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

NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

news.cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 276 posts

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#171

Post by rayiner »

maxerickson wrote: post #167
rayiner wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much of what we consider to be profitable, high-growth business is about taking advantage of market failures. E.g. the advertising industry that bankrolls the internet is basically about taking advantage of cognitive biases to get people to make irrational purchasing decisions. Part of the success of e-commerce is due to the heroic efforts of UPS, etc, in reducing the cost of shipping over the years to make e-tailing…

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-success-story-of-chobani-... But maybe that is the exception that proves the rule. Or maybe you didn't mean dairy products.

Chobani is unusual in that it brought a different product to the market that was objectively better. There are other new players in the dairy industry, but a lot of that action is applying lifestyle marketing to food products (e.g. getting people to pay more for trendy food when they could get the same food for much less without the lifestyle brand). Think about stuff like flavored water--a product that couldn't get more fungible that exists because marketing makes it seem non-fungible.

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#172

Post by pavel_lishin »

invisible wrote: post #163
seren wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume that hotels have to comply to additional regulations (safety, hygiene, etc) and taxes. In this context, an AirBnB hotel would be a de facto hotels, without all the legal constraints. So this is not fair, to your competitors.

So it is OK for people to live there (health-wise) but not OK for people to stay there temporarily? I mean, if there are 200 people in a building and it burns down does it really matter if they were there temporarily or permanently? Bizarre. The only way justification I could see is that if it were not hygienic, there is a chance of a outbreak of a virus happening (but that is no different than the metro or a flea ma…

> * if there are 200 people in a building and it burns down does it really matter if they were there temporarily or permanently?*

It absolutely matters, and your scenario is a very serious one. Permanent residents know where the fire exits are, and which hallways are dead-ends. Temporary residents may not even be aware which windows open onto a fire escape.

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#173

Post by TeMPOraL »

nathanstitt wrote: post #127
baddox wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't, for example, run a tannery in your apartment. I would prefer that you could, in the (perhaps unlikely) scenario that it was allowed by the terms of your rental agreement. If it's your own property, go right ahead. > What's more, as a resident (and especially if I were an owner) I wouldn't want my building being a de facto hotel. Many residents would probably agree, and if enough agree, then there's no re…

You cannot be serious. Just because you happen to own the property does not give you absolute rights. What you are arguing against is called zoning and the legality of that is very well settled. The tannery example is pretty apt here - what right do you have to run a foul smelling eyesore right beside the property where I'm attempting to raise a family?

> what right do you have to run a foul smelling eyesore right beside the property where I'm attempting to raise a family?

He has every right to do this. Why do you assume that your family is more important than his tannery?

The regulations against things like tannery in an apartment are only there so that you can, when e.g. choosing a place to raise your family, find a place that will suit your requirements. It's like labels on food. You want something without sugar? You go and find something labeled "sugar-free". Regulations are there only to help you choose what you want. You don't look at a sugar drink and then ask "what rights does a food company have to put sugar in my drink when I'm trying to stay on keto?".

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#174

Post by gknoy »

tomkarlo wrote: post #99
davidw wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the benefit is certainly from skirting regulations, but I can see some big benefits to accessing a much wider range of options, too, so there might well be a place for AirBnB even if it were taxed/regulated a bit more, rather than simply banned.

That's fine, but it's unproven that the AirBnB market works at all if renters have to pay 20%+ hotel taxes and apartment owners have to pay income tax. It would both raise the effective rates and greatly decrease the received benefit to the seller -- there might not be a clearing market any more. I'd consider renting my spare room for $100 a night, but not for $40.

I'm pretty sure that the hosts still have to pay income tax, if they are getting paid money for having someone stay in their house.

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#175

Post by gte910h »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #152
Diamons wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a right to say no to AirBnB. Does my individual opinion matter? Probably not. Does the collective opinion of my neighborhood matter? Yeah it kind of does. We've been saying no to AirBnB for years, this isn't anything new. NYC says yes but for some reason the rest of the world thinks we're wrong to choose how we want to live.

If your neighbor has a friend stay with them, and their lease allows it, you have no say in the matter. It's their property rights, which flow to them from upstream property/rights owners. This is no different. Your right end where their rights begin, which I'd say start right around where their property lines/walls are.

And their lease likely says "No subleasing". If rent controlled, it precisely defines the amount that can be earned.

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#176

Post by oijaf888 »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #126
baddox wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't, for example, run a tannery in your apartment. I would prefer that you could, in the (perhaps unlikely) scenario that it was allowed by the terms of your rental agreement. If it's your own property, go right ahead. > What's more, as a resident (and especially if I were an owner) I wouldn't want my building being a de facto hotel. Many residents would probably agree, and if enough agree, then there's no re…

Every lease I've seen of my group of friends prohibits subletting without express permission of the landlord/owner. It's already the standard in NYC. Realistically, every AirBNB within a rental unit in NYC is likely violating the terms of their lease.

It might say that but is that an actual enforceable provision?

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#177

Post by seferphier »

rayiner wrote: post #129
sliverstorm wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, AirBnB basically seems to be an exercise in converting externalities into profit.

Much of what we consider to be profitable, high-growth business is about taking advantage of market failures. E.g. the advertising industry that bankrolls the internet is basically about taking advantage of cognitive biases to get people to make irrational purchasing decisions. Part of the success of e-commerce is due to the heroic efforts of UPS, etc, in reducing the cost of shipping over the years to make e-tailing…

Agree. it has been argued that the whole financial industry is indirectly subsidized by the government for being too big to fail.

Elon states that many forbes list billionaires receive huge amounts of profit from the subsidies (oil, agriculture)

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#178

Post by textminer »

stephencanon wrote: post #168
tomkarlo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point, the cost of adjusting for the externalities will erase the savings of AirBnB. Which would indicate that the much of the "benefit" of AirBnB simply comes from not paying for the externalities. Beyond the neighbors, there would also need to be city taxes to pay for the regulation and oversight of the rental (and fire inspections, etc), and the use of city services by visitors (who probably don't pay inco…

I recently stayed for a few days in an AirBnB room while my wife and I were in New York. A comparably nice hotel room in the same neighborhood would have run us a minimum of $350 a night; the AirBnB room was $110. While I certainly believe that some of the "benefit" of AirBnB comes from not paying for externalities, it stretches logic to believe that those externalities account for $240 a day for two people in one ro…

Isn't that less the externalities than the pool of folks using the existing hotel infrastructure (bending supply/demand) rather than exploring AirBnb/couch surfing/etc. I imagine if business travelers and tourists used AirBnB en masse, the prices would more closely approach that of traditional hotels... But with hosts that're less dependable.

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#179

Post by rayiner »

seferphier wrote: post #177
rayiner wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much of what we consider to be profitable, high-growth business is about taking advantage of market failures. E.g. the advertising industry that bankrolls the internet is basically about taking advantage of cognitive biases to get people to make irrational purchasing decisions. Part of the success of e-commerce is due to the heroic efforts of UPS, etc, in reducing the cost of shipping over the years to make e-tailing…

Agree. it has been argued that the whole financial industry is indirectly subsidized by the government for being too big to fail. Elon states that many forbes list billionaires receive huge amounts of profit from the subsidies (oil, agriculture)

Yes, finance is heavily subsidized, but so are many other major industries. The tech industry is also heavily subsidized, by design, and is indeed one of the original recipients of such subsidies. Many of the land-grant universities founded in the 1800's were specifically designed to train engineers to go into what was the high-tech industries of the time. Crossing the line from providing people a general education to specifically training people with the skills relevant to a particular industry and thereby reducing that industry's training costs is a form of subsidy, one that continues to this day.

Re: NY official: Airbnb stay illegal; host fined $2,400

#180

Post by voidlogic »

cletus wrote: post #62

I've had this argument with several people. Their position is that "it's my house/apartment, I should be able to do what I want with it" (even when renting they use this argument). My argument is that this is not and has never been true. You can't, for example, run a tannery in your apartment. What's more, as a resident (and especially if I were an owner) I wouldn't want my building being a de facto hotel. An endless…

>>Imagine the scenario if an AirBnBer does this with say a cigarette?

How is the situation different if you have a friend stay over night? What if they house sit for you a couple of days?

The only difference above is they are not paying you, but how does that affect liability?

Post reply on HN