The big Airbnb debate

[lio45]

I always knew this day would come.

Has it sparked something in Anglo-Canada too? Or just here?

[whatnext]

AirBnB is a cancer that hopes out vibrant city cores. Look at Venice.

[Acajack]

I always knew this day would come.

Has it sparked something in Anglo-Canada too? Or just here?

You mean the fire in Old Montreal that killed six people?

[SignalHillHiker]

It's chewing up the nicest, formerly long-term rental units in the nicer areas of town - which is bad enough - but also making those areas more transient and a bit rowdier. Tourism here is still more fanny pack than meth pipe, but there is enough of the latter to notice.

[lio45]

7, not 6, but especially the huge spotlight that it turned onto the dangers of allowing the operation of hotels allowed to dodge nearly all the safety features required of actual hotels.

[Acajack]

7, not 6, but especially the huge spotlight that it turned onto the dangers of allowing the operation of hotels allowed to dodge nearly all the safety features required of actual hotels.

Yikes. :hell:

[SignalHillHiker]

7, not 6, but especially the huge spotlight that it turned onto the dangers of allowing the operation of hotels allowed to dodge nearly all the safety features required of actual hotels.

The safety aspect hasn't really come up here as we've had no tragedies yet, knock on wood.

The main issues on the host side have been squatters who refuse to leave, and people who put everything inside the place in a UHaul and try to make it back to Ontario before the host notices and they're stopped by police at the ferry :haha:

The main issue on the guest side is by now AirBnBs are more expensive than hotels, and you have more responsibilities (cleaning fees, putting the linens in the laundry bin before you leave, doing the dishes, etc.). It's really lost its business case, at least here. Just waiting for everyone to recognize that fact lol

[lio45]

The owner might be in trouble.

Part of my portfolio is operated as Airbnbs by a buddy of mine, all in zones where it’s legal at least; he wanted to expand recently, in light of this I’m really going to draw a solid line at doing it in buildings not adapted to borderline-hotel use.

[drew]

I can't speak for other cities in Canada, but based on the building where I work in Winnipeg, the main purpose of Airbnb seems to be for dealing drugs and escorts.

[lio45]

The safety aspect hasn't really come up here as we've had no tragedies yet, knock on wood.

The main issues on the host side have been squatters who refuse to leave, and people who put everything inside the place in a UHaul and try to make it back to Ontario before the host notices and they're stopped by police at the ferry :haha:

The main issue on the guest side is by now AirBnBs are more expensive than hotels, and you have more responsibilities (cleaning fees, putting the linens in the laundry bin before you leave, doing the dishes, etc.). It's really lost its business case, at least here. Just waiting for everyone to recognize that fact lolLol. Here THE main reason Airbnb is interesting is that it’s legal to kick out the people at the end of their stay.

In Florida, I never ever considered Airbnb, even though now that I think of it, it’d work well (some of my properties are a 10 min drive to the ocean, and it’s a super touristy area).

The only reason to do Airbnb IMO is to avoid crazy pro-tenant laws (such as Quebec’s). If Quebec were less unreasonable, I’d operate like in FL, with only actual long-term tenants and I’d never even have given Airbnb a look.

[lio45]

Not sure if the story made the news for you guys but one of the Airbnb users who burned to death has her 911 call recorded, she was trapped in her window-less bedroom (totally illegal) …

[OldDartmouthMark]

I'd be fine if all Airbnbs were to cease functioning as such, and all that housing returned to people who just need a place to live in their city. The negatives of Airbnbs far outweigh the positives, IMHO.

[MonctonRad]

I hate Air BnBs

My main issue is that as Air Bnbs proliferate, they result in the removal of traditional rental units from the market place, and this at a time when there is a housing crisis in the country.

This is just as, if not more, important than the use of Air BnBs for illicit activities.

They absolutely need to be tightly regulated and controlled - at least as much as hotel properties are (and taxed accordingly).

[SignalHillHiker]

Nothing here yet, but CBC generally assumes you'll go to the national page and I see it there. The rest of the local media will probably follow this up in a week or so with "After the tragic... should we..."

[lio45]

FYI, the “illicit activities” angle is a pro, not a con: it’s much easier to nip those in the bud when it’s in a building you’re operating as an Airbnb.

I’ve had crack dealers in Airbnbs twice so far, they were a breeze to get rid of. Regular paying tenants who do it, that’s MUCH harder to eliminate (and requires creative solutions).

[casper]

I always knew this day would come.

Has it sparked something in Anglo-Canada too? Or just here?

Some municipal governments in BC have been requiring a business licenses for each location. Usually (but not always) a business license comes with a safety inspection.

Condo boards have been passing bylaws outlawing rentals of under 30 days.

It is a delicate balancing act trying to discourage the practice while still respecting personal property rights.

Personally, I am all for saying if you want to operate a hotel, you should meet the same standards as a hotel. If that happens to be excessively expensive for a single suite hotel, well then maybe you have the wrong business model.

[bridgeoftea]

As someone who loves to travel a lot. I honestly love Air BnB's.
It gives you the opportunity to really dive into the place / countries culture you are in. I've gotten to spend a week in Venice in a beautiful apartment for under 100 euros a night. Where as any hotel comparable would have been 4 times that. I love that it gives you the chance to buy groceries and cook local foods.

I will also point out, I never stay in a Air BnB that isn't a "super host". So far, I've never had a bad experience with them. (that could change on my next trip). Or rented in an area that I felt unsafe or saw nefarious activities going on lol.

To counter point I can see why those who are looking for long term rental or home buying are getting annoyed by the influx of Air BnBs. I feel like there has to be a middle ground (essentially back to where it was around 2018 ish). Raise the income tax for Air Bnbs to where it's not as profitable? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[WhipperSnapper]

I agree with the above comment. AIrbnb is a greater source for all types of trafficking.

Airbnb, etc. has also generated new housing investment and overall rental vacancies aren't near the lows of the 1980s and 1990s. Real estate values are exorbitant but, that has little to do with Airbnb Corporate executive suites existed before Airbnb. Illegal death traps have been around for decades. Airbnb allowed nonprofessionals, good and slum, to broaden their market internationally.

The likeliest outcome is a ban on Airbnb over other legislation to appease the public but, it's not going to stop anything.

[kwoldtimer]

It's chewing up the nicest, formerly long-term rental units in the nicer areas of town - which is bad enough - but also making those areas more transient and a bit rowdier. Tourism here is still more fanny pack than meth pipe, but there is enough of the latter to notice.

Meth pipe tourism?

[whatnext]

As someone who loves to travel a lot. I honestly love Air BnB's.
It gives you the opportunity to really dive into the place / countries culture you are in. I've gotten to spend a week in Venice in a beautiful apartment for under 100 euros a night. Where as any hotel comparable would have been 4 times that. I love that it gives you the chance to buy groceries and cook local foods.

I will also point out, I never stay in a Air BnB that isn't a "super host". So far, I've never had a bad experience with them. (that could change on my next trip). Or rented in an area that I felt unsafe or saw nefarious activities going on lol.

To counter point I can see why those who are looking for long term rental or home buying are getting annoyed by the influx of Air BnBs. I feel like there has to be a middle ground (essentially back to where it was around 2018 ish). Raise the income tax for Air Bnbs to where it's not as profitable? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You should read up on the population decline in Venice, in a large part thanks to residents being pushed out in favour of AirBnBs.

[MonkeyRonin]

Airbnb started off as a good idea, but it's become a bit of a monster. It was originally intended for people to use to rent out their spare rooms, or their homes & apartments when they were away. Which for users, provided a cheaper and more interesting experience than a hotel.

Ultimately it proved to be too successful of a business model and dedicated Airbnb-residences & operators proliferated. They're just as expensive as hotels now too, so I'm not really sure what the appeal is anymore. I was a big fan in the past, but personally I only use it to rent things like cabinets now, where there isn't really a hotel equivalent.

[MonkeyRonin]

You should read up on the population decline in Venice, in a large part thanks to residents being pushed out in favour of AirBnBs.


The depopulation of Venice has been happening for decades - long before Airbnb (or even the internet) existed.

[esquire]

As someone who loves to travel a lot. I honestly love Air BnB's.
It gives you the opportunity to really dive into the place / countries culture you are in. I've gotten to spend a week in Venice in a beautiful apartment for under 100 euros a night. Where as any hotel comparable would have been 4 times that. I love that it gives you the chance to buy groceries and cook local foods.

I will also point out, I never stay in a Air BnB that isn't a "super host". So far, I've never had a bad experience with them. (that could change on my next trip). Or rented in an area that I felt unsafe or saw nefarious activities going on lol.

To counter point I can see why those who are looking for long term rental or home buying are getting annoyed by the influx of Air BnBs. I feel like there has to be a middle ground (essentially back to where it was around 2018 ish). Raise the income tax for Air Bnbs to where it's not as profitable? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I have also had positive experiences with Airbnbs. I used to use them occasionally when travelling on vacation while my kids were very young, roughly from infancy to kindergarten age. Having a home's amenities (separate bedrooms, a kitchen, laundry) made life easier when travelling at those stages. And with an Airbnb it was generally far cheaper than getting a hotel room with similar suite-type amenities... upgraded hotel rooms are typically much more expensive than standard 2-bed rooms.

That said, it does involve a lot of headaches... not knowing what kind of owner you are dealing with, having to tidy up and do chores, the general inconsistencies as compared to knowing what to expect from a particular hotel brand, even just the feeling of being unwelcome by neighbours. While my experiences were good, I was also happy to go back to hotels. I am pretty unlikely to use Airbnb again at this point... I'd only do it if I was unable to find a hotel room at (to me) a reasonable price point.

[mleblanc]

You should read up on the population decline in Venice, in a large part thanks to residents being pushed out in favour of AirBnBs.

Not just Venice, but many touristy cities across Europe. This video explains it in depth, focusing on Prague:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHr7GXuqzm0&

[manny_santos]

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I'm very much pro-AirBNB, insofar as it's regulated properly. I've been a big user of AirBNB in my travels and I have 3 upcoming bookings with them for travel later this year.

