5 ms·

Airbnb Political Campaign [video]

34 points by murtali 12y ago

curmudgeon224 12y ago
and so the astroturfing begins...
japhyr 12y ago
This is one of the best arguments I've seen recently supporting airbnb. However, I'd be curious to see how these numbers would be affected by removing all the undesirable airbnb arrangements - the ones where people are causing hell or even nuisances for their neighbors, the ones where people are turning long-term rental units into under-the-table short term rentals, etc.
- dominotw 12y ago
  What about rent increases for everyone else? Not everyone wants strangers in their homes you know.
kbar13 12y ago
holy crap it's really hard to read that subheader. Contrast, please!
crazypyro 12y ago
Wish the site would explain what their goal is beyond "New Yorkers want Airbnb". As someone who hasn't been keeping up with the latest news, I have no idea what even prompted this campaign and, as such, it makes the call to action pretty weak from my point of view. There's no FAQ explaining what is happening in NY or anything like that, just a page that lists facts which I'm sure were specifically picked out to paint the right light, while completely ignoring any of the arguments from the other side (e.g. neighbor troubles, parking troubles, etc).
chimeracoder 12y ago
> "I have been living in this apartment for 34 years" If she's in lower Manhattan, I'd bet almost anything her apartment is rent-stabilized (and I think she's been here long enough to even have a rent-controlled apartment, potentially, though she might have missed the cutoff by a few years). The bulk of the legal debate around Airbnb has nothing to do with rent-regulated apartments; it's the fact that in NYC, short-term subleases are illegal, period. (Most subleases are also violations of the original lease, though that's secondary). The bulk of the economic debate is around the practical implications. If you're a renter (not owner) in NYC and renting out your apartment on Airbnb, one of two things is happening, economically: 1) You pay sub-market rent due to rent regulations (control or stabilization), and are making money off of this disparity between your rent and market rent. You are pocketing money that, if you were in a non-regulated apartment, would go to your landlord. (And since subletting regulated apartments is illegal, he will evict you and find a tenant to pay full price[0]) 2) You are making additional money on a market rent, which essentially means that the rent you are paying is too low (from the perspective of the owner), and it will go up next year. If I can make $200/week on my apartment (hypothetically) and my landlord knows that, he will simply raise my rent by $800/month when my lease is up for renewal. In either case, money eventually flows towards the property owner, whether this convergence happens immediately or with a slight delay. This has nothing to do with the regulation; it's just the basic economics of rent at play. [0] The law in NYC is obviously incredibly complicated, but that's the eventual result. EDIT: Fixed typo: should have been $800/month ($200/week for four weeks).
- wdewind 12y ago
  I agree with your larger analysis, and wish that Airbnb would essentially pack up and go home. But I don't think you're correct in assuming that rental rates and short term vacation rental rates are in the same economic bucket. That someone can make more off a property does not mean that the property is necessarily worth more, it may also mean it's zoned in a way that is economically locally suboptimal for that property. In this case that's relevant because hotels need to charge more for the same space because they pay very different taxes than homeowners. So an apartment wouldn't necessarily fetch that $800 more a month on the renters market, though it does in a different marketplace under a different premise (Airbnb and short term renting, respectively).
  - notahacker 12y ago
    The different economic buckets exist largely because of regulations. The apartment might not fetch a full $800 per month in short term lets if property owners across Manhattan could charge the highest rent they wanted for the most profitable letting period, but it certainly wouldn't be possible for tenants to make a living off the difference between an artificially high price for [illegal] subletting and the artificially low price of renting long term for established tenants.
bunkat 12y ago
This video is pretty disingenuous in my opinion - it appears this woman remains in the home when people rent out a room (such that she share experiences with them according to the video). Looking through listings in NYC, this is not the common case at all - it's actually expected that a unit rented through Airbnb will be empty during your stay. It's also getting more common that people are purchasing real estate for the sole purpose of renting it out through Airbnb. When I stayed in NYC via Airbnb, I never even met the owner of the unit (keys were dropped off at a coffee shop across the street) and it was very obvious that nobody ever lived in the unit. I also have a problem with the tone of the video - "_I_ should be able to do this because it is a good thing for _me_." What about everyone else that lives in the building? They never signed up to live in a hotel. As a condo owner myself, I don't want random people that haven't been screened getting access to my otherwise secure building. I don't want to have to pay for any damage that they cause and I don't want to deal with any of the association rules that they break (noise regulations, pet regulations, parking, etc). While Airbnb might be great for the people renting out their home, it's a sum negative for everyone else legally living in the building.
- design-of-homes 12y ago
  "This video is pretty disingenuous in my opinion... This was my thought too. This quote by architect Christopher Alexander from his book A Pattern Language" feels very relevant: "…face-to-face rental, with the owners occupying the main structure is the one kind of rental relationship that is reasonably healthy. The landlord is actually there, so he is directly concerned with the well-being of the life around him and with the environment, unlike the absentee landlords who own property only for the money which it makes." In the UK, we have huge numbers of buy-to-let landlords. They are the worst type of abstentee landlord. I see AirBnB operating in the same space. People like having familiar neighbours, not neighbours who come and go contantly, and who have no commitment, concern or care for their neighbourhood; or for their immediate neighbours. Do these things matter to absentee landlords? For most of them (especially in the UK), absolutely not. Housing has a social factor that cannot be ignored. In fact, it isn't ignored in countless countries who place restrictions on renting property for the very reasons above.
- wdewind 12y ago
kchoudhu 12y ago
Had a good laugh when I saw these posters on the subway (D) this morning on the way to a doctor's appointment. When a business gets on the bullhorn to tell you that they're a net positive for society, it's pretty much a given that there's something fishy going on in the background. I'm not outright calling them scumbags right now, but I sure as heck will be doing a lot more research on the claims they're making about the effects they're having on my community.
JohnTHaller 12y ago
Funny that they aren't mentioning the 983 rentals in Manhattan that rent out the entire apartment, nearly all of which are illegal (any without a proper bed and breakfast license). Compare that number to the 967 private room and shared room listings in Manhattan, most of which - while not violating state law - are operating in violation of their lease. So, Airbnb is just glossing over the fact that the vast majority of their rentals in NYC are illegal. It's also interesting that they make no mention of the fact that their insurance policy only covers the renters personal possessions... not the building, common areas, appliances, etc.
- murtali 12y ago
  Violating the lease is probably the biggest issue imo with Airbnb. I think part of it is that we so often gloss over legal contracts and the concept of airbnb where you can just "rent out a room" doesn't FEEL like anything wrong. If as a tenant you know it's wrong, it FEELs like a petty offense which you shouldn't be penalized for or it FEELs like a broken law.
Irishsteve 12y ago
You can't ipo when one of your popular products is questionable legally. That said it's cheaper for me to stay in a Sheraton in Times Square than use Airbnb (which I usually use when traveling).

