Why did you go quiet maggot ? Your slow brain finally got the picture of the scam he got caught running ?
First off, you can cut the personal attacks, they really only reflect poorly on you (Seriously, "maggot", are you in junior high?). If you'd like to come meet me in my office feel free to send me a PM and I'll be happy to extend you an invite to come down spend some time with you in person going over what we do. You can also share your experience starting and running businesses at that point, or you could do so here since you clearly seem to feel you know a lot about it. You can put up or shut up on that front. As to my point: 1. What someone does with their own salary once its been paid is entirely up to them. If I'm a VC, my CEO can spend his salary on wine, women, and blow or he can use it to buy office buildings, I'd actually prefer the latter. 2. If WeWork is on as shaky financial ground as you assert, then leasing a building to them is a very risky endeavor. You don't get paid "no matter what" if the company leasing your building goes out of business. Someone with a building could lease it to any of thousands of stable, creditworthy customers. If they choose to lease it to WeWork, again assuming that it's at arms length transaction terms, they're putting a vote of confidence in WeWork and voluntarily taking a risk on their behalf. 2. If I'm a VC and my CEO voluntarily takes the money he could have spent on anything and instead spends it on an office building that he then chooses to rent to the company (again, if it's at arms length terms) then it's a sign that he's both committed to the company and it removes some of the information asymmetry that naturally exists between company leaders and investors. Concentrating your risk as CEO even more on your own company is something you only do if you, with your most inside of knowledge, think is the best risk for your money, which is something you like to see if you're an investor. It also aligns your incentives with the company, if the company does well the CEO does well, if it goes bust he loses money on those leases along with losing his job. Bottom line, if a CEO of any company voluntarily puts his discretionary funds in a position where he would suffer a loss if the company failed it is a bullish sign for investors. That is what is occurring here, again given that the leases were at arms length terms. You may not like the guy or the company or just be pissed at the world today, but that doesn't change this fundamental way that especially VCs look at those they invest in.
Thank you for the kind words, although I'd have to disagree with the "most intelligent" part given some other folks here I look up to.