When transport and accommodation problems in urban centers have become increasingly common in recent years, a number of policymakers suggest companies relocate to rural settings. Although there are indeed certain benefits associated with this tenancy, I would argue that they are eclipsed by its demerits.
Granted, relocating businesses to the countryside is advantageous to much extent. One primary benefit is overcoming accommodation headaches. This is due to the fact that as companies move out of the downtown areas, many employees tend to move to be near their workplace, thus decreasing demand on housing. This can ease the population density, addressing accommodation shortage, unhygienic living conditions and the real estate bubble. Additionally, reduced population would result in decreased traffic volume and traffic related issues such as traffic jams or the lack of parking space.
Despite the above-mentioned arguments, I believe there are a number of clear disadvantages. One possible explanation for this reason is that relocating to rural spaces can be financially exhausting for businesses. If they shift, they ought to spend a large amount of money to hire new employees, to rent new workplaces or buy new facilities, thereby affecting their financial conditions and can lead to bankruptcy. Another drawback is the inconvenience for employees. This is in light of the fact that when they do not move to be near their workplaces, they ought to travel great distances to get there, leading to increased cost of their daily consumption.
In conclusion, while there are indeed merits posed by moving to satellite towns, its demerits including the risk of bankruptcy and inconvenience are more significant.