this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
491 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

58766 readers
3219 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

This is the real reason for companies wanting people back to the office.

All this talk about collaboration and team spirit is just the publicly given reason for wanting people back to the office.

The real reason is that now the owners of the buildings are losing money.

Cry me a river.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] notannpc@lemmy.world 99 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Let those banks burn. I could not care less. Let the commercial real estate market burn with em.

We don’t need them.

[–] vexikron@lemmy.zip 77 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Yep, been saying this for years now, the vicious and irrational hatred against work from home employees is driven by two main factors:

  1. At a systemic level, despite work from home being obviously less costly in the long run than maintaining an office space, if work from home were allowed to proliferate it basically pop the commercial real estate bubble and then basically every corrupt mayor and idiots in upper management would be shown to be corrupt idiots.

  2. At a more personal level, upper and middle management people essentially get their kicks from seeing busy little worker bees near them, and they would personally have existential crisis when they realize that 90% of what they do is negging and then ommitting or misrepresenting that in actual meetings. Actual meetings which can easily take place in zoom, or often replaced with just an email.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 33 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Another part of #2 is they can no longer be toxic and verbally abusive, like they could in person. Anything virtual might be recorded and every email is a record.

[–] vexikron@lemmy.zip 6 points 8 months ago

Thats a key element as well, the insane corpo manipulation that only exists if you can prove it even though everyone who doesnt up their head up either their own ass or someone elses knows is absurdly rampant... but youre too busy to record it all!

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago (2 children)

And you can’t sleep with employees who work from home.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I count my wife as my secretary every now and then, does that count? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 62 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If only there was some solution to unused corporate office space and the housing crisis that has tents in every city?!?

Oh well. Better give the bank a bailout and stop thinking about it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] versionist@lemmy.world 53 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That doesn't make sense. The companies that want people to come back to the office are the ones paying rent. That rent doesn't get better or worse if people come back to the office.

[–] kambusha@feddit.ch 22 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Yes, thank you! I hate this constant narrative that back-to-office is always tied to commercial real-estate investments, or that there's some magical tax incentive.

Usually what you have is: bank lends money to a commercial real estate company that owns the building. Commercial real estate company leases out office space to one or many companies. When those companies reduce or terminate their leases, the commercial real estate company struggles to pay their mortgage and defaults. Commercial real estate loses. Bank loses. And if commercial real estate had pooled investments to fund the building (along with bank loan), then those investors lose as well.

There are some large companies that own their own buildings, but that's more of an exception.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

But those rent paying companies have very wealthy boards who are invested in commercial real estate.

[–] TheFrogThatFlies@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

And the companies are controlled by venture capitalists, who are smart and distribute their investments. So they have interests in various companies, including the real estate companies.

[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 41 points 8 months ago

It's sad that problems for banks are never problems only for banks. They always turn into problems for everybody else

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 40 points 8 months ago

Oh won't somebody think of the shareholders.

Oh wait, I'm doing it right now. Mua ha ha ha ha ha ha!

[–] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.world 38 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (8 children)

Apparently literally everything is technology according to lemmy

[–] shinratdr@lemmy.ca 9 points 8 months ago

RTO/WFH definitely impacts tech workers the most, I think that’s just obvious.

The pandemic triggering a cultural shift to WFH is a big part of the problems in the commercial real estate market. Basically, America becoming 10% more technologically sophisticated may have unhinged the financial system. Story about the impact of tech on society, I guess?

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 4 points 8 months ago

The logic seems to be, "if it impacts tech workers or people interested in tech in any way, it's technology".

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Toneswirly@lemmy.world 35 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Damn, squatting on real estate is backfiring. I'm heartbroken

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Prox@lemmy.world 34 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

For sure. Business investments go up and down all the time. That’s business

I’m more concerned about trains/transit. After all these years, we (US) are finally investing in improving transportation within and between cities, just as commutes have been cut and many cities may be depopulating.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 30 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This is simply sunk cost fallacy. Companies signed leases. Now they regret it but can't back out so they've got to try to pretend it's worth it even if it costs their employees money out of pocket.

It's not really about owners it's more about leases and the company leasing the property "not getting their money's worth"

[–] evranch@lemmy.ca 27 points 8 months ago

Often they have signed leases with themselves. With original owners, holding companies etc.

This is a way of extracting value from a corporation without paying it as a dividend or salary. Dividends go to all shareholders. Lease payments go to one specific one.

So obviously if there's no reason to pay these leases anymore, somebody powerful is going to be very upset.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 30 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I live in New York. The Wall Street area has been turning older buildings into living spaces for a while. One old office building became an NYU dorm, and the Woolworth Building [once the tallest in the world] is now luxury condos.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 41 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And you know what's nice about doing that? It's people present 24/7 and that means stores and restaurants that can be open even past office hours!

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 20 points 8 months ago (2 children)

It's funny because back in the day, you could go down to Wall Street on a Sunday and have the whole place to yourself. Today, there are lots of bars and restaurants and groceries.