I personally see nothing wrong with it if it's a spare room in a house or apartment where people live. It gives me a place to stay that has several benefits:

- In some cities, the price is considerably cheaper than hotels or motels
- Many of them include kitchen facilities, which allows for me to cook while I'm on vacation and not have to eat out for every meal. I have never seen a hotel with a full kitchen.
- In some instances their locations are far more convenient than hotels, especially if you want to stay in an area that is not in a downtown area or near an airport. As an example, last year I needed a place to stay in Seattle that was close to good public transit and was within a certain budget. AirBNB was the only option, and I both saved hundreds of dollars and stayed in a much better neighbourhood than where the hotels are all located.
- They are incredibly useful if you're moving to a new city and need to stay somewhere for 2-4 weeks while looking for a permanent place to live. I did this when I first moved to BC in 2020, most landlords will not rent to someone who is unable to visit the unit in person (for good reason) and just as importantly most will not offer leases of less than one year.
- They are also useful for temporary work assignments, such as a 3-month term in another city. Again, landlords will typically not rent to someone for 3 months, and hotels for that length of time are cost-prohibitive.

The proliferation of AirBNB is, in part, due to the hotel industry not adapting, as well as artificially limiting the supply of hotel rooms in many cities. In Vancouver there was a recent report showing a projected shortfall of hotel rooms in the coming years. This economic condition is a similar one that led to the proliferation of ride sharing apps, the taxi industry refused to adapt to consumer preferences and still refuses to adapt.

What I do not support is whole condos being used solely as AirBNB units, or so-called "AirBNB hotels". However I think the nuance around the different types of units offered is often missed in the discussion of AirBNB. There's a big difference between an AirBNB "hotel" and a spare room in someone's house or apartment.

In short I put part of the blame for the prominence of AirBNB on the hotel industry. Put hotels in places where people want to stay and not just in touristy areas, build more of them, and offer things like kitchenettes at a price that is competitive with AirBNBs. Then maybe I'll use hotels more in my travels. On the flip side governments also need to take a greater role in ensuring enough housing is being built, including affordable housing.

[MonkeyRonin]

All good points, and from a user perspective there is definitely a lot to like about Airbnb. I've had great experiences with it in the past - being able to stay in some really cool spaces, interesting neighbourhoods, and meeting some great hosts. More recently though, I find these kinds of experiences are rarer and have largely been crowded out by impersonal, professionally-managed "ghost hotel" type arrangements. The prices also seem a lot less competitive now.

Either way, you raise a great point that its success has been the result of the inflexibility and lack of innovation in the hotel industry. The problem with Airbnb though, is that unlike Uber or other tech "disruptors" that solely benefit consumers (at the expense of traditional industries), its success is actively detrimental to the livability of our cities as it consumes housing supply. Makes it harder for supply to meet population growth demand when x% of units are bought to be used as short term rentals instead of places to live.

[esquire]

All good points, and from a user perspective there is definitely a lot to like about Airbnb. I've had great experiences with it in the past - being able to stay in some really cool spaces, interesting neighbourhoods, and meeting some great hosts. More recently though, I find these kinds of experiences are rarer and have largely been crowded out by impersonal, professionally-managed "ghost hotel" type arrangements. The prices also seem a lot less competitive now.

The price is way less appealing now, for sure. Until airbnb got really big 5-10 years ago, it was generally cheaper than hotels. Now it's not. In most places airbnbs will be by and large the same price as a hotel.

At the same price, I'll take the hotel every time. No weirdness, and unpleasant surprises are rare, there's also housekeeping so I don't have to worry about it.

However, in very pricy/in demand destinations, you can still save a fair bit of money with airbnb. I've done that with some of the European capitals, in Maui and other hotspots where hotels are relatively expensive.

[casper]

The price is way less appealing now, for sure. Until airbnb got really big 5-10 years ago, it was generally cheaper than hotels. Now it's not. In most places airbnbs will be by and large the same price as a hotel.

At the same price, I'll take the hotel every time. No weirdness, and unpleasant surprises are rare, there's also housekeeping so I don't have to worry about it.

However, in very pricy/in demand destinations, you can still save a fair bit of money with airbnb. I've done that with some of the European capitals, in Maui and other hotspots where hotels are relatively expensive.

I have noticed a shift with hotels. Even high end brands like Sheraton. House keeping is generally now only offered on request and not by default. Partially a left over from COVID measures and perhaps they discovered most people don't need someone to change towels and make their bed for them each day.

That said, I prefer hotels over airbnb. You have a front desk you can go down to to deal with any questions or issues.

The biggest issue is it is may be more profitable to do airbnb vrs long term rentals. Perhaps that is what is driving up the cost of long term rentals. Not certain.

[JHikka]

Airbnb started off as a good idea, but it's become a bit of a monster.

Give capitalists and landlords something and they'll eventually take it to such lengths that it's no longer viable for the 'normal' person. Nowadays it's likely better to simply stay in a hotel; ditto for taking a taxi over using Uber. Logical ending point once owners are able to realize how much capital they can squeeze out of consumers.

I have noticed a shift with hotels. Even high end brands like Sheraton. House keeping is generally now only offered on request and not by default. Partially a left over from COVID measures and perhaps they discovered most people don't need someone to change towels and make their bed for them each day.
My recent hotel stays had housekeeping on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, or on request.

[manny_santos]

I have noticed a shift with hotels. Even high end brands like Sheraton. House keeping is generally now only offered on request and not by default. Partially a left over from COVID measures and perhaps they discovered most people don't need someone to change towels and make their bed for them each day.

That said, I prefer hotels over airbnb. You have a front desk you can go down to to deal with any questions or issues.

The biggest issue is it is may be more profitable to do airbnb vrs long term rentals. Perhaps that is what is driving up the cost of long term rentals. Not certain.

I stayed in a hotel last year in Montreal that had coffee mugs, but there was a $50 charge if you used the mug and didn’t clean it.

[big T]

I was surprised to read some anti-Airbnb views here and elsewhere.
I’ve never been a host, but as a guest there is definitely a huge benefit for longer stays at least. I don’t think I’d enjoy staying at a hotel for stays longer than a week, plus you get a ton more flexibility when choosing a space that fits the particular needs of your stay (say, a dedicated room to use as an office).

Maybe the answer is to heavily disincentivize Airbnb stays shorter than 3-4 days (where a hotel is usually more convenient anyway), but outright banning it would leave a whole market segment unserved imo.

[urbandreamer]

While I hate how airbnbs have driven up rents and caused so many people trouble, I did need to use airbnbs across Canada because 1) I was traveling with my elderly mother 2) we both have specialized diets that can't be accommodated in cheap motels/hotels or restaurants 3) got to explore different areas of Vancouver for example, staying in PoCo I finally got to hang out in Port Moody and Belcarra. Other than a fantastic rural property south of Nanaimo, they all kind of sucked with their generic grey/beige paint, ikea furniture and low overnight temperature. I did have to clean everything and admittedly got deals by booking 6 months ahead ($75/night in North Vancouver:) for 4 people!)

[TRiToNDREyJA]

This is a bit long winded and very opinionated, just giving a heads up.

Very pro AirBnb myself, but it does need to be regulated so that it doesn't aggravate any housing crisis.

Value per dollar with hotels absolutely sucks for my kind of travel for example. I want to cook, I want to store plenty food, I want to stay in more intimate areas of cities, I want to be able to go on trips with multiple people without sharing rooms or beds or reserving more than 1 hotel room. For trips longer than a few days I want to feel like I'm home when I return to my lodging, not like I'm crammed with other tourists in an illusionary homespace.

Airbnbs often have courteous hosts and guide books telling about local shops & restaurants so that when I eat out, I'm not just going to some large chain restaurant every time. For others, I'm sure Airbnb for family visits and gatherings is a much better option (Family gatherings, visiting terminally ill loved ones, elderly travelers wanting a full space, and plenty more are examples heard from guests my family have hosted in their suites).

Anecdotal, but near everyone I've talked to around my age will book Airbnb over hotels every time when traveling. Hotels don't fit the bill for everyone, and they aren't changing with the times either.

Here in Winnipeg, my family hosts many Airbnbs & maintains them well. They are by far and away more profitable than long-term rentals, while still being competitive with hotels (often cheaper), with so much less headache. I have been astounded over the last few years seeing how much less bullshit my parents deal with running Airbnb vs their long term rentals.

Honestly, the disparity between the pros and cons of running/owning long vs short term rentals feels so problematic to me(And I say this even from the hosts POV. The gap is too large and gives me a bad feeling).

Calling Airbnb a cancer is very brash imo and I'd say "ok boomer" to that narrative if I didn't know any better, but the truth is that important conversations about this travel model do need to be had. (I never use that stupid saying, but I imagine people who do feel similar to the way I did when I read this thread)

It fills a travel niche perfectly & has a undeniably valid place in tourism. It just needs to be better integrated into city/province systems so that it can continue to thrive without bleeding everything else dry.

The hosts who get upset over the idea of any regulations at all rub me the wrong way (quite strongly tbh), but not as much as the people who want to see Airbnb's model die. Times, desires & needs are changing, and working with newer solutions while finding ways to make them sustainable is much better than trying to force the idea that hotels and what's existed before are good enough for all & will be for eternity.

[casper]

Give capitalists and landlords something and they'll eventually take it to such lengths that it's no longer viable for the 'normal' person. Nowadays it's likely better to simply stay in a hotel; ditto for taking a taxi over using Uber. Logical ending point once owners are able to realize how much capital they can squeeze out of consumers.

I am all for Uber. I had some questionable taxi drivers over the year.

I think the issue with airbnb is you own an apartment you can potentially make significantly more money running it under that model than renting it out. However running and airbnb is far more labour intensive. If you have to hire someone to clean between rentals and manage handling over keys and inspecting the property it eats in to that profit quite a bit. If the owner is doing it they may or may not value their time.

My recent hotel stays had housekeeping on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, or on request.

It is weird. I am usually asked if I want housekeeping or not. Some chain at check in offer to give you extra loyalty points for passing on the cleaning service. It is a clear shift away from daily service just being taken for granted. I know some larger hotels in Victoria (and likely other cities) contract out that maid service to on outside contractor, so likely a way of dealing with labour shortages as well save some money.

[Loco101]

I've always wondered what kind of liabilities and Airbnb rental has and what kind and amount of insurance is needed. Are the places that are rented inspected at all?

I almost did Airbnb is some small places in Northern Ontario that didn't have motels but ended up deciding against it.

[JHikka]

I am all for Uber. I had some questionable taxi drivers over the year.
Absolutely. Neither are perfect.

I think the issue with airbnb is you own an apartment you can potentially make significantly more money running it under that model than renting it out. However running and airbnb is far more labour intensive. If you have to hire someone to clean between rentals and manage handling over keys and inspecting the property it eats in to that profit quite a bit. If the owner is doing it they may or may not value their time.
A lot of the loss in value for Airbnb lately has been property owners shifting that responsibility onto users themselves, by way of things like making people clean the unit, using lockboxes for keys, or an array of other requirements that save the owner from ever having to be present.

In its early days Airbnb really was good. It was an improved couchsurfing, basically staying with people if they had an extra bed or room. Then over the years it shifted more to investment types, renovating new units out of nothing, renting out entire apartments, then buildings...Airbnb went from crashing at a friend's house to becoming a part-time tenant. It went from giving money to a person to giving it to a corp.

I'll be staying at an Airbnb in Germany in a few months and the only way I can really be happy with using it is because i'll be replacing the owner of the unit for two weeks as they will be travelling out of country.

It is weird. I am usually asked if I want housekeeping or not. Some chain at check in offer to give you extra loyalty points for passing on the cleaning service. It is a clear shift away from daily service just being taken for granted. I know some larger hotels in Victoria (and likely other cities) contract out that maid service to on outside contractor, so likely a way of dealing with labour shortages as well save some money.
I'm personally fine with it as I assume it's more environmentally friendly not to be cleaning the same sheets every day, over and over again. I'm trying to think of the positive of the amount of energy and water and detergent saved on not having cleaning be mandatory every day.

[LightingGuy]

AirBnB is great, especially for multiple night stays. Having access to a kitchen, proper bathroom, laundry, etc for the same price (or less) than a hotel is a huge perk. And if you're traveling with a group it's a much better deal.

There are seedy ABBs, but there are also seedy hotels and motels - so do your research, and don't go for the cheapest.

RE: It making the housing crisis worse - ABBs aren't the cause of that problem.. you have your local city council's glacial application review process's to thank for that, as well as the BoC's mismanagement of our currency. Don't blame this on small busi ess owners who are fulfilling a need in the market.

[niwell]

At this point it's a bit of a tossup whether or not cabs are worse than uber - though the latter is certainly more convenient. I'm half convinced a large proportion of uber drivers would drive into a brick wall if their GPS told them too. Had to yell at people for making absurdly dangerous moves in traffic multiple times, not to mention countless times almost getting hit as a pedestrian or cyclist by a car with the Uber/Lyft logo. It's a far cry from the earlier days when uber was both a nicer ride and cheaper - but that was always the business plan.


I'm pretty much in complete agreement with Monkeyronin on airbnb. I've used it dozens of times and mostly had good experiences, but it's straying too far from the original concept. The latest places I've stayed in (all superhosted) were clearly units put into use as short-term rentals and nothing else - didn't even bother to put art on the walls. I did much prefer places that were still clearly someone's actual house, or at least a secondary unit. Always enjoyed when the host left a note saying to feel free to have the leftover beer in the fridge or use whatever's in the cupboard. I get that people sometimes get weirded out by stuff like that, but that's what hotels are for. This is what we are planning to do with our house in Napanee, though at this point I'm thinking we won't use the airbnb platform and focus more on ones where it's clear you're renting someone's house/cottage.

Lately I've actually gone back to staying in hotels for shorter stays and found it to be slightly cheaper once cleaning fees are taken into account. The big downside can be location, but for smaller cities that tends not to matter as much. For longer stays or with a bigger group I would likely still go airbnb. It was also a lifesaver in South Africa where finding a non-corporate apartment as a foreigner is virtually impossible and many airbnbs have highly preferential monthly rates.

While I don't think they are the main driver of the housing crisis, you certainly can't discount their effect on desirable neighbourhoods around the world. Has nothing to do with the pace of the development process as we are often talking about apartments in areas that aren't really replaceable. Claiming Toronto council doesn't approve stuff fast enough has nothing to do with the effect on rents in New Orleans - a place where I've used airbnb but don't think I will anymore. Heard far too many stories from locals about displaced renters and the effects on rent even in areas that aren't... great (also seen lots of listings claiming Bywater or Irish Channel yet are actually in semi-dangerous locations).

At the end of the day if these really are "small business owners" then treat them as such - regulate and tax appropriately. Taking a 6 unit apartment building in Kensington Market and renting it out solely as airbnb isn't the same as renting out your place when you travel - now if you're paying commercial property tax rates and have to adhere to commercial safety standards then go for it.

[bridgeoftea]

At this point it's a bit of a tossup whether or not cabs are worse than uber - though the latter is certainly more convenient. I'm half convinced a large proportion of uber drivers would drive into a brick wall if their GPS told them too. Had to yell at people for making absurdly dangerous moves in traffic multiple times, not to mention countless times almost getting hit as a pedestrian or cyclist by a car with the Uber/Lyft logo. It's a far cry from the earlier days when uber was both a nicer ride and cheaper - but that was always the business plan.


I'm pretty much in complete agreement with Monkeyronin on airbnb. I've used it dozens of times and mostly had good experiences, but it's straying too far from the original concept. The latest places I've stayed in (all superhosted) were clearly units put into use as short-term rentals and nothing else - didn't even bother to put art on the walls. I did much prefer places that were still clearly someone's actual house, or at least a secondary unit. Always enjoyed when the host left a note saying to feel free to have the leftover beer in the fridge or use whatever's in the cupboard. I get that people sometimes get weirded out by stuff like that, but that's what hotels are for. This is what we are planning to do with our house in Napanee, though at this point I'm thinking we won't use the airbnb platform and focus more on ones where it's clear you're renting someone's house/cottage.

Lately I've actually gone back to staying in hotels for shorter stays and found it to be slightly cheaper once cleaning fees are taken into account. The big downside can be location, but for smaller cities that tends not to matter as much. For longer stays or with a bigger group I would likely still go airbnb. It was also a lifesaver in South Africa where finding a non-corporate apartment as a foreigner is virtually impossible and many airbnbs have highly preferential monthly rates.

While I don't think they are the main driver of the housing crisis, you certainly can't discount their effect on desirable neighbourhoods around the world. Has nothing to do with the pace of the development process as we are often talking about apartments in areas that aren't really replaceable. Claiming Toronto council doesn't approve stuff fast enough has nothing to do with the effect on rents in New Orleans - a place where I've used airbnb but don't think I will anymore. Heard far too many stories from locals about displaced renters and the effects on rent even in areas that aren't... great (also seen lots of listings claiming Bywater or Irish Channel yet are actually in semi-dangerous locations).

At the end of the day if these really are "small business owners" then treat them as such - regulate and tax appropriately. Taking a 6 unit apartment building in Kensington Market and renting it out solely as airbnb isn't the same as renting out your place when you travel - now if you're paying commercial property tax rates and have to adhere to commercial safety standards then go for it.

One thing I love about Uber is knowing who is picking you up, you can see the license plate number. And then you can follow the map knowing they are taking the direct route, not trying to take "the scenic route" to increase fares.

One side point about Air BnB, if you can book early it is considerably cheaper. I booked 5 locations in Spain in August 2022 for September 2023 and worked out to be less than $60 per night CAD for 5 star, super host apartments. I do understand not everyone can plan that far in advance though.

[suburbanite]

At this point it's a bit of a tossup whether or not cabs are worse than uber - though the latter is certainly more convenient. I'm half convinced a large proportion of uber drivers would drive into a brick wall if their GPS told them too. Had to yell at people for making absurdly dangerous moves in traffic multiple times, not to mention countless times almost getting hit as a pedestrian or cyclist by a car with the Uber/Lyft logo. It's a far cry from the earlier days when uber was both a nicer ride and cheaper - but that was always the business plan.



I'll pay a small premium these days to take a taxi where I can be comfortable knowing the driver is familiar with downtown, knows the best and fastest way to get there given the time of day/traffic conditions, and doesn't drive 10 km/h below the speed limit.

Twice now I've been in an uber where the stupid GPS has told them to get on the Gardiner going west at York, and then immediately get off the Spadina ramp instead of just going down Lakeshore. I was on my phone and not paying attention and both drivers merged into traffic on the Gardiner, missed the off ramp, and we had to sit in traffic for 10+ minutes to get to the next exit at Dunn, then drive backwards through King West. Now I'm watching the road the entire time I'm in an uber which isn't a great experience especially if you're paying $25 surge pricing.

[WarrenC12]

The tone of this conversation is essentially that AirBNB can provide a great experience as a user, but you don't want your neighbours running them. All very understandable IMO.

I'm writing this from an AirBNB in Mexico right now and it's a great experience that's much more immersive than the typical sanitized "all-inclusive" resorts.

Hotels nickel and dimed their way into this problem. Remember when they all added daily unavoidable "resort fees"? Now AirBNB is getting into the same games.

I do think they need more regulation, and most importantly, taxation. Governments love to fleece tourists in the form of special taxes, and AirBNB needs the same levels of taxes that hotels have to charge.

[bridgeoftea]

The tone of this conversation is essentially that AirBNB can provide a great experience as a user, but you don't want your neighbours running them. All very understandable IMO.

