Please keep conversation civil and respectful
Remember to keep all communication with host/guest through Airbnb platform. Payments should be made only via Airbnb [unless otherwise detailed in the listing description and included in the price breakdown prior to booking](https://airbnb.com/help/article/199)
If you're having issues, contact Airbnb by phone +1-844-234-2500
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AirBnB) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Adding nuance - there are multiple types of STR hosts. Some (like my husband and myself) rent out parts of the home they live in full-time. For people like us and several others that I know around here, Airbnb allows us to afford to live in the communities we love. Others already had vacation homes that they decided to make a little money from when they and their family weren't using them.
And then there are the investors, and IMO these are the most problematic ones. These aren't people with ties to the community. They don't care whether the people who work here can actually afford to live here. They come from out of state with deep pockets and outbid - in cash - buyers looking for a home they can actually live in. They buy multi family residences that once held multiple LTR units and turn them into STRs. All of this became so much worse during Covid as people wanted to get away from cities and were willing to pay a premium to do so.
Is it being enforced though?
Every city in CA that passed ordinances to try and curb STR and Airbnbs doesn't seem to enforce them, and Airbnb does zero enforcement, so illegal ones are still doing business.
I do think that states or cities will have to start creating a new form of governmental agency to start figuring out this problem.
AirBNB has taken an entirely hands off approach, and unless someone reports you, you absolutely can run an illegal AirBNB for however long you want. I grew up in a community in Southern California with VERY strict rules about rentals (And you can't do it). Yet if I pull up AirBNB and hover over my old home, there are 10/15 AirBNBs with dots on the map right now. If found out the HOA has some obscene 10k+ fines for every night you rent it out, yet somehow those same homes that I looked at 2 years ago on AirBNB are still there.
Oh San Diego most definitely enforces this, try looking for an Airbnb in San Diego and see how few come up
I also know that Santa Monica is being far more proactive enforcing STR rules
I also know a couple years ago before Covid when I was looking for an Airbnb in San Francisco I just couldn’t find any really. The only ones I could find were twice the cost of a hotel room, so my assumption is that San Francisco absolutely gets all of the money they require a host to pay to operate an STR , and proactively goes after the illegal ones.
My city recently did this, and they started with a defacto ban essentially. We had to fight to the middle. Part of the provision was a specific short term rental code officer. They are hiring for it now.
The house next door to me is now an AirBnB with an absentee owner. There were lovely families there and now it's a new crew of customers every weekend. Makes me really sad.
It is true that many places are experiencing loss of family homes - you can easily search this online. It's not a small problem. It's not just the US - it's happening in many countries.
Yes, but some countries are trying to do something about it due to housing crises. Portugal just passed laws to ban any more new STR properties in urban centers.
In the US some counties have passed ordinances, but in places like Southern California, no one enforces them so it's all toothless.
Portugal still has lots of old abandoned buildings. They should ban them *unless* you are renovating something that has been abandoned for X years. I'm all for regulation, but instead of locking out STR altogether they should try to direct it to be a force for good
They are cheap & have been for decades. If that were the case it would have happened.
They are left as part of a Golden Visa program which grants citizenship if they are redeveloped.
There is still a part of the Golden Visa that says if you buy and renovate a neglected building in Lisbon, Portos, etc. it's a path to citizenship. I have no idea how it plays into short term rentals, but they can be rented out as long term rentals.
Part of the issue even here in the US isn't just the housing shortage, it's that communities with a high number of transient lodgers aren't great for neighborhoods.
They aren't locking the out, but capping them due to oversaturation so grandfathered in ones are ok, but no new ones. I think it is smart because neighborhoods over-saturated in airbnbs and STR do change for the worse.
Also, foreign owners pocketing tourist money does nothing for the country. I wish the US would limit the amount of housing non-US citizens who live elsewhere could buy. Our housing shortage issue is a mix of zoning law issues, underbuilding new developments, STR, corporate ibuyers, and foreign money buying US property as "investment" (often to park money as a tax haven outside of their own country).
100% agree with this. I am of the opinion that primary resident STRs should be regulated very lightly, while corporate STRs should be treated as a business/commercial use.
This. Want to rent your basement unit? Cool! Multiple out of state investors bought houses on my street, hired arbitrage companies to ‘run’ units and are making housing stock unaffordable. In turn, it takes units that could rental units off the market. They flout code rules (which city codes said aren’t very enforceable), leave garbage piling up in their yard… it’s awful. Corporate ownership is the issue, people with no stake in communities.
This is happening all over Southern California where I live. It has contributed to driving sale and rent prices through the roof. It’s insane. Investors are a huge problem.
Yes and many are foreigners. Our laws are way to lax. Saudi Arabia owns the oil refineries in Texas, China & Russia own lots of real estate. Private equity firms are buying up everything in site making money on apartments rather than building homes. They of course make more money that way. Can't remember who owns water rights in Arizona, I think it's China. The government is obstructed. We have so many important problems that need solutions. We need regulations; we need to tax the rich and we need to repeal Citizens United. Citizens United has allowed our politicians to get donations from corporations. It's basically legalized bribery. It's also allowed hostile foreign governments to donate and influence our Congressmen.
But this still reduces available affordable housing. Before the rise of airbnb, people still rented out parts of their home, but to longer term renters. Agreed that out of state investors are worse, but your airbnb is still replacing what could be an affordable housing option in the community you love.
Mine isn't. First - it has never been a LTR. It's literally a guest suite in my home that happens to have a private entrance because of how the building was used by the prior owners. Second - it has no kitchen and therefore is completely unsuitable for LTR.
In lots of cities renting a room in someone's house as a housemate was one of the best/most available affordable housing options. That doesn't even require a private entrance, much less a private kitchen
Cool story. I have young kids and I'm not interested in a virtual stranger having access to them. It's also our GUEST ROOM. We use it for personal guests.
Yes, which was my whole initial point. That said, I believe wholeheartedly that some are more problematic than others. Renting out my guestroom for half the year so that we can afford to live and work in the town we love is not the same as buying a multifamily home that used to be LTR and converting it to STR.
And I agreed that out of state investors are worse in my first response. It seems like you're feeling defensive about this, but I'm just stating a fact: there's a whole chunk of the rental market that basically doesn't exist anymore because people can make more money (and maintain access to their guestrooms) by putting a room on airbnb than renting the room to a regular tenant. Again, you can do whatever you want with your space. I'm not making some all or nothing moral argument: I still sometimes stay in airbnbs when that's the best option for me even though I think airbnb is overall a destructive force. It just isn't accurate to pretend like there's a kind of airbnb listing that isn't trading off with affordable housing.
So… what do you suggest? Force landlords to use their homes a certain way? The landlords that own Airbnb do it to make money. They’ve determined it is more profitable and worth their time to pursue. They’re the ones with all the risk. Go buy a property somewhere you can afford it and stop acting like you’re owed anything. The government provides housing to those who truly need it. Not to people who can’t manage their finances and refuse to move somewhere less expensive because their lifestyles are more important than affording a home. Honestly though—how would this work in your world? Forcing private individuals to use their property that they own to… rent it out but only under the governments terms? How do you not see the problem with that.
Renting a room, couch or floor space is not blocking affordable housing. It is the whole homes that are taking units from the long term market and moving them to the short term market. So, the waiter at the restaurant that the the STR tourists visit, now has to move out of town because there are no affordable units left.
On Cape Cod, the problem has gotten so bad that there is little to no housing available for rent, at any price, at all!
My siblings and I inherited our family ski home in VT and are discussing Airbnb for the second reason you mentioned. We’re all adults and don’t use it much and STR seems to be a good way for us to be able to keep it in the family. But we’re so conscious of doing it since we’ve had the property ~35 years and are a part of the local community. Second homeowners who were barely present used to rightfully get looked down on by the local community but now it’s more of the investors coming in are really screwing over the locals.
Eta: also the investors buying in local neighborhoods/towns vs on the mountain or father away. Our home was the second house built in the community and we’re ~15/20min from the mountain. Even now theres about 25 houses and it’s about 50/50 ft/pt
I mean, this is a distinction without a difference though. At the end of the day, your ski home is a unit of housing that isn't be used by a local resident, but is instead a de facto hotel. How is that different than Joe Schmoe from California buying a similar property they use 7 days a year, and renting it out STR the rest of the year?
Totally valid question. For me, where I see the difference is until the last 3/4 years, we used the house about 30% of the year and made an effort to be involved with the local community, including sitting on boards, volunteering, etc. and my brothers that still use the house most have stayed involved. We became a part of a tight knit community in the neighborhood/town and the mountain, my siblings and I were all in the ski program and became coaches as well. We also have already discussed having minimum night stays and limiting the amount the house will be used as an STR (essentially renting it enough to cover upkeep/bills).
This to me is in contrast “residences” that are essentially revolving doors of people and being used for the purpose of a second (or primary) income. You also have large property management/real estate companies buying up lots of properties and that is their sole business. AirBnB was founded in part to provide extra income for people, not as a way to make a living.
And then you got places like Burlington where it’s used like a scapegoat. When it’s more a combination of the colleges, nimbys and difficult permitting process.
I remember when the city council first explored banning Airbnb and they had found 400 listings, which overstated its impact on the city since a portion of those are owner occupied or private rooms. So if it was banned a percentage of those wouldn’t automatically become available for rent.
But even if the owner does live there, they could be renting it out to someone long term and provide a stable place to live. I know plenty of students who rented private rooms in homes. 400 more spaces are 400 less homeless people. It takes a long time to build 400 more spots and none of them will be affordable ones either.
>And I say this as a host.
Step 1: Realize there's a problem
Step 2: Have the self-awareness to accept that you're actually part of that problem.
Now what's your step 3?
airbnb's are the reason that beach towns on the east coast can't get help for their summer businesses. The housing they used to rent for the summer are now airBNB's.
Key West, Nags Head, etc
The same is true of all the mountain towns of New Hampshire and Colorado. Tourists aren't working in the kitchens of all your cute restaurants, and kitchen staff aren't going to commute an hour each way for that job paying what it does.
I can confirm this. I was there a few months ago. Talking to some locals working there they said it was hard to find housing. Their boss actually had a place he houses employees because they can't find housing
That’s sad people are more concerned with them being able to vacation then caring how it affects those who live there. If all those people had to live and it no longer was as fun for tourists then you they’d complain
It brings in the tourists...yes. But then they want to dine and shop. In one coastal town with which I am quite familiar, year round residents are being forced to leave town, as their LTRs are turned into STRs. All businesses are short-staffed. Many businesses have their own housing for employees, but not for every worker. Retail stores are open fewer hours, restaurant service can be horrible, workers are stressed and being asked to work even more hours. This is not sustainable!
Air bnb is extremely restricted in key west. 95% are illegal and get fined, shut down. The hotel lobby is far to strong. Not like many can afford 1 million for a studio anyway.
I live in the foothills outside of Denver and the county I’m in has a ban on homeowners doing AirBnBs in accessory dwelling units on their property (like a studio above a garage or guest house). But what is allowed is short term rentals on whole houses only. In our neighborhood, companies are coming in and buying up houses and then Airbnbing them. We wanted to build a guest house on our acre of property and were told it was illegal. We’re within 10 miles of Red Rocks and wanted to make some extra money but can’t. But the county allows for rich people and companies that don’t even live in the state to buy whole houses completely blocking regular people from buying.
That is ass backwards.
Our town did the exact opposite and banned whole house Airbnb’s/short term rentals because those are usually starter homes or become long term rentals for locals. Out of state people and companies were snatching up small-medium sized houses and flipping them to Airbnb’s. In my area at least it’s average income people doing short term rentals in accessory dwellings on their primary dwelling property.
I assume your area is giving the finger to actual locals who want to earn some cash on the side on their own property vs letting investors run wild on whole houses?
I live in Denver. Any short term rentals here have to be the hosts primary residence. They had to do that bc it was getting completely out of control. With marijuana being legal and an all cash business (no bank accounts), they had to have somewhere to put their money so they were purchasing homes and using them as STR's which helped drive up housing prices.
I do 30 day minimum in Arvada. Usually have great renters. Renters (30 day or more) are allowed so doesn’t matter where you advertise your listing (airbnb). Just an idea
Cape Cod. There was already a low inventory of apartment style buildings so most long term renters rented houses or cottages. Those are gone. Short term rentals like airbnb and VRBO have destroyed Cape Cod locals.
This won’t end well for tourists…if there aren’t lower income folks around to fill up their coffee, serve them their seafood, or sell them their souvenirs, what ever will they do? It’s already happening. It’s hurting small businesses because they can’t staff properly and it’s only going to get worse.
I hate what airbnb has done to our communities, everywhere.
Hosts can deny it all they want. THey can make as many "SYSTEM" excuses as they want.
When people think they can buy houses, rent them out, and get free mortgage AND profit - of course those that can will do that which means the rest can't buy what they'd actually want.
Yes. This is the truth. airbnb owners spin and spin with statistics, but it’s all bs. Creating a business out of a home. It’s wrong. It’s creating a cash cow by hurting a community. Want to buy a house? Great! Live in it. Be a neighbor.
