Slashdot Mirror


Bidding Website Rentberry May Be the Startup of Your Nightmares (gizmodo.com)

Renting is already fraught with pain, from annual rent hikes to extortionate lettings fees. But if a new service called Rentberry takes off, it could be about to get a lot worse. From a report: Rentberry has been operating in test cities and angering affordable housing advocates since 2016. But with its new expansion into 1,000 cities in the United States, the rental bidding website is about to piss off a lot more people. Alex Lubinksy, founder of Rentberry, seems to be pursuing an image that's closer to Uber's vilified Travis Kalanick than the do-gooder model of Elon Musk. Lubinsky courts the controversy that surrounds his startup and is known to include negative press when communicating his vision to reporters. But one big difference with Rentberry will be that if it takes off and becomes the new standard for renting apartments, most of its customers won't be able to run a #deleteRentberry campaign because landlords will have the control. The website essentially functions as a cross between CraigsList and eBay. A landlord lists a rental space and potential tenants bid against one another to claim the lease. Tenants' personal information is available to the landlord. The landlord then makes their final decision by weighing what the best offer is along with which bidder seems like they'd be the best tenant. For now, Rentberry charges users a $25 fee, but in the future, it plans to charge 25 percent of the difference between the asking price and the agreed upon rent. Whoever received the better deal pays the fee -- every month.

17 of 307 comments (clear)

  1. Only in America by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Rent-seeking off those seeking rent. Oh the irony.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:Only in America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, it has nothing to do with "government mandates". It refers to anyone who tries to extract profits without actually doing any more work. Monopolies (cable companies, unregulated utilities, patent holders, etc.) do it all the time.

    2. Re:Only in America by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "rent-seeking" usually refers to entities that benefit from government mandates. This is not the case here.

      Typically yes, but it is not solely from government sources. From wikipedia: "Rent-seeking implies extraction of uncompensated value from others without making any contribution to productivity." Basically any type of middle-man arrangement with no real added value is rent seeking. In fact, this is worse than a middle man if you consider their long-term goal of charging off of the difference (either way) from the original asking price: their ideal situation is one is which one party gets a decidedly sub-optimal outcome, thereby creating negative value.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  2. Seems like a good idea to me... by imgod2u · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It matches supply with demand. If rents are too high the root problem is there isn't enough housing being built. All of this yelling about "greed" and "rent control" and even worse -- high minimum wage -- are just bandaids that won't solve the root of the problem.

    So politicians get to "champion the little guy" with ineffective measures while enjoying their large lots for their own housing and collecting expensive property taxes. But woe be you if you're a developer seeking to build more housing units. Fees and permits alone will scare away all but the most determined (and profit seeking).

    1. Re:Seems like a good idea to me... by Catbeller · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why would a developer build anything but the priciest luxury rentals? There is no economic incentive to build small places for small rents. There ain't no such thing as a free market for *renters*. Every advantage and price increase trick is on the side of the the property owners.

      Developers will never, ever build enough units to drop rental prices. That would be stupid. They will build to keep supply high for the highest incomes, and let the lower price units dribble away into condos, which keeps rents high and induces more pricey condo contrstuction.

      There is no incentive whatsoever to build cheap apartments. A decentive, really, because the neighbors will fight to the death anyone who tries to put low-income people in their Zillow Zone.

    2. Re:Seems like a good idea to me... by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why would a developer build anything but the priciest luxury rentals? There is no economic incentive to build small places for small rents.

      Actually, there is. You do this on volume and ensure yourself a constant stream of tenants in the buildings generating rent.

      You get your low price, small units in the Federal Section 8 housing program. The US Feds pay most of the rent, they have rules for the tenants, and if the tenants break rules, do drugs, destroy the place, you can have the Feds evict them and replace them with someone else in the program.

      I know folks that make a LOT of mostly GUARANTEED money owning section 8 housing units.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  3. Rent controls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This service is effectively illegal in Quebec.

    Enjoy paying $3000 for a shithole in Manhattan you anti-regulation lunatics

  4. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a landlord we'd never use this service. Who the hell is gonna show the apartments and however long the bidding war takes means I am out that money if I just could have gotten it rented. And I have to pay a fee for my unit being vacant because of some stupid bidding war, and all my leases will just have random dates instead of something standard like the 1st of the months?