I'm writing this from an AirBNB in Mexico right now and it's a great experience that's much more immersive than the typical sanitized "all-inclusive" resorts.

Hotels nickel and dimed their way into this problem. Remember when they all added daily unavoidable "resort fees"? Now AirBNB is getting into the same games.

I do think they need more regulation, and most importantly, taxation. Governments love to fleece tourists in the form of special taxes, and AirBNB needs the same levels of taxes that hotels have to charge.

Was in Cuba over the winter and found after 3 days of being locked on the resort I could have been anywhere. Barely got any real authentic Cuban immersion and when I did, it was rushed. Felt very North Korea at times lol.

[lio45]

Airbnb is in the news daily here. Also, apparently 92.5% of Airbnbs are illegal, and there's little that's done.

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2023/03/21/championne-des-locations-illegales

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2023/03/21/des-plaintes-sans-effet

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2023/03/19/des-ressources-insuffisantes-pour-lutter-contre-les-logements-illegaux-de-type-airbnb-1

https://journalmetro.com/local/ville-marie/3033003/incendie-du-vieux-montreal-les-proprietaires-peuvent-ils-etre-poursuivis/

[rousseau]

Echoing what most other posters have said, at first AirBnB seemed like a unique opportunity to stay in apartments owned by locals in interesting neighbourhoods, but eventually it felt like most of the places we stayed at were run by corporations, and whatever personal touches we'd previously experienced were gone.

We also started to get annoyed by the ridiculous extra fees. "Cleaning fee of $125"? That's a cash grab for something you're supposed to do anyway and should be included in the initial cost. Structuring the fees this way is an obvious ploy to make it look cheaper at first glance (the large print giveth etc.).

[LightingGuy]

If it makes you feel any better, just imagine how much more hotels would cost if they didn't have to compete with AirBNBs.

Cleaning fees are annoying, but it's not as if they don't tell you the cost before you commit to the purchase...

I'm all for better safety/sanitary regulations, but complaining that you're renting from a "business" and not a "person" is a stupid reason to be against something. How do you think the alternative option aka hotels are run?

Anyways.. first world problems...

[chowhou]

IMO just like the debate around replacing industrial/commercial with residential, the debate around rental vs owner occupied housing, the debate around rent control, the debate around housing prices, the debate around rental prices; the core issue for AirBnB is caused by poor land use policy and not allowing enough housing to be built. If you think that housing is being replaced by AirBnB, why is the discussion being framed as "there are too many AirBnBs" instead of "there aren't enough houses"? It seems to me like most of the arguments against AirBnB can be solved by "build more housing".

I like staying in AirBnBs, everyone I know who travels prefers to stay in AirBnBs. I know for a fact that I've stayed in at least one illegal AirBnBs (not by choice, I only found out because the owner left out a binder explaining the things not to do to alert the neighbours).

If the market demands it, and the harms can be mitigated by obvious policy decisions, why should it be illegal? It's kind of like marijuana in that way.

[MonkeyRonin]

I'm all for better safety/sanitary regulations, but complaining that you're renting from a "business" and not a "person" is a stupid reason to be against something. How do you think the alternative option aka hotels are run?


The point is that that was a big part of the appeal of Airbnbs - that it was a more personalised, authentic experience than renting a room in a generic corporate hotel.

But if AirBnBs are just going to offer the same soulless hotel experience (but with less regulatory oversight & sketchy safety standards), then they've lost their competitive advantage.



IMO just like the debate around replacing industrial/commercial with residential, the debate around rental vs owner occupied housing, the debate around rent control, the debate around housing prices, the debate around rental prices; the core issue for AirBnB is caused by poor land use policy and not allowing enough housing to be built. If you think that housing is being replaced by AirBnB, why is the discussion being framed as "there are too many AirBnBs" instead of "there aren't enough houses"? It seems to me like most of the arguments against AirBnB can be solved by "build more housing".

I like staying in AirBnBs, everyone I know who travels prefers to stay in AirBnBs. I know for a fact that I've stayed in at least one illegal AirBnBs (not by choice, I only found out because the owner left out a binder explaining the things not to do to alert the neighbours).

If the market demands it, and the harms can be mitigated by obvious policy decisions, why should it be illegal? It's kind of like marijuana in that way.


Housing isn't an easily scalable product where supply can just be infinitely increased to meet demand though. Land use policy isn't the only thing holding back more housing from being - it's a labour intensive & resource intensive endeavour, and land (especially in the most desirable places) is finite.

And the problem is, is that if x% of new hosuing units being built are being used for AirBnBs or investors instead of housing, that that much more housing needs to be built to meet actual housing demands. It's an inefficient allocation of resources if say, only 60% of new homes being built (as is the case in cities like Toronto) are actually ending up in the hands of end users.

Anyway, I haven't seen anyone here argue that AirBnBs should be illegal, just that they should be better regulated to A. prevent more tragedies like the recent one in Montreal from happening, and B. ensure that there is sufficient housing stock available for residents.

[rousseau]

...complaining that you're renting from a "business" and not a "person" is a stupid reason to be against something. How do you think the alternative option aka hotels are run?

The entire premise of AirBnB was that it was supposed to be like a more affordable BnB, i.e. an alternative to hotels. The clue is in the name.

There used to be a wide range of prices. When the extra fees started appearing and the prices in decent locations went up, and the experience became like a corporate conveyor belt, it wasn't worth it anymore. At least to my wife and me.

[chowhou]

Housing isn't an easily scalable product where supply can just be infinitely increased to meet demand though. Land use policy isn't the only thing holding back more housing from being - it's a labour intensive & resource intensive endeavour, and land (especially in the most desirable places) is finite.

And the problem is, is that if x% of new hosuing units being built are being used for AirBnBs or investors instead of housing, that that much more housing needs to be built to meet actual housing demands. It's an inefficient allocation of resources if say, only 60% of new homes being built (as is the case in cities like Toronto) are actually ending up in the hands of end users.

Minor disagreement there; If New York and Hong Kong can continue to build taller and taller buildings in Manhattan and Central, then I think every Canadian city has a long long way to go before there's any restriction on the amount of space.

Also, AirBnBs, just like investor-owned rentals, are not an inefficient allocation of resources. They're productive in the economy in their own way since if they're lucrative for those investing in them then they're clearly economically viable, so I wouldn't just casually throw them away as an inefficient allocation of resources. Is building a hotel instead of a condo building inefficient? I think it's probably better for the economy if housing units had more usage flexibility so instead of only allowing a building to be a hotel or a condo building let it potentially be both! :D

I tend to agree with some safety requirements, but you can only regulate what is already being done legally. AirBnBs are illegal (but operating) in tons of places and you can't really regulate the black market. (See marijuana)

[whatnext]

I always find it amusing that Gen Z and younger Millennials bill themselves as more environmentally aware yet think it is a god-given right to have a cheap AirBnB anywhere in the world a cheap (polluting) airfare to get there. :rolleyes:

[JHikka]

Yeah, no generation prior to Gen Z ever demanded cheap accommodations or airfare anywhere in the world at any given time. Can't think of anyone asides from them that do that. Nevermind people who for decades have had second winter homes in the southern USA, or go on annual retreats to wealthy inclusive-resorts in otherwise destitute Caribbean countries, or yearly trips on cruise ships. How dare Gen Z want to do something without being chastised.

[niwell]

To echo monkeyronin’s points it’s a bit pointless to point at housing policy when this isn’t just a Canadian thing relegated to a few big cities. New Orleans for instance has a massive amount of vacant land that could be easily built upon yet the Airbnb market is in fact distorting rental rates in the city to the detriment of people who actually live there. Why would you bother building new housing to rent out at lower rates than more desirable places can be rented to non-residents a fraction of the year for? Nothing about this is productive to the economy except for the people who own them.

Also not sure we really want to be looking at Manhattan or Central in HK as examples of rational housing policy in general…

On the plus side I think more than a few Toronto property investors who thought Airbnb would be a big cash cow are now struggling to fill their places. It’s not really worth the hassle if you’re depending on the income and a lot of higher end travellers are going back to hotels. I know most of my friends and acquaintances are at least looking at all the options now before just checking out Airbnb.

[chowhou]

I always find it amusing that Gen Z and younger Millennials bill themselves as more environmentally aware yet think it is a god-given right to have a cheap AirBnB anywhere in the world a cheap (polluting) airfare to get there. :rolleyes:

When did I even ever say I was talking about Gen Z/Millennials? The ones I know can't afford to travel all the time, it's the baby boomers I know that are travelling the world and finding AirBnBs all over the place! :uhh:

To echo monkeyronin’s points it’s a bit pointless to point at housing policy when this isn’t just a Canadian thing relegated to a few big cities. New Orleans for instance has a massive amount of vacant land that could be easily built upon yet the Airbnb market is in fact distorting rental rates in the city to the detriment of people who actually live there. Why would you bother building new housing to rent out at lower rates than more desirable places can be rented to non-residents a fraction of the year for? Nothing about this is productive to the economy except for the people who own them.

I've never heard of AirBnB increasing rents in greater New Orleans. Care to source that claim? If AirBnB was increasing rents, then it should increase the viability of building new housing to rent at higher rates... (And unlike in Canadian cities, you're actually allowed to build new housing in New Orleans)

Also not sure we really want to be looking at Manhattan or Central in HK as examples of rational housing policy in general.

I wasn't talking about housing policy in Manhattan or Central, just the fact that even in those places they apparently still have space to build more housing, is all. Nowhere in Canada even comes close to the density of those areas, so we shouldn't be worried about running out of space anywhere (yet!).

[Changing City]

The City of Vancouver has some pretty stringent requirements to get a Short-term Rental Licence ($109 a year) . They have an MoU with AirBnB to require that the Licence number is included in the listing. You can see the basis on which someone can get a licence here (https://vancouver.ca/doing-business/applying-for-short-term-rental-business-licence.aspx).

