• Creator
    Topic
  • #11000
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

      As Airbnb pumps bucks by the bucketful into the local media to try to convince our MPs to remove the legal right of apartment owners to keep holiday lets out of their buildings, you are going to hear it suggested time and again that Airbnb is just like Uber.

      And, to be fair, in some ways the online holiday letting agency is like the ride sharing private taxi service.  However, in some of the most important regards, they could not be more different.

      True, they both allow people to use an asset they own (or rent), to make money.  Also, taking paying passengers in a private car was at one point illegal.  Airbnb still is, at least in buildings that are zoned residential-only.


      Airbnb – the facts and fictions behind a great little idea that became a money-making monster threatening apartment living 


      They are both very popular with users and service providers alike, and they have both made their founders billions.

      They have also helped to establish the notion that if enough people break the law using new technologies, and can make money from it, the government will change the law to fit. I expect online drug ‘sharing’ to be legalised any minute.

      But as an article in US online magazine Politico pointed out last year, that’s where the similarities ended, certainly as far as New York was concerned.

      The article asks why it was that New York city and state politicians were relatively quick to legitimise Uber but dug their heels in with Airbnb, to the point that the holiday letting giant launched a legal challenge (which it pretty soon abandoned.)

      Firstly, everybody in New York complains both about how hard it is to get cabs and find cheap accommodation.  Uber helped New Yorkers with the former while Airbnb, arguably, made life harder with the latter.

      Uber helps everyone get around, while Airbnb helps a relatively small number of hosts and their overseas visitors. And there’s no votes in foreign tourists.

      Also, Uber submitted itself to the most stringent regulations of any city in which it operates while Airbnb decided to fight any restrictions tooth and nail.

      Oh, and it helped Uber’s case that everyone hated the taxi industry monopolies.  Sound familiar?  Sydneysiders couldn’t wait to load their Uber app on to their smartphones, leading to a cut in taxi credit card and booking charges, while getting around town has become an altogether more pleasant experience.

      Meanwhile a number of studies have shown that residential rents have risen two or three times faster in Sydney’s Airbnb hotspots, compared with the rest of the city.

      Apart from the comparatively few people letting properties online, Sydneysiders in apartment blocks are getting nothing but trouble from holiday lets.

      When it comes to the law, Uber has toed the newly drawn line and everybody is happy.  Airbnb is telling Macquarie St how it should be controlled and a lot of people are very, very annoyed.

      So don’t confuse Uber and Airbnb.  That’s like confusing need with greed. And the problem is broad acceptance of apartment living as a viable lifestyle is just starting to take hold in Australia.  Turning our homes into hotels could turn on its head a mindset shift that has taken decades to evolve.

      The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
    Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • #26654
      EdwinZ
      Flatchatter

        Couldn’t agree more.  As an occasional Airbnb host myself, I’ve found Airbnb’s arrogance breathtaking.  

        I’ve been to a few of their Sydney functions for hosts.  These purport to be all about educating hosts for the benefit of hosts, but from my experience it’s all about how hosts can line Airbnb’s pockets and help Airbnb grow fat on the sweat of hosts.  There’s an awful lot Airbnb Koolaid dispensed at these propaganda rallies and their very obvious purpose is to recruit hosts to become Airbnb’s foot soldiers in the battle against regulation.  Any host who dares to raise a voice in dissent or even attempts to put forward facts that don’t suit Airbnb’s ‘alternative facts’ is bullied and shut down very quickly.  

        Airbnb’s clumsy attempts to promote themselves as the saviour of the battling homeowner and their ridiculous branding of their local lobbyist cells as ‘Home Sharing Clubs’ is sickening.  I don’t begrudge Airbnb their right to build their business, but there’s something so fundamentally gutless, cowardly and manipulative about their approach.  Airbnb seem oblivious to the Orwellian doublethink needed to promote the company line.  As an example, in their Sydney Home Sharing Club forum, one host is expressing dismay that Clover Moore proposes limiting STR in residential zones to 100 days a year.  The host describes it as “a disastrous position for anyone who wants to rent their whole home out.”  Why?  Surely if it’s ‘their whole home’ they’d want to live in it themselves?  I would have thought renting out your actual ‘home’ for 100 days a year was about 80 days more than most homeowners would want or need!  No one legitimately renting out their primary residence would think 100 days was a bad deal.

        To describe Airbnb as greedy is almost too kind.  Hosts are treated as a disposable input to production and there’s a feeling that we are being constantly pushed to do more and more for less and less. Any host who’s had a problem caused by a guest and has sought assistance from Airbnb will know that if there’s any benefit of doubt to be awarded, it will go to the guest and not the host.   My observation from talking with other hosts, is that many hosts are reliant on Airbnb income and don’t dare object to the exploitative treatment for fear of being punished by Airbnb by their instrument of collective control, the dreaded ‘search algorithm’.  

        Make no mistake, whilst there are many hosts who still harbour warm, fuzzy feelings towards Airbnb, there are also many who long for the day that some viable competition emerges. 

        #26656
        Millie
        Flatchatter

          EdwinZ

          I’m really confused:  why do you claim to be a ‘host’ when you’re clearly a landlord?

          “Make no mistake, whilst there are many hosts who still harbour warm, fuzzy feelings towards Airbnb, there are also many who long for the day that some viable competition emerges.”

          Please:  are you talking about renting Residential Housing?  Residential Housing is for the housing of Residents, which is totally legal and absolutely accepted.  Why are you involved with Airbnb…maximum profits at everyone else’s expense?

          Probably no one has ever objected to an investor or landlord renting residential homes to residents.  If one’s seeking maximum profits from commercial rentals there is always investment in serviced apartments/hotels etc, etc, which again no one has ever objected to.

          On the matter of limiting the number of days a residential property can be short-term let each year, personally I find this scheme ridiculous.  If there were no problems with STRs no one would object.  But there are massive problems.  Why subject neighbours to STRs and its problems for ‘X’ number of days a year…and who will/can ever police such a scheme?

          Homes are not Hotels.  And neighbourhoods are not Transit Zones/Tourist Camps.

          #26661
          Jimmy-T
          Keymaster
          Chat-starter

            I actually found EdwinZ’s post enlightening and helpful.  The problem isn’t that people rent out their rooms or even their houses – it’s that a $50 billion dollar global mega-corporations is selling itself as a cosy little local company that’s all about helping ordinary people when it’s really an agency that is driving change in legislation that will be to the detriment of 90 percent of people living in apartments, just so it can continue its out-of-control expansion.

            Taking a “those who aren’t with us are against us” attitude makes it very easy for them to dismiss dissenters as some sort of lunatic, self-interested fringe.

            Millie’s position is very specific – government MPs have been breaking the law and encouraging others to do the same in her building so they can make money from the Sydney bolt-holes while they are back in their constituencies.

            What has the Labor Party not jumped on this?  I’d guess it’s because they are not sure some of their members aren’t doing exactly the same.  

            But there is a grey area and there is room for compromise and the best chance of a reasonable outcome is to allow holiday lets where they don’t harm anyone (including by pushing residential rents up) and keep it out of apartments except for genuine room rentals where the hosts are in situ.

            The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
          Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
          • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.