Airbnb Fires Back, Accuses Hotel Industry Of Punishing the Middle-Class (thehill.com)

According to a legal documents, the American Hotel and Lodging Association (lobbying group for hotels in the U.S.) kicked off a plan last year to fight back Airbnb and other home-sharing services with a $5.6 million annual budget. Airbnb has responded to the revelation. From a report: The company's head of policy, Christopher Lehane, accused hoteliers of price-gouging customers and called their fight against Airbnb a "campaign to punish the middle-class" in a letter. It's only the latest salvo in a long fight between Airbnb and the American Hotel and Lodging Association (AHLA), which believes the startup is cutting into its business. [...] In a letter to the AHLA, Airbnb accused the group of trying to hurt middle-class property owners. The Airbnb head of policy argued that "we ought to be able to agree that the middle-class family that shares their home while traveling is not a commercial operator running a business." In its minutes, the AHLA alleged that many of the listings on Airbnb are operated by commercial entities. Lehane also accused the AHLA of being inconsistent on homesharing. He said the group's board meeting showed support for "the rights of property owners to occasionally rent out a room or their home."

Comments

You aren't joking

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump and other hotel executives like him are literally to blame.

"Since your Idea is Better than ours...."

[Zurkeyon3733]

"We are just going to lobby to make your idea Illegal!" How Pathetic! :-P

Re:"Since your Idea is Better than ours...."

[Carewolf]

"We are just going to lobby to make your idea Illegal!" How Pathetic! :-P

It already is illegal. 90% of airbnb are regulation breaking hotels, not people renting out their own appartments.

Re:"Since your Idea is Better than ours...."

[dcw3]

Is that an accurate figure, or one you pulled from an orifice? What I know is only anecdotal evidence.

Choices.

[0100010001010011]

I work remotely and need to be at a few different sites a few times per month.

For ~$50/night at AirBNB I can get a quiet room, a place to sleep and no distractions.

A hotel in the ~$50-$100/night range has a hall that smells like weed. People wandering up and down the halls at all hours of the night and hit or miss bed bugs.

Re:Choices.

[Frosty Piss]

A hotel in the ~$50-$100/night range has a hall that smells like weed. People wandering up and down the halls at all hours of the night and hit or miss bed bugs.

I guess you and I stay in a different class of hotel.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because AirBNB is still new. Give it time to regress to the mean.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was raped by three men at an AirBNB for hours.

I've never been raped at a hotel.

Re: Choices.

[ArmoredDragon]

That likely depends on where and when you spend the night at a hotel. For example, a really nice hotel in the middle of Bumblefuck, Missouri in the middle of September will likely cost nothing, whereas a hotel that happens to be where and when Superbowl Sunday is being held is either going to be really expensive or really shitty (or, sometimes both.)

Re: Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sigh. Air bnb doesn't have to shoulder the cost of maintaing a property or staff, nor do they directly control customer experience. This is such strawman BS it isn't even funny. Give us abreak, already. The sharing economy was a bad, bad idea. I predict that in ten years, any of these companies that are actually left will just be traditional companies. Crowdsourcing is not a viable business model, ultimately. No, I would call most of this a 'fad'. Fads pass.

Re:Choices.

[viperidaenz]

yeah, but that's because you invited them there to do it.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

AirBNB is causing property investors to buy up condos/homes with the pure intention of putting them up on AirBNB. This is driving up home prices by causing an artificial inventory shortage where entire blocks of cities don't have a resident, only AirBNB renters.

This hurts the middle class.

[Source: Harvard Law & Policy Review - http://harvardlpr.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/10.1_10_Lee.pdf]

Re:Choices.

[Shados]

AirBNB is pretty good for the customers, no real argument there.. It just forces the neighbors who signed up to live in a residential area to live like they were next to a hotel.

Re: Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

That wouldn't be considered rape then. Boy you're a fucking idiot, you know that?

Re:Choices.

[Registered Coward v2]

AirBNB is pretty good for the customers, no real argument there.. It just forces the neighbors who signed up to live in a residential area to live like they were next to a hotel.

This is where neighbors need to work together if someone causes a nuisance by becoming an AirBNB landlord that simply uses the property as a rental. We have a number of lawyers and cops in my neighborhood so it wouldn't be hard to determine what laws are being broken and start complaining so the owner and or renters get fined for violations. For example, if someone is having a loud party have the police show up and if they continue arrest or ticket them. Illegally parked car? Drunk in public? Same thing. Make sure the taxman knows it's generating income and estimate how much. If a homeowner decides to be a problem their are plenty of ways neighbors can address it; I've seen it happen and either stop being an asshat or move. I have no issue with the occasional rental but there are valid reasons zoning laws prevent short term repeated rentals.

Re:Choices.

[0100010001010011]

I guess you and I stay in a different class of hotel.

Absolutely. To get near the same experience as with AirBNB I could stay in a $160/night hotel.

Now I'm looking at $640 wk vs $200 wk.

Re:Choices.

