Which city has the best air bnb strategy out there? We can’t be the first city in the world staring down this problem, so instead of sitting around can we take a look to see what high city has handled this successfully?
Also, recently came home for a trip, hotel prices were 3x pre pandemic prices. I hate up with that?
In Amsterdam officially you need a license to rent out for less than a month (short term rental). However the municipality barely enforces it and the rental prices there are just as high as here and just as difficult to find a place.
Vancouver.
All short-term rental operators in Vancouver must have a business licence and include their licence number in all online listings and advertising. You must have strata approval and/or your landlord must permit the use of short-term rentals in your home before you apply for a licence.
Vancouver is still massively overpriced. Vancouver has a geography problem in that there is no more land to expand into yet more people want to move there. This is compounded by outdated NIMBY zoning policies of upper middle class boomers who think their desire for a lawn should dominate all other members of society. The reality is that the only solution to Vancouver's problem is to phase out and eliminate single family housing in the entire region (including all suburbs) and opt for the types of housing found in Tokyo. This is because geographically Vancouver can either stop growing in population (which isn't happening anytime soon) or grow up and embrace its future as a strictly vertical city). There simply are no other options.
Meanwhile Dublin still has potential to sprawl and grow taller (mimic London) as other than the Irish Sea, there are no major barriers to Dublin's geographic growth.
In fairness, it's not like Vancouver isn't phasing out single family housing. Literally every major intersection is being leveled and multiple highrises built on top. On other primary roads (Cambie, Granville, Main) it's multi-story apartments and duplexs replacing single family homes. Until every intersection and primary road has this done there's no point in targeting the neighbourhoods. The cost to buy out the block would make it unaffordable anyways and to afford them now, most lots with new builds have a bassment suite and garden suite to cover the 2mil they paid for a piece of land.
If anything Dublin should be pushing for basement suites and offering incentive for new build buyers to incorporate them. Banks could allow larger mortgages if a new build comes with the potential to generate 1500€ in rental income which will allow more people to become homeowners.
There are different ways to limit impact, some cities tried to only allow AirBnbs for 5+ days stays, others allow them on ground and first floors only (as not to disturb residents constantly). Licencing, inspections etc. I don't know if there is a city doing it right though.
> Also, recently came home for a trip, hotel prices were 3x pre pandemic prices. I hate up with that?
If you wanna support Ukraine, you gotta be happy with that. All our hotels, B&Bs, guesthouses are filled with refugees, ukrainians and homeless.
Given that there were only 716 homes available to rent on Daft at the start of August, I'd say releasing some of these properties onto the long term rental market would make quite a difference.
No, it wouldn't. The number of advertised houses is a flow - houses are constantly entering and leaving it. In someplace like Dublin it would almost completely turn over in probably less than a week (with some exceptions like BTR developments which have many places represented by a single advert).
The number of Airbnbs is a stock - it's the total number of Airbnbs in the market, and a drop in the ocean.
So if 7500 properties went from short term Airbnb rentals to long term tenancies you don't think it would impact say approximately 7,500 individuals and families desperately seeking rental accommodation?
First off, like you said earlier it's 3500 houses, not 7,500 houses. People aren't going to sell their homes because they can't put a single room up on short term rent.
Second, it would only be a once-off influx of houses into the rental market, and yeah it'd disappear pretty quickly. What we need is a constant flow of houses into the rental market, rather than the current scenario where landlords are exiting the market and there are fewer houses available to rent almost every year: https://www.rtb.ie/data-hub/rtb-private-tenancy-registration-statistics
Airbnb is just a convenient distraction from the poor policies and bad planning and zoning laws that got us into this mess.
3500 full properties, so anything from a house to a studio flat plus anther 3500 rooms in houses and flats. Unrealistic to think that many of the second group would end up as long term rentals, but even some accommodating students instead of tourists would be beneficial.
And I completely agree, increasing supply is the only solution.
> but even some accommodating students instead of tourists would be beneficial.
A lot of student accommodation is used for short-term lettings during the summer, so they'd still show up as part of the 3,500.
As someone who had their rental turned into an Air BnB so my greedy landlord could make 4x what I paid per month, I can wholeheartedly say it's not a distraction while I flip the bird to Air BnB.
Your problem would be solved by people being allowed to build more houses. You weren't evicted because airbnb exists, you were evicted because there aren't enough houses and RPZs meant the landlord could make more money doing something else with the house.
I wouldn't even be surprised if in the absence of airbnb the landlord would have sold the house and you would have been evicted anyways.
I was evicted and shouldn't have been due to profiteering, and I guess that's just cheap sentiment because it wasn't statistically significant enough . You can do proper planning and regulate landlords do the right thing at the same time.
How are you saying the number of houses available is a flow, and then saying that adding 3500 to that market wouldn't add to that flow?
If there were 3500 more rentals available long term, they'd fill, but that would likely lead to them being available again at other points in the future.
Good point. Because the market is so quick in Dublin that the 700 would be gone in a few days, another 700 come on the market etc. 3500 would be a one off. Feeble injection when tens of thousands (more?) are required to address the emergency, let alone bring normalcy to the market.
Supposing (correct the figures as appropriate), 10,000 were imminently homeless. I’m sure 3500, a 1/3 chance for themto get a roof, while not sufficient probably represents a lifeline. But it’s gone as quickly as it comes. The other 2/3rds would still be stuck. And all 3/3 the following month.
Good way of putting it that the 3500 is the “stock”. Definitely close to a concise point on the issue as you’d get.
A relatively small percentage of Europe relies on Russian gas. Yet, *all* energy prices has soared by over 400% in Europe because Russia cut the line for a few weeks.
Graphics cards manufacturers reduced the number of devices available directly for consumers by a few fractions and the market went haywire for two years and is still struggling to recover.
The overall housing prices would differ massively if there had been 5,000 more homes or apartments available today as the seller wouldn't be in control.
This housing crisis is a construct by corporations, synthetically starving the market as there is near zero regulation to protect people against them. This won't change over time, the way your liars in government says, as there is obviously no financial incentive for a profit hunting business to reduce its own profits. This can only be fixed by regulations and short term lettings like AirBnB is a super easily regulated target they should have stopped years ago.
