HN2new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The article seems to highlight a legitimate use case that the regulation is screwing up, which also happens to be Airbnb's original purpose - to sublet while you are out of town or otherwise not using the space.

Sure, Airbnb has grown way past that, but in my mind there is a very big difference between running a business on Airbnb and subletting while you are away to help pay for a trip. A provision with a cap of how many nights a year one could sublet without being considered a hotel would be a lot more sensible.

While I'm sure it would be difficult to enforce, services like Airbnb and HomeAway would probably cooperate in disclosing booked stays per address. It wouldn't be that hard to link the data together and spot violators. I'm sure residents would help as well.

Taxing is sensible though.



While I'm sure it would be difficult to enforce, services like Airbnb and HomeAway would probably cooperate in disclosing booked stays per address. It wouldn't be that hard to link the data together and spot violators.

I can say with first hand knowledge, that HomeAway at least engages with cities politically to build cases for short-term rental advocacy from economic development to enabling and increasing the attractiveness of tourism in cities where they operate. They setup sessions with city and community leaders and work on actionable regulation and legislation with cities to introduce fair laws for rentals.

I'm no shill for HomeAway, but I do have a close personal friend who works on the Government Affairs team and have witnessed their efforts with my own eyes. At least in their case, HomeAway works with cities, instead of against them.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: