2 ms·
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 p
by paulbaumgart 12y 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 12y agoI 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.
- paulbaumgart 12y agoI think you severely underestimate the difficulty of what AirBnB has built. Two-sided marketplaces are hard. But I agree that in the long-term, the trend will be towards decentralization of marketplaces, and AirBnB will need to evolve or be displaced.