Show HN: Short-term rental estimate for sites like Airbnb
eliotandme.com
eliotandme.com
https://www.eliotandme.com/estimator?address=white+house%20&...
PS: And yes this is a parody.
> We regret to announce that the "White House Overnight Guest Program" will no longer continue under the Trump Administration due to the repeal of the Obama Administration's openness and transparency doctrine. You are welcome, however, to make a reservation to stay at the 5-star Trump International Hotel just down the street.
The $400 a night is per double occupancy though, so really it's only $200 per head.
EDIT: Ok, it's a parody. Shame! :(
Make an actual argument with references to back it up and you'll likely still get argument, but not necesarrily downvotes.
That said, I agree, Obama didn't appear to run a very open administration. It appeared very secretive. Then again, the prosecuting of of people for leaked information rather than quiet pressure and sanctions is itself a form of transparency (it's also noted in that article that past presidents used many other techniques to pressure reporters instead of the legal system).
In the end, this is a complex enough topic that without a massive investment of time and effort, most arguments are going to have a hefty amount of opinion, making useful discussion hard. It doesn't help that we don't have an easy comparison with Trump's administration. In one respect, it's likely the most open administration there's ever been. I just don't think that's by design...
Actually I was implying that it may be seen that way, and even if you see it that way that doesn't fully explain what was going on.
> but since this is place a bastion of liberal Democrat support (as you put it)
Not true. There are some vocal Trump supporters here (out at least they were, they've been quiet of late). Unsupported statements are often called out on both sides. It may happen more for one side than the other, but that just means it's up to people like you to ask. If you can do it in a respectful way, you're part of the solution (and I suspect you'll get upvotes for it).
That's also a very vocal set of libertarians that are happy to explain or argue the finer points of their reasoning.
> but since this is place a bastion of liberal Democrat support (as you put it)
I don't think that really has any place in this discussion, but I'll humor you. No, I don't think they would. There are many Republicans working at Google. This is about a specific aspect of the company policy which happens to align with professed democratic principles. An employee publicly called that policy into question in a way that was easy for some to see as bigotry. That's a PR nightmare, and puts a spotlight on the company in a way they don't like, all because of one person. The PR nightmare alone is enough to cause the firing. Everything else just made the decision easier.
https://www.eliotandme.com/estimator?address=Westminster%2C+...
The price the website suggested was 120£.
I then went in to put an obscure address where there is no demand, and the price was $140/day. I've rented a hotel in the area for $30/day.
Of course, with an interest-only mortgage, yes one would need to be cash-flow positive, because there is no such thing as gaining equity. Again, my understanding is that such properties are extremely rare.
When I say you "always want a mortgage" I mean that if you have a mortgage you have your tenants paying for the house. Your cash on cash return is far higher. If your potential property doesn't support that, then find another property. Paying $200k cash for a house that nets $500 per month is far less interesting than buying 10 houses at $20k down that each net $200 per month -- and it takes exactly the same cash.
EDIT: Here's a fun Reddit thread on the topic:
https://www.reddit.com/r/RealEstate/comments/36ikp6/landlord...
Here's an example from that thread on how quickly the math takes you to roughly cash-flow neutral -- and this is with 25% down and 1% rental price:
https://www.reddit.com/r/RealEstate/comments/36ikp6/landlord...
However, I think that's unrealistic, I believe the demand for my house would be extremely low at that price point. My house is very appealing for residents, I don't see it being particularly appealing for travelers and there's cheaper options for travelers.
My neighborhood is zoned residential, however, so I seriously doubt turning it into a hotel would be legal. My neighbors would complain as well (and that's nothing against them)
[1] - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rCz54o_8Z_9fMkPQyTTZ...
Nice try, though.
Where are you getting that from? The price seems totally in line with what’s actually advertised for properties on Airbnb. I don’t know anything about Las Vegas rentals though.
Huh, I've always thought the WH was bigger than that.
I did a more basic analysis when looking at the most profitable Airbnb cities a few months back: https://www.travelstatsman.com/06022017/cities-airbnb-hosts-...
It's almost exactly that (within 10%) for the estimate of my house.
It is interesting how language morphs over time. Some people will be quite opposed to grammatical errors taking root.
But language has a tendency to not only accept those errors as dual-truths, but eventually replace those errors as sole truths!
This is to the point where "you and I" sounds stunted, overly formal and archaic, compared to "you and me", in my opinion.
"Eliot and me gave it to him," is not.
"He gave it to Eliot and I," would be an example of hypercorrection.
Wouldn't you be worried if it showed the exact numbers?
And before anyone jumps down my throat for this, it would be a social good in this particular market and help the local housing market (there is a surplus of housing and ample very affordable housing, the problem here is lack of jobs)
And if anyone thinks this would be a soft option, it would be a lot of work and a lot of responsibility and a lot of value added.