Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Some Amazon Employees Bought NYC Condos Before News of HQ2 Location Emerged, Says WSJ Report (thehill.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the lucky-guess dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Hill: At least two Amazon employees reportedly purchased condos in a New York City neighborhood before news emerged that the area had been picked to host the company's second headquarters. The employees decided to buy units in a new 11-story condo building in the Long Island City neighborhood of Queens just before the first reports of Amazon's HQ2 location were released this month, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday. While employees of companies are barred from buying or selling stocks based on information that has not yet been made public, lawyers told the Journal that they were unaware of any such ban affecting real estate transactions. There are no exact numbers on how many units have gone into contract in the Long Island City area since the announcement, but the Journal reports that one brokerage firm sold nearly 150 units just last week, 15 times its normal volume. Earlier this month, Amazon announced plans to split its second headquarters evenly between New York's Long Island City and Arlington County's Crystal City neighborhoods.

94 comments

  1. Corporate corruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Gets worse every day. The last election was best time to vote the bastards out. The second best time is now

    1. Re: Corporate corruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really. Those real estate brokers didn't have a chance to jack up prices. Oh the humanity!

    2. Re: Corporate corruption by dgatwood · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, I don't get that complaint, either. This isn't at all like buying stock based on knowledge of what a company is about to do.

      if a company announces that it is going to do something amazing in two years, that company's stock will rise immediately on expectation of that future profit, thanks to rampant speculation and broad global demand. The information, when it becomes public knowledge, has an immediate and significant effect on the market.

      By contrast, Amazon's new headquarters will increase housing prices, but not immediately. If they broke ground today, the new headquarters probably wouldn't open until at least a couple of years from now, and demand for housing won't increase much until shortly before that, because most employees won't know that they are going to be transferring until they do (unless they really want to move to NYC and are relatively certain that they'll still be at Amazon in two years and know that a position will be available at that location in a product area that interests them).

      Thus, knowing the decision a couple of weeks early almost certainly did not financially benefit those employees in any meaningful way (except, perhaps, by avoiding extortion by unscrupulous sellers trying to take advantage of their knowledge of a few Amazon facilities staffers' need to move in quickly).

      In short, they almost certainly did nothing wrong.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re: Corporate corruption by larryjoe · · Score: 2

      This isn't at all like buying stock based on knowledge of what a company is about to do.

      This is sort of like insider stock trading in that non-public information was use for financial gain. However, it's not illegal in the same sense that insider stock trading wasn't illegal before SEC regulations made it illegal. When Kennedy made his fortune based on insider stock trading, it wasn't illegal. It only became illegal after he became the SEC head and made it illegal from that point onward.

    4. Re: Corporate corruption by mikael · · Score: 2

      If I had the money to invest, and I knew there was a 50:50 chance the company might move there, and prices go up regardless, then it would be worth making the purchase either way.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    5. Re: Corporate corruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to agree with you but then I remembered they are real estate brokers.

  2. Not exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    There is no law saying that you can't buy a house before announcing where you're going to move. However, there certainly IS a law about lying about the status of your moving decision to investors and governments during the negotiations.

    1. Re: Not exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt it. Lots of companies change their mind about any number of things. You would hardly find every beaurocrat in the world and tell them things they wouldnâ(TM)t believe anyway without signed leases etc.

    2. Re: Not exactly by Daerath · · Score: 1

      The status? The only status they care about is if you plan to live there as a primary residence, or if you will be renting it.

      They don't ask about your reasoning to purchase a home, and even if they did it wouldn't require a level of detail beyond, "because I want to"

    3. Re: Not exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Denver and I'm damn glad they're not coming here. Heaven knows how much tax money NY gave away to that clown. He's there because there's lots of hungry people to employ. He's really just interested in the Virginia operation because that's close to his future rental in DC.

  3. Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find the trolls exhausting. While I feel the urge to contribute to intelligent discussion, the amount of horrifying racism and, quite frankly, cis privilege trolling on this site is horrifying.