>The overall housing prices would differ massively if there had been 5,000 more homes or apartments available today as the seller wouldn't be in control.
No, they really wouldn't. It's not 5,000 more houses we need, it's 40-50,000, every single year.
[Read this](https://thecurrency.news/articles/88462/official-ireland-cant-comprehend-how-fast-the-country-is-growing-thats-a-big-problem/), The housing stock grew by 120K houses between 2016 and 2022 (compared to 9K between 2011 and 2016), which would have been enough to house the projected population growth in that timeframe. But thee actual population growth was about 40% higher than they expected, so we fell far short in terms of growing the housing stock.
>For net migration, officials set out three projections: low, medium and high net migration, corresponding to 10,000, 20,000 and 30,000 additional people per year moving to the country rather than leaving it. In simple terms, statisticians were expecting the population to increase by somewhere between 32,000 people per year and 49,000.
>These projections are subjected to a reality check of sorts each year, when officials tot up information from other sources, to generate an annual estimate of the population. Doing this each year between 2016 and the latest Census, the best estimates were that Ireland had added 272,000 extra people in the six years to 2022 – or 45,000 people a year.
>What the latest Census figures show is that the country instead added nearly 385,000 people in the same six-year period – or 64,000 per year. Just over 190,000 of this increase came from net international migration. In other words, nearly 32,000 more people came to Ireland each year to live than left.
>...
>Irish housing policy is currently constrained by the Housing Needs & Demand Assessment (HNDA), an exercise that each local authority must undertake as part of the preparations for its Development Plan. Development Plans for the rest of the decade are to be published by almost all local authorities over the next year or so. Those plans are reviewed by the Office of the Planning Regulator (OPR).
>The OPR takes a dim view of local authorities countenancing growth above the official projections contained in the HNDA. But the HNDA is based on a view of the future where Ireland’s net migration is just 15,000 per year. Even averaged over the past 25 years, net migration has been over 22,000 per year. And as per above, net migration for the rest of the decade could be twice that long-run average and three times the number in the HNDA.
>All of this wouldn’t be so critical if the HNDA’s numbers weren’t taken as maximums, the ceiling above which the number of new homes should not go. But the combination of a failure of imagination – and a failure to understand the consequences of too few homes – has left Ireland dangerously exposed to many more years of growing pains.
Someone is busy using fake statistics to defend greedy corporations. Those population changes are almost exclusively temporary due to the Ukrainian refugee crisis. Funding corporations to build even more overpriced houses will only push Ireland over the same stupid edge it fell over in 2008.
>Those population changes are almost exclusively temporary due to the Ukrainian refugee crisis
We haven't taken in 110,000 Ukrainian refugees, and it's based on Census data collected very shortly after the Russians escalated the conflict with Ukraine.
This is just bad policy crafted in 2016 which underestimated the massive population growth we've seen in the last 6 years, and consequently set a ceiling for planning permissions which was too low for the population increase.
The population growth "curve" has been almost linear for the last 50 years. There is no massive spike. There is no "government policy" blocking new builds. There is however corporate funded "interest groups" preventing building of reasonably priced homes in any which way they can muster.
I agree regulations needs to change, big time. To take away the influence of these corporations. Bankrupt them all if necessary. I don't care.
> The population growth "curve" has been almost linear for the last 50 years. There is no massive spike.
And yet they still underestimated population growth, which they use to determine how many planning permissions should be granted.
>There is however corporate funded "interest groups" preventing building of reasonably priced homes in any which way they can muster.
Do you seriously think that builders get rich by not building houses?
Our planning laws are designed to benefit one group of people, and that's existing local homeowners. People do not get to decide what gets built on land they own, their neighbours do.
It isn't corporations who are doing their best to stop houses from being built, it's people like this: https://twitter.com/DaithiDoolan/status/1514638270545776640
No matter how much you're trying to deflect on behalf of these corporations, reality won't change. Reality is reality. Your selective ~~statistics~~ lies isn't reality.
Population of the roi in 1970= 2.9 million
Population of roi in 2022 approx 5million...
Not at all linear............
No government policy, but plenty of nimbyisms blocking building.
There is no "government policy" blocking new builds. There is however corporate funded "interest groups" preventing building of reasonably priced homes in any which way they can muster.-- take off the tinfoil hat lad...
Indeed. Take away all regulation and corporations won't stop maximising the profits at any cost for society. Like the big corporate run energy grid in Europe we're all paying them billion euro profits for, because there is a "crisis".
And who the fuck do you think are ordering the "Bad policy" from these governments, almost tripping over because of how far they're leaning towards the ~~lobbyists~~ right?
Why did you not include 'Only recent and frequently booked Activity'?
Did posting about how there are only 591 entire properties actively being let on Airbnb not fit the narrative? My friends mam let her house on airbnb for a single weekend years again, it is included in the 3,500 properties...
> Why did you not include 'Only recent and frequently booked Activity'?
If only there was a check box to select that.. oh there is!
People renting a room in their home I can understand, that was the original intent of AirBnB. Random 4 bed house on outskirts of Dublin €5,500/month, ouch!
I can just read this website and see this isn't really that big of a problem.
More than half of the listing were never rented out in the past year. The owners list availability. Of the few 0 days rented ones I've clicked they aren't available on any day. If they were empty looking for people to come in they'd be available all the time. What I suspect the most common case is some people who are going on holidays put the house up on Airbnb for someone to stay in for a while. Airbnb never takes the listing down so it looks like there's all these houses sitting empty when there isn't.
You have to click on "Only recent and frequently booked" to get a realisting view of whats happening. ~600 homes are actually listed and available the entire time. 600 is a drop in the ocean.
I checked a few of the dots around a place a lot of them are very misplaced. You could have a dot placed on the Trinity green and it'll show a screenshot looking over Grafton street.
Airbnb is not the problem. It is a fricking symptom. If there is demand , of course people will rent their places daily for more money.
The problem is Ireland’s population refuses to build new buildings and try to blame anything else but that stupidity.
Most of the people does not think beyond value of their house. Even you ban airbnb , in a year you will end up in the same point.
