4 ms·

> It's funny to me, because AirBnB runs in to all the same problems we had with hotels a hundred years ago. We have dozens of taxes, rules, regulations, buildin

> It's funny to me, because AirBnB runs in to all the same problems we had with hotels a hundred years ago. We have dozens of taxes, rules, regulations, building codes etc now for hotels. I imagine at some point it will be the same for AirBnBs. What's old is new. An industry can only be disruptive for so long. Eventually, it will either fail, or be successful and become the new status quo.

umvi 8y ago
> Eventually, it will either fail, or be successful and become the new status quo. The book "Animal Farm" is so prescient, it's scary. I know it was written about governments but it applies to a lot of different organizations and industries: "The creatures outside looked from <new> to <old>, and from <old> to <new>, and from <new> to <old> again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." Just swap out <new> and <old> with: Uber/taxis online streaming/cable AirBnb/hotels Not saying all of these will come to pass, but generally as the disruptive <new> are encumbered with ever increasing regulation over time they eventually become <old> again
- rchaud 8y ago
  I disagree with the streaming video example. Netflix, Disney etc aren't facing any regulatory issues that's causing them to circle their wagons and create their own content pipelines and streaming services. They're doing it to maximize profit and be less dependent on third parties.
- trophycase 8y ago
  More like: when immoral profiteers figure out how to best game the new system, the quality becomes more or less the same
- CamperBob2 8y ago
  Uber at their worst still beats the heck out of taxis at their best. (Yes, that's an exaggeration, but only a mild one.) There is a reason why the taxi industry died almost overnight. Legalities aside, that simply doesn't happen to industries whose customers are happy. However, I've never quite grokked AirBnB. I'm not a big fan of traveling in general, and when I do travel I prefer (and don't mind paying for) predictability and good customer service. Crashing in some random person's house doesn't seem very predictable, as threads like this tend to suggest, and responsive customer service is obviously out of the question.
- officemonkey 8y ago
  On the other hand, hotels are innovating on improving the customer experience too. The Hilton App is easier to use than their actual website. I am able to check-in and check-out without talking to anyone. I can use a digital key on my phone. They send me receipts automagically. And thanks to consistent corporate standards, I know what to expect in a Hampton Inn vs. Homewood Suites vs. Conrad. Getting a hotel has become less of a hassle, has less friction, and is more convenient. Oh, and the technology helps the chain as well. If you disrupt an industry, you better hope your moat is big enough to ward off the entrenched business. Ridesharing might indeed kill the taxi, but there's no way AirBnb is going to defeat the hotel industry.
cmsonger 8y ago
> An industry can only be disruptive for so long. I think another thing people tend to forget: regulations are often there for a real reason. Especially in the US there's a vocal majority who thinks that regulations are the problem. It's true sometimes. The reasons for the regulation were either bad in the first place, or have "aged out." But a lot of times: the regulation in the way of some business is there to protect consumers.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  I fully disagree. I view regulation like opioid painkillers. Sometimes they're necessary to solve a problem. Sometimes the problem is temporary. If a society gives them out at the drop of a hat there will be negative consequences far and wide. Regulation is dangerous and is very easy to abuse but it performs a necessary function in society. We need to be careful not to over-prescribe it though because every regulation is at its core a limitation on individual liberty and when we trade away individual liberty the utmost scrutiny should be applied to ensure we are getting a good deal.
  - tezzer 8y ago
    Do you have any examples of such negative consequences, regulations for problems that went away (that became inconvenient after the fact), or dangerous and abusive regulations? Your objection sounds dogmatic, but if it's founded I'd love to hear on what.
    - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
      I submit as evidence a) pretty much every case where a "may issue" permit is required to engage in business (these mostly happen on the state and local level and incentivize corruption). b) Regulatory capture (e.g. the current FCC). c) The war on drugs (I can come up with other examples of unnecessarily criminalizing things if needed). And on the other side, the movies/music/video games/tv rating system sure isn't perfect but it's a great example of an industry coming up with a solution that doesn't involve regulation. Various other professional organizations (ones that are not given special protection via legislation, i.e. not doctors and lawyers) are also good examples. The AWS comes to mind as a pretty good one. Legislation is hard to get right and harder to change and I'd rather only use it when other options have been exhausted (e.g. I support making ISPs utilities and a public option for healthcare). Personally I find the knee jerk reaction to legislate whenever anything bad happens quite dogmatic.

