[ouesp]

Having used AirBnB for a while, I now prefer to stay in a hotel. Staying in AirBnB I don't feel safe at all and 80% of the AirBnB's I stayed had one problem or the other. There is no importance given for the safety or even a proper door. I dont want to deal with problems when I stay somewhere for pleasure or business. And No, I dont want to read hundreds of reviews before I make my decision. I am back to hotel stays. I hope their lobbying finds success.

[reverend_gonzo]

> And No, I dont want to read hundreds of reviews before I make my decision. I am back to hotel stays. I hope their lobbying finds success.

The great thing about the free market is you get the choice. You don't have to pass a law to force everybody to also do as you choose.

There are definitely problems with some AirBNBs. Renting out an apartment as if it was a hotel room should not be allowed. However. that should be a contract issue between tenant/landlord or owner/HOA, and also a local zoning issue.

That said, there are also times that AirBNBs are very worthwhile. I've stayed in homes in the desert, far away from anything else. I've stayed in non-touristy neighborhoods in Venice, Stockholm, and Havana, that let me get away from the common areas and see local life.

Hotels definitely have its pros and cons, as do AirBNBs, but there should not be federal regulation outright banning it.

[warcher]

The issue in my mind is that AirBNB actively thwarts attempts by landlords, HOAs, and zoning officials to enforce their contracts. If it was all above-board, I'd have no issues. Truly. But frankly, if AirBNB was compliant with leases, HOAs, and zoning, they'd be out of business. And they know it.

People talk a lot about the free market, but I see a lot of externalities at play here. Am I as a landlord to be held responsible for the damage to my units caused by somebody running a gypsy hotel, in explicit violation of their lease, paying me not one extra penny? Are their neighbors obligated to deal with a bunch of spring breakers partying through the wall, also for free?

This whole thing smells like a bunch of valley billionaires arguing that they should be above the law so they can make their IPO valuation come out right.

[user5994461]

Properties have been sublet and let on the black markets forever. airbnb is not changing much of that, only making it more visible.

Most airbnb landlords will quickly realize that it takes a huge amount of work to welcome guest for short stays, then they'll realize that they might loose a lot of money if not filled all the time.

[eric_h]

> airbnb is not changing much of that, only making it more visible.

I think it is grossly inflating the scale at which it is now possible.

[user5994461]

Airbnb is a drop in the ocean, I guarantee you.

[eric_h]

Oh for sure. I've known plenty of people who've done relatively brief (~ 2mo) sublets completely against leases etc (of course NYC is still a bit of a Wild West as far as housing is concerned, particularly at the more affordable end of the rental market).

My point was that AirBnB has vastly inflated the potential scale of revolving door short black market sublets (the loud, drunken vacationers that seem to be the source of most disgruntlement/anti AirBnB mentality here in the HN comments) much more than, say, craigslist.

[arise]

For a non-airbnb example of this, look at Ireland: they have minimal regulations/barriers to entry for starting a (real) B&B, and the result is that you can get great accommodations all over this heavily-touristed island for €35-55/night. Truly one of the great deals in European travel.

[mjn]

Similar in the UK, the regulations for B&Bs and guesthouses are pretty minimal compared to a hotel. The biggest issue people run into in getting licensed is that often some changes are needed to meet the fire code for overnight accommodations. Usually not hard to fix, but may involve things like installing fire doors at the top and bottom of stairwells, and installing lockable fire doors on any closets that are located beneath stairs.

[thrownblown]

I rented an entire 3br/2 ba apartment in Dublin for a week for $700, circa 2007. We had 15 people in there.

On the first night there a child cat burgled one of our wallets. He scaled the side of the building and came in through an open window. We caught him in the act, but he was too quick and scampered out the way he came. When we complained to the host (the pharmacy downstairs, really) they asked if we wanted a NEW apt in a different building or another apartment in that one (basically two apts for a week for the price of two nights in a hotel)

Now when people talk about Air B&B, I think of courier dentistry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kX_GfxGIWQs&t=1s

[praneshp]

> child cat Do you mean a kitten or did you mean "child that"? I can't stop laughing, despite your loss of wallet.