[Shados]

It's so much more complicated than that. We don't have many laws to handle things people don't generally do. Laws are almost always drafted as a reaction to things.

There's no law stopping llarge amount of strangers coming in an out of a peaceful neighborhood at any hour of the night. Because in a residential, high owner ratio neighborhood, that just doesn't happen.

Until AirBNB comes in and changes everything in a few years. AirBNB itself is often breaking municipal zoning rules (using a residential zoned area as mix use), which are a pain in the ass to enforce...because we usually don't need to enforce them.

It's not just people doing parties. The mere act of existing changes the character of neighbors semi-randomly (the same way renters do at a much, MUCH slower pace).

In a world where AirBNB itself is not doing anything illegal, hosts are almost constantly in the "fucking annoying, but not illegal" territory. The kind of thing that can ruin people's peace of mind and quality of life in a way they can't do shit about it.

As long as its kept out of purely residential zoned areas, follow all municipal rules, condo rules and rental lease rules, it's really not that bad. But I'd be surprised if even 5% of AirBNBs did.

Re:Choices.

[Ichijo]

Why can't the middle class also buy up condos/homes and put them on AirBNB?

Re: Choices.

[cptdondo]

You really have no clue how airbnb works, do you?

Try being a host. You'll discover that pretty much everything you said is wrong.

Re:Choices.

[Pfhorrest]

Rent in general does this same thing already. People buy up properties just to rent them out which forces home prices up which makes it harder for people to buy and forces them to rent from the people who started that cycle by buying up the housing to rent it out.

That exact mechanism, generalized to all capital besides just real estate, is exactly what causes the runaway concentration of wealth that breaks a truly free market and turns it into capitalism.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

Pics or it didn't happen.

Re:Choices.

[vux984]

Why can't the middle class also buy up condos/homes and put them on AirBNB?

Get a clue... the middle class lacks the free money to buy an extra house just to rent out. Many in the middle class are often themselves renting because they don't have the free money to buy even a house for themselves, nevermind a spare one to rent out... meanwhile they are being evicted from those rentals so the owner can rent it by the day more lucratively on sites like airbnb.

Your solution to them being kicked out their rental to make room for airbnb, is to buy 2 houses; so that they too can benefit from airbnb!

"Let them eat cake!" am i right?

Re:Choices.

[BlueStrat]

AirBNB is pretty good for the customers, no real argument there.. It just forces the neighbors who signed up to live in a residential area to live like they were next to a hotel.

You mean as opposed to living next door to the houses in practically every suburban neighborhood where the kids have a garage band 'rehearsing' after school?

How about we just limit the number of properties/rooms someone can put up on ABnB and/or require the property be the primary residence of the property owner who must occupy it a minimum number of months per year to prevent commercial exploitation?

It seems to me that a private homeowner should be given the maximum amount of freedom to do with his property as he pleases, and it should be the laws and regulations which should adapt accordingly to the extent reasonably and pragmatically possible to maintain equal protections for all while doing so, rather than limiting a homeowner's freedom and property rights as the primary option.

Strat

Re:Choices.

[Shados]

You mean as opposed to living next door to the houses in practically every suburban neighborhood where the kids have a garage band 'rehearsing' after school?

The thing is those are not mutually exclusive. There's a certain level of things we tolerate as a society. And those things add up. I have a few neighbors with noisy kids. Not all my neighbors have noisy kids, because statistics. If I have neighbors with noisy kids AND neighbors with noisy AirBNB, that's just twice as bad.

It seems to me that a private homeowner should be given the maximum amount of freedom to do with his property as he pleases

Yup. As long as it doesn't prevent other people from enjoying their properties.

Re:Choices.

[rtb61]

Tough luck. If the difference is between my neighbour being allowed to turn the home into a for rent party house 7 days a week and it being strictly against planning laws to attempt to turn any home into a hotel at a whim, I stick to the strict planning laws, thank you very much. Having trouble affording holiday accommodation, than buy a bloody tent, no hotels in areas zoned residential only and huge fines for those who attempt to break those planning laws.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

It wouldn't be a problem if there were enough houses built. Supply and demand would then pull rents down naturally to the point where there isn't enough incentive for corps to buy up all the houses and pay property taxes on them all.

When you said:

breaks a truly free market and turns it into capitalism.

You deliberately mis-used these terms to further a point that doesn't actually make sense. A "truly free" market is an ideal concept, never fully realized, and highly volatile when significantly realized. And "capitalism" is just "private ownership of the means of production." Sticking to the proper uses of these words will lend credibility to your posts. Not that you care.

Re:Choices.

[SirLestat]

Agreed ... How could anyone think middle class can afford multiple houses just for renting? For sure if we could rent everyday at maximum price it would not take long to pay the load ... but try convince the banker of that dream you are having would lend you money!

Re:Choices.

[Actually, I do RTFA]

It wouldn't be a problem if there were enough houses built. Supply and demand would then pull rents down naturally to the point where there isn't enough incentive for corps to buy up all the houses and pay property taxes on them all.

And why would they build more housing, lowering their profits, then?