umvi 8y ago

> Eventually, it will either fail, or be successful and become the new status quo. The book "Animal Farm" is so prescient, it's scary. I know it was written about governments but it applies to a lot of different organizations and industries: "The creatures outside looked from <new> to <old>, and from <old> to <new>, and from <new> to <old> again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." Just swap out <new> and <old> with: Uber/taxis online streaming/cable AirBnb/hotels Not saying all of these will come to pass, but generally as the disruptive <new> are encumbered with ever increasing regulation over time they eventually become <old> again

rchaud 8y ago
I disagree with the streaming video example. Netflix, Disney etc aren't facing any regulatory issues that's causing them to circle their wagons and create their own content pipelines and streaming services. They're doing it to maximize profit and be less dependent on third parties.
trophycase 8y ago
More like: when immoral profiteers figure out how to best game the new system, the quality becomes more or less the same
CamperBob2 8y ago
Uber at their worst still beats the heck out of taxis at their best. (Yes, that's an exaggeration, but only a mild one.) There is a reason why the taxi industry died almost overnight. Legalities aside, that simply doesn't happen to industries whose customers are happy. However, I've never quite grokked AirBnB. I'm not a big fan of traveling in general, and when I do travel I prefer (and don't mind paying for) predictability and good customer service. Crashing in some random person's house doesn't seem very predictable, as threads like this tend to suggest, and responsive customer service is obviously out of the question.
officemonkey 8y ago
On the other hand, hotels are innovating on improving the customer experience too. The Hilton App is easier to use than their actual website. I am able to check-in and check-out without talking to anyone. I can use a digital key on my phone. They send me receipts automagically. And thanks to consistent corporate standards, I know what to expect in a Hampton Inn vs. Homewood Suites vs. Conrad. Getting a hotel has become less of a hassle, has less friction, and is more convenient. Oh, and the technology helps the chain as well. If you disrupt an industry, you better hope your moat is big enough to ward off the entrenched business. Ridesharing might indeed kill the taxi, but there's no way AirBnb is going to defeat the hotel industry.

cmsonger 8y ago

> An industry can only be disruptive for so long. I think another thing people tend to forget: regulations are often there for a real reason. Especially in the US there's a vocal majority who thinks that regulations are the problem. It's true sometimes. The reasons for the regulation were either bad in the first place, or have "aged out." But a lot of times: the regulation in the way of some business is there to protect consumers.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
I fully disagree. I view regulation like opioid painkillers. Sometimes they're necessary to solve a problem. Sometimes the problem is temporary. If a society gives them out at the drop of a hat there will be negative consequences far and wide. Regulation is dangerous and is very easy to abuse but it performs a necessary function in society. We need to be careful not to over-prescribe it though because every regulation is at its core a limitation on individual liberty and when we trade away individual liberty the utmost scrutiny should be applied to ensure we are getting a good deal.
- tezzer 8y ago
  Do you have any examples of such negative consequences, regulations for problems that went away (that became inconvenient after the fact), or dangerous and abusive regulations? Your objection sounds dogmatic, but if it's founded I'd love to hear on what.
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    I submit as evidence a) pretty much every case where a "may issue" permit is required to engage in business (these mostly happen on the state and local level and incentivize corruption). b) Regulatory capture (e.g. the current FCC). c) The war on drugs (I can come up with other examples of unnecessarily criminalizing things if needed). And on the other side, the movies/music/video games/tv rating system sure isn't perfect but it's a great example of an industry coming up with a solution that doesn't involve regulation. Various other professional organizations (ones that are not given special protection via legislation, i.e. not doctors and lawyers) are also good examples. The AWS comes to mind as a pretty good one. Legislation is hard to get right and harder to change and I'd rather only use it when other options have been exhausted (e.g. I support making ISPs utilities and a public option for healthcare). Personally I find the knee jerk reaction to legislate whenever anything bad happens quite dogmatic.