Id love to see a breakout of Airbnb rentals by number of bedrooms. 1 and 2 bedroom airbnbs are seemingly never economical anymore compared to hotels, at least in the places I visit.
I’d love for someone to do an analysis where they look at the number of AirBnB’s in a city, and model out what would happen to the rents in that city if those units were put back into the rental market.
Would be absolutely fascinating if there was a tight correlation
1. Rent an airbnb for a period of time.
2. Tenant reaches out to host and asks to stay longer (or vice versa)
3. They agree to a deal outside airbnb that works better for both of them.
they need to start implementing and enforcing extremely high fines on illegal listings and then actually go out and try to enforce it. That's the only way it ends imo.
Should people who come to the city for a couple of weeks not be able to find any accommodation? Why do you think that they should have less rights that people that live in the city full-time? They already have obvious market forces working against them (short-term rents are always more expensive than long-term).
Yes? People who live in the city have families, friends, jobs, and other community structures that they contribute toward. It's where they LIVE.
People who "come to the city for a couple of weeks" are at best visiting for work or family -- in which case, they can get work to subsidize the housing, or stay with the family they're visiting -- and are at worst tourists who are only visiting the city to have fun.
People's lives should be prioritized over fun affordability. Or work saving a buck when employees visit HQ in person. Or even the affordability of someone choosing to visit family.
The people who live in the city are the people who work there, bleed there, eat there, love there, etc. etc. etc. They are the city. The people who visit are just passing through. Livers should not subsidize visitors.
You act like hotels, inns, and short term stay apartment hotels will suddenly disappear if Airbnb is cracked down on but to answer your question yes, people who live in the city should be prioritized over people who want to come over for a quick stay.
Consider how laws are set. Politicians answer to their constituents. If the people who live in the city do not want certain things (short term Airbnb rentals here), you can expect them exert pressure on their representatives to make those things go away. That's exactly what has happened in NYC.
The question of "Why do you think that they should have less rights that people that live in the city full-time?" doesnt really matter. Because the reality is that they have no power/sway over the politicians who are responsible for governing the city.
That's an exaggeration. The alternative to airbnb is not no accommodation, it's better-regulated and therefore more expensive accommodation. Regulations force tourists to bear the costs of their trip (hotel taxes, etc.) and give the city some pricing power to control quantity of tourism.