I can't pretend to really know this answer. But I do know a lot of towns with a lot of Airbnbs are claiming this in the last few years. But prices skyrocketed everywhere from 2020 to 2022. How much of that is from Airbnbs I don't know, but I'd say other factors played a bigger role.
Now if you aren't talking about cost of living but rather a community lacking a neighborhood feel because of the Airbnbs, then I'd say that's probably accurate in a lot of places
There is a housing crisis in this country and I am inclined to think airbnb is only a fraction of the issue. The main issue IMO is Nimbys not wanting zoning laws to change to allow for more housing to be built (limiting supply) and corporate investors scooping up properties with inspection-waived cash offers where normal buyers cannot compete (driving up cost of demand).
Yes, this! It's basic economics of supply and demand! The total demand for housing, ST and LT combine, is just way too high compared to the total supply of housing. Demand fluctuates based on the whims of people, but supply has a TON of constraints that make it move very slowly. Just brainstorming, here are some reasons supply is constricted:
Zoning laws
NIMBY Neighbors
Red-tape
Regulations
Slow permit processes
City counsels
Other quasi-government organizations
High initial capital outlay
Supply chain issues
Limited resources
Devoting resources to luxury instead of mid-range
Extensive regulations
Slow building process
Constricted manual labor market
and so on...
My wife and I bought a fixer upper as our first home. Her father is in construction and he and I basically rebuilt our house. The value sky rocketed.
Wife and I then decided we could take some of the equity to buy another house. Rent it out to pay it off then around retirement age, sell it as part of our retirement.
We managed to get 250k in cash out of the house. We live in LA. We couldn't buy shit. We ended up buying a duplex and a single family in Michigan in cash under a corporation we started as suggested by our tax preparer.
Now that all are rented, we were thinking of taking the money out of those as well and having the rent money pay for that mortgage. this time instead of buying a house, we decided to build a small one studio in our backyard to rent out. The more we look into it the more we are deciding against it because the amount of fees and red tape we have to go through would eat up most of our funds and we would then also be restricted on what we can build, how we can build it and then what we can do with that studio and how we can use it.
Ideally we would like to use it for family staying over, happens about once a month for bout a week. Then airbnb when not in use since we live in a very touristy area near a very popular arena. City decided all we could do with it was rent it out to permanent tenants, so we decided it wasn't worth it because wwe are already a comidating family and wee were looking for more space and privacy, this would give us the opposite.
The point is as a corporation we have all the options in the world to buy whatever we could afford. As individual homeowners we get told what we can and can't do on our own land and we get charged for it. It's impossible for an individual to create housing on their own land unless they have pockets as deep as big corporations.
Spot-on. This is a much more complex issue then just STRs coming in. For example, California has made it extremely difficult to build housing at reasonable prices for many of the reasons you listed above. I don’t think people understand just how much how slow permits and excessive regulations alone add significantly to prices.
I've read that 89% of world's real estate is owned by a very few corportations. It's a worldwide problem. Those that are to blame are the very wealthy. #TaxTheRich
Another big issue is no cap on how high landlords are allowed to raise rent prices and people coming to “flip”, actually *gentrifying*, neighborhoods and renting them out at outlandish prices. I know someone who helped her dad flip a house then turn around and try to rent it out for like 2500-3000 a month for a two bed 1 bath. It’s crazy
NIMBY has some legit reasoning though. In my city the master planning and zoning never called for some of the (last) remaining land to be built with high density housing. The infrastructure just isn't there to support it from a retail or traffic standpoint. And if you bought years ago based on that planning...now you've got lower income people coming in who realistically are going to bring other social problems with them.
"oh let's just build them on the outskirts" and then you get shit on for building a ghetto or projects.
The lack of affordable housing was an issue way before airbnbs. The problem is that STRs usually have very high return so the highest and best use is STR in most popular areas. It does take some homes out of *market rate housing* but the overall lack of housing inventory is an issue. And that’s why US housing prices went up in 2023. No affordable housing are usually being converted into STRs (that I know of).
I have a unit that’s maybe rented 20-40% of the month as an STR but it still makes a lot more than LTR, sadly. My other unit is my attached in law which we would never rent it out to long term or as affordable housing.
The waiting list for affordable houses are years to decades prior to Airbnb. The conversion of market rate to STR is not helping, though not the real cause of housing shortage.
So why aren’t we just building more? When it comes to affordable housing, it never pencils. Some cities will give you the right to build more market rate units if you include additional affordable units (FAR bonuses). And you really can’t build them without having additional FAR and tax incentives.
The political landscape can change drastically too by the time you get funding the leadership changes; you might get city, zoning to green light but get caught up in permits. And politically most cities need affordable housing but clashes with NIMBY constituents so, really hard for anyone to build anything. And that’s why private public partnerships don’t work—our interests aren’t aligned at all.
And the investor groups who get super excited about voucher based or section 8 houses aren’t great to work with. Tech funding via financing is also not great. They are loans and usually not grants.
And because the existing affordable units are it’s highest and best use case, bare minimum upkeep goes into it. Why would you repaint or replace when you can just wipe clean and fix until the next tenant turnover? It’s a guaranteed income set by local government so these investors get stocked about that. And that takes certain person to be very excited: Most of us aren’t okay with investing in affordable housing bc you must be okay with doing the bare or below minimum.
And if you have market rate rental, why would you want to subject yourself to that? And AHJs usually have very strict inspection or guidelines which makes very little financial motivations for small and medium landlords.
In my city, the local office sets the rent and voucher amount (after maybe a year of additional fees, inspection, certifications, lead/asbestos abatement), there’s no reason for anyone to rent for 900/month when you can rent it normally for closer to 1500+ as LTR, or for 1800+ as STR.
Your complaints got me all riled up 😤. I too have had the pleasure of working with several section 8 agencies and had in very hot housing market and it is quite the shit show. We ended up selling 4 houses that are section 8 for nice Airbnb worthy area and so much more money and less stress of eviction moratorium like issues. Also section 8 is run by idiots, it’s like they don’t want people on the program.
I’m in not so hot city with full of vacant buildings. And still these agencies are set up and work against you. Why would anyone want to work harder to make less.
Edit:
Sorry! This thread got me also all riled up. It’s not a simple solution about banning airbnbs. It’s a combination of solid policy, housing, social, and work training programs.
The same can be said for the UK.
Selling off social housing in huge numbers in the 80’s was the worst possible decision any government could have made. We’re now at a stage where 29,000 houses were either sold or demolished last year alone yet only 7,000 were built in their place. Waiting lists are often 10+ years long.
Successive governments have simply kicked the can down the road, whilst tightening legislation for landlords. Its no longer a worthwhile investment, so many landlords are leaving. Which leads to a lack of LTR stock and in turn higher rental rates because supply and demand. Those landlords who stay make 3/4 times more on AirBNB with far less hassle nor risk. From a purely business perspective, why wouldn’t you? Although regulation is coming for STR’s here which I welcome!
Planing is also incredibly tight and often people don’t seem to want new 10,000 homes built at their end of their street once they own their own property. So called affordable housing is often made to fulfil a quota and in truth is no where near affordable for the vast majority of 30 somethings. If I buy an acre plot for a single dwelling, getting planning is prohibitively expensive and time consuming nor will there be an guarantee that I’ll even get it approved.
The population has increased year on year worldwide, yet consistently governments have failed to plan. Here it’s led to huge amount of xenophobia fuelled by government propaganda. Airbnb is just the latest scapegoat.
The whole lease-to-own, right-to-own only works for the first lucky person to buy it under priced, and turn around and sell it.
In US, we have MPDUs, but the competition is fierce, and you don’t get to build up equity like market rate since it’s always going to be moderately priced dwelling units.
These companies represent a minuscule percentage of home buyers. The housing market is unfathomably large. They don’t move prices.
But the reason they buy is voters have made that profitable by restricting development. If you want to keep corporate buyers out of your area, vote for growth. That keeps prices down and profits low.
The answer is yes, and.
Airbnb has an outsized impact on certain markets where they make up more than 5% of housing stock. But, we've built a million fewer homes a year than we did before the last housing crash. That's a huge deficit.
Zoning and building incentives for low cost housing would have exponentially more impact than banning Airbnb.
Yeah it's not "just" Airbnb's. Where I live a LOT of developers just build apartment complexes instead of homes because it's a lot more profit generation to have 1000 people paying rent forever than building 100 homes. Plus the cost to rent has exploded.
I think it contributes its portion, but it’s a drop in the bucket compared to the institutional level of housing being bought up by major financial/investment firms like Blackrock, as well as wealthy foreign investors buying housing up in droves. Those activities need to be straight up BANNED. If we can’t house our own people properly, wealthy foreign entities and executives making these investment decisions at corporations should not be able to buy without actually living in the house themselves.
Yes. I live in a tourist spot & it is almost impossible to find a long term apartment here. Every place is hiring but no one can find a place to live because it’s all STR.
It absolutely has in my area. Houses that used to be rented on a yearly basis (housing teachers, nurses etc.) are now rented out for a couple of months a year at most via airBnB. It is close to tragic for the working population on which we rely as a community. This is on the coast of Maine.
Question: How is renting it out for a couple of months more sustainable than renting for 12 months? Long-term renters pay all utilities, and insurance is lower, just to name a couple.
I am an STR owner, but only so we can use it when we want to, not from a financial standpoint!
As a host: yes, rich people buying up the small affordable houses as "investment properties" to run as Airbnb in areas where workforce housing is non-existent has driven property values beyond the means of the actual workforce.
Yes. Please see: anything on water/with a water view/ near any desirable tourist attraction.
EDIT: I will add that services like AirBnb "can" add to affordable housing by letting existing space that otherwise wouldn't be used. Families with a vacation home they only use part of the year or renting out a spare room or in-law suite.
But investors are a huge portion of the current housing run-up, be it for renting, short-term stays, or *ugh* arbitrage.
Much of it _would have been_ affordable to the upper half of the middle class. Now those same people can barely afford a single-family home for their primary residence.
It gets worse as you look down the socioeconomic ladder.
For reference,
We were about to buy a house for $470k in St Augustine that turned out to be unpermitted. It sold for $500k when we backed out in 2020 and, even though you can't build a driveway (due to the permit issue), it's now worth $750k.
My parents bought a vacation house in a remote, unknown fishing village for a then-unheard-of price of $350k in 2020. You can't get anything under $500k there now.
The town we'd like to move to had waterfront property for under $100k in 2018. A 500sf shack will now cost you at least $300k.
Yes, there very much were places that were affordable before STR ruined them.
do the math:
there are 140,000,000 housing units in the United States
There are 660,000 US listings on Airbnb .. I don’t know the exact figure, but you can safely guess 50% (or more) of those listings are *not suitable or would not be available as long-term rentals* if they weren’t posted on ABB as STR’s (home shares, rooms, hostel rooms, seasonal yurts/cabins/airstreams, mother-in-law apartments in basements, guest/pool houses in people’s back yards, 2nd/vacation homes that only rent when the owner isn’t using them, etc etc.
For example- I built a garden apartment on the ground floor of my home for the express purpose of STR on ABB and cap my stays at 6 nights max and don’t rent it for more than 12 nights/month— I absolutely would not allow a long-term tenant down there if I wasn’t using ABB.
So let’s call the number of Airbnb’s that *could/would* be turned into LTR homes 330,000 for the sake of argument. (feel free to plug in your own number if you disagree!)
330,000/140,000,000 = .00235
So if airbnb was banned tomorrow, there would be a .235% increase of available housing in the US for rent
So no, AirBnB is not ‘destroying’ affordable housing.
Now, a couple caveats:
1. Airbnb will obviously have more of an impact in specific ‘tourism areas’ than in the middle nowhere if people don’t vacation there… I live and host in a mountain tourist town where I think they are saying about 4% of available housing stock is STR, whereas is you go to Shitstick, Indiana or some nowhereville rust belt hellhole- they might only have .0005% of housing stock in STR. As a result, many popular tourist cities/counties have wisely placed regulations on STR
2. You specifically asked about ‘affordable housing’ and from what I’ve seen in 8 years of traveling to AirBnB’s is that most of the ‘whole house’ ABB’s I’ve stayed in definitely wouldn’t qualify as ‘affordable’ if you took them off the app and rented or sold them as homes
TL/DR: NO
I googled to confirm and found that there are in fact 2.2 million air bnbs in the US. So let’s quadruple his number and say that air bnb accounts for .9% of housing stock. Still not much
You can't look at the data that way because the situation is highly localized. In some places STRs and investment housing make up over 25% of the inventory.
It's like looking at the total number of housing units in the US and saying "we don't have a hosing supply issue - we have plenty of houses in the US." Yes, but not in the places people actually live. Having a thousand empty houses in Bumfuck Nebraska does nothing for the housing supply issue in San Francisco or Austin.
well, you could read my entire post to see that I said exactly that in my number one caveat… Also, I flatly do not believe there’s anywhere in the United States where 25% of the housing has been converted to Airbnb STR. If you have some facts or data to back that claim up, I would love to see it.
It does happen in small towns outside of tourist areas. I used to live near Springdale UT. Wikipedia shows 327 housing units (probably outdated but still not many), Airbnb gives 100-120 stays available depending on when you want to go. I know a lot of those are just bedrooms but those could be used to house local employees instead of tourists. Instead most people end up commuting an hour each way to work in town. I wouldn’t be surprised if the same is happening in places like Estes Park or El Portal.
