[ghaff]

Greyness aside, there aren't a lot of places in the US that have uncontroversially better weather than Seattle other than California. Sure, if hot/dry or hot/humid + moderate are your goals, there are places. Las Vegas isn't clearly better weather than Seattle for a lot of people. Austin certainly isn't. Maybe some mountain locations. But, really, Seattle doesn't have bad weather in the scheme of things and Amazon isn't going to establish a new location in prime California real estate.

[thesmallestcat]

Seattle is one of the only metros in the country that experiences rainy weather for weeks on end every year. For many people, it has some of the worst weather around.

[smt88]

This is risking a flame war, but I'd suggest anyplace with so little sun has "uncontroversially" terrible weather. It literally causes health issues.

Also, a city doesn't need good weather all year to have better weather than Seattle.

All that said, I personally doubt weather (and execs' preferences about it) will factor directly into the decision.

[ghaff]

It depends on what people value. Seattle (like Portland) does have gloomy winters--as does a lot of the northern tier of the US. But it doesn't get big snowfalls, bitter temperatures or--in the summer--long stretches of hot, humid weather or blisteringly hot and dry weather. The summer in Seattle tends to be about as pleasant as anywhere.

I can certainly see someone preferring Phoenix or Las Vegas, say, to Seattle in terms of weather but I wouldn't personally.

(I do agree that weather is perhaps one of the least relevant factors to this decision.)