Could Downtown OKC Target Mercury Marine?
Well, it looks like the union folks in Wisconsin have decided they would rather lose their jobs and a hometown employer rather than agree to wage concessions.
Obviously, as reported, the company is looking at moving all of their manufacturing to their plant in Stillwater.
But the question is being asked: could downtown Oklahoma City land the corporate headquarters? The GOLT bond money is there to make such a move possible, and plenty of Class A office space will be available once Devon tower is built.
Mayor Mick, are you up to the challenge of wooing an operation that doesn’t involve sports?
Thank you for joining our conversation on OKC Central. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
Mercury Marine is still a sports business and in Wisconsin they always had their HQ with their plant. DT OKC could target it, but that’s not the way economic development works. Stillwater worked really hard just to save their 400 jobs at the Stillwater plant. Now it looks like Stillwater will get some jobs out of this (after it looked like Stillwater might lose) and we’re supposed to say, oh what a great opportunity for DT OKC?
“Now it looks like Stillwater will get some jobs out of this (after it looked like Stillwater might lose) and we’re supposed to say, oh what a great opportunity for DT OKC?”
Yes.
Nick, I’m a little confused. Are you saying OKC should not go after the Merc corp. headquarters because Stillwater should go for the opportunity, or that OKC should just not seek out this corp. headquarters because it should stay in WI, or for some other reason?
It looks like Stillwater will be getting several hundred new manufacturing jobs which is great for Stillwater and Oklahoma. However, it would seem that the company would have to build a new building for its corp. headquarters if it were to move to Stillwater, or it could move the manufacturing there and its headquarters here and be in a perfect position to absorb quite a bit of the Class A downtown space that will be vacated by Devon in 2012, which is the exact same time Merc will be completing any transfer to Stillwater. To me, it seems like a win-win for both OKC and Stillwater, but I’m intrigued as I would like to hear why you think it may not be a good idea.
Is it necessary to have your HW with your plant? Might be more attractive for the corporate executives to live in OKC versus Stillwater. Plus easier access to networking and a more attractive place to neogtiate business partnerships. Just a thought.
Nothing against Stillwater, but OKC could be a candidate here, because of the availability of scheduled airlines. This also makes Tulsa a candidate, because Tulsa and OKC aer about equidistant from Stillwater.
Of course, if Stillwater gets Mercury’s HQ, then it doesn’t matter. Oklahoma stilll gets the jobs, but Stillwater diversifies its economy a bit.
The press articles I have read are from 900-1000 jobs are in the headquarters alone with another 800-900 currently in the Fond du Lac manufacturing plant.
Nick, I think I know where you are coming from now. Merc already has its HQ in a smaller city and I think that is great. My understanding is that Stillwater is not seeking out the HQ, just the manufacturing jobs. Merc said today that the decision is still out as to the HQ status so we (OKC) should go for it.
I would wholeheartedly agree if Stillwater was actively seeking to get the HQ moved there and think it would be inappropriate if OKC were to step in to take it from them. I do not believe that is the case though. If Merc said they would only consider moving the HQ to Stillwater or keeping it in WI, then I say we do everything we can to support Stillwater in moving it there. However, as my understanding is that any HQ move to Stillwater would involve some significant building and expense for Merc and I do not believe there is a significant effort to move it there at this time, OKC should do everything it can to move it here.
We will have a confluence of events that will make it a perfectly timed moved for OKC. 1. Manufacturing is (likely) being consolidated in OK to be completed in 2012. 2. Merc is still deciding its fate on their HQ. 3. Devon is moving their HQ in 2012. 4. There will be a plethora of empty Class A space in the heart of downtown in 2012. 5. Merc already has an OK prescence besides Stillwater (albeit in Tulsa). 6. It would coincide perfectly with hopefully the first big projects of MAPS 3. 7. There are incentives we can offer to entice them to come that Stillwater may not be able to do. 8. We may be able to enlist the state is assisting more than Stillwater could. 9. This would bring almost 1000 jobs to OKC, and a corp. HQ no less. I could go on and on, but this is an opportunity that comes along rarely for a city. We need to seize this and strike while the iron is hot. Somebody get on the phone (**cough**Mayor Mick***cough***) and ask them “What can we do to put you in OKC today?”
Well, Nick, forgive us for preferring that OKC get a corporate headquarters as opposed to some other city. Not all of us have a strong heartfelt connection with Stillwater.
If the bulk of a company’s operations may be moving, every city in the area should jump at the possibility. It’s competition, OKC shouldn’t shy back any more than any other city just because Stillwater could gain from the departure. If the plant’s operations do move, which is still not certain, then city leaders from all over the area should be trying to entice them to move operations.
Exactly. I think everyone would feel pretty stupid if we stepped aside for Stillwater to make its bid to be the corporate headquarters, only to have Tulsa or Wichita or some other city steal it away. But oh, “Stillwater worked really hard”, so we should just stay out of it.