You can only rent your own home, not anything else you own (those can be leased for 30 days or more, but not short-term). There are requirements for smoke alarms, a fire alarm, and either 45 minute fire seperation or a sprinkler system.

While there were initial problems with non-compliance after the new regualtions were introduced 5 years ago, in the first year 1,600 addresses had enforcement action, and in some cases court proceedings. My mid-2019 73% of short-term rentals were in compliance with the regulations, and 78% by 2020. Here's the report (https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/2020-short-term-rental-highlights-report.pdf) on the 2020 program (when covid started impacting demand for short term rentals). The 2021 report (https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/2021-short-term-rental-highlights-report.pdf) (the most recent currently available) showed 1,090 25% fewer short-term rentals, and 510 short-term rentals switched to long term rentals. Obviously covid will have had an impact, as well as the City's licencing system.

The existance of permanent AirBnB units reduces the potential rental market, which is already significantly stretched in many cities. Suggesting 'we should just build more units' is simplistic bs. We already have a rental shortage, and developers are building pretty much to their capacity - they certainly are in Greater Vancouver, and they appear to be in Canada. In the 2000s and the 2010s annual housing starts were 201,000 in each decade. In the past three years of the 2020s, it's been 250,000.

In Greater Vancouver the 2000s saw 15,360 average annual housing starts, the 2010s saw that increase to 21,655 and in the 2020s so far it's been 24,789.

There are tens of thousands approved units across the region that aren't (yet) being built, for a variety of reasons to do with financing, costs, labour shortages, inadequate sales, etc etc, but it's a myth to suggest it's because they're not being approved fast enough - it's because they can't be built faster.

Putting more rental units back into the market for longer term renters can only help the situation - even if it's only a few hundred, or a few thousand. And all of a sudden, there are five new hotels proposed across the city too.

[chowhou]

The existance of permanent AirBnB units reduces the potential rental market, which is already significantly stretched in many cities. Suggesting 'we should just build more units' is simplistic bs. We already have a rental shortage, and developers are building pretty much to their capacity - they certainly are in Greater Vancouver, and they appear to be in Canada. In the 2000s and the 2010s annual housing starts were 201,000 in each decade. In the past three years of the 2020s, it's been 250,000. Putting more rental units back into the market for longer term renters can only help the situation - even if it's only a few hundred, or a few thousand. And all of a sudden, there are five new hotels proposed across the city too.

It doesn't make sense to me to say "they physically cannot build more units" and in the same breath say "five new hotels will be built if we restrict AirBnBs".

[Changing City]

It doesn't make sense to me to say "they physically cannot build more units" and in the same breath say "five new hotels will be built if we restrict AirBnBs".

One of the two hotels actually under construction is part of the podium of a residential tower. The other is located in the CBD where residential development isn't generally allowed.

The others are only proposed at this point, but it seems likely that there will be a pause in office construction for a while, as the significant recent new construction gets absorbed. (There's also additional office space coming back to the market as businesses restructure after covid). Commercial developments have avoided hotel construction while occupancy rates were down. There should be some construction capacity to switch from office to hotel.

Residential developers could build more residential units, except demand is still uncertain for condos as interest rates remain higher than they have been, and prices haven't fallen dramatically, so some projects haven't managed to sell enough to reach the number needed to commence construction. Federal changes to rules about foreign buyers are also slowing sales of some condo buildings. And of course, some investor purchasers will be less keen to buy if they know they can only lease as long-term rental, rather that short-term. Some residential projects are switching to market rental, but only some developers are willing to make that switch.

The slowdown in new hotel construction was happening pre-covid so presumably partly related to AirBnB, (there were 6,000 on offer just in the City of Vancouver, many of them investor owned and never lived in). There's now greater demand as the pandemic is no longer affecting many people's travel plans, and the business case for new hotels is stronger.

[Wigs]

It's chewing up the nicest, formerly long-term rental units in the nicer areas of town - which is bad enough - but also making those areas more transient and a bit rowdier. Tourism here is still more fanny pack than meth pipe, but there is enough of the latter to notice.

Air BnB is definitely responsible for tightening the rental market and like SHH points out some of the best rentals in any given city are no longer available. Great for tourists, awful for residents that can't afford for sale homes/condos.

As others have stated, the Air BnB owners having strict rules where they expect the guest to do the cleaning is absurd :koko:

[manny_santos]

Air BnB is definitely responsible for tightening the rental market and like SHH points out some of the best rentals in any given city are no longer available. Great for tourists, awful for residents that can't afford for sale homes/condos.

As others have stated, the Air BnB owners having strict rules where they expect the guest to do the cleaning is absurd :koko:

Although I stated I'm pro-AirBNB, I do have some complaints about some of the ones I've stayed in:

- No check-in process. The second time I used AirBNB - ironically in Old Montreal just a few blocks from last week's fire - I got to the property and there was no way to get in. The doorbell didn't work and nobody answered the phone at the number in the listing. It took 3-4 hours to reach someone to get let in - and this was at the tail end of a snowstorm.

- Falsely advertising that the listing had two rooms when it was in fact one. I had specifically booked that place as I was bringing a friend and we wanted separate rooms for each of us. The host seemed unaware that her own listing stated this when I brought it up to her.

- Falsely advertising that the listing was a room in a family's home. The family did not live in the home, it was in fact a house with 6 AirBNB rooms. That one was also extremely hot all the time, with the temperature often in the high 80s and the window in the bedroom being non-openable (a fire hazard, in retrospect)

- Security cameras in the kitchen which the host could watch at any time. I don't like the idea of being watched while I'm in the unit. I have no problem with a security camera at the entrance, but in the unit is too much. As that was not disclosed in the listing, I made sure to point out the existence of the cameras in my review.

Aside from those four experiences, I've had excellent experiences with AirBNBs - there have been many more positive experiences than negative ones. The best one I stayed in had a cat, and the cat was very fond of me for some reason.

[lio45]

The best one I stayed in had a cat, and the cat was very fond of me for some reason.So cute :) That would be a big plus for my gf and I while traveling (we love cats, but don't bring them with us obviously).

Those cleaning charges are total bullshit. I had no idea some people did this. My Airbnbs are actually fully runs like real hotels, my buddy who runs them has his employees who change the bed sheets, make the beds, clean the dishes and mugs, clean the bathrooms, refill toilet paper and soap/shampoo, etc. It's built in the price of the stay and there's no other charge for anything (AFAIK).

Contrary to most here, I've actually never been a user of Airbnb, only a supplier of them. So I realize I don't actually know how most of them are run -- just mine.

[whatnext]

Yeah, no generation prior to Gen Z ever demanded cheap accommodations or airfare anywhere in the world at any given time. Can't think of anyone asides from them that do that. Nevermind people who for decades have had second winter homes in the southern USA, or go on annual retreats to wealthy inclusive-resorts in otherwise destitute Caribbean countries, or yearly trips on cruise ships. How dare Gen Z want to do something without being chastised.

You conveniently forgot my point that Ma & Pa Kettle taking the RV down from Lethbridge to Arizona every year never claimed to be trying to save the world from climate change.

[Wigs]

So cute :) That would be a big plus for my gf and I while traveling (we love cats, but don't bring them with us obviously).

Those cleaning charges are total bullshit. I had no idea some people did this. My Airbnbs are actually fully runs like real hotels, my buddy who runs them has his employees who change the bed sheets, make the beds, clean the dishes and mugs, clean the bathrooms, refill toilet paper and soap/shampoo, etc. It's built in the price of the stay and there's no other charge for anything (AFAIK).

Contrary to most here, I've actually never been a user of Airbnb, only a supplier of them. So I realize I don't actually know how most of them are run -- just mine.

that's the way it should be!

By your traumatic stories that you and your gf have went through, why don't you go on a nice vacation? Everyone needs a break from the mundanity of life. What's the point of earning large sums of money if you never enjoy yourself?

[Wigs]

Although I stated I'm pro-AirBNB, I do have some complaints about some of the ones I've stayed in:

- No check-in process. The second time I used AirBNB - ironically in Old Montreal just a few blocks from last week's fire - I got to the property and there was no way to get in. The doorbell didn't work and nobody answered the phone at the number in the listing. It took 3-4 hours to reach someone to get let in - and this was at the tail end of a snowstorm.

- Falsely advertising that the listing had two rooms when it was in fact one. I had specifically booked that place as I was bringing a friend and we wanted separate rooms for each of us. The host seemed unaware that her own listing stated this when I brought it up to her.

- Falsely advertising that the listing was a room in a family's home. The family did not live in the home, it was in fact a house with 6 AirBNB rooms. That one was also extremely hot all the time, with the temperature often in the high 80s and the window in the bedroom being non-openable (a fire hazard, in retrospect)

- Security cameras in the kitchen which the host could watch at any time. I don't like the idea of being watched while I'm in the unit. I have no problem with a security camera at the entrance, but in the unit is too much. As that was not disclosed in the listing, I made sure to point out the existence of the cameras in my review.

Aside from those four experiences, I've had excellent experiences with AirBNBs - there have been many more positive experiences than negative ones. The best one I stayed in had a cat, and the cat was very fond of me for some reason.

The no check in or improper check in process is annoying AF.
Encountered this issue with my best friend in Toronto pre-pandemic. We were staying right on Bloor near Christie Pits park, in a small older rental building and had to contact the owner to get the key. It took 3-4 hours to finally get into the place as well!
And the apartment was hot as hell with 2 box fans and not enough windows.
In our case we paid for the location and not much else.

False advertising and cameras sound even worse!

[MonkeyRonin]

Minor disagreement there; If New York and Hong Kong can continue to build taller and taller buildings in Manhattan and Central, then I think every Canadian city has a long long way to go before there's any restriction on the amount of space.


