• dugmeup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    56
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Hotels were a nightmare, cabs were a nightmare. These companies indisputably changed the game in the favour of the consumer all around the world.

    Where we are now having an issue is large swaths of housing taken over by companies and investors wanting a return. As long as housing and renting are attractive for investment over and about housing and transitory renting, it will attract lots of money.

    Supply must be improved to improve the housing market. This should be a continuous government function at least at the low and middle income level not just a private endeavour.

    Density and public transport is the answer - not killing something that absolutely changed the game and took the hotel and cab market back to their customers begging for a chance.

    • horsey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      73
      ·
      2 months ago

      Agreed on cabs but hotels haven’t changed anything significantly and they’re looking much better than AirBnB at this point.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sure, but AirBnB and Uber didn’t improve the hotel and taxi markets, they just joined them. They each took advantage of a tech debt and then lowered the barriers for entry to the market. In doing so, they made a shit ton of money by carving out market share from the fucked up systems you described.

      • snooggums@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        2 months ago

        Also by doing and end run around regulations by pretending to be people just renting their house when they are away or giving rides to people going in the same directions. That is why they have names like ‘ride share’ instead of ‘contracted cabbies who drive their own cars’.

      • iopq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Seriously? Not sure about airbnb since I use booking, but Uber was so much better than cabs it wasn’t even close. They didn’t even make that much money. They lost money last quarter

    • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 months ago

      What wasn’t a nightmare was bed and breakfasts. They also weren’t an excuse to keep property off the housing rental market at scale.

      These companies aren’t saviours, they’re businesses who rode public tech optimism and common frustration at established industries in the same fields to stay ahead of regulation and have the public demand it. Surprise, they’re the same businesses.

        • dugmeup@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Don’t have bed and breakfast money. They are regularly more expensive and have less choices than Airbnb

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            The ones I’ve been to are comparable to a hotel and include a good breakfast. So yeah, a bit more than an Airbnb, but not that far off from Airbnb + good breakfast restaurant.

      • gian @lemmy.grys.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        They also weren’t an excuse to keep property off the housing rental market at scale.

        True. But given that houses were off the market even before, I don’t think it is exclusively their fault.

        For example Milano historically always had about 30% of the available homes empty, and that even before Airbnb.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, I think the main issue is supply. Airbnb works because of a mix of supply and costs. There just aren’t many nice places to stay in resort areas, and the few that exist are extremely expensive (e.g. fancy hotels). Likewise, hotels are often more expensive and less convenient if you have a large group (e.g. my family likes to vacation together, and there’s like 20 of us).

      The problem seems to be long term residents feeling the pain of increased housing costs. If you legislate against that, those tourists will still need to go somewhere, which means more hotels or more strain on transportation from the outlying areas to the tourist area. If mass transit is effective, that’s not a big issue, but far too often that’s not the case, so you’ll just end up with tons of traffic.

      My proposal is to not ban it, but instead limit it to residents, so in order to do short-term rentals, you need to be physically present a majority of the year. Otherwise, you need to apply as a regular rental, which can be limited to certain areas near transit hubs to keep traffic under control. Then improve transit into the area so tourists who don’t fit in the city can easily get there.