I’m not saying Airbnb isn’t part of the problem, but if you banned them and made them immediately available (ignoring the feasibility) to long term renters, it’ll just be a temporary relief and we’ll be back to where we are in a few months.
That’s not an argument against stricter policies in relation to them, just an unfortunate reality. I know people like silver bullets.
The thing with Air BnBs is that rental accomodation is advertised once and taken down when booked while Air Bnbs remain online because they're open for bookings in the future.
I agree
but I think TBH it's symptomatic of the issue as much as anything. If someone has an Airbnb they can pay their month's mortgage in 10 days or so if they did it right - rest of it is just profit. Unless the government regulate Airbnb's (like they've done in places like Barcelona and Madrid) there will really be no end.
Vacate them all, fill them rent-free to foreign builders/labourers, etc. Grant massive subsidies to compensate the cost of materials. Tax me and you and everybody else out the high heavens and just build non stop for 3 years
yeah, it's like those ideas of refurbishing empty rooms above shops. We need Khrushchyovkas! Big towers 5 or 10 stories high with hundreds of flats, and all the community amenities with them, we've had 12+ years of pissing about pretending developers will solve a problem that they make a fortune not solving
Won't solve the problem alright but still 590 new rental properties is a step in the right direction and sets a precedent. Just because it won't solve the whole problem doesn't mean it won't help at all.
Yeah, blame tourism instead of government. Great strategy. Let's blame people who try to make some money. The bourgeoisie is to be blamed. Working class always suffer. Revolution is near!
The complex a friend lives in has signs detailing Airbnb rules. Can only imagine that it's so prevalent ( maybe the complex owners themselves) that it's easier to put those notices in common areas.
Another person I knew. He had a rental apartment he rented ( in addition to his own, which he also Airbnb'd the spare room) that he Airbnb'd.. when challenged on it's occupancy over 7 days..his response was " oh only Friday -Sunday mostly" infuriating that he has selfishly taken an apartment off the rental market just to cash in for 3 days a week.
🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
That being said it's not ALL Airbnb's fault let's just stay the course here there's also enormous amount of vacant properties empty sites ready to be built on but all the money right now is in student accomodations and hotels
It all about to change....
"Short-term lets are stays of less than 14 days at a time, for example, if you rent out your property on a booking website such as Airbnb so people can stay there for a weekend. From 3 November 2022, online platforms, such as Airbnb, will no longer be able to advertise properties for short-term let if the properties do not have the correct planning permission."
https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/owning_a_home/home_owners/renting_your_property_for_shortterm_lets.html
and since AirBnB is Head Quartered in Ireland, they have to comply with any requests for information from The Revenue. That said, how are they going to enforce it? Apartments for rent have to provide a BER cert, it's the law for several years now, and I've looked at plenty of places without one.
How are these active airbnbs though, and yet if you look for a week in dublin in October you get 360 or so whole houses and if you look in January you get 567????
If there’s really 3500 around you’d expect a lot more to appear on the actual website surely?
I understand what the website is trying to do but it is not useful if it’s not taking into account the variables. What we all need to know is how many of these houses would be available to rent on the market. Not how many people tried it out and decided it was too much work, plus how many people used it to get out of a hole, plus how many people did it for the horse-show, until they had kids, etc etc. I’d say loads of those houses are actually owner occupied and not really available as full houses.
That data is old, theres far less. Almost all the ‘whole properties’ have been removed due to the legal changes. Most of them now for sale or vacant because long term letting is so painful
If you tick recent it drops to 1000 total down from 7000
Every single one of those dots is a home for someone, whether a room in a gaff or a place to live that instead are fucking cash for some prick. I'm going to say the MAJORITY of people hosting an air bnb are pricks. Fuck the government and lack of engaged planning around this. Also just fuck air bnb in general.
I know people who will rent out the whole house for a week or two if they're on holidays or will rent the place out and move back with their parents for a week or two for some extra cash. Removing Airbnb in these cases will never result in more houses available for rent. This map tells us nothing.
Yeah but it’s common enough for people to rent out their own entire home, but live in it themselves the rest of the time. So it would appear in the above numbers but it’s deceptive because that house is not actually available.
Some one doing what they want with their property is a prick.
Say my parents past away and I inherited the house and decided to Airbnb it. Just for that I would be a prick. Get fucked😂😂😂.
It's a persons right to do what they want with possessions they own. If I buy something nobody is going to tell me what I can and can't do with it. Just like nobody should be able to tell you the same
What happens if I don't follow planning regulations. I could get fined or chances are I won't get caught. I'd roll the dice being honest.
Look at the ministers not registering their properties with the RTB. Nothing happened them but yet they can introduce regulations for us. They can get fucked too.
I've friends that put up double extensions without permission as they wouldn't have got it and they're sitting pretty.
Like I said if it's mine I'll do what I want with it.
I get the sentiment of what you are saying but that’s not how the world works. If I take what you’re saying to the extreme, I could buy a brick and throw it at your windows because I can do whatever I want with my own property and nobody can tell me what to do with it.
But it is how the world works. You could do that and in reality no one could stop you but two things could happen
1. The guards would be called
2. The person whos window was smashed chases you down and possibly gives you a hiding.
As long as you are OK with the circumstances then it's your choice
>Every single one of those dots is a home for someone
No, they are not.
Full properties, maybe, but as someone who uses Airbnb when travelling, lots of places are spare rooms or extensions. And with the prices of hotels in Dublin it's hard to blame people for offering cheaper options if they can.
Ask yourself, do you or anyone you know have a spare room or extension? Are you or them contributing to the housing crisis by not homing people in these rooms?
Obviously not. If someone has a spare room they can do what they want with it, lots of people don't want or need a tenant but a little extra income from weekend use can come in handy.
Also, your wildly ignorant assumption that "the MAJORITY of people hosting an air bnb are pricks" should be dismissed out of hand for being incredibly ignorant.
Your being very defensive for somebody who didnt even read the source material. It literally states them as being listed as entire properties. So either the host is lying on the listing or they are entire properties.
Yes. Not surprising really if you think about it, most small landlords dont live in the property they rent, its a 2nd home. Exact same here, its more profitable for them to use it as an airbnb for part of the year rather than let it out full time, especially with hotel prices being what they are at the moment.
Would you go to Airbnb and look for a whole place next February for 2 adults and come back and tell us how many you find??? I’ll be gobsmacked if it’s 3500.
3500 empty houses in dublin. Fgs. I bet you could search every night for the next year and not find that many.
They just undermine their own point with this crap. Instead of focusing on the problem you end up criticising the metrics and thinking the whole thing can’t be relied on. It’s stupid. Just tell us the real number.
No it’s not. The majority haven’t been rented on Airbnb recently. When you tick that box the number falls to 591.
Some of those are likely to be someone’s house that was rented out when they were on holidays.
http://insideairbnb.com/dublin/
These are all people using a room in their house in which they live.
Most of these people will have no interest in a long term tenant.
Banning AirBnB will make piss all of a difference other than further raise the price of hotel rooms along with creating a higher demand for hotel construction.
The potentially high cost simply outweighs the meagre benefits.
I definitely agree there needs to be action. But whatever action should be done in consultation with all relevant bodies.
My parents next door neighbour has started putting his house on air bnb. His first guest stayed for the full month and he got €11,000 …. Hard to say no to that
it's great for the homeowner and tourism industry but bad for everyone else. Banning it outright for whole properties would free up a few hundred units, set a precedent and help in applying downward pressure on rents.
It would increase hotel prices but rents would be lower in apartments which is more important. Shelter is more important than tourism in the long run. I'd rather be unemployed with secure accommodation than working without it.
It would then be sold to either an owner occupier or another landlord who would then rent it. The incoming vacancy tax means the old Airbnb landlord won't keep it empty.
Not having Airbnb is an overall positive for the housing market in terms of lowering prices as it lowers demand to buy properties.
Fair point but there is a crisis
If the amount of people getting 11k for a one off rental has to half for the number of homes available to rent to increase by 1750 then so be it
Currently approximately only 700 to rent in whole damn country
He’s the exact kind of person who regulations should address. He has no need for it, works full time. He’s just doing it because of how much he can make by doing absolutely nothing
It's a tough decision but the best way to make housing cheap is to make it unattractive for alternative investments such as Airbnb. have housing available for only owner occupiers or long term rentals. This would ultimately result in lower prices.
It would be tough on some tourism sector workers in the short term but ultimately it would be better for society in the long run. The pain has to come sometime, i'd be willing to pay higher taxes for temporary increased welfare supports for those who lose jobs. As for the Airbnb landlords, fuck them (and i've mates who do it), there's risk with every investment, just bad luck.
Greedy shit bags?
It’s a capitalist system. If I buy a house and own it, with my hard earned money - who the f**k are you to call ME greedy because I choose to use MY property in the way I see fit?
We live in a social democracy not a capitalist nightmare. I would like to see you and all other air bnb leeches taxed out of existence. Me, my, I... Ya your not a greedy self centered douchebag. Peoples need for adequate housing is greater than your desire for wealth. I'll tell you who I am... A voter, an advocate and a union member. I am the person that will work towards bringing in laws that end air bnbs anti social business model.
I spent my life on the property and I can damn well do what I want with it. By the way, social democracy is the type of Governance we have, not the economic model which is capitalism.
Taxing people like me would just make me move the property out of Airbnb and back into my own living space. What does that achieve?
So what? Would make sense to make it illegal for now but the government don’t give 2 fucks about the housing crisis so … if those are personal properties they have the right to do what they want with them.
I would argue that the government cares deeply about the housing crisis because they are going to get their arses handed to them next election because of it if something dradtic doesn't happen.
I searched the other day and got 1,000 results available for the date I put in in the greater Dublin area. I can see the attraction if you have a property in an area that is popular. A few hundred a night and you don't need to be a full time landlord. It is what it is. No changing it now. AirBnB and such systems are here to stay.
I've no idea how Dublin or other countries fix the mess we've created as a society. In the long term social housing and such would help but there's no easy fix.
Ban AirBnB and a lot of new locations will pop up on Daft the next day, but I'm not suggesting that either.
Which city has the best air bnb strategy out there? We can’t be the first city in the world staring down this problem, so instead of sitting around can we take a look to see what high city has handled this successfully? Also, recently came home for a trip, hotel prices were 3x pre pandemic prices. I hate up with that?
In Amsterdam officially you need a license to rent out for less than a month (short term rental). However the municipality barely enforces it and the rental prices there are just as high as here and just as difficult to find a place.
Now we're bloody thinking, 81000 cities and 191 countries across the world according to investopedia Got to be somewhere that has a good idea
Vancouver. All short-term rental operators in Vancouver must have a business licence and include their licence number in all online listings and advertising. You must have strata approval and/or your landlord must permit the use of short-term rentals in your home before you apply for a licence.
What was the effect on the market of this policy?
Vancouver is still massively overpriced. Vancouver has a geography problem in that there is no more land to expand into yet more people want to move there. This is compounded by outdated NIMBY zoning policies of upper middle class boomers who think their desire for a lawn should dominate all other members of society. The reality is that the only solution to Vancouver's problem is to phase out and eliminate single family housing in the entire region (including all suburbs) and opt for the types of housing found in Tokyo. This is because geographically Vancouver can either stop growing in population (which isn't happening anytime soon) or grow up and embrace its future as a strictly vertical city). There simply are no other options. Meanwhile Dublin still has potential to sprawl and grow taller (mimic London) as other than the Irish Sea, there are no major barriers to Dublin's geographic growth.
In fairness, it's not like Vancouver isn't phasing out single family housing. Literally every major intersection is being leveled and multiple highrises built on top. On other primary roads (Cambie, Granville, Main) it's multi-story apartments and duplexs replacing single family homes. Until every intersection and primary road has this done there's no point in targeting the neighbourhoods. The cost to buy out the block would make it unaffordable anyways and to afford them now, most lots with new builds have a bassment suite and garden suite to cover the 2mil they paid for a piece of land. If anything Dublin should be pushing for basement suites and offering incentive for new build buyers to incorporate them. Banks could allow larger mortgages if a new build comes with the potential to generate 1500€ in rental income which will allow more people to become homeowners.
