3 ms·

I find it really unfortunate that the airbnb debate is always so polarized. AirBNB has often provided me a better alternative to a largely terrible hotel marke

by hannob 8y ago

I find it really unfortunate that the airbnb debate is always so polarized. AirBNB has often provided me a better alternative to a largely terrible hotel market that often takes racket prices and makes me pay for services I don't need. On the other hand I completely understand when people are annoyed about party folk living in the flat above them or when they lack safety regulations or don't pay the same taxes hotels do. But none of that justifies an outright ban, there should be solutions to regulate the bad while allowing the good. Make them pay hefty fees that they may pass on to their customers if they violate night rest times. Make them follow safety regulations and pay takes. (Yeah, that will make it more expensive, but I can still avoid paying for daily room service I want to opt out and sometimes even can't and 24/7 reception staff I don't need.)

munk-a 8y ago
Airbnb has the ability to enforce these policies internally, which would come with the bonus of not needing to lose money to local governments. It's simply that they don't. In much the same way that Uber skirts the laws of background checks, Airbnb responds to complaints and attempts to introduce regulation with lawsuits. I wish the Hotel and Cab markets were disrupted by companies that wanted to optimize within the rules of the game, but they, either through lawsuits or just ignoring laws, don't play in an even setting, these traditional companies end up being burdened with more regulations than the "disrupters" adhere to.
- sokoloff 8y ago
  To optimize within the cab rules, you’d need to have drivers purchase a medallion and only be able to make pickups in the city which issued the medallion... To optimize within the hotel rules, you’d need hosts to get a hotel/rooming house license...
  - munk-a 8y ago
    Cab medallions are currently transferable, so you would need to purchase enough medallions to operate the fleet you would hit at peak usage, but otherwise you'd just need to ensure that all of the driver can qualify for a medallion. Hotel/rooming house licenses aren't un-affordable, there are regulations around them but both motel6 and mom&pop B&Bs can acquire them, so the bar is generally pretty low. For instance in Cambridge, MA it looks like it'd cost about 200$[1] to file for the license, Airbnb could probably offer legal services to help people properly apply if they cared to. [1] https://www.cambridgema.gov/iwantto/applyforahotellodgingorinnholderlicense https://www.cambridgema.gov/iwantto/applyforahotellodgingori...
    - sokoloff 8y ago
      Clicking through to https://cambridgema.viewpointcloud.com/categories/1096/record-types/6565 https://cambridgema.viewpointcloud.com/categories/1096/recor..., when you read the rules, you see "Do not apply for this if Airbnb or any short term rental, or a bed and breakfast establishment." Making it obviously difficult for AirBnB to play within the established rules...
- xemdetia 8y ago
  Airbnb definitely has become a great example in the 'if you don't regulate yourself as an industry you will become regulated whether you want to or not.' Unlike some of the dynamics in some of the other industries the people that airbnb exploits are individuals who rent/own property and every new airbnb host is effectively having to relearn every problem and potential pitfall/cost that hoteliers or seasoned short-term rental property owners have already solved and priced accordingly. I feel like people don't give enough criticism of Uber/Lyft/Airbnb of them profiting off people who aren't properly evaluating their expenses as a business. Most of what they offer probably should be more expensive than what they end up being but instead because people aren't experienced enough to properly cost things and undervalue what they are providing.
  - sokoloff 8y ago
    I hear that argument fairly consistently about Uber drivers, but I ask most of my Uber drivers their experience on the platform. Almost every one of them seems to have quite a good grasp of the economics that are relevant to their situation. They break down into 3 groups. The smallest are people between jobs. They're doing something that's better than their best alternative. The next largest group are the occasional drivers, meaning Uber is not their main job. These people typically already own a car, so the fixed costs are leaving their pocket every month whether or not they drive ride sharing. Ride sharing more than comfortably covers their variable costs, so they're making money. The largest group (in terms of rides given/taken, not in terms of drivers) are people who are driving Uber essentially full-time. Many of them have bought a car specifically for its Uber suitability (good gas mileage, low maintenance, etc) and I think these drivers are properly thinking about their expenses (because they're pretty compartmentalized). I know it's common to think that the drivers are not fully and rationally evaluating the value proposition that Uber offers, but I see pretty frequent evidence to the contrary. There are fewer than 5% of people for whom I ask the question who respond in a way that makes me think that they think their predominant expense is "just gas money".
parthdesai 8y ago
>On the other hand I completely understand when people are annoyed about party folk living in the flat above them or when they lack safety regulations or don't pay the same taxes hotels do. Or creating a shortage of supply for actual people looking to rent in the cities desirable areas, which results in increase of rent. That's the biggest one imo.
- munk-a 8y ago
  They do have some effect on pricing, sure, but there is a much larger culprit in local zoning practices at work when it comes to housing affordability.
  - parthdesai 8y ago
    I'm not talking about only SF though.
    - munk-a 8y ago
      Overly aggressive zoning isn't an issue specific to SF, it is much more hilariously stupid there, but people living near or within cities in detached houses elsewhere lobby continuously against higher density and public transit to try and keep their neighborhood the quiet one. I'm up in Vancouver and we've got some really strong NIMBY idiots here that are fighting tooth and nail against expanding the skytrain so that it actually services the universities while fighting against density increases in Kitsilano which, honestly, is basically a part of downtown now. Stupid people are abundant everywhere.
Maken 8y ago
Well, the problem is that most cities are actually trying to make them pay and getting their lawyers in response.
snarf21 8y ago
I agree, most people see this as black and white and not grey. One thing to keep in mind though although making the hotels compete may lower prices for you it always comes at a the expense of someone else. In this case it affects the margins of huge hotel chains (not awful) and in the availability of housing and apartments for people who actually need to live in/near the city you are just visiting (really awful). You obviously can pass laws to swing the equilibrium away from people buying up all the property but at some point it becomes a loss after you factor in AirBNB's cut and you're back to the hotels. Like you said, this is multi-faceted.

