5 ms·

I’ve been so turned off by the entire concept of AirBnB, ever since their practices ruined several cities I love with massive overtourism influence. Like so man

by jb1991 5y ago

I’ve been so turned off by the entire concept of AirBnB, ever since their practices ruined several cities I love with massive overtourism influence. Like so many tech companies, the influence has just gotten completely out of control in the modern world on a global scale.

imiric 5y ago
Why would Airbnb be to blame for this? They're providing a market that fulfills demand for low cost or privately owned accommodations, competing directly with the established hotel industry. Not everyone wants or needs to stay in a hotel, and many people prefer the tourist experience facilitated by local hosts. Long-term rentals are also a convenient way to experience a location that doesn't involve complicated paperwork. Airbnb is not the problem. You're bothered by tourists.
- lambic 5y ago
  I have a friend who owns a condo in a building downtown that is almost empty of owner occupiers. The vast majority of the condos are rented out as airbnbs. She has no regular neighbours and most of the people she sees in the building are strangers. When it reaches that level, it is a problem.
  - jb1991 5y ago
    It's a similar problem in neighborhoods that were not designed to be the center of tourism, no hotels, and homeowners had no intention of living next to "hotels", but if just a couple houses become full-time AirBnB all year, that is what happens -- everyone is now living next to hotels, and that spits in the face of neighborhood and those who chose to live there.
- jb1991 5y ago
  > Why would Airbnb be to blame for this? Because they have pushed back hard on cities’ attempts to regulate and enforce what is happening due to the influence of their service. They have no respect for what is happening in some places and how residents are impacted. Your argument is similar to saying that Facebook is not to blame for the spread of misinformation. Tech platforms create a new world and then want nothing to do with the consequences of their influence. It is arrogant and irresponsible.
  - imiric 5y ago
    But it really is up to governments to enforce regulations. Companies have no choice but to ultimately comply if they want to keep operating in those locations. E.g. see Uber. This is not similar to Facebook, since "overtourism" is not as obviously harmful as misinformation. How would you even define it? It could be argued that it's another aspect of globalization which benefits the local economy, the travel industry and mixing of cultures.
  - jakupovic 5y ago
    Your argument is: "we should ban sales of milk because people pollute with used containers".
    - psd1 5y ago
      Only in the context of being knee-deep in milk cartons.
    - jb1991 5y ago
      Your proposed metaphor ignores the crucial question of degree, and thus fails.
      - jakupovic 5y ago
        My metaphor works but you don't like it * *edited
        jb1991 5y ago
        > My metaphor works but you don't like it. Sorry, not Sorry. Please do not use this kind of attitude and communication style on HN.
        jakupovic 5y ago
        The poster is hurt I called out his false argument, tells me I'm wrong and then I call him out on it? What's the problem? Also, are you the police?
- dorchadas 5y ago
  They're providing this market by removing housing from the local people, which drives them out and drives up prices for those who stay. This, in turn, forces all the inhabitants of a city out of it, thus ruining the character those inhabitants gave it. All so some tourist can 'live like a local', at the expense of the actual locals being able to live like a local. And it's wholeheartedly AirBnB's fault and problem. Not to mention there's often new apartment blocks being built to act as de-facto hotels but having none of the regulations in place, which isn't quite competition at all. Basically, tourists aren't locals, they should have a right to live like locals. Especially at the expense of the locals.
  - imiric 5y ago
    At a large enough scale, I agree that there's an impact to locals. But don't tourists also boost the local economy, the travel industry and introduce different cultures themselves? It's not such a clear case that this is all negative. The lack of regulations is an issue of local governments not catching up to tech companies, as usual, not Airbnb's. > Basically, tourists aren't locals, they should have a right to live like locals. What if those tourists do eventually become locals after staying at an Airbnb? Are you against migrants as well? > Especially at the expense of the locals. The locals do benefit financially from tourism. Markets like Airbnb's simply accelerate this, which of course introduces issues, but governments should carry more of the blame for this than a company that disrupts the hotel industry.
    - dorchadas 5y ago
      > At a large enough scale, I agree that there's an impact to locals. But don't tourists also boost the local economy, the travel industry and introduce different cultures themselves? It's not such a clear case that this is all negative. And tourism is planned into this with the way zoning permits work. But AirBnB skirts those rules. Also the negatives of losing housing in a city far outweigh any financial benefit that could come to it, especially as most won't be reaped by the people that are being forced out...or it will be taken from them in terms of increased rent because the supply is much smaller. > The lack of regulations is an issue of local governments not catching up to tech companies, as usual, not Airbnb. Or it's because AirBnB actively lobbies against it and refuses to enforce rules, saying it's up to the individual providers. They facilitate it, and often most things on AirBnB are illegal and against the zoning laws of whatever building they're being used for. > What if those tourists do eventually