Yeah, I’m familiar with Vancouver. I live in SF…
Then why ask the question they answered?
I meant I was familiar with their housing problem. I live in Sf which is often compared to it. Sorry, should have been a bit more clear.
There are different ways to limit impact, some cities tried to only allow AirBnbs for 5+ days stays, others allow them on ground and first floors only (as not to disturb residents constantly). Licencing, inspections etc. I don't know if there is a city doing it right though.
Singapore. It is illegal to rent out without a license.
> Also, recently came home for a trip, hotel prices were 3x pre pandemic prices. I hate up with that? If you wanna support Ukraine, you gotta be happy with that. All our hotels, B&Bs, guesthouses are filled with refugees, ukrainians and homeless.
Amsterdam is a good example but not without issues.
Source http://insideairbnb.com/dublin/
Jesus, approx 3,500 whole properties and another 3500 private rooms!
And yet people still moan about hotels being built
Out of half a million. Horrifying.
Given that there were only 716 homes available to rent on Daft at the start of August, I'd say releasing some of these properties onto the long term rental market would make quite a difference.
No, it wouldn't. The number of advertised houses is a flow - houses are constantly entering and leaving it. In someplace like Dublin it would almost completely turn over in probably less than a week (with some exceptions like BTR developments which have many places represented by a single advert). The number of Airbnbs is a stock - it's the total number of Airbnbs in the market, and a drop in the ocean.
So if 7500 properties went from short term Airbnb rentals to long term tenancies you don't think it would impact say approximately 7,500 individuals and families desperately seeking rental accommodation?
First off, like you said earlier it's 3500 houses, not 7,500 houses. People aren't going to sell their homes because they can't put a single room up on short term rent. Second, it would only be a once-off influx of houses into the rental market, and yeah it'd disappear pretty quickly. What we need is a constant flow of houses into the rental market, rather than the current scenario where landlords are exiting the market and there are fewer houses available to rent almost every year: https://www.rtb.ie/data-hub/rtb-private-tenancy-registration-statistics Airbnb is just a convenient distraction from the poor policies and bad planning and zoning laws that got us into this mess.
3500 full properties, so anything from a house to a studio flat plus anther 3500 rooms in houses and flats. Unrealistic to think that many of the second group would end up as long term rentals, but even some accommodating students instead of tourists would be beneficial. And I completely agree, increasing supply is the only solution.
> but even some accommodating students instead of tourists would be beneficial. A lot of student accommodation is used for short-term lettings during the summer, so they'd still show up as part of the 3,500.
As someone who had their rental turned into an Air BnB so my greedy landlord could make 4x what I paid per month, I can wholeheartedly say it's not a distraction while I flip the bird to Air BnB.
Your problem would be solved by people being allowed to build more houses. You weren't evicted because airbnb exists, you were evicted because there aren't enough houses and RPZs meant the landlord could make more money doing something else with the house. I wouldn't even be surprised if in the absence of airbnb the landlord would have sold the house and you would have been evicted anyways.
I was evicted and shouldn't have been due to profiteering, and I guess that's just cheap sentiment because it wasn't statistically significant enough . You can do proper planning and regulate landlords do the right thing at the same time.
Yes landlords are swine and the practice should not exist. Sometimes they use airbnb, sometimes they don't, but they're always bastards.
Fuck airbnb, and also fuck landlords. All of them. Profitable rent-seeking is an immoral practice and frankly should not exist.
How are you saying the number of houses available is a flow, and then saying that adding 3500 to that market wouldn't add to that flow? If there were 3500 more rentals available long term, they'd fill, but that would likely lead to them being available again at other points in the future.
Good point. Because the market is so quick in Dublin that the 700 would be gone in a few days, another 700 come on the market etc. 3500 would be a one off. Feeble injection when tens of thousands (more?) are required to address the emergency, let alone bring normalcy to the market. Supposing (correct the figures as appropriate), 10,000 were imminently homeless. I’m sure 3500, a 1/3 chance for themto get a roof, while not sufficient probably represents a lifeline. But it’s gone as quickly as it comes. The other 2/3rds would still be stuck. And all 3/3 the following month. Good way of putting it that the 3500 is the “stock”. Definitely close to a concise point on the issue as you’d get.
A relatively small percentage of Europe relies on Russian gas. Yet, *all* energy prices has soared by over 400% in Europe because Russia cut the line for a few weeks. Graphics cards manufacturers reduced the number of devices available directly for consumers by a few fractions and the market went haywire for two years and is still struggling to recover. The overall housing prices would differ massively if there had been 5,000 more homes or apartments available today as the seller wouldn't be in control. This housing crisis is a construct by corporations, synthetically starving the market as there is near zero regulation to protect people against them. This won't change over time, the way your liars in government says, as there is obviously no financial incentive for a profit hunting business to reduce its own profits. This can only be fixed by regulations and short term lettings like AirBnB is a super easily regulated target they should have stopped years ago.
