warehouses, data centers, etc) is a vast moat. Will | this change as interest rates continue to increase? | Vladimof wrote: | But they charge people for warehouse space before they even | sold their product, don't they? | AnimalMuppet wrote: | What Amazon has now is much _less_ capital intensive than | trying to do anything equivalent with retail outlets. | mywittyname wrote: | They retain that advantage. B&M retail needs all of the | warehousing of Amazon, but also requires low-efficiency retail | space that services a pretty narrow geographic area. | iandanforth wrote: | I'm surprised that Amazon doesn't own apartment complexes. Build | a multi-level basement as a fulfillment warehouse, then stack | housing on top. The housing would have 10 minute delivery and be | a great way to further accustom people to Amazon being the place | to get everything. | yuliyp wrote: | That sounds awful. An apartment where you have semis pulling up | at all hours delivering cargo? This is why we have zoning laws | to avoid people building warehouses in residential districts. | agilob wrote: | Surely Amazon can buy some local regulators, just think about | how many low paid jobs this would bring! | supertrope wrote: | Smarter politicians will refuse to bend over backwards for | new employers who offer low wage jobs, set up enterprises | that can be easily relocated when the tax credits expire, | and don't offer anything special. | Dyac wrote: | How is this really that different from city centre multi use | buildings where there are stores on the ground floor and | living space on the upper floors? Especially if some of those | are served by gig-economy delivery couriers. | | Those stores get stocked somehow- usually not by semis. | hetspookjee wrote: | I think you underestimate the traffic a warehouse gets | versus stores in the ground. Also recently in the | Netherlands they've decided that the 10min delivery grocery | stores are actually distribution centres and are no longer | allowed to set up shop in the housing areas, because of the | excessive amount of truck traffic. | spockz wrote: | It wasn't the truck traffic only. It was also the | activity at all hours. Plus the deliverers on their bikes | making lots of noise. Plus these stores being boarded off | or closed becoming very ugly and shady. | yread wrote: | Plus bored drivers being a noisy nuisance and starting | fights with residents | Spooky23 wrote: | A distribution center generates hundreds of truck trips a | day. A good sized supermarket generates ~15 a week, but may | vary based on the company and methodology. | memish wrote: | I tend to agree, although if it costs less to rent and have | 10 minute Amazon delivery? I might go for it. I've lived next | to train lines and highways that are louder. | idlehand wrote: | Those semis are going to be a lot quieter in coming decades | when they go electric. | oblio wrote: | Do you have numbers of that? Tires and drag cause a lot of | noise. | shiftpgdn wrote: | Denying mixed use because it might be noisy for hypothetical | residents is how we wound up with the current disaster that | is American urban/suburban planning | Dyac wrote: | Are mixed use buildings a problem? I thought the normal | problem in America was that zoning tends to prohibit mixing | uselage types. | | Here [0] is a random street i picked in Paris with mixed | use buildings - looks pretty nice tbh-lots of accommodation | & amenities, easily walkable, some shops and restaurants. | | [0] 61 rue de Passy | https://maps.app.goo.gl/14Kxyd9SwARyT79s8 | taylorius wrote: | Mixed use is a winner in urban environments. London has a | lot of it, and it makes for good, local living. | shiftpgdn wrote: | My point was that denying mixed use is what creates the | American suburbanization mess. Most cities have limits on | delivery hours anyway, making the parent comments concern | moot. | adolph wrote: | It'd be funny to take that picture and redo the | neighborhood a la "Microsoft Re-Designs the iPod | Packaging" [0]. 1. Straighten out that | street 2. Repave those cobbles 3. Add green | lane bike path 4. Parking meters 5. ... | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUXnJraKM3k | yuliyp wrote: | Mixed use is not a problem as long as the uses are | compatible, shops and housing work well together. | Industrial and residential not so much. | kwhitefoot wrote: | BMW's Mini pressing plant (formerly Pressed Steel) is in | my home town, Swindon, it's surrounded on three sides by | housing and the fourth by a road that has houses on the | opposite side. | | I don't think it inconveniences anyone. | ianai wrote: | With how short Amazon tenures are, shouldn't they be hotels | at the top? | colinsane wrote: | i think the ordering matters a lot: warehouse added to | residential space: NO. apartment added to an industrial | space: okay. people will put up with a lot of noise (e.g. | those who live under a flight path near the airport), just so | long as they knew what they were signing up for. | supertrope wrote: | People will buy houses next to an arena, airport, or pig | farm and then complain about the noise, traffic, or smell. | globalise83 wrote: | If they build the towers tall enough, or put in only minimal | windows, then only the lower floors will be inconvenienced. | These floors can be reserved for the Amazon workers. /s | agilob wrote: | Will Amazon Prime include affordable housing? | bcx wrote: | Or even better they could continue to vertically integrate | their stack and provide affordable housing to warehouse | employees. | [deleted] | kevmo wrote: | Back to the old ways, eh? | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town | DesiLurker wrote: | also maybe install nets around the joint building, you know | for safety. | trevcanhuman wrote: | ah yes, just like in Asia | schnevets wrote: | In addition to the drawbacks outlined in other responses, human | living situations are too unpredictable to make that kind of | arrangement desirable. Inevitably, there will be a plumbing | issue because someone left a bath running, or a medical | emergency causes unforeseen traffic challenges, or a fire | breaks out. | | The more delivery productivity you stack on top of this | infrastructure, the bigger the impact from an unforeseen | issue... and humans can introduce a lot of unforeseen issues. | wronglyprepaid wrote: | I don't live in US, and there is no amazon specifically | catering to the country I live in, but my experience with | Amazon as a shop has been that it is a really bad user | interface, with crappy search, filled with a bunch of | questionable "spam" products. | | I wonder if this is the case in US also, or maybe just my | individual experience. It is very hard for me to get how a | company so successful has such a crappy flagship product. | usrn wrote: | I hate Amazon as much as the next guy but IME international | Amazon and US Amazon are completely different things and | aren't really comparable, they just have a similar GUI. US | Amazon has nearly any consumer product you'll buy (from most | food up to really expensive stuff like small boats and sheds) | and almost all of it shows up in 1-2 days with minimal | shipping cost. | | I know people in Canada and it's nothing like that. What you | can find is crazy expensive and it it takes weeks to ship. | Mezzie wrote: | I'm an American, but I did my graduate degree in Canada, | and the difference was so extreme I (and others) would just | get stuff shipped to the border and go pick it up. | nonameiguess wrote: | The flagship product is the logistical operation and it is | pretty damn far from crappy. I can't speak for everywhere, | but at least in most parts of the US, they can get you damn | near anything on the same day. For products where you already | know what you want in terms of brand, seller, and quantity, | or regular recurring purchases of staple goods (cat litter, | paper towels, dish soap, anything undifferentiated that you | need to repeatedly purchase), even groceries now thanks to | buying Whole Foods (provided you have the upscale price point | that makes you willing to shop there to begin with), it's | about as perfect an interface as you could hope for. Find and | click in under a minute and you can probably have most goods | in a few hours, at most next day. | | If you're trying to discover new products of unknown quality | and reputation, then it's not so good. For whatever reason, | that seems to be the use case people focus on when | criticizing Amazon on Hacker News, but I don't see how that | can possibly be the dominant use case. Most of what people | ever buy is not something brand new to them that they know | nothing about. | | I'm looking through my last several months of purchases here, | and I'm seeing a bunch of automotive cleaning fluids, mostly | from Adam's, polishing compounds and a respirator from 3M, a | bunch of power tools from DeWalt, a Bose speaker. Known | brands from reputable sellers, every item what I wanted and | it got here quickly. In some cases, I either tried to or had | to purchase elsewhere. For instance, Amazon had most of the | DeWalt power tools I wanted, but was out of stock on rotary | polishers, so I had to get it from some place called Acme | Tools, and it took a week and a half. Amazon got me | everything the next day. (I had a bunch of stuff stolen from | my garage is why I needed all this at around the same time.) | I tried to purchase the Bose speaker from Best Buy since I | have one a five minute