"only about 340 units in SF were rented on Airbnb more than 211 nights, which is what Airbnb has calculated as the break-even point compared to long-term rental

"only about 340 units in SF were rented on Airbnb more than 211 nights, which is what Airbnb has calculated as the break-even point compared to long-term rental" This is a crazy figure. That's saying hosts only charge 1.7X more per night than they would get from a roommate or tenant. That's ridiculous. A quick search on AirBnB shows rooms in my neighborhood going for $130-230. That's $4k-7K/month for a room fully booked. A quick search on Craigslist shows roommates wanted for $1200-2200. That's about a 3X markup, nearly double what Airbnb claims. That matches anecdotally what I hear a lot. People are increasingly preferring to AirBnB rooms instead of seeking roommates. They get more money and/or have more control over their space. No getting stuck with a crazy roommate, no overnight guests, you can have the place to yourself when you want, etc. This takes housing stock off the residential market and moves it to the more attractive tourist market. It's similar when you look at entire apartments too and the incentives to hold onto them and Airbnb them after you've really moved out, instead of letting new residents move in. So the 75 day limit that Prop F proposes is much better targeted at changing those economics than the current 120 day limit (which is not very enforceable anyway). That means you'd have to charge 5X to break even vs. a long term rental, which is too much. So it only makes sense to AirBnB rooms/units that really would never go onto the long term market anyway.