27 ms·

Why would you say you are anti-airbnb? Just curious if it's their business practices, renters themselves, or what. I've only had positive experiences with airbn

Why would you say you are anti-airbnb? Just curious if it's their business practices, renters themselves, or what. I've only had positive experiences with airbnb.

lemworld 11y ago
I also have had only positive experiences with Airbnb, though I've only stayed in "whole apartment" listings. Maybe the OP had some negative experiences with a host they stayed with?
beachstartup 11y ago
i'm anti-airbnb. i prefer to stay in hotels or professionally managed vacation rental units. for example, there's absolutely ZERO chance a hotel will cancel your room on you 12 hours before you show up in europe.
- omarrr 11y ago
  > there's absolutely ZERO chance a hotel will cancel your room on you 12 hours before you show up in europe. wrong
- kleinsch 11y ago
  Clearly you've never showed up at a hotel that's full despite having a reservation. I have.
- AnimalMuppet 11y ago
  Not in Europe, but I've had it happen twice in the US. Once in Dallas, once in Avalon on Catalina Island. (That one was, "Um, sorry, we only have you booked for one night, and we don't have any openings for the second night.")
- morgante 11y ago
  It sounds like you personally prefer not to stay in an AirBnB. That's fine. I likewise prefer hotels to AirBnBs. But why are you anti-airbnb?
- austenallred 11y ago
  Exactly that has happened to me probably half a dozen times
slg 11y ago
I'm not specifically anti-Airbnb, but I'm anti "disruption is euphemism for just ignoring the law". It is common with companies like Uber, Airbnb, and the most recent uproar is over DraftKings and FanDuel. These companies have a disregard for the law as part of their business model and that rubs me the wrong way.
- bcoates 11y ago
  There is a specific, long-standing exception in Federal gambling laws for what DraftKings and FanDuel is doing. They're not ignoring or even bending the law. The weasel-wording they use in their ads is to get around TV network (and sports league) squeamishness about running ads for sports betting.
  - slg 11y ago
    There might be a federal exception for most of their games, but the exception might not apply to all of their games. There are also several states where their games are pretty clearly illegal and these companies are just operating there until they either get shutdown or get enough lobbying power to push through their own exceptions.
zorpner 11y ago
Exploitation of marginal utility is fundamentally disconcerting, and it should be -- as tech people, we could think of it as being paid for time spent in a chair, or lines of code. It exploits an inefficiency which exists because of an absolute measurement that mis-assesses the situation. In the case of housing, at the basic level, we pay a monthly rate in order to have a place to sleep (and maybe live & eat). But embedded in our rules and laws are assumptions about how that works, and one of those core assumptions is stability (that is, people who make this exchange of money for housing will remain in the housing for longer spans). Our noise ordinances are based on long timelines for investigation, monitoring, and enforcement because they embed the assumption of stable tenancy. Our building codes assume certain occupancies and our maintenance schedules assume certain rates of wear. Our building security practices assume that people with the keys have an invested interest in restricting access. These assumptions may or may not be desirable, but they exist, and because of their existence renting an apartment (I have different feelings regarding owned single-family dwellings) for short-term AirBnB-style rentals violates not only the social contract with neighbors, but the unwritten contract involving a number of ambient practices with potentially negative consequences. I'm not 100% against short-term subletting, and I'm certainly not against having relatives stay over, for example. But this is a classic example of both money and automation fundamentally changing an existing practice -- people are "doing the same thing", but at a scale and in a way that results in an emergent difference.
- IIAOPSW 11y ago
  wadr why is any of this "bad". I agree 100% with everything you said about built in assumptions in our laws yet I come to the opposite conclusion that such laws ought to be diminished. IMO the assumption of stability creates a de facto serfdom in which people are tied to the land and don't even realize it. If the best opportunity of your life suddenly popped up half way around the globe, how fast can you be on a plane? For me the answer is "next flight out". I do not mean to say that having a permanent traditional life is less desirable to some people. I simply think that the laws of our land should respect freedom of choice and thus not bias any particular lifestyle. I think it is especially egregious to have laws telling people what they can and cannot do with their own home in a manner that has no tangible effect on their neighbors. I find it dubious (and empirically unsupported) that the presence of airbnb guests has any measurable effect on any neighborhood.
geebee 11y ago
This is a (slightly updated) repost of an earlier response of mine on this topic. Everyone has an opinion about airbnb. Here's my big worry. San Francisco's population of children has plummeted in my lifetime (I grew up in SF in the 70s). In this time, I think it has gone from about 22% to a current rate of 14% or so. I guess it's just important to me that SF continue to be a place people are from, rather than a place where young people move prior to having families, or (increasingly) a place where empty nesters move and enjoy the city after having families. Here's the thing, I consider this to be a very economically vulnerable stretch of life. I have two kids, in SFUSD, and I'm starting to see just how colossal a disadvantage a family with two kids would be in a bidding war against someone who intends to put the extra bedrooms in a SFH or a 3 bedroom apartment on airbnb instead. It's no secret that housing is in short supply in SF, and that the price of a house or apartment in SF reflects what the highest bidder is able to pay. It's also probably not surprising that kids are very expensive. A two income family (pretty tough to live in SF if you aren't) means daycare - and daycare costs, conservatively, over $2,000 a month per kid. Even if they're in SFUSD ("free"), after care at school with run you about $4,000 a year per kid, and summer camps will add another $3000 or so per kid, if you're doing things the inexpensive way. Now, imagine that a family with two kids now has to compete against a bidder who plans to put the "spare" bedrooms on airbnb, and who factors that into the bid. The family has two very expensive, non-revenue generating children. The airbnb buyer has a massive advantage here, and I see it as another factor that could potentially put massive new pressures on an already collapsing population of families with children. It could also reduce turnover - someone who no longer needs the extra bedrooms and might have in the past downsized (opening up a SFH for a new family) now rents the bedrooms out full time on airbnb. Sure, these problems could have existed with permanent, long term tenants, but I do think that it was less likely. Airbnb definitely makes it far easier and more profitable to do this - this is one big reason why the company is so large and profitable itself. Is this happening? I don't know, I don't have the data. Until then, it's just a fear, though not (in my opinion, obviously) an unfounded one. But if they company won't open up the data and recognize the possible danger, my guess is that the public will support strict regulations.
- bsimpson 11y ago
  I'm curious what you think of all the young people who move into the city after college and become roommates with one another. I've lived with people who make $50,000 per year, and with people who make 2 or 3 times that much. Because studios and one-bedrooms have become so expensive, we've started renting spaces with anywhere from 2 to 6 bedrooms. Having 6 adults who can afford to collectively pay $9000+ a month bidding against you has got to be almost as much fun as bidding against someone who's going to Airbnb the extra rooms, but at the end of the day, we all need somewhere to live.

