3 ms·

> AirBNB allows a city to host a larger number of tourists than hotels alone can provide, which stimulates the local economy with lots of spending etc. This is

> AirBNB allows a city to host a larger number of tourists than hotels alone can provide, which stimulates the local economy with lots of spending etc. This is not "artificial", it's real local economic growth. I live in a tourist city - there's no shortage of hotel rooms. As tourists flood into livable dwellings, hotel vacancy rates have skyrocketed, and rents for the locals are skyrocketing as well. Usually tourist cities don't have a hard time building new hotels. Building new housing can be tough. Hotel taxes are popular with the locals for obvious reasons. Property taxes aren't. NINBYs don't like residential density either. For better or for worse, the only way out of this is through regulation.

crazygringo 3y ago
> I live in a tourist city - there's no shortage of hotel rooms. How do you know? It's not going to show up as hotels always 100% full. If there was demand from 10,000 tourists, and there were 7,000 hotel rooms and 7,000 AirBNB properties, then you could have 5,000 (71%) of hotel rooms occupied and 5,000 (71%) of AirBNB properties occupied and you'd think there was no shortage of hotel rooms. But there'd be no shortage of hotel rooms only because of AirBNB. The reality is that there'd be demand from 10,000 tourists and only 7,000 hotel rooms. > Usually tourist cities don't have a hard time building new hotels. Building new housing can be tough. Well tough on them. Lots of things are tough. I have no sympathy -- new housing should be built, end of story. It's not sending a man to a moon, it's just regular old governance. It's very clear that many tourists want to stay in AirBNB's. This is a valid consumer preference to stay somewhere that feels more like a home, in a place that feels like a neighborhood instead of a busy downtown, with a normal amount of space rather than a cramped hotel room, and at less cost. It seems silly to say that's a bad thing.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 3y ago
  > It's very clear that many tourists want to stay in AirBNB's. This is a valid consumer preference Well sure it's a valid preference (I'm not sure what an invalid consumer preference looks like), but city governments will (and should!) obviously prioritize the needs of residents over the wants of tourists. Residents want to live in the houses that are currently sitting vacant 4-5 days of the week, and completely empty through large swaths of the winter. It's horribly inefficient. Residents want tourists to stay in hotels, not drunkenly partying every weekend in their own neighborhoods. Residents don't want their rent to keep rising 3x faster than their wages. It will be frustrating to some tourists and the folks sitting on short term rental empires, but the tourists don't get to vote on these issues and the Airbnb investor gurus are outnumbered. In the coming years Airbnbs are going to get severely restricted, regulated, and taxed in every major metropolitan area that has both tourism and a housing shortage, because it's such an easy popular thing to do.

crazygringo 3y ago

> I live in a tourist city - there's no shortage of hotel rooms. How do you know? It's not going to show up as hotels always 100% full. If there was demand from 10,000 tourists, and there were 7,000 hotel rooms and 7,000 AirBNB properties, then you could have 5,000 (71%) of hotel rooms occupied and 5,000 (71%) of AirBNB properties occupied and you'd think there was no shortage of hotel rooms. But there'd be no shortage of hotel rooms only because of AirBNB. The reality is that there'd be demand from 10,000 tourists and only 7,000 hotel rooms. > Usually tourist cities don't have a hard time building new hotels. Building new housing can be tough. Well tough on them. Lots of things are tough. I have no sympathy -- new housing should be built, end of story. It's not sending a man to a moon, it's just regular old governance. It's very clear that many tourists want to stay in AirBNB's. This is a valid consumer preference to stay somewhere that feels more like a home, in a place that feels like a neighborhood instead of a busy downtown, with a normal amount of space rather than a cramped hotel room, and at less cost. It seems silly to say that's a bad thing.

rrrrrrrrrrrryan 3y ago
> It's very clear that many tourists want to stay in AirBNB's. This is a valid consumer preference Well sure it's a valid preference (I'm not sure what an invalid consumer preference looks like), but city governments will (and should!) obviously prioritize the needs of residents over the wants of tourists. Residents want to live in the houses that are currently sitting vacant 4-5 days of the week, and completely empty through large swaths of the winter. It's horribly inefficient. Residents want tourists to stay in hotels, not drunkenly partying every weekend in their own neighborhoods. Residents don't want their rent to keep rising 3x faster than their wages. It will be frustrating to some tourists and the folks sitting on short term rental empires, but the tourists don't get to vote on these issues and the Airbnb investor gurus are outnumbered. In the coming years Airbnbs are going to get severely restricted, regulated, and taxed in every major metropolitan area that has both tourism and a housing shortage, because it's such an easy popular thing to do.