Re:Dell goes back on WFH pledge, forces employees to come ba...
by bsder on Monday May 15, 2023 @03:11PM
(#35953164)
> for no other reason than to avoid setting a precedent for lower rents even when it wasn't financially necessary.
I agree with your virtiol, but this isn't quite correct.
You can tack "missing" rent onto the end of your financial agreement without penalty. "Lower" rent causes a reevaluation of the financial agreement basis which will almost always require a cash outlay. This is what is causing commercial real estate to be empty for 5+ years rather than lower the damn rent.
Municipalities need to implement an (in?)occupancy tax to stomp this crap out. If real estate isn't generating rent for 12+ months, tax needs to start going up on the space.
Re:Dell goes back on WFH pledge, forces employees to come ba...
by smugma on Monday May 15, 2023 @03:40PM
(#35953431)
SF has a Commercial Vacancy Tax, for properties unoccupied for 182+ days a year.
My guess is that it is not well-defined and therefore generates minimal revenue. I also can't tell if this applies to office buildings or is more for street level commercial real estate.
as a former business owner (good exit, so no bitterness here) all i can say is good riddance, and i hope they take a massive haircut as an industry.
they're the biggest pricks i've ever dealt with in running my business. 'arrogant' doesn't even begin to describe the attitude they had in the 2015-2020 time period. and they are literally no fun at parties.
example in another industry - think of all the restaurants you've ever loved that have had to close their doors because of asshole corporate landlords, for no other reason than to avoid setting a precedent for lower rents even when it wasn't financially necessary.