drive from me, and their website | claimed it was in stock and I could pick it up the same day, | but then right before the pick up window, they texted me to | inform me they didn't actually have it and wouldn't for | another week. So I canceled the order, went on Amazon, and | they had free same day delivery. | | It should be obvious that anything that goes from not | existing 25 years ago to top five market cap company in the | world is probably offering value somehow. | notriddle wrote: | > If you're trying to discover new products of unknown | quality and reputation, then it's not so good. For whatever | reason, that seems to be the use case people focus on when | criticizing Amazon on Hacker News, but I don't see how that | can possibly be the dominant use case. Most of what people | ever buy is not something brand new to them that they know | nothing about. | | First of all, HN is full of entrepreneurs and wannabe | entrepreneurs. A storefront that can't sell anything that | doesn't have a good reputation outside the storefront is | bad for small businesses, because _nobody is willing to try | anything new_. A major part of the value proposition of a | storefront is that the owners will vet the products they | sell for a minimum standard of quality: it 's not | necessarily great, because greatness is subjective, but the | food shouldn't poison you[1] and the AC/DC power converters | shouldn't catch fire. | | The second problem is that sellers will pass off | counterfeit goods as being from major manufacturers when | they aren't. I know I'm falling for selection bias, since | I've probably bought counterfeit goods without knowing it, | but that's not even really the point. The point is that | I've bought stuff on Amazon that just didn't work, sold in | packaging that's identical to stuff I've bought before that | did work. I knew they were counterfeit and not just duds | because the actual product didn't have the branding on it | that genuine ones always have. | | [1]: Well, okay, it might poison you if you have a special | allergy. But anything with the common allergens like gluten | or lactose will have labels. | wronglyprepaid wrote: | > It should be obvious that anything that goes from not | existing 25 years ago to top five market cap company in the | world is probably offering value somehow. | | That is very true, I think probably from the outside | looking in it was hard to see what value they were | offering. But from the responses here I think I got a | better picture of what people get out of it that makes it | the best choice for them most of the time. | renewiltord wrote: | Amazon is one of the most trusted brands in America. It is | almost as trusted as USPS (the top trusted brand) and is, in | general, considered by most Americans to be a reliable, safe, | and high-performance source of goods. | xlix wrote: | I have had friends receive items like candles already used or | paint brushes already used. | | I've been duped into buying travel size bottles of mouthwash, | toothpaste, soap, etc because the seller prices them at or | around the same as full sized items. | | I guess that's on me for not paying attention to the weight | though... | [deleted] | [deleted] | blobbers wrote: | It has a medium level of spam, but if you stick to name | brands sold by amazon, you generally get what you pay for. | | It's replaced the department store, and usually has better | service / return policy than a department store (Target | etc.). | | Costco might be the exception but generally I don't go to | costco to search for a specific product. They either have | some general version of a product, and if I'm willing to buy | that I will; swim goggles for example. Perhaps I want TYR | swim goggles. Costco will have better pricing on Speedo | goggles but won't sell the TYR mirrored version I'm looking | for. Click, bought on amazon, arrives next day. | bergenty wrote: | Amazon has stunning logistics. I've almost never received | anything late over the last 10 years and if there's anything | wrong with the product they just refund my money. There is | some spam that's unavoidable with opening up the platform to | third party sellers but I think it works very well overall. | wincy wrote: | It's really nice for my 3D printing hobby since most of the | brands I'm buying are based in China or Europe (mostly | China). They send over a shipping container of printers and | Amazon handles fulfillment so I get the stuff in a few days | instead of waiting 45 days and pay $100 shipping to get a 20 | pound device delivered. They also have all the replacement | parts and stuff in their warehouses. | | Also, their returns process is painless. I thought I'd | support local workers and had been shopping at Hobby Lobby | instead of using Amazon. For my trouble, when I tried to | return an airbrush that didn't suit my needs (I used it once) | they treated me like a criminal, it was a whole production. | | With Amazon I just head to the Whole Foods down the street | (or Kohls sometimes?), return it, and get credited almost | instantly. | | I do think Walmart is putting a lot of effort into their | online offerings and if you can return online purchases in | store that'd be a huge win. We bought my wife's MacBook Air | off Walmart's online store and it was super convenient. | xxpor wrote: | Hobby Lobby is owned by some of the biggest pieces of shit | in the entire country, so I'm not shocked. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burwell_v._Hobby_Lobby_Stores | ,.... | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobby_Lobby_smuggling_scandal | smachiz wrote: | Hobby Lobby is also an awful company... and is by no means | "buying local". | bko wrote: | > Also, their returns process is painless. I thought I'd | support local workers and had been shopping at Hobby Lobby | instead of using Amazon. For my trouble, when I tried to | return an airbrush that didn't suit my needs (I used it | once) they treated me like a criminal, it was a whole | production. | | I had the same experience. I ordered a $70 worth of | cleaning supplies directly from the manufacturer, thinking | I'd support the brand and cut out the middle man. My | package was stolen (box opened and left right there) so we | contacted the seller and told them the situation and they | said they can't do anything about it, even with a police | report. Amazon would have refunded it immediately. Half the | time when I return something they even let me keep the item | and donate it rather than dealing with the return. | | I want to support smaller online retailers but not so bad | that I'm okay with getting ripped off with no recourse | every once in a while. | c22 wrote: | The fact that they can afford to take a loss on many | returns while their smaller competitors cannot kind of | implies you're getting ripped off in some other way, | doesn't it? | | Where does the money to pay for your stolen cleaning | supplies come from? Why would you even think to contact | the manufacturer about this? Why not the shipping | company? Or your building's management? I've fumbled a | soda and broken it on the ground right after checking out | and the grocer replaced it for free, but I recognized | this as a generous act of kindness and not an expected | baseline of customer service. I've also lost a soda in | the parking lot and I can't even imagine feeling entitled | enough to go back into the store to complain about it. | missedthecue wrote: | Never once in my history of ordering on Amazon have I | received a fake, spam, or bait-and-switch product. | | I have deliberately purchased non-name brand products, and | sometimes I have received defective products, as one would | shopping anywhere, but even then Amazon's customer services | and return process is second to none. It shocks me that | everyone on HN and other popular forums has very little | success buying on Amazon. | cryptoz wrote: | Are you sure you haven't received a fake product? How do | you know? The fakes are so good much of the time that you | may never know if you have received a fake. | | I have received 5+ fake products and stopped ordering on | Amazon a few years ago. Not worth it, too much risk. Would | never, ever, order food from there, or anything you put on | your body, or anything electronic, etc. Way too risky. | ipaddr wrote: | If it is a fake and you cannot tell the difference maybe | it doesn't matter. | matsemann wrote: | It matters when it catches fire because they saved a few | cents skipping some failsafe in the power supply. | abawany wrote: | You are right: | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSE_Nm7pAw4 - this video | from bigclivedotcom shows the unique failure of a usb-c | power supply that also took out a MS Surface and | associated monitor with it. | joe5150 wrote: | The (legitimate) manufacturer will be able to tell the | difference and won't service or provide support for | counterfeits. And warranty claims are obviously out of | the question. | joe5150 wrote: | I get plenty from Amazon but there are whole categories of | products I won't buy there because of poor confidence that | I'll receive a genuine product. | filoleg wrote: | Same. The only category of products where I've personally | encountered a fake was SD cards, and that's a large problem | everywhere online. That's the only thing i buy now directly | from manufacturer-authorized retailers. Idk if that's even | common, because I've only gotten a fake once out of many | times