Hacker News Reader

Sounds like much of the problem would go away with better labeling and categorization. Some people want the get-to-know-your-host experience, some people want the impersonal experience, and some people might want either one depending on the nature of the trip. The problem arises when you expect one and get the other.

I guess I don't understand why people looking for an impersonal experience don't just book a hotel - or even a motel. At least then you are guaranteed certain things such as working showers and toilets.

Some people are cheap, and use airbnb just as a way to spend less money.

Prime example: my girlfriend. We can both easily afford a normal hotel room, especially when traveling together. But in an expensive city, spending $80/night on an airbnb instead of $200/night on a proper hotel, is to her an irresistible savings. We've had bad experiences, and we've had fights about this. There may also be cultural differences. I have a high salary, no debts, and lots of savings, and there are some things which I think are absolutely worth paying for (like a hotel room), and she just doesn't want me to.

Yeah, I understand. I suppose to old adage holds true then: you get what you pay for. The cost savings from booking an AirBnB over a hotel is increased risk that you may have a shitty experience with no recourse. Whereas with a hotel, the experience is a lot more consistent (since hotels are regulated), and if you do have a shitty experience, you have official channels through which you can get compensated.

Definitely. Though to be fair, I was looking at it from the perspective of a hotel alternative, not for Bed and Breakfast - so my results are more indicative of what I think is appropriate in terms of branding.

Aside from the fact that if you market it as such, it loses literally billions in valuation. Airbnb cannot become just a middleman for bed and breakfasts because its investors would rather fail at being a replacement for Hilton/Marriott than settling for a small time bed and breakfast purveyor.

Aside from the fact that if you market it as such, it loses literally billions in valuation.

Therein lies the rub. What a consumer receives may be materially different than what investors and the company thinks it should be.

AirBnB is a reputation-based but otherwise largely unregulated marketplace for nightly accommodation.

Simple as that, I don't know why so many people seem to be tearing their hair out over what it is and what that means.

They are actually fairly heavily regulated, but they choose to ignore that regulation. The majority of their listings are in cities where they are illegal.

Slightly unrelated: I host interesting folk in NYC for free. Have you considered trying out Couchsurfing instead?

I stayed in a house in nice residential neighborhood in Berkeley recently. It had four bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a kitchen, and it was clear the owner didn't live there. In fact, I never saw the owner or spoke with him at all. We were instructed to not speak to the neighbors, and not answer any questions about the owner's Airbnb business. Clearly, the neighbors weren't pleased that an unregulated hotel had sprung up in the middle of their neighborhood.

On the other hand, it cost me $60/night versus the $250+/night charged by local 3-star hotels.

> the thing that you find from a hotel is completely lacking with AirBnB: Consistency

AirBnB isn't an alternative to a hotel, it's an alternative to a booking agency. That's like calling Booking.com inconsistent because you can rent a room at varying levels of hotels.

There are good hotels and bad hotels, and you cannot always know what you're going to get when booking a hotel room sight unseen, either.

Maybe I should clarify...it's an alternative to hotels.com

The difference however is that there is a minimum standard I am getting with all the properties listed at hotels.com, in that there is a consistent check in/out process, there are always options for accessibility, there is a person I can call 24/7 at every location if there is something wrong with the room etc...

It's no secret that the general thought around AirBnB is that it is an alternative to booking a hotel, please don't pretend that isn't the case. That's the entire valuation thesis.

"hotel" is defined, by law in most jurisdictions, to have certain properties, regardless of quality or level. AirBnB listings have very few of these properties as part of the definition.

> should people be looking at AirBnB as a direct replacement for hotels? Obviously that is the operating thesis, but I think a better way to consider AirBnB is as a marketplace for Bed and Breakfast accommodations

I think you're overlooking a very large group of people for whom "hotel" and "bed and breakfast" are fully synonymous terms.

I've never used AirBnB, but presumably the electrical safety problems are things that you can highlight in your review, and will inform future guests?

(I've stayed in hotels with very dodgy electrics, so I don't think this is necessarily an AirBnB-only problem)

I've stayed at a couple AirBnbs that were pretty bad - including an obvious bedbug infestation at one of them.

Both of the AirBnbs came with plenty of rave reviews and had a high average star rating, and all had a good number of reviews to boot.

Either the typical AirBnb guest has really low standards - where 4 walls that didn't collapse on them in their sleep is an automagic 5-star rating - or there's something fishy going on with them reviews.

Did anything come of the bedbugs? I'd be so paranoid about bringing them with me that I'd find any alternative - friends, hostel, expensive last minute real hotel.

Maybe your experience was caused by NYC? I find it quite good except big cities such as NY and London

Perhaps, though one was in the heart of LA, so I don't know if that in and of itself is an issue - I think volume is the bigger issue and whether the room/place is used exclusively for AirBnB listing or if it is legitimately just part of the owner's lifestyle.