>The problems specifically associated with an upsurge in short term rentals in stable residential neighborhoods largely did start with AirBnB and their competit

>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.