by hannob 8y ago

munk-a 8y ago

Airbnb has the ability to enforce these policies internally, which would come with the bonus of not needing to lose money to local governments. It's simply that they don't. In much the same way that Uber skirts the laws of background checks, Airbnb responds to complaints and attempts to introduce regulation with lawsuits. I wish the Hotel and Cab markets were disrupted by companies that wanted to optimize within the rules of the game, but they, either through lawsuits or just ignoring laws, don't play in an even setting, these traditional companies end up being burdened with more regulations than the "disrupters" adhere to.

sokoloff 8y ago
To optimize within the cab rules, you’d need to have drivers purchase a medallion and only be able to make pickups in the city which issued the medallion... To optimize within the hotel rules, you’d need hosts to get a hotel/rooming house license...
- munk-a 8y ago
  Cab medallions are currently transferable, so you would need to purchase enough medallions to operate the fleet you would hit at peak usage, but otherwise you'd just need to ensure that all of the driver can qualify for a medallion. Hotel/rooming house licenses aren't un-affordable, there are regulations around them but both motel6 and mom&pop B&Bs can acquire them, so the bar is generally pretty low. For instance in Cambridge, MA it looks like it'd cost about 200$[1] to file for the license, Airbnb could probably offer legal services to help people properly apply if they cared to. [1] https://www.cambridgema.gov/iwantto/applyforahotellodgingorinnholderlicense https://www.cambridgema.gov/iwantto/applyforahotellodgingori...
  - sokoloff 8y ago
    Clicking through to https://cambridgema.viewpointcloud.com/categories/1096/record-types/6565 https://cambridgema.viewpointcloud.com/categories/1096/recor..., when you read the rules, you see "Do not apply for this if Airbnb or any short term rental, or a bed and breakfast establishment." Making it obviously difficult for AirBnB to play within the established rules...
xemdetia 8y ago
Airbnb definitely has become a great example in the 'if you don't regulate yourself as an industry you will become regulated whether you want to or not.' Unlike some of the dynamics in some of the other industries the people that airbnb exploits are individuals who rent/own property and every new airbnb host is effectively having to relearn every problem and potential pitfall/cost that hoteliers or seasoned short-term rental property owners have already solved and priced accordingly. I feel like people don't give enough criticism of Uber/Lyft/Airbnb of them profiting off people who aren't properly evaluating their expenses as a business. Most of what they offer probably should be more expensive than what they end up being but instead because people aren't experienced enough to properly cost things and undervalue what they are providing.
- sokoloff 8y ago
  I hear that argument fairly consistently about Uber drivers, but I ask most of my Uber drivers their experience on the platform. Almost every one of them seems to have quite a good grasp of the economics that are relevant to their situation. They break down into 3 groups. The smallest are people between jobs. They're doing something that's better than their best alternative. The next largest group are the occasional drivers, meaning Uber is not their main job. These people typically already own a car, so the fixed costs are leaving their pocket every month whether or not they drive ride sharing. Ride sharing more than comfortably covers their variable costs, so they're making money. The largest group (in terms of rides given/taken, not in terms of drivers) are people who are driving Uber essentially full-time. Many of them have bought a car specifically for its Uber suitability (good gas mileage, low maintenance, etc) and I think these drivers are properly thinking about their expenses (because they're pretty compartmentalized). I know it's common to think that the drivers are not fully and rationally evaluating the value proposition that Uber offers, but I see pretty frequent evidence to the contrary. There are fewer than 5% of people for whom I ask the question who respond in a way that makes me think that they think their predominant expense is "just gas money".

parthdesai 8y ago

>On the other hand I completely understand when people are annoyed about party folk living in the flat above them or when they lack safety regulations or don't pay the same taxes hotels do. Or creating a shortage of supply for actual people looking to rent in the cities desirable areas, which results in increase of rent. That's the biggest one imo.

munk-a 8y ago
They do have some effect on pricing, sure, but there is a much larger culprit in local zoning practices at work when it comes to housing affordability.
- parthdesai 8y ago
  I'm not talking about only SF though.
  - munk-a 8y ago
    Overly aggressive zoning isn't an issue specific to SF, it is much more hilariously stupid there, but people living near or within cities in detached houses elsewhere lobby continuously against higher density and public transit to try and keep their neighborhood the quiet one. I'm up in Vancouver and we've got some really strong NIMBY idiots here that are fighting tooth and nail against expanding the skytrain so that it actually services the universities while fighting against density increases in Kitsilano which, honestly, is basically a part of downtown now. Stupid people are abundant everywhere.

Maken 8y ago

Well, the problem is that most cities are actually trying to make them pay and getting their lawyers in response.

snarf21 8y ago

I agree, most people see this as black and white and not grey. One thing to keep in mind though although making the hotels compete may lower prices for you it always comes at a the expense of someone else. In this case it affects the margins of huge hotel chains (not awful) and in the availability of housing and apartments for people who actually need to live in/near the city you are just visiting (really awful). You obviously can pass laws to swing the equilibrium away from people buying up all the property but at some point it becomes a loss after you factor in AirBNB's cut and you're back to the hotels. Like you said, this is multi-faceted.