    Sounds like a really stupid idea for most landlords

  5. Re:Only on slashdot... by vux984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Only on slashdot are we presented with an example of a startup giving complete control of rental housing pricing to the renters"

    How do you figure? The landlord can still reject anyone they don't like, they won't be forced to rent below their 'reserve price' if they don't want to. All it does is pit renters directly against each other not only to "qualify" but now you'll have to compete by offering more money too.

    Meanwhile the company is not just offering this as a service for a flat fee or even a percentage of the rental -- they want a residual income stream for as long as the rental goes on.

    You know what adding another middleman to the deal means? It means the prices go up. Period. Further, it complicates the ability to even negotiate rent with the landlord in the future, since this company is now sitting in the middle taking a piece of each months rent for doing fuck all beyond extracting a higher rate from you in the first place.

    So yeah.. if you are a renter this is pretty much awful. If you are landlord, it's not necessarily too bad, although most landlords aren't going to be keen to see any money flowing to this company month after month that they think should be going to them. I mean... all it should take is "another startup" that charges a flat 25$ fee with no bullshit residuals to kill these guys outright. Wonder if that will happen? Or will they get total market capture like MLS for property sales, and then not using the system becomes a disadvantage.

  6. The downfall of this idea by Sydin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is that landlords have access to bidders personal information, and that the landlord gets to "choose" among the bidders who actually gets to rent the property, regardless of their offers. The article compares the service to ebay, but a key difference is that on ebay the highest bidder always gets the item, provided they can actually pay up. By putting that power instead in the hands of the landlords, the company is really shooting themselves in the foot. Some landlord somewhere will eventually turn down a higher bid from a black/latino/etc potential tenant in favor of a white one, or a male tenant instead of a female one or vice versa, etc etc. Then both the landlord and the company will be buried up to their eyeballs in litigation from every conceivable direction.

    1. Re:The downfall of this idea by KalvinB · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As someone who rents out their house through Renter's Warehouse, I get to see the personal details of someone before I rent to them. And of course I do. I need to know their credit and criminal history before letting them live in my property.

      Just because someone bids the highest doesn't mean they have the credit or history to justify letting them rent your property. They may be renting beyond what they can afford or they may have a history of causing damage. Or a criminal history you don't want to take the risk on.

  7. Re:Want to keep property a certain way? BUY IT! by drew_kime · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hey, if you want to maintain your view of the beach ... join together with your neighborhoods to purchase that property, and maintain it as you see fit—and pool your resources together to fend off that violently imposed monopoly (something something eminent domain).

    I did join together with my neighbors to purchase the property. It's called being a citizen and paying taxes.

    Oh, wait, did you mean to pool together with such a small group that we could be easily overruled by a corporation?

    --
    Nope, no sig
  8. Re:Don't like Rentberry? by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No. NYC does not have enough rental units.

    Well, at some point, a city is a finite resource, and it sounds like NYC is about full, and people need to look elsewhere perhaps, to live?

    Sure, everyone has a right to live wherever they want, but they don't necessarily have a right to "afford" to live wherever they want.

    Everything in life has a price.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  9. Re:Apartments being too expensive is signal to bui by drew_kime · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Resources get allocated poorly, producing too much of what the economy doesn't need, and too little of what the economy does need.

    "The economy" doesn't need shit. It's people who need things.

    --
    Nope, no sig
  10. As an ex-landlord by gurps_npc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I can tell you that before rentberry, the price is pretty much set by the market. You really can't raise it or even lower it much. Frankly, I can't see rentberry changing this much, any more than AirBnb already has. If rents get too high, people either move further out and accept a longer commute, or they buy. People flock to the cheaper areas.

    The difference between a profitable landlord and a poor one is mainly due to two factors (both even more important in the age of AirBnb):

    a) Keeping every apartment/ room filled. A vacant apartment eats all your profit. If you have a large enough portfolio of rental units, this becomes an accepted cost of doing business, but if you four or less units, it kills your profits.

    b) Avoiding the bad tenant. The guy that needs to be evicted, or simply destroys the place. There is ZERO chance I would trust a website to figure out who is a good tenant and who is a bad one. You need to meet them in person and see what if any requests or issues they have.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  11. Already dead. by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Pay a fee every month? yeah that guarantees that it will not become the standard.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  12. Massachusetts law limits rental agent fees by nerdonamotorcycle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    to one month's rent. I'm sure Attorney General Healey is going to be very interested in this.