Re: Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

With everything.. It depends... If the owner is home then it isn't going to be a party house... Or maybe it would be also... But the neighbors would already expect it in that case...

Re: Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

What market? At least around me buying as a rental would mean getting something that should be updated before it would be sold.....

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

That is Econ 101 stuff.

When there isn't enough housing, whether people are renting OR buying, either way, the cost goes up due to high demand and low supply. That rise in costs increases the profit potential of buying land and building houses on it. So, people do, which pulls rents back down over time until eventually the sweet spot is reached, and supply is balanced with demand.

Of course, in realty, that sweet spot is not fixed. It moves over time, in response to all kinds of variables. Furthermore, the market is never truly free; you have government zoning limiting what land can be used for housing, as well as cartels deciding that they would prefer the supply to remain lower than the demand, and pulling all kinds of tricks to ensure that happens (government regulation is pretty much the only defense against these tricks, which produces the inescapable catch-22 of needing some government regulation to protect the freedom of the market).

That was one hell of a crash course in a subject that people spend years studying, of course.

I believe it is customary, at this point, for you to respond with another simple challenge for which the discipline of economics already has a ready answer. I am choosing to get off the merry-go-round with this post...but I will suggest that actual study would do you a world of good over posting your forgone conclusions on web forums.

Re:Choices.

[bjohnson]

Because the "middle class" is broke enough that they have to rent out their spare rooms on AirBnB to keep the rest of the roof over their heads...

Re:Choices.

[Actually, I do RTFA]

AirBnB is better, short term, for the consumer sure. However, even that weed hotel has to have safety standads that the quiet room doesn't, so it's entirely possible that rarely AirBnB is much more costly. Beyond that, AirBnB imposes huge externalities on the rest of the society you are staying in. Amazingly, those places, democracies, are far more interested in their quality of life than you saving money when you visit. Hence, the hotels, which concentrate shortterm rentals away from residential areas, have a much easier sales pitch than taxi companies do.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

Usually the price is a good indicative of the class. The class he stays at are the ~50-100/night.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

> AirBNB is causing property investors to buy up condos/homes with the pure intention of putting them up on AirBNB. This is driving up home prices by causing an artificial inventory shortage where entire blocks of cities don't have a resident, only AirBNB renters.

San Francisco's regulations prevent landlords from making more money through short-term renting on AirBnB than through long-term renting in the apartment rental market. SF's regulations also hold AirBnB hosts to the same regulatory standards as any "traditional" Bread and Breakfast. Both of these restrictions prevent the nightmare scenario you describe. If your municipality hasn't enacted similar regulation, then the market distortion is the fault of your politicians. Fix your broken politicians!

In cities that limit the number of owner-not-present rental nights to 90 per calendar year (like -for example- San Francisco, CA) AirBnB is absolutely a small-operator Bread and Breakfast matchmaking service. If your municipality hasn't structured its regulations to prevent landlords from buying up city blocks of housing and run unregulated hotels, then you _must_ fix your broken politicians!

Re:Choices.

[Ichijo]

the middle class lacks the free money to buy an extra house just to rent out.

Yes, "I can't afford to invest in my future" is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Re: Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

That really nice hotel in the middle of Bumblefuck, Missouri is likely the only choice for miles around, and has high prices year round to make up for its low occupancy rates, and take advantage of the business travellers meeting with Bumblefuck Industries next door who are basically their only customers. Cheap rates are found where the Superbowl Sunday is being held, on days other than when the Superbowl Sunday is held because there is competition, and they already made their profit from Superbowl Sunday. On Superbowl Sunday, you best go where the World Series Final is held to get cheap hotels.

Re:Choices.

[drinkypoo]

Having trouble affording holiday accommodation, than buy a bloody tent,

But if everyone did that, there wouldn't be enough tent sites, either. Or vehicle camping sites, etc etc. There's a finite supply of those, and cities are hesitant to approve more of them because they can become migrant camps and what they really want are vacation spots. Most places aren't going to approve any new affordable ones, they're going to want expensive ones like RV timeshares.

Re: Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

Spoken like a true communist, thank you comrade. We have worked too long and too hard to shutdown small businesses, curtail the middle class and generally prevent economic independence and impoverish the masses, which is why we can't let airbnb (uber, lyft etc.) stand. Nobody should be allowed any economic activity without a license.

Re: Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

No worries, the male attention you are getting today will be much less 10 years today and almost entirely cease in 15. Hang in there. It doesn't take that long for men to lose interest in your good looking body as those looks thankfully fade away fairly quickly. I'm sure you will be glad when men no longer look at you.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

Middle Class doesn't mean the same thing everywhere.

In the UK the middle class are exactly the people buying investment properties.

Re:Choices.

[BlueStrat]

Not all my neighbors have noisy kids, because statistics.

Not all your neighbors rent through ABnB because statistics. Why is the garage band next door OK but not someone putting a spare room on ABnB for some extra cash? ABnB guests who are noisy or otherwise objectionable are the exception because statistics.

Yup. As long as it doesn't prevent other people from enjoying their properties.

