6 ms·

Sounds like they are worried about a large-scale disruption to the lodging industry similar to what Uber did/is doing in the taxi industry.

• jaboutboul 10y ago
  You mean they are worried about PROGRESS and INNOVATION in the lodging industry which gives consumers choice and funnels money away from the people who pay the lobbyists who pay them.
  • Alupis 10y ago
    > PROGRESS and INNOVATION Well, we need to be fair here. Simply because something is different, it's not automatically "progress" nor "innovation". The lodging industry has quite a lot of regulations, put into place to protect the consumer. Airbnb kind of currently operates all on their own. You have no guarantee that you're sleeping in clean sheets, you have no guarantee that carbon monoxide detectors are working, etc. Of course simply because regulations exist doesn't mean every lodging provider adheres to them the same - but it does provide recourse if caught. Applying the same regulations to Airbnb seems to be a net win for everyone involved (except Airbnb themselves).
    • ultramancool 10y ago
      > (except Airbnb themselves). And the sellers on AirBnB who don't want to deal with the complicated mess that will cause. And the buyers on AirBnB who don't want to pay the prices that dealing with that mess will cause.
      • Alupis 10y ago
        > And the sellers on AirBnB who don't want to deal with the complicated mess that will cause If you cannot guarantee clean sheets, working smoke detectors, potable water... then you really should not be offering your house as a place to stay.
        • ultramancool 10y ago
          These regulations are a heck of a lot more complicated than just those, some are proposing creating zoning issues for this stuff for example, which really has nothing to do with the quality of the rooms offered.
          • Alupis 10y ago
            > This sort of thing should really be between the renter and rentee in my opinion Imagine a world where you fly halfway around the country, land, drive to your hotel, and discover body sweat stains on the sheets, the water is undrinkable, oh and sometimes the light switch sparks when you flip it. The hotel says you will need to pay to "upgrade" those room features. You complain to the hotel owner - who doesn't care... he has your money already and isn't interested in refunding it. He states you accepted the room's condition when you booked the room. This is the equivalent of what you are advocating. This is flatly _not_ progress of any kind. It's a gigantic step backwards in safety and living conditions. None of this even considers the other side of the token - the lodging owner. What happens if the rentee trashes the place and Airbnb refuses to reimburse you? Your home owners insurance won't cover anything if they realize you are renting to others for profit. You have no recourse. Airbnb has refused to regulate themselves. There is no reasonable guarantee of anything for either side of the transaction. So now, the government is going to step in and do it for them.
            • ultramancool 10y ago
              > This is the equivalent of what you are advocating. No, this is certainly not equivalent. If you accepted shitty terms that's on you for failing to read, plain and simple. > So now, the government is going to step in and do it for them. This isn't even the sort of thing they're talking about regulating though - they're talking about doing ridiculous stuff like zoning, booking discrimination, accessibility, etc laws on these, nothing to do with the quality of the rooms at all but which certainly do increase the costs to the sellers.
              • Alupis 10y ago
  • davesque 10y ago
    That's one extreme view on this. Remember that zoning exists for a reason. Imagine if you owned a house and both of the neighboring houses turned into full-time AirBNB rentals. Sometimes the guests were nice, but sometimes they weren't and treated the place like somewhere to party and forget about.
    • ultramancool 10y ago
      Seems like that's more an issue with the problematic guests infringing on your house. Perhaps this is simply a matter of noise fines, etc should be applying to the homeowner and the guests?
      • brandonmenc 10y ago
        Good luck collecting - let alone having a complaint heard - in time to catch the current batch of guests next door.
        • ultramancool 10y ago
          So what you're saying is that this is actually an issue with not enforcing existing laws, but they're going to solve it with different, shittier laws that make less sense instead of enforcing the existing, perfectly reasonable laws? Seems like there's a better solution available here.
          • brandonmenc 10y ago
            No. I'm saying that existing residential zoning laws are only effective when you can apply them to actual residents. They fall flat if you have to chase people down (what, across state lines?) or if the fines aren't high enough to eat into an Airbnb revenue stream. Which, is one reason why we have zoning laws in the first place - because the penalties and proxies in a commercial zone are different than they are in a residential one. > but they're going to solve it with different, shittier laws that make less sense Not sure how residents voting to ban short-term residential rentals in their community is shitty or senseless.
  • mywittyname 10y ago
    Even if I agreed with the premise of your argument (I don't), you seem to have it backwards. Tech companies have lots of money to throw around on lobbyists. And right now, AirBNB has a larger market cap than Mariott and IHG.
    • steveax 10y ago
      Yeah, peculiar to see AirBNB and Uber portrayed as the scrappy little intruder fighting the enormous entrenched tyranny.