

Wouldn’t those businesses that own their offices still prefer to sell or rent a property if the business will run without it? Artificially filling a property with employees to “make use of” the property rather than get money out of it is a good way to be left holding the bag when other companies ditch their properties to save money and crash the market anyway. To your point, the property is still the same asset whether employees are in it or not; it costs money. I guess I’m not really buying the notion that businesses are banding together to lose money for the greater good of the business real estate market. The same companies that won’t even invest in obvious long-term profitability plans? Really?
See my other comment in this thread.