4 ms·

I speculate this is part of it, and this is tied to a lot of key people who can enforce this type of move. Big companies also want to legitimize their business

I speculate this is part of it, and this is tied to a lot of key people who can enforce this type of move. Big companies also want to legitimize their business by having a presence. Without any presence virtually anyone start competing them, chipping at their business.

DanielHB 2y ago
Both your arguments seems a bit tinfoil-hat. Grandparent is implying that all the execs making the RTO decisions are personally invested in business real state (why would multiple execs own a bunch of downtown real state?). Although a point could be made for companies who own their real state wanting to prop its value up before liquidating (so a pump and dump) it still stretches believability. You are implying most companies really think that much about long-term unquantifiable effects. I can see a better argument being made about executive with big ego likes sitting at the top of his ivory tower (his top-level corner-office) looking over the masses below him.
- grugagag 2y ago
  Im not implying most companies think long term, just the very large ones and their interests are tied to some commercial real eastate they don’t want to lose on. Im not sure I understand your tinfoil hat argument here, at least it doesn’t make sense to me in this context.
- heavyset_go 2y ago
  > Grandparent is implying that all the execs making the RTO decisions are personally invested in business real state (why would multiple execs own a bunch of downtown real state?) That is not what I am implying. The owner/investor class have portfolios that depend on commercial and prime real estate holding, and continuing to increase in, value. They might not personally own buildings themselves, but they own companies and financial instruments that do. Maybe execs themselves are lucky enough to be that asset rich, maybe they aren't, but it's their jobs to call the shots based on the desires of their respective boards.

DanielHB 2y ago

Both your arguments seems a bit tinfoil-hat. Grandparent is implying that all the execs making the RTO decisions are personally invested in business real state (why would multiple execs own a bunch of downtown real state?). Although a point could be made for companies who own their real state wanting to prop its value up before liquidating (so a pump and dump) it still stretches believability. You are implying most companies really think that much about long-term unquantifiable effects. I can see a better argument being made about executive with big ego likes sitting at the top of his ivory tower (his top-level corner-office) looking over the masses below him.

grugagag 2y ago
Im not implying most companies think long term, just the very large ones and their interests are tied to some commercial real eastate they don’t want to lose on. Im not sure I understand your tinfoil hat argument here, at least it doesn’t make sense to me in this context.
heavyset_go 2y ago
> Grandparent is implying that all the execs making the RTO decisions are personally invested in business real state (why would multiple execs own a bunch of downtown real state?) That is not what I am implying. The owner/investor class have portfolios that depend on commercial and prime real estate holding, and continuing to increase in, value. They might not personally own buildings themselves, but they own companies and financial instruments that do. Maybe execs themselves are lucky enough to be that asset rich, maybe they aren't, but it's their jobs to call the shots based on the desires of their respective boards.