Ah see, and there's the rub! Who defines and sets the standards for what "preventing other people from enjoying their properties" constitutes exactly, and what all does that or can that cover?

Too much legal gray area has been left and so is being legislated through the court system and defined by corporate lawyers instead of being addressed and definitions/limits set by the appropriate legislature. The result is abuse of the system by those with money and legal teams and the loss of individual freedom and property rights.

Strat

Re:Choices.

[cptdondo]

This is funny. No host wants their houses to be turned into party house.

The vast majority of hosts pre-screen their guests; we have turned down people who have bad reviews. We do not allow parties. We comply with zoning codes.
As do most hosts - it's impossible to get insurance otherwise.

The problem is that a few cities do not have effective regulations of bed-and-breakfast operations, and tend to enforce on a "complaint" basis. The fault lies with the cities, not with VRBO or AirBnB or whoever else.

We looked at opening an AirBnB in another city; they require that the property be owner occupied, no more than 2 rooms rented, and no more than 25% of the square footage used for rentals.

Other cities have limits on how many unrelated people can stay at a house - another jurisdiction we looked at limits it to 3 unrelated people under one roof without a commercial hotel or apartment permit.

Re:Choices.

[swb]

Isn't there a diminishing return on this? Some point where AirBnB inventory is saturated and the so-called investors are owning properties that mostly remain vacant, and eventually the market inventory for permanent housing faces a surge in available properties as speculators look to get out from under their under-performing rental properties? It sounds to me like it will turn out like every other real estate speculation bubble.

If this didn't happen, and somehow AirBnB's model managed to permanently shrink the traditional hotel model maybe you'd end up with a kind of reverse effect where hotel chains began to shrink their holdings and hotels got converted into apartments to address the demand for permanent housing.

This doesn't seem entirely complex -- it seems like it would be easy to merge two hotel rooms into a single apartment. Leave one bathroom as-is and knock down the wall in the other and convert it to a kitchen (since there's already plumbing). It might even open up novel mixed-use concepts with the public spaces many hotels have.

I know I've stayed in a couple of hotels that had previously been apartment buildings in NYC and were converted to hotels to meet hotel room demand. That conversion seems more complex due to life safety improvements and the complexity of converting apartments into more uniform hotel rooms.

I stayed at a "Home2Suite" hotel last summer that looked like it was purpose built to convert into an apartment complex -- as a hotel room, it really was basically a one bedroom apartment.

Re: Choices.

[Richard_at_work]

So, as a host, Airbnb pays for the rooms upkeep, the staffs hourly wages to be on call should the guest require an extra towel, or the toilet unblocking...? Or does the host pay for that?

Re: Choices.

[cptdondo]

You do understand how AirBnB works, right? The guests pay AirBnB to find hosts. The hosts pay AirBnB to find guests. AirBnB makes sure everyone gets paid. No different from Orbitz, or Ebay, or Amazon. Or are those all passing fads too?

And how does anything you said have anything to do with crowdsourcing and a sharing economy? We get paid to provide a service. The guests pay to use the service. We pay an agent to make it happen.

Re:Choices.

[Rockoon]

And why would they build more housing, lowering their profits, then?

The one guy who reads the fucking articles... and you dont even understand the simple things of economics?

Those that are allowed to build housing make money on each house that they build. There is no debate about this. Its the end of the discussion on the matter of the "they" economics you were hand waving your bullshit "lowering profits" crap at.

Once you are willing to accept that reality, and it is in fact reality, then you easily come to the conclusion that something must be preventing people from building housing... and there is something doing that... zoning boards. The fucking politicians. It is "they" who hold the keys to "the market" and have fucked it up. In many cases these scumbag politicians are complicit in working together with some private business... for campaign donations.. for favors... but it is not the private business that holds the keys.

Re:Choices.

[Rockoon]

Isn't there a diminishing return on this? Some point where AirBnB inventory is saturated and the so-called investors are owning properties that mostly remain vacant, and eventually the market inventory for permanent housing faces a surge in available properties as speculators look to get out from under their under-performing rental properties?

Yes its self-balancing. However if the supply of housing isnt allowed to grow to meet demand, then one should look at why the supply of housing isn't growing to meet demand, because any "balance" achieved under artificial restrictions wont necessarily resemble the balance that you expected.

I believe in the San Fransisco area right now growth in both low density and high density housing is being greatly restricted by these zoning boards. Its ok tho, because people in California want a nanny.

Re:Choices.

[Rockoon]

How about we just limit the number of properties/rooms someone can put up on ABnB and/or require the property be the primary residence of the property owner who must occupy it a minimum number of months per year to prevent commercial exploitation?

How about instead you just stop fucking with the liberties of other people?

Not only isnt what you offer a solution to the problem, its not even the actual problem.

Re:Choices.

[cptdondo]

That's happening here. Lots and lots of people have entered the rental pool, mostly renting out short term on weekends and holidays and when they're not home; these people typically rent very low. While people like us have a full-time rental and we actually need to have a return on investment. AirBnB wants us to rent at low prices to keep their fees rolling in, while we want to rent high to maximize profits. We stay booked about 80% of the time which is about what we want.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

Many in the middle class are often themselves renting because they don't have the free money to buy even a house for themselves

Those people aren't in the middle class.

