Apple to Build New Data Center in Iowa [Updated]

[MacRumors]

Apple is planning to build a new data center in Waukee, Iowa, according to a meeting agenda published by the Iowa Economic Development Authority Board and shared by The Des Moines Register.

At a meeting that will take place Thursday morning, the board plans to review Apple's application for investment in the city and will "consider an undisclosed amount of incentives" to encourage Apple to build the data center.

An Apple data center in Reno, via the Reno-Gazette Journal​

While the agenda simply suggests Apple is planning some kind of project in Waukee, sources that spoke to The Des Moines Register have said Apple will build a data center, joining Microsoft, Facebook, and Google, companies that also have data centers in the area.

Apple currently has data centers located around the world. In the United States, Apple operates data centers in Reno, Nevada; Prineville, Oregon; Maiden, North Carolina; Newark, California; and Mesa, Arizona.

Update: Iowa's Economic Development Authority approved a deal on Thursday that will give Apple $208 million in state and local tax breaks to construct two data centers near Des Moines. The new data centers will create approximately 50 jobs, and Apple will buy 2,000 acres of land for the project, allowing for future development.

Article Link: Apple to Build New Data Center in Iowa [Updated]

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

That's very small town. They need those jobs.

 

[Tv__]

That's very small town. They need those jobs.

Waukee is a suburb of Des Moines, which has a metro population of over 500,000. So, not small.

Microsoft and Facebook have multiple data centers in the Des Moines area, apparently due to cheap land and ample access to water.

 

[nutmac]

Good. Apple should continue to add and expand data centers so that it can eventually fully replace AWS, Azure, etc. and lower iCloud pricing. $9.99/month for 2 TB is a great price (almost everyone else charges twice as much).

 

[lunarworks]

Good. Apple should continue to add and expand data centers so that it can eventually fully replace AWS, Azure, etc. and lower iCloud pricing. $9.99/month for 2 TB is a great price (almost everyone else charges twice as much).

I'd be happy with 1TB for $5. That could store all my stuff and more.

 

[topgunn]

I'd be happy with 1TB for $5. That could store all my stuff and more.

Agreed. I have just over 200GB at present but the next jump was 2TB. I would love a 1TB option.

 

[Constable Odo]

What does Apple have all those data centers for? It's as though Apple has some huge streaming video library like Netflix or gives users lots of free storage or runs some Youtube library like Google does. Apple is still sucking on Amazon's teat for storage which is absolutely crazy. Heck, Apple could afford to have 10X the storage of AWS if they really wanted to. It seems as though I'm always hearing about Apple opening some new data center and I can't tell if they're really putting them to any good use. I guess it's a lot more important to Apple to buy back shares than to have some massive data storage center. Apple had better stop using all those other services unless there are some huge savings to use other companies' storage facilities. I'm sure Apple knows what's best for them. As a shareholder, I'd just like to hear some explanation of why they do the things they do. It's no fun being kept in the dark. Wall Street is always bragging about all those other companies' cloud services but it never says anything favorable about Apple's storage capabilities.

 

[unipnthr]

Waukee is a suburb of Des Moines, which has a metro population of over 500,000. So, not small.

Microsoft and Facebook have multiple data centers in the Des Moines area, apparently due to cheap land and ample access to water.

The other large piece of that is low, stable electricity costs. I would guess that with over a 1/3 of the energy produced in Iowa coming from wind that doesn't hurt as well. Iowa is 2nd to Texas in terms of over all installed capacity, but 1st

Waukee is a suburb of Des Moines, which has a metro population of over 500,000. So, not small.

Microsoft and Facebook have multiple data centers in the Des Moines area, apparently due to cheap land and ample access to water.

The other large reason is access to low, stable electricity prices. I am sure it doesn't hurt that the electricity provider they would utilize is aiming to have its wind generation account for roughly 90% of its electric retail load.

 

[displayblock]

Microsoft and Facebook have multiple data centers in the Des Moines area, apparently due to cheap land and ample access to water.

The other large piece of that is low, stable electricity costs. I would guess that with over a 1/3 of the energy produced in Iowa coming from wind that doesn't hurt as well.

Don't forget a strategically centralized location and tax incentives. https://www.dsmpartnership.com/growing-business-here/key-industries/data-centers

 

[drewyboy]

What does Apple have all those data centers for? It's as though Apple has some huge streaming video library like Netflix or gives users lots of free storage or runs some Youtube library like Google does. Apple is still sucking on Amazon's teat for storage which is absolutely crazy. Heck, Apple could afford to have 10X the storage of AWS if they really wanted to. It seems as though I'm always hearing about Apple opening some new data center and I can't tell if they're really putting them to any good use. I guess it's a lot more important to Apple to buy back shares than to have some massive data storage center. Apple had better stop using all those other services unless there are some huge savings to use other companies' storage facilities. I'm sure Apple knows what's best for them. As a shareholder, I'd just like to hear some explanation of why they do the things they do. It's no fun being kept in the dark. Wall Street is always bragging about all those other companies' cloud services but it never says anything favorable about Apple's storage capabilities.

