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

The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 104 posts

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#41

Post by richk449 »

dehrmann wrote: post #18
duxup wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a monopoly to break? Are all hotels in NY owned by the same group? There are other issues as well of course, that Airbnb guests (and the owners) who are running a hotel don't care at all if their guests bother the neighbors, leave trash outside, etc. It might be New York City, but it's also a community deciding how things are laid out and work, how they gather taxes, and etc in their city.

The part that I wish someone would break is hotel/tourism tax. It's a tax that locals rarely pay, but visitors pay all the time, and since visitors don't vote where they visit, it's a form or taxation without representation.

By that logic, going to a movie is taxation without representation. Should movie theaters be outlawed?

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#42

Post by notmyaccount »

notahacker wrote: post #20
notmyaccount wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If all the hotel, taxi, etc. owners group up to create a cartel to keep the status quo and not to disrupt the market, then that is also not exactly good. The choice of a community does not necessarily mean that it is the right choice.

I'm not convinced the people with resources to make $20m in hotel revenues from 18 shell corporations are the little guy being stamped on and the neighbours being buzzed by people wanting hotel service are the Big Bad Corporation here...

I am not saying that they should go on breaking the laws. The laws are clear. But at certain times, the laws have been deliberately lobbied to create a hindrance for any new players in the market. Like in this case, applying for a permit to rent out apartments should have been much easier than the current cumbersome process is.

Like NY Taxi Medallions. Before Uber, Lyft or other ride-sharing apps, there was only 13,587 yellow cabs in the city of 8.5 million people. Currently, there are an estimated 100,000 cabs in the city which resulted in a drop of medallion prices from $1.4 million in 2014 to just $140,000 now. It was an artificial bubble created by the taxi drivers community (and government) to keep the medallion price inflated. It is easy to see why they were against ride-sharing apps.

Or California housing zones. We all know that California has a housing crisis and one of the potential solution is to have multi-story buildings. For that, we need easy rezoning of residential zones to allow multi-story building redevelopment. However, most of the community members refuse to allow for that since it would bring down the rent and property prices. So the community is not interested in allowing easy development of multi-story buildings.

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#43

Post by notmyaccount »

rootusrootus wrote: post #24
notmyaccount wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If all the hotel, taxi, etc. owners group up to create a cartel to keep the status quo and not to disrupt the market, then that is also not exactly good. The choice of a community does not necessarily mean that it is the right choice.

If not the community itself, who do you propose gets to determine what the right choice is?

You have to look at the overall benefit, not just the benefit of the local community. I gave certain examples why the community choice might be due to their own selfish reasons in the reply to comment above yours.

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#44

Post by jacques_chester »

jimrhods23 wrote: post #13

I don't really thing what this guy did was a bad thing: He had positive reviews, multiple maids to cleanup after guests, and willingly broke leases and lost money when there were complaints.

On the description it appears that he and his partners (a) broke the law (b) broke his contracts with AirBnB and (c) took extraordinary measures to conceal (a) and (b) from legal scrutiny.

Those are all, by and large, "bad things".

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#45

Post by matchbok »

smallgovt wrote: post #31
matchbok wrote: post #14

More bad behavior that is encouraged by the AirBnb leadership. Disgusting. They could solve this problem overnight with their software but choose not to because it makes ~70% of their revenue, while at the same time claiming they are a "home-sharing" site. AirBnb needs to go into the trash. They consume resources and push costs onto the community and neighbors, while making millions.

> They could solve this problem overnight with their software Can you expand on what the software solution would look like here? I'm curious why the hotel lobby doesn't scrape Airbnb and report all the properties that are breaking regulation.

Eliminating all listings without a host present would solve 99% of these problems. That's what the site sells itself as, anyway. Problem is there isn't much money to be made there.

Or just do a tiny bit of host/property verification. Again, too much money to be made from illegal/unzoned hotels.

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#46

Post by mattzito »

jimrhods23 wrote: post #13

I don't really thing what this guy did was a bad thing: He had positive reviews, multiple maids to cleanup after guests, and willingly broke leases and lost money when there were complaints.

It was no doubt a good thing for Airbnb users. It is much less likely a good thing for the building and other people who live there. I actually live a block away from the building in the article that was described as the #1 moneymaker and opted not to move to that building partially because it was obvious many apartments were being rented on Airbnb.

In other words not only was the neighborhood losing access to housing inventory, but other landlords were losing access to qualified tenants who didn’t want to live in a building with a bunch of Airbnb rentals in it.

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#47

Post by jimrhods23 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #40
jimrhods23 wrote: post #13

I don't really thing what this guy did was a bad thing: He had positive reviews, multiple maids to cleanup after guests, and willingly broke leases and lost money when there were complaints.

You'd probably feel differently if you were these folks: > “It’s been 3 a.m. and I’ve had people ringing my buzzer to get in,” said Ziograin Correa, 40, who lives in the building with his wife and six children. “They don’t have a key, so they ring my buzzer.” The other residents in the buildings can't leave an AirBnB review.

This has happened at my apartment complex when my neighbors invited some friends over.

The residents have something even better: they can complain to the landlord.

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#48

Post by [deleted] »

jseliger wrote: post #38
massivecali wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same could be said for all foreign realestate investment where homes sit empty. (Granted that could be solved by a vacancy tax.) But people already buy places and rent them out as income property. This puts a burden on renters and increases the incentives for builders to only construct larger apartments and homes. It raises the price for everyone and poor single people suffer the most. Im not following how airbnb…

If only there were some way, a technology, even, of increasing the total number of units on a given plot of land, such that those who want to live in a city or visit a city wouldn't have to compete so vigorously for livable housing units. Alas, we can only dream that such a technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_frame

[deleted]

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#49

Post by jimrhods23 »

jacques_chester wrote: post #44
jimrhods23 wrote: post #13

I don't really thing what this guy did was a bad thing: He had positive reviews, multiple maids to cleanup after guests, and willingly broke leases and lost money when there were complaints.

On the description it appears that he and his partners (a) broke the law (b) broke his contracts with AirBnB and (c) took extraordinary measures to conceal (a) and (b) from legal scrutiny. Those are all, by and large, "bad things".

He violated new york regulations and an end user agreement. Nobody was hurt and from the sounds of it, he worked very hard to please his customers.

There will be fines involved, because NYC wants their cut of the profits.

I still don't consider what they did as 'bad things'.

Re: The Rise and Fall of a Multimillion-Dollar Airbnb Scheme

#50

Post by jacques_chester »

notmyaccount wrote: post #42
notahacker wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced the people with resources to make $20m in hotel revenues from 18 shell corporations are the little guy being stamped on and the neighbours being buzzed by people wanting hotel service are the Big Bad Corporation here...

I am not saying that they should go on breaking the laws. The laws are clear. But at certain times, the laws have been deliberately lobbied to create a hindrance for any new players in the market. Like in this case, applying for a permit to rent out apartments should have been much easier than the current cumbersome process is. Like NY Taxi Medallions. Before Uber, Lyft or other ride-sharing apps, there was only 13,5…

Breaking the law because you find it morally repugnant is one thing.

Breaking the law for a buck is a very different thing.

Post reply on HN