undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrchaud7y ago0 comments

Building more units might push down rent, but that assumes that the increase in housing supply won't be offset by owners who will simply convert those new units into more Airbnbs.

If landlords think short-term rentals are better for business than lease-based tenancy, then the amount of housing that would need to be built is much higher than demand.

Hopefully some regulation will be enacted as a result of this study but I won't hold my breath. Way too much money to be made by banks and RE agents in artificially restricting supply.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

dkhenry7y ago· 2 in thread

Its only as high as the amount of demand for _both_ of those things. It may be that landlords convert some percentage of units into short term rental units, but even that has a limited return on investment. There are only so many people that are going occupy those short term rentals, so even if you kept the price of them the same the decrease in occupancy is going to hurt enough to limit the total number of units going onto that market.

93873677y ago

> Its only as high as the amount of demand for _both_ of those things.

What if it's in a major international tourist destination?

Consultant324527y ago

It doesn't matter. If you doubled the number of housing units in New York City you'd crash the real estate market there. It would suddenly become laughably cheap to live there. Even if they all became Airbnbs competition for tenants would drive prices for those short term rentals to basically zero. And if you don't believe it for doubling the housing units, try tripling, or 20x. Don't let me hamper your imagination.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse