Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NYC Renters Paid Extra $616M Thanks to Airbnb, Study Says

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 161 posts

Re: NYC Renters Paid Extra $616M Thanks to Airbnb, Study Says

#31

Post by wand3r »

dragonwriter wrote: post #11
loceng wrote: post #4

'Airbnb Inc. disputed the study’s findings, calling them “wrong on the facts” and containing “substantive issues with the methodology.”' Did Airbnb publish what these wrong facts and substantive issues are?

The odd thing is that AirBnB’s entire value proposition to hosts is that it increases realizable income from the property they control and make available through AirBnB; if true, especially in the presence of supply constraints, this has to increase market clearing prices. They are in a position where what they need hosts to believe is directly at odds with what they want policymakers (including people voting directl…

I think they mean that a room that is unused and not on the market can help you get extra income

Re: NYC Renters Paid Extra $616M Thanks to Airbnb, Study Says

#32

Post by alonmower »

lend000 wrote: post #16
TAForObvReasons wrote: post #2

> For each 1 percent of all residential units in a neighborhood listed on Airbnb, rents in that neighborhood went up 1.58 percent, Stringer said. The estimated $616 million impact is for 2016 alone.

I doubt these factors are statistically independent -- the most popular neighborhoods for tourists and yuppies have always seen prices grow faster relative to the overall metro, and more popular/high-growth/expensive neighborhoods will naturally attract more Airbnb hosts to take advantage of their location. In any case, assuming people travel the same amount, it is zero-sum (Airbnb saved NYC visitors 616 million doll…

Don't 'limit' tourism but yes, don't allow tourists to get price breaks at the expense of residents that rent in a city.

As it stands property owners and tourists are coming out on top. Property owners can now easily make more money renting short term than long term, this raises property prices (because, hey, i can buy that house and make a bunch of money renting it on AirBnB) while also reducing the rental housing stock (because houses that would have been rented to long term renters are now on AirBnB). So now, as a renter, I pay more for rent because I'm competing for fewer houses AND it's going to cost me more money to get into my first house. So I save less money per month because more goes to rent and I have to save up more money to put a down payment down on a house.

Now, sure, how big this effect is is up for debate but I think it's naive to assume it doesn't exist. I expect cities with housing crises that also don't rely too heavily on tourist revenue to start regulating short term rentals aggressively to combat this effect (this has already happened in many places).

Sure, if you're a tourist town and most properties are second/vacation homes then this is less of an issue but in growing cities where renters are already barely getting by this is going to continue coming to a head. Alas, homeowners are more likely to get out and vote and have more directly measurable skin in the game vs a renter who might be more transient and less aware of the effects that are conspiring to squeeze them out.

Re: NYC Renters Paid Extra $616M Thanks to Airbnb, Study Says

#33

Post by CodeWriter23 »

smsm42 wrote: post #7
loceng wrote: post #4

'Airbnb Inc. disputed the study’s findings, calling them “wrong on the facts” and containing “substantive issues with the methodology.”' Did Airbnb publish what these wrong facts and substantive issues are?

https://www.airbnbcitizen.com/airbnb-new-york-and-housing/

From that:

They do not address the possibility that the atypical minority (which presumably is apartments used exclusively for AirBNB and not otherwise occupied by a tenant) might cause the $626M rent increase illustrated by the study. This paragraph seems to be a diversionary tactic, "No, look only at these facts".

Re: NYC Renters Paid Extra $616M Thanks to Airbnb, Study Says

#35

Post by crawfordcomeaux »

JohnStudio wrote: post #12

People wanted disruption ... well that's what you get. Economics of capitalism at work.

Be careful what you wish for, especially if wishing for profit over anyone's well being or if wishing for disruption over sustainability.

I hypothesize an antidote to capitalism could be collaboratively learning how to sustainably contribute to all life's needs together through science, art, and love.

I'm very interested in picking apart this hypothesis. If you (the person reading this) disagree, would you be willing to specify the words you disagree with and/or specific examples explaining why you disagree? Same for if you agree <3

Re: NYC Renters Paid Extra $616M Thanks to Airbnb, Study Says

#36

Post by jedberg »

josephorjoe wrote: post #27

Is there really much evidence that the majority of Airbnb properties would otherwise be traditional "12 month lease" rental apartments if it were not for Airbnb. I mean, I'm sure there are a few, but if I'm a landlord, why would I give up having a stable tenant paying market rate rent for 12 months at a time for essentially managing a hotel room? Sure, the 'rent per day' is going to be a lot better with the hotel roo…

> but if I'm a landlord, why would I give up having a stable tenant paying market rate rent for 12 months at a time for essentially managing a hotel room.

As of today, there is a lot less paperwork involved, and also the tenant has fewer rights. If you rent for 12 months, and they stop paying you, it could take you many months to get rid of that person, and you'd never get the money back. You also have to find renters and negotiate leases yourself.

With AirBnB, they take care of the finding and negotiating part, and if you manage to get a popular spot, you'll make far more money with the short term rentals, even accounting for AirBnBs cut and any service providers you might need to maintain the place.

Re: NYC Renters Paid Extra $616M Thanks to Airbnb, Study Says

#38

Post by jabgrabdthrow »

dragonwriter wrote: post #11
loceng wrote: post #4

'Airbnb Inc. disputed the study’s findings, calling them “wrong on the facts” and containing “substantive issues with the methodology.”' Did Airbnb publish what these wrong facts and substantive issues are?

The odd thing is that AirBnB’s entire value proposition to hosts is that it increases realizable income from the property they control and make available through AirBnB; if true, especially in the presence of supply constraints, this has to increase market clearing prices. They are in a position where what they need hosts to believe is directly at odds with what they want policymakers (including people voting directl…

I ponder, are there more rooms getting listed that weren’t before (increasing supply and dropping price) or are existing rooms on the market becoming more marketable (increasing price directly with a fixed supply as you suggest). “Both” yes but ponder more with me

I ponder I ponder

I bet it depends on the city

Re: NYC Renters Paid Extra $616M Thanks to Airbnb, Study Says

#40

Post by kazinator »

loeg wrote: post #39

$616M / (⅔ * 8.5M) (Edit: was 8M) residents = about $109 (was: $77) per resident renter in 2016.

Residents are not renters. The number of renters in NYC was evidently around 5.4 million in 2016.

Even so, not every renter is a separate rental unit; dividing the figure by the number of rental units would be more useful since it would indicate the impact on the price of rent.

Post reply on HN