    1. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by neoRUR · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Oh how I agree with you. I used to come here for some knowledge and discussion, but now it's all APK, trumpeters and people with lower IQ than a banana.
      I use up all my MOD points on off-topic and troll posts.

    2. Re: Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MAGA!!

    3. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by Humbubba · · Score: 1

      Agreed. All the shitposting and comment filtering is really bringing /. down. I've seen eerily similar postings elsewhere, even YouTube. I don't think it's all coming from somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds. There's a whole troll industry out there. We saw just tip of the iceberg in 2016 with the likes of Nimble America, AggregateIQ and Cambridge Analytica. That some of them could still be active makes me wonder why?

    4. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I love how people can non-ironically call for echo chambers. You people really do spend all your energy on removing thought you disagree with, don't you? It must be a nasty surprise to come in to a website where you encounter dissident views. It's telling that your natural response is, instead of engaging with such views, is to remove them from view.

      They tried that, you know...it didn't work. Without accurate information (dissidents telling you where you're going wrong) your whole society goes off the rails. George Orwell goes into this in "1984" - but in his society, people like you successfully suppressed all dissent.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by Kjella · · Score: 2

      Meh, /. has always had their share of goatse posts and misc junk floating at -1. The signal-to-noise ratio looks worse mainly because the signal is weak, as a news aggregation it always sucked but the comments/discussions used to be great. Now it's mostly loons that don't have the sense to leave, like me. I feel like I'm clinging on because I don't want an era to end, kinda how I still watch the Simpsons even though they've grown stale a long time ago.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe there are a lot of posts missing, and maybe your statement about "echo chambers" is to another post than the anti-APK/troll statement above it?

      But man... heh.

      APK posts, troll posts, these things being removed don't create an echo chamber. Heh. It's like having a public meeting in your town hall, and hauling out the homeless guy that shits in his hand, and throws it at people... and the cat lady that has 5 cats, and yells about how we need more cat parks at *every meeting*, constantly interrupting everyone.

      These people aren't engaged in *any* discussion. None. Nada.

      They're just scum, that's all. APK posts weren't funny on day 1, aren't even worthy enough to be anything but mildly annoying, and certainly contribute nothing to anything.

    7. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by war4peace · · Score: 1, Troll

      You people really do spend all your energy on removing thought you disagree with, don't you?

      That's akin to me saying the exact same thing about the pigeon shit on your car. How dare you spend your energy removing it? They have the right to shit wherever they want and their shit has the right to stay there for everyone to admire it.

      The crap you refer to isn't "thought". It's crap. Period.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    8. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      I use up all my MOD points on off-topic and troll posts.

      Here's an idea, instead of modding down stuff you don't like, why not make the decision to only mod up things that are interesting? Even if you don't agree with the argument being made, at least it can generate some good debate.

      Down-modding creating a debate-free monoculture is the biggest issue for Slashdot right now. I'm not blaming you, I accept you are modding legitimately bad posts, I'm just saying that rather than being the janitor you have an opportunity to reverse the decline.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Thoughts that disagree with your own are treasures - they tell you where you're going wrong. Without accurate criticism, how can you know where you need improvement? Or even if you're completely wrong and need to go home and rethink everything?

      When you come to conclusions like "everyone but me can't think" that is an obviously invalid conclusion and you need to go home and rethink your life.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    10. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      Don't be so sure of yourself sparky:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    11. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      Mod this sentient up please.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    12. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      I must apologize, I was referring to a totally different type of comment, see the link below:â
      https://games.slashdot.org/com...

      When people post their opinion, no matter how weird, it's okay. But trolls are the ones posting comments like the one above.
      I should have exemplified, I hadn't and once again, my apologies. Sometimes I write what I think, but I don't think (about) what I write, and confusion ensues.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    13. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      Nah go ahead, keep censoring. It's what you DO. To fail to censor opposing thoughts would be a violation of everything you stand for.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    14. Re:Can we do something about slashdot trolls? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Who's the crazy one now?

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  4. NYC Nitpicker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Queens isn't a neighborhood in Long Island City. Long Island City is a part of Queens.

