[stingraycharles]

In Amsterdam it’s a broader issue, and excessive tourism is a big complaint by pretty much anyone native to Amsterdam. The city has recently put a halt to any further expansion of tourist shops / hotels / etc downtown, and on a national level we’re trying to get tourists to visit other parts of The Netherlands instead. This, in order to keep the authentic nature of the city, and ensure the city still caters to locals as well.

These kind of rules is something all businesses need to adhere to, and I see no reason why Airbnb should be an exception.

[cornholio]

So auction the tourist lodging right like taxi medallions, to hotels and home bnbs alike. The move you describe will likely enrich the hotels that already exist downtown without any benefit to the city.

[stingraycharles]

Sure, those kind of things are a possibility. The point I was making is that Airbnb needs to play by the same rules as everyone.

[cornholio]

But they don't, do they? The whole point of these "rent 90 days a year, apply for a new license every year" laws is to impose an onerous burden on Bnbs that traditional suppliers either don't face or can amortize over hundreds of rooms.

It's laughable to require a single rented room the same paperwork that a large hotel requires, then say that enables them to "play by the same rules as everyone else". They are a fundamentally different way to provide the same economic service and the law needs to adapt, not protect traditional interests.