3 ms·

Interestingly, I'd agree with you if you'd left airbnb out of that list. I see something more menacing in airbnb, probably because I've witnessed families gett

by geebee 10y ago

Interestingly, I'd agree with you if you'd left airbnb out of that list. I see something more menacing in airbnb, probably because I've witnessed families getting outbid for single family homes by owners who turn around and airbnb out the "spare" rooms - in a city where I grew up and where the percentage of children has plummeted from about 22% to below 14% in my lifetime (yes, I'm talking about San Francisco). Airbnb and related services do convert the housing used for children, who don't pay rent and cost a bundle, into short term rentals for tourists. This isn't the only harm it does, but it's the one that worries me the most. If this isn't true, by all means I'd love to see the data, provided airbnb doesn't scrub it of all evidence first, ahem. BTW, I like airbnb style rentals fine if they are regulated properly. 75-90 days is a lot of time to get to rent out a house that is zoned for long term residence. If I go off on vacation for a couple of weeks, and I rent my place out, I don't see much harm there. But if a former kid's room is converted into a revolving door for tourists, one more kid is displaced from SF? There is tremendous harm if San Francisco ceases to be a place where people are from. The problem is that airbnb is lobbying fiercely against meaningful regulation. I'm personally not against zoning to ensure a proper mix of housing in a city. I don't think that these regulations are obsolete just because someone wrote a rails program that allows you to type in your address and click the "Create Hotel Here" button.

passthefist 10y ago
Sounds similar to the problem of ticket prices and scalping. It absolutely sucks that families are getting displaced, but at the same time it's a correction in the market. I'd be curious to know why family residences are more valuable as short-term rentals. My guess would be that there's just more people that want to stay in SF than there are hotels available at prices people want to pay. The tight housing market isn't helping that either. People are getting evicted and replaced by renters willing to pay more, regardless of Airbnb. There's premium on space, short or long term. Airbnb's not helping, but I think it's more of a symptom of the bay's broken housing market than anything else. I'd wonder if regulating Airbnb rentals wouldn't have a negative effect similar to rent control. My understanding is that most economists agree that price ceilings on real estate only exacerbate the supply problem that places like SF are facing, and the best solution is to build. On the other hand, why risk the capital to build a hotel, when you can just use the existing housing instead?
- superuser2 10y ago
  >more people that want to stay in SF than there are hotels available at prices people want to pay The price discrepancy is enormous. Last time I looked, I could generally find a room on Airbnb in the neighborhood of $90-100/night. The shittiest national chain at the airport (I'm deliberately excluding the Tenderloin) was going to be at least $200/night. "Hotel taxes" is an intellectually lazy explanation. If you actually price out a hotel stay in SF, you'll see "taxes and fees" are around 10%.

by geebee 10y ago

passthefist 10y ago

Sounds similar to the problem of ticket prices and scalping. It absolutely sucks that families are getting displaced, but at the same time it's a correction in the market. I'd be curious to know why family residences are more valuable as short-term rentals. My guess would be that there's just more people that want to stay in SF than there are hotels available at prices people want to pay. The tight housing market isn't helping that either. People are getting evicted and replaced by renters willing to pay more, regardless of Airbnb. There's premium on space, short or long term. Airbnb's not helping, but I think it's more of a symptom of the bay's broken housing market than anything else. I'd wonder if regulating Airbnb rentals wouldn't have a negative effect similar to rent control. My understanding is that most economists agree that price ceilings on real estate only exacerbate the supply problem that places like SF are facing, and the best solution is to build. On the other hand, why risk the capital to build a hotel, when you can just use the existing housing instead?

superuser2 10y ago
>more people that want to stay in SF than there are hotels available at prices people want to pay The price discrepancy is enormous. Last time I looked, I could generally find a room on Airbnb in the neighborhood of $90-100/night. The shittiest national chain at the airport (I'm deliberately excluding the Tenderloin) was going to be at least $200/night. "Hotel taxes" is an intellectually lazy explanation. If you actually price out a hotel stay in SF, you'll see "taxes and fees" are around 10%.