3 ms·

Fair enough, but airbnb wasn't the first to capitalize on the void in the market (for short term stay for cheap, non hostel), and nor will it be the last. It's

Fair enough, but airbnb wasn't the first to capitalize on the void in the market (for short term stay for cheap, non hostel), and nor will it be the last. It's not like these problems just appeared with airbnb, right? And if we push the problems down the road, whats to stop a decentralized network where the listors profit even more with even less payout for negative externalities? Maybe in that case, listors assume more risk, but as it is now, I don't see property owners being proactive and mining listing sites for their properties. Illegal in some areas or not, the law moves too slow to appease the crowd. Hell, I even tried (I took down the website though, might open source it if enough interest) launching a SaaS app last year that did just that, and talked to some of my Real estate friends in NYC and here's the feedback one gave me from the landlords/managers she talked to: "I spoke with 6 landlords and one real estate property manger and here's what I left with: 1. All the landlords with smaller portfolios agreed that there was no need for such a service, especially if they paid for it. They knew their buildings very well - and the doorman always kept them in the loop. 2. The property manager did not see a use for the service at all. He was actually a bit offended that I asked him about it, but he had a few good points: - Buildings with property managers keep pretty good tabs on who is coming in and out of their building. Especially if there is a doorman. - He questioned how data on the website would be verified and felt that simply "pulling listings" from other websites was not enough. There are inaccurate listings all over the web - especially in NYC. 3. My personal thoughts are that you would need a dedicated team to verify and confirm air bnb services. Also, after they find out that someone is illegally subletting - what next? Does the website offer a solution? The landlords I spoke with typically used illegal subletting to charge their own tenant additional fees (like $100/day until the illegal subletter is out) so in the case someone is silly enough to do so - they can make money off of it." The cognitive dissonance on one side in this market is telling me that if airbnb looses this battle, I should do something for the side of the market that is actually trying to solve their problems and pay for it. But, If you know a landlord or property manager that actually has this problem and wants to make money of trying to solve the problems arising because of the negative externalities rather than moan that government isn't doing enough, point me in their direction because I would love to talk more! Can reach me at my username here with gmail.

brudgers 13y ago
It's not like these problems just appeared with airbnb, right? The problems generally associated with short term rentals did not begin with AirBnB. The solutions are largely reflected in existing regulations. The problems specifically associated with an upsurge in short term rentals in stable residential neighbourhoods largely did start with AirBnB and their competitors and their facilitation of illegal activity. NYC is just one place where AirBnB operates and it is atypical in that it pits wealth against wealth. Most people in the US don't have doormen and property managers to handle problems for them. To be honest, the way to address the issue isn't on the supply side, it's by the demand side. AirBnB doesn't really solve a problem most of the time - most of the time their are adequate hotel rooms available in most places. This means that the value proposition for travellers is much more cost sensitive than for black market hoteliers. They have alternatives and it doesn't take much to make those alternatives more attractive than renting illegally, while appealing to the empathy of those renting is a losing proposition since they wouldn't rent if they much cared how the neighbours felt about it. And going after demand requires much less harsh measures. Fining the renter $200 a day plus a court appearance significantly shifts the value proposition if there is a substantial risk of being caught. On the other hand, the owner can roll small fines and attorney fees into the rents they collect.
- cinquemb 13y ago
  >The problems specifically associated with an upsurge in short term rentals in stable residential neighborhoods largely did start with AirBnB and their competitors and their facilitation of illegal activity. And now that airbnb exists and is largely software enabling already present behaviors, if this subpoena results in an injunction and somehow halts airbnb, will the cat be put back into the bag now that people know something like it is possible? >AirBnB doesn't really solve a problem most of the time - most of the time their are adequate hotel rooms available in most places. That's highly suspect to say… >This means that the value proposition for travelers is much more cost sensitive than for black market hoteliers. … because you say it yourself, they must be doing solving someones problems (cost sensitive travelers) if they are even in business and growing the way they have. Are there laws that go after the demand side (cost sensitive travelers)? It seems like the laws now are only on the supply side (renters who illegally list) and if that is the case, I question what those current alternatives are. What are they, and why aren't people using them? >And going after demand requires much less harsh measures. Fining the renter $200 a day plus a court appearance significantly shifts the value proposition if there is a substantial risk of being caught. On the other hand, the owner can roll small fines and attorney fees into the rents they collect. Aren't renters (people who list) the supply side if your looking at it from airbnb's perspective, and who has the incentive to do that now? Not airbnb, and evidently not even the managers, because the current "solution" for them is to whine to the government.

brudgers 13y ago

It's not like these problems just appeared with airbnb, right? The problems generally associated with short term rentals did not begin with AirBnB. The solutions are largely reflected in existing regulations. The problems specifically associated with an upsurge in short term rentals in stable residential neighbourhoods largely did start with AirBnB and their competitors and their facilitation of illegal activity. NYC is just one place where AirBnB operates and it is atypical in that it pits wealth against wealth. Most people in the US don't have doormen and property managers to handle problems for them. To be honest, the way to address the issue isn't on the supply side, it's by the demand side. AirBnB doesn't really solve a problem most of the time - most of the time their are adequate hotel rooms available in most places. This means that the value proposition for travellers is much more cost sensitive than for black market hoteliers. They have alternatives and it doesn't take much to make those alternatives more attractive than renting illegally, while appealing to the empathy of those renting is a losing proposition since they wouldn't rent if they much cared how the neighbours felt about it. And going after demand requires much less harsh measures. Fining the renter $200 a day plus a court appearance significantly shifts the value proposition if there is a substantial risk of being caught. On the other hand, the owner can roll small fines and attorney fees into the rents they collect.

cinquemb 13y ago
>The problems specifically associated with an upsurge in short term rentals in stable residential neighborhoods largely did start with AirBnB and their competitors and their facilitation of illegal activity. And now that airbnb exists and is largely software enabling already present behaviors, if this subpoena results in an injunction and somehow halts airbnb, will the cat be put back into the bag now that people know something like it is possible? >AirBnB doesn't really solve a problem most of the time - most of the time their are adequate hotel rooms available in most places. That's highly suspect to say… >This means that the value proposition for travelers is much more cost sensitive than for black market hoteliers. … because you say it yourself, they must be doing solving someones problems (cost sensitive travelers) if they are even in business and growing the way they have. Are there laws that go after the demand side (cost sensitive travelers)? It seems like the laws now are only on the supply side (renters who illegally list) and if that is the case, I question what those current alternatives are. What are they, and why aren't people using them? >And going after demand requires much less harsh measures. Fining the renter $200 a day plus a court appearance significantly shifts the value proposition if there is a substantial risk of being caught. On the other hand, the owner can roll small fines and attorney fees into the rents they collect. Aren't renters (people who list) the supply side if your looking at it from airbnb's perspective, and who has the incentive to do that now? Not airbnb, and evidently not even the managers, because the current "solution" for them is to whine to the government.