Anti business climate? The 6th largest economy in the world!
LOL
Not surprised they would use that excuse.
Anti business climate? The 6th largest economy in the world!
I don't want to continue to go off-topic, so let's continue our discussion in a new thread here:
Actually California passed Great Britain a couple years ago and is now the 5th largest economy in the world FWIW.
It is a cost cutting move to get HQ out of California. It saves money. Plain and simple. Same reason Toyota, Charles Schwab, and numerous other companies have left. Some companies can afford to HQ in CA and others opt to HQ elsewhere instead. I can see how a fast food company with declining unit count may need to re-evaluate its cost structure. If you can't afford Boardwalk you have to settle for Baltic.
Very true.storewanderer wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 10:56 pmIt is a cost cutting move to get HQ out of California. It saves money. Plain and simple. Same reason Toyota, Charles Schwab, and numerous other companies have left. Some companies can afford to HQ in CA and others opt to HQ elsewhere instead. I can see how a fast food company with declining unit count may need to re-evaluate its cost structure. If you can't afford Boardwalk you have to settle for Baltic.
In fairness, Toyota was reluctant to move its primary HQ from California. Its assets were spread throughout SoCal, and growth potential was limited, which fueled the Manufacturing Headquarters in Kentucky. In the late 2000s, reports surfaced that Toyota was seeking to consolidate these facilities into a single campus. Reports suggested that Toyota had met with The Irvine Company (likely the only place in SoCal capable of providing Toyota the space they needed) but ultimately decided that Irvine was too difficult for most of its incumbent employees and relocation was expensive. Reports also suggested that should Chrysler had failed, Toyota would've bid on some of its assets. including its Auburn Hills, MI headquarters - which was expected to sell for pennies on the dollar. Eventually, they decided to cash in on Texas' offer.storewanderer wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 10:56 pm It is a cost cutting move to get HQ out of California. It saves money. Plain and simple. Same reason Toyota, Charles Schwab, and numerous other companies have left. Some companies can afford to HQ in CA and others opt to HQ elsewhere instead. I can see how a fast food company with declining unit count may need to re-evaluate its cost structure. If you can't afford Boardwalk you have to settle for Baltic.