    1. Re:NYC Nitpicker. by nadass · · Score: 1

      in the Long Island City neighborhood of Queens

      The summary wasn't wrong.

    2. Re:NYC Nitpicker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Different AC, but it took me several reads of that before I understood how you were reading it.

      The way I am guessing you read it is "in the neighborhood inside Queens that is known as Long Island City".

      The way I kept reading it (and my fellow AC was likely reading it) "in the neighborhood inside Long Island City that is known as Queens".

      So while you are technically correct that the summary wasn't wrong, it could have been a whole lot clearer by not wording it in an ambiguous manner.

  5. defrauding the public.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    it's not an sec violation.. but this should be enough evidence for the state and city to decrease the public-funded 'incentives' to locate there... it clearly shows prior intent to move there regardless of what any city "bid" to get the 'prize' of an amazon office.

    fuck amazon.

    1. Re:defrauding the public.... by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      Hardly. It sounds as though they started buying within the same week as the announcement. The deal would have been locked in, but a few people probably got a slight heads up, especially if they were expected to relocate for their job.

      If you’re going to use this as a line in the sand instead of all manner of other corporate malfeasance, then I’m not really sure what to make if you. This deals like some kind of manufactured outrage.

    2. Re:defrauding the public.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Plus it was "two people" and they didn't name anyone. That is, they weren't some top level executive.. making their names newsworthy.

      I can see myself doing this. Probably, there were whispers a few days ahead of the announcement. So I talk to a buddy, we divvy up the task, and we start looking for excellent purchases in the area. Just a few hours a night after work, whatever.

      Then as the article says "just before" (it's not clear on timelines or names, of course), maybe even the day before, news leaked inside Amazon that things were 100%. So probably the offer was put forward with a deadline, the seller accepted, and at that point it's too late for either party to backout without penalties.

      Done. Someone worked their ass off to time it right, and maybe made an extra $50k for retirement.

      Good job.

  6. Code of Conduct by eric31415927 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This sort of problem has arisen before and solved by requiring people knowing about big deals (i.e. accountants and lawyers) having to abide by codes of conduct within their professional associations. Even the appearance of a conflict of interest should be avoided to stay onside.
    I wonder if Google employees in general have such codes of conduct written into their employment contracts.

    1. Re: Code of Conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alicia silverstone showed off the key to her new apartment before her role on clueless was announced

    2. Re:Code of Conduct by fibonacci8 · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting and off-topic question! The article is about Amazon, not about Google.

      Replying because the net moderation would be zero anyway.

      --
      Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
    3. Re:Code of Conduct by eric31415927 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for pointing out my mistake.
      (I did read the article before posting.)
      Now that two big companies have been mentioned, I wonder if any employees of either company must follow a code of conduct.

    4. Re: Code of Conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon and apple have very strict codes of conduct they follow almost religiously

    5. Re:Code of Conduct by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It's a big issue with politicians.......who are also allowed to do insider trading (for example, if they know a bill is going to tank the stock market, it's legal to short it).

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re: Code of Conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many people has she fucked?

    7. Re:Code of Conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If they're going to live in it, what is the problem? Should you have to wait for artificial speculation to hit a market when you need somewhere to live just because you know you're about to have to move? That's ridiculous.

      If a person was a teacher an became aware that a new school was going to be built and eventually they would move to a new suburb, should they also be banned from buying land in the area until the school is finished and everyone has moved in? Now most teachers probably won't have access to that information or the financial ability to take advantage of it, but it still sounds ridiculous to me.

    8. Re: Code of Conduct by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Certainly not enough, for example I was left out.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    9. Re:Code of Conduct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't know that though do we? As other mentioned if it's a lower ranked engineer not top brass, they might not know if they are getting transferred there. This could be more likely speculation that they can rent or sell the property later for profit.

  7. Good lord by sunking2 · · Score: 0

    Looking at what we have so far for comments what a sad and petty pathetic society we now have.

  8. Because TRUMP Motherfuckers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's all good! TRUMP motherfuckers!

  9. no problems here by renegade600 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    don't blame the employees for buying condos before the announcement. I have no problems with this as long as the purchase was for their own use and not to resell after the announcement.

