• Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I think it’s a tragedy of the commons type scenario. If they all act together and force everyone back to the office, then the real estate will be used and have value. If they all don’t then all the real estate becomes worthless.

    You’re right though, each of them individually could sell the property, or lease it and come out ahead. As soon as that starts though, it becomes a game of hot potato, who holds the buildings when they lose their value?

    • penguin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Very true. I also believe though that CEOs essentially never do anything for the common good of other companies or even the entire planet. If they can earn 0.00001% more revenue by firing a bunch of people, or polluting, they won’t think twice about it.

      So if they could earn more by leasing their office space to another company, they would do the same thing (if they were acting equally logically/pragmatically) but I believe it’s different in this case because of my personal opinion that it’s simply the preference of the upper management types for various reasons.

      But not every CEO has forced people back. Many have embraced how it’s the future of office work.