[yardie]

I had the same reaction. Then realized he meant a pint-sized cat burglar scaled the wall, snuck through a window, and lifted a wallet. To me this is extreme considering it would be far easier to be a pickpocket or scam artist.

[JeffreyKaine]

I think they meant that a child (noun) cat-burgled (verb). https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cat_burglar

[feadog]

great accommodations all over this heavily-touristed island for €35-55/night.

Used to be about half that pre-Euro!

[Avolition]

Dude, pretty much everything, everywhere "used to be about half that" 15 years ago, regardless of currency...

[narag]

I don't know about Ireland, but in Spain it was terrible in many sectors. An euro is 166.386 pesetas. Guess what happened.

[Frondo]

People are talking a lot about safety regulations, as in, "well, if you're willing to take the risk of sleeping in someone's house, you should be able to," but what gets me is that safety's just one of the things hotel regulations ensure.

Another is access for the disabled. I've stayed in a few AirBNBs that would absolutely have been off-limits to someone in a wheelchair, but the number of times I've stayed in a hotel that wasn't disability-accessible? Zero.

Yeah, choice is great when you're talking about saving some bucks and taking on the risk of sleeping in an essentially-unlicensed hotel, but what about the people for whom the regulations guarantee them access to commerce or travel at all?

Like others have said, regulations develop out of a reaction to a lousy status quo. I think it'd be a shitty world to live in where people with disabilities were being shut out again, to the extent they used to be.

(Am I saying that, if you're going to let your room commercially, you should make it ADA-compliant? Maybe so. It's at least worth thinking about, instead of saying, by default, screw those folks in wheelchairs.)

[eric_h]

ADA compliance is a fair point, but at the same time, I've lived in completely legal to rent apartments in NYC that were absolutely not wheelchair accessible.

All new buildings in NYC must have elevators/general wheel chair accessibility, but the old buildings are still there, and still being used.

Further, there are numerous AirBnB rentals that existed as licensed rental properties long before AirBnB came around that are most certainly not wheelchair accessible.

I think it would at least be fair for AirBnB to require listings that are/are not wheelchair accessible to say so on their listings. Beyond that I don't think it's fair to require owners of those properties to invest a large sum of money to make it accessible.

[Frondo]

Oh, absolutely, I don't think the answer is black and white; neither "any exchange of housing for money must be fully ADA-compliant"-- nor "raising the question of ADA compliance is a burdensome regulation that should be ignored".

For me, the question that's worth asking is, how do we ensure, as new ways of doing old things develop, that the people who've been shut out in the past (i.e. the people that the ADA protects) aren't just getting shut out again?

People in wheelchairs, that's a thing. The ADA is the way that, up til now, we've set up to enforce that businesses must accommodate them. Stuff like AirBNB and Uber is bringing an absolute ton of new individuals, essentially doing business, who've simply never had to think about making business accessible to people with disabilities.

Maybe there's a new regulatory framework that needs to develop? Maybe there should be a burden on the companies like AirBNB and Uber to ensure that, wherever they operate, some percentage of their service offering is wheelchair-accessible? (Even if they're buying property or hiring drivers directly to satisfy that requirement?) I don't know, just brainstorming at this point, I guess.

It would cost those businesses more, of course, but I ask myself which world I'd rather live in--one in which my two wheelchair-bound friends could actually use AirBNB wherever they went, or one in which I said "hey, sucks you're locked out of that experience, but free market, yolo"?

[eric_h]

I'm really not sure how best to handle it. Uber has definitely gotten some grief for their total inability to be accessible to people in wheelchairs in NYC, when there are yellow cabs that are, but that criticism has largely fallen by the wayside.

That cabin I rented with some friends in bumblefuck an hour outside of Boulder, CO - should they be required to install an elevator when the car we drove could just barely even get us there (even in the summer time)?

100% accessibility seems impossible (barring significant improvements in wheelchairs, which are definitely coming), but where exactly is the line?

I don't really know the answer. I think in general if you're making something new - you should make it as accessible as is reasonably feasible, but how much should we require to be "backported"?

[Spooky23]

> also a local zoning issue

Isn't AirBnb a party to that issue?