    1. Re:no problems here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I do not have a problem with it. Good on them.

      The SEC on the other hand. They will. Having recently started working at a large bank. The SEC and FTC have *very* strict sort of rules on this sort of thing. At least according to the 30+ hours of training I just went through and laws I was forced to read.

    2. Re:no problems here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      SEC has no interest in this. They care about public trading in stocks, bonds and such, not private real estate transactions. Now the sellers may have a civil suit to get out of the sale contract if they like, but that's kind of a stretch.

      It does, however, show the lack of morals and ethics of such people. But in today's age, it's everyone for themselves anyway, so I'm not surprised.

    3. Re:no problems here by MikeDataLink · · Score: 1

      The SEC on the other hand. They will.

      Nope. They won't. Not their area of governance.

      --
      Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
    4. Re:no problems here by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 2

      I have had contracts with banks and technology companies for projects, and the line is a little squishy. I could not act directly in a way that could impact (or be construed to impact) negotiations or entitlements on a property purchase or lease. Buying up 10 condos across the street could hit that line easily, but 10 people putting in offers in the days as negotiations are closing with a third party could be ok.

      When working for a bank, this extends to their clients buying property as well. Same theoretically with Realtors, but they skirt the rules all the time.

    5. Re: no problems here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is acutally, buying the condos was in effect advertising the new location of hq2, defauding investors who didn't know. Check the trading history of the bankers and realtors who knew what was going on to see the trail of investor fraud.

    6. Re:no problems here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      I have no problems with this as long as the purchase was for their own use and not to resell after the announcement.

      Wouldn't it be the other way around? Speculating on real estate is something people with money do. Purchasing for your own use property to use before prices spikes because you know for certain the HQ will be in the area seems underhanded. Put another way, you seem to think that "resell" and "own use" are different things with the former implying foreknowledge and the latter speculation, but it could easily be the reverse; or at least, you think one sort of speculation/foreknowledge as a means of enrichment is okay. Certainly part of buying a condo is with the notion you can and probably will resell it at a future date. Resale is part of "use". Speculation should be fine so long as it's speculation. Foreknowledge seems underhanded regardless, whether it's legal or not.

    7. Re:no problems here by sunking2 · · Score: 1

      The SEC could not care less. This in no way defrauds investors which is what they do care about. So some people got a better deal on a condo before prices sky rocketed, or are even able to flip it for more money. Nobody loses money with that. Hell, anyone who knew ahead of time was free to go and buy a condo with the sole intention to flip it. That's not illegal. Nobody loses more money as the final price is when all is said and done is what the market demands. Realtors may not have made as much, but they still sold it for the price they were willing to sell it for.

    8. Re:no problems here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody loses money with that

      Realtors may not have made as much

      Your logic is impenetrable.
      You're also forgetting the *owners* selling those condos.

      Lets take an example: You're at a company, you hear they're about to announce earnings and they're going to massively beat market estimates, so you immediately call your broker and buy tons of stock.
      Technically, no one "lost money", but I'm still pretty sure the SEC would frown on such practices.

    9. Re: no problems here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it really isn't. It maybe be hideously unethical but as far as the SEC is concerned it did not involve publicly traded shares so they don't care. Similar to how Madoff got away with it for so long, as long as he completely avoided actually trading any shares in the scam it was not in the SEC's jurisdiction to do anything about it even though they pointed fingers for years suggesting something was wrong.

    10. Re:no problems here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you elaborate on which morals and ethics are lacking in the Amazon employees that bought NYC properties before the HQ2 location was announced?

      I personally can't see anything wrong with it. So an explanation would be helpful.

  10. Insider Trading by atomicalgebra · · Score: -1

    How is this not insider trading? Buying real estate using information not known to the public should result in prosecution. Martha Stewart served jail time for less.

    1. Re:Insider Trading by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I think it depends if they bought it for their own use or if they bought to resell based on that information.

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    2. Re:Insider Trading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Real estate is not publicly traded as a commodity. Martha lied to investigators. That's why she went to prison or it would have been a fine and a slap on the wrist.

