From this weeks Trepp wire:
https://soundcloud.com/the-treppwire-podcast/94-hotel-sales-comps-retail-earnings-return-to-office-rollbacks-eviction-ban-extension#t=33:30
Looks like the bank wants new space
Near the Irving Convention center (Google map that)
They are looking for about 400,000 sq ft.
Win win for the bank.
What this means is they can:
- * shed not only expensive real-estate in SF
- * but more importantly shed expensive hi cost California employees who have built deep connections to community in SF and/or are unwilling or unable to move,
- * cut corporate taxes in the process.
My guess is they want new space, but if there is existing space they would prefer that as it will more quickly help the bank eliminate costs.
Remember that it is legal to discriminate based on location - this is how they get away with offshoring. Moving corporate headquarters to Texas is a direct attack on California career employees and unfortunately likely a legal move.
The employee status is in question if they choose not to move. If employee says no, did the employee quit or did they get fired? The bank will probably offer similar position in new location or severance if the employee chooses not to go.
Those of you in California - what is the likelyhood you would move to Texas?