If AirBnb stuck to it's early role as way for people to rent rooms in homes or vacation homes, it would be an amazing service. By seeking to "disrupt" the hotel industry, they kind of poisoned the well.

[noja]

> The great thing about the free market is you get the choice.

Have you ever looked at the AirBNB rating system? It's a disaster. Five stars or get abuse. Without a trustable rating system here you won't get a free market.

[anon1385]

>The great thing about the free market is you get the choice. You don't have to pass a law to force everybody to also do as you choose.

Not necessarily: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons

[AnthonyMouse]

That paper is about information asymmetry. If you know you're getting a room in someone's apartment, there is still no reason to prohibit informed customers from doing that.

[sk5t]

You know you're getting a room, but you don't know if the room or experience will be plagued with trouble. Much the same as the "lemon car" problem--not all cars or rooms at "market price" are equal.

[bmelton]

Having traveled enough to know that not all hotel rooms are created equally, I don't even know how that's a concern.

I've stayed in hotels that were frequented by prostitutes (not a value judgement, but it does change the experience of the stay considerably), hotels with drug dealers in the parking lot, etc. Even going with a big brand, I've had extremely disappointing experiences.

Most recently, I stayed at the Hyatt Regency in Louisville, which is a highrise hotel in which all the rooms are located around a central lobby. This is fine, assuming there aren't people screaming in the lobby, but surprise, there were literally people screaming in the lobby for long periods in each of the two nights we stayed there, and repeated calls to the front desk didn't resolve the situation.

We'd planned a longer stay, but ended up relocating after the second night of interrupted sleep, and somewhat ironically, ended up in a super quaint AirBNB that was a fraction of the price.

Yes, AirBNB can be a bit of a crapshoot, but that isn't a problem that's unique to AirBNB.

[AnthonyMouse]

You know that the average quality is lower than a hotel, with reviews on top of that. And if you don't want to risk a lemon then you can still stay in a hotel.

You have hotels either way and you clearly can't save the market for not-hotel rooms by prohibiting it entirely. Where is the harm in allowing someone to knowingly take a risk in exchange for a discount?

[eropple]

And the externalities visited upon everyone else around the apartment renter?

[Karunamon]

They may or may not exist depending on the location, the layout of the building, the particular renter, the behavior of the homeowner, and probably about a thousand other variables that are impossible to even identify.

[DINKDINK]

>I hope their lobbying finds success.

Your opinion piece is fine until your last line where you support using the state to ban other people from making the choice that you prefer not to make.

[mdpopescu]

That is a general rule with prohibitionists. "I don't drink, so nobody else should." "I don't do drugs, so nobody else should."

[SilasX]

In fairness, the non-caricature prohibitionist is more like, "I don't like drunken fights breaking out in the street, so I think anyone profiting from public drinking should follow measures to reduce the risk of such fights breaking out."

[dexterdog]

The beginning of the slope is always benign.

[geebee]

There's a general rule about people who harm others with externalities. They always loudly wonder why the people they victimize can't just mind their own business.

[cuckcuckspruce]

"I don't die in a fire because the short-term rental I stayed at doesn't have a working smoke detector!"

Yeah, that's really the prohibitionist mindset there.

[smokeyj]

As opposed to having your rental be burned down by a long-term renter? That's an oddly specific preference..

[metaphorm]

a long term renter has a much greater vested interest in preserving the quality of life of the community and mitigating impact on the neighbors.

the fire safety issue is a bit of a red herring. that's something that is the responsibility of the landlord and the local fire safety inspector anyway, not really part of the long term vs short term rental debate.

the issues related to ABB tenants are about their lack of responsibility and accountability within the community, since they will be gone (forever) in a short period of time. the issues related to ABB hosts is that they evade regulations that their competitors cannot evade, and that (in some situations) they violate community laws or norms that exist for good reasons.

[smokeyj]

> the fire safety issue is a bit of a red herring.

Which was the only point I was making.

> that's something that is the responsibility of the landlord

So you agree it's red herring because fire safety is already regulated..

> the issues related to ABB tenants are about their lack of responsibility and accountability within the community

If I could demonstrate that responsibility and accountability were already regulated in communities - would you agree that your objections are red herring as well?

