Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
The RTO push is designed to keep the commercial real-estate market from crashing. I've never seen any good proof of this, but believe it. I don't exactly know why CEOs of big companies would really care that much about commercial real-estate. Perhaps their large shareholders (hedge fund managers?) also own commercial real-estate and are putting pressure on CEOs? Perhaps at that level it's just a big club, and all the wealthy just help eachother out, out of solidarity? Dunno.
If the value of corporate real estate falls then that had a material impact on the balance sheet of companies owning their own offices. It's in their own best interests to keep demand high.
Companies that rent don't enforce RTO.
Perhaps. I guess the companies could use their campus equity in a beneficial way. Not sure how beneficial this is to most companies though. With the companies I'm thinking of, I'd guess campus equity is pretty minor (compared to their "human resources"). I may be wrong though.
Yes, offices will be a small proportion of total assets. But there is still profit to be made.