3 ms·

Having stayed in ~50 AirBnBs, we have very seldom used sketchy ones that have the problems you describe (once). Are you certain you are representing most unit

Having stayed in ~50 AirBnBs, we have very seldom used sketchy ones that have the problems you describe (once). Are you certain you are representing most unit owners fairly?

reitzensteinm 2y ago
How would staying in an Airbnb give you any insight? The problem isn't the hosts, it's the folks staying. They're substantially more likely to be drunk and partying, and don't need to worry about any long term consequences of their antisocial behaviour. I check Airbnb when I move, and I'd rate a full time rental next to me similarly to a busy street. Not a deal breaker, but certainly a strike against it. If others do the same, that translates to a direct reduction in property value for the host's neighbours. I don't have any moral issue with Airbnb hosts or travellers - I have used it about as much as you have. I don't mind people making money from it. But when a city decides to quantify the externalities and impose restrictions, it is absolutely not appropriate to talk about financial losses hosts have. They made a cynical bet on relaxed (poor) governance, and lost. You or I shouldn't care any more than they should care about my startup failing.
- pjkundert 2y ago
  The cities that have done so are likely to experience the outcomes historically associated with rent controls — disaster. I’m just stating the obvious.
  - reitzensteinm 2y ago
    Banning or controlling Airbnb is simply not analogous to rent control. Assuming free market long term rentals and no NIMBY building restrictions, long term rental prices will fluctuate, and if the demand is sufficient, more units will be built. That your plan for a house with a rental unit attached isn't profitable under the new regime isn't a disaster, it's the market doing its job. If residents wanted it enough, they'd be willing to pay for it. There is no disaster by definition. You're not stating the obvious, you're talking your book.
    - pjkundert 2y ago
      Your hypothesis, that AirBnB units are not fungible with long-term rentals, is not sound. I personally know property owners, large and small, and their properties are fluidly exchangeable between long and short term rentals. Reducing the production of new rental units will have the obvious result.
      - reitzensteinm 2y ago
        If you don't have rent control or NIMBY blocking construction, you've got a free market and everything will be fine. The legality of Airbnb is completely orthogonal to this. I'm not even suggesting that cities should ban or restrict Airbnb, just that doing so can be rational and business owners need to take the risk of this into account. Given the delta in profitability, the market does understand this. I did not claim that Airbnb units aren't fungible with rentals, that's obviously true, and rereading this discussion I don't understand how you believe I made that argument.
- fragmede 2y ago
  but the city does care about your failing startup if you've taken a loan from them and owe back taxes to them.

Having stayed in ~50 AirBnBs, we have very seldom used sketchy ones that have the problems you describe (once). Are you certain you are representing most unit owners fairly?

reitzensteinm 2y ago

How would staying in an Airbnb give you any insight? The problem isn't the hosts, it's the folks staying. They're substantially more likely to be drunk and partying, and don't need to worry about any long term consequences of their antisocial behaviour. I check Airbnb when I move, and I'd rate a full time rental next to me similarly to a busy street. Not a deal breaker, but certainly a strike against it. If others do the same, that translates to a direct reduction in property value for the host's neighbours. I don't have any moral issue with Airbnb hosts or travellers - I have used it about as much as you have. I don't mind people making money from it. But when a city decides to quantify the externalities and impose restrictions, it is absolutely not appropriate to talk about financial losses hosts have. They made a cynical bet on relaxed (poor) governance, and lost. You or I shouldn't care any more than they should care about my startup failing.

pjkundert 2y ago
The cities that have done so are likely to experience the outcomes historically associated with rent controls — disaster. I’m just stating the obvious.
- reitzensteinm 2y ago
  Banning or controlling Airbnb is simply not analogous to rent control. Assuming free market long term rentals and no NIMBY building restrictions, long term rental prices will fluctuate, and if the demand is sufficient, more units will be built. That your plan for a house with a rental unit attached isn't profitable under the new regime isn't a disaster, it's the market doing its job. If residents wanted it enough, they'd be willing to pay for it. There is no disaster by definition. You're not stating the obvious, you're talking your book.
  - pjkundert 2y ago
    Your hypothesis, that AirBnB units are not fungible with long-term rentals, is not sound. I personally know property owners, large and small, and their properties are fluidly exchangeable between long and short term rentals. Reducing the production of new rental units will have the obvious result.
    - reitzensteinm 2y ago
      If you don't have rent control or NIMBY blocking construction, you've got a free market and everything will be fine. The legality of Airbnb is completely orthogonal to this. I'm not even suggesting that cities should ban or restrict Airbnb, just that doing so can be rational and business owners need to take the risk of this into account. Given the delta in profitability, the market does understand this. I did not claim that Airbnb units aren't fungible with rentals, that's obviously true, and rereading this discussion I don't understand how you believe I made that argument.
fragmede 2y ago
but the city does care about your failing startup if you've taken a loan from them and owe back taxes to them.