> To me it appears there was not enough demand so it had to discount its rents by a lot to get to the target 97%-98% occupancy and thus lost revenue. This quot

> To me it appears there was not enough demand so it had to discount its rents by a lot to get to the target 97%-98% occupancy and thus lost revenue. This quote is specifically from a company that had 50k units, normally ran with 100% occupancy, did some trials with the pricing company, which showed they could increase revenue by running at an occupancy of 98%, and has now pushed that lower to 95%. By lowering their occupancy rate, they're increasing housing pressure, which forces renters to accept their higher rates. > And yes, I don't have a real estate license in Louisiana, so can you please name the specific laws you had in mind? You don't have one at all, or you'd know the laws. Based on your responses I can tell you didn't read the article, and aren't debating in good faith, so I don't plan on continuing this.