New York and Hong Kong are actually great examples of how construction isn't something that's easily scalable in a practical way. As space is taken up, land values rise, and the only way for a development to justify the cost of the land is to build very tall and/or very high-end. Unfortunately, supertalls (especially ones in crowded urban settings) require complex engineering & logistics, and are just about the most costly form of construction on a PSF basis - and so the units are priced accordingly. As density increases, therefore so too must prices. This isn't necessarily a bad thing when it happens in limited high-demand geographies, but it certainly shouldn't be the goal of our housing policy. 

New York also has a lot more heritage protections and other regulations, and builds proportionately less than we do. I'm not sure where this idea of Canadian cities not building anything or being anti-development came from, when in reality Canada is probably the most development-friendly country in the western world. We have some bad zoning rules and the approvals process can take too long in many cities, but the construction industry is still firing on all cylinders and delivering hundreds of thousands of new units every year (again, proportionately much more than the US and likely most other western countries). 




Also, AirBnBs, just like investor-owned rentals, are not an inefficient allocation of resources. They're productive in the economy in their own way since if they're lucrative for those investing in them then they're clearly economically viable, so I wouldn't just casually throw them away as an inefficient allocation of resources. Is building a hotel instead of a condo building inefficient? I think it's probably better for the economy if housing units had more usage flexibility so instead of only allowing a building to be a hotel or a condo building let it potentially be both! :D


Good lord, where do I even begin with this one. Real estate is the worst allocation of capital. Speculation is an inherently predatory practice (as it necessitates reducing the buying power of others by bidding up the cost of their basic necessity of shelter to profit), but is also the least efficient way to optimize economic efficiency & innovation, as it grows debt, diverts spending away from other sectors, and investment dollars away from more innovative businesses. It enriches a few, at the expense of everyone else. There's a reason why Canada's is the worst-performing economy in the OECD and it's because real estate is such a big part of our economy: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-why-canadas-economic-growth-is-expected-to-be-dead-last-among-advanced/

[MonkeyRonin]

- Security cameras in the kitchen which the host could watch at any time. I don't like the idea of being watched while I'm in the unit. I have no problem with a security camera at the entrance, but in the unit is too much. As that was not disclosed in the listing, I made sure to point out the existence of the cameras in my review.


That's definitely illegal and should have been reported directly to AirBnB.

[chowhou]

New York and Hong Kong [...]

Again, not talking about housing policy, just the fact that any Canadian city would have to grow 10x the size to have the same land constraints as New York or Hong Kong, both of which are still growing despite those constraints.

Good lord, where do I even begin with this one. Real estate is the worst allocation of capital. Speculation is an inherently predatory practice (as it necessitates reducing the buying power of others by bidding up the cost of their basic necessity of shelter to profit), but is also the least efficient way to optimize economic efficiency & innovation, as it grows debt, diverts spending away from other sectors, and investment dollars away from more innovative businesses. It enriches a few, at the expense of everyone else. There's a reason why Canada's is the worst-performing economy in the OECD and it's because real estate is such a big part of our economy: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-why-canadas-economic-growth-is-expected-to-be-dead-last-among-advanced/

I used to believe this, but I don't really quite follow how it makes sense anymore. Real estate investment does not destroy capital. For every purchaser there is an equal and opposite seller receiving that capital who is free to reinvest it; For every renter there is an equal and opposite leaser receiving the rent who is free to reinvest it. Capital is not "locked into" real estate in a way that prevents that capital from flowing through the economy, it's just a fairly illiquid asset.

Debt is not bad for economic growth (in fact the opposite) I don't know if there's such thing as "diverting spending" when capital is not destroyed.

You can definitely make the argument that high real estate prices promote economic inequality, but I don't think you can make the argument that high real estate prices are a bad use of capital.

[suburbanite]

I used to believe this, but I don't really quite follow how it makes sense anymore. Real estate investment does not destroy capital. For every purchaser there is an equal and opposite seller receiving that capital who is free to reinvest it; For every renter there is an equal and opposite leaser receiving the rent who is free to reinvest it. Capital is not "locked into" real estate in a way that prevents that capital from flowing through the economy, it's just a fairly illiquid asset.



By this logic no investment is more economically productive than another simply based on the fact that someone ultimately received the money invested? Real estate is unproductive because it employs very few people (once constructed), produces almost no innovation, and sucks away capital that could otherwise be invested in areas that do achieve the former. Opportunity cost is the name of the game, and it's costing Canada its economic future.

By promoting a system that puts real estate on a pedestal compared to every other investment, you're heavily incentivising the people who do receive large capital injections from selling property, or monthly cash flows from renting, to just put that money back into real estate. Ultimately this is crowding out people who don't want to spend 60% of their income on their housing, who otherwise perhaps would have invested in a business or started their own but whose disposable income is now enslaved by the system we've created around a fundamental human need.

[chowhou]

By this logic no investment is more economically productive than another simply based on the fact that someone ultimately received the money invested? Real estate is unproductive because it employs very few people (once constructed), produces almost no innovation, and sucks away capital that could otherwise be invested in areas that do achieve the former. Opportunity cost is the name of the game, and it's costing Canada its economic future.

By promoting a system that puts real estate on a pedestal compared to every other investment, you're heavily incentivising the people who do receive large capital injections from selling property, or monthly cash flows from renting, to just put that money back into real estate. Ultimately this is crowding out people who don't want to spend 60% of their income on their housing, who otherwise perhaps would have invested in a business or started their own but whose disposable income is now enslaved by the system we've created around a fundamental human need.

Investments can be productive or unproductive for the individual and I agree that real estate investments don't seem to be as productive for the individual as other investments, but if the money is eventually flowing into other investments, that shouldn't matter in the broader perspective of the economy. Especially if it's not employing many people, the opportunity cost of capital taking a slight detour through a real estate transaction should be no worse than holding that same capital in cash for a couple months while finding another investment.

I'd say if someone owns a trucking business and they take 100% of the earnings and hide that money under their mattress for retirement, that's far worse for the economy than if someone buys a condo for an AirBnB and puts 100% of the earnings towards investing in local businesses.

[suburbanite]

Investments can be productive or unproductive for the individual and I agree that real estate investments don't seem to be as productive for the individual as other investments, but if the money is eventually flowing into other investments, that shouldn't matter in the broader perspective of the economy. Especially if it's not employing many people, the opportunity cost of capital taking a slight detour through a real estate transaction should be no worse than holding that same capital in cash for a couple months while finding another investment.

I'd say if someone owns a trucking business and they take 100% of the earnings and hide that money under their mattress for retirement, that's far worse for the economy than if someone buys a condo for an AirBnB and puts 100% of the earnings towards investing in local businesses.

The whole point is that they are not flowing into other investments. Canada as a nation disproportionately allocates our cumulative available capital into overpriced real estate. Your argument is basically that if the Government spent $1 billion on a bridge to nowhere in Nunavut instead of the new Windsor/Detroit bridge, the "broader economic perspective" is that it doesn't matter because the contractors involved still got $1 billion and can now invest that money back into the economy. It ignores the reality that available capital is finite and every dollar invested in one sector is a dollar not spent elsewhere that could've produced significantly more positive externalities.

If your going to use your example you need to compare someone reinvesting the profits of their business back into said business, vs. a landlord reinvesting into more real estate in a finite market.

[chowhou]

The whole point is that they are not flowing into other investments. Canada as a nation disproportionately allocates our cumulative available capital into overpriced real estate. Your argument is basically that if the Government spent $1 billion on a bridge to nowhere in Nunavut instead of the new Windsor/Detroit bridge, the "broader economic perspective" is that it doesn't matter because the contractors involved still got $1 billion and can now invest that money back into the economy. It ignores the reality that available capital is finite and every dollar invested in one sector is a dollar not spent elsewhere that could've produced significantly more positive externalities.

If your going to use your example you need to compare someone reinvesting the profits of their business back into said business, vs. a landlord reinvesting into more real estate in a finite market.

Sure, we can make that comparison. If the Canadian government were to spend $1 billion on a bridge to nowhere in the arctic and used basically no labour to do so or manufacturing capacity in Canada (real estate transactions take effectively no labour or resources), that would be zero ROI for the government but economic stimulus all the same. Not to try to bring outside politics into this, but in Canada we generally tend to side with the Keynesians that quantitative easing can be used to stimulate the economy, even though it's "unproductive".

Real estate investments are generally better since the dollars continue to circulate, and the individual at least has non-zero ROI.

I feel like underlying this discussion is a big disconnect between us over whether real estate is fairly priced or is a speculative bubble right now. I personally lean on the fairly priced side, but maybe you disagree there and think that real estate investors are pumping more and more money into a bubble.

[suburbanite]

Sure, we can make that comparison. If the Canadian government were to spend $1 billion on a bridge to nowhere in the arctic and used basically no labour to do so or manufacturing capacity in Canada (real estate transactions take effectively no labour or resources), that would be zero ROI for the government but economic stimulus all the same. Not to try to bring outside politics into this, but in Canada we generally tend to side with the Keynesians that quantitative easing can be used to stimulate the economy, even though it's "unproductive".

Real estate investments are generally better since the dollars continue to circulate, and the individual at least has non-zero ROI.

I feel like underlying this discussion is a big disconnect between us over whether real estate is fairly priced or is a speculative bubble right now. I personally lean on the fairly priced side, but maybe you disagree there and think that real estate investors are pumping more and more money into a bubble.

It's about the efficient allocation of capital and that holds true regardless even if real estate is fairly priced. A bridge to nowhere is not just zero ROI for the government. It's zero ROI for everyone who benefits from increased trade and freedom of movement with our most important neighbour to the south, and will not receive those benefits because of a poor allocation of a fixed amount of capital.

[WarrenC12]

The City of Vancouver has some pretty stringent requirements to get a Short-term Rental Licence ($109 a year) . They have an MoU with AirBnB to require that the Licence number is included in the listing. You can see the basis on which someone can get a licence here (https://vancouver.ca/doing-business/applying-for-short-term-rental-business-licence.aspx).

Yeah they have all that, now try and report an illegal one. It's impossible and the enforcement is non-existent.

[Changing City]

Yeah they have all that, now try and report an illegal one. It's impossible and the enforcement is non-existent.