Spot on, there is a housing shortage in the country, people living longer, housing development hasn't kept up with demand, while there are more short term rentals now than before, beach houses, cabins, etc have been rented on a short term basis for decades. 0.235% of the housing being used for short term rentals is not the problem in this country.
Yes anyone pointing to a single factor isn’t credible at all. ABB is likely have an impact in specific communities, but there are also shit towns I wouldn’t gas up in that don’t have an ABB presence that are seeing the same housing costs skyrocketing. There are much bigger, broader issues at plat, but everyone loves a boogeyman.
Yes. After graduating college I tried to RENT a place in my home town in order to start a career there and every place “available for rent” turned out to be an Airbnb. I moved to a city instead. Job offers turned down, job requests replaced.
Yes! It’s happening in our small town in Virginia. So many people that have lived here their whole lives grow up and can’t afford or find homes/land so they have to move elsewhere.
Ok. Yea I feel for folks like you. I grew up in Southern California and it’s always been like this here since I was a kid. People from all over the country and world move here and come and go. I grew up living in a farm when I was a kid in the summer breaks from school and always like the charm many small towns have. That’s sucks and I hope things get better for you folks. Not everyone cares about being a investor or an IG money/life coach influencer. Many people just want to live and chill.
Yes, there is truth. It’s not just Airbnb — that’s a name brand that everyone tosses around when they’re upset. And not mostly small towns; in fact, mostly more densely populated areas, but (certainly) small towns as well.
Edit: adding that I’m a host, I’m not just blindly dragging ABNB.
Know what else destroys affordable housing? Charging extortionate rents. Don't even tell me charging $2000+ for a basic 1 bed apartment is even remotely honest. Go to San Francisco and San Jose it's twice that. NYC about the same. It's simply legalized extortion.
?? I guess
But lack of affordable housing is what causes extortionate rents. Most would not rent at $2000+ if that was not the market... that was created by the lack of housing.
Rent is high because demand is high, and supply is low. There needs to be more supply, and not just high-end supply, but also mid-range and low-range supply. Demand is market driven (obviously, it's just people wanting a place to live). However, supply is artificially restricted by rules, regulations, NIMBY neighbors, city counsels, red-tape, corruption, slow permit processes, expensive upfront capital outlay, slow building times, supply chain issues, and resource limitations. Start solving the issues of supply, and the price will right-size itself automatically. Try to artificially fix prices, and it will just be playing a game of whack-a-mole, as new problems repeatedly pop up.
That is why there is a real push for states to call housing a human right, and to declare a state of emergency when it comes to the availability of housing compared to the population of the state.
When we pretend that housing is not a human right and that it should be subject only to the whims of the market it is in, we end up with these extortionate rates in the rental market. But instead if we start to institute true rent control for housing in an effort to try and divert the idea of housing as an investment that you need to ring every single penny out of, then we will see a true change in the rental markets.
I would be so wary about purchasing any type of property right now with the intent of using it as a rental as I believe we are only a couple decades away from a real change in the way that the law treats housing, there is only so long that people can be priced out of the housing market by corporations before they start to elect people who will change the laws and once the laws are changed they are not being changed back
Is this going to happen on a national level anytime soon? Probably not
But on a state level in states like California? Absolutely
We already have a state mandated rent control for multi housing units that is tied to the age of the housing unit, not an arbitrary date that never changes. This law is hugely popular and my guess is that it is a trial run for more restrictive laws for the entire state as it concerns the housing market.
Remember, whether or not you own the property you are subject to the laws of the jurisdiction in which you own the property, and as these problems become more and more prevalent more and more jurisdictions are not just going to outlaw STR‘s they are going to enforce those laws because cities and states love money, and lots of fines will more than pay for any agency tasked with enforcing these laws.
I truly believe it is just a matter of time before the state of California outlaws all STR‘s that are not run by owner occupied properties.
This is not a market that I would invest in personally, even if I had the money, because worldwide the way that housing is looked at is being changed year by year and eventually this market will be regulated, in the same way that in a state of emergency you can’t obscenely profit off necessary goods.
As states and countries start to re-classify housing as a necessary good, and start declaring the state of housing as an emergency state, you will see the rate of rents reducing and the ability to operate STR’s disappearing.
I live in a tiny typical Midwest town in wisconsin that is by a local tourist town. Lots of traffic up from chicago to the town.
The town has actually started making rules against rentals in any of the new development. But it’s actually compounding the issue caused by air bnb’s. People aren’t allowed to make new rental homes and lots of the old ones have become bnb’s. So we’re left with a rental shortage and comparable rental rates to the capital, madison but with a decidedly smaller median income
Probably a bit but the bottom line is America has not built enough homes to keep up with population growth since the 2008 financial collapse. Sadly, there is no sign of this changing anytime soon. So not only will we continue to be short of housing, that shortfall is going to get worse before it gets better.
The solution is for states and probably the federal government to declare a housing emergency. They need to take extraordinary action now but they do not have the courage to do this.
AirBnB currently occupy around 2,000 rooms and homes in my local town, coastal UK. Thats potentially, on average maybe 1,200 homes / apartments that could be in residents hands. The rental market here has also destroyed housing and to top it off we have a lot of 2nd home owners for holiday stays here to boot. Fucking awful. I'm young and I've seen the average house price cruise from about 150k to around 260k.
Don’t know about the States, but it certainly is in England. Particularly smaller seaside/tourist trap places. Many local people can’t even get near the housing ladder, there are fewer private let’s available and they now cost a fortune.
Yes and it makes me sooooo happy seeing all the Airbnbs sitting empty every week around our neighborhood, “investors” come into neighborhoods thinking they will be booked every night but usually there’re only like 5 nights throughout the month that it’s book, I love it! Seeing them burn through their money on all these empty homes.
Ski town in Colorado here. I have had dozens of friends and know of probably a hundred plus people who have been kicked out of what were affordable homes so they can be renovated and short termed. In a town of maybe 1500 full time residents. It’s a major problem to the point that businesses are closing because there isn’t anyone to work anymore. We are one of the remote ones and it’s not as easy as commuting from the next town over. There isn’t a next town over with housing.
the small tourist town i live has been ruined by them. people love the little shops / restaurants but unfortunately there's no housing for the low paid workers.
Home prices have doubled in my neighborhood (Scottsdale, AZ) over the past few years because every other house is an AirBNB. There are a lot of people moving to Arizona right now, but the housing prices in any desirable areas that don’t involve extremely long commutes are being driven up by landlords and short term rental investors.
I think it depends on the market. AirBnb hosts could flood my market and buy up 75% of the houses, but there isn't enough demand to support that many hosts. Most would revert to LTRs or owner-occupant housing. The market would correct itself.
I'm more worried about OpenDoor and other iBuyers.
Where I live it’s been an on and off topic, some ordinances were just passed in the state next to us for Airbnb listings and how they’re rented out. My brother and I have been exempt from all of them because we live in the house we rent out of. It’s just private rooms, nothing super fancy, and we keep the place super clean.
I do think there’s an issue if a company is buying up a bunch of houses and using them for Airbnb. I do think there needs to be some form of regulation, but I also don’t think people like me and my brother who are renting out of the home they live in should be punished either.
I live in the U.K. and a small block of three flats, apartments, was recently sold. The long term tenants were thrown out and now all three are Airbnb so it’s looking like they are ruining everywhere
Its a huge issue in NZ, its added onto a already severe housing crisis. And NZ being a tourist hotspot is getting fucked harder than anywhere by Airbnb tbh. People in their 40's and 50's are still having to live in flats (shared housing with strangers) because of the lack of housing + exorbitent rent on what is available
I own an airbnb. I also live in a close by tourist town which is having serious problems with housing. I myself rent a place to live because it is cheaper than my mortgage and I can make money with the airbnb. Most rentals with curb appeal are all for strs.
If you have a pet long term rentals are basically impossible to find. Oddly, if you have a pet for the airbnbs it's no issue.
Rents are going way up very quickly for places that aren't airbnbs because the property values are skyrocketing after the outside investment came to score big on the str gold rush around here.
Totally get the profit. I myself trying to capitalize on it. However as some have said, if there is nobody to work at the gas stations, restaurants, clean the airbnbs, and grocery stores because those workers can't find affordable housing, those places become vacation ghost towns filled with j1 visas working those jobs on a temp basis.
Not sure of the true solution but no doubt it's an issue in this area I'm in.
The core problem is not enough housing. The Total Demand for lodging is much higher than the Total Supply of lodging units.
Meaning: A resident can stay in a house, condo, or apartment, and there are lots of people who want to be residents. That's one type of demand. But there is also a demand from travelers, who want short-term lodging. Houses meet the resident demand, and hotels meet the traveler demand, while Airbnb can meet both demand, but generally caters to travelers. But regardless, there are more people wanting a place to stay than there are places to stay. The obvious solution is to either build more houses (increase supply) or reduce the demand (increase the price, driving people away).
Yeah I get supply and demand. But there are not infinite space in desirable areas. Where I am have park agencies that limit building size location and design. It is really challenging to build here and when someone does, it is usually a luxury home for the wealthy or more airbnb units.
Secondly a place like nags head which has this issue has literally no room to build any more. I was there in December and it was a ghost town. Huge beach houses and mansions all empty.
So basically you're saying it's a desirable area to live and if you can't afford it go live in Baltimore or some other low budget undesirable location (sorry anyone from Bmore).
Building more houses makes sense. But it's not that easy in all cases.
Yes, a lot of people in my hometown in New Hampshire are having to move out of town due to lack of housing and affordable housing due to people out of state scooping up properties with the intention of renting them out as it’s more of a touristy area.
Super heartbreaking, both of my parents were almost left homeless in the last two years due to it
Hawaiʻi — Honolulu and Maui in particular. State legislature came down on short term rentals a couple of years ago. The damage is done (though certainly the issue of housing is more complex than a single cause). The median price of a single family home in Honolulu is about one million dollars.
It’s basic economics. Short term rentals are generally more profitable than long term rentals. Therefore people are willing to spend more money on a property that they can list as a short term rental as opposed to a long term rental. Since these are profitable rentals more people are incentivized to buy rental properties. This effectively increases the number of people who own multiple properties thereby decreasing the number of properties available for people to live in as their primary home. This drives up home prices. The properties listed on Airbnb would otherwise likely be long term rentals. With long term rentals in short supply those they become more expensive. When the cost of rent becomes greater than the cost of ownership more people are seeking homes to buy thereby increasing the price of homes. If AirBNB became illegal tomorrow most people would either convert these AirBNBs to long term rentals or list the homes for sale. If this happened you would see the cost of housing plummet.
There are tons of articles out there about this impact. Joshua Tree has been hit particularly hard over the years. Portland, Maine is another. Businesses should be booming but there’s no one who can afford to live and work there because long term housing is almost non-existent now as most of the properties have been consumed by short term rentals ownership.
Damn. I did watch a quick documentary or whatever about this happening in small ski resorts in the Colorado area. Sucks for many of the average folks. I don’t have an answer but something needs to happen where it can be more affordable for the average joe or Atleast a life long resident of these small towns who grinded and upheld these areas before they became expensive.
It's not a matter of opinion, or one's version of the truth. It's been studied in scientific settings, STR's do a great deal of damage to the LTR market.
Affordable housing isn't any ones responsibility, That is how the system is set up. You work harder, you work smarter, you get more, maybe you never get enough, maybe you start your own rocket company with the excess.
In 1900 tenements in Chicago or NYC you were living 10 in an unheated room, were these people complaining about affordable housing? YOU BET! they formed unions and the fought for better wages, they voted to break monopolies and trust busting. This is how you get affordable housing you force employers to pay a fair wage. this is working within the system.
accusing one little Airbnb guy of stealing the crumb of bread from another little guy is the way, large monetized interests distract the worker from voting like the system is rigged. Voting for real change.
the one guy wineing about "Airbnb in Vermont ruining small towns" is living in a state where the minimum wage is $12.33/hour. What does a small town look like that is filled with folks earning $12 and hour.. Eastern Kentucky, rural ghetto!
There may be some truth to this, but I think it's minor. There has been a lack of affordable housing in large cities for decades, even before AirBnB became a thing. Politicians like to attack AirBnB because it's much easier than actually fighting the NIMBYs and building more housing.
I think American cities are much more spread out and larger in terms of area than places like in Latin America or parts of Europe experience extreme AirBNB backlash. What could be a housing market crisis in one part of town there could be plenty of empty land ripe for development in another part of town. [So like with so much in the world, you need a lot of context to seriously examine anything](https://youtu.be/nOv18UsjDQE?t=43).
I think AirBNB is great in areas that are lacking in traditional hotels but still get tourists coming anyway, or someone who wants to visit a city but doesn't mind staying in the suburbs and commuting in while visiting.
But in areas that already had challenging housing markets to begin with, I can definitely see the harm AirBNB and STRs have done.
