[mikeklaas]

It's sensible in San Francisco because having an active renter makes a property worth significantly less.

Why? You basically cannot kick evict a renter or raise their rent.

[htormey]

Doesn’t that depend on the age of the building? I thought rent control was 1970s and earlier? That being said, SF is generally very tenant/sub tenant friendly in its laws.

[enahs-sf]

Even still, landlords fear legal repercussions so much that they're willing to let a lot slide. When I moved out of my SF apartment, a plant I had had damaged the floor and my landlord was willing to eat the cost provided we moved out swiftly. Replacing the floors probably set him back a couple grand, but evicting tenants could be far more expensive.

[cheriot]

Sitting empty it's hemorrhaging cash, which isn't a great quality for investors.