They're in the, "I'm too much of a dumbass to realize I'm putting myself into the lower class, but gosh darn it, I deserve a home in a place where prices are inflated 200% above average, dontchaknow?" class at best.

Yeah. That's not a real class.

Neither is the current definition of middle class.

Re:Choices.

[apoc.famine]

Donald, go back to tweeting. You don't understand people outside the 1%, and most of what we talk about on this site is the cyber anyway.

Re:Choices.

[swb]

I may be misinterpreting this, but maybe AirBnB is actually structuring their model in a way designed to encourage casual rentals (ie, spare bedroom or whatever) and discourage more commercial rental operators (people that buy living space explicitly for short term commercial rental).

I can see where people who are trying to use AirBnB as a business service would be something they may not want -- people who are profit/investment/business focused about it would be more demanding and less malleable to AirBnB, whereas casual renters may look at it as just some extra cash they can get for a room that's otherwise empty.

You could rephrase that less flatteringly, that they want to just steamroll the naive, or you could look at it that they're really trying to stay true to the "sharing economy" concept and not create a full-on hotel system with rooms supplied by professional property investors. They want to be the short-term rental Craigslist, not the short-term Amazon.

Re:Choices.

[Anonymous Coward]

don't you mean Bed and Breakfast?

Re:Choices.

[vux984]

Those people aren't in the middle class.

People who are renting aren't middle class? Graduated university, got a decent job, single, renting a condo or apartment in the city near where they work, living comfortably and saving money every month, but don't have a hundred thousand in cash for a down payment... or who would prefer to rent to stay more mobile, maybe even living with a roomate 90's 'Friends' style and don't want the commitment of a joint mortgage with those people... etc.

OR maybe their on a short term contract, so it doesn't make sense to buy a home.

That's not the working poor, and that's not 'dumb asses' either.

Re:Choices.

[vux984]

Yes, "I can't afford to invest in my future" is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Heh. The number one rule of smart investing is diversification. For the average middle class family to buy a 2nd house (and not just some small affordable rental income property in the suburbs... it pretty much has to be "downtown" to be much of a draw to airbnb guests...

Then you are tying up 100,000 to 200,000 just in the down payment; and taking on a large 2nd mortgage.

If your net worth is say, 500,000; and half of that is in your primary residence, would you put the rest all in one stock? even a blue-chip? Of course not! And putting it all into one single property, in the same city you live... that's just asking for trouble.

But that's what it would take... minimum just for a reasonable downpayment on a hot commodity condo downtown in these cities. Plus you are taking on a huge debt load that you're going to need nearly constant tenants to cover.

No, you need a net worth of 1.5M+ before it starts making sense to considering buying a 2nd property in a market like that.

There's LOTs of middle class people with net worths under a million dollars.

Re:Choices.

[Actually, I do RTFA]

then you easily come to the conclusion that something must be preventing people from building housing

Your Econ 101 answer ignores a lot of things. For instance, houses are not interchangable. So, building 2 houses is frequently less profitable than one bigger one. In fact, complexes where I live are being replaced by smaller, more expensive ones. You also ignore that there is a limiting factor in land. Capitalism works great for shoes, because you can produce as many as you want. Housing faces a much quicker falloff in marginal benefits (as you leave urban areas). Further, the "they" was intentional. Unless you have a large plot of land, you cannot replace it with more smaller apartments. So, either a high rise, or a few acres or something. But, that becomes prohibitive to collect, because those are already owned by people. So, there really tends to be oligopoplies of real estate groups that can afford to build new housing in areas.

Housing also is one of the areas with huge externalities, so obviously there needs to be regulation.

Re:Choices.

[Ichijo]

and not just some small affordable rental income property in the suburbs... it pretty much has to be "downtown" to be much of a draw to airbnb guests...

Oh good, then people renting suburban homes are practically immune to being evicted by owners who want to turn them into Airbnb rentals.

Re:Choices.

[vux984]

"Oh good, then people renting suburban homes are practically immune to being evicted by owners who want to turn them into Airbnb rentals."

Depends exactly how "suburban". Far enough away from amenities, and public transit etc, then yeah... airbnb people aren't remotely as interested.

Re: Choices.

[ArmoredDragon]

Cheap rates are found where the Superbowl Sunday is being held, on days other than when the Superbowl Sunday is held because there is competition, and they already made their profit from Superbowl Sunday. On Superbowl Sunday, you best go where the World Series Final is held to get cheap hotels.

That's not even remotely true. If you go to a place that has a major event happening, even within a week of said event, you're going to pay quite a lot. The entire week prior to the Superbowl is like this in every place that its held, every single year.

Let's be honest.

[Frosty Piss]

Let's be honest.

AirBnB is "Home Shareing" about as much as Uber is "Ride Sharing".

