I read somewhere on HN that commercial real estate is financed differently from residential real estate, and in particular, financing costs are related to what a building could earn rather than what a building does earn. If you keep rents the same but have vacancies, your funders apparently don't count that against you, while if reduce rents, suddenly the earning potential of your building has dropped and it will cost you, even if the building is actually earning more in cash flow than if it were vacant.

Seems like a bit of a misincentive here, and a recipe for lenders to go bust too. Then again, it seems like commercial real estate has periodic financial crises, so this seems to reflect reality. Get ready for the next one.