3 ms·
> Now students cannot effectively sublet their apartments on Craigslist while out on summer break or study abroad, for a summer intern working at a company in t
by CPLX 10y ago
> Now students cannot effectively sublet their apartments on Craigslist while out on summer break or study abroad, for a summer intern working at a company in the city
Incorrect. Sublets of 30 days or more are still legal, as they have been forever, and in fact are highly protected under NYC rent law, which requires landlords to allow sublets.
So your narrative is fiction. The law, which existed before the founding of Airbnb, and subsequent flaunting thereof, prohibits short term transient rentals. The only recent change is the prohibition on actively soliciting this illegal activity, not the already-illegal activity itself, thus making enforcement easier.
We can have a healthy debate about the short term sublet laws. Many NYC residents, myself included, will support the ban on transient rentals and improvised hotel arrangements, because it has severe negative externalities to other residents of the buildings in question, negatively affects the rental market, and violates community principles of land use and zoning.
Others, perhaps including yourself, will take the opposite view. And via democracy, following that debate, the law against short term subletting can be amended or retained. Needless to say if you're promulgating these views from San Francisco your preferences on the matter will be disregarded.
The only thing that's happened here is that the other strategy, the Silicon Valley end-around of just breaking the law and seeing what happened, has proven to be an ineffective means of changing policy. Good.
- linkregister 10y agoThanks, I didn't remember the amount of days right; I thought it was a ban on longer rentals also. I'm glad that sublets aren't affected; that significantly changes my perspective on the law. It basically invalidates Airbnb's business model but changes nothing for preexisting common arrangements, such as month-long sublets. I appreciate your response. > The only thing that's happened here is that the other strategy, the Silicon Valley end-around of just breaking the law and seeing what happened, has proven to be an ineffective means of changing policy. Good. I think the outcome is a bit more nuanced than that. The lesson to be learned in this situation is that Airbnb provided terrible curation of its service while being instrumental in renters breaking the law. I don't think it's universally a bad idea to break laws one doesn't agree with, especially if they carried no significant consequences for all stakeholders involved. Because Airbnb failed at its curation, the state of New York added teeth to the existing law. I still maintain that the primary use case for Airbnb, the sporadic rental, is a useful one for both guests and owners. The Airbnb rentals I've used in the past were mutually beneficial. Maybe I'm an outlier because I used the rental for non-malicious purposes.
- CPLX 10y ago> I still maintain that the primary use case for Airbnb, the sporadic rental, is a useful one for both guests and owners Indeed. But it's not nearly as good for Airbnb's business model.
- linkregister 10y agoIs that not the vast majority of Airbnb rentals offered through the service, sporadic rentals?
- shagie 10y agoAs I read it, there's a point you made in the final paragraph that is kind of missed in the first paragraph. > the state of New York added teeth to the existing law > It basically invalidates Airbnb's business model The rentals that AirBnB was listing that are illegal now were illegal before. The business model was predicated on that the fines were less than the cost of doing business illegally that AirBnB facilitated. As I understand it, it shifted the scales to making fines more expensive, but that AirBnB in NYC was not necessarily a valid business model before the adding of teeth.
- linkregister 10y agoThe business model priced in the risk of fines and the amount under the old regime; it was profitable. Now all the city has to do is scrape the frontend (or API, if there is one) and tally up the fines. Am I missing something here?
- shagie 10y agoThe distinction I was trying to make was "facilitating illegal activities and snubbing those charged with enforcement is not a viable business model." The risk / reward of fines isn't AirBnB's model, but rather the calculation of the people and landlords offering rentals and their business model.