[rramdin]

"I don't avoid local safety and service regulations, so nobody else should."

[kesselvon]

Last time I checked, running an unlicensed hotel was still illegal

[kalleboo]

What's a hotel though? Where I'm from, running a bed and breakfast (defined as 4 or fewer rooms and 8 or fewer guests) doesn't require any kind of special licensing.

Of course running it out of an apartment runs afoul of every rental agreement I've seen.

[philrapo]

A common zoning distinction is that a bed & breakfast is a private home where the host lives in the home. If the host does not live there, many cities/towns would then consider it a hotel and subject it to different rules.

I think a lot of the arm waving about airbnb is because of the latter situation. I don't think many people seem to have issues with renting out a spare room.

[mdpopescu]

We don't have zoning in my country. I've had two companies, their address was always my apartment. I was also manager for a company - it was located in an apartment, then a house, then finally a commercial place (when we got to over 25 people).

[xapata]

Would you get a haircut from an unlicensed hairdresser?

[kalleboo]

In Sweden there is no such thing as hairdresser licensing. I guess I've been at mortal risk all this time!

[dexterdog]

I do it all of the time when I cut my own hair. I cut hair for other people when they ask. I don't charge money, but obviously I am unlicensed.

[cuckcuckspruce]

No. I don't want to get lice or a scalp infection.

[xapata]

I guess I've been lucky so far.

[smokeyj]

It's against the law because it's illegal? Well, I can't argue with that logic.

[kesselvon]

Zoning laws.

[ythn]

> Your opinion piece is fine until your last line where you support using the state to ban other people from making the choice that you prefer not to make.

What's wrong with that? Virtually every regulatory law does this. Unless you are arguing that the state should not be able to regulate anything, I don't see why supporting regulations in one industry or another is a bad thing.

[nommm-nommm]

You can't sell an unsafe car. You can't run an unsafe restaurant. You can't build an unsafe building. You can't rent an unsafe home. You can't drive in an unsafe manner. You can't allow an unsafe number of people in your business. You can't run an unsafe salon. You can't practice medicine in an unsafe manner. You can't sell unsafe food.

And you can't run an unsafe hotel.

[tim333]

Your usual airbnb property is not "an unsafe hotel." My flat is presently being let on airbnb and isn't suddenly unsafe because someone else is in it rather than me.

[ryanbrunner]

In my experience, the vast (90+%) of Airbnb properties share more in common with a hotel room than an apartment that is occasionally rented out.

[dang]

My experience is the opposite - 90% of the places I've stayed have clearly been people's homes or cottages. At least in the US. In Europe it was different but for me that's a much smaller sample size.

[drewmate]

I have the same experience as yours. Of the 7-8 AirBNBs I have stayed at, only 1 felt like a hotel (it was in Hong Kong, and the cheapest place I could find.)

On the other hand, some of my best travel experiences have been eating meals with hosts, staying up talking about life and drinking by a bonfire with hosts, and otherwise getting the authentic AirBNB experience. Of course I wouldn't say that the hotel-type experience isn't out there (it may even be cheaper than hotels) but that's not why I do AirBNB. It would be a shame (both for hosts and guests) to have fewer opportunities like this available.

[tptacek]

Are you looking for a kind of place that keeps you away from the illegal hotels? Is there a price point thing, or neighborhoods you tend to stay in? I have the same experience as you do, but I'm avoiding the kinds of searches that would ever put me in an illegal hotel.

[ceejayoz]

> My flat is presently being let on airbnb and isn't suddenly unsafe because someone else is in it rather than me.

You might not have changed the smoke detector batteries in a decade, though. Fine if you want to risk your own life that way, but we've decided as a society that renting a hotel room means extra safety requirements and checks to protect the guests.

[noarchy]

>Fine if you want to risk your own life that way, but we've decided as a society that renting a hotel room means extra safety requirements and checks to protect the guests.

Sorry, how did "we as a society" decide that? Governments are deciding the things you're talking about. What we as a society can do, is post and read reviews on hotels and Airbnb rentals, and we certainly do this.