i ordered sd cards. | | Everything else? I've been buying all sorts of stuff from | amazon, from electronics/hardware to clothing to furniture | to almost anything you can think of, and not once was it | fake. Before anyone asks how I know they weren't fake, most | of them came with a "register on the manufacturer's website | to get extended warranty/extra stuff" unique serial number, | and i was able to do so just fine. Ofc that doesn't apply | to everything I bought, because not every product allows | registering itself on manufacturer's website. But for those | that don't, I haven't noticed a single sign of | fake/counterfeit items. | | Ofc this is all just anecdata and isn't an evidence of | anything. But i gotta say, as others have mentioned, their | extremely easy and efficient return process definitely | makes my decision-making efforts much easier. | Retric wrote: | 5 of my last 7 items ordered from Amazon where either fake | or defective. | | I don't care how easy Amazon's returns are, it's not worth | the hassle of not having the item let alone doing anything | above and beyond that. | JoshCole wrote: | Weird. | | I've had a defect rate of less than 1% percent with a | sample size of enough items to reduce the margin of error | on that statistic to something rather negligible. | | To get your configuration you need to have two items that | aren't defective and five items that are. | | P(!defect)^2P(defect)^5 = 0.99^20.01^5 = 9.801e-11 | | There are seven choose five ways you could have a | particular configuration where you have five defects out | of seven purchases. | | 7 Choose 5 = 21 | | So therefore the probability of what happened to you | happening to me would seem to be: | | 9.801e-11 * 21 = 2.05821e-9 | | This written out in numbers is: 0.00000000205821 That | number as a percentage is: 00.000000205821% For | comparison the probability of being struck by lighting | over the course of a person's life is 1-in-15,300 which | is 0.00006535947. Many people struggle with reading | really small numbers like that and so we often decide to | round. If we do that the probability of what happened to | you happening to me is roughly 0% if we choose to round | at six decimal places. Seconding the OP claim that the | general experience is shocking, because it is _extremely_ | divergent. It would be _more shocking_ to be hearing | everyone on Hacker News was regularly being hit by | lightning bolts than that people are getting your defect | rate. | Retric wrote: | When you see a result like that it's a good idea to check | your assumptions. | | That calculation assumes these probabilities are | independent when they aren't. What was ordered, when it | was ordered, and where it's being shipped to are all | likely to impact the odds. On top of that are ability to | detect fakes and defective items are likely to be | different. | | Having said that, I have been hit by lighting. Or at | least it stuck the car I was in and I felt some effects. | I didn't report it anywhere that records such strikes, | which suggests non serious lightning strikes may be | underestimated in those statistics. | gjs278 wrote: | [deleted] | HarryHirsch wrote: | Up until the mid-2000's Amazon was mainly a bookstore with a | very good catalog and recommendation system. Then it became | the pile of spam that it is today, a marketplace of sellers | worse then Mos Eisley. | | But they did get their foothold selling books. | ajkjk wrote: | Basements are by far the most expensive parts of apartment | building. It's one of the reasons that reducing parking | requirements for apartment buildings is a good way to make | housing more cost-effective to build and therefore to increase | housing supply (last I heard). | SoftTalker wrote: | Yeah but parking above ground is probably cheaper than | building out apartments. I've lived in buildings where the | first 6 or 8 floors were parking. And a parking space rented | for several hundred a month, on top of your apartment rent. | smachiz wrote: | expensive to build, but less desirable for anyone (but | parking) so there's no incentive to build much. It will | definitely be more expensive than a warehouse 45 minutes away | - even in the most expensive cities (where they do build | basements to the extent that they can before they hit subways | and whatever). | paxys wrote: | Zoning laws exist | outside1234 wrote: | They could have everyone work in the basement for at 4% | discount on rent too. Great stuff - totally not dystopian at | all. | politician wrote: | So dystopian. You can imagine the vending machine kiosk on the | first floor-- no, the Alexa built into every unit- that's ready | to deliver anything you wish, and accept your rent payment. | missedthecue wrote: | Hmm. I