6 ms·

"If your landlord was interested in running a tenement home/boarding house/hotel" - then he would have to staff it himself too, promote it and take the risk of

• hack_edu 14y ago
  Yes, though if the landlord had a hand in the operation I'd imagine it would have to be a legal business. This means taxes, insurance, wages, administration costs, permits that probably make it more trouble than its worth.
  • fennecfoxen 14y ago
    Let's take a moment and see the amazing things that can be accomplished with AirBnB and marvel at the things that we do to ourselves with regulation which could make things like this practically impossible. Stifling business and innovation, deadweight losses to society, and all that economics jazz. Great for the traditional hotel industry, though, and whatever lobbyists they have at City Hall and in Albany...
    • deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    • deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    • Locke1689 14y ago
      Yeah, it's amazing how one can make a lot more money by violating health and safety regulations. Upton Sinclair did a great piece about how amazing it is.
      • fennecfoxen 14y ago
        Your comment is incredibly relevant and insightful because the world is black and white and our current regime, which is perfect, is all that stands between us and _The Jungle_. So-called "sensible" reforms to hotel-related legislation and economic freedom in general will only doom us all to accidental cannibalism in our hamburgers. Seriously, this is flippin' AirBnB, not the slaughterhouse industry. I only asked you to think about the costs, not to roll everything back. Is this a knee-jerk reaction to straw-man arguments which you happen to imagine coming from your least-favorite Republicans, or what?
        • Locke1689 14y ago
          You criticized regulation in general so I criticized lack of regulation in general. It's not a hard leap. If you want a more closely related set of laws, look at tenement housing. The Jungle was not the only example of an industry that badly needed reform.
    • hack_edu 14y ago
      True, its easy to go this grasp for this argument in the abstract. Hell, maybe the way they do things in NY is corrupt. But in reality you're grossly oversimplifying a century of progress in public policy. Labor laws protect the needy and powerless, taxes pay for schools and city services, permits keep us safe and hold businesses accountable if they fuck customers over or violate things like heath codes...
    • rprasad 14y ago
      The Chinese suppliers who provided all that terrific melanine-spiked baby powder said the same thing! Why let such silly things as laws stand in the way of profit? Who cares if someone else gets hurt...
    • fennecfoxen 14y ago
      Okay, I don't want to drag HN into flamewars for the lulz, so... Man, all you guys, chill. I'm not saying let's all go anarchist hyper-libertarian on you, or say that no regulation has any purpose or any benefit. I'm just asking you to think about the costs we impose on ourselves with it - I think this is reasonable, because you're clearly doing a perfectly good job thinking of alllll the benefits already, as your responses have clearly indicated. And this is a specific occasion to see the costs. Most occasions you won't get to see the costs. They'll be behind the veil of obscurity and all you'll actually see is a bunch of (possibly self-interested) Republicans talking about abstractions, if the costs are mentioned at all. Perhaps now that we are better enabled by technology we can get all or substantially all of the benefits with fewer costs in the future? Then everyone can be happy happy freedom joy double rainbow all across the sky puppy-kisses. For srsly. :) okay i'm done here. :)
      • 205guy 14y ago
        Yeah, but what are the "costs" when AirBnB "moves in?" Expectations of residential building/neighborhood such as certain amount of traffic and noise, as well as neighbors who are relatively long term (in other words, you can get to know them--example may not apply in some cities). Face it, AirBnB is just the next hiding place for illegal rentals after tax and zoning officials caught on to vrbo. I don't understand how so many people think that they can turn the property under their control (owned or rented) into a business without liability or regulation. Just write the word taxi on your car, pick up some fares, and see what happens.
    • rayiner 14y ago
      The problem is that it's hard to tell when value arises from the elimination of a deadweight loss and when it arises from externalization of costs. E.g. environmental regulation generates some deadweight loss in the form of compliance, etc. It also seeks to internalize inherent costs of activity that would otherwise be externalized. If we got rid of the regulation, a factory owner would see a small amount of benefit from the elimination of the deadweight loss, and a very large amount of benefit from being able to externalize the inherent environmental costs of operating a factory on the local community. In the situation of AirBnB, the externalities are imposed on all the other residents of the building and the neighborhood who signed up for apartment leases on the assumption that random people would not be coming and going. The value that accrues to the AirBnB host is generated partially by the loss of value to his neighbors. So what you have is not a creation of value, but rather the opportunistic transfer of value.
      • peterjancelis 14y ago
        Negative externalities are best handled by tort law. Let case law develop over time. Central planning (i.e. one law with 'good intentions') does not work.
        • rayiner 14y ago
          Tort law works okay when the number of interacts are limited, but it falls down when you're talking about large numbers of people interacting. Ronald Coase, who is deified in modern conservative economics circles, said as much in his seminal 1960 paper on the FCC.
