3 ms·

> bottom line is commercial real estate (CRE) is screwed and the sole driver of all of this as a former business owner (good exit, so no bitterness here) all i

> bottom line is commercial real estate (CRE) is screwed and the sole driver of all of this as a former business owner (good exit, so no bitterness here) all i can say is good riddance, and i hope they take a massive haircut as an industry. they're the biggest pricks i've ever dealt with in running my business. 'arrogant' doesn't even begin to describe the attitude they had in the 2015-2020 time period. and they are literally no fun at parties. even the front desk receptionists were arrogant, WHILE I WAS LITERALLY HANDING THEM CHECKS. mind blowing. example in another industry - think of all the restaurants you've ever loved that have had to close their doors because of asshole corporate landlords, for no other reason than to avoid setting a precedent for lower rents even when it wasn't financially necessary. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/dei https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/dei look at that beautiful, beautiful drop. it brings a tear to my eye. a tear of joy.

bsder 3y ago
> for no other reason than to avoid setting a precedent for lower rents even when it wasn't financially necessary. I agree with your virtiol, but this isn't quite correct. You can tack "missing" rent onto the end of your financial agreement without penalty. "Lower" rent causes a reevaluation of the financial agreement basis which will almost always require a cash outlay. This is what is causing commercial real estate to be empty for 5+ years rather than lower the damn rent. Municipalities need to implement an (in?)occupancy tax to stomp this crap out. If real estate isn't generating rent for 12+ months, tax needs to start going up on the space.
- smugma 3y ago
  SF has a Commercial Vacancy Tax, for properties unoccupied for 182+ days a year. My guess is that it is not well-defined and therefore generates minimal revenue. I also can't tell if this applies to office buildings or is more for street level commercial real estate.

bsder 3y ago

> for no other reason than to avoid setting a precedent for lower rents even when it wasn't financially necessary. I agree with your virtiol, but this isn't quite correct. You can tack "missing" rent onto the end of your financial agreement without penalty. "Lower" rent causes a reevaluation of the financial agreement basis which will almost always require a cash outlay. This is what is causing commercial real estate to be empty for 5+ years rather than lower the damn rent. Municipalities need to implement an (in?)occupancy tax to stomp this crap out. If real estate isn't generating rent for 12+ months, tax needs to start going up on the space.

smugma 3y ago
SF has a Commercial Vacancy Tax, for properties unoccupied for 182+ days a year. My guess is that it is not well-defined and therefore generates minimal revenue. I also can't tell if this applies to office buildings or is more for street level commercial real estate.