>

This shows a very limited knowledge of the breadth and scope of successful businesses. 
A successful wholesaler will likely operate out of the cheapest warehouse space they can find, because that increases their already slim margins. A successful holding company may operate out of a nondescript office building. Etc.
History is littered with failed startups that overpaid for offices in prestigious locations. >

Capcom is over 40 years old I would not call that a fail and it’s still standing. >

Sure, but I can name a dozen companies that failed despite their fancy offices. 
Offices don’t tell you about financial success >

Not necessarily. For example, you might have a very successful import business. All you need is a large warehouse in the crappy industrial part of town to store your goods, and maybe a small nondescript rented office. 
There are plenty of industries that don't rely on customer-facing prestige, and just have small, utilitarian office space but still earn a lot of money. >

How does that apply to any of the business I have listed. >

Your CMV is "You can measure the success of a business by its location." You gave some examples of businesses, but didn't limit the scope of your argument to only those businesses. 
If you mean "You can measure the success of a very small subset of businesses by their location," you should have specified that. >

If people want to visit your business there going to judge the area that it’s in. For example there is a sports complex in an area that is not somewhere people would want to go to at night.