Fan Nation
Forums
Forum list
Search forums
Rules & Policies
Podcast
Mobile App
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Shop
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Horned Frog Athletics
Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum
Fred's at TCU
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BABYFACE" data-source="post: 2867781" data-attributes="member: 159"><p>Have seen both sides of the story when it comes to tenants and holding companies/landlords.</p><p></p><p>Most commonly, the landlord is overvaluing their property and tenants leave because it becomes no longer a profitable situation. Then the tenant moves out and the space sits vacant for 1-2 years. Well, that didn’t go so well for the landlord, did it? But that is common with big holding companies. Logic is not applicable with them.</p><p></p><p>From a logic standpoint: If the landlord thinks they should get a higher rent but the tenant is not willing. Give the tenant 6 month extensions until the space is leased out. Landlord gets the higher rent on next tenant but doesn’t lose rent with space sitting vacant. </p><p></p><p>Another issue is overvalued property where profitability over the long haul is not sustainable for a chunk of businesses. Again, holding companies would rather have vacant spots than adjust. The hotel industry model does pretty well with adjusting to demand. An empty room is zero income generated. A discounted room is better than a empty room.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BABYFACE, post: 2867781, member: 159"] Have seen both sides of the story when it comes to tenants and holding companies/landlords. Most commonly, the landlord is overvaluing their property and tenants leave because it becomes no longer a profitable situation. Then the tenant moves out and the space sits vacant for 1-2 years. Well, that didn’t go so well for the landlord, did it? But that is common with big holding companies. Logic is not applicable with them. From a logic standpoint: If the landlord thinks they should get a higher rent but the tenant is not willing. Give the tenant 6 month extensions until the space is leased out. Landlord gets the higher rent on next tenant but doesn’t lose rent with space sitting vacant. Another issue is overvalued property where profitability over the long haul is not sustainable for a chunk of businesses. Again, holding companies would rather have vacant spots than adjust. The hotel industry model does pretty well with adjusting to demand. An empty room is zero income generated. A discounted room is better than a empty room. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Which team did TCU defeat in the College Football Playoffs?
Post reply
Forums
Horned Frog Athletics
Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum
Fred's at TCU
Top