Hacker News Reader

Comment by YellowZeeZee | Hacker News Reader

The supply&demand issue does not turn what this company is doing into a "distraction", quite the opposite. Their "algorithm" has an outsize influence on the prices precisely because of the underlying housing crisis.

I put algorithm in quotes, because it's clearly just a facade in front of good ol' fashioned price collusion.

As the example in the article points out, replace the word "algorithm" with "a guy named Bob" and suddenly it doesn't sound so innocent to say: The companies controlling 90% of apartments in a neighborhood give all their data to Bob, and then Bob tells each one what to price their apartments. It's price collusion by proxy, pure and simple.

We shouldn't just ignore it because it's not the biggest cause of the price increases. Yes, we absolutely need to tackle the housing supply problem, but at the same time we need to stop companies like this from exploiting the crisis and driving prices up even further.

View on HN

> As the example in the article points out, replace the word "algorithm" with "a guy named Bob" and suddenly it doesn't sound so innocent....

And there's your gig-workforce and companies like Uber that figured out that replacing blatantly illegal stuff with "AlgOriThMS" somehow takes governments long times to untwine and figure out that they're illegal shills.

But the in-person businesses can't do such tactics. But some venture capital financed outlet can dump hundreds of scooters on public areas, and socialize their costs and privatize their gains.

And yes, the article shows that this is collusion through a third party. I don't give a shit if it's an 'algorithm', Bob, or a tarot reading. It's collusion, and anyone involved needs to suffer.. up to and including being awarded the apartment/house.

But, we know the worst that'll happen is some lawyers will get millions, and the plebes will get a check for $100 off their rent at participating renters.

Ending the crisis by creating housing supply is the way to stop exploiting the crisis.

If you stop "this one company" you'll just have someone else making profits and still have people homeless.

Not if the RICO act was used against them, and all rental properties are transferred to the renter in payment for fraud, conspiracy, interstate fraud, etc

Do you honestly think any other property owner would touch companies like this if this one popped like that?

I understand your frustrations. But nothing here is anywhere close to a RICO violation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corru...

Oh look, the DOJ Antitrust Division uses fraud/false statements laws "to fight illegal activities that arise from conduct accompanying antitrust violations..."[1]. To me this company looks like a $10.2B bet on prosecutorial discretion. Remarkable.

[1] https://www.justice.gov/atr/antitrust-laws-and-you

If the new supply uses the same algorithm, it does not solve the problem.

> Ending the crisis by creating housing supply is the way to stop exploiting the crisis.

> If you stop "this one company" you'll just have someone else making profits and still have people homeless.

And this new homes will be bought by ordinary people who for years paid inflated rents and have no real liquidity or corporations/landlords who have profited by renting and have more than enough cash to absorb any new properties that would become available on the market? Because grabbing them allows for a virtual monopoly on home ownership so people are forced to rent. And we have another cycle of capitalism.

The article notes that the software encourages landlords to maximize profitability by raising rents and reducing supply.

> RealPage claims its software will increase revenue and decrease vacancies. But at times the company has appeared to urge apartment owners and managers to reduce supply while increasing price.

Prosecute them for price collusion then prosecute every company after that tried the same thing.

“Oh no, someone is clearly doing something illegal, if only we could do anything about it”.

Also we could legislate that apartments must target >80% occupancy in dense areas or face penalties for overpricing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com