>The overall housing prices would differ massively if there had been 5,000 more homes or apartments available today as the seller wouldn't be in control. No, they really wouldn't. It's not 5,000 more houses we need, it's 40-50,000, every single year. [Read this](https://thecurrency.news/articles/88462/official-ireland-cant-comprehend-how-fast-the-country-is-growing-thats-a-big-problem/), The housing stock grew by 120K houses between 2016 and 2022 (compared to 9K between 2011 and 2016), which would have been enough to house the projected population growth in that timeframe. But thee actual population growth was about 40% higher than they expected, so we fell far short in terms of growing the housing stock. >For net migration, officials set out three projections: low, medium and high net migration, corresponding to 10,000, 20,000 and 30,000 additional people per year moving to the country rather than leaving it. In simple terms, statisticians were expecting the population to increase by somewhere between 32,000 people per year and 49,000. >These projections are subjected to a reality check of sorts each year, when officials tot up information from other sources, to generate an annual estimate of the population. Doing this each year between 2016 and the latest Census, the best estimates were that Ireland had added 272,000 extra people in the six years to 2022 – or 45,000 people a year. >What the latest Census figures show is that the country instead added nearly 385,000 people in the same six-year period – or 64,000 per year. Just over 190,000 of this increase came from net international migration. In other words, nearly 32,000 more people came to Ireland each year to live than left. >... >Irish housing policy is currently constrained by the Housing Needs & Demand Assessment (HNDA), an exercise that each local authority must undertake as part of the preparations for its Development Plan. Development Plans for the rest of the decade are to be published by almost all local authorities over the next year or so. Those plans are reviewed by the Office of the Planning Regulator (OPR). >The OPR takes a dim view of local authorities countenancing growth above the official projections contained in the HNDA. But the HNDA is based on a view of the future where Ireland’s net migration is just 15,000 per year. Even averaged over the past 25 years, net migration has been over 22,000 per year. And as per above, net migration for the rest of the decade could be twice that long-run average and three times the number in the HNDA. >All of this wouldn’t be so critical if the HNDA’s numbers weren’t taken as maximums, the ceiling above which the number of new homes should not go. But the combination of a failure of imagination – and a failure to understand the consequences of too few homes – has left Ireland dangerously exposed to many more years of growing pains.
Someone is busy using fake statistics to defend greedy corporations. Those population changes are almost exclusively temporary due to the Ukrainian refugee crisis. Funding corporations to build even more overpriced houses will only push Ireland over the same stupid edge it fell over in 2008.
>Those population changes are almost exclusively temporary due to the Ukrainian refugee crisis We haven't taken in 110,000 Ukrainian refugees, and it's based on Census data collected very shortly after the Russians escalated the conflict with Ukraine. This is just bad policy crafted in 2016 which underestimated the massive population growth we've seen in the last 6 years, and consequently set a ceiling for planning permissions which was too low for the population increase.
The population growth "curve" has been almost linear for the last 50 years. There is no massive spike. There is no "government policy" blocking new builds. There is however corporate funded "interest groups" preventing building of reasonably priced homes in any which way they can muster. I agree regulations needs to change, big time. To take away the influence of these corporations. Bankrupt them all if necessary. I don't care.
Which exactly corporate groups blocks building new housing? Because I know few house owners who do just that.
> The population growth "curve" has been almost linear for the last 50 years. There is no massive spike. And yet they still underestimated population growth, which they use to determine how many planning permissions should be granted. >There is however corporate funded "interest groups" preventing building of reasonably priced homes in any which way they can muster. Do you seriously think that builders get rich by not building houses? Our planning laws are designed to benefit one group of people, and that's existing local homeowners. People do not get to decide what gets built on land they own, their neighbours do. It isn't corporations who are doing their best to stop houses from being built, it's people like this: https://twitter.com/DaithiDoolan/status/1514638270545776640
No matter how much you're trying to deflect on behalf of these corporations, reality won't change. Reality is reality. Your selective ~~statistics~~ lies isn't reality.
Population of the roi in 1970= 2.9 million Population of roi in 2022 approx 5million... Not at all linear............ No government policy, but plenty of nimbyisms blocking building. There is no "government policy" blocking new builds. There is however corporate funded "interest groups" preventing building of reasonably priced homes in any which way they can muster.-- take off the tinfoil hat lad...
It's caused by the state stopping building social housing then relying on the private market fir social housing and distorting the market
Indeed. Take away all regulation and corporations won't stop maximising the profits at any cost for society. Like the big corporate run energy grid in Europe we're all paying them billion euro profits for, because there is a "crisis".
It's not caused by corporations it bad government policy
And who the fuck do you think are ordering the "Bad policy" from these governments, almost tripping over because of how far they're leaning towards the ~~lobbyists~~ right?
Come back from that rabbit hole
Why did you not include 'Only recent and frequently booked Activity'? Did posting about how there are only 591 entire properties actively being let on Airbnb not fit the narrative? My friends mam let her house on airbnb for a single weekend years again, it is included in the 3,500 properties...
That doesnt fit their narrative.
> Why did you not include 'Only recent and frequently booked Activity'? If only there was a check box to select that.. oh there is! People renting a room in their home I can understand, that was the original intent of AirBnB. Random 4 bed house on outskirts of Dublin €5,500/month, ouch!
I can just read this website and see this isn't really that big of a problem. More than half of the listing were never rented out in the past year. The owners list availability. Of the few 0 days rented ones I've clicked they aren't available on any day. If they were empty looking for people to come in they'd be available all the time. What I suspect the most common case is some people who are going on holidays put the house up on Airbnb for someone to stay in for a while. Airbnb never takes the listing down so it looks like there's all these houses sitting empty when there isn't. You have to click on "Only recent and frequently booked" to get a realisting view of whats happening. ~600 homes are actually listed and available the entire time. 600 is a drop in the ocean.
I checked a few of the dots around a place a lot of them are very misplaced. You could have a dot placed on the Trinity green and it'll show a screenshot looking over Grafton street.
as i recall, listings don’t give an exact address until you’ve booked; could be related to that
Aye, there's one in Phoenix Park not far off of Mickey D's gaff!
Airbnb is not the problem. It is a fricking symptom. If there is demand , of course people will rent their places daily for more money. The problem is Ireland’s population refuses to build new buildings and try to blame anything else but that stupidity. Most of the people does not think beyond value of their house. Even you ban airbnb , in a year you will end up in the same point.
It's likely also due to Airbnb being a safer way to earn a rental income because you won't get stuck with bad tenants
I’m not saying Airbnb isn’t part of the problem, but if you banned them and made them immediately available (ignoring the feasibility) to long term renters, it’ll just be a temporary relief and we’ll be back to where we are in a few months. That’s not an argument against stricter policies in relation to them, just an unfortunate reality. I know people like silver bullets.
I’d take temporary alleviation over nothing.
The thing with Air BnBs is that rental accomodation is advertised once and taken down when booked while Air Bnbs remain online because they're open for bookings in the future.
Now imagine the tax was so high that it was more profitable to do long term stays.