I think they use their DC's for live data/transaction type of stuff to keep the most important data in house. Just a guess though.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

What does Apple have all those data centers for? It's as though Apple has some huge streaming video library like Netflix or gives users lots of free storage or runs some Youtube library like Google does. Apple is still sucking on Amazon's teat for storage which is absolutely crazy. Heck, Apple could afford to have 10X the storage of AWS if they really wanted to. It seems as though I'm always hearing about Apple opening some new data center and I can't tell if they're really putting them to any good use. I guess it's a lot more important to Apple to buy back shares than to have some massive data storage center. Apple had better stop using all those other services unless there are some huge savings to use other companies' storage facilities. I'm sure Apple knows what's best for them. As a shareholder, I'd just like to hear some explanation of why they do the things they do. It's no fun being kept in the dark. Wall Street is always bragging about all those other companies' cloud services but it never says anything favorable about Apple's storage capabilities.

Apple is constantly expanding its cloud services, and how much data its customers are likely to put into the cloud. In recent years, that includes the addition of iCloud Photo Library and storing Mac Desktop and Documents folders in iCloud Drive, and making iCloud Drive easier to access (which implies heavier usage as well). As the amount of storage on iPhones and iPads grows (from 8-16GB in the earlier days to as much as 256GB today) the amount of iCloud backup space needed grows right along with it. In iOS 11 and Mac OS High Sierra, iMessage message archives will be stored in the cloud. In addition, there is now the cloud-based Apple Music streaming service, which has been growing into video streaming...

Apple's huge customer base (something like 1 billion devices in current use) is constantly being encouraged to expand their use of the Apple ecosystem. The cloud is the glue and often the source for that ecosystem.

So, are you criticizing Apple for not building its cloud infrastructure fast enough to eliminate third-party providers, or are you criticizing them for needing cloud infrastructure at all? As an investor, you may be aware that Services is apple's fastest-growing revenue source. Services come from the cloud. As long as growth continues, it's likely that Apple will continue to build new data centers, and will likely continue to use third-party providers who have the in-place capacity to allow faster expansion than Apple could build on its own. (Why wait to sell new services until the "factory" has been built, when you can lease existing facilities and start selling sooner?)

 

[chromite]

Waukee is a suburb of Des Moines, which has a metro population of over 500,000. So, not small.

Microsoft and Facebook have multiple data centers in the Des Moines area, apparently due to cheap land and ample access to water.

500k could be considered small depending on what one's used to, especially for a metro area.

 

[pdsubraa]

Apple would sure rock in IOWA as big companies has already proved earlier there.

 

[L-U-R-C-H]

The other large piece of that is low, stable electricity costs. I would guess that with over a 1/3 of the energy produced in Iowa coming from wind that doesn't hurt as well. Iowa is 2nd to Texas in terms of over all installed capacity, but 1st


The other large reason is access to low, stable electricity prices. I am sure it doesn't hurt that the electricity provider they would utilize is aiming to have its wind generation account for roughly 90% of its electric retail load.

Panthers?! No man... Go Cyclones! Haha I know this is completely unrelated to this post

Thought it was cool to see a story related to my hometown (I live in Waukee).

 

[Tv__]

500k could be considered small depending on what one's used to, especially for a metro area.

Sure, but the original poster implied that the DSM area needs the 50 jobs the data center will bring, which simply isn't true. Unemployment in Central Iowa is well below the national average. Adding 50 jobs (and several hundred construction jobs) is nice, but it's not like the region is hurting for jobs.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

That's very small town. They need those jobs.

My town is a bit smaller in population than that one, but it's smack in the middle of a very major metropolitan area (it was still mostly rural until the early 1900s). The vast majority of residents are commuters, the vast majority of development is single-family residential.

Judging by the map, so is this town. Its population has doubled and redoubled over the past few decades, with little or no commercial development to support it. You can barely locate the traditional town center - it's the size you might expect for a village whose 1960 population was 687 (currently approaching 20,000).

Chances are a town that small doesn't have enough workers qualified to do that work - they'll be commuting from the neighboring towns and cities. The local impact is more likely going to be felt in real estate values, property tax revenues, etc. Likely, farmland will be lost (which would happen with or without Apple), but the locals are probably happy that there will be more money for their schools, without adding to the school population.

 

[pdsubbu]

Well written post - This would sure create more job opportunities in IOWA