HOW TO MINIMISE THE BIGGEST RISKS IN COMMERCIAL PROPERTY INVESTING

Commercial property can deliver higher yields, longer leases, and more passive income than residential. But with greater returns come greater risks. The rules are different, the stakes are higher, and one misstep can turn a promising asset into a financial burden.

Here, property expert Abdullah Nouh outlines five of the biggest risks in commercial investing and how to manage them strategically.

1. Vacancy risk

Vacancies in commercial property cut deeper than in residential. An empty building means no rent, yet you’re still footing the bill for rates, insurance and maintenance.

This is especially dangerous in oversupplied markets. In major CBDs like Melbourne and Sydney, office vacancy rates have climbed as high as 30 per cent. In such environments, landlords often need to offer high-end fit-outs or generous incentives to attract tenants.

How to minimise it: Invest in tightly held, high-demand locations. Choose properties with secure, long-term leases and flexible layouts that can suit multiple industries if a tenant moves out.

2. Weak lease structures

Not all leases offer equal protection. Some may appear strong – long-term, high rent, decent yield – but lack real security for the landlord. Some tenants can exit with minimal penalty. Others sign inflated leases that look good on sale but collapse at renewal.

How to minimise it: Scrutinise lease terms. Know how rent increases are structured, whether there are break clauses, and whether the rent reflects market conditions. Favour leases with guarantees, security deposits, or cash bonds – and always vet the financial health of the tenant.

3. Overpaying

A high yield doesn’t always mean a good deal. A 7.5 per cent return from a regional tenant in a shaky industry may be far riskier than a 5.5 per cent return from a stable, ASX-listed tenant in a prime location. Chasing numbers without context exposes you to tenant defaults, falling rents, or limited resale options.

How to minimise it: Focus on tenant quality and lease sustainability, not just the headline yield. Understand the tenant’s industry and how it might weather an economic downturn. Always base your valuation on true market rent – not inflated or unsustainable figures.

4, Market volatility

Commercial sectors respond differently to economic shifts. Retail has been hit by e-commerce, while office spaces face challenges from hybrid working. Yet some sectors – logistics, healthcare, childcare – have proven resilient.

How to minimise it: Target essential services less vulnerable to economic cycles. Stay across industry trends and adjust your portfolio as needed. Diversify across sectors and regions to spread risk.

5. Finance and liquidity

Commercial finance is trickier than residential. It requires larger deposits, stricter checks, and often hinges on lease strength, not your personal income. Selling can also be slower – especially if your tenant is weak or the lease is short.

How to minimise it: Use brokers who understand lease-doc lending, where loans are based on rental income. Buy properties with strong leases in prime locations to ensure broader buyer appeal. Always plan your exit strategy and maintain cash buffers to manage tenant turnover or delayed sales.

Commercial property isn’t for everyone – but for those who know the risks and manage them well, it can be a powerful tool for building wealth. Smart investors don’t just buy for today. They plan for what could go wrong and structure their deals to survive it.

Abdullah Nouh is the founder of Mecca Property Group, a boutique buyer’s agency in Melbourne, helping Australians build wealth through strategic property investment.

It’s the corporate gamble of the moment: Can you run a company, increasing sales and juicing profits, without adding people?

American employers are increasingly making the calculation that they can keep the size of their teams flat—or shrink through layoffs—without harming their businesses.

Part of that thinking is the belief that artificial intelligence will be used to pick up some of the slack and automate more processes. Companies are also hesitant to make any moves in an economy many still describe as uncertain.

JPMorgan Chase’s chief financial officer told investors recently that the bank now has a “very strong bias against having the reflective response” to hire more people for any given need. Aerospace and defense company RTX boasted last week that its sales rose even without adding employees.

Goldman Sachs , meanwhile, sent a memo to staffers this month saying the firm “will constrain head count growth through the end of the year” and reduce roles that could be more efficient with AI. Walmart , the nation’s largest private employer, also said it plans to keep its head count roughly flat over the next three years, even as its sales grow.

“If people are getting more productive, you don’t need to hire more people,” Brian Chesky , Airbnb’s chief executive, said in an interview. “I see a lot of companies pre-emptively holding the line, forecasting and hoping that they can have smaller workforces.”

Airbnb employs around 7,000 people, and Chesky says he doesn’t expect that number to grow much over the next year. With the help of AI, he said he hopes that “the team we already have can get considerably more work done.”

Many companies seem intent on embracing a new, ultralean model of staffing, one where more roles are kept unfilled and hiring is treated as a last resort. At Intuit , every time a job comes open, managers are pushed to justify why they need to backfill it, said Sandeep Aujla , the company’s chief financial officer. The new rigor around hiring helps combat corporate bloat.

“That typical behavior that settles in—and we’re all guilty of it—is, historically, if someone leaves, if Jane Doe leaves, I’ve got to backfill Jane,” Aujla said in an interview. Now, when someone quits, the company asks: “Is there an opportunity for us to rethink how we staff?”

Intuit has chosen not to replace certain roles in its finance, legal and customer-support functions, he said. In its last fiscal year, the company’s revenue rose 16% even as its head count stayed flat, and it is planning only modest hiring in the current year.

The desire to avoid hiring or filling jobs reflects a growing push among executives to see a return on their AI spending. On earnings calls, mentions of ROI and AI investments are increasing, according to an analysis by AlphaSense, reflecting heightened interest from analysts and investors that companies make good on the millions they are pouring into AI.

Many executives hope that software coding assistants and armies of digital agents will keep improving—even if the current results still at times leave something to be desired.

The widespread caution in hiring now is frustrating job seekers and leading many employees within organizations to feel stuck in place, unable to ascend or take on new roles, workers and bosses say.

Inside many large companies, HR chiefs also say it is becoming increasingly difficult to predict just how many employees will be needed as technology takes on more of the work.

Some employers seem to think that fewer employees will actually improve operations.

Meta Platforms this past week said it is cutting 600 jobs in its AI division, a move some leaders hailed as a way to cut down on bureaucracy.

“By reducing the size of our team, fewer conversations will be required to make a decision, and each person will be more load-bearing and have more scope and impact,” Alexandr Wang , Meta’s chief AI officer, wrote in a memo to staff seen by The Wall Street Journal.

Though layoffs haven’t been widespread through the economy, some companies are making cuts. Target on Thursday said it would cut about 1,000 corporate employees, and close another 800 open positions, totaling around 8% of its corporate workforce. Michael Fiddelke , Target’s incoming CEO, said in a memo sent to staff that too “many layers and overlapping work have slowed decisions, making it harder to bring ideas to life.”

A range of other employers, from the electric-truck maker Rivian to cable and broadband provider Charter Communications , have announced their own staff cuts in recent weeks, too.

Operating with fewer people can still pose risks for companies by straining existing staffers or hurting efforts to develop future leaders, executives and economists say. “It’s a bit of a double-edged sword,” said Matthew Martin , senior U.S. economist at Oxford Economics. “You want to keep your head count costs down now—but you also have to have an eye on the future.”