A zero sum game implies that when one party wins someone else must lose by an equal amount. But in this world, most things aren’t actually zero sum. But real estate in particular is about value creation for all parties.
Buildings are owned by investors that have an interest in owning an asset. Their model is built around the physical asset. They don’t need the space for themselves or their operations but they make it available to others in exchange for a cash flow.
Corporations commonly lease buildings. They value the flexibility to change greater than the value of the physical asset. Owning an asset can often be detrimental to the business because it ties up cash that could be invested back into core operations. Real estate is a significant cost component to the business as a whole and is usually looked at as a cost center.
Business units are the functional groups of a corporation. They also have a vested interest in real estate but specifically around the market characteristics around the building. The building itself is nice, but it is really just a gateway to a workforce, customer base or operating cost structure. Often the actual cost of the lease is negligible and saving a buck or two a square foot makes no difference to the decision they are making.
The dynamics between these three groups is what makes any potential real estate decision a wild west show down between different ways of evaluating value. In the best real estate agreements all three parties leave the table extremely happy. And the percent of deals where all parties are happy is probably greater than most people would guess.
0 thoughts on “Real Estate is the anti-zero sum game”