6 ms·

I think this is a good example of how playing the hardline, aggressive "disruptor" can backfire. I've talked to the Airbnb founders a few times, and they're pr

I think this is a good example of how playing the hardline, aggressive "disruptor" can backfire. I've talked to the Airbnb founders a few times, and they're probably the most passionate founders I've met. It's clear that they believe in their vision 100%, even without the money (just look at their history of self-funding for years before they could attract VC interest). But by refusing to cooperate with cities on some legitimate complaints (like a small number of hosts who own a ton of properties, which is even sketchy to me as a guest), they really brought this hardline pushback on themselves.

kayoone 8y ago
I was in Budapest recently and had a very good experience with the host, but was already a bit perplexed that i was in contact with 3 different people over the course of the stay. In the end i realised that the host owns 25 properties in the city centre and probably has a dozen assistants to take care of stuff. It's a full blown tourism business and a problem for the local community at that point.
- bamboozled 8y ago
  I once lived in Amsterdam and during summer, my neighbourhood was overrun with loud Airbnb tourists coming and going at all hours of the night. As a resident it was an impossible situation for 2-3 months each year. I ended up leaving over it, it was affecting my ability to to my job. I learned (the hard way) why regulations and building codes exist.
  - cornholio 8y ago
    I don't want to minimize your plight, sleeping above a commercial street can be a nightmare. And it's a bugger when your quiet neighborhood suddenly transforms into Tourist Ground Zero. But cities do need to grow and expand. Quiet backstreets turn into busy boulevards. They have done so for millennia. The economic opportunities such transformation brings for the city far outstrip the cost of new sound insulating windows - not to mention that, for owners, those are more than covered by the appreciation of the property. That's why I prefer a system where tourists and hosts pay for the creative destruction they do to residential areas, and put that revenue to good use for everybody else.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      Cities have a process for growing and transforming neighborhoods from sleepy residential areas to "tourist ground zero", and that process does not involve waiting for Airbnb to decide which areas to do that to.
    - stingraycharles 8y ago
      In Amsterdam it’s a broader issue, and excessive tourism is a big complaint by pretty much anyone native to Amsterdam. The city has recently put a halt to any further expansion of tourist shops / hotels / etc downtown, and on a national level we’re trying to get tourists to visit other parts of The Netherlands instead. This, in order to keep the authentic nature of the city, and ensure the city still caters to locals as well. These kind of rules is something all businesses need to adhere to, and I see no reason why Airbnb should be an exception.
      - cornholio 8y ago
        So auction the tourist lodging right like taxi medallions, to hotels and home bnbs alike. The move you describe will likely enrich the hotels that already exist downtown without any benefit to the city.
        stingraycharles 8y ago
        Sure, those kind of things are a possibility. The point I was making is that Airbnb needs to play by the same rules as everyone.
        cornholio 8y ago
        But they don't, do they? The whole point of these "rent 90 days a year, apply for a new license every year" laws is to impose an onerous burden on Bnbs that traditional suppliers either don't face or can amortize over hundreds of rooms. It's laughable to require a single rented room the same paperwork that a large hotel requires, then say that enables them to "play by the same rules as everyone else". They are a fundamentally different way to provide the same economic service and the law needs to adapt, not protect traditional interests.
- qwerty456127 8y ago
  How is that a problem?
  - jabgrabdthrow 8y ago
    I would guess it’s a zoning issue, it’s an issue to the extent communities have a right to do zoning at all
- raverbashing 8y ago
  It's probably a management company, the host might be the owner or just a worker of that company