    3. Re:Insider Trading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insider trading only refers to stocks and other securities (like stock options and bonds). Real estate transactions are not covered by insider trading laws.

    4. Re:Insider Trading by Frank+Burly · · Score: 1
      IIRC Martha Stewart lied to the FBI about selling stock in her own company.

      Regardless, insider trading is for securities, not real estate. I can't remember the specifics of how an insider is defined, but I think an insider trading rap would be a stretch because the information they had was not confidential to the real estate owner.

    5. Re:Insider Trading by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think it depends if they bought it for their own use or if they bought to resell based on that information.

      No, this does not matter at all. The only thing that matters is whether it involves securities regulated by the SEC.

      New York apartments don't fall under the SEC's jurisdiction, unless they are part of a REIT.

    6. Re:Insider Trading by tsqr · · Score: 4, Informative

      How is this not insider trading? Buying real estate using information not known to the public should result in prosecution. Martha Stewart served jail time for less.

      According to the SEC , As defined by the courts, illegal insider trading refers to purchasing or selling a security while in possession of material, non-public information concerning that security, where the information is obtained from a breach of fiduciary duty, or a duty arising from a relationship of trust or confidence.

      So, since real estate is not a security, that is how this is not insider trading. And by the way, Martha Stewart was not convicted of insider trading; she was found guilty in March 2004 of felony charges of conspiracy, obstruction of an agency proceeding, and making false statements to federal investigators.

    7. Re:Insider Trading by atomicalgebra · · Score: 1

      TIL

    8. Re:Insider Trading by I75BJC · · Score: 1, Informative

      Martha Stewart served jail time in relation to "insider trading" of stocks and bonds. It wasn't real estate. Bid difference according to the summary.

    9. Re:Insider Trading by jrumney · · Score: 2

      Or maybe it was just executives with inside information getting in before the lowly workers started driving up real estate prices in the neighborhood. Seems ethically pretty similar to insider share trading to me, even if it is not illegal.

    10. Re:Insider Trading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm, so there is a legal way to use insider information?

      Real estate purchases are public record. So, if you scraped for high level executive names cross-referenced with purchases in the last 30 days, you'd be onto something. Time to make friends with a real estate broker. :D

    11. Re:Insider Trading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe it was just executives with inside information getting in before the lowly workers started driving up real estate prices in the neighborhood.

      I can pretty much guarantee you that the 'lowly' workers cannot cause enough of a blip in the real estate prices to impact the executives in any way.

      Those extra zeroes on the end of the executive salaries say they're not going to be directly competing with the rank and file workers.

    12. Re:Insider Trading by gravewax · · Score: 1

      yes and people do this already. follow the money when you want to know where to buy.

  11. Of course this makes me wonder... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    If lots of existing Amazon employees are now relocating to New York NY (and Arlington VA) - how many new jobs are actually being created in these locations? Because job creation is ostensibly one of the major reasons these cities fell all over themselves to give Amazon billions of dollars.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Of course this makes me wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Generally speaking, I doubt either city cares where the jobs come from. It's not like "new" jobs pay better than "used" jobs -- the tax dollars are the same regardless.

      In any event, there's no way that Amazon can start up a hub with tens of thousands of new employees without any current employees to set things up. I'd guess that somewhere between 1% and 10% of the employees at either site will be from Seattle.

      Another possibility is that they move whole divisions to one of the new sites, but that seems like a big pain. They'd have to get thousands of employees to agree to relocation for that to work, and there would be plenty who like living in the Pacific Northwest, want to stay near family, want to keep their kids in school, can't move due to a spouse's job, or whatever. It's much easier to simply create new teams on the East Coast than to move existing ones.