34 points by murtali 12y ago

and so the astroturfing begins...

This is one of the best arguments I've seen recently supporting airbnb. However, I'd be curious to see how these numbers would be affected by removing all the undesirable airbnb arrangements - the ones where people are causing hell or even nuisances for their neighbors, the ones where people are turning long-term rental units into under-the-table short term rentals, etc.

dominotw 12y ago
What about rent increases for everyone else? Not everyone wants strangers in their homes you know.

kbar13 12y ago

holy crap it's really hard to read that subheader. Contrast, please!

crazypyro 12y ago

Wish the site would explain what their goal is beyond "New Yorkers want Airbnb". As someone who hasn't been keeping up with the latest news, I have no idea what even prompted this campaign and, as such, it makes the call to action pretty weak from my point of view. There's no FAQ explaining what is happening in NY or anything like that, just a page that lists facts which I'm sure were specifically picked out to paint the right light, while completely ignoring any of the arguments from the other side (e.g. neighbor troubles, parking troubles, etc).

chimeracoder 12y ago

> "I have been living in this apartment for 34 years" If she's in lower Manhattan, I'd bet almost anything her apartment is rent-stabilized (and I think she's been here long enough to even have a rent-controlled apartment, potentially, though she might have missed the cutoff by a few years). The bulk of the legal debate around Airbnb has nothing to do with rent-regulated apartments; it's the fact that in NYC, short-term subleases are illegal, period. (Most subleases are also violations of the original lease, though that's secondary). The bulk of the economic debate is around the practical implications. If you're a renter (not owner) in NYC and renting out your apartment on Airbnb, one of two things is happening, economically: 1) You pay sub-market rent due to rent regulations (control or stabilization), and are making money off of this disparity between your rent and market rent. You are pocketing money that, if you were in a non-regulated apartment, would go to your landlord. (And since subletting regulated apartments is illegal, he will evict you and find a tenant to pay full price[0]) 2) You are making additional money on a market rent, which essentially means that the rent you are paying is too low (from the perspective of the owner), and it will go up next year. If I can make $200/week on my apartment (hypothetically) and my landlord knows that, he will simply raise my rent by $800/month when my lease is up for renewal. In either case, money eventually flows towards the property owner, whether this convergence happens immediately or with a slight delay. This has nothing to do with the regulation; it's just the basic economics of rent at play. [0] The law in NYC is obviously incredibly complicated, but that's the eventual result. EDIT: Fixed typo: should have been $800/month ($200/week for four weeks).