Re:Let's be honest.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hotels: how dare you let peasants enter the same business as us gods.

Re:Let's be honest.

[Anonymous Coward]

Airbnb owners: How dare you let the poor own homes! Homes exist so we can let them out either as Airbnbs. The poor can sleep under a bridge!

Re: Let's be honest.

[Anonymous Coward]

Peasants:. Let's just crush them both! Power to the people, power to the people! Down with the oppressors!

Re:Let's be honest.

[Anonymous Coward]

How progressive of you to save those middle class families the indignity of having the cash they need. Lemme guess, factory workers around the world should be "freed" to go back to subsistence farming too, right?

Re: Let's be honest.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see, work to get food to eat, or be worked into the food others eat.

Tough choice.

Re:Let's be honest.

[Anonymous Coward]

> AirBnB is "Home Shareing" about as much as Uber is "Ride Sharing".

In cities that limit the number of owner-not-present rental nights to 90 per calendar year (like -for example- San Francisco, CA) AirBnB is absolutely a small-operator Bread and Breakfast matchmaking service. If your municipality hasn't structured its regulations to prevent landlords from buying up city blocks of housing and run unregulated hotels, then fix your broken politicians.

San Francisco's regulations prevent landlords from making more money through short-term renting on AirBnB than through long-term renting in the apartment rental market. SF's regulations also hold AirBnB hosts to the same regulatory standards as any "traditional" Bread and Breakfast. Again, if your municipality isn't doing the same thing, fix your broken politicians.

Re:Let's be honest.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have stayed with Airbnb many times and it is almost always in the guest bedroom of someone's house. They live there.

Re:Let's be honest.

[Frosty Piss]

In cities that limit the number of owner-not-present rental nights to 90 per calendar year (like -for example- San Francisco, CA) AirBnB is absolutely a small-operator Bread and Breakfast matchmaking service.

Don't be dense.

Do normal people have to take sides?

[Anonymous Coward]

I will take AirBNB side at once. Hotel chains do whatever they want with the customer and we can not limit the freedom of people on renting their properties. If Hotel chains can not evolve to these days, that is their problem. And also, everybody is free to pay to an hotel chain if they offer what the public wants.

We're AirBnB hosts

[cptdondo]

And yes we have overhead. We pay ourselves. We pay for the space, the utilities, replacement sheets, towels, soap, etc.

But the bottom line we make a tidy profit at the end of the month on a nice apartment. Why else would you stay in business?

I support restrictions. AirBnB shoild.be owner occupied, and limited to a few rooms. Many cities have this already.

It really is a problem where cities don't have effective laws regulating bed and breakfasts as opposed to hotels.

Re:We're AirBnB hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Except there really isn't anything like AirBnB out there on the market, which makes it so effective in the first place.

A hotel lacks privacy, personal touch, furnishings, and a wide range of choices. These are all things that are strengths of AirBnB. They're all the same rooms with the same lame overpriced bullshit, lacking kitchens, furnishing, washers/dryers, etc. The stuff that you typical use day-to-day that AirBnB offers you. So thanks for supplying that for other people, you deserve to make a tidy profit off of it.

It's capitalism in it's best form.

Re:We're AirBnB hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

"A hotel lacks privacy" What? In an airbnb you are staying in someones house and probably use a common bathroom. That is soo much more private.

Middle class screwed either way.

[extranatural]

I live in a city where rental properties are hastily being converted to Airbnb rentals at an alarming rate.

Many middle class folks, myself included have been recipients of no-fault evictions as landlords rush to cash in on the short-term rental craze.

At least in my city, Airbnb drives up the price of property, making the dream of home ownership an increasingly distant fantasy for many in the middle class.

Sure when I travel, I can more easily afford a room for a night, but I'm a lot more concerned with the affordability of a the property I have to rent longterm. One day I hope to afford a mortgage, but I don't know how that will happen if every property gets converted in to an ad-hoc hotel.

Now if you happen to be one of the lucky middle-class people who already owns 1 or more properties, you might be able to make a little money with Airbnb, but for the most part Airbnb is doing nothing to help the middle class.

Re:Middle class screwed either way.

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in a city where rental properties are hastily being converted to Airbnb rentals at an alarming rate.

Many middle class folks, myself included have been recipients of no-fault evictions as landlords rush to cash in on the short-term rental craze.

This problem can be solved easily by having laws for a fixed quota of quasi hotel rooms (like AirBnB). Say you have 100,000 residential units in your city. Only 5% (or 5,000 units) are allowed to be used as AirBnB or similar quasi hotel rooms. There should be a lottery every month to determine which 5,000 units are eligible. This is win-win-win for AirBnB, the hotels and people paying rent for apartments.

Re:Middle class screwed either way.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not just the damage to those that would like to rent the apartment, it damages the whole area.
Short term lets don't buy the same sorts of things long term renters do, so expect more bars and restaurants, but fewer supermarkets, electronics stores etc.
Expect (certain) crime(s) to go up - people unfamiliar with an area are ripe pickings for muggers and pickpockets.
Expect social cohesion to decrease - you can't get to know your neighbor if they only stay there 1 week.

