5 ms·

.5B on a model with grave legal headwinds. Who wants to see the deck for how that gets spun to investors?

• paulbaumgart 13y ago
  Legal headwinds is par-for-the-course for companies bringing large, established industries into the internet age. See also: Uber, Tesla.
  • rosser 13y ago
    One of these things: {Uber, Airbnb, Tesla} is not like the others.
    • paulbaumgart 13y ago
      Depends on the level of abstraction at which you view them :) They are all getting into legal troubles by trying to replace the status quo with a more efficient process that happens via the internet.
      • mbreese 13y ago
        But one of them actually makes something. For Tesla the issue isn't what they are selling, but how. For AirBnB and Uber, the issue is what (and even for Uber, that's really only an issue for UberX).
        • rosser 13y ago
          But disruption, man!
    • colinbartlett 13y ago
      They are all attempting to disrupt very established industries.
  • pistle 13y ago
    Uber: small capital loss with short disentanglement arc for hosts (cars+drivers) Tesla: orange Airbnb: large capital loss with longer disentanglement arc for hosts (property owners) The places most likely to reinforce the established industry are exactly the places airbnb needs to be most prevalent. I'm not saying there isn't a path through the thicket, just that I'd love to see how they are saying they can get there. .5B only buys so many politicians in so many markets. Guerilla resistance by entrenched interests with force applied by upset neighbors could easily swamp cash reserves. Tesla only has to fight each state due to sales channels and they have a product which doesn't offend people driving in the car next to them. Airbnb might be fighting city to city and their service providers would really annoy plenty of neighbors. With the small surge in speculative buyers who never owner-occupy, their success would come in a zero-sum game with neighbors. Your condo is worth less if there is a stream of tourists stumbling through the commons all the time.
    • paulbaumgart 13y ago
      Yeah, clearly a city with all housing rented out on Airbnb is a crappy city, and a city that bans it outright is an inefficient city. The golden mean is still probably big enough (worldwide) to make Airbnb an immensely valuable company.
      • 205guy 13y ago
        I disagree. As soon as they fight the fight, and the cities lay down the law, anyone can copy their model. They will have first mover advantage, but also a bad legacy. I can definitely see space for a company to move in and claim to follow all laws (and actually do it), and for the rest just copy AirBnB exactly. Users would just feel better knowing they are complying with laws and not annoying neighbors. They could even start now and take the high road, for example advocate for reasonable reform (allow only owner-occupiers and only 30-60 days hosting max per year). Yes, they're limiting their market, but they gain huge mindshare and free media, and they're also avoiding the (admittedly small but non-zero) risk of going down in flames. Also, local copies of AirBnB can spring up very easily. It would be very easy to add just enough local knowledge to a product that makes it better than AirBnB. For example, you could add local attractions on the maps, local restaurants, local partners offering discounts (in a way you can't do with targeted ads). Hosts might prefer the specialized website since they won't be competing with so many nearby areas.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
• alphonse23 13y ago
  this is what has been on my mind the whole time this Airbnb thing has been making the rounds. I really don't think this is a good idea - and is doomed to fail. That's so much money too...