Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 14:01     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
I imagine it's expensive to hold that much real estate in a location accessible to a metro station, especially when a significant portion of your workers will still want parking.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:59     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:The kind of people that work at Northrop Grumman are the kind of people that want to drive. The kind of people that work at Amazon are the kind of people that would like to take the metro.


I was sort of thinking the same thing. I just read that they're a defense contractor (didn't know, lol--live in DC and don't know anyone in that line of work), and that they've donated more to Republicans' campaigns than Democrats, and that several former employees have served in the Bush administration. Seems more like they'll attract a NoVa type of worker more than any other DC area.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:55     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
In the case of NG, a lot of their employees are actually located in metro-accessible locations (esp. Arlington) and not the HQ. The majority of their workers aren't actually at HQ.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:51     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:Companies want to make the most amount of money with the lowest cost (overhead) to maximize profit. That's what a company cares about.

The problem with "metro accessible" or more specifically
"walkable" likely means more urban/city like, which likely means higher $/sq ft costs. This is a big factor for companies (like say NG) and why they don't have their headquarters in DC proper. It's why you've seen companies leave high cost areas and move to others, be it the suburbs or relocate to another area.


Based on your thoughtless embrace of propaganda, I'll guess you're expecting Goldman Sachs and Google to decamp to Mississippi. LOL! There's more texture to the reality than you simpletons can imagine!
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:49     Subject: Re:Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Some of what you say is probably correct, but your implied premise is that the best are those living in the city. Probably false.


I dont mean to say people who live in cities are the best and I dont want to start a debate about that. What I mean to say that younger people and Millenials mostly live in the city and want to live car-free. You are cutting yourself from a broad demographics, and I do not see the value of an off-metro location. Reducing cars on the road benefits everyone including those who drive to work.

My theory is that these companies are run by old school execs who have not adapted to the new car-free generation.



The new care free generation will one day have strollers, go to Home Depot, and have to buy groceries instead of avocado toast at bus boys. Plenty of young families have, do, and will continue to choose the suburbs.


Don't fool yourself that anyone actually wants to make that move. Young families move to the car-dependent suburbs because 99% of them are totally priced out of the 2-3 neighborhoods that combine a truly car-optional lifestyle with halfway decent schools.

There is a huge demand for such places but until all the Boomer NIMBYs finally die off and take their car fetish with them, the supply will not expand to make them affordable for most families.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:46     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Companies want to make the most amount of money with the lowest cost (overhead) to maximize profit. That's what a company cares about.

The problem with "metro accessible" or more specifically
"walkable" likely means more urban/city like, which likely means higher $/sq ft costs. This is a big factor for companies (like say NG) and why they don't have their headquarters in DC proper. It's why you've seen companies leave high cost areas and move to others, be it the suburbs or relocate to another area.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:38     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:The kind of people that work at Northrop Grumman are the kind of people that want to drive. The kind of people that work at Amazon are the kind of people that would like to take the metro.


Try to sound like less of a dolt. The kind of people that work at Amazon are the kind of people who like to get a paycheck.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:26     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
The kind of people that work at Northrop Grumman are the kind of people that want to drive. The kind of people that work at Amazon are the kind of people that would like to take the metro.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:21     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Arlington resident - I would guess less than 20% of Arlintonians are truly car-free.


+1

I can't think of anyone I know in DC without a car either...

DC isn't the land of great public transportation unfortunately, so many people have cars. Maybe they don't use them every day but they aren't car-free.


I know lots of ppl in DC w/o cars
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:15     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They just aren't concerned with drawing the "best" talent. NG isn't Google or Amazon, it's NG. They want good talent but they aren't looking to pay for Best of the Best talent. They can get that from people in the burbs with cars.


Some of what you say is probably correct, but your implied premise is that the best are those living in the city. Probably false.


It's standard economic theory that competition produces better outcomes. An urban labor market is more competitive than a suburban office park. But as others have stated, many big companies are for a variety of reasons NOT looking for the best people.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:11     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:Arlington resident - I would guess less than 20% of Arlintonians are truly car-free.


Former Arlington resident. I did not know a single person without a car (though I knew a few couples with one car between them).
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:08     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They just aren't concerned with drawing the "best" talent. NG isn't Google or Amazon, it's NG. They want good talent but they aren't looking to pay for Best of the Best talent. They can get that from people in the burbs with cars.


Some of what you say is probably correct, but your implied premise is that the best are those living in the city. Probably false.


Not in the slightest. If you want to draw the best of the best, you need to make sure you are accessible to everyone, either city or suburbs, car or not, because the best of the best could be living anywhere. If you are looking for good/good enough for the job, you don't need to be anywhere near as concerned with being accessible to everyone out there because the pool of people who are good enough is much larger than the pool of "The Best". There are more than enough people that are good enough in either the city or the burbs so companies that only want good enough don't need to be worried about pulling from locations where they aren't located.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:08     Subject: Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:
Amazon HQ2 had clear requirements that it had to be in a metro-accessible area which makes sense to me because they want to draw the best talent. However, some fortune 500 companies like Northrop Grumman still have a very archaic thought process. Take for instance the location of their HQ which is off of 495 and 50 intersections. They have 20k employees in the Metro DC area which means they will be adding 20k cars on the already congested roads. Also, how do DC residents and Arlington residents (most of whom live car-free) get to work? Even if you dont care about the environment, or dont believe in global warming, dont you want to draw the best talent?


North Grumman HQ
2980 Fairview Park Dr
Falls Church, VA 22042

Just curious?


guess you never been outside DC before?

like pp said, apple is essentially cupertino, a 40min drive from SF downtown.....
and google is essentially mountain view

their employee chose to live in cupertino/mountain view for a shorter commute, they dont like far away in SF downtown like a retard and commute 1 hour + to apple/google
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 13:02     Subject: Re:Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:

If you had your office in a metro accessible location people who want to drive always have the option of parking at the metro station. (Most of the new silver line stations and sub urban metros have massive parking lots). Also, metro travel cost can be pre-taxed and/or company subsidized. But people who dont own cars especially millennials will have no choice.


This is not true. The only silver station with a huge lot is Wiehle.

OP, most people are NOT car-free. Most people in the DC metro area live in the suburbs where the metro isn't as convenient.
Anonymous
Post 01/25/2018 12:57     Subject: Re:Why do fortune 500 companies Like Northrop Grumman have HQ in non metro accessible location?
Anonymous wrote:
Some of what you say is probably correct, but your implied premise is that the best are those living in the city. Probably false.


I dont mean to say people who live in cities are the best and I dont want to start a debate about that. What I mean to say that younger people and Millenials mostly live in the city and want to live car-free. You are cutting yourself from a broad demographics, and I do not see the value of an off-metro location. Reducing cars on the road benefits everyone including those who drive to work.

My theory is that these companies are run by old school execs who have not adapted to the new car-free generation.



The new care free generation will one day have strollers, go to Home Depot, and have to buy groceries instead of avocado toast at bus boys. Plenty of young families have, do, and will continue to choose the suburbs.