4 ms·
That's an altruistic lens applied over a more likely scenario -- 20-40% of salaries are lost to rentier cadres. Throughout history they have been a blight upon
by ihsw2 9y ago
That's an altruistic lens applied over a more likely scenario -- 20-40% of salaries are lost to rentier cadres. Throughout history they have been a blight upon humanity and they have always been formidable, and furthermore Facebook actuaries likely calculated that rental costs are only going to keep going up unabated. There will be a point where Facebook will have to move headquarters and that will come with a multibillion dollar pricetag.
In this hypothetical scenario, they will have to take steps to ensure this doesn't happen again, which comes with a hefty pricetag in itself, so provided this data there is only one question -- where to relocate the HQ?
There is no better place than the SF Bay Area, so logically it stands to reason that they take the same steps to progressively expand their current HQ rather than relocate.
Not only that but this new FB community can be a testbed for applying the same pernicious digital surveillance mentality to the physical world. Truly, it will be the place to measure how much privacy people will give up for real-life benefits (eg: rent).
- yellow_postit 9y agoWith the housing challenges in SF I think you will see more and more companies questioning the “there’s no better place than SF” mindset.