wdewind 12y ago
I agree with your larger analysis, and wish that Airbnb would essentially pack up and go home. But I don't think you're correct in assuming that rental rates and short term vacation rental rates are in the same economic bucket. That someone can make more off a property does not mean that the property is necessarily worth more, it may also mean it's zoned in a way that is economically locally suboptimal for that property. In this case that's relevant because hotels need to charge more for the same space because they pay very different taxes than homeowners. So an apartment wouldn't necessarily fetch that $800 more a month on the renters market, though it does in a different marketplace under a different premise (Airbnb and short term renting, respectively).
- notahacker 12y ago
  The different economic buckets exist largely because of regulations. The apartment might not fetch a full $800 per month in short term lets if property owners across Manhattan could charge the highest rent they wanted for the most profitable letting period, but it certainly wouldn't be possible for tenants to make a living off the difference between an artificially high price for [illegal] subletting and the artificially low price of renting long term for established tenants.

bunkat 12y ago

This video is pretty disingenuous in my opinion - it appears this woman remains in the home when people rent out a room (such that she share experiences with them according to the video). Looking through listings in NYC, this is not the common case at all - it's actually expected that a unit rented through Airbnb will be empty during your stay. It's also getting more common that people are purchasing real estate for the sole purpose of renting it out through Airbnb. When I stayed in NYC via Airbnb, I never even met the owner of the unit (keys were dropped off at a coffee shop across the street) and it was very obvious that nobody ever lived in the unit. I also have a problem with the tone of the video - "_I_ should be able to do this because it is a good thing for _me_." What about everyone else that lives in the building? They never signed up to live in a hotel. As a condo owner myself, I don't want random people that haven't been screened getting access to my otherwise secure building. I don't want to have to pay for any damage that they cause and I don't want to deal with any of the association rules that they break (noise regulations, pet regulations, parking, etc). While Airbnb might be great for the people renting out their home, it's a sum negative for everyone else legally living in the building.

design-of-homes 12y ago
"This video is pretty disingenuous in my opinion... This was my thought too. This quote by architect Christopher Alexander from his book A Pattern Language" feels very relevant: "…face-to-face rental, with the owners occupying the main structure is the one kind of rental relationship that is reasonably healthy. The landlord is actually there, so he is directly concerned with the well-being of the life around him and with the environment, unlike the absentee landlords who own property only for the money which it makes." In the UK, we have huge numbers of buy-to-let landlords. They are the worst type of abstentee landlord. I see AirBnB operating in the same space. People like having familiar neighbours, not neighbours who come and go contantly, and who have no commitment, concern or care for their neighbourhood; or for their immediate neighbours. Do these things matter to absentee landlords? For most of them (especially in the UK), absolutely not. Housing has a social factor that cannot be ignored. In fact, it isn't ignored in countless countries who place restrictions on renting property for the very reasons above.
wdewind 12y ago

kchoudhu 12y ago

Had a good laugh when I saw these posters on the subway (D) this morning on the way to a doctor's appointment. When a business gets on the bullhorn to tell you that they're a net positive for society, it's pretty much a given that there's something fishy going on in the background. I'm not outright calling them scumbags right now, but I sure as heck will be doing a lot more research on the claims they're making about the effects they're having on my community.

JohnTHaller 12y ago

Funny that they aren't mentioning the 983 rentals in Manhattan that rent out the entire apartment, nearly all of which are illegal (any without a proper bed and breakfast license). Compare that number to the 967 private room and shared room listings in Manhattan, most of which - while not violating state law - are operating in violation of their lease. So, Airbnb is just glossing over the fact that the vast majority of their rentals in NYC are illegal. It's also interesting that they make no mention of the fact that their insurance policy only covers the renters personal possessions... not the building, common areas, appliances, etc.

murtali 12y ago
Violating the lease is probably the biggest issue imo with Airbnb. I think part of it is that we so often gloss over legal contracts and the concept of airbnb where you can just "rent out a room" doesn't FEEL like anything wrong. If as a tenant you know it's wrong, it FEELs like a petty offense which you shouldn't be penalized for or it FEELs like a broken law.

Irishsteve 12y ago

You can't ipo when one of your popular products is questionable legally. That said it's cheaper for me to stay in a Sheraton in Times Square than use Airbnb (which I usually use when traveling).