Curious, what makes this move (and all the rest of the WFH companies) permanent? Won't in the future when things go back to normal the cities will pressure the companies to have their employees go back into offices to make the economy moving? You know, coffee shops, restaurants, etc need to survive.
The longer this goes, the more normalized it becomes. There’s also the fact that some percentage of workers have made it very clear that they do not want to return to an office, and companies fear mass attrition to permanent WFH companies if they don’t setup a release valve.
A VP recently told me that he expected 15-20% attrition if he demanded a return to the office once this is over.
On the coffee shop front, the most likely outcome is that remote workers will move to smaller cities away from NYC and coastal CA. Coffee shops and restaurants will still get patrons, but there will be more of them in Denver and Austin than SF and LA.
> You know, coffee shops, restaurants, etc need to survive.
in general, yeah, but do the shops and restaurants that exist to serve downtown / office park workers need to survive? I'm not convinced that WFH changes the net demand for these services. if these businesses move away from places people commute to and move into places where people actually live, I would consider that an improvement. I'd much rather spend my food budget on happy hour at a local pub than a rushed 30 minute lunch.
> if these businesses move away from places people commute to and move into places where people actually live,
Here in the UK,I'm hoping this will happen. We've been suffering the 'death' of the local high street for years, and many local communities are non-existent because there are no longer local social hubs. For every coffee shop or pub closed in the centre of the cities, another could open in a rural area. We'd all be better off for this, I know it.
More people working from home maybe have a small impact for local restaurant/pubs etc. but i doubt it will be significant enough to revive somewhere with a "non-existent" local community.
The reason food/drink service does so well around offices is that there are 1000s of people in multi-floor offices in one area. All within 5-20mins walk of good places to go.
An average town may have more people, but they are spread over miles in houses or flats. Unless you live right in the town centre the convenience of going out to eat/drink is just not the same.
Popping out after work with friends (or just colleagues) is convenient for everyone as well. At home you have to round up your mates and all agree on a time.
People will still go to coffee shops and restaurants. It's just that the location of those places will move from office hubs to residential neighborhoods. That's a good thing.
I'm sure co-working spaces will still have high demand so many office spaces would turn into that.
I don't think so. I don't live in SF but I'm sure it's a nice place to live. There's still a lot going on there, like universities, food, diversity, etc. Rent and house prices in the city are likely to go down, which is a good thing given how insanely expensive it is right now. Long term it might be even good for the city.
The tax deficit for this year is going to really hurt the city. SF makes most of its income in tourism and tech. There isn’t much travel right now and there is a tech exodus. So the deficit is growing everyday.
Bars and restaurants have been either on strict lockdown or reduced capacity since early March, a lot of them that have been around for decades are closing.
So now we have an exodus of small businesses, tech workers, and reduced tourism.
The city will have to convince tech workers and small business owners to come back while they probably increase taxes to work off the deficit. The lack of small businesses and increase in squalor will impact tourism even after COVID and the longer COVID goes on the more damage there is.
I don’t see the SF govt cutting expenses until it’s absolutely necessary. Overall it seems like an uphill battle. I feel really bad for the small business owners in SF who are likely never going to recover from this.
That's not a SF only problem. All major cities (NYC, Amsterdam, Paris, etc etc) suffer from reduced tourism and tax money. There's no question that a city like SF would suffer more than many other cities given high percentage of its tourism is business travel. But the city still has a lot going for it besides tech. And at least FAANG for the most part will still attract many people to the area as the majority of them are not going fully remote yet. The city can also try to attract more diverse industries such as pharma companies that still require office space. They can also increase property taxes for a few years if they need to. Yes, SF as the center of tech as we know it is probably dead, but it doesn't mean the city is dead.