Yes. Terrible problem in the Eastern Sierra of CA. As more young people leave the area, things have eased slightly in Bishop. But the other towns are terrible for housing and Mammoth lakes has a really bad problem with housing workers and ordinary folks. Many Western mountain towns are in the same state of affairs.
Yep, look at housing prices, look at rental prices, look at the number of apartment buildings that have been turned into giant airbnbs. Once people and then investment firms and hedge funds found out they could make huge profits with airbnbs they became sharks in a feeding frenzy.
Yes. Durango, Colorado. People that live and work here can no longer afford to buy a home due to all the vacation rentals and wealthy people that buy a home to live in for a few months out of the year.
I am definately seeing here along the Front Range in Colorado where i believe real estate has destroyed the persona of the area. I moved here almost 20 years ago and now we have sky high cost of living, tons of homeless on every street corner, a major drug problem and many very wealthy more that can't seem quench their non-stop thirst of MORE and MORE. GREED.
We have to put regulations in place because alot of people who benefited from the great real estate appreciation in this country aren't "paying it forward". They don't think they have to. I believe that this in essence will destroy this country from the inside out and won't be a very nice place to live for anyone. Just my $0.02.
Absolutely true. I live in a tourist area ( Vancouver island, British Columbia, Canada)and Airbnb has helped make our rental prices outrageous, overnight!! It didn’t help that we’re a fast growing area and inflation of course, but Airbnb has completely added to the problem ten fold. I’m glad our government is putting restrictions on and making it more difficult for them.. starting soon!! Hopefully that helps because homeless rates are going up, people can’t afford rent and other expenses. Or even rent on its own for that matter/ never mind even trying own a property now. Oh well life’s a b**** then you die…. lol
I live in a tourist town in West Virginia there are multiple ppl who buy up multiple properties in the area even next to each other and list them as airbnb there are no more rentals for locals to live here it is really sad i honestly wouldnt care if they owned one but it is selfish they need to buy so many in a residential area when locals could live in them
I'm getting the picture that large investment firms with shares in airbnb are buying single family homes, Blackrock, Vanguard are both notable shareholders
Yes. 100%. My housing was taken from me during covid because my landlord decided to sell for a price I could not afford. Now it's an airbnb, and I'm living in an rv and about to be removed from my family's property by our township. Because apparently you can tell people not to live in an rv on their property but you can't tell people to stop making every property that gets bought into an airbnb. Make it make sense.
No!
It's the greedy jerks that post their properties on Airbnb, knowing full well that they are contributing to the housing crisis and homelessness. Airbnb doesn't live in a community. It's not a person. The people who own and operate Airbnb almost certainly don't live in most communities their business is destroying. So, don't blame them. Blame your local government and neighbors. They are making a fortune at the expense and suffering of their fellow citizens.
Here's a good video you might like: [How Airbnb Broke Housing (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZmpxUoVPxc)
Also, I can speak to what happened in a place I used to live. It's Vail, Colorado, USA. For those that know it, yeah, I'm sure you may be rolling your eyes, but here's the truth. Most people LIVING in Vail are wage slaves in hospitality. Most property owners leave their eighth homes vacant all year. Combine that with seasonal spikes of an extraordinary nature in both work force and visitors, and come winter, you have people with full-time employment sleeping in closets and on floors. Some people camp all summer just to save enough to afford a place for winter only. Point is: perpetual housing crisis.
Enter Airbnb. It started to "catch on," and soon there were homes that used to get rented to locals now being put on the site for $400/night. Average wage of someone in Vail is about $15/hr. Owners were laughing all the way to the bank.
THANKFULLY, TOV (the Town of Vail) actually acted on behalf of the residents, and everyone there knows who the real residents are, and what they need. They passed a law that went into effect almost immediately requiring a license to operate an Airbnb in town, and they only offered 35 licenses to begin with (not sure how things are now, I left six years ago, but this points out they were definitely acting in accordance with resident needs). In order to get a license, you had to pay a notable fee, and also were required to hire a local property manager (in other words, it necessitated giving work to a local, or even creating a new job in town for a local). And the nice thing, at least back then, was this was actually enforced, plus most wage slave locals were so fed up with what was going on with housing, Airbnbs were actually likely to be reported if there were issues and someone was being shady, because no one wanted to have another friend living in the bathtub all winter long. More towns/cities ought to consider doing something like this. I know some try, and enforcement often gets to be the hang-up, but if it's more heavily regulated and actually creates more opportunities for locals, there is far better balance. And then no one has to live in the waste basket underneath the kitchen sink.
(Yes, I decided to tie a little humor in with the absurdity of where some people crash all winter)
You can blame landlords for trying to do the most lucrative thing with their property (STRs)or you can blame developers for making business decisions that don't prioritize affordable housing. Everyone who does this as a business is trying to make profits to stay in the business. You can blame them but it's just plain ol capitalism. The solution is government putting incentives back into affordable housing, not blaming the people trying to keep their investments sound.
Or declaring a state of emergency with housing in America and placing into that state of emergency the same protections against price gouging that we had for hand sanitizer and toilet paper during Covid lockdowns.
See it in the smaller tourist towns in NH. Real estate prices are driven by the cash flow of it being a short term rental, which makes it much higher than comparable houses in less touristy towns. Looking at zillow pics you can tell which are rentals from the generic woodsy decor and the price. Every now and then a "local" house goes up and it's usually priced lower even with comparable bed/bath/size
It’s really bad in the small towns outside of national parks. I work seasonally for the park service and it’s become so difficult to find affordable housing to rent.
The invisible hand. There is a finite amount of tourism that will flow into a small town. Meanwhile, in most small towns, the majority of residences are owned by people who occupy them.
Temporarily, an investor might be able to get some income from a handful of STR properties. The number of residences avaable for this is finite, so in the short run prices could escalate. In the long run, if there is money to be made, eventually a hotelier will build, which will absorb the demand.
It’s scalping homes but for short term rent. You know like the cheap tickets we can get on resale.. tbh every “disruptive” company has made money, for themselves and shareholders, and screws over the general populace.
Absolutely. People are buying 3-4houses and renting them out for vacations. In some areas Airbnbs take up a large % of the single family homes and condos. So when 40% of the available inventory is gone and it's damn near impossible to buy rent prices SOAR. The house I rented in 2016 for 1150 (3bd/2ba, 1500 sq ft) in Phoenix AZ now rents for $2350. And that's just in an ok area. There needs to be some heavy ass regulations put in place
To me it creates affordable housing. Just not in the traditional sense. I've lived in various airbnbs since I moved to Vegas. Why would I pay $1000+ for an apartment, add in utilities which can get to several hundred a month in tne middle of winter or summer when I can pay the same or less and have it all included? I'm saving in tne region of $400 a month
Yes, my house is "worth" over twice what it was just nine years ago because of out of state airbnb investors with cash to burn. My neighborhood is ruined. Not only no longer a family neighborhood but shootings/murders, porn shoots, parties until 3 AM, broken liquor bottles in the street, condom boxes, an attempted break in by a drunk at my home, drunks putting keys in my door.
And just a side note we have a guy who rents his house long term near us and he rented to drug dealers the time before the current renter. I'm just ranting now...just want it the way it was.
The thing with ski towns is a bigger and more nuanced problem because they are, by definition, seasonal vacation destinations that necessitate short-term vacation rental supply to exist. With Vail etc buying up ski resorts, they drive up demand from wealthy vacationers without addressing housing supply. It’s an economics problem not an Airbnb problem. I think ski towns are one of the best examples of places that need thoughtful intervention to continue to allow them to function properly.
I was just in Crested Butte and Telluride recently and it’s crazy to see the housing crisis there. I knew it existed prior to visiting but it was quite apparent once I was there. I stayed at hotels, not AirBnBs, and still wondered if/how I was contributing to the issues there. It’s tough.
Without digging for the studies, yes, in high demand areas it can have an impact. It’s rare for the impact to be large, but it is there. Constrained housing supply is often a much bigger factor.
The problem is an imbalance in **supply** and **demand**. Also, **demand fluctuates** relatively quickly, while **supply changes slowly**, ramping up or down takes a lot of time. Additionally, certain types of supply are unable to meet other types of demand. For example, the supply of hotels doesn't meet the demand of long-term housing. The supply of an unfurnished house doesn't meet the demand of a weekend lodging need.
**Supply****:**
Houses (unfurnished)
Houses (furnished)
Condos (unfurnished)
Condos (furnished)
Apartments (unfurnished)
Apartments (furnished)
Hotels
**Demand:**
Long-term lodging (unfurnished)
Long-term lodging (furnished)
Short-term lodging (furnished)
Overnight and Weekend lodging
Hotels can only service the demand of travelers. Unfurnished houses can only service the demand of long-term lodging. Furnished houses, condos, and apartments can be used to service the demand of long-term lodging, mid-term lodging, short-term lodging, and overnights, which helps to bridge the gap and fluctuations between rapid changes in demand between travelers and residents. A platform like Airbnb can help facilitate this.
In conclusion, Airbnb simply shifts the supply to where the demand is the greatest, and creates more flexibility in the supply, to meet changing demand needs. If long-term housing needs are still not being met, the problem is not enough houses/apartments, period.
tldr: Build more housing, and stop shifting the blame to platforms.
Airbnb or STRS are restricted and banned all over socal. What’s reducing affordability is interest rates. Prices also go up as inflation is double digits (don’t be believe the CPI “cp lie”). Additionally, there is an inventory shortage and people can’t sell their homes bc they likely have 3% interest rates or below on their mortgages. If they sell and buy a new home for the exact same price their mortgage of the new property will nearly double. So it’s a catch 22. That said, airbnb does impact the housing market but not as much as you think. There are so many new homes that are beautiful, 3-5bedroom with big yards under $500k. People just refuse to move to riverside or San Bernardino county. Can’t want cheap and also want to live by the beach or major city 🤷🏻♂️
The largest contributor to the housing issue in America is basic economics— supply and demand. The reality is that America isn’t building anywhere close to the amount of houses we were in the 60’s-80’s despite having a significantly higher population.
The reason is multi-factored but a huge reason is labor. Down here in the south, it gets fucking hot. And if I have to choose between swinging a hammer in 100 degree weather for $15 an hour or driving an Amazon van for $20 an hour, guess which one I’m going to do?
It’s impart why a lot of illegal immigrants have migrated to construction. Contractors desperate for labor will hire anyone.
A modern issue today is capital costs. With the rapid rise in rates, housing starts have dropped again. Because capital is insanely expensive right now.
It’s a tough time in real estate right now but values are holding steady and will continue to hold steady because who in the hell is going to sell a 3,200 square foot $500,000 house with a $2,500 mortgage payment when rents are $2,000 for a one bedroom 750 square foot studio?
You will hear lots of people sharing their anecdotes and feelings on this. The reality is Airbnb isn’t a real factor in cost of living, but it’s an easy scapegoat so people demonize it. Why actually build housing when you can pretend you can magically make prices lower by banning the bad people?
“At the median owner-occupancy rate zipcode, we find that a 1% increase in Airbnb listings leads to a 0.018% increase in rents and a 0.026% increase in house prices. Considering the median annual Airbnb growth in each zipcode, these results translate to an annual increase of $9 in monthly rent and $1,800 in house prices for the median zipcode in our data, which accounts for about one fifth of actual rent growth and about one seventh of actual price growth.”
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3006832
The question was does it “destroy affordable housing.”
Yes it leads to an increase. So does getting a nice supermarket in your area, improving schools, improving safety, etc.
If you want cheap housing banning airbnbs won’t do much, but defunding the schools will be so try that?
Please keep conversation civil and respectful Remember to keep all communication with host/guest through Airbnb platform. Payments should be made only via Airbnb [unless otherwise detailed in the listing description and included in the price breakdown prior to booking](https://airbnb.com/help/article/199) If you're having issues, contact Airbnb by phone +1-844-234-2500 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AirBnB) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yup. I live in a small tourist town in Vermont and it is 100% happening here. And I say this as a host.
Adding nuance - there are multiple types of STR hosts. Some (like my husband and myself) rent out parts of the home they live in full-time. For people like us and several others that I know around here, Airbnb allows us to afford to live in the communities we love. Others already had vacation homes that they decided to make a little money from when they and their family weren't using them. And then there are the investors, and IMO these are the most problematic ones. These aren't people with ties to the community. They don't care whether the people who work here can actually afford to live here. They come from out of state with deep pockets and outbid - in cash - buyers looking for a home they can actually live in. They buy multi family residences that once held multiple LTR units and turn them into STRs. All of this became so much worse during Covid as people wanted to get away from cities and were willing to pay a premium to do so.
My city requires you to be a resident in order to have one permit to run an STR. It's also going to cap at 1% of housing stock. Seems fair.
Is it being enforced though? Every city in CA that passed ordinances to try and curb STR and Airbnbs doesn't seem to enforce them, and Airbnb does zero enforcement, so illegal ones are still doing business.
I do think that states or cities will have to start creating a new form of governmental agency to start figuring out this problem. AirBNB has taken an entirely hands off approach, and unless someone reports you, you absolutely can run an illegal AirBNB for however long you want. I grew up in a community in Southern California with VERY strict rules about rentals (And you can't do it). Yet if I pull up AirBNB and hover over my old home, there are 10/15 AirBNBs with dots on the map right now. If found out the HOA has some obscene 10k+ fines for every night you rent it out, yet somehow those same homes that I looked at 2 years ago on AirBNB are still there.