Re:Middle class screwed either way.

[Anonymous Coward]

And then you will have a black market of people handing over the lucky ticket if this is not managed right, and why should people invest money in improving an apartment when they could fail the lottery for years to come? That does not make sense.

Resedential

[fluffernutter]

How is keeping residential areas residential punishing the middle class? Don't the middle class have homes that would benefit from not having a loud party next to them every weekend?

You bring up a good point with the Bed Bugs

[rsilvergun]

do I really want a traveler in my house? It's not hard to cart those things around... Air BnB, like Uber, seems like another example of way too much risk being foisted on the user. Far more than they realize.

Mod Parent up

[rsilvergun]

He shoulda posted on a UID. The above deserves to be noted.

Re:Mod Parent up

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not a "he", but I prefer to remain anonymous and let my post be judged on it's merit rather than internet points.

Silicon Valley Humor

[mbone]

Airbnb Fires Back, Accuses Hotel Industry Of Punishing the Middle-Class.

A Silicon Valley firm funded by Sequoia Capital accuses a brick and mortar industry of punishing the middle class. Let's hope they don't try and expand into stand up comedy.

Landlords are not middle class

[Pfhorrest]

If you own property and make money from renting that property out to others you are not middle class, you are upper class, by any measure.

The proper middle class barely own property enough to not have to borrow it from others.

The statistical middle class can only dream of such luxury as not borrowing housing, never mind lending it.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[deesine]

I own a second home that I bought and fixed up to rent. That was the fruit from a year when I bought three properties with the aim of either flipping them or fixing then up and keeping then as rentals -- flipped the second and the third burned down during construction. I made less than $50K last year. Your definition of upper class would include me, and that's ridiculous.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[50000BTU_barbecue]

"I own a second home "

" Your definition of upper class would include me"

"and that's ridiculous."

Time for a bit of introspection, I think.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[Anonymous Coward]

You bought and tried, doesn't make you rich, but it puts you well above others. The majority of Americans don't have $500 saved for an emergency anywhere (study from last year?). Meaning they couldn't even charge that much to a credit card. They are one mishap away from complete disaster. You would have had to put down 20% or pay cash for that second home. Right before you paid that, you were well above average.

I'm currently trying to buy a multi-plex to live in and rent the other units out. With 10K saved there's nothing within 40 minutes of me that I can afford and which would make a profit of $50 a month or more (and years of profit would be wiped out by the first eviction or an angry tenant). If I wasn't saving for a house, I'd be able to consider myself rich. There's nothing I want that I can't buy (except a house).

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny that how much you made last year doesn't define what class you're in.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[Pfhorrest]

$50k is twice the average American's income. I make around that much, and it's going to be a lifelong struggle to ever own a FIRST home before I die. That you've apparently bought at least four homes (your own, the rental, the one you flipped, and the one that burned down) makes you spectacularly rich beyond my wildest dreams, and I'M already spectacularly rich by most Americans' standards. Like someone else in this thread already said, I can easily afford anything I want -- except a house. If you've got several, you are rich, period.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[JesseMcDonald]

I made less than $50K last year. Your definition of upper class would include me, and that's ridiculous.

Time for a bit of introspection, I think.

No, the idea that someone who makes $50k per year should be considered "upper class" is indeed ridiculous, no introspection required. A person is not "upper class" just because they make their money from real estate. To be sure. deriving wealth from investment rather than from working for an employer is part of the definition, but there are other aspects to consider. For one thing, the income has to be significantly above average, which is not the case here. Historically speaking, one's family background played an even larger part than wealth in determining one's social status—a merchant might be wealthier than the average aristocrat, but would still not be considered "upper class" for the simple reason of not being born into the aristocracy.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[LunaticTippy]

I make below median for my area and own 5 houses. I can't afford to buy a house where I work so I rent there. The other 5 I bought gradually, and all are mortgaged. They barely pay for theirselves but in 30 years when the mortgages are paid off I will have a modest retirement income source.

You can call me upper class, but the fact that my income is below median and I can't afford a house where I live makes your definition quite strange. I do a lot of other things that are strange for upper class, such as doing most of the handyman work myself, at least when I lived near the houses.

I've helped several tenants get their shit together and guided them through buying their own house. One of them has several houses now and calls me a role model. All my tenants are grateful for me helping them have a decent place to live at a fair price.

Working poor live paycheck to paycheck, a single setback can often result in bankruptcy or eviction. Upper class I'd say is people in the top quintile of income. There are plenty of people like myself, solidly middle class, who have eked out a modest real estate portfolio. I don't know why you are determined to see us as upper class, but the attitude isn't helpful.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[LunaticTippy]

Some free advice: if you are strapped for down payment buy a single family home with a FHA loan, you need 3% down. Live there a year while fixing it up. Rent it out and buy another house. Repeat until you have enough houses.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[deesine]

$50k is not twice the Average American income, you're wrong. And that's the highest income I've ever made, it's always less than that.