- mrgordon 8y ago
  Sounds like it created a lot of jobs in the local community. How is that a problem exactly? You would prefer if they didn't hire assistants?
  - rdlecler1 8y ago
    When you eat up the marginal supply of housing it can greatly increase the cost for everyone vs adding a couple dozen low wage jobs for which they’ll also have trouble affording to pay rent themselves. Tourists are not paying taxes to the city, their needs should come second to the citizens that live there.
    - mrgordon 8y ago
      The marginal supply of housing argument is often a bit ridiculous. Many cities will give their best real estate to hotels and create entire neighborhoods where locals can basically not find housing. Meanwhile some Airbnbs interspersed through the city is the thing driving up housing cost. Just start converting hotels into apartments and you've solved the problem. You say "tourists are not paying taxes to the city" which is certainly wrong for San Francisco and for most other cities I've travelled to as well. In San Francisco, there is a 14% occupancy tax and it is taken by Airbnb automatically during booking as they do in hundreds of cities. Compare this to Craigslist where I used to rent and nobody ever mentioned paying tax once. Finally, many of these cities literally have tourism as their number one industry. Its a bit dangerous to start saying that the people who fund your city are second class citizens since they only pay occupancy taxes and not income taxes. In fact many of the areas against Airbnb like Miami Beach have bent over so far backwards for tourists that all they care about are the hotels now.
      - jimrandomh 8y ago
        No, converting hotels into apartments doesn't solve the problem. The total amount of spaced used by Airbnb and hotels combined is too small compared to the need for housing; the only thing that solves the problem is removing the height limits, and letting people put up taller buildings.
mrgordon 8y ago
I'm curious why a superhost renting a bunch of properties is "sketchy" while a corporate hotel brand with many properties is to be trusted. What if the hosts registered LLCs and listed their friendly sounding corporation names instead? What was sketchy was when I used to have to rent apartments in cities off Craigslist with absolutely no regulation, no escrow, and no reputation to avoid people who literally just finished ripping someone off. This is where many cities seem to want to return. Since many people prefer to stay in apartments / houses while they travel, some of the hotels will not be needed and can be converted into additional housing. It makes sense that there would be entrepreneurs who learn to make these places attractive to travelers while maintaining low costs to clean and maintain the property. In fact, these places are often better run than a property that is only rented out a few times a year. If I were the cities, I would focus on regulating the things that really impact quality of life (e.g. having firm penalties for frequent noise violations) without trying to micromanage how people use hotels versus apartments. People will always rent apartments, do house swaps, couchsurf, etc. and its often a win-win for everyone involved. Punish the bad actors, leave people alone who rent a lot of places out but don't trigger complaints, and avoid pushing the movement underground where you can't tax it or try to help with noise violations and other problems.
- detaro 8y ago
  It's sketchy if they pretend to not be a superhost, and I'd at least suspect that they're not operating entirely proper businesses then too.
  - mrgordon 8y ago
    Well its a bit of a chicken and egg problem then, right? If you say they pretend not to be a superhost, then that seems to imply they have multiple accounts. The only reason they would do this is because their city has put in place strict rules against renting multiple properties out. If the city hadn't put those rules in place, those people would have one account and wouldn't be "sketchy" anymore. Meanwhile the same people will instead now go to Craigslist or a local equivalent and rent out 50 properties without the need to create any accounts or earn superhost status. They won't report that income, it won't be taxed, and they probably won't have a legitimate business. Somehow this is a win.

