Google’s AI Hub: Visakhapatnam’s Jackpot, South India’s Heartburn

By K Raveendran

When Google announced that Visakhapatnam would be home to its $15 billion project to build the company’s first artificial intelligence hub in India, the news landed like a thunderclap across the southern states. For Andhra Pradesh, it was nothing short of a jackpot — a once-in-a-generation opportunity to rewrite the state’s economic and technological future. But elsewhere, the announcement was received with clenched teeth and forced smiles. The jubilation in Visakhapatnam was matched by muted agony in Chennai, Bengaluru, and Thiruvananthapuram — each of which had been quietly confident that they, not a coastal city known more for its beaches than its bandwidth, would be Google’s chosen one.

The symbolism of the selection has not been lost on anyone. Visakhapatnam, or Vizag as it is fondly called, is now set to become India’s newest tech lodestar, a place that will host one of the world’s most ambitious AI research and development centres. Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu has wasted no time calling it a ‘vote of confidence’ in the state’s digital readiness, even describing it as the ‘New India’s Silicon Shore’. His government, which has long been seeking to diversify Andhra’s industrial portfolio beyond agriculture and port-based industries, suddenly has a global validation it could not have bought with any amount of lobbying.

But success stories have their shadow sides, and in this case, the shadows fall heavily on Google’s neighbouring states. For Karnataka, which has long prided itself as the undisputed technology capital of India, the loss was unexpected and painful. Bengaluru has been the natural home of all things digital for decades. It has hosted the crème de la crème of global IT giants, from Microsoft and Amazon to Meta and IBM. Yet, this time, the seemingly obvious choice lost out. The murmurs in the city’s business circles suggest that congestion, rising costs, and infrastructural fatigue may have tilted the balance against Bengaluru. Google, known for its penchant for planned expansion and work-life balance, might have preferred Vizag’s relative quiet and expansive geography over Bengaluru’s chaos.

Tamil Nadu, however, has taken the blow more personally. The irony is difficult to miss: Sundar Pichai, the man at the helm of Google, is a Tamil by birth, and yet his company chose to set up its most high-profile Indian investment in Andhra Pradesh, bypassing his home state. Opposition parties in Tamil Nadu have weaponised this irony with glee. They accuse Chief Minister M. K. Stalin of failing to make Tamil Nadu competitive enough to attract marquee investments, even from a son of the soil. In political rallies and social media exchanges, the refrain has been relentless: “Even Pichai ditched his own land.” The narrative has touched a raw nerve in a state that prides itself on its legacy of education, science, and entrepreneurship.

Stalin has tried to soften the blow by citing the ongoing expansion of Foxconn’s manufacturing operations in Tamil Nadu as evidence that the state remains a major investment magnet. He reminded critics that the Taiwanese giant’s investment of Rs 15,000 crore in Tamil Nadu is no small feat. But Foxconn’s own clarification that the investment is not new — only an extension of earlier commitments — has punctured the argument. The perception, as always in politics, has mattered more than the fact. Tamil Nadu finds itself caught between pride and envy: proud that one of its sons heads Google, envious that his biggest Indian investment has landed just across the border.

Kerala’s reaction has been subtler but no less telling. The state government, which rarely misses a chance to highlight its achievements as an emerging knowledge economy, finds itself nursing a quiet disappointment. The irony here is sharper still: Thomas Kurian, the CEO overseeing the Google AI hub project, is a Malayali. For years, Kerala has positioned itself as the thinking state — literate, skilled, globally connected. The government’s digital evangelism, its startup missions, and its rhetoric of ‘brain over brawn’ had created a belief that it was only a matter of time before the big tech boys came calling. But when they finally did, they went to a different door. Vizag’s triumph is, by extension, Thiruvananthapuram’s embarrassment.

The choice of Visakhapatnam thus tells a bigger story about India’s tech geography being redrawn. For too long, India’s digital power map has been dominated by a few southern cities — Bengaluru, Chennai, Hyderabad, and to some extent Pune. Google’s decision signals a possible decentralisation of that concentration. It suggests that global investors may now be looking beyond traditional clusters, seeking new frontiers where infrastructure can be built afresh rather than wrestled out of crowded megacities. For Andhra Pradesh, it is a validation of the government’s patient efforts to rebuild its post-bifurcation identity around technology and sustainability. The creation of a tech corridor anchored in Vizag may well become a model for second-tier cities aspiring to leapfrog into global relevance.

Industry watchers note that the choice of Vizag aligns with Google’s new-age expansion philosophy — one that prioritises environmental sustainability, digital inclusiveness, and social infrastructure over mere brand geography. The company reportedly found in Vizag a rare mix of coastal connectivity, renewable energy availability, and untapped urban potential. It is also said that the state government offered an unusually attractive policy package, including long-term land leases, tax incentives, and custom-built digital infrastructure support. In contrast, older metros like Bengaluru and Chennai, already burdened by overpopulation and policy fatigue, might not have matched that enthusiasm.

There is also a subtle political subtext. The Modi government at the Centre has been pushing aggressively for development beyond traditional metros as part of its “Viksit Bharat 2047” vision. The selection of Vizag fits neatly into that narrative — a story of tier-two India rising to global prominence. Though Google insists its decision was purely based on merit and logistical factors, political optics are rarely irrelevant in such mega investments. Andhra’s ability to align its pitch with the national narrative of regional empowerment may have helped it clinch the deal.

Meanwhile, in the boardrooms of Chennai, Bengaluru, and Thiruvananthapuram, the post-mortems continue. The irony of two southern sons — Sundar Pichai and Thomas Kurian — choosing a neutral territory between their home states for India’s most ambitious AI project is not lost on anyone. It reminds that corporate decisions, however emotionally interpreted, are seldom sentimental. They follow logic, opportunity, and sometimes, the winds of change. (IPA Service)