The article seems mostly about noticing a fun coincidence backed by anecdotal evidence, except I’m currently going through the same thing, so I’m lending the theory more weight. (The elevators were always fine; now, two years later, they’re constantly out, and the garage door is busted for the first time.)

My thought was that it could plausibly be that renting goes in cycles: the building is desperate for renters, so they fix everything, advertise, and so on. Then, once they’re full, the company cuts costs by reducing maintenance. Then they lose renters, and the cycle continues.

However, I then thought about my last two buildings, which were cheaper, and things were just broken right from the start, so… who knows.