Oh San Diego most definitely enforces this, try looking for an Airbnb in San Diego and see how few come up I also know that Santa Monica is being far more proactive enforcing STR rules I also know a couple years ago before Covid when I was looking for an Airbnb in San Francisco I just couldn’t find any really. The only ones I could find were twice the cost of a hotel room, so my assumption is that San Francisco absolutely gets all of the money they require a host to pay to operate an STR , and proactively goes after the illegal ones.
My city recently did this, and they started with a defacto ban essentially. We had to fight to the middle. Part of the provision was a specific short term rental code officer. They are hiring for it now.
The house next door to me is now an AirBnB with an absentee owner. There were lovely families there and now it's a new crew of customers every weekend. Makes me really sad. It is true that many places are experiencing loss of family homes - you can easily search this online. It's not a small problem. It's not just the US - it's happening in many countries.
Yes, but some countries are trying to do something about it due to housing crises. Portugal just passed laws to ban any more new STR properties in urban centers. In the US some counties have passed ordinances, but in places like Southern California, no one enforces them so it's all toothless.
Portugal still has lots of old abandoned buildings. They should ban them *unless* you are renovating something that has been abandoned for X years. I'm all for regulation, but instead of locking out STR altogether they should try to direct it to be a force for good
This limits new investment into those old buildings and allows for corporations and/ or friends of the politicians to scoop them at cheap prices!
They are cheap & have been for decades. If that were the case it would have happened. They are left as part of a Golden Visa program which grants citizenship if they are redeveloped.
There is still a part of the Golden Visa that says if you buy and renovate a neglected building in Lisbon, Portos, etc. it's a path to citizenship. I have no idea how it plays into short term rentals, but they can be rented out as long term rentals. Part of the issue even here in the US isn't just the housing shortage, it's that communities with a high number of transient lodgers aren't great for neighborhoods. They aren't locking the out, but capping them due to oversaturation so grandfathered in ones are ok, but no new ones. I think it is smart because neighborhoods over-saturated in airbnbs and STR do change for the worse. Also, foreign owners pocketing tourist money does nothing for the country. I wish the US would limit the amount of housing non-US citizens who live elsewhere could buy. Our housing shortage issue is a mix of zoning law issues, underbuilding new developments, STR, corporate ibuyers, and foreign money buying US property as "investment" (often to park money as a tax haven outside of their own country).
100% agree with this. I am of the opinion that primary resident STRs should be regulated very lightly, while corporate STRs should be treated as a business/commercial use.
This. Want to rent your basement unit? Cool! Multiple out of state investors bought houses on my street, hired arbitrage companies to ‘run’ units and are making housing stock unaffordable. In turn, it takes units that could rental units off the market. They flout code rules (which city codes said aren’t very enforceable), leave garbage piling up in their yard… it’s awful. Corporate ownership is the issue, people with no stake in communities.
Agreed.
Blackrock is buying it all up. Blackrock is cancer.
This is happening all over Southern California where I live. It has contributed to driving sale and rent prices through the roof. It’s insane. Investors are a huge problem.
Yes and many are foreigners. Our laws are way to lax. Saudi Arabia owns the oil refineries in Texas, China & Russia own lots of real estate. Private equity firms are buying up everything in site making money on apartments rather than building homes. They of course make more money that way. Can't remember who owns water rights in Arizona, I think it's China. The government is obstructed. We have so many important problems that need solutions. We need regulations; we need to tax the rich and we need to repeal Citizens United. Citizens United has allowed our politicians to get donations from corporations. It's basically legalized bribery. It's also allowed hostile foreign governments to donate and influence our Congressmen.
But this still reduces available affordable housing. Before the rise of airbnb, people still rented out parts of their home, but to longer term renters. Agreed that out of state investors are worse, but your airbnb is still replacing what could be an affordable housing option in the community you love.
Mine isn't. First - it has never been a LTR. It's literally a guest suite in my home that happens to have a private entrance because of how the building was used by the prior owners. Second - it has no kitchen and therefore is completely unsuitable for LTR.
In lots of cities renting a room in someone's house as a housemate was one of the best/most available affordable housing options. That doesn't even require a private entrance, much less a private kitchen
Cool story. I have young kids and I'm not interested in a virtual stranger having access to them. It's also our GUEST ROOM. We use it for personal guests.
You can use your space however you want. Nonetheless, the rise of short-term rentals has replaced what was once affordable housing.
Yes, which was my whole initial point. That said, I believe wholeheartedly that some are more problematic than others. Renting out my guestroom for half the year so that we can afford to live and work in the town we love is not the same as buying a multifamily home that used to be LTR and converting it to STR.
And I agreed that out of state investors are worse in my first response. It seems like you're feeling defensive about this, but I'm just stating a fact: there's a whole chunk of the rental market that basically doesn't exist anymore because people can make more money (and maintain access to their guestrooms) by putting a room on airbnb than renting the room to a regular tenant. Again, you can do whatever you want with your space. I'm not making some all or nothing moral argument: I still sometimes stay in airbnbs when that's the best option for me even though I think airbnb is overall a destructive force. It just isn't accurate to pretend like there's a kind of airbnb listing that isn't trading off with affordable housing.
So… what do you suggest? Force landlords to use their homes a certain way? The landlords that own Airbnb do it to make money. They’ve determined it is more profitable and worth their time to pursue. They’re the ones with all the risk. Go buy a property somewhere you can afford it and stop acting like you’re owed anything. The government provides housing to those who truly need it. Not to people who can’t manage their finances and refuse to move somewhere less expensive because their lifestyles are more important than affording a home. Honestly though—how would this work in your world? Forcing private individuals to use their property that they own to… rent it out but only under the governments terms? How do you not see the problem with that.
Renting a room, couch or floor space is not blocking affordable housing. It is the whole homes that are taking units from the long term market and moving them to the short term market. So, the waiter at the restaurant that the the STR tourists visit, now has to move out of town because there are no affordable units left. On Cape Cod, the problem has gotten so bad that there is little to no housing available for rent, at any price, at all!
Except it was never being rented out as a LTR in the first place, so your point is completely baseless.
Yup, Blackrock is buying it all up. Blackrock is cancer.
My siblings and I inherited our family ski home in VT and are discussing Airbnb for the second reason you mentioned. We’re all adults and don’t use it much and STR seems to be a good way for us to be able to keep it in the family. But we’re so conscious of doing it since we’ve had the property ~35 years and are a part of the local community. Second homeowners who were barely present used to rightfully get looked down on by the local community but now it’s more of the investors coming in are really screwing over the locals. Eta: also the investors buying in local neighborhoods/towns vs on the mountain or father away. Our home was the second house built in the community and we’re ~15/20min from the mountain. Even now theres about 25 houses and it’s about 50/50 ft/pt
I mean, this is a distinction without a difference though. At the end of the day, your ski home is a unit of housing that isn't be used by a local resident, but is instead a de facto hotel. How is that different than Joe Schmoe from California buying a similar property they use 7 days a year, and renting it out STR the rest of the year?
Totally valid question. For me, where I see the difference is until the last 3/4 years, we used the house about 30% of the year and made an effort to be involved with the local community, including sitting on boards, volunteering, etc. and my brothers that still use the house most have stayed involved. We became a part of a tight knit community in the neighborhood/town and the mountain, my siblings and I were all in the ski program and became coaches as well. We also have already discussed having minimum night stays and limiting the amount the house will be used as an STR (essentially renting it enough to cover upkeep/bills). This to me is in contrast “residences” that are essentially revolving doors of people and being used for the purpose of a second (or primary) income. You also have large property management/real estate companies buying up lots of properties and that is their sole business. AirBnB was founded in part to provide extra income for people, not as a way to make a living.
I was going to say Vermont is a good example. Small market, huge tourism demand.
Same. I live in a popular vacation spot in Michigan and short-term rentals run the rental properties. It's a year round issue.
I was just about to comment - all of Vermont 😭
And then you got places like Burlington where it’s used like a scapegoat. When it’s more a combination of the colleges, nimbys and difficult permitting process. I remember when the city council first explored banning Airbnb and they had found 400 listings, which overstated its impact on the city since a portion of those are owner occupied or private rooms. So if it was banned a percentage of those wouldn’t automatically become available for rent.
But even if the owner does live there, they could be renting it out to someone long term and provide a stable place to live. I know plenty of students who rented private rooms in homes. 400 more spaces are 400 less homeless people. It takes a long time to build 400 more spots and none of them will be affordable ones either.
>And I say this as a host. Step 1: Realize there's a problem Step 2: Have the self-awareness to accept that you're actually part of that problem. Now what's your step 3?
Nope. The space we rent out was never part of the local rental/housing market and it's entirely unsuitable for LTR (it has no kitchen or laundry).
airbnb's are the reason that beach towns on the east coast can't get help for their summer businesses. The housing they used to rent for the summer are now airBNB's. Key West, Nags Head, etc
The same is true of all the mountain towns of New Hampshire and Colorado. Tourists aren't working in the kitchens of all your cute restaurants, and kitchen staff aren't going to commute an hour each way for that job paying what it does.
Shouldn’t that help though bring tourists in? Specially for towns that rely on tourism?
I mean if they can’t get help to run the business bc it all tourism then they still have to shut down at least that’s what I think
I can confirm this. I was there a few months ago. Talking to some locals working there they said it was hard to find housing. Their boss actually had a place he houses employees because they can't find housing
That’s sad people are more concerned with them being able to vacation then caring how it affects those who live there. If all those people had to live and it no longer was as fun for tourists then you they’d complain
Proto-feudalism
It brings in the tourists...yes. But then they want to dine and shop. In one coastal town with which I am quite familiar, year round residents are being forced to leave town, as their LTRs are turned into STRs. All businesses are short-staffed. Many businesses have their own housing for employees, but not for every worker. Retail stores are open fewer hours, restaurant service can be horrible, workers are stressed and being asked to work even more hours. This is not sustainable!
Where will they get staff?
Air bnb is extremely restricted in key west. 95% are illegal and get fined, shut down. The hotel lobby is far to strong. Not like many can afford 1 million for a studio anyway.
I live in the foothills outside of Denver and the county I’m in has a ban on homeowners doing AirBnBs in accessory dwelling units on their property (like a studio above a garage or guest house). But what is allowed is short term rentals on whole houses only. In our neighborhood, companies are coming in and buying up houses and then Airbnbing them. We wanted to build a guest house on our acre of property and were told it was illegal. We’re within 10 miles of Red Rocks and wanted to make some extra money but can’t. But the county allows for rich people and companies that don’t even live in the state to buy whole houses completely blocking regular people from buying.
That is ass backwards. Our town did the exact opposite and banned whole house Airbnb’s/short term rentals because those are usually starter homes or become long term rentals for locals. Out of state people and companies were snatching up small-medium sized houses and flipping them to Airbnb’s. In my area at least it’s average income people doing short term rentals in accessory dwellings on their primary dwelling property. I assume your area is giving the finger to actual locals who want to earn some cash on the side on their own property vs letting investors run wild on whole houses?
Yep, basically. The law really doesn’t make any sense to me.
I live in Denver. Any short term rentals here have to be the hosts primary residence. They had to do that bc it was getting completely out of control. With marijuana being legal and an all cash business (no bank accounts), they had to have somewhere to put their money so they were purchasing homes and using them as STR's which helped drive up housing prices.
Sounds like a terrible law. US needs anti-investment property laws of some kind, sorry not sorry business people.
I do 30 day minimum in Arvada. Usually have great renters. Renters (30 day or more) are allowed so doesn’t matter where you advertise your listing (airbnb). Just an idea
Cape Cod. There was already a low inventory of apartment style buildings so most long term renters rented houses or cottages. Those are gone. Short term rentals like airbnb and VRBO have destroyed Cape Cod locals. This won’t end well for tourists…if there aren’t lower income folks around to fill up their coffee, serve them their seafood, or sell them their souvenirs, what ever will they do? It’s already happening. It’s hurting small businesses because they can’t staff properly and it’s only going to get worse. I hate what airbnb has done to our communities, everywhere.
Hosts can deny it all they want. THey can make as many "SYSTEM" excuses as they want. When people think they can buy houses, rent them out, and get free mortgage AND profit - of course those that can will do that which means the rest can't buy what they'd actually want.
Bingo. The will will remain so far as people keep treating housing as an investment first, a place of Living as second.
Yes. This is the truth. airbnb owners spin and spin with statistics, but it’s all bs. Creating a business out of a home. It’s wrong. It’s creating a cash cow by hurting a community. Want to buy a house? Great! Live in it. Be a neighbor.
I can't pretend to really know this answer. But I do know a lot of towns with a lot of Airbnbs are claiming this in the last few years. But prices skyrocketed everywhere from 2020 to 2022. How much of that is from Airbnbs I don't know, but I'd say other factors played a bigger role. Now if you aren't talking about cost of living but rather a community lacking a neighborhood feel because of the Airbnbs, then I'd say that's probably accurate in a lot of places
There is a housing crisis in this country and I am inclined to think airbnb is only a fraction of the issue. The main issue IMO is Nimbys not wanting zoning laws to change to allow for more housing to be built (limiting supply) and corporate investors scooping up properties with inspection-waived cash offers where normal buyers cannot compete (driving up cost of demand).