kayoone 8y ago

I was in Budapest recently and had a very good experience with the host, but was already a bit perplexed that i was in contact with 3 different people over the course of the stay. In the end i realised that the host owns 25 properties in the city centre and probably has a dozen assistants to take care of stuff. It's a full blown tourism business and a problem for the local community at that point.

bamboozled 8y ago
I once lived in Amsterdam and during summer, my neighbourhood was overrun with loud Airbnb tourists coming and going at all hours of the night. As a resident it was an impossible situation for 2-3 months each year. I ended up leaving over it, it was affecting my ability to to my job. I learned (the hard way) why regulations and building codes exist.
- cornholio 8y ago
  I don't want to minimize your plight, sleeping above a commercial street can be a nightmare. And it's a bugger when your quiet neighborhood suddenly transforms into Tourist Ground Zero. But cities do need to grow and expand. Quiet backstreets turn into busy boulevards. They have done so for millennia. The economic opportunities such transformation brings for the city far outstrip the cost of new sound insulating windows - not to mention that, for owners, those are more than covered by the appreciation of the property. That's why I prefer a system where tourists and hosts pay for the creative destruction they do to residential areas, and put that revenue to good use for everybody else.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    Cities have a process for growing and transforming neighborhoods from sleepy residential areas to "tourist ground zero", and that process does not involve waiting for Airbnb to decide which areas to do that to.
  - stingraycharles 8y ago
    In Amsterdam it’s a broader issue, and excessive tourism is a big complaint by pretty much anyone native to Amsterdam. The city has recently put a halt to any further expansion of tourist shops / hotels / etc downtown, and on a national level we’re trying to get tourists to visit other parts of The Netherlands instead. This, in order to keep the authentic nature of the city, and ensure the city still caters to locals as well. These kind of rules is something all businesses need to adhere to, and I see no reason why Airbnb should be an exception.
    - cornholio 8y ago
      So auction the tourist lodging right like taxi medallions, to hotels and home bnbs alike. The move you describe will likely enrich the hotels that already exist downtown without any benefit to the city.
      - stingraycharles 8y ago
        Sure, those kind of things are a possibility. The point I was making is that Airbnb needs to play by the same rules as everyone.
        cornholio 8y ago
        But they don't, do they? The whole point of these "rent 90 days a year, apply for a new license every year" laws is to impose an onerous burden on Bnbs that traditional suppliers either don't face or can amortize over hundreds of rooms. It's laughable to require a single rented room the same paperwork that a large hotel requires, then say that enables them to "play by the same rules as everyone else". They are a fundamentally different way to provide the same economic service and the law needs to adapt, not protect traditional interests.
qwerty456127 8y ago
How is that a problem?
- jabgrabdthrow 8y ago
  I would guess it’s a zoning issue, it’s an issue to the extent communities have a right to do zoning at all
raverbashing 8y ago
It's probably a management company, the host might be the owner or just a worker of that company
mrgordon 8y ago
Sounds like it created a lot of jobs in the local community. How is that a problem exactly? You would prefer if they didn't hire assistants?
- rdlecler1 8y ago
  When you eat up the marginal supply of housing it can greatly increase the cost for everyone vs adding a couple dozen low wage jobs for which they’ll also have trouble affording to pay rent themselves. Tourists are not paying taxes to the city, their needs should come second to the citizens that live there.
  - mrgordon 8y ago
    The marginal supply of housing argument is often a bit ridiculous. Many cities will give their best real estate to hotels and create entire neighborhoods where locals can basically not find housing. Meanwhile some Airbnbs interspersed through the city is the thing driving up housing cost. Just start converting hotels into apartments and you've solved the problem. You say "tourists are not paying taxes to the city" which is certainly wrong for San Francisco and for most other cities I've travelled to as well. In San Francisco, there is a 14% occupancy tax and it is taken by Airbnb automatically during booking as they do in hundreds of cities. Compare this to Craigslist where I used to rent and nobody ever mentioned paying tax once. Finally, many of these cities literally have tourism as their number one industry. Its a bit dangerous to start saying that the people who fund your city are second class citizens since they only pay occupancy taxes and not income taxes. In fact many of the areas against Airbnb like Miami Beach have bent over so far backwards for tourists that all they care about are the hotels now.
    - jimrandomh 8y ago
      No, converting hotels into apartments doesn't solve the problem. The total amount of spaced used by Airbnb and hotels combined is too small compared to the need for housing; the only thing that solves the problem is removing the height limits, and letting people put up taller buildings.

mrgordon 8y ago

I'm curious why a superhost renting a bunch of properties is "sketchy" while a corporate hotel brand with many properties is to be trusted. What if the hosts registered LLCs and listed their friendly sounding corporation names instead? What was sketchy was when I used to have to rent apartments in cities off Craigslist with absolutely no regulation, no escrow, and no reputation to avoid people who literally just finished ripping someone off. This is where many cities seem to want to return. Since many people prefer to stay in apartments / houses while they travel, some of the hotels will not be needed and can be converted into additional housing. It makes sense that there would be entrepreneurs who learn to make these places attractive to travelers while maintaining low costs to clean and maintain the property. In fact, these places are often better run than a property that is only rented out a few times a year. If I were the cities, I would focus on regulating the things that really impact quality of life (e.g. having firm penalties for frequent noise violations) without trying to micromanage how people use hotels versus apartments. People will always rent apartments, do house swaps, couchsurf, etc. and its often a win-win for everyone involved. Punish the bad actors, leave people alone who rent a lot of places out but don't trigger complaints, and avoid pushing the movement underground where you can't tax it or try to help with noise violations and other problems.

detaro 8y ago
It's sketchy if they pretend to not be a superhost, and I'd at least suspect that they're not operating entirely proper businesses then too.
- mrgordon 8y ago
  Well its a bit of a chicken and egg problem then, right? If you say they pretend not to be a superhost, then that seems to imply they have multiple accounts. The only reason they would do this is because their city has put in place strict rules against renting multiple properties out. If the city hadn't put those rules in place, those people would have one account and wouldn't be "sketchy" anymore. Meanwhile the same people will instead now go to Craigslist or a local equivalent and rent out 50 properties without the need to create any accounts or earn superhost status. They won't report that income, it won't be taxed, and they probably won't have a legitimate business. Somehow this is a win.