Technology

59605 readers

3403 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

500

‘Zombie Offices’ Spell Trouble for Some Banks - The New York Times (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 9 months ago by 1984@lemmy.today to c/technology@lemmy.world

122 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This is the real reason for companies wanting people back to the office.

All this talk about collaboration and team spirit is just the publicly given reason for wanting people back to the office.

The real reason is that now the owners of the buildings are losing money.

Cry me a river.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Hillock@feddit.de 2 points 9 months ago

There is no better alternative than turning these offices into housing. Forcing people to work in offices again is worse and keeping them empty is also worse.

A big advantage of converting them is there is already a lot of desirable infrastructure in place. Public transportation, shops, restaurants, everything is there already. Building apartment complexes at the edge of town might be cheaper but there usually is nothing there.

I also doubt that it's actually cheaper to raze and rebuild for that many buildings. The only real trouble is upgrading the plumbing. Everything else is definitely offset buy using the existing shell.

Some buildings have a floorplan that doesn't really work for residential but there is also no need to convert all offices. Pick the ones that are best suited and keep the remaining to satisfy the reduced need for office space.

The only real issue is that the current owner of the building obviously prefer just forcing people back into office since that's more profitable. So it would take government subsidies and incentives for them to make the switch more profitable. And then we are once again putting hundred of millions into the pockets of already rich people. But it's cheaper for the city and better for the people so while a tough pill to swallow, it's still beats any alternative.