Why would you say you are anti-airbnb? Just curious if it's their business practices, renters themselves, or what. I've only had positive experiences with airbnb.

lemworld 11y ago

I also have had only positive experiences with Airbnb, though I've only stayed in "whole apartment" listings. Maybe the OP had some negative experiences with a host they stayed with?

beachstartup 11y ago

i'm anti-airbnb. i prefer to stay in hotels or professionally managed vacation rental units. for example, there's absolutely ZERO chance a hotel will cancel your room on you 12 hours before you show up in europe.

omarrr 11y ago
> there's absolutely ZERO chance a hotel will cancel your room on you 12 hours before you show up in europe. wrong
kleinsch 11y ago
Clearly you've never showed up at a hotel that's full despite having a reservation. I have.
AnimalMuppet 11y ago
Not in Europe, but I've had it happen twice in the US. Once in Dallas, once in Avalon on Catalina Island. (That one was, "Um, sorry, we only have you booked for one night, and we don't have any openings for the second night.")
morgante 11y ago
It sounds like you personally prefer not to stay in an AirBnB. That's fine. I likewise prefer hotels to AirBnBs. But why are you anti-airbnb?
austenallred 11y ago
Exactly that has happened to me probably half a dozen times

slg 11y ago

I'm not specifically anti-Airbnb, but I'm anti "disruption is euphemism for just ignoring the law". It is common with companies like Uber, Airbnb, and the most recent uproar is over DraftKings and FanDuel. These companies have a disregard for the law as part of their business model and that rubs me the wrong way.

bcoates 11y ago
There is a specific, long-standing exception in Federal gambling laws for what DraftKings and FanDuel is doing. They're not ignoring or even bending the law. The weasel-wording they use in their ads is to get around TV network (and sports league) squeamishness about running ads for sports betting.
- slg 11y ago
  There might be a federal exception for most of their games, but the exception might not apply to all of their games. There are also several states where their games are pretty clearly illegal and these companies are just operating there until they either get shutdown or get enough lobbying power to push through their own exceptions.