      That said, if they are moving thousands of jobs away from Seattle and not replacing them, does Seattle get upset? I'd guess that Seattle would be fine the relief from the traffic congestion and sky-high housing prices that comes with a few thousand people moving away.

      dom

    2. Re:Of course this makes me wonder... by I75BJC · · Score: 1

      Lots. Lots of new jobs for New York State and new jobs for the Commonwealth of Virginia. Every transferring employee with have to pay their new state's income tax -- New York has one. A transferred employee is a New taxpayer for New York. Plus each transferring employee will pay real estate taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes and all the taxes on anything the buy. They will have to pay taxes on anything they buy Or own in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

    3. Re:Of course this makes me wonder... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Does a tenth of a percent of the population moving away really affect real-estate prices? Heck, do an extra 25k people in NYC (if they were all transplants) really effect prices in a city with 8ish million?

      People say that's the case, but I just don't get how.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    4. Re:Of course this makes me wonder... by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 1

      New York City has an income tax as well, in addition to New York State. Lots of new tax money to go around.

    5. Re:Of course this makes me wonder... by charliemerritt03 · · Score: 1

      .1% of the population might be 120% of available apartments.

  12. You say that like it's a bad thing by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 0

    America is here to be looted by the 1 percent, at the expense of the 99 percent, it's all part of the Kaiser's plan.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:You say that like it's a bad thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      F*** your 1 percent. America's been looted by all comers since Columbus.

  13. What professional associations? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    I can't imagine any that folks at Amazon belong to. Maybe the really top guys and the lawyers, but this is probably the engineers who're getting dragged to NY against their will...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:What professional associations? by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, it almost certainly isn't. They're building a headquarters. Buildings don't go up overnight. Nobody buys a new house based on hoping that they will get transferred in two or three years.

      If it is engineers, it is because they're leaving Amazon to work at some other company in New York, and the timing is a fluke. Amazon has over 613k employees. That's an area of NYC with a lot of new construction, which makes it an attractive location for people on tech salaries to live. There's a lot of tech in NYC. So I could easily see this happening entirely by chance. (Admittedly, only a small percentage of those employees are tech workers, but there's nothing stopping non-tech workers from moving there, either, notwithstanding the cost.)

      That said, it is more likely that there are Amazon (facilities) employees who are going to be overseeing work on the new headquarters (and then staying on permanently as the facilities reps in the new location). It makes perfect sense for them to start planning their moves as soon as the plans are solid, so that they won't have to spend months in a hotel.

      And further (I'm responding more to the GP post than to your comment here), even if we assume that it was somebody who overheard the new location in the hallway, it still would not be a conflict of interest to act on it. How could Amazon's interests possibly be harmed by some of their employees owning homes near their new location?

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:What professional associations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it almost certainly isn't. They're building a headquarters. Buildings don't go up overnight. Nobody buys a new house based on hoping that they will get transferred in two or three years.

      If that's so, why has a brokerage in the area sold 15x its normal volume in the last week?

    3. Re:What professional associations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If it is engineers, it is because they're leaving Amazon to work at some other company in New York, and the timing is a fluke.

      That's my guess. Statistically, based on the amount of Amazon staff in the US, I'd wager there are people at Amazon buying real estate in New York every single week of the year.

      To link it to some nefarious insider scheme seems a bit petty at best.

    4. Re:What professional associations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1 word...

      Fucking Speculators and "Investors"!

    5. Re:What professional associations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which totally includes Amazon Engineers. lol.

    6. Re:What professional associations? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      If they heard that NYC had a good chance of winning then speculatively buying property there makes sense. Even if NYC didn't win in the end it's hard to lose money on property in in-demand areas like that. Worst case you just rent it or sit on it while the value goes up.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  14. Disgusting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not the employees, but the other commentators here. This story is mostly meaningless without info on if they had also attempted to buy apartments in the other cities as well. Real estate investors have no issues putting a bunch of units under contact then canceling the purchases if what theyâ(TM)re betting on doesnâ(TM)t occur.

  15. What's the big deal? by ddtmm · · Score: 1, Insightful

    First off, the only people that would be upset are people that wanted to buy into the nearby neighbourhood and are now looking at higher prices. What did they expect? Of course this is going to happen. Let's face it, the whole exercise in NY's bid was to have Amazon move in. And guess what, a ton of people are going to be moving in with them. Whether they move in a week before the bell or after, prices are gong up and things are gonna change. "Insider" knowledge is not the issue here, but jealousy, that may play a part...

