4 ms·

Their value-to-money is better because the externalize all the cost to the local community where they remove supply and up the rent for what supply is left.

wink 5y ago
The problem I see is that for certain trips a Hotel is simply bad. My last one was a Chaos Communication Congress where I knew I'd be in my room exactly 6h-8h per night for like 4 days. All I really need is a bed and a shower. In the end I chose a hostel for that but if I don't use 90% of the amenities of the hotel (not even storing my luggage there), why would I pay that high amount? Maybe it's too situational, maybe what I would have wanted was a capsule hotel with a tiny room with a bed (or something to put my sleeping bag on), and it wouldn't have to be the same one every night if I had a locker there. Disclaimer: Have never used AirBnb or alternatives before, but I think it has its uses. For example sharing a flat with 6 people is sometimes half the cost of 3-4 hotel rooms (depending on how you can split)
- dorchadas 5y ago
  > For example sharing a flat with 6 people is sometimes half the cost of 3-4 hotel rooms (depending on how you can split) And, again, this is the whole problem. Because that's a flat that could have gone to someone who actually lives and works in the local area, not a tourist. It's cheaper because it externalizes that cost. I'm fine with hostels too, I see no problem with people choosing them. I'm not fine with converting residential homes into unlicensed hotels . It destroys the local community, and drives up prices for all the other people who are left trying to live there, and further feeds housing crises.
magicroot75 5y ago
This sounds like a problem for local regulators and not Airbnb. We can't expect corporate actors to operate for much more than legally attained profits. They have a fiduciary duty to do so. And many localities do regulate Airbnb. In many cases locals vote for those regulators. Don't want corporate actors who optimize for wealth? Expect conditions far worse than a neighborhood with a bunch of Airbnb units.

wink 5y ago

The problem I see is that for certain trips a Hotel is simply bad. My last one was a Chaos Communication Congress where I knew I'd be in my room exactly 6h-8h per night for like 4 days. All I really need is a bed and a shower. In the end I chose a hostel for that but if I don't use 90% of the amenities of the hotel (not even storing my luggage there), why would I pay that high amount? Maybe it's too situational, maybe what I would have wanted was a capsule hotel with a tiny room with a bed (or something to put my sleeping bag on), and it wouldn't have to be the same one every night if I had a locker there. Disclaimer: Have never used AirBnb or alternatives before, but I think it has its uses. For example sharing a flat with 6 people is sometimes half the cost of 3-4 hotel rooms (depending on how you can split)

dorchadas 5y ago
> For example sharing a flat with 6 people is sometimes half the cost of 3-4 hotel rooms (depending on how you can split) And, again, this is the whole problem. Because that's a flat that could have gone to someone who actually lives and works in the local area, not a tourist. It's cheaper because it externalizes that cost. I'm fine with hostels too, I see no problem with people choosing them. I'm not fine with converting residential homes into unlicensed hotels . It destroys the local community, and drives up prices for all the other people who are left trying to live there, and further feeds housing crises.

magicroot75 5y ago

This sounds like a problem for local regulators and not Airbnb. We can't expect corporate actors to operate for much more than legally attained profits. They have a fiduciary duty to do so. And many localities do regulate Airbnb. In many cases locals vote for those regulators. Don't want corporate actors who optimize for wealth? Expect conditions far worse than a neighborhood with a bunch of Airbnb units.