[Frondo]

You are engaged in the political process aside from once-every-few-years voting, right? That's how "we as a society" decided it.

If all you do is punch a ballot, yeah, that's lazy, and yeah, you're basically letting other people decide these things for you.

[ceejayoz]

> Governments are deciding the things you're talking about.

Governments are made up of our elected representatives and those our elected representatives appoint/hire. If we're unhappy with those decisions, we vote for someone else and tell them to change them. See Trump and the EPA for a current-events sample of this in action - the Right feels things are too regulated, they won the election, and now we're getting a bunch of regulations removed (to our likely detriment, IMO).

[monkmartinez]

Who defines usual?

Who else has keys to the flat? Are you sure your electrical is up to code? How about plumbing, heating/cooling? Do you have a CO detector?

[rramdin]

Is your flat in compliance with local regulations for disabled persons? Or is the service you're selling only for certain kinds of people?

[DINKDINK]

Is the web service you build accessible by blind and deaf people? Or is the web service you're selling only for "certain kinds of people"

[Spivak]

Why wouldn't it be if the parent is currently living in it? Are the regulations for short-term and long-term rentals different?

[SilasX]

Yes, there are in fact less (or no) disability access requirements for a private residence. The typical home, if used as a hotel, would not be in compliance with access requirements imposed on hotels. This is one way that the deck is stacked against hotels.

[squeaky-clean]

I don't understand this comment or why GP is being downvoted. No, my own home is very wheelchair unfriendly because I am not in a wheelchair.

[nommm-nommm]

So your flat has been inspected by the hotel commission and your hotel permit is displayed in a prominent location in your flat and you've kept logs of all required maintenance and I can view your flat's inspection records?

[exergy]

Huh? Why does he have to do that? I can understand being suspicious of those who actually come and STAY in the Airbnb, but to use your line of argument against the person renting out the room makes no sense to me. What exactly does the hotel permit specify? That the toilet is clean? That the building is structurally sound?

[amyjess]

Among others, that it meets fire codes.

Just wait until an AirBNB customer dies in a fire because the property didn't meet fire safety requirements. AirBNB probably wouldn't survive the fallout.

[enraged_camel]

>>Huh? Why does he have to do that?

Because hotels are subject to those regulations. It's not optional for them. Why should it be optional for AirBnB hosts?

[nommm-nommm]

It certainly depends on where you live but almost all jurisdictions have those sorts of requirements. For example, first thing I saw on Google

>Environmental health specialists inspect every hotel at least twice a year or more often as deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the Hotel, Food Service Establishment, and Public Swimming Pool Act of 1985* and the hotel rules and regulations. Current hotel permits must be displayed in a prominent location for the public to view and the inspection report must be available for public scrutiny.

https://www.tn.gov/health/article/eh-hotels#sthash.fTwnqZnV....

[SilasX]

I can understand hotels having a legitimate objection to the differential regulation that gives Airbnb hosts a cost advantage, but there are good reasons for exempting (some) hosts: generally, once you run a business at scale, there's a disconnect that leads to cutting corners with safety, which is what prompts these regulations.

If a hotel room is just one of a thousand properties (the thinking goes) then the owner might be too casual about safety issues -- hence regs to force them to care. But if it's a room in the owner's very own house, there is no such "incentive incompatibility": a fire is much more than just a financial loss for them, so -- if anything -- they're overcautious! Thus, it's reasonable to exempt the renting out of one's primary residence from these additional safety regs.

With that said, your general point still stands: many of these hosts are "superhosts" who rent 3+ properties, which does (from the perspective of regulatory concerns) look like a hotel business and which therefore does merit similar regulation.

[zip1234]

Nobody looks at that when renting a hotel.

[ctrl-j]

Maybe because by and large, hotels have a hard time getting around being inspected. So there is no need for the average consumer to spend the time to do the research so they can say "yep, government regulators are doing a good job!"

As with most regulations, it drives up the cost a bit for the end user, but it's worthwhile - and when done properly, invisible to the consumer.

[subliminalbrad]

Because they don't need to, because it's mandatory for hotels.

[BeetleB]

If the legislation actually tests the safety, instead of a blanket ban, then I can see your point. Because many motels I've stayed at are unsafe. On multiple occasions I've gotten a key card to my room without showing ID (having forgotten it in the room).

