101–110 of 362 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Rent caps are never a good idea, they have so many unforseen consequences. Compared to uncapped rent that doesn't have any?
Uncapped rent will lead to people getting priced out of their homes by the first person willing to outbid them. Nothing unforeseen about that.
Put me in the camp that's very anti-AirBnB as a resident who doesn't want where I lived turned into a hotel. I live in NYC. It's a problem. None of this is a surprise, so much so that AirBnB seems to be aware of this and is acting in a way that's, at best, ethically challenged and, at worst, illegal eg deleting listings before giving data to the state of NY that "shows" most hosts only have one unit [1]. If people wa…
You're simply demonstrating NIMBYism. You get to stay in one of the most geographically desirable locations in the world and in order to pay lower rent you want to prevent others who live in much less geographically desirable places from renting units in your locale so that they can get to enjoy something you get to enjoy year round, for a few days of the year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The experience of it happening in certain places where I live. Lots of nice places are now rented in AirBnB for what amounts to their old monthly rent but now asked for for a weekly rental or less.
That doesn't mean they are more lucrative. Property can be empty half the time and Airbnb takes a massive commission on the earnings.
But the fact that they are kept that way instead of reverting to regular residential renting means that they are indeed more lucrative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the kind of pluck and industriousness that made this country great.
Thank you, somebody who gets it. "But my neighbors are complaining!" has somehow trumped "It's my property." in the modern age. If neighbors don't like what their neighborhood is becoming, they should move. Aside from homeowners group contracts, a person should be able to do as they wish with what they own. I'd bet that's the feeling of a good majority of people on this site regarding computer equipment and personal…
Even if it affects others? I should be able to turn my apartment on the floor above yours into a nightclub, because it's my property?
If I choose to Jailbreak my iPhone so I can tweak it the way I see fit, that's a decision that affects no one else.
Is this surprising at all? Most "sharing" apps are now overrun by professionals in their field. The apps help the professional (or company) achieve zero cost customer acquisition cost. In case the apps do catch up, these guys end up being "promoted" because they are a good fit. The pros make for much better "sales target" for these sharing apps.
Uber started out as ride sharing, now it's an international taxi service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it further reduces the number of homes available for people to actually live (which is why we have zoning laws), which inflates rent/housing prices. This forces the bottom rung out of the city, because they can't afford to live there, and now minimum wage jobs (which we need to run the services people want) can't be filled, artists and musicians disappear, and the city becomes a place only for tourists and th…
Did you know hotels take up space that could be used for housing as well? It's crazy, but I looked it up and it's true. Using urban space for hotels, stores, and other amenities absolutely reduces the number of housing units thus potentially driving up prices for renters. In fact, this is a major factor in urban planning. Assuming that this is unique to AirBNB is poorly thought out.
I think there are only a few cities, like NYC, where it creates a significant problem. Where it is a problem, laws and regulations should be enacted in response and companies like AirBnB should be cooperative.
Put me in the camp that's very anti-AirBnB as a resident who doesn't want where I lived turned into a hotel. I live in NYC. It's a problem. None of this is a surprise, so much so that AirBnB seems to be aware of this and is acting in a way that's, at best, ethically challenged and, at worst, illegal eg deleting listings before giving data to the state of NY that "shows" most hosts only have one unit [1]. If people wa…
>Put me in the camp that's very anti-AirBnB as a resident who doesn't want where I lived turned into a hotel. I live in NYC. You're simply demonstrating NIMBYism. You get to stay in one of the most geographically desirable locations in the world and in order to pay lower rent you want to prevent others who live in much less geographically desirable places from renting units in your locale so that they can get to enjo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A whole apartment/house does have some amenities that aren't in a decent hotel, though. Like a kitchen. Or enough beds for a group of 5. I appreciate those when traveling on a budget and/or with my family. - Airbnb employee.
Extended stay hotels will offer rooms with a kitchens, and can accommodate a family of 5, maybe just not for a price you like. Just be honest and say you like it cause its cheaper and you think your vacation is more important than the needs of residents.
And please let's keep this civil.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The experience of it happening in certain places where I live. Lots of nice places are now rented in AirBnB for what amounts to their old monthly rent but now asked for for a weekly rental or less.
That doesn't mean they are more lucrative. Property can be empty half the time and Airbnb takes a massive commission on the earnings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is it a problem, or what problems has it been causing in NYC? I understand the legality is questionable but I don't know why the laws exist in the first place.
It converts long term housing stock into short term housing, which benefits tourists with cheaper prices and increases the price for residents since both are competing for the same units. Basically, tourists are getting a free ride on the backs of residents. Its always been the other way around, tourists pay extra taxes and fees which go back to the city (and residents) and entrepreneurs build hotels which once again…
The neat property of this business model is that it's actually viral: the way to avoid getting screwed by AirBnBers next door is to rent your place out on AirBnB too, and then go stay in somebody else's AirBnB.
It can be interesting to try and consider the endgame of various startups' business models, basically what the world would look like if the economic inefficiency they exploit is arbitraged away entirely. YCombinator is a world where everyone is an entrepreneur, but the returns to entrepreneurship aren't much better than having a regular job, and everybody works much harder. Google is "information wants to be free", where everybody has full access to information and the market price of that is zero. Napster was that nobody would produce art or music; Facebook is that all socializing occurs online; Uber/DoorDash/PostMates and other sharing economy startups create a caste society where those without technical skills serve those who do. AirBnB's endgame is the destruction of the concept of residency. If they succeed in their mission and arbitrage away all inefficiencies in the housing market, they effectively institutionalize the digital nomad lifestyle, where everybody can live and work anywhere in the globe, and yet never has a permanent home.
I'll let other people judge whether that's a good or bad thing. To me, most social institutions are pretty arbitrary anyway, and I have confidence I could adapt to whatever world comes next. I'll say that they're riding a really powerful trend that's independent of any one corporation or individual: the Internet has made nearly all markets global, and so the idea of being tied to a particular place is becoming increasingly quaint for many people.