The article talks about how some big companies, like IBM and Bank of America, are asking their workers to come back to the office even if they were working from home. They want them to work there at least three days a week. This is making some people worried because they liked working from home and moved to bigger houses or other places away from the city. Read from source...

- The title is misleading and sensationalist, implying that IBM's RTO policy is somehow detrimental to its employees' performance or that it has some hidden agenda. The truth is, IBM's RTO policy is a common practice among many companies in various industries, especially those that require face-to-face collaboration, client interaction, or security compliance. There is nothing inherently wrong or unethical about IBM's decision to mandate its workers to return to the office, nor is it evidence of poor management or corporate culture.
- The article relies heavily on anecdotal evidence and personal opinions from a few disgruntled employees who are unhappy with the RTO policy. These sources are not representative of the majority of IBM's workforce, who may have different preferences, needs, or expectations regarding remote or hybrid work arrangements. The article does not provide any concrete data or statistics to support its claim that IBM's RTO policy is "code for poor performance" or that it negatively impacts employees' productivity, well-being, or satisfaction.
- The article uses emotional language and tone, such as "or else", "forced", "threatened", "resentment", and "fear", to elicit a negative reaction from the readers and portray IBM as an oppressive, authoritarian, or uncaring employer. The article also implies that IBM's RTO policy is a result of its declining performance, market share, or innovation, without providing any factual basis or comparison with its competitors. This is a classic example of guilt-by-association fallacy and a straw man argument, as it misrepresents IBM's motives and goals for implementing the RTO policy.

1. Airbnb (NASDAQ:ABNB) - Buy with a target price of $200, potential upside of 36%. Airbnb has been benefiting from the recovery in travel demand and its strong brand recognition. The company is also investing in new growth areas such as experiences and long-term rentals to diversify its revenue streams and increase customer loyalty. However, there are some risks involved, such as the possibility of new COVID-19 variants, increased competition from alternative accommodation platforms, and regulatory challenges in certain markets.
2. Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZZ) - Buy with a target price of $4,000, potential upside of 58%. Amazon is the dominant player in the e-commerce market and has been expanding its presence in other sectors such as cloud computing, digital advertising, and entertainment. The company's customer loyalty, network effects, and innovation capabilities make it a formidable competitor in any industry. However, there are also some risks to consider, such as higher inflation, labor shortages, logistical bottlenecks, and regulatory scrutiny on its market power.