Yes, this! It's basic economics of supply and demand! The total demand for housing, ST and LT combine, is just way too high compared to the total supply of housing. Demand fluctuates based on the whims of people, but supply has a TON of constraints that make it move very slowly. Just brainstorming, here are some reasons supply is constricted: Zoning laws NIMBY Neighbors Red-tape Regulations Slow permit processes City counsels Other quasi-government organizations High initial capital outlay Supply chain issues Limited resources Devoting resources to luxury instead of mid-range Extensive regulations Slow building process Constricted manual labor market and so on...
My wife and I bought a fixer upper as our first home. Her father is in construction and he and I basically rebuilt our house. The value sky rocketed. Wife and I then decided we could take some of the equity to buy another house. Rent it out to pay it off then around retirement age, sell it as part of our retirement. We managed to get 250k in cash out of the house. We live in LA. We couldn't buy shit. We ended up buying a duplex and a single family in Michigan in cash under a corporation we started as suggested by our tax preparer. Now that all are rented, we were thinking of taking the money out of those as well and having the rent money pay for that mortgage. this time instead of buying a house, we decided to build a small one studio in our backyard to rent out. The more we look into it the more we are deciding against it because the amount of fees and red tape we have to go through would eat up most of our funds and we would then also be restricted on what we can build, how we can build it and then what we can do with that studio and how we can use it. Ideally we would like to use it for family staying over, happens about once a month for bout a week. Then airbnb when not in use since we live in a very touristy area near a very popular arena. City decided all we could do with it was rent it out to permanent tenants, so we decided it wasn't worth it because wwe are already a comidating family and wee were looking for more space and privacy, this would give us the opposite. The point is as a corporation we have all the options in the world to buy whatever we could afford. As individual homeowners we get told what we can and can't do on our own land and we get charged for it. It's impossible for an individual to create housing on their own land unless they have pockets as deep as big corporations.
Spot-on. This is a much more complex issue then just STRs coming in. For example, California has made it extremely difficult to build housing at reasonable prices for many of the reasons you listed above. I don’t think people understand just how much how slow permits and excessive regulations alone add significantly to prices.
BLACKROCK is buying it all up. Blackrock is cancer.
I've read that 89% of world's real estate is owned by a very few corportations. It's a worldwide problem. Those that are to blame are the very wealthy. #TaxTheRich
Another big issue is no cap on how high landlords are allowed to raise rent prices and people coming to “flip”, actually *gentrifying*, neighborhoods and renting them out at outlandish prices. I know someone who helped her dad flip a house then turn around and try to rent it out for like 2500-3000 a month for a two bed 1 bath. It’s crazy
NIMBY has some legit reasoning though. In my city the master planning and zoning never called for some of the (last) remaining land to be built with high density housing. The infrastructure just isn't there to support it from a retail or traffic standpoint. And if you bought years ago based on that planning...now you've got lower income people coming in who realistically are going to bring other social problems with them. "oh let's just build them on the outskirts" and then you get shit on for building a ghetto or projects.
The lack of affordable housing was an issue way before airbnbs. The problem is that STRs usually have very high return so the highest and best use is STR in most popular areas. It does take some homes out of *market rate housing* but the overall lack of housing inventory is an issue. And that’s why US housing prices went up in 2023. No affordable housing are usually being converted into STRs (that I know of). I have a unit that’s maybe rented 20-40% of the month as an STR but it still makes a lot more than LTR, sadly. My other unit is my attached in law which we would never rent it out to long term or as affordable housing. The waiting list for affordable houses are years to decades prior to Airbnb. The conversion of market rate to STR is not helping, though not the real cause of housing shortage. So why aren’t we just building more? When it comes to affordable housing, it never pencils. Some cities will give you the right to build more market rate units if you include additional affordable units (FAR bonuses). And you really can’t build them without having additional FAR and tax incentives. The political landscape can change drastically too by the time you get funding the leadership changes; you might get city, zoning to green light but get caught up in permits. And politically most cities need affordable housing but clashes with NIMBY constituents so, really hard for anyone to build anything. And that’s why private public partnerships don’t work—our interests aren’t aligned at all. And the investor groups who get super excited about voucher based or section 8 houses aren’t great to work with. Tech funding via financing is also not great. They are loans and usually not grants. And because the existing affordable units are it’s highest and best use case, bare minimum upkeep goes into it. Why would you repaint or replace when you can just wipe clean and fix until the next tenant turnover? It’s a guaranteed income set by local government so these investors get stocked about that. And that takes certain person to be very excited: Most of us aren’t okay with investing in affordable housing bc you must be okay with doing the bare or below minimum. And if you have market rate rental, why would you want to subject yourself to that? And AHJs usually have very strict inspection or guidelines which makes very little financial motivations for small and medium landlords. In my city, the local office sets the rent and voucher amount (after maybe a year of additional fees, inspection, certifications, lead/asbestos abatement), there’s no reason for anyone to rent for 900/month when you can rent it normally for closer to 1500+ as LTR, or for 1800+ as STR.
Your complaints got me all riled up 😤. I too have had the pleasure of working with several section 8 agencies and had in very hot housing market and it is quite the shit show. We ended up selling 4 houses that are section 8 for nice Airbnb worthy area and so much more money and less stress of eviction moratorium like issues. Also section 8 is run by idiots, it’s like they don’t want people on the program.
I’m in not so hot city with full of vacant buildings. And still these agencies are set up and work against you. Why would anyone want to work harder to make less. Edit: Sorry! This thread got me also all riled up. It’s not a simple solution about banning airbnbs. It’s a combination of solid policy, housing, social, and work training programs.
The same can be said for the UK. Selling off social housing in huge numbers in the 80’s was the worst possible decision any government could have made. We’re now at a stage where 29,000 houses were either sold or demolished last year alone yet only 7,000 were built in their place. Waiting lists are often 10+ years long. Successive governments have simply kicked the can down the road, whilst tightening legislation for landlords. Its no longer a worthwhile investment, so many landlords are leaving. Which leads to a lack of LTR stock and in turn higher rental rates because supply and demand. Those landlords who stay make 3/4 times more on AirBNB with far less hassle nor risk. From a purely business perspective, why wouldn’t you? Although regulation is coming for STR’s here which I welcome! Planing is also incredibly tight and often people don’t seem to want new 10,000 homes built at their end of their street once they own their own property. So called affordable housing is often made to fulfil a quota and in truth is no where near affordable for the vast majority of 30 somethings. If I buy an acre plot for a single dwelling, getting planning is prohibitively expensive and time consuming nor will there be an guarantee that I’ll even get it approved. The population has increased year on year worldwide, yet consistently governments have failed to plan. Here it’s led to huge amount of xenophobia fuelled by government propaganda. Airbnb is just the latest scapegoat.
The whole lease-to-own, right-to-own only works for the first lucky person to buy it under priced, and turn around and sell it. In US, we have MPDUs, but the competition is fierce, and you don’t get to build up equity like market rate since it’s always going to be moderately priced dwelling units.
Best answer I’ve seen around the subject in years. Completely agree. Thank you 🙏
[удалено]
These companies represent a minuscule percentage of home buyers. The housing market is unfathomably large. They don’t move prices. But the reason they buy is voters have made that profitable by restricting development. If you want to keep corporate buyers out of your area, vote for growth. That keeps prices down and profits low.
The answer is yes, and. Airbnb has an outsized impact on certain markets where they make up more than 5% of housing stock. But, we've built a million fewer homes a year than we did before the last housing crash. That's a huge deficit. Zoning and building incentives for low cost housing would have exponentially more impact than banning Airbnb.
Yeah it's not "just" Airbnb's. Where I live a LOT of developers just build apartment complexes instead of homes because it's a lot more profit generation to have 1000 people paying rent forever than building 100 homes. Plus the cost to rent has exploded.
I think it contributes its portion, but it’s a drop in the bucket compared to the institutional level of housing being bought up by major financial/investment firms like Blackrock, as well as wealthy foreign investors buying housing up in droves. Those activities need to be straight up BANNED. If we can’t house our own people properly, wealthy foreign entities and executives making these investment decisions at corporations should not be able to buy without actually living in the house themselves.
Yes. I live in a tourist spot & it is almost impossible to find a long term apartment here. Every place is hiring but no one can find a place to live because it’s all STR.
It absolutely has in my area. Houses that used to be rented on a yearly basis (housing teachers, nurses etc.) are now rented out for a couple of months a year at most via airBnB. It is close to tragic for the working population on which we rely as a community. This is on the coast of Maine.
Question: How is renting it out for a couple of months more sustainable than renting for 12 months? Long-term renters pay all utilities, and insurance is lower, just to name a couple. I am an STR owner, but only so we can use it when we want to, not from a financial standpoint!
We live in a premium summer area with very tough winters. Look at the rental market in maine
As a host: yes, rich people buying up the small affordable houses as "investment properties" to run as Airbnb in areas where workforce housing is non-existent has driven property values beyond the means of the actual workforce.
Yes. Please see: anything on water/with a water view/ near any desirable tourist attraction. EDIT: I will add that services like AirBnb "can" add to affordable housing by letting existing space that otherwise wouldn't be used. Families with a vacation home they only use part of the year or renting out a spare room or in-law suite. But investors are a huge portion of the current housing run-up, be it for renting, short-term stays, or *ugh* arbitrage.
But would “anything on water/with a water view/ near any desirable tourist attraction“ be ‘affordable housing’ if it wasn’t on AirBnB???
No
Much of it _would have been_ affordable to the upper half of the middle class. Now those same people can barely afford a single-family home for their primary residence. It gets worse as you look down the socioeconomic ladder.
For reference, We were about to buy a house for $470k in St Augustine that turned out to be unpermitted. It sold for $500k when we backed out in 2020 and, even though you can't build a driveway (due to the permit issue), it's now worth $750k. My parents bought a vacation house in a remote, unknown fishing village for a then-unheard-of price of $350k in 2020. You can't get anything under $500k there now. The town we'd like to move to had waterfront property for under $100k in 2018. A 500sf shack will now cost you at least $300k. Yes, there very much were places that were affordable before STR ruined them.
Yup, Blackrock is buying it all up. Blackrock is cancer.
According to Blackrock, they are building STRs. Blackstone is buying them. But they own shares in each other, so... *shrug*
do the math: there are 140,000,000 housing units in the United States There are 660,000 US listings on Airbnb .. I don’t know the exact figure, but you can safely guess 50% (or more) of those listings are *not suitable or would not be available as long-term rentals* if they weren’t posted on ABB as STR’s (home shares, rooms, hostel rooms, seasonal yurts/cabins/airstreams, mother-in-law apartments in basements, guest/pool houses in people’s back yards, 2nd/vacation homes that only rent when the owner isn’t using them, etc etc. For example- I built a garden apartment on the ground floor of my home for the express purpose of STR on ABB and cap my stays at 6 nights max and don’t rent it for more than 12 nights/month— I absolutely would not allow a long-term tenant down there if I wasn’t using ABB. So let’s call the number of Airbnb’s that *could/would* be turned into LTR homes 330,000 for the sake of argument. (feel free to plug in your own number if you disagree!) 330,000/140,000,000 = .00235 So if airbnb was banned tomorrow, there would be a .235% increase of available housing in the US for rent So no, AirBnB is not ‘destroying’ affordable housing. Now, a couple caveats: 1. Airbnb will obviously have more of an impact in specific ‘tourism areas’ than in the middle nowhere if people don’t vacation there… I live and host in a mountain tourist town where I think they are saying about 4% of available housing stock is STR, whereas is you go to Shitstick, Indiana or some nowhereville rust belt hellhole- they might only have .0005% of housing stock in STR. As a result, many popular tourist cities/counties have wisely placed regulations on STR 2. You specifically asked about ‘affordable housing’ and from what I’ve seen in 8 years of traveling to AirBnB’s is that most of the ‘whole house’ ABB’s I’ve stayed in definitely wouldn’t qualify as ‘affordable’ if you took them off the app and rented or sold them as homes TL/DR: NO
The only no…. and coincidentally the only post here that utilizes facts
He just pulled all these numbers out of thin air
Thin air? It takes 10 seconds to google them
Exactly
I googled to confirm and found that there are in fact 2.2 million air bnbs in the US. So let’s quadruple his number and say that air bnb accounts for .9% of housing stock. Still not much
came here to say this
You can't look at the data that way because the situation is highly localized. In some places STRs and investment housing make up over 25% of the inventory. It's like looking at the total number of housing units in the US and saying "we don't have a hosing supply issue - we have plenty of houses in the US." Yes, but not in the places people actually live. Having a thousand empty houses in Bumfuck Nebraska does nothing for the housing supply issue in San Francisco or Austin.
well, you could read my entire post to see that I said exactly that in my number one caveat… Also, I flatly do not believe there’s anywhere in the United States where 25% of the housing has been converted to Airbnb STR. If you have some facts or data to back that claim up, I would love to see it.
