A property manager has a chance for a management contract for a large commercial building that has been vacant for 2 years. The manager should insist upon a

In the context of managing a large commercial building that has been vacant for two years, insisting upon a minimum fee makes practical sense. This is because the property manager will face several challenges, such as potentially high vacancy rates, the need for extensive marketing, and significant effort to attract tenants to a previously unoccupied space. These factors may lead to uncertain income flows during the initial stages of management.

By negotiating a minimum fee, the property manager secures a guaranteed income regardless of the building's occupancy status in the early months. This arrangement provides financial stability and compels the property manager to invest time and resources into effectively marketing and leasing the property, knowing they have some baseline income to cover their operational costs. Additionally, a minimum fee can serve as a motivational factor for the manager to work harder to get the property leased.

Other choices, while valuable in different scenarios, do not directly address the unique challenges presented by this specific situation of managing a long-vacant commercial property. A comprehensive lease agreement provides terms for tenants but does not ensure income for the manager. A long-term contract could tie the property manager to a situation that may not yield immediate results, while a performance bond is generally related to financial protection for the owner in case of non-performance, not