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

Our Commitment to Trust & Safety

blog.airbnb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 177 posts

Re: Our Commitment to Trust & Safety

#63

Post by rapcal »

I thought the post started well with the "we screwed up" tone. It sounded personal and felt sincere. However, along the way it shifted 180 degrees to a very cold business-centric approach.

Nonetheless, I think Airbnb is finally starting to have a clue on how to properly handle this crisis.

But what intrigued me the most in this whole thing was Michael Arrington's position on TechCrunch. He set this thing on fire, giving it a very aggressive kind of coverage. I wonder: will he now invest on Airbnb, as they're now supposedly going through another funding round? And if so, how much less will he have to pay for the same equity compared to 1 month ago? I'd like a little disclosure on that...

Re: Our Commitment to Trust & Safety

#65

Post by JimmyL »

yid wrote: post #44
JimmyL wrote: post #28

Two things immediately pop out from this: "Earlier this week, I wrote a blog post trying to explain the situation, but it didn’t reflect my true feelings." I'm not sure how I feel about this line (I assume it's referring to his TC post). On one hand, it's nice that he's now 'fessing up with a this-is-how-I-feel post. On the other, it's a pretty clear admission that he's had no problems in the past sending out PR spin…

> Could I then sue the insurance company as well, for helping my tenant break the conditions of their lease? The decision to break the conditions of the lease was solely your tenant's decision. Any sane insurance company will either verify the tenant's ability to rent out their place, or will void the contract if they discover later that the tenant did not have the legal right to rent out their place. Most likely, if…

I agree - but isn't this then a huge out for Airbnb, in terms of reducing the number of people that will actually be covered under this? NY has its well-known laws that make most Airbnb listing contrary to State law, and in my lease (for example) it specifically says that I can't rent it out to people without the landlord's permission - which I think is similar to most boilerplate leases.

Given that, would all the damage to EJ's stuff even be covered by the policy?

Re: Our Commitment to Trust & Safety

#66

Post by drgath »

ScottWhigham wrote: post #45
drgath wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a home owner and someone who has used airbnb, trust me, $50k will more than cover everything in pretty much every place airbnb rents out. Just because someplace costs $200k doesn't mean it costs $200k to rebuild from the ground up (a lot is in property, structure, etc...). Realistically, you'd really have to try hard to do $50k+ damage to a typical airbnb property without the cops being called as it is happening.

"Just because someplace costs $200k doesn't mean it costs $200k to rebuild from the ground up " In Dallas (where I live), a structure usually costs much more to tear down and rebuild new than it is currently worth. For example, you might get a mortgage on a $250,000 10yo house here yet your insurance will be for $375,000 for that reason.

True. I was just thinking of typical airbnb apartment rentals, where the property owner only owns the "walls-in" portion of the unit.

Re: Our Commitment to Trust & Safety

#68

Post by lotharbot »

chegra wrote: post #55
swombat wrote: post #3

I wonder if this will be killed like http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2834066 ...

A story can't be killed if it has ten comments on it. You were one away. I asked a question that died with 61 points. But knowing that it only takes 10 flags to kill a story, I wouldn't be surprise to know that AirBnB has ten diehard supporters.

I'm not particularly a supporter of AirBnB.

I'm just a supporter of a crap-free HN. Thus, I flag stories that don't add anything new to the discussion. I know there are at least ten others like me...

Re: Our Commitment to Trust & Safety

#69

Post by brianchesky »

mef wrote: post #5

Seems like a pretty good response to the situation, especially the host insurance, 24-hour customer service, and improved guest verification. For Brian Chesky's sake I hope the SFPD actually have a suspect in custody this time.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/techchron/detail?entry_i...
Post reply on HN