4 ms·

From that: < The majority of our hosts are sharing the home in which they live, not removing permanent housing from the market. In fact, as NYU researchers rece

From that: < The majority of our hosts are sharing the home in which they live, not removing permanent housing from the market. In fact, as NYU researchers recently found, in order for someone to make as much money from an Airbnb guest as from a long-term tenant, they would have to share a home for 216 nights a year in New York City — more than triple the number of nights that a typical listing is shared. > They do not address the possibility that the atypical minority (which presumably is apartments used exclusively for AirBNB and not otherwise occupied by a tenant) might cause the $626M rent increase illustrated by the study. This paragraph seems to be a diversionary tactic, "No, look only at these facts".

gautamnarula 8y ago
> They do not address the possibility that the atypical minority (which presumably is apartments used exclusively for AirBNB and not otherwise occupied by a tenant) might cause the $626M rent increase illustrated by the study. This paragraph seems to be a diversionary tactic, "No, look only at these facts". IIRC, NYC passed a law against this and Airbnb has bee cracking down on those types of listings. I think SF has a similar law as well. I also wonder if NYC now charges any occupancy taxes in Airbnb like SF does. If so, the revenue collected should also be weighed against any increases in rent. I also wish the article had actual calculated how much of a per month rent increase the $600m figure resulted in. In a city as big as NYC, I don't know if 600m is a big deal or not.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  Unfortunately, this law is only marginally enforceable, and it's not in AirBnB's interest to do much more than pay lip service to enforcement.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  Unfortunately, this law is only marginally enforceable without AirBnB's wholehearted collaboration, and it's not in AirBnB's interest to do much more than pay lip service to enforcement.
loceng 8y ago
I agree that there'd need to be an independent research body to get into more depth, otherwise everyone will be sharing based on biased perspectives or shallow data.

gautamnarula 8y ago

> They do not address the possibility that the atypical minority (which presumably is apartments used exclusively for AirBNB and not otherwise occupied by a tenant) might cause the $626M rent increase illustrated by the study. This paragraph seems to be a diversionary tactic, "No, look only at these facts". IIRC, NYC passed a law against this and Airbnb has bee cracking down on those types of listings. I think SF has a similar law as well. I also wonder if NYC now charges any occupancy taxes in Airbnb like SF does. If so, the revenue collected should also be weighed against any increases in rent. I also wish the article had actual calculated how much of a per month rent increase the $600m figure resulted in. In a city as big as NYC, I don't know if 600m is a big deal or not.

cimmanom 8y ago
Unfortunately, this law is only marginally enforceable, and it's not in AirBnB's interest to do much more than pay lip service to enforcement.
cimmanom 8y ago
Unfortunately, this law is only marginally enforceable without AirBnB's wholehearted collaboration, and it's not in AirBnB's interest to do much more than pay lip service to enforcement.

loceng 8y ago

I agree that there'd need to be an independent research body to get into more depth, otherwise everyone will be sharing based on biased perspectives or shallow data.