You can supposedly report it here (https://van311.ca/services/short-term-rental2) (or call 311).

In 2021 908 casefiles were opened, 151 inspections carried out, 212 Licences were suspended or voluntarily closed due to non-compliance, and 8 cases were referred for prosecution.

[chowhou]

It's about the efficient allocation of capital and that holds true regardless even if real estate is fairly priced. A bridge to nowhere is not just zero ROI for the government. It's zero ROI for everyone who benefits from increased trade and freedom of movement with our most important neighbour to the south, and will not receive those benefits because of a poor allocation of a fixed amount of capital.

I think your reasoning is flawed because once the government uses its available capital that capital is gone for the government. So you're right, the government has squandered the potential investment of its fixed capital. The government is the only real authority to construct critical infrastructure in Canada so that's definitely a lost opportunity cost. For private individuals and organizations though, misallocation of capital doesn't cause it to disappear, it just becomes available to whoever it is given to.

If the government blows a billion dollars on a bad infrastructure project, that's a billion dollars that cannot be used for infrastructure improvements.
If a private entity blows a billion dollars on a bad investment, that's a billion dollars another private entity now has (probably minus some tax kickbacks to the government, good right?) that can be used for another investment.

[lio45]

that's the way it should be!

By your traumatic stories that you and your gf have went through, why don't you go on a nice vacation? Everyone needs a break from the mundanity of life. What's the point of earning large sums of money if you never enjoy yourself?Lol. You're not the first one to ask me this exact question.

I almost went on a little vacation just now (couple weeks in coastal FL) but since I'm selfless, I'm sending my parents instead; they're leaving in a couple days. (Someone has to go take care of some business there -- but it's still partly a vacation.)

[MonkeyRonin]

Again, not talking about housing policy, just the fact that any Canadian city would have to grow 10x the size to have the same land constraints as New York or Hong Kong, both of which are still growing despite those constraints.


Of course we have room to grow, but how is that relevant? The point is that if housing is being built, but a significant proportion of that is being used for investment/airbnb purposes instead of it's actual intended use as housing, then even more housing needs to be built, which is both inefficient and drives prices up further than they would otherwise need to; and that the free market cannot just infinitely provide further supply to meet theoretically infinite demand due to multiple real-world physical constraints (of which space is just one).



I used to believe this, but I don't really quite follow how it makes sense anymore. Real estate investment does not destroy capital. For every purchaser there is an equal and opposite seller receiving that capital who is free to reinvest it; For every renter there is an equal and opposite leaser receiving the rent who is free to reinvest it. Capital is not "locked into" real estate in a way that prevents that capital from flowing through the economy, it's just a fairly illiquid asset.


This is such a simplistic take on economics. Just because money is being spent does not mean equal value will be derived from it, regardless of what it is being spent on. Put simply, there are more productive and less productive uses of money, and real estate is one of the less productive ones, as it encourages rent-seeking behaviour instead of real wealth growth.

Canada also has a greater share of its wealth tied up in real estate than any other developed country does, which makes our economy more volatile and susceptible to swings in the market. As is the case anywhere, the more diversified the economy, the more resilient it is. But don't take my word for it - as I noted before, the OECD predicts that Canada will be one of the worst economic performers for the next several decades (https://bcbc.com/insights-and-opinions/oecd-predicts-canada-will-be-the-worst-performing-advanced-economy-over-the-next-decade-and-the-three-decades-after-that), in no small part due to our low-productivity, heavily real estate-focused economy; while Oxford Economics warns that Canada's over-reliance on real estate is putting us at a greater risk of economic crisis (https://financialpost.com/executive/executive-summary/canada-housing-crash-bank-crisis-risk).

[Wigs]

Lol. You're not the first one to ask me this exact question.

I almost went on a little vacation just now (couple weeks in coastal FL) but since I'm selfless, I'm sending my parents instead; they're leaving in a couple days. (Someone has to go take care of some business there -- but it's still partly a vacation.)

Taking care of business is not a vacation :facepalm:
You have to unplug from work

[MolsonExport]

that's the way it should be!

By your traumatic stories that you and your gf have went through, why don't you go on a nice vacation? Everyone needs a break from the mundanity of life. What's the point of earning large sums of money if you never enjoy yourself?

https://prod-images.tcm.com/v5cache/TCM/Images/Dynamic/i516/christmascarol51_jacobmarley_fc_470x264_112220190849.jpg?w=400

[niwell]

Of course we have room to grow, but how is that relevant? The point is that if housing is being built, but a significant proportion of that is being used for investment/airbnb purposes instead of it's actual intended use as housing, then even more housing needs to be built, which is both inefficient and drives prices up further than they would otherwise need to; and that the free market cannot just infinitely provide further supply to meet theoretically infinite demand due to multiple real-world physical constraints (of which space is just one).



To further this point I think it's important to look at the type of housing airbnb is replacing. As mentioned before I don't think short term rentals are the cause of Toronto's housing crisis, or even a major factor compared to the use of real estate as an investment vehicle. But a lot of the housing we'd consider affordable in central areas - small apartments and places verging on but not quite SROs (buildings with lots of small units) is what's being used for airbnbs. Even if all regulations were thrown out the window I can't see this type of housing being replaced at anywhere near the rate it needs to be. Now look at smaller centres that experience high levels of tourism but little economic/population growth - it's easy to see how the market gets massively distorted.

Of course on the other end of the spectrum we have stuff like ICE condos - two massive towers that are seemingly predominantly Airbnb. To the point where the condo board has an exclusivity deal for listing and takes a cut of the listing fees! Who is this benefiting exactly? Constant complaints from people who actually want to live in their units and from the City's perspective it's just another condo - not a commercial building with a much higher usage rate. I'm not sure how anyone can say this is an efficient use of resources.




This is such a simplistic take on economics. Just because money is being spent does not mean equal value will be derived from it, regardless of what it is being spent on. Put simply, there are more productive and less productive uses of money, and real estate is one of the less productive ones, as it encourages rent-seeking behaviour instead of real wealth growth.



Indeed.

Also not clear how someone can claim that any form or real estate investment is economically productive, yet also think that the housing crisis can be solved simply by allowing more permissive zoning (which again, I think is only a small part of the issue). These seem like contradictory statements to me - if the viability of real estate investment hinges on policy decisions then it seems maybe not the most productive/efficient investment.

[suburbanite]

The problem with the argument as well is that it ignores the reality of real estate as a fundamental human need and not just a paper investment. Despite our incentivization of real estate investing, the vast majority of residential product is still owned by those who occupy it. Any proceeds on a transaction for those properties is not some free and clear cash flow to be used for something more productive. A substantial portion of it has to be used for replacement, unlike an equity investment which we do not require to keep us warm in the winter...

That is what is meant by capital being tied up in the system. Everyone needs it, our incomes our fixed, and so the more expensive it becomes relative to incomes, the less money we collectively have to spend on things that produce far more positive externalities through job creation and innovation.

[lio45]

Taking care of business is not a vacation :facepalm:
You have to unplug from workThat's an unrealistically high standard for calling something a vacation, IMO :P

Don't worry so much for me. If I ever feel like I need a Wigs-style vacation, I'll take one ;)

[lio45]

suburbanite is fully correct (and some others too). It's unarguable that our addiction to real estate as a safe and reliable investment is harming our competitiveness, innovation, and general economy. I've actually witnessed many real life examples (all "small cuts" at the scale of the economy, yet still net harm). I'm even one myself: having been burned a couple times by business ventures that turned out to be not anywhere near as solid as the model of collecting rent from decently urban brick-and-mortar in an environment of continued Human QE / population Ponzi Scheme (there are billions of people in "shithole countries" who can potentially contribute to Justinflating rents here even more), I'm not participating too much in the economy anymore (proportionally). I know several others who are in the exact same situation. Basically, "spoiled" by real estate, so all other investments just sound unbearably risky; "uh, you could actually lose money with this!!!" is a deal-breaker.

[suburbanite]

suburbanite is fully correct (and some others too). It's unarguable that our addiction to real estate as a safe and reliable investment is harming our competitiveness, innovation, and general economy. I've actually witnessed many real life examples (all "small cuts" at the scale of the economy, yet still net harm). I'm even one myself: having been burned a couple times by business ventures that turned out to be not anywhere near as solid as the model of collecting rent from decently urban brick-and-mortar in an environment of continued Human QE / population Ponzi Scheme (there are billions of people in "shithole countries" who can potentially contribute to Justinflating rents here even more), I'm not participating too much in the economy anymore (proportionally). I know several others who are in the exact same situation. Basically, "spoiled" by real estate, so all other investments just sound unbearably risky; "uh, you could actually lose money with this!!!" is a deal-breaker.

Another fun question. How many people do you employ in the managing of your real estate portfolio compared to the other "real" business ventures (which I assume are smaller in overall enterprise value)?

[Wigs]

That's an unrealistically high standard for calling something a vacation, IMO :P

Don't worry so much for me. If I ever feel like I need a Wigs-style vacation, I'll take one ;)

Like the Trooper song "We're here for a good time, not a long time..." :cheers:

3Oedw2ENdX8

[Wigs]

https://prod-images.tcm.com/v5cache/TCM/Images/Dynamic/i516/christmascarol51_jacobmarley_fc_470x264_112220190849.jpg?w=400

Unlike Lio, Ebenezer didn't even pay people to take care of his geriatric arse.
Lio is more like Charles Montgomery Plantagenet Schicklgruber "Monty" Burns :haha:

https://media.giphy.com/media/l2JefFAsp0mxfzdn2/giphy.gif

[whatnext]

If politicians think we're in a "housing crisis" why do we even allow AirBnB?

'This is a very serious issue': Growing concerns over illegal Airbnb listings flooding the Vancouver market
Kevin Charach
CTV News Vancouver Multi-Media Journalist
Published July 24, 2023 6:58 p.m. PDT

City Councillor Lenny Zhou says he's working with staff to figure out just how many illegal short-term rental units are operating in Vancouver.