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I was visiting a friend down there and walked back to my hotel at 2am. Literally the only people out were a bunch of cops standing around empty street corners.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 7 points 8 months ago

The only time I went was about 8 years ago on a Thursday evening and the place was dead, a few people that worked late and were going home, a few tourists here and there and that's it...

[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 26 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I had to start going back to the office today. I'll eventually split time between two buildings, but my main office is practically empty. Been here 3 days in a row, and I'm the only one in my area that stayed the entire day. The first day 4 of 5 other people left at lunch. The last person left about 4:15pm.

Yestersay I was by myself until about 10am and that person left at 4. I'm here by myself today and I don't suspect anyone will show up late.

On the other side of the floor where the breakroom is, there's maybe been 7 people total across the 3 days I've been here lol.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 23 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Yeah it's like that now. People come in late and leave early. I do that too since it's fine. Only one office day is required and I make sure to come in late and leave early to beat traffic. Everyone does. :)

I use it as a day of socializing with the team. Just talking. Not much work.

[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I get the socializing aspect and it hasn't been bad coming in. I've been wfh for the past like 4 years so it's nice to put on actual clothes instead of wearing joggers and t-shirts every day lol. You're lucky you're only required to come in one day a week. We have to come in 3 days (eventually we'll be monitored to make sure we come in 3 days) but at least we can pick the 3 days every week.

On the plus side, we have assigned cubes (no hotel cubes thankfully!) and since I was part of the first small group to come in, I was able to change cubes.

However, I still think it's BS that companies are forcing the back to work crap with such strict boundaries.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] doublejay1999@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago

lol I wrote this over a year ago

[–] Omgboom@lemmy.zip 16 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Meanwhile my company wants to double or even triple the amount of office space we lease in the next 2-3 years, but building management is quoting us prices that are even slightly higher than they were in 2020.

[–] AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago

Prices only go up. If a price is allowed to fall then the gravy train stops and the owner class gets really salty.

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Kinda sounds like the board of your company is full of real estate developers who still win if you guys go tits up.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 14 points 8 months ago
[–] whoelectroplateuntil@sh.itjust.works 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

So more or less, since many businesses are only keeping their offices because they have multi-year leases preventing them from simply packing up and going fully remote or downsizing to a smaller office, we can expect occupancy rates to continue falling and slow-burn exacerbating the commercial real estate crisis. And really, the problem here is just that banks are overinvested in commercial real estate, not knowing that a pandemic would alter work patterns in a lasting way. So again, we're all in for a fun ride on the roller coaster that is capitalism, literally because of problems caused by real estate speculation.

[–] Allero@lemmy.today 9 points 8 months ago

Because banks fucked up and we have to solve it

[–] AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

If you're holding onto something useless and eating up your budget, like, that's on you, bro.

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

What's that you say? Rezone these as residential and make more housing you say?

[–] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 12 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Fwiw, turning most of these buildings into livable spaces is a lot harder and more expensive than you'd expect. For many of them, it would actually be cheaper to just raze it and create a new residential building, even if it maintains the same outer dimensions.

[–] Yamainwitch@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

True, so we should turn them into schools and libraries 🤩

[–] EssentialCoffee@midwest.social 7 points 8 months ago (2 children)

So... rezone for residential, tear down, rebuild for residential....

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Chessmasterrex@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

I just hope something can be done with the empty structures. Turning them into housing is easier said than done for many buildings.

[–] peak_dunning_krueger@feddit.de 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This is a good post, but I'm not sure it belongs in technology. Hmm.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The connection is mostly that tech companies have been wanting people back to offices for years now, so it kind of made sense to place this also in tech. But I know what you mean.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Aermis@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I'm a union commercial electrician where I spent a decade building and improving tenant spaces in commercial towers in Seattle and Bellevue. There's a huge dip in our work now that there aren't high rises being occupied. I'd like people to work from home, but my blue collar job can't be done from home. If we can change what these buildings are used for I wouldn't be worried.

Google here in Fremont area on the other hand is expanding their space by occupying a larger foot print with a smaller work force per square foot. That's a good way to keep us working.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

Oh no.

Anyway.

[–] pearable@lemmy.ml 6 points 8 months ago
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 8 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Employees sent to work from home at the start of the pandemic have not fully returned, a situation that, combined with high interest rates, is wiping out value in a major class of commercial real estate.

The past week brought a taste of the brewing problems when New York Community Bank’s stock plunged after the lender disclosed unexpected losses on real estate loans tied to both office and apartment buildings.

When a string of banks failed last spring — partly because of rising interest rates that had reduced the value of their assets — analysts fretted that commercial real estate could trigger a wider set of problems.

In other cases, banks are using short-term extensions rather than taking over struggling buildings or renewing now-unworkable leases — hoping that interest rates will come down, which would help lift property values, and that workers will return.

The value of bank assets has taken a beating amid higher Fed rates, Mr. Piskorski and Ms. Jiang found in their paper, which means that mounting commercial real estate losses could leave many institutions in bad shape.

“Commercial real estate is an area that we’ve long been aware could create financial stability risks or losses in the banking system, and this is something that requires careful supervisory attention,” Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said during congressional testimony this week.


The original article contains 1,246 words, the summary contains 223 words. Saved 82%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›