guess one man's dystopia is another man's utopia. | jawmes8 wrote: | > Hmm. I guess one man's dystopia is another man's utopia. | | That does seem true for most sci-fi stories! | | I would think the dystopian aspect is lack of entry for | smaller businesses to reach those potential customers | politician wrote: | Alexa: Wake up. It's time to head to your shift. | | missedthecue: Snooze | | Alexa: Snooze boost activated for 10 minutes. $5 has been | deducted from your account. | lancesells wrote: | Might as well just house employees there as well and take the | rent directly out of their paychecks. | | Frighteningly they have almost 1 million employees in the US, | which is more than the population of a handful of states. | plasticchris wrote: | I wonder what the tax treatment would be - I think company | housing might not be taxed as income in this case (on prem, | required to work there, etc), allowing them to pay much | lower effective rates for labor by baking the cost of | housing into a paycheck and pocketing the tax savings. | longtimelistnr wrote: | There's not a fucking chance that's legal | zdragnar wrote: | Employee benefits are routinely taxed differently. Health | insurance, 401ks, some meals, etc. | | Most likely, it'd be considered a "fringe benefit" and | the employee would still have W2 / income taxes and | withholdings on it. How municipalities would tax the | property value depends entirely on how they choose to tax | on-site housing (as it is technically both commercial and | residential space). | | Maintenance on the buildings would likely be partially | deductible as operating expenses, no different than any | other building operated by a landlord or business. | tyingq wrote: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town | G3nnaro wrote: | Amazons already building apartments at HQ2 and I believe | Seattle as well - | https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/26/22593871/amazon-key-for-b... | | Amazon can't build apartment complexes on top of their | warehouses because many of their warehouses are already 3 or 4 | floors, and the obvious zoning issues of building complexes in | the middle of nowhere with a bunch of other warehouses. | User23 wrote: | I used to joke that Amazon should buy up the housing in SLU and | then between Amazon sales and rent they'd get 90% of their | costs of employment back as revenue. | nominusllc wrote: | _You load 16 totes,_ | | _waddya get_ | | _another day older and deeper in debt_ | | _jeff bezos dont you tell me that I cant go_ | | _I owe my soul to the amazon stoooooore_ | [deleted] | Guthur wrote: | Obvious propoganda, it's a public company, it does not purchase | anything quietly it's public knowledge. Just because they're not | running wall to wall adverts about the fact does not mean it's | hiding anything. | | All these media outlets are doing everything, everything on the | beck and call of those in charge and with an agenda. No article | aimed at this level of society is done independent of those who | wish to be in charge. | Teandw wrote: | I think you have a severe problem of digging into things too | deeply. | | This is purely semantics and your proclaiming some odd | propaganda angle. Which is a bit odd really. The article/title | is 100% accurate. They are quietly buying thousands of acres of | land because they're not going around and talking of their | masterplan. They're just doing it without saying anything. | | Just because certain information is public for those who seek | it out, it doesn't mean it can't be done 'quietly' by the | company. Like I say, it's semantics. | nielsbot wrote: | Who is in charge and what is the agenda in reporting this? | moltar wrote: | Do they need to be buying it loudly? | markdown wrote: | Real estate speculation is the bane of modern society. A land | value tax is sorely needed. | treis wrote: | I don't get how this is a story. Who wouldn't think Amazon is | buying land for warehouses? | | And what exactly does it mean for them to be doing it "quietly"? | Are they supposed to bring a marching band along everytime they | look at property? | bregma wrote: | If they buy up enough land quietly they can then spin it out as | a REIT and lease it back from themselves, thus writing off | capital gains and moving them under operating expenses as a | major tax dodge. | | If they did it loudly people would start speculating which will | present reduced wealth extraction by siphoning off rent. The | goal is to avoid letting other people get rich and cornering | all the capital for yourself. Stealth is a pirate's best | friend. | merely-unlikely wrote: | Just like what happened with housing around planned HQ2 | sites. | kolbe wrote: | It's total clickbait. Also, the article mentions