"Some people are actually not using their principal residence, (they're) using their investment unit as a short-term rental. That's not right," Zhou told CTV News. "This is a very serious issue. For one, our city is experiencing a housing crisis and some people are taking advantage of the system and trying to make some money using some illegal short-term rental."

Under City of Vancouver regulations, you need a valid business licence to operate a short-term rental, and it’s illegal to operate a short-term rental that isn’t your principal residence.

According to city staff, there are 4,084 active listings for short-term rentals in Vancouver. So far in 2023, 132 licenses have been suspended, 120 violation tickets were issued and 54 units were flagged for investigations and audits.

The current fine is $1,000 per violation, the maximum allowed under provincial law. Zhou believes that needs to change.

"This is too low," said Zhou. "For short-term rentals you could probably make up the money in 2-3 days."

Zhou couldn't provide an estimate of how many illegal units are operating, but says his research has returned some eye-opening figures.

“There was one strata building – so they have 233 units, but what they told me is they have 30 illegal short-term rentals in one building. That’s more than 10 per cent,” said Zhou, adding they're still verifying those numbers....

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/this-is-a-very-serious-issue-growing-concerns-over-illegal-airbnb-listings-flooding-the-vancouver-market-1.6492769?cid=sm%3Atrueanthem%3Actvvancouver%3Atwitterpost&taid=64bf33bde6315400010b9c11&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

[Truenorth00]

What I don't get is why municipal authorities don't hang a team tracking STR violations full time. They could pay for themselves many times over.

[WarrenC12]

What I don't get is why municipal authorities don't hang a team tracking STR violations full time. They could pay for themselves many times over.

Agree 100%. Vancouver has very reasonable STR rules on paper. Then they hand out licenses like candy and there is zero enforcement.

[O-tacular]

An interesting Airbnb in Calgary. I'd stay there.

https://dailyhive.com/calgary/soccer-ball-house-calgary

https://images.dailyhive.com/20230627084412/Collage-Maker-27-Jun-2023-09-44-AM-6664.jpg

https://images.dailyhive.com/20230627084500/R5CS1102.jpg

https://images.dailyhive.com/20230627084859/R5CS1251.jpg

[Truenorth00]

Quebec is forcing Airbnb to remove all listings not specifically authorized by the province.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/airbnb-listings-permits-quebec-government-1.6789949

Why can't other provinces do this?

[whatnext]

Quebec is forcing Airbnb to remove all listings not specifically authorized by the province.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/airbnb-listings-permits-quebec-government-1.6789949

Why can't other provinces do this?

Good on Quebec! Hopefully this puts pressure on other provinces to do the same.

[lio45]

Quebec is forcing Airbnb to remove all listings not specifically authorized by the province.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/airbnb-listings-permits-quebec-government-1.6789949

Why can't other provinces do this?Not sure how much it’s been in the news but as an “industry insider”, I can confirm that the Legault government basically took Airbnb’s Quebec operations behind the shed and put a bullet in its head. (In reaction to several burned cadavers. We’re a very reactive culture here; takes a major disaster for any change to get implemented.).

Airbnb has basically ceased to exist in this province; it’s like we’re back in 2005.

[big T]

Not sure how much it’s been in the news but as an “industry insider”, I can confirm that the Legault government basically took Airbnb’s Quebec operations behind the shed and put a bullet in its head. (In reaction to several burned cadavers. We’re a very reactive culture here; takes a major disaster for any change to get implemented.).

Airbnb has basically ceased to exist in this province; it’s like we’re back in 2005.

Really? we recently rented a chalet and there seemed to be lots of listings still. But it wasn't too long after the old mtl fire, maybe it's declined a lot in the few weeks-months since.

Or did you mean in the sense of AirBnB corporate retaliating by pulling jobs out of Quebec? I seem to remember they had a decently sized presence here after buying out some local niche player (I think Luxury Retreats?)

[lio45]

Really? we recently rented a chalet and there seemed to be lots of listings still. But it wasn't too long after the old mtl fire, maybe it's declined a lot in the few weeks-months since.

Or did you mean in the sense of AirBnB corporate retaliating by pulling jobs out of Quebec? I seem to remember they had a decently sized presence here after buying out some local niche player (I think Luxury Retreats?)It fell off a cliff overnight on the exact day Airbnb finally started to comply with the new rules (and purged like 90% of their ads), which IIRC was somewhere in the spring, a little while after the Old Mtl fire -- which was the trigger, but the direct effect wasn't implemented immediately.

Everyone I know who used to Airbnb their rental buildings has stopped, overnight. They tell me it's basically over for Airbnb here (and have reverted to other types of rental, month to month or yearly, outside Airbnb's platform).

So, yep, if there's a will, it can happen.

Airbnb still lives in Quebec as a platform that allows individual owners to rent their own residence on the occasions they're away, but it ceased to exist as a means for landlords to get more income from rental properties.

[someone123]

Airbnb still lives in Quebec as a platform that allows individual owners to rent their own residence on the occasions they're away, but it ceased to exist as a means for landlords to get more income from rental properties.

It would be pretty easy to say that only primary residences can be listed on Airbnb.

So a Canadian family born in and living in China would only be able to rent out, say, a sensible $80M of Vancouver real estate. One mansion for the husband, one for the estranged homemaker, one for each student child, etc.

[lio45]

It would be pretty easy to say that only primary residences can be listed on Airbnb.

So a Canadian family born in and living in China would only be able to rent out, say, a sensible $80M of Vancouver real estate. One mansion for the husband, one for the estranged homemaker, one for each student child, etc.Quebec is actually very aggressive with the rules, it wouldn't work. To list a Quebec property on Airbnb, you need a certificate from the municipality in which the property is located, and to get that, you need to show docs proving that you actually live there. Also a cap could easily be set: if you rent it on Airbnb more than half the time, clearly you're a fraud, as it cannot be your "primary" residence -- you're not there "most of the time".

I'm not surprised by your reaction because here in Canada we're usually pretty stupid about enforcing our in-spirit rules ("as an unemployed homemaker who gets the GST credits and reports $0 in yearly income, I'm selling this mansion right after switching my personal mail to getting sent there for 366 days in a row and pocketing several million entirely tax free", etc.), but in the case of Airbnb in Quebec, the provincial government is very serious about it and they actually have an army of inspectors that check everything, and fines are high enough that it's absolutely not worth it.

As others said earlier, if governments want to be serious about this, it's easy: just set really high fines, and no landlords will be Airbnb'ing anything anymore. Quebec just demonstrated it. QED

[someone123]

Caring about fixing an issue and seeing it as an opportunity to collect political points are often two separate things. If you don't care or don't want something fixed then it's often best to implement a rule with a loophole and claim the problem is fixed. This is particularly true when fixing the problem would come with some personal or political cost.

One factor here is probably the media who often cover things superficially (regurgitating legal changes is easy while fully investigating the impact is hard) and sometimes operate as mouthpieces for one party or another.

[harls]

An interesting Airbnb in Calgary. I'd stay there.

https://dailyhive.com/calgary/soccer-ball-house-calgary

https://images.dailyhive.com/20230627084412/Collage-Maker-27-Jun-2023-09-44-AM-6664.jpg

https://images.dailyhive.com/20230627084500/R5CS1102.jpg

https://images.dailyhive.com/20230627084859/R5CS1251.jpg

https://destiny.wiki.gallery/images/thumb/5/59/Cabal-pod-final.jpg/1600px-Cabal-pod-final.jpg

[whatnext]

Some details on the AirBnB cancer in Vancouver. Funny how the foreign money and AirBnB come together to screw those Canadians looking for housing:

Vancouver short-term rentals have become 'mini-hotel' businesses, critic says
One listing mentions two "mortgage-helpers," which the agent quietly touts as bringing over $19,000 a month in revenue as short-term rentals
Author of the article: Joanne Lee-Young
Published Aug 02, 2023

On West 28th Avenue in the Riley Park area of Vancouver, a laneway house and basement suite are marketed as short-term rentals on Booking.com.

The entire 3,600-square-foot property, including the main house, is for sale, asking price $5.388 million.

The listing describes the one-bedroom laneway house and the three-bedroom basement suite as “mortgage helpers,” and when visitors tour the property, the agent quietly touts the two as bringing over $19,000 a month in revenue as short-term rentals....

...Visitors to a recent showing of the West 28th property with the laneway house and basement suite pointed out the listing to Postmedia, as well as the stark contrast between the revenue potential of this property, at $19,000 a month, and that of a nearby laneway house geared toward long-term tenants, at $3,650 a month, plus utilities.

Layla Yang of Dracco Pacific Realty said the $5.388 million asking price of the West 28th property was based on comparable sales that took into consideration its location, its newer condition and ability to generate high income.

She described the owner of the property as a single parent who has been using the proceeds from the short-term rentals to raise her family...(bold mine)

https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/vancouver-short-term-rentals-mini-hotel-businesses-critic

[UnderwoodJasmine]

I'm pretty new to this forum, but I couldn't resist jumping into this discussion. Reading all your thoughts on the Airbnb debate is quite enlightening! I totally get where Suburbanite is coming from. Real estate has long been seen as a "safe bet" for investments, but it's true that this can have consequences for our economy and innovation.

[AronGlower]

I've seen friends and even experienced it myself – getting a bit "spoiled" by the idea of steady rental income from urban properties. But let me tell you, there's a whole world out there beyond real estate. I used to be in a similar boat, hesitant to explore other investment opportunities. Then, I decided to take a leap and check out some alternatives. Speaking of alternatives, if you ever find yourself in Amsterdam, you should definitely explore the city's best hotels and accommodations. Trust me; it's a whole new experience! The best hotels in Amsterdam (https://thishotel.com/amsterdam/) offer a unique blend of culture, comfort, and adventure. It's a fantastic way to diversify your investments, in a sense – investing in memorable experiences rather than just brick-and-mortar.