GM's Thread About Everything/GM's Thread About Nothing (23 Viewers)

[cosjobs]

I have a full can of Billy Beer that I'm going to open on my deathbed. It'll be fine.

So you're you going to wait your entire life and blow your entire legacy on your deathbed?

 

[cosjobs]

I'm never going back to work unless I carpool

 

[Terminalxylem]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

 

[General Malaise]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

 

[cosjobs]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

First of all, you spend about 50% of the building's value retrofitting plumbing to get up to code for residential occupancy.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

First of all, you spend about 50% of the building's value retrofitting plumbing to get up to code for residential occupancy.

And electrical

 

[urbanhack]

GM Hack cornhole

It happened.

 

[Terminalxylem]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

No idea.

Just seems really contrived insisting people come to work to use the space, when we have a shortage of affordable housing.

I realize one can’t just wave a wand to change commercial to residential RE, but I’m guessing there’s ways it could happen.

 

[General Malaise]

Well, we don't really need to send kids to school to get an education but we do so because they need the socialization.

Grownups need it too. This working from home is not helping us socialize. It's good for you to go mingle with people you hate and long for a lunch break.

We run the risk of turning into hermits.

 

[-fish-]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

First of all, you spend about 50% of the building's value retrofitting plumbing to get up to code for residential occupancy.

And electrical

In states have gone to the IBC instead of the UBC, the residential codes and commercial codes aren't all that different. Yeah, you need to add some showers/baths to commercial spaces, but other than that it isn't all that difficult to convert it. Electrical wouldn't be a major change.

Is the cost worth it to rent out residential space instead of letting commercial space sit empty? Right now that's the issue I'm seeing commercial owners dealing with. It's borderline.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

First of all, you spend about 50% of the building's value retrofitting plumbing to get up to code for residential occupancy.

And electrical

In states have gone to the IBC instead of the UBC, the residential codes and commercial codes aren't all that different. Yeah, you need to add some showers/baths to commercial spaces, but other than that it isn't all that difficult to convert it. Electrical wouldn't be a major change.

Is the cost worth it to rent out residential space instead of letting commercial space sit empty? Right now that's the issue I'm seeing commercial owners dealing with. It's borderline.

The problem with electrical is getting each unit on its own meter. Giant PIA

 

[Uruk-Hai]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

First of all, you spend about 50% of the building's value retrofitting plumbing to get up to code for residential occupancy.

And electrical

In states have gone to the IBC instead of the UBC, the residential codes and commercial codes aren't all that different. Yeah, you need to add some showers/baths to commercial spaces, but other than that it isn't all that difficult to convert it. Electrical wouldn't be a major change.

Is the cost worth it to rent out residential space instead of letting commercial space sit empty? Right now that's the issue I'm seeing commercial owners dealing with. It's borderline.

The problem with electrical is getting each unit on its own meter. Giant PIA

Sure, but it's also a giant PITA to have 30,000 sq ft sitting empty and not generating revenue. Retrofits wouldn't be cheap but they'd pay for themselves pretty quickly.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

First of all, you spend about 50% of the building's value retrofitting plumbing to get up to code for residential occupancy.

And electrical

In states have gone to the IBC instead of the UBC, the residential codes and commercial codes aren't all that different. Yeah, you need to add some showers/baths to commercial spaces, but other than that it isn't all that difficult to convert it. Electrical wouldn't be a major change.

Is the cost worth it to rent out residential space instead of letting commercial space sit empty? Right now that's the issue I'm seeing commercial owners dealing with. It's borderline.

The problem with electrical is getting each unit on its own meter. Giant PIA

Sure, but it's also a giant PITA to have 30,000 sq ft sitting empty and not generating revenue. Retrofits wouldn't be cheap but they'd pay for themselves pretty quickly.

I get it. And am all for it.

My family bought 3 interconnected warehouse buildings in DTLA in 1980. We turned them into 26 separate loft living units. It’s where I grew up. The biggest hurdle from a cost and inspection perspective was installing separate water and power meters. So much so that we didn’t do it. Water and power remained on one system. You were billed based on. The size and occupancy of your unit. One had to accept this set up in teh lease. It worked for. A mom and pop shop. Doubtful that it would for a multi hundred/thousand unit building.

 

[cosjobs]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

First of all, you spend about 50% of the building's value retrofitting plumbing to get up to code for residential occupancy.

And electrical

In states have gone to the IBC instead of the UBC, the residential codes and commercial codes aren't all that different. Yeah, you need to add some showers/baths to commercial spaces, but other than that it isn't all that difficult to convert it. Electrical wouldn't be a major change.

Is the cost worth it to rent out residential space instead of letting commercial space sit empty? Right now that's the issue I'm seeing commercial owners dealing with. It's borderline.

It's not so much the difference in codes, but the difference in customers demands. Most people leasing 2000 sf office aren't going to require 3 baths, w/d laundry room and full kitchen. Retrofitting that to any code will be extremely costly. It was an absolute deal like when I researched it about a decade ago and I'm pretty sure it's be a lot more expensive now.
As far as electrical, you could do an all bills lease and save boatloads.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

First of all, you spend about 50% of the building's value retrofitting plumbing to get up to code for residential occupancy.