zorpner 11y ago

Exploitation of marginal utility is fundamentally disconcerting, and it should be -- as tech people, we could think of it as being paid for time spent in a chair, or lines of code. It exploits an inefficiency which exists because of an absolute measurement that mis-assesses the situation. In the case of housing, at the basic level, we pay a monthly rate in order to have a place to sleep (and maybe live & eat). But embedded in our rules and laws are assumptions about how that works, and one of those core assumptions is stability (that is, people who make this exchange of money for housing will remain in the housing for longer spans). Our noise ordinances are based on long timelines for investigation, monitoring, and enforcement because they embed the assumption of stable tenancy. Our building codes assume certain occupancies and our maintenance schedules assume certain rates of wear. Our building security practices assume that people with the keys have an invested interest in restricting access. These assumptions may or may not be desirable, but they exist, and because of their existence renting an apartment (I have different feelings regarding owned single-family dwellings) for short-term AirBnB-style rentals violates not only the social contract with neighbors, but the unwritten contract involving a number of ambient practices with potentially negative consequences. I'm not 100% against short-term subletting, and I'm certainly not against having relatives stay over, for example. But this is a classic example of both money and automation fundamentally changing an existing practice -- people are "doing the same thing", but at a scale and in a way that results in an emergent difference.

IIAOPSW 11y ago
wadr why is any of this "bad". I agree 100% with everything you said about built in assumptions in our laws yet I come to the opposite conclusion that such laws ought to be diminished. IMO the assumption of stability creates a de facto serfdom in which people are tied to the land and don't even realize it. If the best opportunity of your life suddenly popped up half way around the globe, how fast can you be on a plane? For me the answer is "next flight out". I do not mean to say that having a permanent traditional life is less desirable to some people. I simply think that the laws of our land should respect freedom of choice and thus not bias any particular lifestyle. I think it is especially egregious to have laws telling people what they can and cannot do with their own home in a manner that has no tangible effect on their neighbors. I find it dubious (and empirically unsupported) that the presence of airbnb guests has any measurable effect on any neighborhood.

geebee 11y ago

This is a (slightly updated) repost of an earlier response of mine on this topic. Everyone has an opinion about airbnb. Here's my big worry. San Francisco's population of children has plummeted in my lifetime (I grew up in SF in the 70s). In this time, I think it has gone from about 22% to a current rate of 14% or so. I guess it's just important to me that SF continue to be a place people are from, rather than a place where young people move prior to having families, or (increasingly) a place where empty nesters move and enjoy the city after having families. Here's the thing, I consider this to be a very economically vulnerable stretch of life. I have two kids, in SFUSD, and I'm starting to see just how colossal a disadvantage a family with two kids would be in a bidding war against someone who intends to put the extra bedrooms in a SFH or a 3 bedroom apartment on airbnb instead. It's no secret that housing is in short supply in SF, and that the price of a house or apartment in SF reflects what the highest bidder is able to pay. It's also probably not surprising that kids are very expensive. A two income family (pretty tough to live in SF if you aren't) means daycare - and daycare costs, conservatively, over $2,000 a month per kid. Even if they're in SFUSD ("free"), after care at school with run you about $4,000 a year per kid, and summer camps will add another $3000 or so per kid, if you're doing things the inexpensive way. Now, imagine that a family with two kids now has to compete against a bidder who plans to put the "spare" bedrooms on airbnb, and who factors that into the bid. The family has two very expensive, non-revenue generating children. The airbnb buyer has a massive advantage here, and I see it as another factor that could potentially put massive new pressures on an already collapsing population of families with children. It could also reduce turnover - someone who no longer needs the extra bedrooms and might have in the past downsized (opening up a SFH for a new family) now rents the bedrooms out full time on airbnb. Sure, these problems could have existed with permanent, long term tenants, but I do think that it was less likely. Airbnb definitely makes it far easier and more profitable to do this - this is one big reason why the company is so large and profitable itself. Is this happening? I don't know, I don't have the data. Until then, it's just a fear, though not (in my opinion, obviously) an unfounded one. But if they company won't open up the data and recognize the possible danger, my guess is that the public will support strict regulations.

bsimpson 11y ago
I'm curious what you think of all the young people who move into the city after college and become roommates with one another. I've lived with people who make $50,000 per year, and with people who make 2 or 3 times that much. Because studios and one-bedrooms have become so expensive, we've started renting spaces with anywhere from 2 to 6 bedrooms. Having 6 adults who can afford to collectively pay $9000+ a month bidding against you has got to be almost as much fun as bidding against someone who's going to Airbnb the extra rooms, but at the end of the day, we all need somewhere to live.