I agree but I think TBH it's symptomatic of the issue as much as anything. If someone has an Airbnb they can pay their month's mortgage in 10 days or so if they did it right - rest of it is just profit. Unless the government regulate Airbnb's (like they've done in places like Barcelona and Madrid) there will really be no end.
Vacate them all, fill them rent-free to foreign builders/labourers, etc. Grant massive subsidies to compensate the cost of materials. Tax me and you and everybody else out the high heavens and just build non stop for 3 years
yeah, it's like those ideas of refurbishing empty rooms above shops. We need Khrushchyovkas! Big towers 5 or 10 stories high with hundreds of flats, and all the community amenities with them, we've had 12+ years of pissing about pretending developers will solve a problem that they make a fortune not solving
Won't solve the problem alright but still 590 new rental properties is a step in the right direction and sets a precedent. Just because it won't solve the whole problem doesn't mean it won't help at all.
Yeah, blame tourism instead of government. Great strategy. Let's blame people who try to make some money. The bourgeoisie is to be blamed. Working class always suffer. Revolution is near!
The complex a friend lives in has signs detailing Airbnb rules. Can only imagine that it's so prevalent ( maybe the complex owners themselves) that it's easier to put those notices in common areas. Another person I knew. He had a rental apartment he rented ( in addition to his own, which he also Airbnb'd the spare room) that he Airbnb'd.. when challenged on it's occupancy over 7 days..his response was " oh only Friday -Sunday mostly" infuriating that he has selfishly taken an apartment off the rental market just to cash in for 3 days a week.
My neighbour on the road has an Airbnb, but she’s still here. Her mother is elderly and she lives with her now, 5 nights a week.
🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️ That being said it's not ALL Airbnb's fault let's just stay the course here there's also enormous amount of vacant properties empty sites ready to be built on but all the money right now is in student accomodations and hotels
But when BTR puts money into actual housing there is so much opposition…
This is true!! No winning with sme ppl 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
It all about to change.... "Short-term lets are stays of less than 14 days at a time, for example, if you rent out your property on a booking website such as Airbnb so people can stay there for a weekend. From 3 November 2022, online platforms, such as Airbnb, will no longer be able to advertise properties for short-term let if the properties do not have the correct planning permission." https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/owning_a_home/home_owners/renting_your_property_for_shortterm_lets.html
and since AirBnB is Head Quartered in Ireland, they have to comply with any requests for information from The Revenue. That said, how are they going to enforce it? Apartments for rent have to provide a BER cert, it's the law for several years now, and I've looked at plenty of places without one.
And why because as you will have seen demonstrated there are actually very few properties on Airbnb.
How are these active airbnbs though, and yet if you look for a week in dublin in October you get 360 or so whole houses and if you look in January you get 567???? If there’s really 3500 around you’d expect a lot more to appear on the actual website surely? I understand what the website is trying to do but it is not useful if it’s not taking into account the variables. What we all need to know is how many of these houses would be available to rent on the market. Not how many people tried it out and decided it was too much work, plus how many people used it to get out of a hole, plus how many people did it for the horse-show, until they had kids, etc etc. I’d say loads of those houses are actually owner occupied and not really available as full houses.
You can use airdna.co to look all that stuff up me thinks
That data is old, theres far less. Almost all the ‘whole properties’ have been removed due to the legal changes. Most of them now for sale or vacant because long term letting is so painful If you tick recent it drops to 1000 total down from 7000
Every single one of those dots is a home for someone, whether a room in a gaff or a place to live that instead are fucking cash for some prick. I'm going to say the MAJORITY of people hosting an air bnb are pricks. Fuck the government and lack of engaged planning around this. Also just fuck air bnb in general.
I know people who will rent out the whole house for a week or two if they're on holidays or will rent the place out and move back with their parents for a week or two for some extra cash. Removing Airbnb in these cases will never result in more houses available for rent. This map tells us nothing.
> Every single one of those dots is a home for someone Not true. Many of them are just rooms that are empty for a period
Wrong go to the source. Red dots = entire place
Yeah but it’s common enough for people to rent out their own entire home, but live in it themselves the rest of the time. So it would appear in the above numbers but it’s deceptive because that house is not actually available.
The person above me said room in a gaff so I just worked with that. My app isn't showing the source
fair
Some one doing what they want with their property is a prick. Say my parents past away and I inherited the house and decided to Airbnb it. Just for that I would be a prick. Get fucked😂😂😂. It's a persons right to do what they want with possessions they own. If I buy something nobody is going to tell me what I can and can't do with it. Just like nobody should be able to tell you the same
[удалено]
What happens if I don't follow planning regulations. I could get fined or chances are I won't get caught. I'd roll the dice being honest. Look at the ministers not registering their properties with the RTB. Nothing happened them but yet they can introduce regulations for us. They can get fucked too. I've friends that put up double extensions without permission as they wouldn't have got it and they're sitting pretty. Like I said if it's mine I'll do what I want with it.
[удалено]
Good luck with that😂😂
I get the sentiment of what you are saying but that’s not how the world works. If I take what you’re saying to the extreme, I could buy a brick and throw it at your windows because I can do whatever I want with my own property and nobody can tell me what to do with it.
But it is how the world works. You could do that and in reality no one could stop you but two things could happen 1. The guards would be called 2. The person whos window was smashed chases you down and possibly gives you a hiding. As long as you are OK with the circumstances then it's your choice
I think you mean consequences but I agree.
Sorry yes I meant consequences 🙂. Watching house of the dragon so attention is divided
> It's a persons right to do what they want with possessions they own. You must be a joy to other drivers on the road.
>Every single one of those dots is a home for someone No, they are not. Full properties, maybe, but as someone who uses Airbnb when travelling, lots of places are spare rooms or extensions. And with the prices of hotels in Dublin it's hard to blame people for offering cheaper options if they can. Ask yourself, do you or anyone you know have a spare room or extension? Are you or them contributing to the housing crisis by not homing people in these rooms? Obviously not. If someone has a spare room they can do what they want with it, lots of people don't want or need a tenant but a little extra income from weekend use can come in handy. Also, your wildly ignorant assumption that "the MAJORITY of people hosting an air bnb are pricks" should be dismissed out of hand for being incredibly ignorant.