become locals after staying at an Airbnb? Are you against migrants as well? What a ridiculous question. Obviously I'm not against migrants. I'm against tourists thinking they have a right to live like locals. > The locals do benefit financially from tourism. Markets like Airbnb's simply accelerate this, which of course introduces issues, but governments should carry more of the blame for this than a company that disrupts the hotel industry. > The locals do benefit financially from tourism. Markets like Airbnb's simply accelerate this, which of course introduces issues, but governments should carry more of the blame for this than a company that disrupts the hotel industry. The locals benefit nothing from AirBnB. The landlords do, sure, but the actual residents and regular workers do not. If anything, it makes matters worse as rents are driven up, or they have to move further away from work. In the worst case scenarios, the town just becomes tourist-oriented and there's no other jobs left. That's a horrible thing as if the tourism ever dries up, the town is left up the creek. But also tell the locals they benefit financially when their local bar closed down because the landlord thought it'd be better to make it a shop that caters towards tourists; or when all their neighbors move out because of the rambunctious drunken tourists coming in at 2 every night of the week; or when their landlord decides to evict them/up their rent because the landlord knows they can make more on AirBnB than renting to residences. It's a wholly negative impact to everyone except those people who own the AirBnBs, who are often skirting multiple regulations, facilitated by AirBnB itself. It is a net negative for the city, and I know personally that housing crisis in at least one country (Ireland) has been facilitated by it, as the amount of houses on the market in Dublin doubled during the pandemic when tourism was shut down.
- hiharryhere 5y ago
  Residents have a say in how their city functions. A well run city balances the needs of its constituents - schools, access to shops, bus routes, community centres, parks, parking etc. It also balances the need of business, tourism operators, hospitality etc. None of that works when an operator like Airbnb ignores it all. Nimby’s give community consultation a bad name, but the alternative is the Wild West. No thanks.
  - nickpp 5y ago
    So, basically, Not In My Backyard, no?
    - throwaway2037 5y ago
      No, I think OP is advocating for a more balanced, community-oriented approach. The the moment AirBnB is a free-for-all, where externalities are unfairly borne by the local community. A better way would be to design a community-oriented system of rules that are applied when an owner wants to rent. For example, in this neighborhood, we allow up to X00 units to be rented during this quarter. It may change next quarter. (Or some regular period.) My point: Start small... let it grow, and allow for continuous community feedback. Another way to interpret your comment, would be to replay the OP but substitue... hmm... oil/chemical refinery next to your house. Then how does it feel if random Internet stranger replies to your post: "So, basically, Not In My Backyard, no?" It sounds low empathy. My point: There are plenty of stories on HN/Twitter/Internet about living next door to a nitemare AirBnB rental that hosts loud drunken parties each weekend.
      - seattle_spring 5y ago
        Where exactly is Airbnb a “free-for-all” nowadays? Every municipality I can think of where it might affect housing prices has very onerous regulations on STRs.
drstewart 5y ago
Exactly. Look at Venice, which was a quaint little town nobody had ever heard of until Airbnb came long. As you correctly point out, without Airbnb excessive tourism wouldn't exist. It's so nice that I've been able to find a single villain to blame this problem on instead of talking about the broader housing crisis that leads to this, which is completely the fault of governments to address housing shortages due to influence from NIMBYs and corporations. As further proof you're correct, look at Miami Beach. It's banned Airbnbs and short term rentals, and now housing there is incredibly affordable and not the most expensive in Florida.
- imiric 5y ago
  > Look at Venice, which was a quaint little town nobody had ever heard of until Airbnb came long. Venice, Italy? Arguably the most popular tourist destination in Italy for... decades? Centuries? Airbnb might've exploded this popularity, but Venice has always been Italy's Disneyland. > look at Miami Beach. It's banned Airbnbs and short term rentals, and now housing there is incredibly affordable and not the most expensive in Florida. Drastic measure aside, which has surely plummeted profits from tourism, are you sure the drop in real estate prices has nothing to do with the fact most parts of Florida's coastline will be underwater within the next few decades[1]? [1]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/miami-is-the-most-vulnerable-coastal-city-worldwide/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/miami-is-the-most...
  - drstewart 5y ago
    I was being ironic on both counts: Venice was overcrowded long before Airbnb, and Miami Beach is incredibly expensive despite Airbnb. The point is there are systemic issues of housing shortages - Airbnb is at best a manifestation of these symptoms, not a cause.
    - imiric 5y ago
      Gotcha. I invoke Poe's law :)

by jb1991 5y ago

imiric 5y ago

Why would Airbnb be to blame for this? They're providing a market that fulfills demand for low cost or privately owned accommodations, competing directly with the established hotel industry. Not everyone wants or needs to stay in a hotel, and many people prefer the tourist experience facilitated by local hosts. Long-term rentals are also a convenient way to experience a location that doesn't involve complicated paperwork. Airbnb is not the problem. You're bothered by tourists.