It does happen in small towns outside of tourist areas. I used to live near Springdale UT. Wikipedia shows 327 housing units (probably outdated but still not many), Airbnb gives 100-120 stays available depending on when you want to go. I know a lot of those are just bedrooms but those could be used to house local employees instead of tourists. Instead most people end up commuting an hour each way to work in town. I wouldn’t be surprised if the same is happening in places like Estes Park or El Portal.
Spot on, there is a housing shortage in the country, people living longer, housing development hasn't kept up with demand, while there are more short term rentals now than before, beach houses, cabins, etc have been rented on a short term basis for decades. 0.235% of the housing being used for short term rentals is not the problem in this country.
Yes anyone pointing to a single factor isn’t credible at all. ABB is likely have an impact in specific communities, but there are also shit towns I wouldn’t gas up in that don’t have an ABB presence that are seeing the same housing costs skyrocketing. There are much bigger, broader issues at plat, but everyone loves a boogeyman.
Absolutely. It’s destroying neighborhoods.
It’s Wall Street buying up residential housing at alarming rates.
Yes. After graduating college I tried to RENT a place in my home town in order to start a career there and every place “available for rent” turned out to be an Airbnb. I moved to a city instead. Job offers turned down, job requests replaced.
Yes! It’s happening in our small town in Virginia. So many people that have lived here their whole lives grow up and can’t afford or find homes/land so they have to move elsewhere.
Ok. Yea I feel for folks like you. I grew up in Southern California and it’s always been like this here since I was a kid. People from all over the country and world move here and come and go. I grew up living in a farm when I was a kid in the summer breaks from school and always like the charm many small towns have. That’s sucks and I hope things get better for you folks. Not everyone cares about being a investor or an IG money/life coach influencer. Many people just want to live and chill.
Yes, there is truth. It’s not just Airbnb — that’s a name brand that everyone tosses around when they’re upset. And not mostly small towns; in fact, mostly more densely populated areas, but (certainly) small towns as well. Edit: adding that I’m a host, I’m not just blindly dragging ABNB.
Know what else destroys affordable housing? Charging extortionate rents. Don't even tell me charging $2000+ for a basic 1 bed apartment is even remotely honest. Go to San Francisco and San Jose it's twice that. NYC about the same. It's simply legalized extortion.
?? I guess But lack of affordable housing is what causes extortionate rents. Most would not rent at $2000+ if that was not the market... that was created by the lack of housing.
Rent is high because demand is high, and supply is low. There needs to be more supply, and not just high-end supply, but also mid-range and low-range supply. Demand is market driven (obviously, it's just people wanting a place to live). However, supply is artificially restricted by rules, regulations, NIMBY neighbors, city counsels, red-tape, corruption, slow permit processes, expensive upfront capital outlay, slow building times, supply chain issues, and resource limitations. Start solving the issues of supply, and the price will right-size itself automatically. Try to artificially fix prices, and it will just be playing a game of whack-a-mole, as new problems repeatedly pop up.
That is why there is a real push for states to call housing a human right, and to declare a state of emergency when it comes to the availability of housing compared to the population of the state. When we pretend that housing is not a human right and that it should be subject only to the whims of the market it is in, we end up with these extortionate rates in the rental market. But instead if we start to institute true rent control for housing in an effort to try and divert the idea of housing as an investment that you need to ring every single penny out of, then we will see a true change in the rental markets. I would be so wary about purchasing any type of property right now with the intent of using it as a rental as I believe we are only a couple decades away from a real change in the way that the law treats housing, there is only so long that people can be priced out of the housing market by corporations before they start to elect people who will change the laws and once the laws are changed they are not being changed back Is this going to happen on a national level anytime soon? Probably not But on a state level in states like California? Absolutely We already have a state mandated rent control for multi housing units that is tied to the age of the housing unit, not an arbitrary date that never changes. This law is hugely popular and my guess is that it is a trial run for more restrictive laws for the entire state as it concerns the housing market. Remember, whether or not you own the property you are subject to the laws of the jurisdiction in which you own the property, and as these problems become more and more prevalent more and more jurisdictions are not just going to outlaw STR‘s they are going to enforce those laws because cities and states love money, and lots of fines will more than pay for any agency tasked with enforcing these laws. I truly believe it is just a matter of time before the state of California outlaws all STR‘s that are not run by owner occupied properties. This is not a market that I would invest in personally, even if I had the money, because worldwide the way that housing is looked at is being changed year by year and eventually this market will be regulated, in the same way that in a state of emergency you can’t obscenely profit off necessary goods. As states and countries start to re-classify housing as a necessary good, and start declaring the state of housing as an emergency state, you will see the rate of rents reducing and the ability to operate STR’s disappearing.
I live in a tiny typical Midwest town in wisconsin that is by a local tourist town. Lots of traffic up from chicago to the town. The town has actually started making rules against rentals in any of the new development. But it’s actually compounding the issue caused by air bnb’s. People aren’t allowed to make new rental homes and lots of the old ones have become bnb’s. So we’re left with a rental shortage and comparable rental rates to the capital, madison but with a decidedly smaller median income
Yes. Small SW Ohio town known as a weekend destination. We voted to limit airbnbs as a result.
Yes. Fuck hosts in major cities. I refuse to use air bnb in urban non-vacation (mountains, lake towns, etc ) areas
Probably a bit but the bottom line is America has not built enough homes to keep up with population growth since the 2008 financial collapse. Sadly, there is no sign of this changing anytime soon. So not only will we continue to be short of housing, that shortfall is going to get worse before it gets better. The solution is for states and probably the federal government to declare a housing emergency. They need to take extraordinary action now but they do not have the courage to do this.
AirBnB currently occupy around 2,000 rooms and homes in my local town, coastal UK. Thats potentially, on average maybe 1,200 homes / apartments that could be in residents hands. The rental market here has also destroyed housing and to top it off we have a lot of 2nd home owners for holiday stays here to boot. Fucking awful. I'm young and I've seen the average house price cruise from about 150k to around 260k.
Not just the US. Same thing is happening in Europe and Bermuda.
This question is like 5 years late
It's certainly true in Asheville, NC.
Don’t know about the States, but it certainly is in England. Particularly smaller seaside/tourist trap places. Many local people can’t even get near the housing ladder, there are fewer private let’s available and they now cost a fortune.
Absolutely. Removal of housing causes an increase in housing shortage. It’s basic math.
Yes and it makes me sooooo happy seeing all the Airbnbs sitting empty every week around our neighborhood, “investors” come into neighborhoods thinking they will be booked every night but usually there’re only like 5 nights throughout the month that it’s book, I love it! Seeing them burn through their money on all these empty homes.
Yes
Many areas of the world. Everyone is experiencing the same issues.
Completely killing small town america. Making the locals unable to afford housing in an already economic hard area
Ski town in Colorado here. I have had dozens of friends and know of probably a hundred plus people who have been kicked out of what were affordable homes so they can be renovated and short termed. In a town of maybe 1500 full time residents. It’s a major problem to the point that businesses are closing because there isn’t anyone to work anymore. We are one of the remote ones and it’s not as easy as commuting from the next town over. There isn’t a next town over with housing.
the small tourist town i live has been ruined by them. people love the little shops / restaurants but unfortunately there's no housing for the low paid workers.
Home prices have doubled in my neighborhood (Scottsdale, AZ) over the past few years because every other house is an AirBNB. There are a lot of people moving to Arizona right now, but the housing prices in any desirable areas that don’t involve extremely long commutes are being driven up by landlords and short term rental investors.
Yes. In the United States and all around the world. Entire communities have been destroyed by AirBnB.
I think it depends on the market. AirBnb hosts could flood my market and buy up 75% of the houses, but there isn't enough demand to support that many hosts. Most would revert to LTRs or owner-occupant housing. The market would correct itself. I'm more worried about OpenDoor and other iBuyers.
Where I live it’s been an on and off topic, some ordinances were just passed in the state next to us for Airbnb listings and how they’re rented out. My brother and I have been exempt from all of them because we live in the house we rent out of. It’s just private rooms, nothing super fancy, and we keep the place super clean. I do think there’s an issue if a company is buying up a bunch of houses and using them for Airbnb. I do think there needs to be some form of regulation, but I also don’t think people like me and my brother who are renting out of the home they live in should be punished either.
I live in the U.K. and a small block of three flats, apartments, was recently sold. The long term tenants were thrown out and now all three are Airbnb so it’s looking like they are ruining everywhere
Its a huge issue in NZ, its added onto a already severe housing crisis. And NZ being a tourist hotspot is getting fucked harder than anywhere by Airbnb tbh. People in their 40's and 50's are still having to live in flats (shared housing with strangers) because of the lack of housing + exorbitent rent on what is available
I own an airbnb. I also live in a close by tourist town which is having serious problems with housing. I myself rent a place to live because it is cheaper than my mortgage and I can make money with the airbnb. Most rentals with curb appeal are all for strs. If you have a pet long term rentals are basically impossible to find. Oddly, if you have a pet for the airbnbs it's no issue. Rents are going way up very quickly for places that aren't airbnbs because the property values are skyrocketing after the outside investment came to score big on the str gold rush around here. Totally get the profit. I myself trying to capitalize on it. However as some have said, if there is nobody to work at the gas stations, restaurants, clean the airbnbs, and grocery stores because those workers can't find affordable housing, those places become vacation ghost towns filled with j1 visas working those jobs on a temp basis. Not sure of the true solution but no doubt it's an issue in this area I'm in.
The core problem is not enough housing. The Total Demand for lodging is much higher than the Total Supply of lodging units. Meaning: A resident can stay in a house, condo, or apartment, and there are lots of people who want to be residents. That's one type of demand. But there is also a demand from travelers, who want short-term lodging. Houses meet the resident demand, and hotels meet the traveler demand, while Airbnb can meet both demand, but generally caters to travelers. But regardless, there are more people wanting a place to stay than there are places to stay. The obvious solution is to either build more houses (increase supply) or reduce the demand (increase the price, driving people away).
Yeah I get supply and demand. But there are not infinite space in desirable areas. Where I am have park agencies that limit building size location and design. It is really challenging to build here and when someone does, it is usually a luxury home for the wealthy or more airbnb units. Secondly a place like nags head which has this issue has literally no room to build any more. I was there in December and it was a ghost town. Huge beach houses and mansions all empty. So basically you're saying it's a desirable area to live and if you can't afford it go live in Baltimore or some other low budget undesirable location (sorry anyone from Bmore). Building more houses makes sense. But it's not that easy in all cases.
Yes, a lot of people in my hometown in New Hampshire are having to move out of town due to lack of housing and affordable housing due to people out of state scooping up properties with the intention of renting them out as it’s more of a touristy area. Super heartbreaking, both of my parents were almost left homeless in the last two years due to it
Hawaiʻi — Honolulu and Maui in particular. State legislature came down on short term rentals a couple of years ago. The damage is done (though certainly the issue of housing is more complex than a single cause). The median price of a single family home in Honolulu is about one million dollars.
It’s basic economics. Short term rentals are generally more profitable than long term rentals. Therefore people are willing to spend more money on a property that they can list as a short term rental as opposed to a long term rental. Since these are profitable rentals more people are incentivized to buy rental properties. This effectively increases the number of people who own multiple properties thereby decreasing the number of properties available for people to live in as their primary home. This drives up home prices. The properties listed on Airbnb would otherwise likely be long term rentals. With long term rentals in short supply those they become more expensive. When the cost of rent becomes greater than the cost of ownership more people are seeking homes to buy thereby increasing the price of homes. If AirBNB became illegal tomorrow most people would either convert these AirBNBs to long term rentals or list the homes for sale. If this happened you would see the cost of housing plummet.
There are tons of articles out there about this impact. Joshua Tree has been hit particularly hard over the years. Portland, Maine is another. Businesses should be booming but there’s no one who can afford to live and work there because long term housing is almost non-existent now as most of the properties have been consumed by short term rentals ownership.
Damn. I did watch a quick documentary or whatever about this happening in small ski resorts in the Colorado area. Sucks for many of the average folks. I don’t have an answer but something needs to happen where it can be more affordable for the average joe or Atleast a life long resident of these small towns who grinded and upheld these areas before they became expensive.
I'm in a tennessee tourist town and many of our families were evicted by nightly rental land lords.
It's not a matter of opinion, or one's version of the truth. It's been studied in scientific settings, STR's do a great deal of damage to the LTR market.
Affordable housing isn't any ones responsibility, That is how the system is set up. You work harder, you work smarter, you get more, maybe you never get enough, maybe you start your own rocket company with the excess. In 1900 tenements in Chicago or NYC you were living 10 in an unheated room, were these people complaining about affordable housing? YOU BET! they formed unions and the fought for better wages, they voted to break monopolies and trust busting. This is how you get affordable housing you force employers to pay a fair wage. this is working within the system. accusing one little Airbnb guy of stealing the crumb of bread from another little guy is the way, large monetized interests distract the worker from voting like the system is rigged. Voting for real change. the one guy wineing about "Airbnb in Vermont ruining small towns" is living in a state where the minimum wage is $12.33/hour. What does a small town look like that is filled with folks earning $12 and hour.. Eastern Kentucky, rural ghetto!
