Sure, they add value for those that own property at the expense of everyone else. When you go to defend a company that essentially acts to exclude large swaths

Sure, they add value for those that own property at the expense of everyone else. When you go to defend a company that essentially acts to exclude large swaths of the community from home ownership by accumulating real estate assets and driving prices up $400+/sq ft in many communities without actually doing any work to these houses, it's important to distinguish who exactly benefits here, because it's not most people that benefit from this. Defending a company that adds value exclusively to the wealthier, property-owning class to everyone else's detriment by arguing that they "add value" is a bit of an oversimplification, isn't it?