they bought | 4000 acres in 2 years. The vast majority of this is rural, | where farmland runs 5-20k per acre. Let's be generous and say | they spent 50k per acre. That's $200mm dollars. Absolutely | nothing to amazon. | sib wrote: | And a single full-size Amazon fulfillment center plus its | associated truck yards and employee parking lots can easily | take up 0.5 - 1.0 square miles (320 - 640 acres / 130 - 260 | hectares), so this doesn't seem like a lot of land, given | that they already have more than 100 fulfillment centers in | the US. | Invictus0 wrote: | > Who wouldn't think Amazon is buying land for warehouses? | | The people that read the article, which stated that for many | years, Amazon was not buying land for warehouses. | treis wrote: | I did read it: | | >the company said there is no change in its long-term real | estate strategy | | This is a made up non-story with a click bait headline. | mikestew wrote: | I read the article, and look what I found, not two paragraphs | in: | | "Amazon plans to use much of the real estate for a new | generation of towering fulfillment centers that can store a | wide variety of products close to customers in populous | areas, according to people familiar with the strategy." | | So it sounds like Amazon is buying land for warehouses, might | be reading different articles, dunno. | pessimizer wrote: | "Buying land is a major shift for Amazon, which | historically relied on a handful of developers to find | property, build fairly simple warehouses and rent them back | to the company." | | The comment was "Who wouldn't think Amazon is buying up | land for warehouses?". The answer is _anyone who was | familiar with what Amazon was doing until 3 years ago._ | | If you thought three years ago that Amazon was buying up | land for warehouses, because it's so obviously obvious, you | would have been wrong. | [deleted] | [deleted] | curiouscats wrote: | From the article: "Buying land is a major shift for Amazon, | which historically relied on a handful of developers to find | property, build fairly simple warehouses and rent them back to | the company." | | That is the news in my opinion. They were renting before, in | the last 2 years they started buying a lot of land (they still | rent a lot too). | merely-unlikely wrote: | That and, "The new facilities can be 100 feet tall or more, | are packed with state-of-the-art automation and require lots | of electricity... The new facilities can cost twice as much | to build as typical warehouses, which currently run about | $200 per square foot. So Amazon is courting a new class of | investor to help finance the expansion" | | Their development model has shifted and the warehouses are | becoming more advanced and specialized. | devoutsalsa wrote: | I'd guess that Amazon doesn't want to be at the mercy of | landlords that jack up the prices. Rent increases can eat | into your margin. | mywittyname wrote: | They probably weren't very experienced in the area of | property development/management and decided to get some | partners early on to help out. | | I'm sure now their holdings are large enough to justify an | entire property management division. | photochemsyn wrote: | Amazon company town. Born into Amazon baby diapers, raised in | Amazon communal housing, worked at the Amazon warehouse, buried | in an Amazon coffin. Rents extracted at every stage of the | process. | | Look up 'feudal serfdom in medieval Europe' or 'company towns in | the American Gilded Age' for similar projects. | hilyen wrote: | People need to stand up to the corruption and wealth | inequality, or this isn't just some far off concern, it will | happen. These big companies are quite happily enjoying the same | scenario internationally where workers live at their factories. | Don't for a second think they won't do it here. | gtirloni wrote: | I think you're exaggerating a lot here. Is this some dystopian | short story? | hilyen wrote: | read this | | https://www.pbs.org/tpt/slavery-by-another- | name/themes/compa... | | https://www.history.com/news/americas-largest-labor- | uprising... | gtirloni wrote: | I'm fully aware of such history. I'm asking if you think | Amazon is doing this right now? Any sources? | bregma wrote: | Or a Springsteen song? | katz_ wrote: | If you don't want people to pay rent then you reject the | concept of a societal meta-organism. The only problem with that | is that another country will lean into the meta organism | concept and become much stronger than everyone who doesn't. | Which will result in the economic or military destruction of | those people. | [deleted] | mmarq wrote: | Nothing can be worse than the London private rental market ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-06-14 23:00 UTC)