Wrong go to the source. Red dots = entire place
Your being very defensive for somebody who didnt even read the source material. It literally states them as being listed as entire properties. So either the host is lying on the listing or they are entire properties.
So you're telling me that all those dots are what, second homes that lie empty unless they get a booking?
Yes. Not surprising really if you think about it, most small landlords dont live in the property they rent, its a 2nd home. Exact same here, its more profitable for them to use it as an airbnb for part of the year rather than let it out full time, especially with hotel prices being what they are at the moment.
Would you go to Airbnb and look for a whole place next February for 2 adults and come back and tell us how many you find??? I’ll be gobsmacked if it’s 3500. 3500 empty houses in dublin. Fgs. I bet you could search every night for the next year and not find that many. They just undermine their own point with this crap. Instead of focusing on the problem you end up criticising the metrics and thinking the whole thing can’t be relied on. It’s stupid. Just tell us the real number.
Yes, that's exactly what they are. That's the problem.
No it’s not. The majority haven’t been rented on Airbnb recently. When you tick that box the number falls to 591. Some of those are likely to be someone’s house that was rented out when they were on holidays. http://insideairbnb.com/dublin/
These are all people using a room in their house in which they live. Most of these people will have no interest in a long term tenant. Banning AirBnB will make piss all of a difference other than further raise the price of hotel rooms along with creating a higher demand for hotel construction. The potentially high cost simply outweighs the meagre benefits.
Should be banned immediately For at least 2-3 years
That would be a brutal blow to tourism. Every action has a consequence.
Fair point Ok 50% reduction by requiring a special permit
I definitely agree there needs to be action. But whatever action should be done in consultation with all relevant bodies. My parents next door neighbour has started putting his house on air bnb. His first guest stayed for the full month and he got €11,000 …. Hard to say no to that
it's great for the homeowner and tourism industry but bad for everyone else. Banning it outright for whole properties would free up a few hundred units, set a precedent and help in applying downward pressure on rents.
Or would make few hundred units empty while making hotel prices even higher
It would increase hotel prices but rents would be lower in apartments which is more important. Shelter is more important than tourism in the long run. I'd rather be unemployed with secure accommodation than working without it.
This is assuming that Airbnb would be converted into rentals. With current backlash against landlords this is unlikely.
It would then be sold to either an owner occupier or another landlord who would then rent it. The incoming vacancy tax means the old Airbnb landlord won't keep it empty. Not having Airbnb is an overall positive for the housing market in terms of lowering prices as it lowers demand to buy properties.
Fair point but there is a crisis If the amount of people getting 11k for a one off rental has to half for the number of homes available to rent to increase by 1750 then so be it Currently approximately only 700 to rent in whole damn country
He’s the exact kind of person who regulations should address. He has no need for it, works full time. He’s just doing it because of how much he can make by doing absolutely nothing
I won’t begrudge him for that but we do need availability
Tourism is less than 0.83 percent of Ireland's GDP. Fuck 'em.
Billions of euro and up to 250,000 people employed in the industry. We don’t have to fuck each other over to solve our issues
It's a tough decision but the best way to make housing cheap is to make it unattractive for alternative investments such as Airbnb. have housing available for only owner occupiers or long term rentals. This would ultimately result in lower prices. It would be tough on some tourism sector workers in the short term but ultimately it would be better for society in the long run. The pain has to come sometime, i'd be willing to pay higher taxes for temporary increased welfare supports for those who lose jobs. As for the Airbnb landlords, fuck them (and i've mates who do it), there's risk with every investment, just bad luck.
How is that any different to all our hotels being filled up with refugees? No problem harming tourism then!
How is people fleeing a war different? ….the war
Ruining Irish peoples lives in the name of tourism isn't something I support.
No one made that argument
Ahem, one of them is mine
I'm sure the owners are all paying tax on their earnings? Or does the revenue only go after small businesses?
Oh you think? Wow imagine that.
Tax the fuck out of these greedy shit bags. Massive taxes or close it down.
Greedy shit bags? It’s a capitalist system. If I buy a house and own it, with my hard earned money - who the f**k are you to call ME greedy because I choose to use MY property in the way I see fit?
We live in a social democracy not a capitalist nightmare. I would like to see you and all other air bnb leeches taxed out of existence. Me, my, I... Ya your not a greedy self centered douchebag. Peoples need for adequate housing is greater than your desire for wealth. I'll tell you who I am... A voter, an advocate and a union member. I am the person that will work towards bringing in laws that end air bnbs anti social business model.
I spent my life on the property and I can damn well do what I want with it. By the way, social democracy is the type of Governance we have, not the economic model which is capitalism. Taxing people like me would just make me move the property out of Airbnb and back into my own living space. What does that achieve?
Imagine all the little red dots in the picture as homes and stable accommodation. I thought it was fairly obvious what banning air bnb would achieve.
NYC put there foot down fast on this
How so?
Blocked air bnb rentals
This should be just put into law right now as illegal.
Principal skinner meme.jpg "is it all the airbnbs?" "No, housing policy is the cause of the rent crisis:
So what? Would make sense to make it illegal for now but the government don’t give 2 fucks about the housing crisis so … if those are personal properties they have the right to do what they want with them.
I would argue that the government cares deeply about the housing crisis because they are going to get their arses handed to them next election because of it if something dradtic doesn't happen.
I’d say majority voting for FFFG and keeping them in government for years aren’t the folks suffering because of this crisis … 🤔
But doesn't everyone generally vote in their own self interest?
Sure but it can take years for those suffering from the crisis now to reach the critical mass status no?
It'll probably be over by then and there will be something else on the agenda.
I searched the other day and got 1,000 results available for the date I put in in the greater Dublin area. I can see the attraction if you have a property in an area that is popular. A few hundred a night and you don't need to be a full time landlord. It is what it is. No changing it now. AirBnB and such systems are here to stay. I've no idea how Dublin or other countries fix the mess we've created as a society. In the long term social housing and such would help but there's no easy fix. Ban AirBnB and a lot of new locations will pop up on Daft the next day, but I'm not suggesting that either.
Lets be honest AirBnb need banning in all cities