What ethics? Really? Business is business. No offense to Stillwater, but that’s a headquarters that OKC or Tulsa or anywhere else close by could lure to their advantage, and they’d be stupid not to. Ethics. Ha.
I say OKC go for it. Tulsa too.
You will not see Mercury Marine in Oklahoma at anywhere near its present size. The marine industry ( and RV industry ) has taken a huge hit , not only from the economic crash but also from high gasoline prices. Merc will be downsizing on a large scale.
If oil prices continue to rise and we shift to alternative fuels, there will be real doubts whether a marine industry will exist. You can’t tow boats with electric cars. Not sure CNG can power outboard motors.
The future for this industry has major challenges and Merc may not even be around in a few years.
NO. OKC needs to stay out of it!!!!!!! the headquarters will do just fine in STILLWATER with the PLANT!!!! the plant in stillwater as enough available land next to it that will be theres to build on for ther HQ space
no one has said anything about the headquaters moving. I proudly work for the Stillwater plant and they will only be moving a big portion of the jobs. around 200 will be staying there
just so everyone knows merc has NOT changed their original offer to the union in WI. unfortunately for them if there is no change in the original offer from the company according to union rules they have they cannot re-vote on the contract.article in fon du lac paper today says that jobs will start leaving wi. in the last quarter of this year
It is amazing you people are so eager to handout the tax dollars the city takes from your pockets and give it to a corporation to move their headquarters here. The sad part is, corporate welfare is the only reason downtown exist today. Most everything that is new or still open is thanks to the taxpayers money and their is nothing like giving your tax dollars to a company that is looking to move because they want to cut employee pay. CLASSIC!
As I said above, to my knowledge Stillwater is not seeking out the corp. HQ so we are not taking anything from Stillwater. Rick, perhaps we have a different definition of corporate welfare. Unfortunately, this is how the game is played. States and cities make their best pitches to companies in order to bring jobs to their areas (WI is trying to do the same thing to keep the HQ).
I completely respect your opinion if it is that we should take a position that OKC should stand on its own, no tax breaks, no rebates, nothing should be changed just to lure a corp. HQ to our city and its 900 jobs. However, we all know that just means we are taken off the list of potential sites for relocation. I personally would prefer OKC to stand on its own merits too as OKC should be at the top of every relocation list in my mind, however, the world doesn’t work that way. It is a company’s job to make money and save as much as they can too, if they think they can do that here so much the better for hundreds of Oklahomans. More jobs ultimately mean more tax revenue, that is why these things are done. If we can’t make more money eventually by giving the break, we should never do it though. Therein lies the great debate: Do you make more in taxes from giving the breaks through other income taxes, ancillary businesses to support the HQ, sales taxes, etc. or not? I’m not sure anyone can really answer that, thus the reason for these great discussions. But as I said, I fully respect the position that OKC should stand on its own, it just doesn’t work in today’s business realm.
When a company relocates ( or locates ) in a community, they bring value to that community. Those businessmen want to realize that value, as opposed to just giving it away for nothing.
Its a reality of doing business. Either get with it or get left behind.
[...] Stillwater wouldn’t like it either. Stillwater is about 65 mi. from Oklahoma City. Commentary at: Could Downtown OKC Target Mercury Marine? Meanwhile, the county supervisors in Fond du Lac are thinking about imposing a county sales tax to [...]
lynn, you are partly right and partly wrong. mercury may or may not be around, but not for the reasons you state. after waiting SEVEN months, i finally got delivery of my new e-tech evinrude boat motor. while i felt a little disloyal to oklahoma, mercury does not produce a motor i want to buy. two-stroke engines are vastly superior to four-strokes; if they were not, the market would have shifted to four strokes without government interference long ago. evinrude offered a superior product that pollutes less, weighs less, has more torque, and uses less fuel. moreover, the maintenance and repair cost is far, far less.
however, your arguments about fuel and marine use are just wrong. first, electric motors produce far more torque deliverable to the axle. ever heard of the diesel/electric locomotive? virtually every freight train in the country runs on electric motors, and they pull far more than any car or truck. as to fuel use, boats are NEVER going out of style. technology may change, but as i pointed out above (2 vs. 4 stroke), innovation will keep people moving. if mercury can stay innovative (which is how their company was founded in the first place), they can stay around for a ver long time, indeed.
So lets see david, you’re gonna put a diesel and an electric motor in a pickup truck as a tow vehicle ??? Yeah, right … how big will that thing be and will it sell for under a $100,000 ? It may work for trains, but not everyday transportation, which almost all boat owners vehicle must serve dual duty as a household vehicle and tow vehicle. The average guy will need an economical commuting vehicle and your diesel/electric won’t get it.
There is an electric car in most people’s future and it will NOT be large enough to tow a boat. Boating as we know it today will not be accessible to the average middle class person. It will be the domain of the wealthy.
why on earth would someone like you want to steal jobs away or even suggest such a thing from another oklahoma town? this is so typical of city folks. let me guess, the “country bumkins” would have no clue how to treat them right.