And electrical

In states have gone to the IBC instead of the UBC, the residential codes and commercial codes aren't all that different. Yeah, you need to add some showers/baths to commercial spaces, but other than that it isn't all that difficult to convert it. Electrical wouldn't be a major change.

Is the cost worth it to rent out residential space instead of letting commercial space sit empty? Right now that's the issue I'm seeing commercial owners dealing with. It's borderline.

The problem with electrical is getting each unit on its own meter. Giant PIA

Sure, but it's also a giant PITA to have 30,000 sq ft sitting empty and not generating revenue. Retrofits wouldn't be cheap but they'd pay for themselves pretty quickly.

I get it. And am all for it.

My family bought 3 interconnected warehouse buildings in DTLA in 1980. We turned them into 26 separate loft living units. It’s where I grew up. The biggest hurdle from a cost and inspection perspective was installing separate water and power meters. So much so that we didn’t do it. Water and power remained on one system. You were billed based on. The size and occupancy of your unit. One had to accept this set up in teh lease. It worked for. A mom and pop shop. Doubtful that it would for a multi hundred/thousand unit building.

Gotcha.

 

[Scoresman]

Well, we don't really need to send kids to school to get an education but we do so because they need the socialization.

Grownups need it too. This working from home is not helping us socialize. It's good for you to go mingle with people you hate and long for a lunch break.

We run the risk of turning into hermits.

I agree, but I dont need the corporation I work for looking after my social health. I can do that on my own, and without having to sit in traffic 2 hours a day.

 

[nirad3]

We have a commercial real estate crisis in this country. The easiest fix is to force folks back into the office to justify the expense. I promise you, the last thing this country needs is a real estate crash.

My company owns its own home office. They're definitely using "in-person collaboration" as some BS excuse to justify having everyone that just happens to live close to the home office come in 3 days a week. I VERY rarely "collaborate" with anyone in person when I'm at my office. It's incredibly unfair.

They need to justify the expense of having a home office. It's not "free". There is somebody somewhere examining every expense and asking for a breakdown of people using the office to keep it open and maintain the costs associated with that....utilities, insurance, taxes, etc.

It might be shareholders it might be a board it might be equity holders - the higher ups want financial justification for keeping the lights on in this building.

It's a math problem.

You may be right, but forcing people to come in to use unnecessary commercial real estate is pretty absurd, particularly when you consider our concomitant housing crisis.

ETA I see @rockaction covered it

Who pays the owners of the buildings for the new occupants who will live there? The occupants or?

I like the idea just wondering how this works financially.

No idea.

Just seems really contrived insisting people come to work to use the space, when we have a shortage of affordable housing.

I realize one can’t just wave a wand to change commercial to residential RE, but I’m guessing there’s ways it could happen.

Funny because I actually work IN affordable housing.

 

[Idiot Boxer]

From a managerial perspective, managing seasoned employees remotely works fine. On-boarding and managing new hires is frought with hurdles and doesn't work very well.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Well, we don't really need to send kids to school to get an education but we do so because they need the socialization.

Grownups need it too. This working from home is not helping us socialize. It's good for you to go mingle with people you hate and long for a lunch break.

We run the risk of turning into hermits.

Meh. There are numerous other ways to form social networks, and I’m not talking about electronic social media. Minus unnecessary work commutes, there should be even more time for meaningful human interaction.

Also, while some home schoolers do OK, I think we do need to send most kids to school.

 

[kevzilla]

I have a plan to turn my local mall into senior living. You wouldn't need to get rid of all the retail; I imagine Walgreens would love to be on-site. Plenty of room for urgent care, too, which might save a few ER visits. The majority of the vast parking lot would be converted to a par-three golf course, pickleball, etc. The main retrofitting challenge might not be plumbing, but windows. Folks are going to insist on those, too.

 

[RC94]

I have a plan to turn my local mall into senior living. You wouldn't need to get rid of all the retail; I imagine Walgreens would love to be on-site. Plenty of room for urgent care, too, which might save a few ER visits. The majority of the vast parking lot would be converted to a par-three golf course, pickleball, etc. The main retrofitting challenge might not be plumbing, but windows. Folks are going to insist on those, too.

I'm not a senior yet, but I do agree that they will want windows.

 

[mr. furley]

I have a plan to turn my local mall into senior living. You wouldn't need to get rid of all the retail; I imagine Walgreens would love to be on-site. Plenty of room for urgent care, too, which might save a few ER visits. The majority of the vast parking lot would be converted to a par-three golf course, pickleball, etc. The main retrofitting challenge might not be plumbing, but windows. Folks are going to insist on those, too.

forget windows. just give me the golf and a killer arcade.

wonder how the mall conversions in Illinois are working out https://archive.ph/ponEA -

 

[-fish-]

I have a plan to turn my local mall into senior living. You wouldn't need to get rid of all the retail; I imagine Walgreens would love to be on-site. Plenty of room for urgent care, too, which might save a few ER visits. The majority of the vast parking lot would be converted to a par-three golf course, pickleball, etc. The main retrofitting challenge might not be plumbing, but windows. Folks are going to insist on those, too.

This is a great idea.