lambic 5y ago
I have a friend who owns a condo in a building downtown that is almost empty of owner occupiers. The vast majority of the condos are rented out as airbnbs. She has no regular neighbours and most of the people she sees in the building are strangers. When it reaches that level, it is a problem.
- jb1991 5y ago
  It's a similar problem in neighborhoods that were not designed to be the center of tourism, no hotels, and homeowners had no intention of living next to "hotels", but if just a couple houses become full-time AirBnB all year, that is what happens -- everyone is now living next to hotels, and that spits in the face of neighborhood and those who chose to live there.
jb1991 5y ago
> Why would Airbnb be to blame for this? Because they have pushed back hard on cities’ attempts to regulate and enforce what is happening due to the influence of their service. They have no respect for what is happening in some places and how residents are impacted. Your argument is similar to saying that Facebook is not to blame for the spread of misinformation. Tech platforms create a new world and then want nothing to do with the consequences of their influence. It is arrogant and irresponsible.
- imiric 5y ago
  But it really is up to governments to enforce regulations. Companies have no choice but to ultimately comply if they want to keep operating in those locations. E.g. see Uber. This is not similar to Facebook, since "overtourism" is not as obviously harmful as misinformation. How would you even define it? It could be argued that it's another aspect of globalization which benefits the local economy, the travel industry and mixing of cultures.
- jakupovic 5y ago
  Your argument is: "we should ban sales of milk because people pollute with used containers".
  - psd1 5y ago
    Only in the context of being knee-deep in milk cartons.
  - jb1991 5y ago
    Your proposed metaphor ignores the crucial question of degree, and thus fails.
    - jakupovic 5y ago
      My metaphor works but you don't like it * *edited
      - jb1991 5y ago
        > My metaphor works but you don't like it. Sorry, not Sorry. Please do not use this kind of attitude and communication style on HN.
        jakupovic 5y ago
        The poster is hurt I called out his false argument, tells me I'm wrong and then I call him out on it? What's the problem? Also, are you the police?
dorchadas 5y ago
They're providing this market by removing housing from the local people, which drives them out and drives up prices for those who stay. This, in turn, forces all the inhabitants of a city out of it, thus ruining the character those inhabitants gave it. All so some tourist can 'live like a local', at the expense of the actual locals being able to live like a local. And it's wholeheartedly AirBnB's fault and problem. Not to mention there's often new apartment blocks being built to act as de-facto hotels but having none of the regulations in place, which isn't quite competition at all. Basically, tourists aren't locals, they should have a right to live like locals. Especially at the expense of the locals.
- imiric 5y ago
  At a large enough scale, I agree that there's an impact to locals. But don't tourists also boost the local economy, the travel industry and introduce different cultures themselves? It's not such a clear case that this is all negative. The lack of regulations is an issue of local governments not catching up to tech companies, as usual, not Airbnb's. > Basically, tourists aren't locals, they should have a right to live like locals. What if those tourists do eventually become locals after staying at an Airbnb? Are you against migrants as well? > Especially at the expense of the locals. The locals do benefit financially from tourism. Markets like Airbnb's simply accelerate this, which of course introduces issues, but governments should carry more of the blame for this than a company that disrupts the hotel industry.
  - dorchadas 5y ago
    > At a large enough scale, I agree that there's an impact to locals. But don't tourists also boost the local economy, the travel industry and introduce different cultures themselves? It's not such a clear case that this is all negative. And tourism is planned into this with the way zoning permits work. But AirBnB skirts those rules. Also the negatives of losing housing in a city far outweigh any financial benefit that could come to it, especially as most won't be reaped by the people that are being forced out...or it will be taken from them in terms of increased rent because the supply is much smaller. > The lack of regulations is an issue of local governments not catching up to tech companies, as usual, not Airbnb. Or it's because AirBnB actively lobbies against it and refuses to enforce rules, saying it's up to the individual providers. They facilitate it, and often most things on AirBnB are illegal and against the zoning laws of whatever building they're being used for. > What if those tourists do eventually become locals after staying at an Airbnb? Are you against migrants as well? What a ridiculous question. Obviously I'm not against migrants. I'm against tourists thinking they have a right to live like locals. > The locals do benefit financially from tourism. Markets like Airbnb's simply accelerate this, which of course introduces issues, but governments should carry more of the blame for this than a company that disrupts the hotel industry. > The locals do benefit financially from tourism. Markets like Airbnb's simply accelerate this, which of course introduces issues, but governments should carry more of the blame for this than a company that disrupts the hotel industry. The locals benefit nothing from AirBnB. The landlords do, sure, but the actual residents and regular workers do not. If anything, it makes matters worse as rents are driven up, or they have to move further away from work. In the worst case scenarios, the town just becomes tourist-oriented and there's no other jobs left. That's a horrible thing as if the tourism ever dries up, the town is left up the creek. But also tell the locals they benefit financially when their local bar closed down because the landlord thought it'd be better to make it a shop that caters towards tourists; or when all their neighbors move out because of the rambunctious drunken tourists coming in at 2 every night of the week; or when their landlord decides to evict them/up their rent because the landlord knows they can make more on AirBnB than renting to residences. It's a wholly negative impact to everyone except those people who own the AirBnBs, who are often skirting multiple regulations, facilitated by AirBnB itself. It is a net negative for the city, and I know personally that housing crisis in at least one country (Ireland) has been facilitated by it, as the amount of houses on the market in Dublin doubled during the pandemic when tourism was shut down.
hiharryhere 5y ago
Residents have a say in how their city functions. A well run city balances the needs of its constituents - schools, access to shops, bus routes, community centres, parks, parking etc. It also balances the need of business, tourism operators, hospitality etc. None of that works when an operator like Airbnb ignores it all. Nimby’s give community consultation a bad name, but the alternative is the Wild West. No thanks.
- nickpp 5y ago
  So, basically, Not In My Backyard, no?
  - throwaway2037 5y ago
    No, I think OP is advocating for a more balanced, community-oriented approach. The the moment AirBnB is a free-for-all, where externalities are unfairly borne by the local community. A better way would be to design a community-oriented system of rules that are applied when an owner wants to rent. For example, in this neighborhood, we allow up to X00 units to be rented during this quarter. It may change next quarter. (Or some regular period.) My point: Start small... let it grow, and allow for continuous community feedback. Another way to interpret your comment, would be to replay the OP but substitue... hmm... oil/chemical refinery next to your house. Then how does it feel if random Internet stranger replies to your post: "So, basically, Not In My Backyard, no?" It sounds low empathy. My point: There are plenty of stories on HN/Twitter/Internet about living next door to a nitemare AirBnB rental that hosts loud drunken parties each weekend.
    - seattle_spring 5y ago
      Where exactly is Airbnb a “free-for-all” nowadays? Every municipality I can think of where it might affect housing prices has very onerous regulations on STRs.