  16. It's screwing developers by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    If they bought single family houses that were owner-occupided, I would be pissed. They would be screwing the little guy. But they bought new condos. So, my heart bleeds so very little for the real estate developers.

    Now that I think about it, it probably would have been smart (if you had the cash) to buy property in all the finalist cities. I doubt the value went down when Amazon declined to go to Austin.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
    1. Re:It's screwing developers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How would it be screwing the "little guy" when the home owner would have already had his residence on the market in the first place? Sure, bad luck/timing on the part of the home owner. Employees moving to NY will essentially be getting screwed when every "little guy" starts jacking their prices up.

  17. Gambling by pz · · Score: 1

    We knew the short list, right? It was public.

    I can readily imagine many Amazon employees made speculative decisions and brought condos in different cities. Since resources are finite, each made their own decision as to how they would use their available resources for investment, even WITHOUT any insider knowledge.

    We are hearing about the lucky ones who chose correctly. What about the others?

    What about the vast trove of people who did the same, but are not Amazon employees?

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  18. Far below statistical expectation by Solandri · · Score: 2

    About 11% of Americans move each year. That's about 35.5 million people.

    About 264,000 people moved to NYC last year. So about 0.74% of all movers relocated to NYC.

    Amazon has about 600,000 employees. I can't find a breakdown of U.S. vs overseas employees, but about 70% of their sales are in the U.S.. So figure 420,000 U.S. employees. If 11% of them move, that'd be 46,000 Amazon employees moving each year.. 0.74% of that is 340 Amazon employees moving to NYC each year.

    Of that amount, most would rent. But it seems highly likely that more than two would end up buying.

    1. Re:Far below statistical expectation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can't find a breakdown of U.S. vs overseas employees, but about 70% of their sales are in the U.S. [statista.com]. So figure 420,000 U.S. employees. If 11% of them move, that'd be 46,000 Amazon employees moving each year.. 0.74% of that is 340 Amazon employees moving to NYC each year.

      I doubt very many of those employees, mostly picking and packing, can afford to buy property on Long Island, so you need to adjust the numbers you are using to take that into account.

  19. Re: Lost me at: cis privilege trolling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The moment you said that you revealed yourself to be a SJW jackass.

    I prefer APK spam because at least I can skip over it unread. APK does not masquerade as a real person with something intelligent to say.

    However, as an SJW sheep, I have to waste a few seconds on every post before I can move on looking for something worth reading because it sure as hell wont be anything from you.

    Tl;dr: I prefer easily skipped APK to your SJW time wasting bullshit.

  20. Does Bezos have a house in NYC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If so, it was a slam dunk that NYC would be selected.

    When a company moves/add headquarters, 95% of the time, the company picks a place where the CEO lives.

  21. Faggots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it true that only faggots live on Long Island ? If it is then I'm moving there. I'm going to get my pasty white ass churned into butter or my name isn't Dale Cr....

    Just watch me !

  22. Standard practice by dsgrntlxmply · · Score: 1

    It is standard practice in large scale real estate development to assemble parcels of land into a larger development, with incremental purchases under various shell corporations that conceal the eventual owner. A seller is likely to want a higher price from National Megacorp headquarters project than from Rabbit Hole Limited Partnership XVII.

    Acquaintances in Munich noted that some people decades ago made a great deal of money buying parcels that "happened" to be situated near what eventually became S-Bahn (suburban train) stations.

  23. Amazon employee here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here is what happened with the Amazon HQ:
    The two locations for the HQ were determined in 2017 and were only going to be in places where Bezos had some existing business or personal property. One chosen location has Bezos property and the other location has a business.

    Some of us knew they picked the location last year, but didn't understand what we were hearing from the press.

    The idea was simple: pick the HQ locations first and then use the incentives offered up by the other cities as levers for negotiation.

    Many of us have reason to believe that Amazon got much greater incentives from the selected locations because of all the freebies offered by cities which never had a chance. Spend 5 minutes around upper management and you will know these are the types of things they do all day.