[smokeyj]

So the hotel lobby is taking away my choices.. to keep me safe? Now that's some seriously good hospitality. The hotel lobby is like the paternal figure I've always wanted.

[nommm-nommm]

We are talking about safety here.

Safety regulations don't typically form out if nowhere. You grew up in a world where the previous generations lobbied for safety regulations in response to an actual lack of safety. It's like the new anti vaccinations movement- there's a whole generation who grew up not watching children be maimed and killed by what's now vaccine preventable infectious diseases so now suddenly vaccinations are poison. Absolutely no frame of reference.

In terms of safety hotel lobby is pissed because they have to follow regulations and pay associated taxes whereas AirBnB isn't. The hotel lobby certainly would be in favor of loosening safety regulations in general as compliance will certainly cut into their bottom line at least a little.

[erikpukinskis]

You can pretend the conversation is about safety but there's more to it than that. There are legitimate safety regulations, which could be monitored with a $100 random annual inspection. And then there are the actual regulations which are usually just encoding the business practices of the incumbent into law so that other companies with other advantages are impossible to make legal, regardless of safety.

If it were actually about safety, the "hotel commission" would try to make it as easy and as cheap as possible to get inspected. The fact that they don't suggests it's more about gatekeeping.

[matt4077]

Sure, all regulations look like regulatory red tape strangulating the free market.

Until you look at actual, individual, regulations–which tend to be codified common sense.

[wanderer2323]

> The hotel lobby certainly would be in favor of loosening safety regulations in general as compliance will certainly cut into their bottom line at least a little.

I'm pretty sure they would be in favor of tightening regulations as much as possible, as long as those regulations are draconically enforced. The incumbents can comply with anything and pass the buck to the customer while any potential competitor cannot enter the market because the upfront regulatory cost is so immense.

[smokeyj]

> You grew up in a world where the previous generations lobbied for safety regulations in response to an actual lack of safety

Sure hope you're not talking about the tobacco lobby. Tell me which company paid for what safety regulation. I'd like to applaud these upstanding corporate citizens.

[monkmartinez]

Great observation. Fire inspectors perform an entirely different inspection on commercial property than that of a SFR or even multi family residence. There is a reason and it was paid in blood.

[coredog64]

> You can't sell an unsafe car.

I'd like to address this. Not everyone can afford a new car complete with mandatory TPMS, side airbags, and traction control. When we as a society decide to put requirements on new cars, we price some marginal consumers out of a new car and into a less-safe used car.

As the price of new cars increases, so to does the price of those used cars. So there again, we're pushing less well off consumers into cars that aren't as safe.

Personally, I think manufacturers should have the ability to sell any car they want. At the same time, they should be required to put a notice on the window sticker that says "We used the value of $X to drive the design of our safety features" (or something like that). If you want an ultra-safe car, you look for one that has $1,000,000. But people knowingly buy motorcycles and Corvettes, so obviously not everyone has the same tolerance for risk.

[learc83]

Car safety isn't just about the people driving them. Many car safety features like anti-lock breaks, traction control, and backup cameras are just as helpful for everyone outside of the car as they are for people inside the card.

Forcing unsafe cars out of the market through attrition has benefits for everyone else.

[mullen]

Unsafe cars are also raise the death raise inside and outside of the car and raises health costs that are borne by all members of society. People should not be allowed to drive unsafe cars.

[ceejayoz]

They're not in New York state - your car must pass an annual safety inspection. IIRC when I lived in Ohio they had a similar inspection regime.

[ballenf]

And you shouldn't apply car safety rules to motorcycles or bicycles.

Airbnb isn't a hotel. It should have to live by "the rules", but those rules should be tailored to it's industry not a tangentially related industry threatened by its existence.

[athenot]

In this case, Airbnb is a motorcycle with 4 wheels, a roof and windows. While technically still running a motorcycle engine, the perception it is actively courting among its users is that of a car.

So in once camp, people are saying it should be regulated for what it feels like: a car. In the other camp, people are saying that it should be regulated for what it's made of: a motorcycle. There are good (and bad) arguments for both sides.