        • msellout 14y ago
          So I can sue smokers for polluting my air as I walk past them? How about my neighbors who play loud music at 4am? Oh, and that guy who urinated on the plants outside my apartment? Hmmm. I'm not sure that it's so easy for courts to take on all these cases. I'm especially worried that it's too much burden on individuals to defend their rights. Maybe we should try to find a consensus on what's OK and have the police hand out tickets?
  • cabalamat 14y ago
    > though if the landlord had a hand in the operation I'd imagine it would have to be a legal business Couldn't the landlord just up the rent? That way, presumably everyone would be happy.
  • msellout 14y ago
    I pay my landlord in cash. He doesn't accept checks. Though I suppose AirBnB does force you to accept credit card and that's a bit harder to hide.
• btilly 14y ago
  Read the article, the landlord is getting into AirBnB. Why would the landlord want a middleman in this case?
  • pajmullaney 14y ago
    It sounds like the OP was actually an excellent host, and that's worth something on AirBnB. The landlord wouldn't necessarily be able to consistently pull in the kind of high-quality guests by himself.
    • epo 14y ago
      The OP is a parasite, abusing his landlord's resources for gain. Also, if he hasn't declared his 'rental' income for tax purposes then his problems are only just beginning ...
      • z0r 14y ago
        The OP pays his rent. He abused his landlord's resources in the sense that his lease prohibited his behavior, but there's no need to label him as a parasite. His behavior is no more parasitical than the behavior of the landlord himself. If you have no moral objections to rent, your objection to someone creating value by providing rental liquidity and turning a small profit while doing so is bewildering.
        • tatsuke95 14y ago
          >"He abused his landlord's resources in the sense that his lease prohibited his behavior" He signed an agreement with another party saying he would not do what he ended up doing, for profit. How are you equating that with the landlord collecting rent? Maybe if the landlord signed an agreement with one rent price, then started charging a higher price, you could equate the two behaviours.
  • ed209 14y ago
    >Why would the landlord want a middleman in this case? for the reason I stated, someone to look after the place while multiple Airbnb guests come and go. Otherwise you'll need to pay for a cleaner and check the place every time someone stays. That middleman is taking a lot of the pain of managing a property away from the landlord.
• chrisdannen 14y ago
  Exactly. This restraining order was the first I had heard from my landlord that he didn't want us airbnb'ing. A phone call and I would have stopped. I knew it was too good to be true.
  • parfe 14y ago
    Attached to the order was a complete printout of my Airbnb listing and all my reviews, included as evidence I had violated clauses in my lease. (Some leases, I have since learned, have evolved specific language prohibiting tenants from listing their pads on vacation-rental sites such as Airbnb.) I don't buy your innocence here. I've been leasing houses for ~10 years now during and after college. The leases have always required a mix of landlord approval for subletting, banned running a business from the house, and prohibited occupation by non-lessees. Here are two clauses from an older lease[1] I happen to have in my desk: * Tenant shall not assign this Agreement, or sub-let or grant any license to use the Premises or any part thereof without prior written consent of Landlord. * The premises shall be used and occupied by Tenant and Tenant's immediate family... exclusively, as a private single family dwelling. Your faux innocence is pretty annoying actually. You were abusing the property for commercial purposes and you're surprised he didn't give you a friendly phone call? 1 Looks like the lease was originally snatched from www.academichomes.com/downloads/ExampleLeaseAgreement2.doc
    • omonra 14y ago
      I actually find your belligerent attitude annoying. Is that helpful to note? OP would be 'abusing' the property if he were running a crack den. I see no problem with tenants doing whatever they want with the property that they are leasing - as long as no damage is done & neighbors are not troubled.
      • parfe 14y ago
        Then don't get doe-eyed when served with legal papers after signing a lease which explicitly prohibits the behavior.
      • adgar 14y ago
• chives 14y ago
  I'm glad someone made the connection; if his landlord is going to Airbnb anyway, why not cut a deal? If I was his landlord, I would have more than enough leverage with the breech of contract to get him to sign a new similar contract, this one charging maybe 2 times more rent. The landlord gets paid more, which in turn covers his slightly higher (or possible the same) landlords insurance and then some. The landlord lets his tenant do what he's good at (maintain a sterling Airbnb profile and choose good renters) and the landlord takes a larger cut. Worst case scenario, his tenant doesn't take the deal and the landlord proceeds to kick the tenant out for breech of contract (could possibly lead to a court battle, but breech of contract is a pretty cut and dry phenomenon and the contract most likely has breech of contract clauses built into it) and do was he was going to do anyway (rent it out through Airbnb or otherwise). As it stands the landlord will be throwing money at lawyers (possibly covered by landlords insurance, but could effect the premiums later), which may not turn out favorably for the landlord in court, to ultimately do something that is outside his area of expertise (act as an Airbnb hotel himself). That's what I think at least.