Despite Ban, New York City Had More Airbnb Rentals Than Anywhere Else in the World on New Years Eve
City officials should learn that Airbnb and other short term rental services can't be legislated out of existence.

Despite a ban on advertising short-term rentals that comes with heavy punishments for anyone who tries, New York City had more Airbnb rentals than any other location in the world on New Year's Eve.
The San Francisco-based short term rental service told the New York Daily News that there were more than 55,000 rentals in the city on the final night of 2016, up from about 47,000 on last New Year's Eve. There were more Airbnb rentals in New York City than anywhere else on the globe as 2016 became 2017.
With perhaps the most famous New Year's Eve celebration in the entire world, it's no surprise that people flocked to the Big Apple on December 31, but the number of people using Airbnb in defiance of the city's ban should make officials question that policy and will likely upset hotel executive who pushed for the ban in order to limit competition.
The real heroes, though, are the residents of the city who flouted a silly law and risked fines of up to $7,500 for doing so. New York officials have promised to use the Airbnb ban to crack down on what they call "illegal hotels"—that is, locations used exclusively for short-term rentals year-round—rather than going after residents who rented-out their apartments or homes for the holiday weekend.
The only beneficiaries of New York's ban on Airbnb rentals are the city's hotels—which, naturally, were the driving force behind the passage of the ban in the first place. That's why hotel executives were toasting the ban after it passed.
In reality, though, the ban helps prop-up one of the worst hotels in America by giving tourists fewer, better options.
As New Year's Eve shows, visitors to The Big Apple are looking for other options and residents of the city are willing to freely exchange their space for money. Aside from protecting users against fraud and violance, there's little reason for the government to be involved in those transactions.
The lesson that city officials should take from all this is that Airbnb (and other short term rental services like VRBO and Home Away) can't be legislated out of existence. Visitors to New York, or any other city, have more lodging options than ever before—that's a good thing—and the marketplace is only going to get more diverse in the future.
Instead of fighting that tide, city planners should look for ways to accommodate new forms of accommodations.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Fidel Castro never had this problem.
Maybe Putin can evice Lenin and Raul can make an Airbnb reservation for Fidel.
but the number of people using Airbnb in defiance of the city's ban should make officials question that policy
"We're not using enough violence?"
-City Officials
You stupid libertarians saying all laws can lead to death! Minor laws would never be enforced in such a fashion! And if they are, it's all the fault of individual police officers!
City officials should learn that Airbnb and other short term rental services can't be legislated out of existence.
Oh, they know that already.
But think of the JOBS!!
Instead of fighting that tide, city planners should look for ways to accommodate new forms of accommodations.
It's capitulation all the way down.
Well said.
Prohibition always works.
If prohibition didn't work we would have stopped using it decades ago.
The real heroes, though, are the residents of the city who flouted a silly law and risked fines of up to $7,500 for doing so.
Hitler used to rent out the bunker, you know.
"Hitler learns that some of the tenants have been smoking in their rooms."
He, very specifically, checked off the No Smoking box. A most unfortunate software error.
Sounds like a target-rich environment for an ambitious prosecutor.
What they need is a joint task force.
Sounds more like a DEA response ot marijuana legalization.
The lesson that city officials should take from all this is that Airbnb (and other short term rental services like VRBO and Home Away) can't be legislated out of existence.
Nope, but you can sure cause a lot of people to look over their shoulders and occasionally make an example by hanging a few headless bodies off a bridge.
So if city officials had their way you wouldn't be able to find a place to sleep, even if you got to Brooklyn (not recommended for work).
"risked fines of up to $7,500"
Just curious. What's the fine for punching someone in the face in NYC?
It's a sliding scale, all the way from death for punching a police officer to official indifference to punching a civilian Trump supporter.
A stint in Rikers.
This is outrageous. This is a nation of laws, is it not? Without laws this nation goes down the tubes! Why, the government should...
Oh, you were talking about Airbus and not immigrashion. Yeah, stoopid legislators, what are they thinking?
Stupid autocorrect.
Airbnb. Not Airbus.
When the cringe is too strong. I bet that gotcha sounded better in your head.
Re: Acomist,
It actually sounds delicious now that you troubled yourself replying to it, for some reason.
And I know of a place where it is nearly impossible to legally own a firearm, and it has resulted in PEACE:
"Chicago marked 2016 as the deadliest year in nearly two decades
[...]The city saw a surge in gun violence in 2016: 762 murders, 3,550 shooting incidents, and 4,331 shooting victims, according to a statement released by the department on Sunday."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/01/.....index.html
You have to admire the brazen attempt to sweep the pile of corpses under the rug.
If they confiscate enough guns they'll create a new revenue stream for violent gangs (assuming they haven't already). GENIUS!
They should raise the minimum wage; that'll help.
Yep, getting more people fired means they can't afford the guns.
"The real heroes, though, are the residents of the city who flouted a silly law and risked fines...."
I'm hoping California's residents prove heroic, instead of relinquishing our "hi-cap" magazines to law enforcement as we're now told we must do.
But, this is California after all.
But, this is California after all.
A couple years ago, there was widescale, open defiance of new gun controls in New York state - the SAFE Act, I think it was called. If New Yorkers can pull it off, maybe California can too.
Reason also posted this to their Facebook page. Someone there posted: "More people drive drunk on New Year's Eve, so abolish all traffic laws?"
Needless to say, he's been taken to task and has proved unable to defend his comment. Been good for a few lols.
"More people drive drunk on New Year's Eve, so abolish all traffic laws?"
Come on, Karl. This was obviously a typo that should have read
"Abolish all traffic laws so more people drive drunk on New Year's Eve."