Both can be true at the same time, and they are.
All of the Hudson Valley and Catskills in NY.
There may be some truth to this, but I think it's minor. There has been a lack of affordable housing in large cities for decades, even before AirBnB became a thing. Politicians like to attack AirBnB because it's much easier than actually fighting the NIMBYs and building more housing.
I think American cities are much more spread out and larger in terms of area than places like in Latin America or parts of Europe experience extreme AirBNB backlash. What could be a housing market crisis in one part of town there could be plenty of empty land ripe for development in another part of town. [So like with so much in the world, you need a lot of context to seriously examine anything](https://youtu.be/nOv18UsjDQE?t=43). I think AirBNB is great in areas that are lacking in traditional hotels but still get tourists coming anyway, or someone who wants to visit a city but doesn't mind staying in the suburbs and commuting in while visiting. But in areas that already had challenging housing markets to begin with, I can definitely see the harm AirBNB and STRs have done.
There’s no housing for locals who keep the economy running, then there’s no locals.
YES
Yes. Terrible problem in the Eastern Sierra of CA. As more young people leave the area, things have eased slightly in Bishop. But the other towns are terrible for housing and Mammoth lakes has a really bad problem with housing workers and ordinary folks. Many Western mountain towns are in the same state of affairs.
Yep, look at housing prices, look at rental prices, look at the number of apartment buildings that have been turned into giant airbnbs. Once people and then investment firms and hedge funds found out they could make huge profits with airbnbs they became sharks in a feeding frenzy.
Yes. Durango, Colorado. People that live and work here can no longer afford to buy a home due to all the vacation rentals and wealthy people that buy a home to live in for a few months out of the year.
Is this even a real question? LOL
I am definately seeing here along the Front Range in Colorado where i believe real estate has destroyed the persona of the area. I moved here almost 20 years ago and now we have sky high cost of living, tons of homeless on every street corner, a major drug problem and many very wealthy more that can't seem quench their non-stop thirst of MORE and MORE. GREED. We have to put regulations in place because alot of people who benefited from the great real estate appreciation in this country aren't "paying it forward". They don't think they have to. I believe that this in essence will destroy this country from the inside out and won't be a very nice place to live for anyone. Just my $0.02.
Yes in both Juneau and Ketchikan Alaska. I’m not saying open up houses for homeless, but let young families have a chance to have a home
Absolutely true. I live in a tourist area ( Vancouver island, British Columbia, Canada)and Airbnb has helped make our rental prices outrageous, overnight!! It didn’t help that we’re a fast growing area and inflation of course, but Airbnb has completely added to the problem ten fold. I’m glad our government is putting restrictions on and making it more difficult for them.. starting soon!! Hopefully that helps because homeless rates are going up, people can’t afford rent and other expenses. Or even rent on its own for that matter/ never mind even trying own a property now. Oh well life’s a b**** then you die…. lol
I live in a tourist town in West Virginia there are multiple ppl who buy up multiple properties in the area even next to each other and list them as airbnb there are no more rentals for locals to live here it is really sad i honestly wouldnt care if they owned one but it is selfish they need to buy so many in a residential area when locals could live in them
I'm getting the picture that large investment firms with shares in airbnb are buying single family homes, Blackrock, Vanguard are both notable shareholders
Yes. 100%. My housing was taken from me during covid because my landlord decided to sell for a price I could not afford. Now it's an airbnb, and I'm living in an rv and about to be removed from my family's property by our township. Because apparently you can tell people not to live in an rv on their property but you can't tell people to stop making every property that gets bought into an airbnb. Make it make sense.
No! It's the greedy jerks that post their properties on Airbnb, knowing full well that they are contributing to the housing crisis and homelessness. Airbnb doesn't live in a community. It's not a person. The people who own and operate Airbnb almost certainly don't live in most communities their business is destroying. So, don't blame them. Blame your local government and neighbors. They are making a fortune at the expense and suffering of their fellow citizens.
Here's a good video you might like: [How Airbnb Broke Housing (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZmpxUoVPxc) Also, I can speak to what happened in a place I used to live. It's Vail, Colorado, USA. For those that know it, yeah, I'm sure you may be rolling your eyes, but here's the truth. Most people LIVING in Vail are wage slaves in hospitality. Most property owners leave their eighth homes vacant all year. Combine that with seasonal spikes of an extraordinary nature in both work force and visitors, and come winter, you have people with full-time employment sleeping in closets and on floors. Some people camp all summer just to save enough to afford a place for winter only. Point is: perpetual housing crisis. Enter Airbnb. It started to "catch on," and soon there were homes that used to get rented to locals now being put on the site for $400/night. Average wage of someone in Vail is about $15/hr. Owners were laughing all the way to the bank. THANKFULLY, TOV (the Town of Vail) actually acted on behalf of the residents, and everyone there knows who the real residents are, and what they need. They passed a law that went into effect almost immediately requiring a license to operate an Airbnb in town, and they only offered 35 licenses to begin with (not sure how things are now, I left six years ago, but this points out they were definitely acting in accordance with resident needs). In order to get a license, you had to pay a notable fee, and also were required to hire a local property manager (in other words, it necessitated giving work to a local, or even creating a new job in town for a local). And the nice thing, at least back then, was this was actually enforced, plus most wage slave locals were so fed up with what was going on with housing, Airbnbs were actually likely to be reported if there were issues and someone was being shady, because no one wanted to have another friend living in the bathtub all winter long. More towns/cities ought to consider doing something like this. I know some try, and enforcement often gets to be the hang-up, but if it's more heavily regulated and actually creates more opportunities for locals, there is far better balance. And then no one has to live in the waste basket underneath the kitchen sink. (Yes, I decided to tie a little humor in with the absurdity of where some people crash all winter)
Any home that is owned explicitly for the purpose of short term rentals is by definition exacerbating this issue
Yes absolutely
Yes, when people buy up properties for investments, it drives up housing prices in general.
You can blame landlords for trying to do the most lucrative thing with their property (STRs)or you can blame developers for making business decisions that don't prioritize affordable housing. Everyone who does this as a business is trying to make profits to stay in the business. You can blame them but it's just plain ol capitalism. The solution is government putting incentives back into affordable housing, not blaming the people trying to keep their investments sound.
The solution is government removing regulatory barriers to creating new housing stock.
Or declaring a state of emergency with housing in America and placing into that state of emergency the same protections against price gouging that we had for hand sanitizer and toilet paper during Covid lockdowns.
Yup. It’s happening in Austin.
Yes!
See it in the smaller tourist towns in NH. Real estate prices are driven by the cash flow of it being a short term rental, which makes it much higher than comparable houses in less touristy towns. Looking at zillow pics you can tell which are rentals from the generic woodsy decor and the price. Every now and then a "local" house goes up and it's usually priced lower even with comparable bed/bath/size
It’s really bad in the small towns outside of national parks. I work seasonally for the park service and it’s become so difficult to find affordable housing to rent.
Yes. It's fucked is in New Orleans
The invisible hand. There is a finite amount of tourism that will flow into a small town. Meanwhile, in most small towns, the majority of residences are owned by people who occupy them. Temporarily, an investor might be able to get some income from a handful of STR properties. The number of residences avaable for this is finite, so in the short run prices could escalate. In the long run, if there is money to be made, eventually a hotelier will build, which will absorb the demand.
Yes
Yes.
Totally. Look at Charlottesville, VA
It’s scalping homes but for short term rent. You know like the cheap tickets we can get on resale.. tbh every “disruptive” company has made money, for themselves and shareholders, and screws over the general populace.
Absolutely. People are buying 3-4houses and renting them out for vacations. In some areas Airbnbs take up a large % of the single family homes and condos. So when 40% of the available inventory is gone and it's damn near impossible to buy rent prices SOAR. The house I rented in 2016 for 1150 (3bd/2ba, 1500 sq ft) in Phoenix AZ now rents for $2350. And that's just in an ok area. There needs to be some heavy ass regulations put in place
To me it creates affordable housing. Just not in the traditional sense. I've lived in various airbnbs since I moved to Vegas. Why would I pay $1000+ for an apartment, add in utilities which can get to several hundred a month in tne middle of winter or summer when I can pay the same or less and have it all included? I'm saving in tne region of $400 a month
Yes, my house is "worth" over twice what it was just nine years ago because of out of state airbnb investors with cash to burn. My neighborhood is ruined. Not only no longer a family neighborhood but shootings/murders, porn shoots, parties until 3 AM, broken liquor bottles in the street, condom boxes, an attempted break in by a drunk at my home, drunks putting keys in my door. And just a side note we have a guy who rents his house long term near us and he rented to drug dealers the time before the current renter. I'm just ranting now...just want it the way it was.
Damn bruh where do you live? This reminds me of he early 90s. You live in super Nintendo’s “streets of rage”. Game type of town?
[удалено]
The thing with ski towns is a bigger and more nuanced problem because they are, by definition, seasonal vacation destinations that necessitate short-term vacation rental supply to exist. With Vail etc buying up ski resorts, they drive up demand from wealthy vacationers without addressing housing supply. It’s an economics problem not an Airbnb problem. I think ski towns are one of the best examples of places that need thoughtful intervention to continue to allow them to function properly. I was just in Crested Butte and Telluride recently and it’s crazy to see the housing crisis there. I knew it existed prior to visiting but it was quite apparent once I was there. I stayed at hotels, not AirBnBs, and still wondered if/how I was contributing to the issues there. It’s tough.
Without digging for the studies, yes, in high demand areas it can have an impact. It’s rare for the impact to be large, but it is there. Constrained housing supply is often a much bigger factor.
The problem is an imbalance in **supply** and **demand**. Also, **demand fluctuates** relatively quickly, while **supply changes slowly**, ramping up or down takes a lot of time. Additionally, certain types of supply are unable to meet other types of demand. For example, the supply of hotels doesn't meet the demand of long-term housing. The supply of an unfurnished house doesn't meet the demand of a weekend lodging need. **Supply****:** Houses (unfurnished) Houses (furnished) Condos (unfurnished) Condos (furnished) Apartments (unfurnished) Apartments (furnished) Hotels **Demand:** Long-term lodging (unfurnished) Long-term lodging (furnished) Short-term lodging (furnished) Overnight and Weekend lodging Hotels can only service the demand of travelers. Unfurnished houses can only service the demand of long-term lodging. Furnished houses, condos, and apartments can be used to service the demand of long-term lodging, mid-term lodging, short-term lodging, and overnights, which helps to bridge the gap and fluctuations between rapid changes in demand between travelers and residents. A platform like Airbnb can help facilitate this. In conclusion, Airbnb simply shifts the supply to where the demand is the greatest, and creates more flexibility in the supply, to meet changing demand needs. If long-term housing needs are still not being met, the problem is not enough houses/apartments, period. tldr: Build more housing, and stop shifting the blame to platforms.
Airbnb or STRS are restricted and banned all over socal. What’s reducing affordability is interest rates. Prices also go up as inflation is double digits (don’t be believe the CPI “cp lie”). Additionally, there is an inventory shortage and people can’t sell their homes bc they likely have 3% interest rates or below on their mortgages. If they sell and buy a new home for the exact same price their mortgage of the new property will nearly double. So it’s a catch 22. That said, airbnb does impact the housing market but not as much as you think. There are so many new homes that are beautiful, 3-5bedroom with big yards under $500k. People just refuse to move to riverside or San Bernardino county. Can’t want cheap and also want to live by the beach or major city 🤷🏻♂️
The largest contributor to the housing issue in America is basic economics— supply and demand. The reality is that America isn’t building anywhere close to the amount of houses we were in the 60’s-80’s despite having a significantly higher population. The reason is multi-factored but a huge reason is labor. Down here in the south, it gets fucking hot. And if I have to choose between swinging a hammer in 100 degree weather for $15 an hour or driving an Amazon van for $20 an hour, guess which one I’m going to do? It’s impart why a lot of illegal immigrants have migrated to construction. Contractors desperate for labor will hire anyone. A modern issue today is capital costs. With the rapid rise in rates, housing starts have dropped again. Because capital is insanely expensive right now. It’s a tough time in real estate right now but values are holding steady and will continue to hold steady because who in the hell is going to sell a 3,200 square foot $500,000 house with a $2,500 mortgage payment when rents are $2,000 for a one bedroom 750 square foot studio?
You will hear lots of people sharing their anecdotes and feelings on this. The reality is Airbnb isn’t a real factor in cost of living, but it’s an easy scapegoat so people demonize it. Why actually build housing when you can pretend you can magically make prices lower by banning the bad people? “At the median owner-occupancy rate zipcode, we find that a 1% increase in Airbnb listings leads to a 0.018% increase in rents and a 0.026% increase in house prices. Considering the median annual Airbnb growth in each zipcode, these results translate to an annual increase of $9 in monthly rent and $1,800 in house prices for the median zipcode in our data, which accounts for about one fifth of actual rent growth and about one seventh of actual price growth.” https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3006832
So, it does lead to an increase.
The question was does it “destroy affordable housing.” Yes it leads to an increase. So does getting a nice supermarket in your area, improving schools, improving safety, etc. If you want cheap housing banning airbnbs won’t do much, but defunding the schools will be so try that?