Again, you're whacked if you think my situation puts me into the "upper class".

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny that so many think how much you made doesn't somehow define your "class". You upward justice soldiers are cute.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[Pfhorrest]

If you are mortgaging then you have lower class borrower status partly cancelling out your upper class rentier status. Your renter status pulls your overall class down too. But if on the whole you are making more from people paying to borrow your capital than you are paying to borrow others', that puts you on the upper side of the class line. Raw income does not define class because it may be coming at the expense of great sacrifice (of time and energy and opportunity, or of goods already owned) and it may largely go to providing other people free income that spares them such sacrifice, that is, in paying rents or interest. Class is determined more by wealth than income, by the capital that you own or not, and consequently what you have to borrow or rent or can afford to lend or rent out. You personally have a complex mix or borrowing, renting, and renting out going on, but if on the whole you are making more from renting out than you pay in interest and rent then you are upper class. And it sound like you at least are aiming for that status if you don't have it already.

Re:Landlords are not middle class

[Pfhorrest]

The median personal income for the united states is approximately $25k. The mean personal income is closer to $50k but that's not the kind of average people usually use in statistics like this because it is skewed way upward by the concentration of income at the top. The median american household income is also around $50k but the median household also has about two people in it so of course that is twice the personal income, there are twice the persons. And I'm not saying making $50k makes you upper class, just that that is far from a low income statistically. Owning multiple homes (somehow, despite the income you deride as low) is what makes you upper class. Raw income is irrelevant to class; borrower/lender or renter/rentier status is what matters. Do you have so much wealth that you can make money letting others use it, or do you have so little that you have to pay to use others'? That is what matters.

Darkstar economy but better than hotels

[jago25_98]

Although AirBNB itself is a dark star centralised monopoly it has been a godsend for hosts surviving in places like Spain who risk a lot to use it.
  Likewise, as a guest there are some cities where I can get a room for a price which means I can actually afford to go there. I have also stayed had unique experiences through it I never would have had before AirBNB.

What the p2p economy needs is leadership from government to assist in competition, such as requirements on API's to allow competitors to search and present each others results.

Why can't poor people

[rsilvergun]

just buy more money?

Lobby are the problem

[DrYak]

Which shows that lobby are the real problem.

In other country (e.g.: France) on-line systems for people renting out their appartment - all the way to small hotel-like family-operated business - have existed for ages without any problems.

As such technologies started to appear (in France : all the way back to minitels) society and legislation simply adapted to it.

Countries vary

[DrYak]

Having trouble affording holiday accommodation, than buy a bloody tent, no hotels in areas zoned residential only and huge fines for those who attempt to break those planning laws.

In other countries (e.g.: France), renting apartment is considered pretty normal whereas you deffinitely aren't free to put your tent anywhere else except is a few designated camping area (that you must pay, and make reservations in advance).

Thus AirBnB-like service are considered pretty much normal there and have been exist long before (all the way back to the minitel-era)

Isn't Air BnB just a swap service?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm confused. Isn't AirBnB just a service where dumbasses ... I mean "good natured individuals" (sorry) can sign up to have complete strangers rob them... I mean "to graciously share their homes" (sorry again)?
Aren't hotels expensive places where underpaid staff sorta-kinda pretend to clean rooms in which hundreds of people have sex... I mean "sleep" (sorry, I don't know what's wrong with me) in the same bed?
Sounds to me like the proverbial rock and a hard place (pun CERTAINLY intended).

Air Bang-n-Blow

[bluefoxlucid]

How many AirBnB listings are just so you can sift through hot women for the ones who are looking to hook up during their stay?

As a matter of fact, I don't have any faith in humanity.

Classic Power grab

[JimSadler]

Hotel owners form an organization and act as if they are some sort of authority, gaining political power and maybe some supported legislation. Palms are greased. So now a new thing comes along and the pseudo established authority tries to hold them down. So now the answer is to disestablish any hint of authority or legitimacy of hotel industry associations. This is like the war against Tesla. Auto dealerships join in lock step to crush Tesla as Tesla simply has no need at all to establish dealerships. They have designed their vehicles to be repairable by any garage thus no need for dealers and they market their cars without any need for dealerships as well. The simple truth is that any car manufacturer could also design their vehicles with programs that would eliminate the need for dealerships but the corrupt systems tend to stay in place as people almost always resist change.

I Gotta Laugh

[dcw3]

I've gotta laugh at all the whining I'm reading here about loud parties, and neighbors who are suddenly living next to a hotel. I bought my home in a brand new upscale neighborhood full of McMansions seventeen years ago. I expected it to be peaceful, and yet I have kids who ride bikes across my lawn to get to a neighbors trampoline. Other neighbors with souped up hot rods and Harleys that make noise just because they want attention. And other neighbors who's kids come home at 2am with their windows down, and subwoofer thumping some hip hop that feels like a 5 on the Richter Scale. If some neighbor decided to rent out their home, or a portion of it, I highly doubt anyone would notice.

Unless you have some actual statistics on complaints from neighbors, I'd suggest that you're full of shit.