drstewart 5y ago

Exactly. Look at Venice, which was a quaint little town nobody had ever heard of until Airbnb came long. As you correctly point out, without Airbnb excessive tourism wouldn't exist. It's so nice that I've been able to find a single villain to blame this problem on instead of talking about the broader housing crisis that leads to this, which is completely the fault of governments to address housing shortages due to influence from NIMBYs and corporations. As further proof you're correct, look at Miami Beach. It's banned Airbnbs and short term rentals, and now housing there is incredibly affordable and not the most expensive in Florida.

imiric 5y ago
> Look at Venice, which was a quaint little town nobody had ever heard of until Airbnb came long. Venice, Italy? Arguably the most popular tourist destination in Italy for... decades? Centuries? Airbnb might've exploded this popularity, but Venice has always been Italy's Disneyland. > look at Miami Beach. It's banned Airbnbs and short term rentals, and now housing there is incredibly affordable and not the most expensive in Florida. Drastic measure aside, which has surely plummeted profits from tourism, are you sure the drop in real estate prices has nothing to do with the fact most parts of Florida's coastline will be underwater within the next few decades[1]? [1]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/miami-is-the-most-vulnerable-coastal-city-worldwide/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/miami-is-the-most...
- drstewart 5y ago
  I was being ironic on both counts: Venice was overcrowded long before Airbnb, and Miami Beach is incredibly expensive despite Airbnb. The point is there are systemic issues of housing shortages - Airbnb is at best a manifestation of these symptoms, not a cause.
  - imiric 5y ago
    Gotcha. I invoke Poe's law :)