[67726e]

How about this: I hope the hotels successfully lobby to enforce existing zoning laws. I don't want my neighbors running a business out of their house. If they break the law, punish them. Simple as that.

[snakeanus]

> I don't want my neighbors running a business out of their house

Why?

[nommm-nommm]

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-airbnb-party-hou...

>Neighbors of what critics say is a “party house” in the Glenwood community told the Glendale News-Press that the constant partying in the 1300 block of Norton Avenue was interfering with their sleep in the early-morning hours. They said they’d find beer bottles in the street, people fighting on the sidewalk in the early-morning hours, parking clogged and loud music blaring.

>Frank Higginbotham, who lives across the street from the house, said he saw tour buses with about 30 people pull up to the residence for a party about two weeks ago.

>Earlier in December, neighbors, said, there was one party that had to be shut down using a powerful spotlight from a hovering police helicopter and several police officers.

>“This was like a war zone,” he said, adding that parties have been going on every weekend for months. “Every night I came home, I was scared to think about what I was going to find here.”

[xapata]

I'd be amazed if they were violating no laws. Surely the law would help the neighbors regardless of whether or not the party host was an AirBnB.

[WkndTriathlete]

Common concerns:

* Increased traffic

* More noise

* Greater odds of criminal activity

* Resultant reduction in nearby property values

These are not theoretical and are part of the reason why zoning laws exist.

[sanderjd]

Related to most of the above: a lot of people like to know their neighbors so that they can be comfortable talking to them if there's a problem. Full time rentals mess that up. Now you might well find yourself going to complain to a stranger who couldn't care less what you think, and it's a different stranger every weekend.

[67726e]

Because I live in a residential neighborhood with residential zoning, and I don't want to deal with itinerant neighbors with little regard for the neighborhood. You want to run a B&B? Go through the proper legal channels and build a legitimate business.

[dominotw]

But, we want govt to ensure our safety at work, from the drugs we buy at the pharmacy. An ordinary person doesn't have the tools to verify this information for himself.

[mason240]

Then stay in a hotel.

[TallGuyShort]

>> I dont want to deal with problems when I stay somewhere for pleasure or business

This is why I've stopped using AirBnB. I had used it for multiple business trips and personal stays, and in only 2 of the places I've stayed has the host had any sense of professionalism. One slept in and wasn't up at the time they said breakfast was served. I eventually left before they woke up. Another canceled at the last minute because they were traveling. Too late for me to alter my other travel plans, so my only option was to take an expensive hotel room I wouldn't have booked otherwise, or miss that part of my planned vacation. Another had family staying and they clearly weren't equipped for all the guests.

The problem with AirBnB is it's usually additional, passive income. It initially feels like this glorious free market, but there's not enough skin in the game for them. If they want to blow you off at the last minute you just have to with an expensive, last-minute back up plan. And they just forfeit some income they weren't really counting on anyway. I've been jerked around by hotels too, but not nearly as often.

[ballenf]

> This is why I've stopped using AirBnB.

> It initially feels like this glorious free market, but ...

Based on the number of posts of former AirBnB users, sounds like the free market is working.

Maybe the failure here is in Airbnb's marketing of their services to the wrong crowd.

[TallGuyShort]

Yeah the larger market is working, the specific market that is the AirBnB community kinda sucks in that sellers have disproportionate power.

I felt like I was the ideal AirBnB user. I have low standards for where I sleep and can usually be flexible schedule-wise, and I also value low prices over most other factors. But I just can't afford last minute cancellations and people not living up to the expectations they set themselves. I'm pretty sure you won't find many people who are more open to what AirBnB could be than that...

[nommm-nommm]

I've never stayed at an AirBnB but this is the exact issue I have with using Uber - the quality is so incredibly inconsistent. They seem to encourage any random yahoo to sign up and start driving with minimal (no?) training.

[yardie]

Most of the Uber/Lyft drivers I've been picked up by are recent immigrants. The language barrier isn't a big deal but they blindly follow the directions on whatever driving app they are using (Google, Apple, Waze) and have no local knowledge. There are a few roads near me that are closed for construction or oneway only. So I've gotten into the habit of looking over their shoulder and interjecting where they should actually turn rather than what the app tells them.

[TallGuyShort]

Curious what area you've used it in? I've only used it in San Francisco / San Jose and once or twice in other cities, and have actually had reliable experiences. The last couple times the vehicle quality was way lower than before, though.

[nommm-nommm]

I travel a lot so pretty much everywhere along the east coast. I haven't been to the west coast since Uber has existed. Dont get me wrong, I've had great service with Uber as well but it's totally hit or miss.

I still use it though because it is much more reliable than a cab most places and usually cheaper and I don't have to worry about payment.

[dazc]

I've stayed in an AirBnB maybe a dozen times and always had some problem or other that I've been expected just to accept - because it's AirBnB and not an hotel?

I've stayed in lots more hotels and experienced fewer problems. The times I've had resulted in either a sincere apology or full refund (the last time for the 2 days stay rather than the one night I complained about).

I can see the advantage of AirBnB for a group of people who are willing to compromise in return for a cost saving but not much else.

[exergy]

You make it sound like cost saving is a throwaway matter, an afterthought. I'm a grad student. Before Airbnb, I could only stay in hostels, which are worse than both hotels and airbnbs. Airbnb is awesome if I don't want to spend my holidays staying woken up by idiotic frat boys.

[collyw]

Some friends here are complaining that Airbnb apartments in their block mean that they are getting woken up by frat boy parties.

[exergy]

Haha, and so the cycle continues. Down with frat boys!

[zip1234]

A hotel is also less authentic. I stayed in AirBnB and hotels both when traveling through Europe and the AirBnB gives you a bit more local flavor vs hotels, which tend to be very standardized. I also was traveling with kids and AirBnB allows you to rent out an entire apartment for the price of a single hotel room. Much better. Hotels should lower their prices and increase their options and then maybe they would compete? Instead of anti-competitive legislation...

[feadog]

Staying in AirBnB I don't feel safe at all and 80% of the AirBnB's I stayed had one problem or the other.

This is almost the direct opposite of my own experience.

[ouesp]

Experience 1:

Got an AirBnB in Montreal Canada in December 2016. The photos were great. The owner was quick to respond. So I booked it and reached the place.

Bummer 1: No cable. ( But in the listing it was there) Bummer 2: No safety. The owner had converted an apartment into two, separated by a thin wall. The wall had come off and he had the gypsum wall leaning and cautioned me not to touch it.

Since it was for 2 days and in the middle of a heavy snowfall, I let it pass. Fast forward some hours, a couple of people checked into the other half of the apartment, started playing loud music, shouting and smoking. The smoke started coming into my half of the place because the wall was not really sealed.

Experience 2:

Rented a place which had a profile photo of a family. I thought great ! When I checked in, I felt it was some sort of "setup" just for the purpose of renting it out for AirBnB, I asked the owner where she lived. She said "nearby". I felt something fishy as there was no family ! The reviews even said there was a family (fake reviews ? ).

So after the owner left, I googled the address and to my surprise, I found that the address is under a rental agency. Next I found that the door lock is not working and internet is less than the speeds of dial up. I left the next day and disputed it on AirBnB.

AirBnB said, "Its legal for rental agencies to list on AirBnB". ( what was the photo of that family then ? ) Since AirBnB was not willing to refund and gave me a 25$ coupon, I disputed with AMEX and got all my money back.

That was my last & final stay using AirBnB. Deleted my AirBnB account after this incident.

[microcolonel]

If you like staying in hotels, wouldn't it be better if the hotel industry failed to lobby against AirBnB? That would mean cheaper rooms for you!

[ouesp]

After staying in AirBnB, I realized why I have to pay more in hotels. In hotels, we take things like security,clean beds,heating,cooling, a 24 hour reception etc for granted. But in AirBnB I have to waste my time behind all those things rather than enjoy my vacation or fulfill my purpose of the visit.

[esMazer]

Although I do not read hundred of reviews per stay I'm very picky and only choose the best.. this way I have stayed in multiple countries and have had very few issues with Airbnb.

To be fair with Hotels you also have to do your work and read the reviews.